Page 8 of 8 FirstFirst ... 45678
Results 106 to 114 of 114

Thread: Broadstone Warren

  1. #106
    Map Geek marcush's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    4,542
    Thanks
    111
    Thanked 43 Times in 36 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by pa_broon74 View Post
    I don't know anything about London property prices, but generally, are we not heading into uncharted territory in terms of property demand - what with Covid and Brexit?

    I assume now is not a good time to sell.
    As someone working in the market now. Now is a great time to sell. BP house will be knocked or at least converted and if TSA are clever getting outline planning for redevelopment would be worth it.

    Downe - development site with housing, forestry and agriculture screaming all over it and they are strong markets at the minute. outline planning could again be worth it on that.

    The 30 million and 2 million I've seen seem sensible numbers. I would not be surprised if Downe in particular goes higher.

    They both won't stay in Scouting and this exercise is asset disposal pure and simple. TSA aren't looking to sell to local scouting for either of these, and the value isn't there to local scouting. To buy a campsite now for local scouting is not worth the huge risk.

    Rule 66. A map and compass offers no protection against getting horribly lost.

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to marcush For This Useful Post:

    pa_broon74 (06-11-2020)

  3. #107
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    10,922
    Thanks
    3,138
    Thanked 2,554 Times in 1,594 Posts
    TSA isn't looking to sell to local Scouting, but if local Scouting bids highest (e.g. with local funding from something like the PACCAR foundation which saved Chalfont Heights, another site that was ripe for development given its "stockbroker belt" location where even a small house will have at least a 3 as the first number) why not sell to them? This is purely about liquidising assets; if emotions get into TSA's decision then that is very, very wrong.
    Last edited by Neil Williams; 06-11-2020 at 08:44 AM.

  4. #108
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    80
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 14 Times in 14 Posts
    For the campsites, the biggest value is not necessarily in disposal for housing or intensive re-development. In many instances it will be.

    I don't know about those sites, but there will be sites around the UK with covenants and planning constraints which would be very difficult to overcome. Impossible to overcome doesn't exist in planning in practice, but the cost/ practicalities of overcoming the constraints may be prohibitive. e.g. I lived in a small market town a few years ago and a supermarket got planning permission to redevelop a former disused cattle market. At that point none of the large chains operated in the town. Planning permission was granted but the cost of implementing the conditions required by highways wasn't worth doing so the supermarket withdrew and last time I checked (I live 30 miles away now) nothing had happened.

  5. #109
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    485
    Thanks
    145
    Thanked 175 Times in 103 Posts
    Downe is in the green belt. It will be awkward to get planning permission to build there.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  6. #110
    Map Geek marcush's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    4,542
    Thanks
    111
    Thanked 43 Times in 36 Posts
    covenants are fairly easy to remove now. planning constraints, green belt shouldn't be an issue with a good architect.

    Rule 66. A map and compass offers no protection against getting horribly lost.

  7. #111
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    London
    Posts
    606
    Thanks
    616
    Thanked 411 Times in 189 Posts
    I would have though there was a reasonable risk of the locals around Downe starting a vociferous campaign - possibly targeting TSA - if large-scale development was on the cards.

    Last night's meeting for those who missed it:

  8. #112
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    1,305
    Thanks
    196
    Thanked 550 Times in 341 Posts
    I'm going to play devils advocat here for a second... should TSA be running campsites themselves?

    Groups/districts/counties (ie local scouting) providing facilities which are used both by local scouts and by visiting groups make sense. Usually because they are run by small organisations they are run with a degree of cost efficiency, almost entirely by volunteers, and with local needs in mind. They also double as HQs, as venues for county activities teams, etc.

    TSA sites on the other hand seem to be trying to be commercial... but almost always fail at the basics. And scout groups seem to pay the same as other charitable youth groups so they don't directly benefit scouting.

    Better perhaps for these sites to be run by a charitable Trust that can run them to benefit all youth provision

    This could be done on the basis of long leases to charitable trusts, with a condition that the trust constitution includes provision for a representative of the local scouting County to be on the board. These trusts may well find it easier to access lottery funding etc.

    A smaller, slimmer TSA could then concentrate on its core provision (back office support for scouting) without having massive liabilities for maintaining huge properties which are often in questionable condition

  9. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to campwarden For This Useful Post:

    BalooNav (12-11-2020),richardnhunt (06-11-2020)

  10. #113
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    5,950
    Thanks
    2,397
    Thanked 1,725 Times in 1,203 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by campwarden View Post
    I'm going to play devils advocat here for a second... should TSA be running campsites themselves?

    Groups/districts/counties (ie local scouting) providing facilities which are used both by local scouts and by visiting groups make sense. Usually because they are run by small organisations they are run with a degree of cost efficiency, almost entirely by volunteers, and with local needs in mind. They also double as HQs, as venues for county activities teams, etc.

    TSA sites on the other hand seem to be trying to be commercial... but almost always fail at the basics. And scout groups seem to pay the same as other charitable youth groups so they don't directly benefit scouting.

    Better perhaps for these sites to be run by a charitable Trust that can run them to benefit all youth provision

    This could be done on the basis of long leases to charitable trusts, with a condition that the trust constitution includes provision for a representative of the local scouting County to be on the board. These trusts may well find it easier to access lottery funding etc.

    A smaller, slimmer TSA could then concentrate on its core provision (back office support for scouting) without having massive liabilities for maintaining huge properties which are often in questionable condition
    I kind of agree with this. I also think there is a difference now in terms of how groups run. There are those who do run on a commercial-type model - they pass all costs on to parents, do very little fundraising so don't subsidise activities. I think big groups probably need to be that way - but - I'd be interested to know what the split is between types of groups.

    I suppose the same goes for districts, but perhaps less so for counties (because they bigger anyway).

    I don't think when organisations like TSA try to compete with much slicker commercial set ups, that it will ever end well. I just don't think TSA is cut out for it - they're too nice - and the aims are completely different.

  11. #114
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Oxford
    Posts
    382
    Thanks
    609
    Thanked 121 Times in 87 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by campwarden View Post
    I'm going to play devils advocat here for a second... should TSA be running campsites themselves?

    Groups/districts/counties (ie local scouting) providing facilities which are used both by local scouts and by visiting groups make sense. Usually because they are run by small organisations they are run with a degree of cost efficiency, almost entirely by volunteers, and with local needs in mind. They also double as HQs, as venues for county activities teams, etc.

    TSA sites on the other hand seem to be trying to be commercial... but almost always fail at the basics. And scout groups seem to pay the same as other charitable youth groups so they don't directly benefit scouting.

    Better perhaps for these sites to be run by a charitable Trust that can run them to benefit all youth provision

    This could be done on the basis of long leases to charitable trusts, with a condition that the trust constitution includes provision for a representative of the local scouting County to be on the board. These trusts may well find it easier to access lottery funding etc.

    A smaller, slimmer TSA could then concentrate on its core provision (back office support for scouting) without having massive liabilities for maintaining huge properties which are often in questionable condition
    Thats almost exactly what happened with Youlbury and probably why TSA have retained it.

    It has very restricted planning constraints, cannot exceed existing footprints overall and some legal constraint that it has to be used for Scouts/Guides or handed back.
    It was offloaded years back from TSA to County but eventually got handed back to TSA as the costs of upgrading it couldn't be bourne or raised by county.

    TSA managed to replace two big buildings and refurbish a 3rd and usually they are used by schools during the week along with activities (and catering) bringing in a lot of money and then its Scouts/Guides weekends and holidays. But the fees for one of the buildings are high in part due to them being 30+ beds. Its almost PGL.
    There is still camping but a lot of local groups don't use it.
    Dave Ralphs
    Yarnton Scout Group (Treasurer)
    DofE Advisor & District Exec Member - Oxford Spires District
    http://yarntonscouts.org.uk/

    I work for O2, any posts are my own personal views & do not represent O2

Similar Threads

  1. Groups near Broadstone warren
    By CambridgeSkip in forum Scouting Talk
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 15-02-2016, 08:48 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •