The land behind the Jarrold stand.........

[Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0]

[quote user="GazzaTCC"]

Frankly, there seems too much time spent on working out the costs associated with the development of the multi storey car park, when the crux of the matter is:-

A) The Club are highly unlikely to develop the car park themselves.

B) The land was allocated as a multi storey car park as part of a much wider Planning Brief which was needed to secure that wider planning permission, as the planning application did not accord with the provisions of the Local Plan, so consent wouldn''t be forthcoming without an approved Planning Brief.

C) Just because the site was allocated as a car park, doesn''t mean that a car park has to be built on it. Planning Permission are time sensitive and lapse if development doesn''t commence within the permissable period.

D) It follows on, if the thing isn''t financially viable, why would any developer want to bid for the site in the first place and, perhaps more importantly, why would the Club agree to sell the land to the car park operator to develop out?  The Club can do similar apprasials to any developer and if it doesn''t stack up, they''d be negligent to sell.

[/quote]

But you''ve missed the point.  Yes, the MSCP is uneconomic whether NCFC or somebody was to be involved and it doesn''t have to built ......hence the interest in nearby land. When they eventually sell the land for housing / flat development they will need car parking elsewhere. The following indicates they have an operational requirement for 100+ spaces:

 

http://www.norwich.gov.uk/webapps/meeting_minutes/Meetings.asp?meeting=specific&mid=1784&id= The last page shows where the MSCP. would be located, i.e. behind the river end of the Jarrold stand.     Page 16 of the report includes the following:   ''At all other times, the car park will operate principally as a public car park,with a short/medium stay tariff, and will be included on the variable message signing system (a contribution to facilitate this has been agreed as part of the package of measures to reduce traffic impact), although 101 of the 330 spaces are required for the operational use of the Club, the hotel and the office development. In effect, therefore, this part of the City will operate in a similar manner to the rest of the City Centre and will therefore only require operational car parking for the commercial uses.   The Prisoner’s forecast cost of £5m plus £0.6m re section 106 Planning obligations, tell me how the club is going to make a profitable return on the investment in a MSCP. given the small number of spaces?  So overall for the MSCP to go ahead the club will in effect be spending £2m - £3m net, even IF and I mean IF we can sell the land for £10m in three years time.  ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0]

[quote user="T"]I agree you should give stop trying to propogate the same old myths[/quote]

I thinking of you actually!  Presumably we will be hearing from you no longer as you have departed the scene.

[Largey 0]

Noooo..I park there for work :)

[Butler 0]

[quote user="Tangible Fixed Assets anyone"]

[quote user="T"]I agree you should give stop trying to propogate the same old myths[/quote]

I thinking of you actually!  Presumably we will be hearing from you no longer as you have departed the scene.

[/quote]ho ho ho - that was very witty!you must have been thinking about that one for a long time

[T 190]

As I posted elsewhere I don''t see why being objective and understanding business and finance makes someone an employee or adviser of the club. Besides, I would not do that job for that money. It is substantially less than market rates in business and the professions.

[GMF 736]

Sorry Tangy, I don''t follow the point you are trying to make here, your post doesn''t make it clear. The fact that the Club then had a requirement for circa 100 spaces doesn''t mean it''s set in stone that they have to provide circa 100 spaces for employees going forward. Some, if not all of the requirement can probably be met within the existing car park without the MSCP being built. Even if it can''t be totally met, the Club can always hold back other land and revise the detailed application for the other phasings of housing developments. 

[Desert Fox 0]

GMF,

I am but a noivce when it comes to all matters car parking, but I think the point that TFAA was trying to make was that was that it is likely to be contractually obliged to provide car parking for its tennants (offices) and JV partner (hotel) and non-football customers (e.g. catering functions). Whilst it is not implausible that staff will be made to park away from the ground, it is unlikley that the players, senior directors, referees, sponsors and visiting officials will be made to walk. The key point that TFAA appears to be making is that the club''s plans to develop the extsing car park will require it somehow to povide an alternative. If using another part of land it is has acquired for housing development, this would prove to be very expensive in terms of opportunity  loss. Equally, as Buckethead has demosnstrated previously, a MSCP will not prove viable either.

[blahblahblah 2]

[quote user="T"]I don''t see why being objective and understanding business and finance makes someone an employee or adviser of the club.[/quote]I put that down to an inferiority complex on the part of the fans - fans can''t possibly understand business and finance can they ? [:)]

[Desert Fox 0]

BBB,

Especially not those fans who work in business and finance!!!

[GMF 736]

Desert Fox, I''m struggling to find the plan that goes with the planning application, so this is from memory, but isn''t the proposed MSCP on the site of the existing car park? If so, then all the needs to which you refer are catered for within the existing arrangements. We don''t need the MSCP and the remainder of the outline planning permission (housing etc) can be implemented without the need to develop it.