Constructive ideas for Ground Development

[Shots1954]

Maybe contact Wates and ask them they are the ones that need the rd not the football club

Sorry Doug but Wates may need the road but that does affect the football club and it's "proposed" stadium redevelopment..........

[ShotOnTarget]

Maybe it's time to look seriously at a Community Share scheme with the fans, club, RBC, HCC, FCoT and other potential tenants/users as co-owners/investors. Maybe 20 years too late but better late than never. The current scheme with its constant obstacles and schoolboy errors regarding the design is looking sillier with the passing of each year

[Shots1954]

I totally agree SOT!

[Richard Petty]

Maybe it's time to look seriously at a Community Share scheme with the fans, club, RBC, HCC, FCoT and other potential tenants/users as co-owners/investors. Maybe 20 years too late but better late than never. The current scheme with its constant obstacles and schoolboy errors regarding the design is looking sillier with the passing of each year

SOT I am genuinely interested in how you could see this Community Share Scheme working because in principle I am all for the idea of "genuine" community stadiums which become an asset to their communities but to do so they do have to offer something other than just football on a Saturday afternoon or a Tuesday night. I know a lot of stadiums call themselves Community stadiums but that's just a name (bit of a con really) and I know that's not what you are suggesting

So I get that the community joint ownership scheme could work if we were building a new stadium on a decent site because then we could include all sorts of additional content to the stadium such as retail, leisure (Bowling, Pool, Snooker etc..., activities (sports centre, climbing walls, laser quest etc..) Pickle ball (growing sport), and even artificial pitches. If we could do any of that then yes there would be additional grants, investment from the activity providers and maybe some fans may wish to donate towards some sort of community share. RBC and/or HCC would almost certainly be happy to support such a scheme but unless it could be an alternative to an existing already costed development they would be very unlikely in the current financial climate to produce any additional finance towards it.

Bearing in mind that regrettably not one of the above ideas could be properly implemented into anything that the current site with its limited size would allow I can't see how any outside investment other than small scale fan donations would be attracted. One of the criticisms of the plan that was put forward to us at the meeting with the developer was that other than Phase One, the rest relied on outside investment and most people (myself included) cannot see what outside investment potential the existing stadium site offers, unless the idea of a hotel at the front comes back on the agenda as that's the only thing I can think of that could bring in extra money.

Before anyone thinks I am just pouring cold water on the idea that's not the case, I would love to see something like I described above (which I think is what you would also like SOT) but I just cannot see how we could achieve it unless we relocate the stadium completely.

[ShotOnTarget]

Maybe it's time to look seriously at a Community Share scheme with the fans, club, RBC, HCC, FCoT and other potential tenants/users as co-owners/investors. Maybe 20 years too late but better late than never. The current scheme with its constant obstacles and schoolboy errors regarding the design is looking sillier with the passing of each year

SOT I am genuinely interested in how you could see this Community Share Scheme working because in principle I am all for the idea of "genuine" community stadiums which become an asset to their communities but to do so they do have to offer something other than just football on a Saturday afternoon or a Tuesday night. I know a lot of stadiums call themselves Community stadiums but that's just a name (bit of a con really) and I know that's not what you are suggesting

So I get that the community joint ownership scheme could work if we were building a new stadium on a decent site because then we could include all sorts of additional content to the stadium such as retail, leisure (Bowling, Pool, Snooker etc..., activities (sports centre, climbing walls, laser quest etc..) Pickle ball (growing sport), and even artificial pitches. If we could do any of that then yes there would be additional grants, investment from the activity providers and maybe some fans may wish to donate towards some sort of community share. RBC and/or HCC would almost certainly be happy to support such a scheme but unless it could be an alternative to an existing already costed development they would be very unlikely in the current financial climate to produce any additional finance towards it.

Bearing in mind that regrettably not one of the above ideas could be properly implemented into anything that the current site with its limited size would allow I can't see how any outside investment other than small scale fan donations would be attracted. One of the criticisms of the plan that was put forward to us at the meeting with the developer was that other than Phase One, the rest relied on outside investment and most people (myself included) cannot see what outside investment potential the existing stadium site offers, unless the idea of a hotel at the front comes back on the agenda as that's the only thing I can think of that could bring in extra money.

Before anyone thinks I am just pouring cold water on the idea that's not the case, I would love to see something like I described above (which I think is what you would also like SOT) but I just cannot see how we could achieve it unless we relocate the stadium completely.

One thing for sure is that a thread on Shotsweb would not constitute a feasibility study. It would require a consultation with organisations experienced with such ventures.

One thing for sure is that the current plans have not seen anything of note materialise and I personally don't see how anyone can view the project with anything approaching optimism.

[Richard Petty]

Maybe it's time to look seriously at a Community Share scheme with the fans, club, RBC, HCC, FCoT and other potential tenants/users as co-owners/investors. Maybe 20 years too late but better late than never. The current scheme with its constant obstacles and schoolboy errors regarding the design is looking sillier with the passing of each year

SOT I am genuinely interested in how you could see this Community Share Scheme working because in principle I am all for the idea of "genuine" community stadiums which become an asset to their communities but to do so they do have to offer something other than just football on a Saturday afternoon or a Tuesday night. I know a lot of stadiums call themselves Community stadiums but that's just a name (bit of a con really) and I know that's not what you are suggesting

So I get that the community joint ownership scheme could work if we were building a new stadium on a decent site because then we could include all sorts of additional content to the stadium such as retail, leisure (Bowling, Pool, Snooker etc..., activities (sports centre, climbing walls, laser quest etc..) Pickle ball (growing sport), and even artificial pitches. If we could do any of that then yes there would be additional grants, investment from the activity providers and maybe some fans may wish to donate towards some sort of community share. RBC and/or HCC would almost certainly be happy to support such a scheme but unless it could be an alternative to an existing already costed development they would be very unlikely in the current financial climate to produce any additional finance towards it.

Bearing in mind that regrettably not one of the above ideas could be properly implemented into anything that the current site with its limited size would allow I can't see how any outside investment other than small scale fan donations would be attracted. One of the criticisms of the plan that was put forward to us at the meeting with the developer was that other than Phase One, the rest relied on outside investment and most people (myself included) cannot see what outside investment potential the existing stadium site offers, unless the idea of a hotel at the front comes back on the agenda as that's the only thing I can think of that could bring in extra money.

Before anyone thinks I am just pouring cold water on the idea that's not the case, I would love to see something like I described above (which I think is what you would also like SOT) but I just cannot see how we could achieve it unless we relocate the stadium completely.

One thing for sure is that a thread on Shotsweb would not constitute a feasibility study. It would require a consultation with organisations experienced with such ventures.

One thing for sure is that the current plans have not seen anything of note materialise and I personally don't see how anyone can view the project with anything approaching optimism.

I appreciate that you would need a full feasibility study for something that extensive but what I am asking is how you think it could be made to work "In principle" as your suggesting it.

[ShotOnTarget]

SOT I am genuinely interested in how you could see this Community Share Scheme working because in principle I am all for the idea of "genuine" community stadiums which become an asset to their communities but to do so they do have to offer something other than just football on a Saturday afternoon or a Tuesday night. I know a lot of stadiums call themselves Community stadiums but that's just a name (bit of a con really) and I know that's not what you are suggesting

So I get that the community joint ownership scheme could work if we were building a new stadium on a decent site because then we could include all sorts of additional content to the stadium such as retail, leisure (Bowling, Pool, Snooker etc..., activities (sports centre, climbing walls, laser quest etc..) Pickle ball (growing sport), and even artificial pitches. If we could do any of that then yes there would be additional grants, investment from the activity providers and maybe some fans may wish to donate towards some sort of community share. RBC and/or HCC would almost certainly be happy to support such a scheme but unless it could be an alternative to an existing already costed development they would be very unlikely in the current financial climate to produce any additional finance towards it.

Bearing in mind that regrettably not one of the above ideas could be properly implemented into anything that the current site with its limited size would allow I can't see how any outside investment other than small scale fan donations would be attracted. One of the criticisms of the plan that was put forward to us at the meeting with the developer was that other than Phase One, the rest relied on outside investment and most people (myself included) cannot see what outside investment potential the existing stadium site offers, unless the idea of a hotel at the front comes back on the agenda as that's the only thing I can think of that could bring in extra money.

Before anyone thinks I am just pouring cold water on the idea that's not the case, I would love to see something like I described above (which I think is what you would also like SOT) but I just cannot see how we could achieve it unless we relocate the stadium completely.

One thing for sure is that a thread on Shotsweb would not constitute a feasibility study. It would require a consultation with organisations experienced with such ventures.

One thing for sure is that the current plans have not seen anything of note materialise and I personally don't see how anyone can view the project with anything approaching optimism.

I appreciate that you would need a full feasibility study for something that extensive but what I am asking is how you think it could be made to work "In principle" as your suggesting it.

Without being led into a faux feasibility study on an internet thread, It would, in principle, involve replacing parts of the stadium with structures built according to the needs and funding available from investors. Bowling, Pool, Snooker, sports centre, climbing walls, laser quest etc is for the birds, but a replacement south stand, for example, with limited hospitality, multi-purpose rooms and possibly a gym seems entirely possible and given the current hiatus and as ideas go, as valid as the idea of building a hotel on the site to finance the club and most certainly a better one than demolishing the East Bank.

The first step would be to consult those vested with the skills and expertise in community share schemes and similar projects and ask what they believe is realistic and possible.

[Richard Petty]

One thing for sure is that a thread on Shotsweb would not constitute a feasibility study. It would require a consultation with organisations experienced with such ventures.

One thing for sure is that the current plans have not seen anything of note materialise and I personally don't see how anyone can view the project with anything approaching optimism.

I appreciate that you would need a full feasibility study for something that extensive but what I am asking is how you think it could be made to work "In principle" as your suggesting it.

Without being led into a faux feasibility study on an internet thread, It would, in principle, involve replacing parts of the stadium with structures built according to the needs and funding available from investors. Bowling, Pool, Snooker, sports centre, climbing walls, laser quest etc is for the birds, but a replacement south stand, for example, with limited hospitality, multi-purpose rooms and possibly a gym seems entirely possible and given the current hiatus and as ideas go, as valid as the idea of building a hotel on the site to finance the club and most certainly a better one than demolishing the East Bank.

The first step would be to consult those vested with the skills and expertise in community share schemes and similar projects and ask what they believe is realistic and possible.

Thanks, I get your thinking but unless you have at least some of the "For the birds" options that I suggested the money would sadly not be enough to make even a slight dent. A small gym of the size that could go into the South stand would not attract any significant investors and multi purpose rooms which are I agree an excellent use of space (boxes for matches, meeting rooms in the week) would be right to include but no one is going to invest in them as their share of any profit would be miniscule especially when there are so many competitors around offering flexible serviced accommodation.

As I suggested before really good positive thinking but unfortunately just not viable for the limited site that the club has to work with.

[ShotOnTarget]

I appreciate that you would need a full feasibility study for something that extensive but what I am asking is how you think it could be made to work "In principle" as your suggesting it.

Without being led into a faux feasibility study on an internet thread, It would, in principle, involve replacing parts of the stadium with structures built according to the needs and funding available from investors. Bowling, Pool, Snooker, sports centre, climbing walls, laser quest etc is for the birds, but a replacement south stand, for example, with limited hospitality, multi-purpose rooms and possibly a gym seems entirely possible and given the current hiatus and as ideas go, as valid as the idea of building a hotel on the site to finance the club and most certainly a better one than demolishing the East Bank.

The first step would be to consult those vested with the skills and expertise in community share schemes and similar projects and ask what they believe is realistic and possible.

Thanks, I get your thinking but unless you have at least some of the "For the birds" options that I suggested the money would sadly not be enough to make even a slight dent. A small gym of the size that could go into the South stand would not attract any significant investors and multi purpose rooms which are I agree an excellent use of space (boxes for matches, meeting rooms in the week) would be right to include but no one is going to invest in them as their share of any profit would be miniscule especially when there are so many competitors around offering flexible serviced accommodation.

As I suggested before really good positive thinking but unfortunately just not viable for the limited site that the club has to work with.

As I said, consult the experts. Opinions (yours or mine or indeed others) are no substitute for applied expertise. I'm also unsure as to why the viability of a project should always be considered in terms of the potential to make a few quid. Sure, a project doesn't want to lose money but the return on investment on community facilities isn't always measured in terms of financial gain. If that was the case, the Rec and the football club would be long gone.

[Shots1954]

Without being led into a faux feasibility study on an internet thread, It would, in principle, involve replacing parts of the stadium with structures built according to the needs and funding available from investors. Bowling, Pool, Snooker, sports centre, climbing walls, laser quest etc is for the birds, but a replacement south stand, for example, with limited hospitality, multi-purpose rooms and possibly a gym seems entirely possible and given the current hiatus and as ideas go, as valid as the idea of building a hotel on the site to finance the club and most certainly a better one than demolishing the East Bank.

The first step would be to consult those vested with the skills and expertise in community share schemes and similar projects and ask what they believe is realistic and possible.

Thanks, I get your thinking but unless you have at least some of the "For the birds" options that I suggested the money would sadly not be enough to make even a slight dent. A small gym of the size that could go into the South stand would not attract any significant investors and multi purpose rooms which are I agree an excellent use of space (boxes for matches, meeting rooms in the week) would be right to include but no one is going to invest in them as their share of any profit would be miniscule especially when there are so many competitors around offering flexible serviced accommodation.

As I suggested before really good positive thinking but unfortunately just not viable for the limited site that the club has to work with.

As I said, consult the experts. Opinions (yours or mine or indeed others) are no substitute for applied expertise. I'm also unsure as to why the viability of a project should always be considered in terms of the potential to make a few quid. Sure, a project doesn't want to lose money but the return on investment on community facilities isn't always measured in terms of financial gain. If that was the case, the Rec and the football club would be long gone.

Spot on SOT!

[SteveyAsp]

I've not read this thread so my question may have been answered.
My understanding is that the new lease has always been there but not signed due to the club waiting for certain things to happen.
Could the change of political situation in Rushmoor/Aldershot see the lease offer revoked?

[Richard Petty]

I've not read this thread so my question may have been answered.
My understanding is that the new lease has always been there but not signed due to the club waiting for certain things to happen.
Could the change of political situation in Rushmoor/Aldershot see the lease offer revoked?

That was my concern prior to the local elections but I understand from sources of my own outside of the club that the lease offer had cross party agreement at the time and there has been no change in the councils view of the project.

The council need to continue to generate income to reduce their deficit so there would be no gain for them in cancelling the deal as for them it provides them with a share of the profit with no costs and no risk.

[SteveyAsp]

I've not read this thread so my question may have been answered.
My understanding is that the new lease has always been there but not signed due to the club waiting for certain things to happen.
Could the change of political situation in Rushmoor/Aldershot see the lease offer revoked?

That was my concern prior to the local elections but I understand from sources of my own outside of the club that the lease offer had cross party agreement at the time and there has been no change in the councils view of the project.

The council need to continue to generate income to reduce their deficit so there would be no gain for them in cancelling the deal as for them it provides them with a share of the profit with no costs and no risk.

Thanks Richard

[Preston Shot]

And another September arrives
Is that four or five now i can't remember , but i am guessing we are no nearer now than where we were six years ago ?

[Headley Shot]

I understand the development can’t proceed as the MOD won’t sell the access land at a price which makes sense to the project.
I’m interested in learning what the EFL require from a newly promoted club stadium wise (would a smaller stadium and footprint be sensible if we were to get promoted?) and does the existing lease provide for any financial support from Rushmoor should the Shots go up ? I’m guessing not.
Also, would there be bigger grants available to an EFL club to help with ground improvements, rather than a National League outfit ?
It seems to me that the club may have to stay where they are and pay the loans back from transfer/Cup run income rather than demolishing half the ground and building houses on it and deferring half the rebuild for several years.
It would be great to know what the Directors of the club are thinking because otherwise it appears we there is just one objective : get the Road, wait for Wates to build and sell the houses, collect some profit share then slowly rebuild 2 sides of the ground. The only constructive thing about that will be that at least the stands built will be new.