Barnyb

Team UK

Recommended Posts

 

 

 

 

I guess none of you are actually interested in what that ^ UK brains trust have come up with so far?

Talk talk talk?

 

 

The external rams on the foils are new & patches on topsides - T2.1!

clik

886050_830494703735867_52797886357812508

 

Oct 6

12091189_819139024871435_832251907123112

I have been wondering exactly what they did with the daggerboard box. The whole box seems to have been re-mounted and the additional ram added. I would guess to give them more adjustment to the foils. I would just like to see more images of the modifications, which actually seem pretty extensive, to get a better idea of just what they have done.
And so begins the search for the little details we need to get good at, hone in on. You're right, rams could be one of the good areas to watch closely. Like with the new ability to control rudder foils, there should be a big new emphasis on surface controls beyond the 'agricultural' .5 degree button-stabs on the mains of AC34; and these finer control devices may well be platform-external for extra leverage and therefore visible.

All of a sudden the memories of sneaking around Newport Shipyard and the docks along then Thames St in my dinghy and Blue Jay (13 yrs old) in the late 60's early '70s, taking pictures of Intrepid, Heritage and Valient with my trusty Minolta 16 "spy" camera, and sending the images back to my old sailing master back in Japan when they were first starting to gain interest in competing on the world level.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"The most important is flat water"

"The maximum is probably 25 kts but we train in less wind"

"best is between 13-19 kts but it's fun as soon as we have 7 Kts"

 

Which means they probably begin to fly at 7 kts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I guess none of you are actually interested in what that ^ UK brains trust have come up with so far?

Talk talk talk?

 

The external rams on the foils are new & patches on topsides - T2.1!

clik886050_830494703735867_52797886357812508

 

Oct 612091189_819139024871435_832251907123112

I have been wondering exactly what they did with the daggerboard box. The whole box seems to have been re-mounted and the additional ram added. I would guess to give them more adjustment to the foils. I would just like to see more images of the modifications, which actually seem pretty extensive, to get a better idea of just what they have done.
And so begins the search for the little details we need to get good at, hone in on. You're right, rams could be one of the good areas to watch closely. Like with the new ability to control rudder foils, there should be a big new emphasis on surface controls beyond the 'agricultural' .5 degree button-stabs on the mains of AC34; and these finer control devices may well be platform-external for extra leverage and therefore visible.

Welcome my friends to the show that never ends....

Spinbots version of pseuds corner...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Guys is anyone forgetting that oracle can build two boats and already have 2 45s sailing? This cup is already theirs. The main reason they want a more OD boat is so that no big surprises come out like in the last cup. It takes a lot more money and time investment to make a semi OD boat 1% better than it does to come up with a revolutionary idea that makes the boat 50% faster.

 

is that enough if the other team has the better skipper?

is the 1% material enough over a better crew? I'm not sure...

2 boat testing is great all the way.

but one wrong tactical decision and that was it...

now I'm not sure that BA is THE MAN and will win in any one design contest (I know this is not really one design).

but with BA and team NZ the competition is really tough.

you all make it sound like is was a walk through last time for team oracle.

They weren't that dominant until the end, if you remember. It so easily could have come the other way - for example if the time limit had been 5 min more, or something else ...

 

 

I think the difference is that BA is BAR- he is putting a very strong team together, not a group of individuals. The skills on that team with Freddie, CJ, Leigh and the rest is proven.

It's a very well orchestrated and thought out team with a lot depth to it, on and off the water.

And it is a British team with British sailors.

 

 

:lol: Go with that if it floats your boat - ignore the 2 Kiwis in the sailing team - and the South Africans, the French, the Spanish, the Ozzies, the Irish, the Portuguese, the Dutch, the Swiss, the Italians the Belgians, the Germans, the Swedish, the Americans and the Argentinians in the team (apologies if I missed a few).

 

http://land-rover-bar.americascup.com/en/sailing-team.html

 

Welcome by the way...

 

 

That'll teach me not do double-check before posting!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

8 Brits, 2 Kiwis in the sailing team. That's British to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

not entirely

but, not bad either!

I'd like to see the oracle nationality split but can't be bothered to be honest. How many ami's on that boat?

how is team kiwi doing in that category?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jimmy Spithill - AUS
Tom Slingsby - AUS
Andrew Campbell - USA
Matt Cassidy - USA
Cooper Dressler - USA
Kinley Fowler - AUS
Ky Hurst - AUS
Tom Johnson - AUS
Rome Kirby - USA
Kyle Langford - AUS
Joey Newton - AUS
Sam Newton - AUS
Louis Sinclair - ANT/USA
Graeme Spence - AUS
Philippe Presti - FRA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The wrap on our base in Portsmouth is finished! Did you know it protects the building from the elements and helps with our energy efficiency!

 

12189456_832234910228513_363123457236572

 

12188061_832234920228512_831446501489867

 

12186767_832234916895179_370988102640686

 

12194516_832234953561842_778221745702976

@facebook

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is that a new building or is it a remodel?

Very much a new build

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jimmy Spithill - AUS[/size]Tom Slingsby - AUS[/size]Andrew Campbell - USA[/size]Matt Cassidy - USA[/size]Cooper Dressler - USA[/size]Kinley Fowler - AUS[/size]Ky Hurst - AUS[/size]Tom Johnson - AUS[/size]Rome Kirby - USA[/size]Kyle Langford - AUS[/size]Joey Newton - AUS[/size]Sam Newton - AUS[/size]Louis Sinclair - ANT/USA[/size]Graeme Spence - AUS[/size]Philippe Presti - FRA[/size]

 

Wot!! No Kiwis?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The wrap on our base in Portsmouth is finished! Did you know it protects the building from the elements and helps with our energy efficiency!

 

12189456_832234910228513_363123457236572

 

12188061_832234920228512_831446501489867

 

12186767_832234916895179_370988102640686

 

12194516_832234953561842_778221745702976

@facebook

I guess locail in the little houses on the other side will appreciate having their view on the ocean replaced by this white elephant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I guess locail in the little houses on the other side will appreciate having their view on the ocean replaced by this white elephant.

 

Yet another case of you talking about things you know nothing about.

 

First, if you were to look from those houses towards the BAR base, you would be looking inland.......

 

Next, you need to consider what views the base really is blocking, while considering what was there before.

 

Finally, having read most of the stuff about local objections to the development, I cannot find any that say it blocks views. The objections were about 2 things. First, the design didn't fit with context and didn't consider local history while second, and maybe more important, there was a belief that there wasn't due process in the planning approval for the site - for instance, businesses were given termination of lease notices before approval was granted and work commenced before the approval. Most of those objections were really due to people not understanding planning law and what could and couldn't be done without approval.

 

As for it being a White Elephant, I am really lost to understand how you could say that, but then again, you seem to be "having" a lot of those sort of moments........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not an everyday view/perspective but the new sail-like wrap on the BAR base looks well enough in context of the Spinnaker Tower, as seen in a photo above.

 

By many measures that building could be the nicest AC base ever built.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The wrap on our base in Portsmouth is finished! Did you know it protects the building from the elements and helps with our energy efficiency!

 

 

 

 

 

12186767_832234916895179_370988102640686

 

 

@facebook

Simon, I have not been in Portsmouth but what do you see at the right ? isn't that the ocean that the houses on the left won't be able to see ? Are you ignorant or full of shit ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The wrap on our base in Portsmouth is finished! Did you know it protects the building from the elements and helps with our energy efficiency!

 

 

 

 

 

12186767_832234916895179_370988102640686

 

 

@facebook

Simon, I have not been in Portsmouth but what do you see at the right ? isn't that the ocean that the houses on the left won't be able to see ? Are you ignorant or full of shit ?

 

I have been to Portsmouth many times and I have also enjoyed a few pint in the Bridge onoccasions.

 

Just to make sure I wasn't forgetting how the whole place is orientated, I even bothered to check on Google Earth. If you draw a line from those houses through the base, you end up in the middle of Gosport. What you are probably unaware of is that the shore turns 90 degrees south west at this point rather than continuing on in the same north easterly direction that you can see in the picture.

 

So I am neither arrogant or full of shit. Rather than do what you do, namely firing off without any regard for facts you could easily check, I bothered to do my research. Not only do I know the exact location well (among other things, I raced a yacht kept at the Naval base opposite), but I checked on maps. I further looked at the planning objections to the base, because the way the British system works means that you can be pretty sure that if views are compromised, people will include that in the objections. Added to that, I am an architect and am well used to looking at maps and Google Earth to determine views, based on a fairly good knowledge of sight lines etc. Now, I admit that I do not have any "before" pictures to help me and if I were making the statements to a client, I would not only check by visiting the site and surrounding area but I would also make 3d models in order to explore and confirm the impact on views, However, for the sake of this forum, I think I have probably done more than enough to say that with a reasonable degree of certainty, your comments about the base obstructing previous views of the ocean are wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You should have stopped at "I've never been to Portsmouth"

 

The only "ocean views" being restricted are of the harbour master and gosport Marina.

 

And even if that was an issue, there was never an unrestricted view anyway.

 

Clear the whole area and they are looking at the solent not the ocean.

Ha, ha. Last time I visited the Isle, it was in the Channel. Have they now moved it to the Atlantic, or the North Sea?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes Simon you are arrogant when you think you know, while very often wrong. Do you want me to do the list again ?

 

If you knew the place so well you wouldn't have needed to look at google map. And why do you assume I didn't ?

 

Yes behind the arm of sea is Gosport, why do you brag to be an architect to undderstand the map ? that is not the point.

 

There is clearly an arm of sea that some houses will not see. Why are you so stubborn not to agree with that ?

 

And I know that problem ( oups, I am going to use your "I know" style) because some in my family own an old house from the 15th century which view was blocked with an awful new building.

 

Oh ! it was not the ocean, it was the harbour, and I don't have to look at google map to know it.

 

Portsmouth-Harbour.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

T-C

 

Stop being a total dick and showing us all that you have no idea what you are talking about. Read what Drop Bear said. He obviously knows the area as well. Simple fact. The building of the BAR base has not restricted any views that people had before the building of the base.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Objections, such as I recall, were largely that the design was out of scale and out of keeping with a historical area. I have seen the area before and after and personally I'd say it was previously a semi-derelict marine-industrial area and I don't think the design is out of keeping. It does however loom pretty large at close quarters. In the UK it is a virtual certainty that some locals will object to any large development. I've had some involvement in the planning process and on the whole such objections make no difference. Particularly if the planning authority wants the development which was the case here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

T-C

 

Stop being a total dick and showing us all that you have no idea what you are talking about. Read what Drop Bear said. He obviously knows the area as well. Simple fact. The building of the BAR base has not restricted any views that people had before the building of the base.

Simon, as usual your arrogance and ego makes you behave like an idiot and will make you refuse to accept the obvious.

 

You pretend you know the place and admit you had to go on google map, you admit you didn't know what existed before the BAR building and you now states that it doesn't restrict any view. :lol:

 

This is not what locals say, perhaps you should get informed before posting.

 

The Camber Dock development, with top floors arranged as roof terraces, was initially given planning permission as a place of work.

Mr Richards added: "There are some exceptional properties round here.

"Lots of them have balconies of their own and with this kind of proposal they're going to suffer greatly.

 

Local resident Gail Baird said: "In comparison to the Bridge Tavern [one of the tallest buildings on the proposed site], it's going to be three times the height, so it's going to dwarf a lot of the area."

 

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-hampshire-27899182

 

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-hampshire-33476438

 

I don't live there, I don't mind, but it shows how you can behave like an arrogant ignorant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whatever, T-C. I guess that I should be pretty happy that you disagree with me, seeing your track record of getting so much so wrong.(BTW, not one of those reports says a single thing about loss of views, which is what you claimed).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Simon, I have not been in Portsmouth but what do you see at the right ? isn't that the ocean that the houses on the left won't be able to see ? Are you ignorant or full of shit ?

 

 

I live in one of the buildings you see it those photographs and am therefore very familiar with the area and what happened through the planning process. Nobody lost an 'ocean view' and even if they had it is a Non-Material Planning Consideration. Some (very few) will have very partially lost a bit of a water view but these views are not protected and I think that the majority of local residents see the new building as an improvement. Loss of sunlight (based on Building Research Establishment guidance) and being overlooked with a loss of privacy are Material Planning Considerations, but the people who were vocal in their objections (some of whom said some very silly things) were bright enough not to object on Material Planning Consideration grounds because they simply didn't apply. Instead they spoke about 'character' and 'bulk' and anything that didn't obviously expose them as a nimby.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you lived in those buildings you would call it the sea. If you were English you would call it the sea.

If you were from pompy you'd thank ainslie for blocking the view of Gosspit!

 

Glad to see with no performance derived criticism of the BAR team some space shuttle doorgunner is critiquing planning applications.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and the above just shows how pathetic it all is, arguing about the views around a cup base. FFS!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Glad to see with no performance derived criticism of the BAR team some space shuttle doorgunner is critiquing planning applications.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

from http://www.renishaw.com/en/renishaw-brings-3d-printing-expertise-to-land-rover-bar-technical-innovation-group--37036

--

12 November 2015

 

Renishaw is proud to announce that the company has joined Land Rover BAR's Technical Innovation Group (TIG) as an official supplier joining the quest to bring the America's Cup home to Britain. The company will contribute its expertise in metal 3D printing and position feedback encoding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Simon, I have not been in Portsmouth but what do you see at the right ? isn't that the ocean that the houses on the left won't be able to see ? Are you ignorant or full of shit ?

 

 

I live in one of the buildings you see it those photographs and am therefore very familiar with the area and what happened through the planning process. Nobody lost an 'ocean view' and even if they had it is a Non-Material Planning Consideration. Some (very few) will have very partially lost a bit of a water view but these views are not protected and I think that the majority of local residents see the new building as an improvement. Loss of sunlight (based on Building Research Establishment guidance) and being overlooked with a loss of privacy are Material Planning Considerations, but the people who were vocal in their objections (some of whom said some very silly things) were bright enough not to object on Material Planning Consideration grounds because they simply didn't apply. Instead they spoke about 'character' and 'bulk' and anything that didn't obviously expose them as a nimby.

 

 

 

JarVah

 

I am pleased to hear your comments. I personally think the building has some interesting architectural merit and, as you point out, it is considerably better than what was there. i am also pleased to see the Bridge is still there. Lots of fond memories from there.

 

I hope you get a good view of BAR hitting the water and if so, how about some "spy" photos!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good one

--

 

America’s Cup: Taking a sneaky peek at Land Rover BAR and Oracle Team USA’s latest boats

A pause in proceedings for the AC World Series sees the big teams go back to training aboard their potent development boats where speeds have taken a 10 knot hike over the AC45fs. Matthew Sheahan gets in to see Oracle and Ainslie’s latest machines

http://www.yachtingworld.com/blogs/matthew-sheahan/americas-cup-taking-a-sneaky-peek-at-land-rover-bar-and-oracle-team-usas-latest-boats-69031

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Out practising ahead of the storm blowing in...

 

click for huge...... if you want to check their revised foil boxes again

 

12239426_833494693435868_154620497704704

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good one

--

 

America’s Cup: Taking a sneaky peek at Land Rover BAR and Oracle Team USA’s latest boats

 

A pause in proceedings for the AC World Series sees the big teams go back to training aboard their potent development boats where speeds have taken a 10 knot hike over the AC45fs. Matthew Sheahan gets in to see Oracle and Ainslie’s latest machines

http://www.yachtingworld.com/blogs/matthew-sheahan/americas-cup-taking-a-sneaky-peek-at-land-rover-bar-and-oracle-team-usas-latest-boats-69031

 

There are a few strange things in there.

 

No accumulators allowed.

The defender is the only team that can 2 boat test

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Good one

--

 

America’s Cup: Taking a sneaky peek at Land Rover BAR and Oracle Team USA’s latest boats

 

A pause in proceedings for the AC World Series sees the big teams go back to training aboard their potent development boats where speeds have taken a 10 knot hike over the AC45fs. Matthew Sheahan gets in to see Oracle and Ainslie’s latest machines

http://www.yachtingworld.com/blogs/matthew-sheahan/americas-cup-taking-a-sneaky-peek-at-land-rover-bar-and-oracle-team-usas-latest-boats-69031

 

There are a few strange things in there.

 

No accumulators allowed.

The defender is the only team that can 2 boat test

 

Those same two items caught my eye but it's overall a good article.

 

It may be fun to try approximate how much beam the various T's have, using maybe photos taken from astern and using known peoples' height or somesuch to compare to the nearby beam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
land rover bar All-AC45-01.png

To bring the America’s Cup back to the UK where it all began in 1851 and become the first British syndicate to win the world’s oldest trophy. That is the ambitious project behind the creation of Land Rover BAR led by the Sir Ben Ainslie, the most successful Olympic sailor of all time, who won the America’s Cup in 2013 as tactician on board ORACLE TEAM USA.

To achieve his aim, he has put together a group of very experienced and determined sailors as well as a high-profile design and management team, including former CEO at the McLaren Group, Martin Whitmarsh. The British challenge was launched in June 2014 in the presence of HRH The Duchess of Cambridge.

 

http://www.lvacwsportsmouth.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why'd they paint the spinnaker tower the colors of the Michigan football team?

For the same reason we put Windsor Castle next to Heathrow Clean! Numpty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

The wrap on our base in Portsmouth is finished! Did you know it protects the building from the elements and helps with our energy efficiency!

 

12189456_832234910228513_363123457236572

 

12188061_832234920228512_831446501489867

 

12186767_832234916895179_370988102640686

 

12194516_832234953561842_778221745702976

@facebook

 

I guess locail in the little houses on the other side will appreciate having their view on the ocean replaced by this white elephant.
Clearly you know very little about this site and it shows.

It was a coal depot for a huge power station, then full of warehouses used to import potatoes from Jersey and tomatoes from Guernsey then most recently a dilapidated rat infested asbestos shed. I know because we knocked it down ( and built the new building) The owners of the dry stack volunteered to move to a position closer to their dock and the small fish shop was relocated as his lease was due to expire in 2016.

The vast majority of residents supported the scheme as it was there or one of two locations in Southampton which had planning approval for large scale marine activities.

post-70145-0-38289200-1447457223_thumb.jpeg

post-70145-0-27486000-1447457249_thumb.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

The wrap on our base in Portsmouth is finished! Did you know it protects the building from the elements and helps with our energy efficiency!

 

 

 

 

 

12186767_832234916895179_370988102640686

 

 

@facebook

I guess locail in the little houses on the other side will appreciate having their view on the ocean replaced by this white elephant.
Clearly you know very little about this site and it shows.

It was a coal depot for a huge power station, then full of warehouses used to import potatoes from Jersey and tomatoes from Guernsey then most recently a dilapidated rat infested asbestos shed. I know because we knocked it down ( and built the new building) The owners of the dry stack volunteered to move to a position closer to their dock and the small fish shop was relocated as his lease was due to expire in 2016.

The vast majority of residents supported the scheme as it was there or one of two locations in Southampton which had planning approval for large scale marine activities.

 

One stupid argument and a wrong affirmation

What existed before is not a proof that the new building does not hide the view to nices houses behind, unless you can find a photo of a bigger one just before the construction. The rest is an interesting story.

 

Now regarding the support of the population you are clearly not aware of what went in the news and blogs. The due process was not respected and lots of locals did not want such a big building and the noise that could come out of it.

http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/news/business/local-business/planning-boss-insists-council-got-best-deal-for-ben-ainslie-america-s-cup-base-1-6664008#axzz3rQOXlcdQ

 

Did you read that or did you get a call from Simon ?

 

"Here we have a case of the Council spending a million pounds to clear a site and giving away 10 years rent for free so a lot of rich boys can splash around in the Solent whilst local people lose the Hayling Ferry and now find it very difficult to get to work as the company has gone into administration.

I'd rather our money went to support local people, schemes and services instead of giving away over £2m so existing multi-millionaires can finance their hobby.

In their blind ambition to fawn over and suck up to celebrities they have overlooked the real needs of local people right under their noses.

Absolutely disgraceful. These people should be held accountable for making such terrible financial decisions which only benefit a limited few rich boys."

"monstrous carbunkle, its ruined Old Portsmouth, total fiasco but from the people who brought the Spinnaker Tower, Park and Ride, bus lanes, Parking Permits, overtaking lanes on the M27 and many more costly c o c k ups what more can we expect"

 

"Have you also considered, Ainslie and his mates get to park in old Portsmouth for free...we all have to pay....adds insult to injury...! "

 

"The more I read about this fiasco...the more it makes my blood boil. This should have been a revenue opportunity that could have provided the citizens of Portsmouth with tangeable financial benefits, instead of which seems to be great example of commercial incompetence. Anywhere else those responsible would be out on their ears.."

"Planning boss insists council got best deal for Ben Ainslie America's Cup base"

 

"I think the headline should read

"Ben Ainslie got best deal for America's Cup base"

 

All down to a load of dim people that would never get a real job in the real world!"

"This is yet another example of local councillors "playing" at being businessmen. Was the no rent situation in the public domain before PCC started to clear the site, or was this a case of BAR saying we have got you over a barrel and you will agree to our terms. Best deal for Portsmouth my a--e, BAR are laughing at your incompetence PCC, it will be the joke of the century in every sailing club in the land. Slight whiff of the last big deal these amateurs' got involved in, and a certain sticky lift."
"Well if the fibdems had agreed a pepper corn rent, How come the terms were changed. This was the best deal for Portsmouth. How can they possibly know that. Was the land put up for sale or lease before we got sold out?

Was the property offered on the open market?

What would the current market value be ?

I have been looking locally for a unit to rent. The cheapest i have found that suits my purpose is 12k a year. Then on top of that i would have to pay a minimum of 3.5k a year rates. So 15.5k a year for something hidden on a industrial estate. I think i would probably have to clean it myself also.

The multi millionaire Sir Ben get the site cleared no rent or rates for ten years.

If that's the best deal we could get. Well i suggest we need someone else to care of that side of the city's finance. The deal, whether a fibdem stitch up or Lee Stubbs incompetence, is a rubbish one for the city.

To say it's less else is just a lie.

Yachting is a rich mans sport, This is not a rich mans city apart from sir ben of cause. Now he is even richer."

There is much more and ALL going in the same way, you seem to know very little of what is going in you city and it shows :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

T-C

 

I guess it is business as usual for you. Even in the face of overwhelming evidence, you will not let go. You have never been there yet you disagree with people who live and work there. You did read that one of the people who says you are wrong actually lives in one of the properties you say was effected. Instead of listening to real people who live there, you trawl through the net to try to find anything you can to support your own argument, without knowing or caring about the background. You take the view of a small minority group and make out that is the view of all when a local resident has clearly told you that is not the case. You started off writing stuff that was clearly wrong (about loss of views) and are now trying to find anything to attack the BAR base, although why you should do that is beyond me. It really is pretty pathetic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

T-C

 

I guess it is business as usual for you. Even in the face of overwhelming evidence, you will not let go. You have never been there yet you disagree with people who live and work there. You did read that one of the people who says you are wrong actually lives in one of the properties you say was effected. Instead of listening to real people who live there, you trawl through the net to try to find anything you can to support your own argument, without knowing or caring about the background. You take the view of a small minority group and make out that is the view of all when a local resident has clearly told you that is not the case. You started off writing stuff that was clearly wrong (about loss of views) and are now trying to find anything to attack the BAR base, although why you should do that is beyond me. It really is pretty pathetic.

You are completely disregarding what ALL comments are saying.

 

The supreme irony about internet is that by your own admission, you had to check your "knowledge" on google map. Time to STFU Simon.

I am not trying to attack the Bar base, I was just saying that some residents may not have been happy,... which is the case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dude, let it go.

 

Who ever you quoted is a crank trying to score points. The only good point he makes is that the entire area has been a design black spot for ever. In that respect the new building is very much in keeping with the place.

 

"Old Portsmouth" is no more than a row of quaint old brick naval buildings in an area of town with a reputation for agro, in a town with a reputation for agro.

 

Do a bit of googling on the Hayling Ferry. It seems to have been a badly run and inconsistent service. And the boat it's self has been sold to a party who intends to reinstate service.

 

Half a dozen top floor flats that previously had a glorious view of a ferry terminal and a health hazard now have a view of a ferry terminal and the side of a large building. I seriously doubt any of the residents where there for the fantastic postage stamp view across the Solent (does that even count as a sea view?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not wishing to prolong one of the most ridiculous shitfights here but what you said was:

 

 

I guess locail in the little houses on the other side will appreciate having their view on the ocean replaced by this white elephant.

 

Which I think JarVah has more than adequately rebutted given he lives in one of those very houses. My parents have always lived the other side of the harbour (Gosport - you must never go there...) so I too know this place well and can back him up. Not that that's needed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

The wrap on our base in Portsmouth is finished! Did you know it protects the building from the elements and helps with our energy efficiency!

 

 

12186767_832234916895179_370988102640686

 

@facebook

 

I guess locail in the little houses on the other side will appreciate having their view on the ocean replaced by this white elephant.
Clearly you know very little about this site and it shows.

It was a coal depot for a huge power station, then full of warehouses used to import potatoes from Jersey and tomatoes from Guernsey then most recently a dilapidated rat infested asbestos shed. I know because we knocked it down ( and built the new building) The owners of the dry stack volunteered to move to a position closer to their dock and the small fish shop was relocated as his lease was due to expire in 2016.

The vast majority of residents supported the scheme as it was there or one of two locations in Southampton which had planning approval for large scale marine activities.

One stupid argument and a wrong affirmation

What existed before is not a proof that the new building does not hide the view to nices houses behind, unless you can find a photo of a bigger one just before the construction. The rest is an interesting story.

 

Now regarding the support of the population you are clearly not aware of what went in the news and blogs. The due process was not respected and lots of locals did not want such a big building and the noise that could come out of it.

http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/news/business/local-business/planning-boss-insists-council-got-best-deal-for-ben-ainslie-america-s-cup-base-1-6664008#axzz3rQOXlcdQ

 

Did you read that or did you get a call from Simon ?

 

"Here we have a case of the Council spending a million pounds to clear a site and giving away 10 years rent for free so a lot of rich boys can splash around in the Solent whilst local people lose the Hayling Ferry and now find it very difficult to get to work as the company has gone into administration.

I'd rather our money went to support local people, schemes and services instead of giving away over £2m so existing multi-millionaires can finance their hobby.

In their blind ambition to fawn over and suck up to celebrities they have overlooked the real needs of local people right under their noses.

Absolutely disgraceful. These people should be held accountable for making such terrible financial decisions which only benefit a limited few rich boys."

 

"monstrous carbunkle, its ruined Old Portsmouth, total fiasco but from the people who brought the Spinnaker Tower, Park and Ride, bus lanes, Parking Permits, overtaking lanes on the M27 and many more costly c o c k ups what more can we expect"

 

"Have you also considered, Ainslie and his mates get to park in old Portsmouth for free...we all have to pay....adds insult to injury...! "

 

"The more I read about this fiasco...the more it makes my blood boil. This should have been a revenue opportunity that could have provided the citizens of Portsmouth with tangeable financial benefits, instead of which seems to be great example of commercial incompetence. Anywhere else those responsible would be out on their ears.."

"Planning boss insists council got best deal for Ben Ainslie America's Cup base"

"I think the headline should read

"Ben Ainslie got best deal for America's Cup base"

All down to a load of dim people that would never get a real job in the real world!"

 

"This is yet another example of local councillors "playing" at being businessmen. Was the no rent situation in the public domain before PCC started to clear the site, or was this a case of BAR saying we have got you over a barrel and you will agree to our terms. Best deal for Portsmouth my a--e, BAR are laughing at your incompetence PCC, it will be the joke of the century in every sailing club in the land. Slight whiff of the last big deal these amateurs' got involved in, and a certain sticky lift."

 

"Well if the fibdems had agreed a pepper corn rent, How come the terms were changed. This was the best deal for Portsmouth. How can they possibly know that. Was the land put up for sale or lease before we got sold out?

Was the property offered on the open market?

What would the current market value be ?

I have been looking locally for a unit to rent. The cheapest i have found that suits my purpose is 12k a year. Then on top of that i would have to pay a minimum of 3.5k a year rates. So 15.5k a year for something hidden on a industrial estate. I think i would probably have to clean it myself also.

The multi millionaire Sir Ben get the site cleared no rent or rates for ten years.

If that's the best deal we could get. Well i suggest we need someone else to care of that side of the city's finance. The deal, whether a fibdem stitch up or Lee Stubbs incompetence, is a rubbish one for the city.

To say it's less else is just a lie.

Yachting is a rich mans sport, This is not a rich mans city apart from sir ben of cause. Now he is even richer."

 

 

 

There is much more and ALL going in the same way, you seem to know very little of what is going in you city and it shows :)

 

TB

The fact is this that there were objections. I attended the public consultations so heard them. There are always objections to every development in every city in the UK but one meeting had to be moved to a bigger building because the pro supporters who came to neutralise the opponents were simply too many for the original meeting place. This happened when it was made public that an anti BAR group was being formed. Objectors are always more vocal than supporters.

I don't live there but if I did I would be pleased with the investment PCC made. Sure there was short term public money used but if you were familiar with Council Rates in the UK you would know that these are based on rateable values. The rates on a building of that size will be substantial never mind the income BAR generate for the city. For £ 1 million or so million pounds it will be a great return over even a short time. The only other possible viable scheme for that site was more flats and those would have had to be very expensive as the ground conditions are extremely complicated. Parking was already an issue there so more residential would be a problem. It was not possible to go underground due to the steel anchored bars supporting the quay wall.

I don't know why you are so anti that site as I said it was there or Southampton who also would have welcomed Ben with open arms. I attended many meetings with Ben with both Councils and it was Bens preference to choose Portsmouth as that is the home of so much British Maritime heritage. Who are you and where do you live and would you like to be shown the building and see the "lost views"?

I'm happy to show you round.

Morty

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Do a bit of googling on the Hayling Ferry. It seems to have been a badly run and inconsistent service. And the boat it's self has been sold to a party who intends to reinstate service.

 

Yes it was badly run, that's not really the point and the rest of your information is out of date. The service has gone and is almost certainly not coming back. The boats (plural) were sold as part of winding up the previous operator and have gone elsewhere. Hopes that they would be purchased by a new operator of the service did not come to pass. The nail in the coffin was the decision by Hampshire, Havant and Portsmouth councils to withdraw subsidy. It also seems Langstone Harbour Board want a large chunk of capital from any new operator to renovate the shore-side infrastructure. If you couple that with the need for capital to buy ferry or ferries and no more subsidy, it isn't going to happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The supreme irony about internet is that by your own admission, you had to check your "knowledge" on google map. Time to STFU Simon.

 

You really are an ignorant and stupid man. I didn't need to check on to know you were wrong. I knew that from visiting the area, which is why I contradicted your ill informed and incorrect comments in the first place. However, unlike you, I actually bothered to use the tools at my disposal so I could make a definitive statement. You, on the other hand, made a statement about somewhere you had never been without making any attempt to check your facts, something you consistently do on these forums.

 

It's also funny how you post so many comments that suggest that the financial arrangements made with the council were bad. Again, you focusing on these show your lack of knowledge and understanding, because the comments are based on ignorance. First off, whoever was going to take over that site would have required the council to cover clean up costs. this is absolute standard in every council property deal i have been involved in. Sometimes the costs are wrapped up within the whole deal so the figure doesn't become public, but often the council prefers transparency and shows the figures like in this case. But the real thing those complainers miss is that they do not take into account the true value of the lease to the council. There are a number of key factors that need to be taken into account. For instance, at the end of the lease the GBP15m building reverts back to council. The building is has constructed to a high spec and standard so if you take the usual depreciation factor used in the UK for this type of building (2%) and discount the final value back to a rental for the first 10 years, I think you would find that the council is doing rather well out of the whole deal. Consider the alternative - the council would have needed to develop the site themselves, with all the up front costs and then the risk of leasing it. Or they could have hoped to find somebody who was going to invest many millions of pounds building a new building that they would never own and who would be stupid enough to also pay a market rent for it! Bottom line is, there is a lot more to the deal between Portsmouth council and BAR than you can learn from ignorant people writing in the comments page of a local newspaper which is always going to want to try to spin stories in order to get page hits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's also funny how you post so many comments that suggest that the financial arrangements made with the council were bad.

 

I have been and remain critical of central government funding of BAR but I've no complaints as far as the deal Portsmouth CC struck is concerned. As you say, I think they got a good deal.,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Good one

--

 

Americas Cup: Taking a sneaky peek at Land Rover BAR and Oracle Team USAs latest boats

 

A pause in proceedings for the AC World Series sees the big teams go back to training aboard their potent development boats where speeds have taken a 10 knot hike over the AC45fs. Matthew Sheahan gets in to see Oracle and Ainslies latest machines

http://www.yachtingworld.com/blogs/matthew-sheahan/americas-cup-taking-a-sneaky-peek-at-land-rover-bar-and-oracle-team-usas-latest-boats-69031

There are a few strange things in there.

 

No accumulators allowed.

The defender is the only team that can 2 boat test

Where did this article state the defender is the only team that can 2 boat test? It stated each team can build unlimited development boats and that OR is ALREADY 2 boat testing.

It has already been said that BAR has another boat on the boards, thats why they are training 2 more sets of crews.

It hasnt been said as of yet, but my understanding is AR is doing the same.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Good one

--

 

Americas Cup: Taking a sneaky peek at Land Rover BAR and Oracle Team USAs latest boats

 

A pause in proceedings for the AC World Series sees the big teams go back to training aboard their potent development boats where speeds have taken a 10 knot hike over the AC45fs. Matthew Sheahan gets in to see Oracle and Ainslies latest machines

http://www.yachtingworld.com/blogs/matthew-sheahan/americas-cup-taking-a-sneaky-peek-at-land-rover-bar-and-oracle-team-usas-latest-boats-69031

There are a few strange things in there.

 

No accumulators allowed.

The defender is the only team that can 2 boat test

Where did this article state the defender is the only team that can 2 boat test? It stated each team can build unlimited development boats and that OR is ALREADY 2 boat testing.

It has already been said that BAR has another boat on the boards, thats why they are training 2 more sets of crews.

It hasnt been said as of yet, but my understanding is AR is doing the same.

 

 

The statement came at the end of this paragraph...

 

As it happens I had a sneaky look inside Oracle Team USA’s base in Bermuda a few weeks back and they are indeed a bit further down the line. For starters they have set up camp at the Cup venue and have two development boats and have already started two boat training in Bermuda’s Great Sound.

 

Only the defender may test using two boats.

 

or words to that effect. Clearly it's been corrected since yesterday, but why they left the other incorrect reference to accumulators in is anyone's guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

I don't know why you are so anti that site as I said it was there or Southampton who also would have welcomed Ben with open arms. I attended many meetings with Ben with both Councils and it was Bens preference to choose Portsmouth as that is the home of so much British Maritime heritage. Who are you and where do you live and would you like to be shown the building and see the "lost views"?

I'm happy to show you round.

Morty

 

I am not against that building. Actually I think the building is pretty nice even though at the wrong place. I don't know Portsmouth but I know Plymouth and I love these old british harbours and cities, I think they should be preserved.

 

At beginning I just made a small comment about the view but the sheer stupidity of Simon's answer made me think that there was something else than the view at stake.

 

And I discovered that most comments posted were going in the same way with 2 main issues, the deal and the opacity of PCC decision making process.

 

That said, I wish to best to BAR, one of my favorite team for next AC. I think the Brits deserve to have the cup back in UK.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

That said, I wish to best to BAR, one of my favorite team for next AC. I think the Brits deserve to have the cup back in UK.

A nice closing of the issue!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know why you are so anti that site as I said it was there or Southampton who also would have welcomed Ben with open arms. I attended many meetings with Ben with both Councils and it was Bens preference to choose Portsmouth as that is the home of so much British Maritime heritage. Who are you and where do you live and would you like to be shown the building and see the "lost views"?

I'm happy to show you round.

Morty

I am not against that building. Actually I think the building is pretty nice even though at the wrong place. I don't know Portsmouth but I know Plymouth and I love these old british harbours and cities, I think they should be preserved.

 

At beginning I just made a small comment about the view but the sheer stupidity of Simon's answer made me think that there was something else than the view at stake.

 

And I discovered that most comments posted were going in the same way with 2 main issues, the deal and the opacity of PCC decision making process.

 

That said, I wish to best to BAR, one of my favorite team for next AC. I think the Brits deserve to have the cup back in UK.

 

TB

 

Are you always so aggressive when presented with facts?

 

Preserved as what? A coal fired power station or a rat infested asbestos shed. The rats in there were as big as cats and we had to get men in full suits to remove the asbestos.

 

You simply don't get the process. A planning application is lodged with the local authority, in this case PCC. Public consultations are held and anybody can write in to object or support. A number of independent consultees have considerable input such as The Environment Agency, English Heritage, English Nature to name a few and none of them objected. None of these bodies have direct links to PCC and they can't be influenced. You don't have to live nearby to object by the way.. The planning committee is made up of Elected Councillors who vote on each application. The BAR application was approved by this elected body and if process is not adhered to a Judical Revue can be requested by a member of the public. There was no underhand deals done on this site, rumour maybe, but there was never a question of a JR being considered.

As for it being in wrong place it was the one and only realistic site in Portsmouth, believe me, Ben and I looked for months. Ask 1,000 Portsmouth residents if they would have preferred the base to go to Southampton and I would guess somewhere between 950 to 975 would keep it in Portsmouth. You can please all of the people some of the time and some of the people all the time but never all of the people all of the time.

My invitation still stands so I can prove you wrong on the loss of view. Do you live a long way away from Portsmouth?.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

That said, I wish to best to BAR, one of my favorite team for next AC. I think the Brits deserve to have the cup back in UK.

A nice closing of the issue!

 

The Brits will deserve the Cup, if and when they can win it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

The supreme irony about internet is that by your own admission, you had to check your "knowledge" on google map. Time to STFU Simon.

 

You really are an ignorant and stupid man. I didn't need to check on to know you were wrong. I knew that from visiting the area, which is why I contradicted your ill informed and incorrect comments in the first place. However, unlike you, I actually bothered to use the tools at my disposal so I could make a definitive statement. You, on the other hand, made a statement about somewhere you had never been without making any attempt to check your facts, something you consistently do on these forums.

You didn't need to check but finally needed to check. How long are you going to ridicule yourself Simon ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

That said, I wish to best to BAR, one of my favorite team for next AC. I think the Brits deserve to have the cup back in UK.

A nice closing of the issue!

 

The Brits will deserve the Cup, if and when they can win it.

 

You know, I would like,

the Kiwis to win because they deserved it the last time and they invented the new foils

the Brits because they have been trying long enough, Lipton would love it in his grave

the Swedes because they paid much in AC34 and they make an incredible comeback

the French obviously

 

Any of them have to win it though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Are you always so aggressive when presented with facts?

 

Preserved as what? A coal fired power station or a rat infested asbestos shed. The rats in there were as big as cats and we had to get men in full suits to remove the asbestos.

 

You simply don't get the process. A planning application is lodged with the local authority, in this case PCC. Public consultations are held and anybody can write in to object or support. A number of independent consultees have considerable input such as The Environment Agency, English Heritage, English Nature to name a few and none of them objected. None of these bodies have direct links to PCC and they can't be influenced. You don't have to live nearby to object by the way.. The planning committee is made up of Elected Councillors who vote on each application. The BAR application was approved by this elected body and if process is not adhered to a Judical Revue can be requested by a member of the public. There was no underhand deals done on this site, rumour maybe, but there was never a question of a JR being considered.

As for it being in wrong place it was the one and only realistic site in Portsmouth, believe me, Ben and I looked for months. Ask 1,000 Portsmouth residents if they would have preferred the base to go to Southampton and I would guess somewhere between 950 to 975 would keep it in Portsmouth. You can please all of the people some of the time and some of the people all the time but never all of the people all of the time.

My invitation still stands so I can prove you wrong on the loss of view. Do you live a long way away from Portsmouth?.

So you are coming back ? I don't think I was agressive in my last post even wishing the Brits to get the cup back.

So, let's go, you can thank brillant Simon for opening the Pandora box.

 

Facts are you say a vast majority support the project while we can read that Portsmouth people complain about the following:

- opacity of the decision making

- no consultation of local residents

- too big building for the nice little houses behind

- the building will be too noisy

- they lack parking place instead

- bad deal for the city, sweet deal with no lease for BAR during many years

 

Just a few other quotes found in the net:

 

"So BAR receive rent free for ten years. Then for nine years at 110k the million that is owed to Portsmouth tax payers will eventually be repaid completely interest free. So realistically it will be 2034 before BAR actually pay any rent for prime land and by that time BAR will be gone.

Incidentally does BAR have the same contract in Southampton as well or is it paying rent there?

It all smells a bit porky to me with so many noses in the trough."

"PCC have done the unthinkable and managed to shock me with their incompetence! This report raises some questions for me:

Why has work commenced prior to this contract being agreed, this would seem to give BAR an advantage in negotiations;

Cllr Stubbs states the contract will help PCC recoup the £1m, how? To me if the market rate for this site is £110K a year and it is rent free for 10 years that's a further £1.1m written off at a time of huge cuts;

What has been done to ensure that, in the event of BAR losing interest in this project, they can't just fold the company and escape liability, has this been guaranteed in any way."

"It sounds great having the America's cup in Portsmouth. The potential for highly skilled job creation is there but.

1. In times when essential services are being withdrawn through lack of money, should council tax payers money be used to subsidise a rich mans sport that might never see a return.

2. If Sir Ben can't fund the rent then it is unlikely the project will get off the ground. Team Oracle had a budget of over $200m for the last cup.

3. Just like Formula 1, teams can shut down at the drop of a hat. They guzzle vast amounts of cash and if the tap is turned of for any reason there is very little in the way of assets.

4. I would hazard a guess that most of the technology will be bought in from existing manufacturers from around the world and therefore very little in the way of local job creation.

5. If a company manufacturing something very mundane came to Portmouth Council with a full order book and plans to expand in 10 years, would they be afforded the same deal.

6. Small businesses in Fratton and North End are closing, where is the help for them.

Maybe the councillors should put their own money into this project. It's always easier spending other peoples money."

"What?! Free leases for 10 years?! In a prime location?! And all I have to do is try my best to win a competition that the uk has never won.

Please can I have this deal? (LS - No you can't)

I am not a supporter of any party in Portsmouth, but I do want good, honest, consistent local government.

The inconsistent nature of this council towards generating money is baffling."

 

I have no stake in that, you don't have to convince me but fellow Portsmouth citizens, they seem as vocal as those from SF about LE. I just hope that the royals will find everything is ok.

 

You want to show me that a 8 storey building doesn't hide the view to 2 storey houses? is that common sense ? well I am 5 000 km away from Portsmouth now, but I love England and will be very happy to have a beer with you when I visit.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

That said, I wish to best to BAR, one of my favorite team for next AC. I think the Brits deserve to have the cup back in UK.

A nice closing of the issue!

 

The Brits will deserve the Cup, if and when they can win it.

 

You know, I would like,

the Kiwis to win because they deserved it the last time and they invented the new foils

the Brits because they have been trying long enough, Lipton would love it in his grave

the Swedes because they paid much in AC34 and they make an incredible comeback

the French obviously

 

Any of them have to win it though.

 

Fair enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

That said, I wish to best to BAR, one of my favorite team for next AC. I think the Brits deserve to have the cup back in UK.

A nice closing of the issue!

 

The Brits will deserve the Cup, if and when they can win it.

 

At this point the Cup is so devoid of tradition, sporting character and moral value (if it ever had any) that winning or not winning is all that's left. Anyone who wins it deserves it. Who, how or why is basically irrelevant.

 

In fact, thanks to the Litigious Larry, much of the recent entertainment has been wonderment at just how far the masters of our universe will lower them selves for a gaudy mug.

 

The Americas Cup really is a symbol of our age. May be any age, defining as it does the depths to which the very top level of our society will go in order to possess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cynicism is easy and I don't find myself agreeing with that. LE failed utterly when the AC game was approximately a sporting/design competition and in the end "won" it with the best lawyers and the most money. Then changed the game completely so others were playing catch-up. I don't regard that as deserving. By all means EB's hubris played a part in opening the opportunity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps the best you can say about this time is that a few dogs are getting to gnaw at the discarded bone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well dogwatch is my screen name. What's your excuse for sticking around for this unedifying spectacle?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Away from real sport and into a commodity/franchise/American sports league you mean - owned and run for ego and profit?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

That said, I wish to best to BAR, one of my favorite team for next AC. I think the Brits deserve to have the cup back in UK.

A nice closing of the issue!

The Brits will deserve the Cup, if and when they can win it.
Thank you, nobody deserves the Cup. If deserving had anything to do with it, then just award it to AR and all they have been through to win this Cup.

The only team to deserve it, is the team with the most MATCH wins at the end of 2017.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Away from real sport and into a commodity/franchise/American sports league you mean - owned and run for ego and profit?

the detail is extreemly boarish I'll agree. Wich makes it all the more frustrating.

 

But its about time sailing had a top level of competition at the cutting edge of tech with the best saikors in it.

 

How people use 'owner driver' and 'grand prix ' in the same sentemce is beyond me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know Portsmouth but I know Plymouth and I love these old british harbours and cities, I think they should be preserved.

 

Better tell the Luftwaffe.

 

DSC_0864.JPG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I don't know Portsmouth but I know Plymouth and I love these old british harbours and cities, I think they should be preserved.

 

Better tell the Luftwaffe.

 

DSC_0864.JPG

 

Yes, the Luftwaffe hit british harbours pretty bad, but nothing close to what Brest and Lorient had to suffer, I think, they were nearly erased at the end of the war. The reason was that they had a German submarine base for Uboats. Brits were bombing during the day at rather low altitude for better precision, the US airforce at night and high altitude for better security.

At the end only one bomb hit the Brest Uboat base with no real damage, it is still visible. But both cities were destroyed and score of habitants killed, much more than German soldiers.

Still, most of the population, even though "preferring" British tactics, did not criticize the bombardments and said "it was the war".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you always so aggressive when presented with facts?

Preserved as what? A coal fired power station or a rat infested asbestos shed. The rats in there were as big as cats and we had to get men in full suits to remove the asbestos.

You simply don't get the process. A planning application is lodged with the local authority, in this case PCC. Public consultations are held and anybody can write in to object or support. A number of independent consultees have considerable input such as The Environment Agency, English Heritage, English Nature to name a few and none of them objected. None of these bodies have direct links to PCC and they can't be influenced. You don't have to live nearby to object by the way.. The planning committee is made up of Elected Councillors who vote on each application. The BAR application was approved by this elected body and if process is not adhered to a Judical Revue can be requested by a member of the public. There was no underhand deals done on this site, rumour maybe, but there was never a question of a JR being considered.

As for it being in wrong place it was the one and only realistic site in Portsmouth, believe me, Ben and I looked for months. Ask 1,000 Portsmouth residents if they would have preferred the base to go to Southampton and I would guess somewhere between 950 to 975 would keep it in Portsmouth. You can please all of the people some of the time and some of the people all the time but never all of the people all of the time.

My invitation still stands so I can prove you wrong on the loss of view. Do you live a long way away from Portsmouth?.

So you are coming back ? I don't think I was agressive in my last post even wishing the Brits to get the cup back.

So, let's go, you can thank brillant Simon for opening the Pandora box.

 

Facts are you say a vast majority support the project while we can read that Portsmouth people complain about the following:

- opacity of the decision making

- no consultation of local residents

- too big building for the nice little houses behind

- the building will be too noisy

- they lack parking place instead

- bad deal for the city, sweet deal with no lease for BAR during many years

 

Just a few other quotes found in the net:

 

"So BAR receive rent free for ten years. Then for nine years at 110k the million that is owed to Portsmouth tax payers will eventually be repaid completely interest free. So realistically it will be 2034 before BAR actually pay any rent for prime land and by that time BAR will be gone.

Incidentally does BAR have the same contract in Southampton as well or is it paying rent there?

It all smells a bit porky to me with so many noses in the trough."

 

 

"PCC have done the unthinkable and managed to shock me with their incompetence! This report raises some questions for me:

Why has work commenced prior to this contract being agreed, this would seem to give BAR an advantage in negotiations;

Cllr Stubbs states the contract will help PCC recoup the £1m, how? To me if the market rate for this site is £110K a year and it is rent free for 10 years that's a further £1.1m written off at a time of huge cuts;

What has been done to ensure that, in the event of BAR losing interest in this project, they can't just fold the company and escape liability, has this been guaranteed in any way."

"It sounds great having the America's cup in Portsmouth. The potential for highly skilled job creation is there but.

1. In times when essential services are being withdrawn through lack of money, should council tax payers money be used to subsidise a rich mans sport that might never see a return.

2. If Sir Ben can't fund the rent then it is unlikely the project will get off the ground. Team Oracle had a budget of over $200m for the last cup.

3. Just like Formula 1, teams can shut down at the drop of a hat. They guzzle vast amounts of cash and if the tap is turned of for any reason there is very little in the way of assets.

4. I would hazard a guess that most of the technology will be bought in from existing manufacturers from around the world and therefore very little in the way of local job creation.

5. If a company manufacturing something very mundane came to Portmouth Council with a full order book and plans to expand in 10 years, would they be afforded the same deal.

6. Small businesses in Fratton and North End are closing, where is the help for them.

Maybe the councillors should put their own money into this project. It's always easier spending other peoples money."

 

 

"What?! Free leases for 10 years?! In a prime location?! And all I have to do is try my best to win a competition that the uk has never won.

Please can I have this deal? (LS - No you can't)

I am not a supporter of any party in Portsmouth, but I do want good, honest, consistent local government.

The inconsistent nature of this council towards generating money is baffling."

 

 

 

I have no stake in that, you don't have to convince me but fellow Portsmouth citizens, they seem as vocal as those from SF about LE. I just hope that the royals will find everything is ok.

 

You want to show me that a 8 storey building doesn't hide the view to 2 storey houses? is that common sense ? well I am 5 000 km away from Portsmouth now, but I love England and will be very happy to have a beer with you when I visit.

 

 

 

 

Again I'm afraid you don't understand the revenue raising by a UK local authority. Rent on a derelict contaminated site is one thing and that was an business agreement made by PCC. However, Business Rates are another form of income and rates on a building of that size this will generate substantial income for Portsmouth. Southampton did have a similar site, one that was an old shipyard which was sold for housing on part of it in return for a Section 106 contribution that required marine employment on the remainder of the site.

As I've said other than housing there was little chance of anything else working at Camber and councils in the UK generally do not get involved in commercial developments. I can't go into the commercial arrangement but rest assured if BAR do disappear the council is in good shape.

Work did not start on the demolition of the old shed until the full Planning Permit had been issued as the threat of a Judicial Review if there is any question on the due process, is too high. As I said, Elected Councillors made this decision as Civil Servant Planning Officers can only make recommendations to the Councillors. The Council in Portsmouth was not a Right Wing council and they made this decision for the benefit of the city. More car parking spaces were created btw than were there before.

Catch up for a beer when you come the 5000 km.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again I'm afraid you don't understand the revenue raising by a UK local authority. Rent on a derelict contaminated site is one thing and that was an business agreement made by PCC. However, Business Rates are another form of income and rates on a building of that size this will generate substantial income for Portsmouth. Southampton did have a similar site, one that was an old shipyard which was sold for housing on part of it in return for a Section 106 contribution that required marine employment on the remainder of the site.

As I've said other than housing there was little chance of anything else working at Camber and councils in the UK generally do not get involved in commercial developments. I can't go into the commercial arrangement but rest assured if BAR do disappear the council is in good shape.

Work did not start on the demolition of the old shed until the full Planning Permit had been issued as the threat of a Judicial Review if there is any question on the due process, is too high. As I said, Elected Councillors made this decision as Civil Servant Planning Officers can only make recommendations to the Councillors. The Council in Portsmouth was not a Right Wing council and they made this decision for the benefit of the city. More car parking spaces were created btw than were there before.

Catch up for a beer when you come the 5000 km.

First, let me thank you for the tone and the content of the post, I always prefer an intelligent conversation to exchanges with the other troll.

 

In fact we know more than you may think as this kind of project have been discussed at length here regarding LE's projects in San Francisco. Pretty much the same scenario, old piers that would be rehabilitated with not lease for 15 or 20 years, same explanations that "it was not possible to build private housing" etc. And you know what happened ? Larry got the boot and left for Bermudas.

The first person finger pointed in the post is Luke Stubbs, good for him if his choice was supported by the council.

 

That said, did the council get the right information ? what knowledge do they have of ACEA false promises to cities ?

 

1) business rent: how much will it be ? how many years to get even ?

 

2) general income for the city, who hired KPMG ? they have a reputation of delivering the figures that will please the guy who pays for it. (I was close work for them a few years ago, very glad I didn't)

 

3) now,let's read that :

"Return on investment: Land Rover Ben Ainslie Racing and the Louis Vuitton America's Cup World Series Portsmouth yesterday jointly published the results of an economic impact study carried out by KPMG since the team’s launch and move to the city of Portsmouth, and the first Louis Vuitton America’s Cup World Series event in the city. The results show a combined £47M economic impact on the UK economy. Read the report here: http://goo.gl/KgsqLu "

Seriously ? these figures are inflated and do not represent the reality at all.

12115447_1931818333710414_64154264565530

 

 

I would be happy that a city like Brest or Roscoff would host the ACWS, but let's be clear with the population, it is not a positive financial operation, it's an expense.

 

I have a house in front of Plymouth on the other side of the channel, I want to visit Portsmouth for a precise reason, walk on the deck of the boat of the brit guy who, one day, said "England expects every man to do his duty"

 

Then I will be very happy to offer you a beer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Radio Solent interview with BA. It starts at 16m in and SKM talks at 39m.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p036xkm4

 

"This Team, this business. This business" !?

 

Then "us sailors". Talk about having your cake and eating it too. Both hands out....

 

"Getting a quarter of a million people to a sailing event is phenomenal".

 

Does 30 minutes of racing qualify it as a "sailing" event? As sport even? Surely it's just a generic "corporate opportunity"

 

But spin away dudes, keep milking it hard.

 

(edit: just seen the photo above..."Chairman of Louis Vuitton America's Cup World Series Portsmouth" you cannot be serious - pompous idiot! :lol: )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Does 30 minutes of racing qualify it as a "sailing" event? As sport even? Surely it's just a generic "corporate opportunity"

 

 

Henley by the Sea

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Henley by the Sea is already taken. That is Cowes Week. NTTAWT.

 

It's slightly rich to read our southern hemisphere friends complaining about commercialisation of the Cup, since historically they led that particular charge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites