Thetownend.com

Heard a whisper today that it may be over Witchelstow way.

Highworth isnt it

Someone I know in the Council said there was an application in over at the 'Stow.

By the golf club?

I thought it was the Golf Club. Apparently the owner died and left it to his daughter or someone and they're just looking to sell.

It's a flat one though, right?

Let's hope so... then we can move in and move on... and putt this whole thing behind us...

That Wood be good for the Club to be based there. Let's hope the canteen serves some good tee...

Power specifically said it was with in the borough, which technically rules the late Dougie Austin's place out!  I heard it was the old Oakfield site in town!  We will find out soon enough I guess through Fanzai!!

I just hope it doesn't drive a wedge between the community and the club.

So, so far we have Witchelstow, Highworth and ex Oakfield school, i.e. Greenbridge (nr Rugby club).

Anymore?

Cavvy Square?

Bulldozing Penhill

Its a bloody big training ground....

Calne?

Morshead knows. I asked him on the webchat on Total Sport earlier but he wouldn't disclose it?

Sorry.

Can't see why it's a state secret

Probably upset in case he loses privileged access to the club.

Oh.

Moredon I thought?? Council owned, they'd be happy to sell

Ha. No, just doing things properly. Beeb will get leaked it at some point no doubt. Some of you seem to know it already anyway.

You tease you.

Some.. So only 2 individuals mentioned 2, so some means the golf club one where ever that is

Think Moredon was offered but Power said it was not a suitable site.

What's the advantage for you in doing things properly?

Were you interested in the BBC's plan to recruit 200 local journalists? If you can't beat 'em...?

As an ex inmate, i take exceotion, Park School if you please.

Some meagre sense of self-righteousness maybe. Maybe it's just the way I've always done it and don't really want to stop.

Park School is just an age thing...  I remember it as both as I was school age when it switched, thankfully never went there though.  My Mrs did :)

So that's a no comment on my second para then...

So when the county ground gets renamed.......

Park Grammar School please, if it's going to be an age thing. I passed the 11+ to get there.

Has Power said how much the training ground is projected to cost and how many years it will likely take to build?  :sherlock:

He hinted at it being a few years and a few million... Because the pitches need to be setup, the buildings need to be constructed (they won't have a press office though, so that's one less)

I've also heard Moredon Golf Course mentioned

Does Power play golf, from the suggestions being banded around we seem to be less building a training ground and more buying a golf club?

For comparison, Beversbrook took approx 18 months from approval to completion in 2009 and cost just over £1m. That was slightly smaller than the current site as they've since added 2 11v11, 1 9v9 and 1 7v7 pitch at an approx cost of £100,000 in 2012. But costs would likely be higher and take longer in Swindon as you're dealing with an urban area (even if it's greenfield site) which is always more complex, hence more expensive. Although the club may not need quite such an extensive site so that may defray costs a little, although I doubt it as the cost comes from build/complexity, rather than pitches (although 3G pitches aren't cheap and I'd assume they'd want a few 3G areas in there)

Can't see why it would take more than 2 years from planning OK to completion

Planning could be 1-2 years, they are the slowest moving people on the planet.

Power said it had been offered but rejected as not suitable - thought I mentioned that before!

No we are fucking not!

Well that took you over 20 minutes ;)

Buying a golf club is very much like buying a house...

wasn't Maisey the HM? Or am i thinking of another school in the locale?

Mr Coggan. Decent enough chap, I was hauled up in front of him a few times in my 6 years there, and he was always very fair. Unlike the fella at Junior school who liked a bit of caning, which I considered unfair in my cases.

Theres a golf course for sale on the village, long as the team don't mind an hour-ish commute from swindon every day.

Would imagine the quality of pitches, irrigation system etc will be vastly superior to Beversbrook though, it'll be around £3m or £4m when you factor in the purchase, planning, land clearance, changing facilities, probably a gym and all that sort of stuff.

That was when it was a toff's school - when it opened, the Swindon Mayor at the time (Diamond?), who lived on Bath Road, managed to get his son in there even though Commonweal Grammar was only 10 mins walk away.   :)

Not so sure about that my sis was at Commonweal, and was transferred to Park, because SBC wanted to make up the numbers there, we lived about half way between the two.

Where is the location for this? Sure I saw somebody mention it on another thread over the last couple of days but can't seem to find it.

Nothing concrete, just in the borough and near to sign off.

ASD seems to think it will be in Highworth!

Twelve oaks golf course as you come out of Highworth towards Lechlade.

http://www.flicwiltshire.com/town-to-start-work-on-new-training-ground-in-new-year-after-completing-purchase-of-12-oaks/

A timber-framed training ground, that'll be twee.

They'll need to evict Jed first

(http://i1372.photobucket.com/albums/ag351/rickrose1204/Mobile%20Uploads/2479335_a1caf114_zpslleit251.jpg) (http://s1372.photobucket.com/user/rickrose1204/media/Mobile%20Uploads/2479335_a1caf114_zpslleit251.jpg.html)

I do like it that the new training ground is no more than a few (about 5) fields away from the River Cole which forms the border with Oxfordshire.  (I am sad enough to have checked this on the satellite view of Google Maps.)

As with all things STFC, I'll believe it when I see it, but if it does happen then it's an impressive effort from Mr Power.

An asset for the club which may help when Power sells up.

Let's hope there are no 'development' opportunities there.

That's crossed my mind as well. Having no sale-able assets has been, ironically, something that may have protected STFC from unscrupulous developers in the past. I hope this is something that Power/The Trust have considered.

Me, too. Not owning the CG may be a blessing in disguise.

I presume, though, that if the Eady money is being used there must be some clause in the legal jargon prohibiting any future sale for anything other than sporting related.

I thought Power has said in one of his radio chats the Eady money was being kept back and used on the ground - I also hope that the likes of the Trust ensure that the training ground is owned by STFC and not owned by L Power & Co and leased to STFC, this for me is very important

Yes LP has said several times the eady money is not being used for the training ground.

Not sure if that is a good thing or not.

I don't know what power the Trust have to ensure that, LP is the owner and as such he can do what he wants as long as it is within the law of the land!  We could well be in the shit like Northampton who thought they had been taken over by foreign investors only to find out five days before a demand for £10 million from the council is due to be paid that it has all fallen through.  Perhaps Jed and co will ride in to their rescue!

I think you will find that the demand from the council was deliberate in conjunction with their trust due to a long winded takeover that was confidential so no one was bring told who it was - and then conveniently a few days later they pull out, I think the club borrowed money from the council to build a stand or something and nothing happened

I suspect that if Power has bought the land with his own cash there is little anyone can do regarding ownership etc.

Whenever a planning application is made it should at least clarify who the landowner is?

Hope it doesn't lead to a Kassam-type position

Jeez you are worse than my mrs for worrying about every single thing.

Well, everything seems to be going tits up at the moment and football chairmen aren't exactly known for their largesse.

Seems a reasonable enough thing to at least have a mild concern about - could also see arguments over valuation of the training ground cropping up in future takeovers running into difficulties as well. But on a glass-half-full basis, pleased to see it's going ahead, slightly concerned about where the money's coming from too.

So are you thinking that the monies raised by player sales, are being put into the acquisition of this patch of land, under the disguise of a training ground, while the club heads off to the Conference South....and it's then sold on to developers for a fat profit?

Have to admit hadn't thought of that.

No I wasn't. But now I'm worrying about that too. Thanks Reg!

The club could be also paying rent to the land owner for use of said. training facility. 

Nah.

If his plan involved raising the cash through player sales, then why not just keep going as he was and continue raising money through player sales? Why go with an extravagant development scheme (that could go wrong) when he could just wack the profit from player sales into his bank account each season instead?

If he was on a scam, there's no need for him to mention any training ground or whatever. Why open a can of worms when there's no need? The 'getting my investment back' argument would suffice and he's clearly not stupid.

The 'Kassam' argument could have some legs, but STFC would have to be in a reasonable position to pay able to pay rent at all which pretty much rules out him making anything if we are playing in non-league.

My concern is that the club having sale-able assets could leave us vulnerable to developers in the future. Developers that could take over the club for a quid or whatever and then cash in on assets - the debt owed.

I'd take that as a given and as long as it's a fair market rate, entirely reasonable tbh.

soapy tit wank Reg, Dougie Grant tried that one!!  He never got anywhere with SBC and turned it into the golf course!

But they are buying it outright, contracts to be exchanged by the end of this month apparently!

I think the only worry is who Power eventually sells up to.

Don't suppose we will know exactly how Power will finance the new facility - obviously he has already said a good slice of recent player sales will go into it.

He will sell up some time, obviously. And him owning the training facility will make it more attractive to any purchaser and no doubt Power would get a good return.

Way the current injury crisis is, this place should be the new training ground

It is being bought outright, doesn't mean the club will be the direct owner.

Here was me thinking that Mr Power was setting this up as some sort of generous act to carry the club forward...must be going soft in my old age  :)

It was in general. If i said the sky was a little less bluer today, then audrey would worry the sea was shrinking ;)

STFC history has turned me into a cynical old bastard, I admit.

But what's this about the sky . . .aaaaargh

run for the hills

run for your lives!!!!!!

Hopefully there will be a lease agreement between the club and owner in that instance and shouldn't present too much of a problem.

Adver reporting the site has planning permission for holiday homes.

So if STFC/Power buy the site, build the training facilities and a few holiday homes, hopefully the project could pay for itself.

has anybody come to the conclusion that one day this could quite possibly be our new ground?

Strange isn't it....buy a holiday home in Highworth  ???

Fucking hope not. The CG is in a fantastic location - albeit a bit of a dump.

The way we're going atm, Highworth Town's ground may do in the future....bit of a slope mind.

Adver living up to their usual shit quality 'journalism' then. If you look on the Swindon planning portal an application was put in in May 2014 for 18 holiday homes and was refused. So has nothing to do with Town!

Fair level of scepticism on here. One thing is for certain - there is nothing wrong with Power making profit from running the club. Otherwise, why do it? There is no rule to say that any business must reinvest all of its profit. There's definitely no rule to say that a loss making business must reinvest revenue.

We, like most clubs, are likely to continue to operate at a loss. If the man who is prepared to fund the losses wishes to make profit from some extraordinary projects (such as a new ground or training grounds) than I'm not sure we can complain.

The key is that the arrangements that are put in place are balanced and fair such that they do not inhibit the future of the club, financial or otherwise.

If there was housing adjacent to the training facility, does that matter?

If he owned the training ground and the club pays a rent, there is a conflict of interest - there is nobody to negotiate that deal in the interests of the club rather than the chairman. But if the rent is fair, if the lease is long (99 years+), there's a sporting convenant put on the land - then where does that leave us? With a better training ground, better able to attract players, just without a valuable financial asset that could be sold / used as security for loans for the club etc.

Pleasantly surprised it could be up and running in time for next pre-season.

Makes you wonder why they signed a 3 year deal in Calne.

Knowing LP there'll be a get out clause!!

Will playing golf improve thier footballing skills though  :sherlock:

Didn't do me any harm. When I started playing golf I was turning out in the Newbury and District 4th division, 4 years later after I stopped playing golf due to  bad back, I was in the 3rd. Coincidence?

I wouldn't have thought the course would be staying

But should the training ground not be an asset to the football club, like owning its own ground

As for LP making money out of the club, I'm the money he puts in is not interest free but generally at this level there is not much profit to be made, the profit will come if the club has been run well and it get's sold on, unlike previous where it has had to be sold for £1 along with large debts.

Yes. But the proviso for that is can the club afford to pay for the asset? If it can't, then external funding will be needed, whether from Lee Power or other investors, which either sits in the club as a debt or else the club doesn't initially own the asset but has to lease it. Or we wait until the club can afford to build the asset from it's own means. That could take a while

It's only worth owning such an asset if you can afford it, afford it when you need it, and exploit it. If Power owns it, so long as sufficient protection is there that he won't be able to screw the club over in the future (e.g reasonable future buy out arrangements at market value or a limited percentage above) then I'm happy.

As for his loans, the club won't have access to usual avenues of debt finance. No lower league football clubs will, so directors loans are the norm. If he takes a return through interest payments, again, it's a case of quite how reasonable they are. If they are along the lines of market rate (if the club solvent), then fantastic.

Contracts being signed tomorrow. Going to be at Twelve Oaks golf course.

Good interview with Fraser Digby on Flic about this and how they can get some pitches built up before having to wait to long

What's the point in hurrying if they are still contracted to Calne?

Unless they will move to the new place and are happy to carry on paying for Calne despite not using it.

Only the first team are contracted to Calne, that's the main point of this place, get all the age groups training together

Perhaps they can rent out pitches at the training ground to make a bit of money in the mean time?

I suspect there is a break clause in the contract, probably half way through.

What are the Trust guys up to these days - other than raising the money for stratton bank improvements, not sure if they have meetings with stfc and would be able to ask questions ?

So looks like they are planning two temporary pitches on the existing driving range at this stage?
http://pa1.swindon.gov.uk/publicaccess/files/C32095DC1FA9183B3FD9AA0600B4EABD/pdf/S_16_0589-TEMPORARY_PITCHES-536188.pdf

http://pa1.swindon.gov.uk/publicaccess/files/A324C335ABF2D8A3E5377392C84B5108/pdf/S_16_0589-PROPOSED_PITCH_DEVELOPMENT-536165.pdf

Application documents at http://pa1.swindon.gov.uk/publicaccess/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=documents&keyVal=O55PBGPT0EE00

I see the training ground change of use has been granted by the council last week. Good news!

So whats it going to be used for then ?

Raising money for a roof on the bank. Never going to happen even if they raise the funds. Too much red tape involved between club and council. Money could be better spent on the other 3 stands that do get used.

Training?

Anymore news on the progress of this? Does anybody on here drive past the site & can see things taking shape?

The game v Bassett last night was by way of a thank you for us being able to use their facilities for training....I'd imagine such grovelling means that is still the state of affairs.

The Highworth thing, is definitely a case of believe it when you see it, Steve Morgan...ex owner of Wolves reckons the project of plastering England with housing is still going swimmingly despite Brexit.

I'm not certain I'd wholly believe the new press fella if he tells me our owner doesn't want a piece of that action.

This is from the infamous facebook group. Cant see it myself

Buying a golf course is like buying a house.....

But really, surely there there are lawyers involved and conveyancers and the like? The money would surely get paid during the process otherwise it would not complete?

I don't actually know for sure, but I'm calling bullshit.

I was thinking the same. Surely if anyone had any sense it would go through solicitors. You don't just give someone a golf course and ask for the money after.

For one the deeds would need to be changed, which requires a solicitor/conveyancer.

From recollection the planning forms submitted with the application included certificate a being completed which is the applicant declaring they own the land, as it was submitted on behalf of the club by an agent they would know what they are doing, if the declaration was false it would invalidate the consent.

Plus if the previous owner has transferred ownership without receiving the cash they are either incredibly naive or will have a lovely claim against their solicitor!

As for a lack of work on the ground the consent they have only relates to change of use and laying out a couple of pitches, so apart from some groundwork I am not sure what you would actually see without going into the site?

So Peter Brown is just making shit up then?

What a fuck-nugget. No doubt there's plenty on that site that will lap it up with utter disregard as to whether or not it's actually true.

Why did I read that first line as "buying a gold course is a lot like making love to a beautiful woman"....

(https://headswapboy.files.wordpress.com/2015/12/swiss-toni-800x450.jpg?w=1200)

No idea, how old are they all, looking at the snippet of profile pics they are all grown adults but most of the posts show a grasp of the English language and an understanding of the real world that would put many under 10's to shame.

They are just lucky that Power is not as lively as Owen Oyston or there could be some nasty letters popping through doors!

Doesn't seem to be on there anymore. Maybe it was too much bullshit even for that group.

Enlighten us that dont have facebook what was said please.

Tans posted it as an attachment on the previous page.

Cheers didnt show up for some reason, there now, this damn pc is going in next doors hedge

Any normal property deal you can't complete without transfer of funds so can't see how she wouldn't have been paid. Sounds like someone wanting to sound like they are 'in the know' but have chose a subject they know nothing about to BS about. Clever....

I drove past it tonight. It was dark. Couldn't see anything.

THEREFORE

It doesn't exist.

I dare you to post that on the group. I bet people will agree.

In fact it might be an interesting experiment to see just how much bullshit one could come up with before any of them go "hang on a minute, that's probably unlikely"

Of course it does. The reason you couldn't see it is because it has been repossessed.

Why did they get rid of the old ghost?

I honestly believe that some will.

I dread to imagine the state some would get into if you came up with some far fetched tail of doom and gloom, they'd lap up anything as long as it's negative!

It was only last week that some were entertaining the idea that the abandonment was all a money-making scheme.

Did see that, shouldn't have started the game some were saying... I'm sure the league would have been fine with us postponing a game on a prestine pitch on the off chance it would rain a lot.

The accusation was that Power could have called off the match before kick-off, but chose not to because he could charge again for tickets if the match was abandoned rather than postponed.

Of course, plenty joined in as though this was definitely the case. Critical thinking seems to be a rare commodity on that group.

It'd be a reverse Occam's Razor - A Kostuik bellend, perhaps. I know someone who has worked at the CG for years and am technically ITK - I wonder where to start.

Looks like Cassidy is down there today judging by his Twitter so must be something going on.

Well the presence of a notorious cowboy like Butch Cassidy just confirms what we all think about Power.

Some positive news at least. Someone posted some photos of the new training ground earlier, pitches look pretty nice to be fair, looks like a proper job has been done.

Looks like the tee points have been kept on the old driving range, so that's how he plans to make money sell 100 balls and allow 'fans' to fire balls off at Rodgers!

Power said on Tuesday on BBC Wiltshire that the team go there on Fridays regularly now.

Do  they go in that battered looking security van ,that's always parked inside the 5 bar gate . :sherlock:

Wonder if they'll be there tomorrow instead of going to Oldham? I assume we don't do overnight stays these days.

Got any links?

https://twitter.com/mattrainey3/status/779007055977975808

That looks fantastic.

Cheers m8. Looks really good, fair play.

Has the toxic subsoil been excavated, or did they just seed over the top ?

what toxic subsoil?

Why do they want a flat pitch with grass on it? Most L1 pitches are rutted and sandy so they should be training on one of those. Typical of this namby-pamby tippy-tappy football shite!

Toxic (facebook) Subsoil most likely. Or something that came out of the 200 foot sinkhole..

http://mobile.swindontownfc.co.uk/news/article/2016-17/club-statement-town-reveal-plans-for-twelve-oaks-facility-3682762.aspx

First official confirmation that the Eady money is involved? Lots of new details there, and if the Eady trust are satisfied then it suggests that the facility will benefit the club even beyond Power's tenure. Promising?

It sounds good, as long as it's an asset of the club and not Lee Power.
I don't want a training ground funded by the Eady money being rented to us when Power fucks off.

if the club own it, not power or holding company, it could be good.

have to say i thought power was already doing this.

fucking odd time to release a statement

Interesting use of the word "considering". I thought it was where the transfer money went. Does power still get his housing. As batch says a weird time for a statement

I took considering to just mean planning permission isn't in place yet rather than anything more malign. Maybe that's just me not being cynical enough...

Hope he won't be charging rent on it


Sent from my iPhone

hope he won't be owning it full stop.

considering could mean lack of planning permission, or it could mean assessing the stipulations the Eady trust may put down.

who the fuck knows with power

I thought he said last season that work had started and they were hoping to start using it this season.

Must have been training playing 6 a side on the 14th hole putting green

My theory is the following. He's had enough and wants out, he will either rent to the club or will now or sell it outright with the club buying it with the Eadie money

interesting theory...

Definitely interesting.

Fuck knows what it means.

Stupid decision.

Can't believe the Eady trustees let Power anywhere near the money

1. Announcement timed to deflect the Bolton Bury result.
2. Training ground already being used in some capacity as Lukewarm likes to have his pre/post training coffee in the Co-op cafe in Highworth.  He was in there Saturday morning around 10am.  Unless he just likes the Co-op in Highworth, of course.

The Eady money should be for Swindon, not Highworth. This is an opportunity to push on with the county ground site if the trust can get their arses in gear and make realistic offers. Combine the Eady money with the trust bid. Get some large companies from the town involved too

We don't know they are. In fact, we don't know anything about this deal, so maybe let's hold up on slagging everyone off?

From the statement, seems the Nigel Eady Trust will own it or at least will own the site - does that mean the facilities on the site will be owned separately?

"The site has been secured initially by Chairman, Lee Power, and will be vested in the Nigel Eady Trust who are partnering the Club in the project. "

Let's hope then that Power has realized he isn't going to be able to build what  he wants

Sounds to me as if the Eady money has bought that part of the golf course earmarked for the training ground and will also pay for kitting it out.

Win win situation. Power retains a good chunk of the land, gets some money back off Eady and the club get a spanking new bespoke training ground whilst saving on the rent they are presently paying for training.

 As ever, I'll believe it when I see it.  Bit of PR spin to try and offset our imminent arrival in Div 4.

This was in Jan 2016, whats the holdup been then

http://www.watfordobserver.co.uk/news/14186272.display/

Why has the Watford Observer got an article on us?

not sure mate, its here also http://www.thisiswiltshire.co.uk/sport/14186272.Power_aims_to_have_Town_at_new_base_in_summer/

I would guess that STFC will not own the land (as STFC is presumably effectively owned by Power and his to profit from).

I expect the Eady Trust will own the relevant part (offices and pitches).  The terms of the Eady Trust appear that it is to hold the land for the benefit of the club and, it seems, also "community". 

The cost of the building work may be subject to some "joint venture" agreement between the Eady Trust and Power.  There may well be a lease giving STFC responsibility for meeting the maintenance of the site (groundsman, business rates, buildings) but with a peppercorn rent. 

If the club's use of the premises could be funded by other associated fund raising activities associated with the Eady Trust's interest in the site, then that could be a fantastic benefit.  The Eady Trust will not allow itself to pass on any "capital" benefit from which 3rd parties like Power or future owners could personally benefit, I'm sure.  Hopefully the Eady Trust would be able to withdraw any benefit to STFC and allocate it to the Trust if ever STFC were being shafted by an owner.

Sam Morshead has said on Twitter that the trust are buying the land off Power rather than the initial agreement of a peppercorn rent. I guess this is to give the club / trust the stability that the land can't be sold off / rent increased at a later date.

The trust / club will own the buildings, like the club own the stands but not the land of the CG, the club would be the maintainers of the facilities (like the CG). The facilities are supposedly going to be for community benefit so expect them to be rented out to other clubs / groups so it's in constant use and brings in additional revenue.

Interesting and re-assuring further background there, thanks.

I would hope our "Trust" and the Eady Trust are in contact.  The acquisition of the CG could be a further plank in securing the club's future unless the new training ground signals any shift away, ground-wise, for the club.

It's a shame Power the individual always seems so "closed" as his "model", though tarnished somewhat, does have its attractions.

That's a possibility for the Eady trust and the truststfc to work together but it depends on how much is in the kitty and if the trust want the financial backing from it, the problem with the CG is although the ET and TSTFC could own the land of the CG, the club will still own the stands which then puts them in trouble if they fall out with the owner and they decide to move elsewhere...... the ET would want to own the stands and rent them to the club as part of the ground rent (which I believe is the trust stfc plan for the SB and TE).

The trust stfc seem to have the funds in place to buy the CG land without any help, they just need the council to agree to sell it to them at a figure they both find respectable.

If true that is a concern as surely it would mean certain individuals would be loaning the money to the Trust so you would imaging have a hold over the CG until perhaps paid back.

But I read they was to offer bonds so fans could be able to have a stake in owning the club.

Owning the ground, not the club.

Doesn't the Trust generally work on a on member one vote system?

I think it is far more likely that the Trust would be given the money to purchase the ground (or raise it through members). They will not loan it, that would be madness.

The sooner this gets sorted the better. Training exclusively on a 3G pitch can only contributed to our dismal performances and our ridiculous number of injuries. It's nothing like real grass and much harder on the body.
Now it appears that it will be immune from the risk of third party ownership this can only be a positive.

This seems to be a recurring issue raised, the two stands of any useful function are the Arkells and DRS, however one is in excess of 40 years old and the other at least 20, in any such structure the only bits that can be reused are the steel framing and in all cases this has to be extracted from the cladding material and have all the concrete and brick removed. From professional experience demolition costs a lot more than people think and on that basis alone I would conclude that neither of the stands have any real value and in both cases it would probably be cheaper to buy new than try and extract these from the CG site (at great cost), transport somewhere else (at cost) and then rebuild (at further cost). It just ain't going to happen.


This has always been my concern likewise, plus if the Trust have got the money to buy the CG they have kept that bloody quiet from all those signing up to support the cause?

The fans will be able to buy bonds but there is a group of businessmen who are willing to put the majority of the money needed up to buy the ground, they were initially going to invest into roofing the SB but decided they couldn't as they wouldn't own the SB, they put the motion forward to the trust that they would give the trust the money they need only if the trust owned the ground (not the stands). This means the trust then have collateral and have income coming into keep maintaining the SB and other things.

Realistically, apart from the DR, all the stands need knocking down and rebuilding but that comes at a great expense (the DR can be extended especially with exec boxes in the middle). It's not going to happen for a very long time as raising that sort of money isn't easy and the trust / club will want to own the land before they go spending £10m+ on building brand new stands BUT the club desperately need them to increase attendances and also to increase matchday revenue.

If the club were to leave the CG they could sell the stands for scrap and make a pretty penny from that leaving the trust with nothing on the land so they have a dead duck of grass but no use for it, so they realistically have to keep the club and it's owners on good terms in the future.

I like the way things are going recently with the training facility and the ground purchase but Power needs to step up and do his part to try and put some life back into the team as it's kind of wilting at the moment.

But these 'businessmen' are either going to want their money back (with interest? and thus a loan) or will own the ground which will potentially bring us into a third party ownership scenario like the Kassam, unless they have promised just to give a million notes to the Trust. At least with the Council owning we have some certainty that with their ineptitude they are unlikely to have the appetite or professional ability to screw us over.


They will struggle to make a pretty penny, scrap values are not to bad but that's clean scrap steel, steel that has concrete bonded to it all over the place and still forms part of a building isn't worth very much as its a pain in the arse to move and process.

Interesting concerns on third party funding and clearance costs and values.  It would be better for TSTFC not to own the Ground than invite a Kassam situation.  I think that the club not owning the Ground has indeed protected the club in the past.

The risk of the club changing grounds in the future does surely pose a serious question for TSTFC.  

One would hope that some alternative development of the land could be made (with pre-agreed split re possible planning gain between SBC and TSTFC) with some sporting aspect to any development/and or financial inducement taking care of the Goddard sporting covenant (if enforceable).  It might even have to be sold for a land bank of some builder.

TSTFC could then reinvest in any new ground project if invited, re-pay any bondholders or other investors in its CG project and/or be better equipped to buy STFC.

Certainly there do seem to be some off-field reasons to be cheerful - though this time 6 or 7 years ago some of us were dreaming that 2017 might see a shiny, re-developed CG hosting sustainable Championship football.

That's a question for the trust but I believe they would be putting in the money on the same terms as fans which are bonds, they can't call in / sell their bonds and can't ask for their money back, it's basically a donation to the trust.

how times change eh? Unfortunately even the greatest plans go down the shitter and basically it's the same as it's always been at stfc, poor financial management which then leads the club to be sold onto the next person to try and change things.

For all his faults, Power is trying to be open about his ultimate goals, he said from the start he was never going to finance the club personally so the club would have to run at break even, he would get the club it's own training facility and get us championship within 3 years or something.

He hasn't given us the championship football yet but there is some optimism about the other things, it maybe that getting us to the championship is beyond what he can do on the budgets he has set so possibly will need to sell on now he has partially completed the other things he set out to do (profitable club / training facility). Things look bleak on the football side but overall the club seems to be in a good position, just needs some investment in the team, will that be from Power? time will tell.

I know fuck all about these things, but can there not be a scenario whereby the present CG site is sold for development to the highest bidder, SBC take their £2m or whatever it is they would accept from the Trust and then reinvest the remainder in a new stadium somewhere else in the borough.

The CG site must be worth a fortune if allowed to be developed commercially.

It has a covenant on it so can only be used for sporting purposes, hence why the council won't let the club move away from the ground as they would have a useless piece of land they won't get 200k rent from  :-[

oh ffs.... calling Pauld ...covenant claxon

Don't get PaulD started as I did a couple of weeks ago ;)

I will let the Covenant King answer that point, but I am more intrigued regarding the manner that the Council 'won't let the club move away from the ground' as the club only have (I think) a rolling lease at the moment they could fuck off with probably a years? notice and there is nothing the Council could do - bar hit them with some dilapidation claims.

The club would have to buy land to put the new ground on, guess who owns a lot of the land in the Swindon borough? Now lets say that the club get hold of some land, they need planning permission to build anything in on that land, guess who runs that? The club have come up with many plans to either rebuild the cg or move to a new stadium over the years and the council always step in the way e.g.

- was going to be something up by the M4 J15 - didn't happen as it's not brownfield land, but they can build a hospital
- was going to be where whitchelstow is now - didn't happen
- was going to be north swindon (shaw) - didn't happen

http://www.swindontown-mad.co.uk/news/tmnw/stadium_plans_rejected_167407/index.shtml

The council will do as much as they can to stop the club moving as they don't want them out of the town as they will lose £200k a year in rent, thousands in taxes and the numerous other things that the football depends on including bus users, parking etc.

The only chance of the club getting anything new would be to build it out of the Swindon borough (so either down by chippenham or up by Hungerford).

I mean this in the nicest possible way but none of that makes any sense whatsoever to me

Gareth. Your posts would be more agreeable if you stopped stating your opinion as a fact.

Gareth doesn't really get this shit.

Have the Council ever refused to sell any land to the club? They don't own all the land do they?


As a Planning Consultant I am entirely aware who grants planning permissions ;), I am also aware that in each of the cases you have outlined the case for a new ground has been very flawed in planning terms from day 1, as illustrated by the fact, I suspect, that the club have never bothered to appeal any of the refusals to PINS, as for the link you have added not sure what that actually says although it does perpetuate the myth regarding light and the Bank?

Likewise if the Council were to sell some land to the club for a new ground any planning decision would not actually be made by the Council at all as it would have to be referred to the Secretary of State (Actually the Planning Casework Unit in Birmingham) to determine as the Council would have a financial interest in the decision.


Possibly so, but likewise the club have royally pissed the Council off over the years by not paying their rent and thus I suspect the feeling with many members is not as clear cut as portrayed! In terms of Council budgets £200k PA is not much more than petty cash?

I am not for a minute saying the Council are perfect, from professional experience they are really not (they are a pain!), but if the club had actually approached things better through various ownership's something could have been achieved and to lay the blame at the Councils feet ignores that fact.

Sorry if it wasn't made clear but that was my opinion and not facts, the council have a vested interest in the club being at the CG so rightly or wrongly it seems like they have or would do as much as they can to try and keep the club in the town rather than let them rebuild elsewhere in the borough.

It's not just the 200k PA that the club pay, it's everything else that goes with it including the usability of the land, the footfall to the town and the rates charged to the businesses that rely on the football (pubs etc).

More I think about it, that was just a rant about how it seems from an outsider where as councils like Reading and Oxford seemed more willing to help their clubs. Hopefully the trust, council and Power (STFC) are able to build bridges and put something together which finally sees something done about the CG as it's in a poor state after years of failed promises.

Gareth... the policy of SBC under the Tories is to divest themselves of any assets, which may be seen as community useful as they don't turn a profit for their business donor chums. At the moment, they're looking to sell the CG, legally they have to abide by the ACV, but if that fails then it will go to a developer. These are dangerous times.

You write all that and then manage to undermine your own post in the last paragraph. STFC could easily leave the borough and carry on in some guise. Hell it could relinquish its league status and play at Supermarine if it wanted to and there's very little the council could do. In terms of buying land I doubt there's that much worth having that the council haven't already sold, the golf course was bought privately for example.  I would imagine most land suitable for ground would be owned by the likes of Oxford University or private individuals.
Most of the schemes you mention above were never going to happen as they were in highly controversial locations, had parties involved with highly questions motives and most importantly the club didn't actually have a plan or money to build a stadium without including thousands of houses to finance the schemes making them even more controversial.

Erm

http://www.swindonadvertiser.co.uk/sport/15233692.No_commitment_yet_from_Eady_Trust_to_Town_project/?ref=twtrec

Oooh it's like the old days.

Club statement tomorrow, please.

Sorry to keep picking you up but again you don't appear to have provided any firm evidence to support this supposition.


Does match day bring that much footfall, as an outsider (but home supporter) I have only ever walked from the station to the ground and back on a match day, never been into the town centre (in fact cannot remember lat time I was in Swindon town centre, probably 30+ years ago to be honest), and away fans will do the same if they travel by train?

As for business rates the Council has the cost and ball ache of collecting them but only keeps a comparatively small proportion, the majority goes to central government?

Finally I think we sadly have to face the fact that the club does not mean that much to the overwhelming % of the population of the Borough, and thus is not a high priority for elected members, based upon the 2011 census the Borough has a population of c.209,000 and at a high estimate we get say 7,000 home fans per game.... thats c.3%....


In terms of Reading the Council were not that helpful as the club had to fund and build a bloody great road a part of the deal, plus the site was one which was a ballache to develop due to its former use, I would suspect that if SBC had a former dump that needed remediation for development they would be happy to offer it to STFC for a new home, likewise I would rather we did not end up on an industrial estate next to a sewage works (there is a definite trend here). In both cases Councils appear to have identified pain in the arse sites and seen the football club as a method to kick start development, whereas STFC have gone for sites with substantive planning issues - does Swindon have any such sites?

The club statement itself was very non committal "considering..." and (the Eady money) "could be used" stating it could be 2 years before its ready.

This article just put the timeline in place. Its very very early in the process and as Reg says - I'll believe it when I see it.

I don't however think its a bad thing for the club. The devil is of course in the detail - is the land suitable, will it get through planning. what else is Power proposing for his own land as part of the development, is he selling back to the club at cost or taking the piss and looking for profit...
-------------------------------
The thing that has pissed me off, he made a big song and dance about buying this and developing it for the club (for this year?). He's seemingly done fuck all in reality.

Either he's realised he's bitten off more than he can chew, or he's full of shit.
Or he's executing an exit strategy, but I think that's a bit optimistic/pessimistic*.

* delete as appropriate dependent on fullness of your glass.

Just backs up my theory really. This is just a very public for sale advert by Power in my opinion

The club's statement was carefully worded. The Eady's statement does not contradict it, although that wont stop many acting as though it does.

As for everything else... I duuno.  

A growing consensus - has he got what he wanted all along, the plot of land out at Highworth? The club's certainly in a better position for sale if wheels are in motion for assets at the training ground and a fan-owned stadium (obviously completely depending on the terms of both of those, which none of us know).

A long and interesting road ahead I'd imagine, but seems to me too that this is another step on the exit strategy (Waterford being the first one).

could be

but equally could be a no cost to power solution to improving  his academy turd polishing model. better training facilities= better chance of recruitment .

 This is all getting distinctly weird.

 DRS and PP, could you explain why you think this is Power flagging up a sale of the club?

Or DPDS jumping the gun as usual, same as they did on the TipStad fiasco

Would usually go that route but the fact the club issued a statement this time suggests Power has a lot more to do with it.

Reg it is literally just a gut feeling i have.

The line saying DPDS had been involved for years with STFC planning matters is hardly encouraging.

What is DPDS?

They're a planning consultancy. They were the ones who did the grand unveiling of the TipStad scheme with Mike Bawden et al back in the day. Shortly before it went TipsUp. Due to not having been properly thought out and a bit unlawful. Oh, and TalkTalk :)

Of the 3 plans you list, none went further than a back page story in the Adver other than the Shaw (TipStad) scheme, which was launched jointly with the then leader of the council. So hardly the council standing in the club's way! It foundered because it was posited on the council selling the club the CG for housing, but at an undeveloped price. Which they weren't lawfully allowed to do. Oh, and Shaw is in West Swindon, not North Swindon.

Bollocks. We have an excellent site for a stadium, which should benefit the club, the town and fans if properly developed. The club is Swindon Town, Chippenham and Hungerford already have teams.

But this time they have seemingly launched it with Fraser Digby involved who seems to be working for Power on this project, I assume it is just in an 'overseeing' capacity and Power trusts him to represent his interests with him being out of the country, not sure if it is just on the training ground  or for the winder development of the land as well.

DPDS are up in Old Town, by the Arts Centre.  They seem all right, the consistent failing in STFC planning proposals is more likely STFC and/or the Council Leadership.

This all looks generally positive I would have thought.  You can bet if the Eady money gets used it will tie the club up in knots to ensure it is for the benefit of the club.

My niece text me yesterday saying just had a meeting with Digby, I asked what about and she replied training ground. Apparently she now does some part time work for Highworth council.
Beyond that she wouldn't elaborate  :hmmm:

A Planning consultancy http://www.dpds.co.uk/ , I had an interview with them when I left University about 20 years back but they didn't give me a job, STFC would no doubt have a new ground already if they had employed me .....  :D (not really!)

The Adver story is very sketchy in areas so I suspect that not too much should be read into its content, I think the only conclusions can be drawn are that a) the Club and Eady Trustees are talking and b) someone has spoken to Highworth Town Council about it. Both entirely logical things to do, but probably too soon to be drawing any conclusions (be them negative or positive).

On b), it seems according to Sam Morsehead's twitter, that this accounts for the slightly odd timing of the club statement on Tuesday night - they (the club and DPDS) had a meeting with Highworth Council on Tues to update Highworth Council on their (club/DPDS) progress/proposals and the club decided that they should go public about what was happening rather than have half details and rumours leak out. Which seems reasonable, tbf.

I thought half details and rumours is what has leaked out from the club?

Is that security van still parked by the gates ?

No its goals that have leaked!

Power wanting to upgrade planning for 18 holiday lets to "residential" shock [apparently to help fund training ground project and no mention here of Eady Trust funding in the article] and local councillors objecting to floodlights etc on the training ground aspect.

http://www.swindonadvertiser.co.uk/sport/15331803.Concerns_raised_over_Swindon_Town_s_training_ground_plans/

Any comments from the better connected or informed as ever welcome.  Which came first I wonder, the planning opportunity or the training ground suitability?

Have a relative at Highworth council. She told me the plan the club outlined was half the site being sold to STFC with Power holding the rest. The 2 buildings currently on site to be adapted for admin and changing rooms etc or just flattened and purpose built.
A proposal was put forward to convert the planning permission from holiday let's to residential though this lays outside the current highworth housing plan. The house sales being used to fund the cost of facilities.
The club were 100% sure they had the Eady money which sounded as if that was being used to purchase the land from Power, Highworth council hadn't seen Eady documents last I heard but as it's for community use as well as club then a 4G pitch was proposed for community use in amongst the other pitches.

Haven't heard anything for a while so not up to speed.
My guess is Power will chuck in planning for housing if and when club get permission on their  part.

Firstly the article barely makes sense, oh and the first paragraph is total bollocks as at best all Highworth TC can do is object to the proposals, SBC will always be making the final decision.

I don't have time to go back through the planning permission for the lodges (scrub that its here is anyone is interested http://pa1.swindon.gov.uk/publicaccess/files/51A35AAC83CAEFC86E4B3DE0143B4AAD/pdf/S_14_0823--505712.pdf )but I strongly suggest that to build houses would be heavily contrary to planning policy and unlikely to gain success (I suspect why consent was only sought for lodges in the first place), unless they can present it as some manner of enabling development case but to do that they would have to major on the public benefits, get the community on board etc.

We got something similar through last year for a village boozer in Buckinghamshire, which had closed and the community bought to reopen and to make viable needed 15 new houses to pay for it, the Planning Officers recommended it for refusal as it was contrary to policy but it got through as all the PC members the Local Councillors all supported it and the Planning Committee went with the level of community support. However ours was at least on the edge of the village, this one is in the open countryside and thus is likely to be bloody hard unless they can get the locals and Council on board.

Also I have no idea what she is wittering on about regarding traffic as highways didn't object to the original application and no highways Conditions were imposed?

Can't believe that the local council have taken that stace on the training ground obviously they wouldn't agree with the houses but the training ground shouldn't be a problem at all! Very short short sighted.
As for the houses who can blame him who wouldn't try it. I believe the previous owners tried it, I wish him and the club the best of luck.

So the locals have no problem as long as there isn't light pollution, increased levels of noise, marginally more traffic, and that they don't have to drive a little bit to access the community 4G pitch that they currently don't have anyway! Fucking NIMBY's.

Always the same thing with any development isn't it. Cant stand the cunts.

There are no residents there. It's just passed the Blackworth Industrial Estate and a fair way away from Sevenfields.

All this bollocks and yet they have built a small town of new houses next to the greyhound/speedway stadium.

There's like maybe a cottage or 2 near by but no real residential within a good couple of km.

Sent from my SM-G930F

If the facility is just for STFC there won't be any light or noise pollution - the players all fuck off by 2pm so they can get down the pub/bookies.

They are pretty close but have a massive roundabout and will be quiite far back into the land so not sure what the issue is with floodlights and noise, especially since it's never going to be late night (after 10pm). Are the just refusing for any spurious reason?

It's going to be community use so any local teams could use it, hence using a 4G, bit like the Swindome and the Cirencester Arena.

There were football pitches initially on that site and Woollen Sports had a very successful team in the Hellenic League. When they won their Division they wanted to move on up through the pyramid but required floodlights to do so. Guess what? Local objection prevailed (mainly from cottage nearby iirc), upheld by Highworth Town Council, hence team folded. Touch of deja vu here.

There's 4 rather expensive looking houses adjacent to the old Woollen Sports pitch just before the main entrance to the golf course. Would bet that this is where the objections come from as I'm sure at least one of them will belong to someone with influence.

The house nearest the golf course came in the deal so I asume power own that, but Yeh I should think the others would complain at the back of the land there are two farms so they'd be complaining to

Just noticed Aldi are building a new store in Highworth - north of Blackworth Ind. Est. Isn't that Power country?

Yeh I thought the same, can't be to far away.

Will be fun to see as the ones opposing the club having floodlights for a training ground wouldn't be too impressed with a supermarket with 100 spaces even closer.

The only thing between "Power's land" and the supermarket is 2 houses, will be fun to see if they oppose the Aldi plans

 Just have the training ground in Waterford.

Anybody heard anymore on this lately?

The security van is still parked by the gates  :sherlock:

It's going to be ready just after the new speedway stadium ;)

is that just before Akers Way is finished

Shortly after they finish the roads in Wichelstowe

(https://my91yearoldmom.files.wordpress.com/2014/01/hell-frozen-over.jpg)

Dont forget the Oasis redevelopment . . Mr Perkins.

Any news on this or just a load of tosh

Training ground me hairy arse. It always was a load of bollocks.

The security van has gone.
Ropey old horsebox parked in the gateway now.

What's sparked all this then? Other than impatience and bad temper?

Not ours sadly, but the fairy tale down on the coast continues....

https://www.afcb.co.uk/news/club-news/new-training-ground-plans-given-green-light

shock

Any news on ours? Those who drive past it, are there any noticeable changes?

The gates been painted

Red??

Yellow and blue

I had a feeling you might say that  :D

Pushing two years since this pic was posted!! WTF is going on with this? Are we even training there at the moment?

Liddington, Beversbrook, Highworth, Bassett - who can tell?

Fucking shambles.

If only there was an opportunity recently for people to call in and ask the manager where they have been training...

Yeah, but given nobody did its probably OK to ask about it in a thread called "New Training Ground" isn't it? There's usually a fan who can answer this type of question.

Ah, right. I shall refrain from reminding people that they can put such questions to the club in the future.

 ::)

Thanks
-------

I''d heard we were using it 1 day a week, but who knows.

Brown on current situation:


I guess Bassett, and any two from Liddington/Beversbrook/Highworth.

Power has gone a bit radio silent, which I don't mind given the ground was originally July 2016 . The (unreliable) fan chatter is planning permission and required ground works have delayed it somewhat. Lets charitably call the situation "fluid".

Fuck, I knew I should have planned my life around that hour of opportunity.

Along with the potential purchase of the ground by the Trust the training ground is one of the most important parts of the clubs medium to long term future. Building up some form of structure for the club going forward is crucial. It would be nice to hear an update from LP detailing the latest. Maybe some of you locals know what 'planning' issues are holding this up.

it's just pub talk, could be any reason. An update would be welcome given Browns criticism of things.

I think that LP mentioned in his last interview with the BBC that there would be some news on the training ground in 6 weeks.

Can't remember when the interview was, but it was more than 6 weeks ago.

cheers wobbly, seem to keep missing BBC phone ins/interviews.

Have you tried turning on the wireless.... I've found this helps.

Given that Power's exit strategy now involves fronting up the CG purchase for a developer, I'd be very surprised if anything ever happens at Highworth.

you may be onto something....

He owns the land so something will happen, it just depends what.

Owning land in Swindon and district, usually means sitting on it until a house builder shows interest.

If he can make a profit then who's to blame him? It'll slightly tarnish his boast about being the first owner to buy Town a training ground that they actually own mind.

There is nothing wrong with making money - just not under the 'cloak of invisibility' of our club !

Wasn't the previous owner a massive town fan who's wife after he passed away sold the land to power for the training ground in a kinda tribute to her late husband ?  If that's the case would be pretty low to use land for anything else.

http://www.swindonadvertiser.co.uk/sport/15233692.No_commitment_yet_from_Eady_Trust_to_Town_project/

That from 13 months ago. No change since?

Nope. He's still dead.

 :clap:

well played, well played indeed

OK, so somebody on Twitter responded , won't use their name as they have a locked account, but AFAIK its just a fellow fan (no not Tans!).

At the last council meeting  planning permission wasn't granted due to light pollution and a few other q's, so the plans will need re-work to address that.
==
I assume that is public record somewhere.

So it seems that its a bit off just yet, assuming the finances are in place. But as was pointed out, the bloke from Axis being around probably helps.

edit: Oh wait, that could be from June 2017
http://www.swindonadvertiser.co.uk/sport/15331803.Concerns_raised_over_Swindon_Town_s_training_ground_plans/

The minutes of the last Planning meeting (April 2018 next one is June because of the local elections) make no mention of the training ground application, however there was mention of the application next to the ground (was it FITC or something) so someone may be getting confused?

The planning application for CoU of the golf course to training ground (S/16/0589 | Change of use from Golf driving range to Football Training Facilities and associated works. ) was granted on 28 June 2016. But the planning file seems to show some post decision fucking about which I cannot really make head nor tail of- although from experience of SBC planning that could merely be their piss poor admin, as none of the later documents seem to relate to the application proposal and pre-date the Decision Notice!

There is a Condition stating that the parking area needs to be laid out and completed before the site is occupied for training purposes, but I can find no planning reason why they should not be on site training now. 

As for light pollution what professional football club trains at night?

BTW if Power has secured the land with aspirations for residential development he is either playing an incredibly long game here or being very badly advised.

I thought that when the 4G pitches were up and running they would be available to us commoners for 5-a-side and suchlike. Need lights for that.

Possibly so but as the planning permission was only sought for a temporary use creating two grass pitches for occupation from July 2016 its outside the scope of what was applied for. In theory the consent runs out in summer 2019 anyway.

Didn’t realise permission was needed for grass pitches. With their already being a clubhouse on site with adjacent parking why is that an issue?

Can’t work out who is dragging their heels on this.

The plans presented were for nine pitches. Nine. +1x4G...That's quite a lot of pitches...
I assume then from Horlock's post that this proposal never arrived at formal application stage

Seems to me that the training ground development and the purchase of SN1 are linked, in as much as Power needs money for both, relegation to Div4 has probably put a dent in those aspirations and tantalising sell on fee for Fred Flintstone hasn’t materialised either. Step forward the ground developers sometime in the near future.

Much as it pains me to say so, cannot see where any blame can lie with the Council on this one, the club have had unfettered consent to do the initial works to get training on site for nearly 2 years now....


The only application submitted relates to the temporary works to get the site occupied for first team training, that has had consent for nearly 2 years now and neither that has happened or any subsequent application submitted (for reasons unknown)


The only financial that seems to be holding up the development for the training ground is the cost of laying out the parking which has to be complete before the use can be commenced, the earlier pictures seems to suggest that the pitches have been laid out so who knows?

Can someone hire a helicopter and go and take a birds eye view to see if anything has been done

Car park is enough for 30 motors, plan can be found here - if the link works....

http://pa1.swindon.gov.uk/publicaccess/files/1FD8A23500C04A89465B8E50461BE152/pdf/S_COND_16_1311-TEMPORARY_PITCHES_SHOWING_PROVISION_FOR_VEHICLE_PARKING-544658.pdf

I strongly suspect that the elephant in the room might be the existing consent for 18 holiday lodges to be built on part of the site and specifically whether implementing the training ground application prejudices that consent?

Horlock, are you able to call on one of your associates at SBC's planning department for some inside info? I seem to recall you have memories of your dealings with them in the past ;)

It’s your specialist subject so I bow to your greater knowledge. It does smack of coming back to money. The 18 holiday lodges i imagine being In the valuation area of the Cotswold Hobourne? So cash generating circa £300-500k each? Even at £300k = £4.6m less building costs.

:no: :hmmm:

It will need to be implemented by September this year or the consent will lapse (not to say that a technical start has not been made already!)....

http://pa1.swindon.gov.uk/publicaccess/files/51A35AAC83CAEFC86E4B3DE0143B4AAD/pdf/S_14_0823--505712.pdf

Conditions only allow 11 month of the year occupation which will obviously give values a bit of a hammering, not sure what sort of holiday hot spot Highworth is these days, although the chippy was always great when I was a kid!

The 11 month occupancy is a common and standard caveat for this type of dwelling as you know, indeed a family member has a static caravan on the south coast and the site owners are replacing some of them on the higher elevation of the site with bungalows and these are two bed and start at £109k for a 20 year lease plus services at circa £4.5k per annum. The views are stunning if all you just want to do is look out to sea...so for the planned dwellings at Highworth i doubt more than £300k maybe less but it does generate some serious dosh however you look at it and as you rightly say is dependant on planning. I say Power is skint and by that I mean in relation to how you perceive millionaire football club owners to be financially. Has more money than me by a country mile but i’m not trying to front up and run a football club.

My bad. That was meant to read 'fond' memories given I've seen you slating them on here before.

Will any prospective holiday lodge purchaser be happy sharing the site with a football club’s entire footballing age groups?

Depress the price, I reckon. Which is why I think the very idea of Power and a training ground is nothing more than hot air.

The key word in your comment is ‘Share’, I think the short answer is no. However, it must surely depend on the facilities these lodges have themselves and their proximity to the other facilities on site a bit like a private gated community which is fine but if there is fuck all to do what is the point? Also it wouldn’t look good for anyone walking around their lodge in the buff being stared at by a load of kids would it? Equally being sat with the neighbours enjoying a BBQ and having a ‘Can we have our ball back Mr. please’ every five minutes. I will say it again, those lodges are his golden ticket to make the site viable. After all whatever he paid for it if the golf is decommissioned and the sole use is sports training as such then the income is going to be minimal, against the initial outlay substantial.

But there are ‘proper’, established holiday lodges just down the road at the Cotswold Water Park.

Why anyone would want to buy one outside Highworth I have no idea.

Maybe permission being granted for lodges is a gambit for obtaining future permission for residential housing. Power wouldn’t have bought the golf course without first knowing what he wants to do with it and the chances of achieving it.

I honestly can’t envisage a training facility there.

It is indeed a conumdrum. I agree about the Cotswold Hobourne, why buy one in Highworth, other than the Chippy as Horlick pointed out. It does have a ring of testing the water regarding future housing.

Plans for STFC new £6m training facility released tonight,breaking news on BBC Wiltshire Twitter at midnight!!! Shows a mock up picture of a new HQ building and pitches in the distance.

Looks like I was right and wrong. The lodges were, indeed, a stepping stone to apply for residential housing.

If permission is granted that’s a big wow. Wondering what sort of timescale we’re looking at.

Who’s going to be the first to chirp up they’d rather £6m was spent on players instead of a poxy training centre - cue Facebook?

I must add a word of caution. A similar situation is playing out over the new greyhound/speedway stadium at Blunsdon. The new build submitted plans and permission granted and the final tranche of residential houses being built was dependent on the new stadium being built. There is no sign of any new stadium and the caveat dropped so the houses will still get built.

Owners, Gaming International, also bought Torquay Utd with the promise of a new stadium but, surprise surprise, that has been dropped in favour of yet more residential housing.

https://www.swindontownfc.co.uk/news/2018/june/stfc-to-unveil-detailed-proposals-for-new-training-centre--hq/

that answers that then. could be very good if it comes off. if.

I'm hoping we'll be out of league two by then, Phil. Unless he's suggesting we'll be in the new training ground soon.

it looks a way off doesn't it (the training ground, hopefully not L1)

yes Audrey, the Swindon speedway farce is of concern.

The difference here though being power also owns the fc, nothing to stop him making the profit on the homes his exit strategy I suppose but we'll have to see.

seems a way off at the moment

How dare a business man want to make money...

So what if there are houses that he can sell. Someone is investing money into making the players, hopefully, better.

Yes, as I've pointed out many times GI, are Swindon based, so of course will have no interest if SBC sells the CG to Power.

I don't think we'll need to get too excited about this latest plan, unlikely to happen, however desirable.

I don't think anyone has queried Power making money out of the golf course. Just commenting that plans are just that until something actually gets built.

If he can't get planning permission for residential, it wont be built.

Which is understandable.

I know from my job, to get a design to that stage, a lot of money, and a lot of man hours will have gone in so far. That's not just the end product of a single person on sketch up. So someone is serious about getting it done.

Exactly.  I can't help but think back to the old A ground, a fine training facility, consisting of one pitch, with floodlights, a small stand,  incorporating a club house type facility with changing rooms, some limited parking, but the players would walk to and fro from the CG.  Realistically, you don't need a whole lot more.  OK fine if you can get the sexy extras, but they're not going to materially affect what happens on the pitch.

The new £6 million training HQ proposal by #stfc is not being backed by money left in the will of lifelong supporter Nigel Eady, @AdverSport understands.
https://t.co/aaCRFCNu3F https://t.co/iqtdfhYj4b

It's a very fine plan.... however, in relative terms, quite small scale. 

The big house builders, multi nationals and UK based companies know how to steam roller local planning, by putting their money into Tory party donations etc and taking it up to ministers for the nod however vehement objections are from the local council or the local population.

The wheeze in the Borough of Swindon, is that apparently not enough new houses are being built, even though you can't move for estates sprouting up, so it enables developers/ministers to nod through the over-riding of any local plans.  This is where the cost lies, greasing that particular pole. I doubt Lee is in this league...

Isn't the key issue for SBC that they didn't complete a Strategic Plan showing how they would achieve the numbers they were targeted?  That is what makes developments like this more probable -they don't have an alternative site earmarked when someone appeals, so they don't really even have the power to decline a planning permission request.

Shall I rise to the blatantly incorrect conspiracy theories and bore you all.....

For all our sakes.... Nope...  :D

Indeed, if it was just a lip service job could have been done for about 5% of the cost that would have cost.

Pah, Mr Whippy had a whole stadium mapped out in his head in 5 minutes for the price of a few pints and the council eating out of his hand. Don't forget even his enemies admired him. Don't know what all this faffing about is for.

That's just the scale of the drawing....  ;)

:)

these things are small...these things are far away...

He was like a Swindon-scale pre-Trump wasn't he? It would have been a biiiig beautiful stadium, the biggest and best stadium we'd ever seen.

I see the adver article says a few members of the squad might be at the consultation event - why are the players being dragged into this, it is nothing to do with the playing squad and AFAIC it is unfair to drag them into something to say how good it will be when it is only at the early stages.

I know I'm no expert but how can the club be talking about getting grants to help build this I assume form the likes of sport England, when the football club will not own this ground and will not see any revenue from it, so they would effectively be given the grant cash to Lee Power to line his pockets.

I notice also that Mr Power is staying quiet on this not even a quote from him.

I'd say it's very relevant to hear about it from players view points actually, they can emphasise how hard it has been training at multiple locations that are inadequate for a professional clubs needs. Any of them that were here under Williams will be able to talk about the fact we had to spend most of a season training on a 3G pitch which couldn't have helped our cause much. Those that have been at other clubs who have had decent facilities such a Taylor & Vigs will be able to offer a view on why it is needed.

Shut up. Why does Power need to make a statement. The club has.

This is all good for the club, staff and players. It's normal to apply for grants for such things, as it is sport related which will also help the community.

And yeah, Power is going to make millions out of this.

Players will likely have some sort of community contribution written into their contracts. Even then, they may have been happy to help out.

If people are having to scrape the barrel this low for something to moan about, it must be pretty good news on the whole. On the face of it at least.

I'm surprisd they're not on holiday still.  I suspect the good nimbys of Highworth won't be moved from their entrenched views by the blandishments of James Dunne and Luke Norris.

Sport England will have already been involved, even if only to tick boxes, that it passes their criteria. Another thing that, takes time and money on designs.

TBH, I would be a bit pissed off if he was spending his/the club’s money on this. In my mind, that should be spent on the playing side. Raising it via a development is really the only viable option for a small club.

PMSL  There has been some debate on a Highworth web site following on from a comment from a loacl resident that she understands that it is a complete new stadium that they are asking pp for!!  Somebody even suggesting that if permission is granted it must include a caveat that a nw dual carriageway is built from the A419 to cope with the expected influx of supporters!!  Chinese whispers x 100!!!

and the Aldi shoppers.

I thought SBC had a plan but basically the developers aren't building enough houses, so it makes it irrelevant and they can do what they like.

Adver 6 June:

Durrant added: “We consulted Highworth Town Council last year to outline the initial proposals and they specifically asked us to undertake some community consultation when more details were available.

“We will do this on June 16 and return to a future meeting with Highworth Town Council to discuss both the proposals and the reaction that we receive as a result of the consultation event.’’

Surely having a couple of Town players there contributes to creating a community consultation event? Better than just having potentially faceless developers.

Yes,seems that is the case.  A plan exists that nobody is sticking to, so the Govt. have already essentially made it worthless by approving planning permission for developments on land outside the adopted plan.

 I see that the mysterious Steve Anderson has been wheeled out to talk up the benefits of the project.... first time I've seen or heard owt from him.... and a pic too.

Until I saw that pic I thought he was an "imaginary" friend of LP!!

He actually looks quite normal.... which is worrying.

Anyone going to post a pic of Steve Normal (not to be confused with Steve Murrall) then?

http://www.swindonadvertiser.co.uk/sport/swindon_town_2014/16277840.New_training_base_can_sell_Town_s_future/

He looks very similar a mate of mine who shares the fairly common surname...wonder if they're related?  :hmmm:

Did anybody manage to get along to the consultation at Highworth earlier?

Someone on the oracle of truth that is the adver site posted this

Thanks Ells, sounds quite positive - from that POV anyway. But also a bit off actually happening.

Made me laugh a bit - its my ball and I'm going home!

Or he's not accountable to peasants like us. I suppose no approval for houses no training ground.

I read the btl comments on thisis, to get context etc  Definitely a mistake.

Piece just added to the club site.

https://www.swindontownfc.co.uk/news/2018/june/swindon-town-proposals-for-new-hq--training-centre/

Quite positive to be fair although does seem to lack balance. Surely at least one angry resident turned up?

Did any Mucklowes turn up?

Nah, there was a steam fair on in Devizes.

Why would the applicant report that anyone disliked the scheme?  :hmmm:

To give a fair reflection & greater understanding for the untrained eye as to what the likely obstacles they are going to face are I'd have guessed. You obviously know a lot more about it then most given your background. Is it common practice for the contractor to paint a picture of a bed of roses or do they tend to steer away from any negative vibes when feeding back on events such as this?

https://www.swindonadvertiser.co.uk/news/17292323.opposition-against-plans-for-new-football-training-ground-housing-and-horse-riding-centre-in-highworth/?ref=mr&lp=6

Local residents & councillors unhappy with something new being built near them?

Well I, for one, am shocked.

It's not even near them really. It's on the way out of town towards lechlade.

Bed of roses all the way!

Residents in NIMBY shocker! Although in this case they appear more to be BANANA's

It does look like he has added bits though since what he first proposed

You have got to be unlucky to be a hilltop town which suffers flooding......

But they are right about access to the local schools. Crossing that road and the walk to Warneford School is a fair trek and hazardous - if the route is the back of Sevenfields.

If the route is to just cross the road into Blackworth Ind Est and straight up the hill into the town - not so bad.

If the residents of Rodbourne can be overridden with Aldi, the hotel and drive throughs I’m sure it shouldn’t be a deal breaker.

As for the horse training facility, Mad John Manners trains his horses a similar distance from Highworth on the road to Swindon.

Multi nationals and large companies will always find a way around planning rules and local democracy.... usually by appealing to HMG, who then nod stuff through, obviously having no self interest.  More difficult for individuals or small companies, who the aforementioned planners and local councillors like to show they still count by making their lives difficult.

Chappy who Power bought the site from had the same problems....

So has this been thrown out or just advised for it to be thrown out and planning need to approve or not ?

Jesus Christ we are getting deep into ill informed tin foil territory here....

a) You cannot appeal to HMG, you Appeal to PINS which is independent of government and interpret applications based on planning policy without the local baggage of LPA's determining applications;
b)Small individuals and companies follow exactly the same process;
c) Even if planners/Councillors 'like to show they still count by making their lives difficult.' option b is always available.

The planning system is pretty crap, and PINS often inept and frustrating but its not the conspiracy theorists wet dream you love to make it out to be.

Neither. The parish council have objected, but they don't have the power to throw it out, that falls to SBC

I'm sure you're right, but the Coate development was decided by the govt minister, Eric Pickles, who "called it in". So the government do, or at least can, have a say if they want to force something through

There are (entirely understandably and logically) three applications a) training ground, b) horse racing facility and c) houses, these have only been in since the start of November and I would suspect that the Council will be seeking to determine around February time, what is happening at the moment are objectors (who are consulted although anyone can comment) are publicising their objections to try and gain some momentum, the applicants will then respond no doubt.

After this has happened the Planning Officer will write a report and make a recommendation, which will no doubt be considered at planning committee in February/March and the choice will lie with members (and thus no doubt it Reg's head the Tories will wave it through, whilst exchanging envelopes and  chasing the proletariat with hounds, whilst the Labour members are held hostages with woodbines hanging out of their mouths).

Ultimately its comparatively early days and everything is still up for grabs.

In the big scheme of things this is, quite frankly, a poxy small development and thus it would take a hell of a leap for the government to take a blind bit of notice and suggest that it had national planning implications warranting a call in.

I've been told by a local redident they are planning to submit an application for equestrian facilities a barn & 20 stables with ancillary rooms to the application which is probably why this may get opposed.

They already have submitted and policy at SBC confirmed no policy objection.

That's good to know as the guy who lives near the golf course said it was added after the original plans were given to the local residents so must be being opposed for something else then.

Of course they do.... the former Mr Pickles, who was recently ennobled presumably for his services to someone, but hardly it would seem to local communities, is now Lord for Fat Cats.... looking into corruption  :)

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/31/Eric_Pickles%2C_October_2009_1_cropped.jpg/200px-Eric_Pickles%2C_October_2009_1_cropped.jpg)

Oh absolutely, but that was Reg's original point - that big companies working on big developments could call in favours from govt. as happened at Coate whereas smaller developments like this one wouldn't have the same clout.

But it doesn't work like that, in my years doing this tedious job the only time a favour has potentially been called in on one of my schemes was DfE calling in a favour from DCMS to not list a building they wanted to demolish (I have no firm evidence to support this, its only a suspicion based upon the process as followed and the documents I was copied in on) .

The secretary of state will normally only call in if the application conflicts with national policy in important ways, or is nationally significant, and if he is seen to do so for any other reason he would rapidly find himself in court defending his position.

IIRC Coate is c.1000 houses and thus probably met the criteria above, a crappy little stable sport pitch and 18 houses would not....

Nonetheless, the end effect is that locally SBC rejected Coate and the developers went over their heads to national govt where they were able to get the result they wanted.

Apologies, but for fuck sake!

As per previously you cannot go 'over the Councils head to government', all you can do is appeal to PINS to independently review in accordance with adopted local and national policy, which you and I are equally allowed to do, who then determine, in the case of such a large scheme it would then be called in ('recovered' is the actual term) if appropriate to SoS (Actually a bloke in an office in Birmingham but that's by the by!) who then decides whether they agree with the Inspector or not!

I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but locally democracy means very little in the development control system, if a proposal is policy compliant (and the public and councillors get ample opportunity to influence policy but tend not to as its either boring or not seen as a vote winner/chance to get your photo in the paper with a placard) it should be approved otherwise its a complete lottery and they system would grind to a halt as no one would develop as the risks would be ridiculous.

If it isn't developers have the right to appeal and should legally win, on large schemes that's why 'evil developers' are often portrayed as the bad guys as Councils often go against (or deliberately misinterpret) their own policies to pander to objectors and/or members, refuse schemes that should be approved which are subsequently approved after the local angle is removed. I can honestly say that in my 20+ years in this awful system I have experienced many cases of anti developer shenanigans from members and officers under their influence.

Applicants can appeal anything and do so, it could be worse, In RoI there are third party rights of appeal and its a NIMBY's paradise.

Apologies for being a grumpy twat about this but I am sick of posters (poster actually) on here trying to shoehorn ill informed bollocks into any planning discussions on here to try and justify/support some political conspiracy theory.

Sorry, but what you've described there sounds exactly like a developer going over the Council's head to national government.
1) Developer puts in planning application
2) Council rejects it
3) Developer appeals to PINS to review
4) Secretary of State decides whether or not to call it in.

How is that not a developer going over the head of the council to national government?

And yes I'm well aware that in the case of Coate, this was precisely what happened:

Call it what you like and disagree all you want... but it amounts to the same.

A similar story in Wroughton recently....  SBC took this one to a public inquiry


There's good money to be made from these decisions.... the fella who benefitted from PaulD's thing was recently in line for a £100 mill bonus payment.... dropped to £75 mill when it was suggested that perhaps a tad ott, given that much of te profits are generated by the Government's Help to Buy scheme

SBC did not take to Inquiry, PINS would have made the decision regarding route......

Inspector recommended approval and SoS agreed, nowt to do with government.

Next!

SBC's rejection of the application brought about the public inquiry.... yes we get that a planning inspector makes a recommendation, but it still has to be nodded through by a Pickles or Javid, who the last time I looked were in government.

Who appoints your inspector chums?  By that I mean who are they answerable to, at the top of the food chain.... wouldn't be any Government agencies by any chance  :hmmm:

How is the Secretary of State, a senior member of the government, "nowt to do with government"?

I think Horlock is pointing out the the Govt/SoS only ensure that the correct legal process has been followed.  IN this regard, isn't SBC pretty much fucked every time someone approaches for housing, as they've not accounted for enough in the local plan?

So long as the application complies with local planning policy, any rejection based on political desires/local noise will be over turned, which is what happened with Coate.

Unless I am very wrong.

SBC has got plenty of houses in the local plan... probably more than just about anywhere else in the UK.  When developers want to build outside the plan, the ruse is to say SBC are not building them quickly enough, rather than there aren't enough in the plan. So for example the Eastern development is for 8,000 houses... but it isn't happening yet.

It's not a ruse if SBC can't sort themselves out.

The comments from some of the councillors are quite amusing.

The site is on the outskirts of town, hardly going to be an eyesore, i doubt you would even know ot was there

SBC will always bend over backwards for a passing multi-national or large developer.... but they are dependent on economic conditions.  Developers are happy to hoard land, if the economy cannot justify building on it at that time;  they'll wait, and look for more suitable sites which maybe are outside the plan.

PaulD's thing; included in the plan eventually passed, was land earmarked for employment purposes near J15. This has been on the market for several years now.... with no takers.  So developer now wants to build more houses

I think Horlock has given up. If anyone is going to know his spicy pickled (no not Eric) onions about planning then I'll respect his word over several others. Unless you'd like to reveal you have a history of council planning, let the man share his correct knowledge.

Erm, a) SoS merely confirmed the Inspectors decision, if they had contradicted* it your argument, whilst poorly informed, would have held at least a little weight. as for b) PINS are an executive agency of government so are essentially independent as they hold legal and constitutional separation from ministerial control (I can just imagine you getting the baby oil out if appeals were managed by a private body) so they appoint their own staff, as I know when they didn't appoint me (with hindsight thankfully) about 5 years back!

*From experience (which I know in your conspiratorial world is nowhere near as important as what a bloke told you in the pub) SoS rarely over rules inspectors and when they do its mainly the other way, i.e Inspector will say approve and SOS says not to (in fact it happened yesterday on a big scheme).

See response to your fellow conspiracy theorist above...  :D In this case its at best a  procedural rubber stamping process - but hey what do I know.

Nope you are pretty darn right, but then again you are not trying to shoehorn a point using flawed information!  ::)


Yeah but the Council have the keyboard warriors to support their position.

The developers are also trying to renege on their S106 obligations, costing a few million, despite paying their CEO £100m in bonuses and salary last year. I doubt the Secretary of State will be calling that in

Evidence of this would be welcome, the idea that Swindon has a greater supply than anywhere else is just nonsense as there are plenty of Councils that are capable of providing the required 5 years supply = 20% (see below).

Helpfully the Inspectors Report WRT the scheme in Wroughton that you erroneously quoted as evidence actually disproves your point very easily....

131. I find that the LPA has less than 2.5 years HLS. Even if the 20% buffer was not applied to the backlog the LPA would still have a HLS that is significantly below 3 years. Considerable weight should be given the extent of the shortfall in HLS. The lack of 3 years HLS also has the effect, in the context of the WMS, of rendering the relevant NP policies for the supply of housing (RH3 and RH6) and the NP settlement boundary out-of-date. Paragraph 14 of the Framework* is engaged.

Ultimately Councils have to show they have a 5 year supply of housing, the target being calculated by a needs study (using an accepted formula and process**) and then sites being identified by way of a SHLAA (may have a new name now) process, this was explicitly placed in national policy to stop Councils blocking needed housing in dubious ways, as we all agree that the country needs more houses strangely until they are proposed near where we live.

Swindon obviously cannot prove this and thus are immediately fighting with one hand behind their backs, which the Officers should have informed the members of before the decision was reached.

* Its not that Paragraph anymore as the NPPF was revised in July 2018, but I cannot be arsed to check as I know you won't take a blind bit of notice anyway.
** Amusingly in Lancaster the other year the Green Councillors objected to the results of the needs study saying the Councils consultants had done it incorrectly to inflate the figure, the demanded it be done again by another party of their choosing and when it came back it was actually higher than the original one.

Nice ad hominem response. I've already said that SBC fucked up over Coate, most probably deliberately. They stitched us all up by including Coate in the Local Plan, then councillors overturned their own Local Plan in planning committee when they shit themselves over the public response, knowing full well that it would get overturned on appeal and they could say "Well, we tried but got done over by big bad govt". No need to be such a patronising cock

Don't know anything about the case but a) the Council should be seeking independent advice to establish the facts on costs etc (and asking the developer to pay for it - but before you get your knickers twisted the developer pays, but the Council chooses, agrees scope and appoints!) and b) what the company is worth/paying its staff is entirely irrelevant in the big scheme of things, its based on the site itself and nothing else!

Nothing to do with conspiracy theory.... just observation. Probably as an insider you can't see the wood for the trees, it happens when you're inside an organisation, after a length of time you become institutionalised in way of thought. It's not a wrong thing, but rather inevitable.

Well the fault squarely lies at your elected members then rather than the government nor the big bad developers.

The system isn't great (in fact in many ways its bollocks) and could be better, but also from experience it is nowhere near as bent as people like to think, usually it suffers at a Council level from a lack of strategic thought and long term planning (master planning has become a dying art - which is amusing as its all they really teach you on a Planning Degree), most graduates come out of uni never having seen an application in their lives, poor decision making and an inability to rationally (or possibly wilfully) interpret national policy.

I apologise if I appear patronising, frustrated would better a better way to describe, although I promise to be less of a patronising cock if you agree to be a less belligerent one  ;) (although it may be your scouse blood coming to the fore! ;D)  

Christ are you going to bring the masons into it in a minute, What organisation am I inside of? I work for a private company, we are a two man band (well actually one man and one woman) company and I work alone in an office in a garden in Cumbria!

If you can provide hard evidence supported facts to support your 'observations' I would be more than happy to discuss, otherwise its just presenting gossip as fact to support an already ingrained view of a conspiracy that doesn't exist.

Trust me I have been on the receiving end of some very dubious decisions over the years with Inspectors taking some enormous leaps of fancy in their consideration and decision letters, the ones to which you keep making reference whilst not making sense to you maybe, appear to have been determined in accordance with adopted policy which is all that the Council/PINS/SOS can reasonably do). In every case SBC/objectors etc could have sought a JR to argue that policy/the law had not been applied correctly, no one has?  :hmmm:

Are you a Mason horlock?

Out of interest why do you think you didn't get the inspectors job?  Seems a good number, look at the rules written down and there you go, black or white.... no judgement involved. I'm sure you'd be more than competent.

Just noticed that this thread was started over 3 years ago.

Not sure exactly when the planning application went in, but is this timescale the norm for a project of this size?

Interesting stuff, hopefully one day this thing will get built.

I organised a stone masonry course once, and have previously been approached to join the Rotary Club (I declined!) does that count?


To be honest I should never applied, I was just insanely peeved with my job at the time and it seemed like a nice gig! I have subsequently discovered as a friend works there now, that a) its bloody hard job as they work from home with very little support and its not really like you can phone a friend like I do and b) they are incredibly understaffed and Inspectors are being asked to do stuff well above their pay grade.

I suspect I didn't get the job as I am possibly not methodical and analytical enough, you need to have a very legal mind (which I sort of have) and be able to analyse and present very concisely, which I am not good at as I ramble somewhat. We do a fair bit of legal work instructing QC's etc in my present job and we work well as I am very good at putting the case together and working with the QC and my partner is good at presenting and working with the QC at Inquiry, so suits us both really!

I have got a mate who would make a fantastic Inspector as he is made for the job, but he gets insulted each time I suggest as they are a breed of their own and the money isn't great!

There has been two application processes, the short term one was approved a few years back and the detailed long term ones (x3) went in this November. They have dragged their heels a bit, but 2-3 years is possibly the par for the course.

Is anyone actually using the site or are the players still training elsewhere?

Still using Calne until summer of 2020.

That could tie in with the new place being ready by then. ???

Don't mind PaulD, he's just sour they built a housing estate in his front garden.

More importantly ...

"Christ are you going to bring the masons into it in a minute, What organisation am I inside of? I work for a private company, we are a two man band (well actually one man and one woman) company and I work alone in an office in a garden in Cumbria!"

... which one are you?

Technically yes, of course you are correct, ethically it's a pretty good example of what is wrong in the way we organise these things.
:D damn right! Although tbf as housing estates go, it could have been a lot worse.

Certainly not many poor people going to be living there!

I like that Reg is defending, in a way, a Tory Council.

Profitable businesses are clearly nastier than incompetent Tory Councils, especially ones who can't devise a Local Plan that is sufficient to stand up to any pressure at Planning Decisions.

 Reg is an anagram of ERG

I preferred their earlier work....

(https://nssdata.s3.amazonaws.com/images/galleries/15968/cover.jpg)