Counsel for PUHL opened by recounting how Colin Hill "saved the football club" and only has the interest of PUFC in mind with the application to build a much needed new stand. To finance this much needed stand, PUHL propose to build 135 flats on the car park behind it. Furthermore he said "there was no profit in the proposal to consider any community benefits. All the profits would be used to supply the football club with this "state of the art stand" and this was deemed to be the sole Community Benefit".
Counsel for the City Council, defended the council's decision to reject planning permission on the grounds that the application was "premature" and could only be considered in conjunction with the wider South Bank development, and the "Carbon Challenge" plans being formulated to the adjacent areas incorporating council owned land and the ex-Elliot's land now owned by English Partnerships.
Disappointingly the City Council appear to have accepted and not challenged the "Indicative Development Appraisal" put forward by PUHL i.e. :-
Costs
New Flats and Parking = £ 11,247,600
New Stand = £ 2,583,000
External Works(drainage lighting etc.) = £ 1,010,870
Professional Fees = £ 1,382,560
Agents fees = £ 251,550
Marketing = £ 50,000
Legal fees = £ 83,850
Interest @6.5% on half construction period of 18 months = £ 741.398
LESS FIT OUT BY THE CLUB = £ 1,015,875 -
TOTAL COST = £ 16,334,953
39 x 1 bed flats @£110,000 plus 96 x 2 bed flats @ £130,000 = £ 16,770,000
PROFIT = £ 435,047
THEREFORE THEY CONCLUDED THAT, "THERE ARE INSUFFICIENT FUNDS FOR COMMUNITY BENEFITS"
Mr Kirby, Chairman of the local residents association, spoke about the impact of additional traffic in Glebe Rd, Fairfied Rd and Queens Rd. He added that in general, on street parking was not a major problem at present, but expressed a concern that if the development goes ahead, supporters would no longer be able to park at the Moy's end, which would incur excessive on street parking in the area.Mr Kirby also highlighted the fact that for the proposed 135 flats development, only 80 parking spaces would be provided, which could dramatically increase on street parking, 7 days a week, in the surrounding area.
Vice-chairman Barry Bennett addressed the Inquiry on behalf of The Posh Supporters' Trust and made a comprehensive verbal statement. (a copy was previously posted.)
Prior to making the statement he made the following point of clarification. :-
"Many times throughout the inquiry, there has been incorrect and potentially deceptive reference to the Football Club whilst talking about the application, inferring that they were one and the same.
A typical example of this is when Mr Shaw was asked what contribution the proposed development would make to the South Bank development, he replied :- " Housing provided by the Football Club!"
To Clarify, "Peterborough United Holdings Limited is a property owner and potential developer and Peterborough United Football Club is a separately-controlled entity!"
The statement was then read out, emphasising the inaccuracies being quoted by the applicants.
In Conclusion Barry made reference to Mr Shaw's 3 Principle reasons for the Development.
In Conjunction with The Football Club's recent official statement
1)(PUHL) "The Football Club Needs a new Stand" ----------
(BB) Well Yes - But Not Here!
2)(PUHL) "The Residential Development will Fund that Stand" ------------- (BB) No it will not it will Merely Fund a shell. And the Football Club has NOT agreed to help Finance a stand!
3)(PUHL) " Football Club is an Essential Part of the South Bank" -
(BB) The Football Club is actively seeking to Re-Locate!
In response to the statement "PUFC has been aware of the £1.015 million fitting out costs requirement from Day1" made by PUHL, Barry said, "It was ludicrous to suggest that PUFC were aware and had agreed to such a requirement. At the time of the original application in 2005, PUFC were financially struggling to survive, and pay basic wages. Therefore is would be absolutely impossible for the club to find money to fit out a stand."
Only in December 2006, after the Trust insisted on some evidence to support PUHL's claim that there was no money available for community funding, did the "fitting out costs" emerge. It was the Trust that made PUFC aware of the requirement at that stage.
PUFC Chief Executive, Bob Symns then made a brief statement about the football clubs independent status and Clarify the Football Clubs recently issued statement
When asked if the football club were for, or against the development, he replied that "PUFC were neither for nor against the proposal" He emphasised that there had been no discussion or agreement to a financial requirement from the football club. Although the Inspector suggested that they must have an opinion to support or oppose the plans Mr Symns again stated that "PUFC were neither for nor against the proposal" The inspector asked what was the relationship between PUFC and PUHL. Mr Symns replied "We have a Landlord and Tenant relationship".
Barry Fry then addressed the Inquiry, and promptly told the representatives of PUHL: "You just haven't got a clue what your talking about"
He went on to tell the Inspector that he was the Sole owner of PUFC. He owns 100% of the 'B' shares of PUHL thereby giving him 100% control. And they were totally separate entities.
The inspector queried the 'A & B' Shares and confusion therein. Mr Fry said that PUHL were controlled by the 'A' shareholders who have 2 Directors Mr Ian Forsythe and Mr Sean Keegan.
PUFC is owned by the two 'B' shareholders namely himself and his wife. The inspector looking further confused asked bemusedly "Then who is this Colin Hill"? After some uncertainty it was conclude that he was a man with money who pulls the strings.
The inspector then asked if Darragh MacAnthony was a shareholder. Mr Fry replied no. But he wants to buy all my shares and take this football club to a level I could only dream of. But Colin Hill will not allow me to sell my shares to Mr MacAnthony until the council give him permission to do the development.
Barry Fry went on to say, "As the owner of this football club, there is no way on this earth that I can put any money into fitting out a stand! I couldn't afford to put in a pound let alone a million. I have mortgaged my mother-in-laws house and sold a property to keep this club going and I haven't got any more.
The inspector looked totally confused with the A & B shares set up of PUHL and PUFC, and decided to stop before further confusion was added to the mix.
After summing up by the Counsel for PUHL and the Counsel for PCCl, the inspector advised that he will study all evidence before him over the next few weeks and make his decision known by W/C 3rd September 2007.
Public Enquiry Verbal Statement
Home | News | Shop | Support The Trust | Smile Tickets | Gold Bond | About The Trust | Minutes of Meetings | Newsletters | Links | Newsletters | Programmes
material © The Posh Supporters Trust
design © 