I know the detail of the planning application was filed yesterday but the general outline was contained in Charge & Covenant registered on CAWAT when they took the site over 17/03/2016. That charge was filed and became public knowledge 18/03/2016.
CCC own the freehold, AHCT owned the 150 year lease assigned to CAWAT, Cawat own the Alan Higgs Centre and CSF operate the Alan Higgs Centre, AEHC have charged the property . The covenant details amongst other things
- a payment of £400k from CAWAT to AEHC (part repayment of original investment of £12m)
- Wasps are specifically mentioned in the document
- a premium of £150k payable to CAWAT by Wasps plus peppercorn rent for use of the site
- the area to be developed is outlined
- the actual proposal of what could be developed is outlined because AEHC has to give permission for any development on the site that CAWAT want to do
- there is Charity permission to build a swimming pool as well as the kicking barn
- there is a clause that says any disposal of interest to a party that has instigated or threatened legal action against the Charity in the previous 5 years will be vetoed
- the covenant lasts for 30 years
- the facilities must include community usage
Pretty much a done deal if you ask me with funds committed and partnerships forged - the planning application is process.
Why do I mention this - it has been on the public record for 11 weeks and yet CA raises the issue the same day as the planning application is made claiming he knows nothing and were being forced out, followed by statements from Mr Breed that are contradictory and in my opinion misleading. Both did themselves no favours yesterday. Not sure that I will place much weight on any future statements from either of them. I found the mix of the statements verbose, patronising, manipulative and misleading - nothing new there then. I find it very hard to believe that both had little or no knowledge of what was going on
Then it turns out there had been discussions between Wasps & CCFC about usage of the kicking barn by CCFC with a view to maintaining CCFC's Cat 2 status. These were repeated on CWR this morning by Mr Armstrong, (7:50 ish) saying it actually works quite well because the Wasps squad finish at 3pm and the Academy (mainly school kids) start at 5 or 6 in the evening. Apparently it is just a big indoor space (half the size of a rugby pitch) that can be used for many sports. He seemed top know all about the requirements etc for Cat 2. So there is an outline offer on the table from Wasps that should safeguard the Academy future once the development is done. Wasps it seems are prepared to work with the club to maintain the category 2 status - prospect of a partnership for a change?
What changes for the Academy. Well they would still rent facilities so they will have to pay, they would not have exclusive usage but never did in the first place and still met the Cat 2 criteria, they would lose the pitch next to the Alan Higgs centre, and another pitch would be used by Wasps - that would still leave other pitches to be used. So in reality not a lot.
Does it still leave the option to go build our own - yes. Are CCFC actually being forced out of the Alan Higgs Centre ? - doesn't seem so. Is the academy important to the club? - you would hope so certainly is to the fans. Are Wasps & CCFC prepared to commit to this? Would both commit to it long term? Would both commit to a sporting excellence partnership? What are the CCFC plans for the next 2, 5, 10, 15 years? what are CCFC or the owners prepared to commit to? - because it is about time they committed to something
There is as yet no planning application for the pool but the head leaseholder has agreed to its potential build. So until it is built the current indoor facilities remain and could well overlap with the kicking barn.
The grounds for challenging this planning application on an existing sports site with reasonable infrastructure around it are very limited in my opinion
I think it would be wise to press all sides on this including CCFC and to keep doing so, demand proper answers from all of them. . As often is the case things are never so clear cut as might seem. It looks like there are solutions it just depends who is prepared to pick them up and run with them
Final thoughts. But before I make it, I believe and always have that the Academy is vital to CCFC's future and that it must be protected at all costs. If that means protesting, challenging, fighting for it then lets do it. However lets make sure we are challenging the right people - that seems to be CSF, Wasps, CCC and importantly given the above CCFC. But say the planning is rejected, then CSF gets permission on the pool is the future of CCFC academy more secure or not?
Really wish we didn't even have to consider any of this. One more thing to add to the long and ever growing messes that CCFC gets embroiled in