What sort of acreage was it?
Bit of quick googling shows your in the right ballpark there which implies at that price its been sold by Severn Trent on the basis of it being green belt and not useable for development.20 acres - say net 15/16 acres developable
£1m per acre with pp?
But could the have put a condition on the sale that if planning permission was granted that they would get a share of the valuation jump? It would seem a sensible precaution that would not (yet) show up in the sale price, especially as they had already attempted to get planning permission.Bit of quick googling shows your in the right ballpark there which implies at that price its been sold by Severn Trent on the basis of it being green belt and not useable for development.
or not until Wasps apply"no" means not yet or not as the application is currently presented.
But did Wasps put in exactly the same application as STW? Maybe they reduced the overall number of houses, increased the percentage of affordable houses, chucked in a road, school, public toilet...or not until Wasps apply
But did Wasps put in exactly the same application as STW? Maybe they reduced the overall number of houses, the percentage of affordable houses, chucked in a road, school, public toilet...
Councils are under increasing pressure to approve more housing and a minor change might just tip the balance, especially if they think that an appeal to the Government Inspector could well succeed anyway.
But did Wasps put in exactly the same application as STW? Maybe they reduced the overall number of houses, increased the percentage of affordable houses, chucked in a road, school, public toilet...
Councils are under increasing pressure to approve more housing and a minor change might just tip the balance, especially if they think that an appeal to the Government Inspector could well succeed anyway.
Link to STW planning application that was approved. The STW land must be smaller than the total site that Wasps have plans for, so presumably they must be buying, or have already bought, more land to get 240 properties on.
http://planning.coventry.gov.uk/portal/servlets/ApplicationSearchServlet?PKID=710787
Roughly £100K to build a 4bed. detached.
Wouldn't come as a huge shock if it was CCC of one of the usual suspects.Who owns the surrounding land?
Read an article that stated a margin of 7% for a small house-builder and 11.7% for a large one, though read elsewhere that Barratts were looking at 40%. Though once permission is granted you might see Wasps sell the land on to an actual house-builder. I have no idea how much it would cost to build an estate of 240 houses including all the infrastructure work required (no doubt CCC will find something to help this part).
Who owns the surrounding land?
As I just replied to someone mate, houses can be built cheaply these days. They can go up in just a few weeks, just ask Longboy how quick it takes to lay bricks and the roof structures come practically made, it's astonishing. My uncle has a decorating business and they have a machine where they can blanket paint a 5 bed house in a day ready as a blank canvas for people moving in. The same for skimming too, machines to do that which cuts down on such a lot of time.
I'm sure the council will try to help them. Taking the emotion out of it, as a builder, I am happy the council are helping to get projects like this off the ground. The city needs housing and if it was Joe Bloggs applying to build 240 houses I'm sure it wouldn't get a mention on here. For Wasps it makes good sense and yet another annoyance about our owners inability to even build bridges to sort our future out.
It doesn't look amateur it is!I agree with you. Despite my absolute opposition to Wasps, they have played the game with the council, and seem to be doing things that meets theirs (and the council's) mutual objectives. SISU's lack of imagination beyond court cases looks amateur in comparison.
It doesn't look amateur it is!
I agree with you. Despite my absolute opposition to Wasps, they have played the game with the council, and seem to be doing things that meets theirs (and the council's) mutual objectives. SISU's lack of imagination beyond court cases looks amateur in comparison.
Er...that piece of land WAS included on the city planmoved it to the other thread as people were talking about it in there.
Sure its just another coincidence that Wasps who, according to their owner Richardson, aren't interested in property development 'I’m not a property developer, I’ve never developed anything in my life. I’ve never thought of this as something I might make profit from.' are now moving into property development.
Building on green belt land no less that requires CCC to change the city plan. Wonder if they purchased the land at a price reflecting the restrictions in place or a price appropriate to a site being developed for housing?
Seem to recall when we were talking about a stadium within the city boundary many were saying it was impossible if it wasn't in the city plan as that couldn't be changed.
How much more evidence do people need that the council and Wasps are working hand in hand?
Are you sure? Can't check the city plan at the moment.Er...that piece of land WAS included on the city plan
The revelations follow negotiations with Coventry City Council over changing the ‘Local Plan’ blueprint for future development with a view to obtaining planning permission for the entire 240 homes plan, at the part Green Belt site off London Road/Allard Way.
H2:9 only covers part of the site Wasps are planning to build on.You'll find H2:9 on page 51. http://www.coventry.gov.uk/download...ked_changes_showing_proposed_minor_amendments
Oh okay. H2:9 refers 200 houses. That seems to have risen to 240 since January. The Plan gets updated, it's hardly set in stone.H2:9 only covers part of the site Wasps are planning to build on.
Councils all over the country are under orders in reality from central Government to find areas within its boundaries to build housing. About a year ago through my job I drove group of councillors all round the city to various spots at all points of the city. That didn't include Allard Way by the way. Couldn't give a shite now to be honest whether Wasps and CCC are hand in glove or not.
What I would be interested in though is apart from housing is there enough land at Allard Way to double what is there now plus room for housing, which may give the football club room to add what is required to have an all purpose training centre.
I was at the Bristol City Acadamy the weekend a superb set up, it's actually a Sports Acadamy including rugby, hockey, indoor facilities and has a small ground about the size of BPA floodlights, stands etc. where Bristol City ladies FC play, I would guess the whole site was double the Higgs site, would probably stretch from where the Acadamy is now down to the London Road.
The future perhaps ?
Councillors don't travel by bus, only in style and that includes me.Do you drive a normal or bendy bus.?
I've heard the same thing about the council from several sources.It's a fair point and is often glossed over on here. I heard a few years back (within the council and within Higgs) that I simply wouldn't believe some of things about Sisu and how they conducted business. The words I heard were 'shocking' and 'unbelievable.'
I do understand a lot of the wrath around at the moment, 'why do this for Wasps but not for Sisu,' but this I do think is a big factor, that of Sisu with the batter people in court mentality and falling out with a number of organisations.
As with everything pretty much, it's not all just black and white.
Yeah, but isn't that throughout history rather than just the last 10 years?I've heard the same thing about the council from several sources.
well I haven't been here for the whole of their history!Yeah, but isn't that throughout history rather than just the last 10 years?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?