MP calls on Sutton Harbour to name its price for the airport site
AIRPORT operator Sutton Harbour Holdings has been attacked for refusing to reveal how much its Roborough site is worth.
The company, which closed down the airport last December, has rejected an appeal for the information by Plymouth Sutton and Devonport MP Oliver Colvile.
Mr Colvile wrote to Sutton Harbour last month asking for the figures.
He said that he received a reply yesterday from chief executive Jason Schofield, saying the information was "commercially sensitive" and could not be released.
BUY ONE GET ONE FREE - Medium Cod, Chips & Mushy Peas at...
View details
Simply Purchase a Medium Cod, Chips and Mushy Peas and receive another portion for FREE.
Sustainable Cod, Fresh Cut Chips & Proper Mushy Peas.
Visit Our Website for more information and offers
Terms: Offer valid only with this Voucher, 1 voucher Per Customer. Not for use with any other offer, Not transferable to other menu items
Contact: 01752 421044
Valid until: Thursday, June 27 2013
"That is not a satisfactory answer," Mr Colvile said.
"People wanting to make a bid to run the airport need that information to write their business plan."
Mr Colvile said he would now be writing to council leader Tudor Evans, asking him to instruct officers to carry out valuations of the land for use as an airport and for development, as proposed by Sutton Harbour Holdings.
Sutton Harbour holds a 150-year lease on the land. The council owns the freehold.
In his letter to Mr Colvile, Sutton Harbour chief executive Jason Schofield wrote that "information of this nature is commercially sensitive and I am therefore unable to comment at this time".
He went on, "we have always been prepared to consider any credible business proposal for the airport, provided it is evidenced by the appropriate financial support, but to date no such proposal has been received".
A spokesman for Sutton Harbour Holdings said: "We would assume that any parties with a serious interest in the airport would engage independent expert advice about the value of the land.
"While we understand the reasons for Mr Colvile's request, any value we might put on the site is commercially sensitive information.
"However we have always said we would evaluate any substantive proposals brought forward by parties who can demonstrate the necessary financial capability. To date none has been forthcoming."
Comments
by b_mused
Friday, September 07 2012, 11:08PM
“'m_dalston - I think you've spotted what I spotted - a few weeks ago I read that PCC stand to make something like 75% of any development profits. They haven't got the sense to realise that surplus houses, supermarkets etc. may not generate as much profit as they hope because there won't be any jobs for people to go to.”
by b_mused
Friday, September 07 2012, 11:01PM
“It must now be the duty of this rather retarded council to advise SHH that planning permission for anything other than airport improvements will not be given for at least 25 years and only then if an experienced operator has failed to make it work. That will knock the value down a bit.”
by hstmtu4000
Friday, September 07 2012, 6:13PM
“The phrase "knowing the cost of everything and the value of nothing" springs to mind here.In purely cost/benefit analysis terms the land is far more valuable to Plymouths wider economy as an airport than it is as just another housing/retail development in the North of Plymouth given the awful road and rail links we are stuck with.God knows we have enough out of town retail and housing developments as it is with even more to come.Surely even SHH must realize that its in their own long term business interests for Plymouth to have good transport links in the 21st century.Its the city centre where SSH should be looking for such development opportunities not destroying the one and only airport site we are ever likely to have within the Plymouth area and thereby consign us and themselves to even more severe economic problems in the future.”
by CharlieDodd
Friday, September 07 2012, 1:33PM
“I read that a SHH executive resigned from them last year for unspecified reasons.
Hopefully he'll come forward and tell us more, he could do it under an anonymous name and log in here..;)”
by m_dalston
Friday, September 07 2012, 1:18PM
“Oh .. and talking about interests that are different .. could it be that for some people within PCC, selling off valueable infrastructure would nicely cover for our money they lost by sticking it in a bank which was underwritten by a population smaller then that of Plymouth???”
by m_dalston
Friday, September 07 2012, 1:12PM
“Margrathea - I disagree with your point. The housing value outstripping the airport value is ONLY true for SHH - to Plymouth and its residents (and probably a large part of South and West Devon and East Cornwall) having an airport isn't even on the same scale as a short term monetary gain by building a few houses.
The only reason I can think of why PCC is not acting on behalf of the PCC taxpayers is that (some of) the responsible people within that organisation have a vested personal interest which is different.
It should be an absolute no-brainer that a large urban area with no other decent modern transport links would fight tooth and nail to keep an airport going.”
by Waltersmith
Friday, September 07 2012, 12:54PM
“At least the Herald are allowing discussion - rather than pulling stories about the airport willy-nilly in the recent past or simply not allowing comments at all.
The airport site does have more value as housing but that is not the point. Plymouth is badly served by transport and that hinders its economic growth. I cannot understand how a housing development at Roborough will lead to economic prosperity but I can see how an air link would.
Perhaps a cost benefit analysis would be a better way of identifying the importance or lack of it to Plymouth's economy.”
by DoWhatNow
Friday, September 07 2012, 12:43PM
“I still cannot figure out how the LEASEHOLDER (SHH) has any rights to sell or develop the land without the permission and agreement of the FREEHOLDER (PCC). PCC own the land and SHH are just tenants, basically. And if the lease that SHH have signed ends up giving them more rights to the land than the actual owners, then PCC and their legal beagles should be shot! The whole thing is completely farcical.”
by Hermes_001
Friday, September 07 2012, 12:20PM
“I'm totally ignorant of these matters but is it not possible for Plymouth City Council to compulsory purchase the lease?”
by Magrathea2011
Friday, September 07 2012, 11:54AM
“As I understand the situation, the Council are both Judge and Jury on this.
They have made the situation impossible by imposing the 5 tests and decide any 'credible' bid against that before 'supporting' it or not, although they have no commercial interest in doing so.
Or do they?
I understand that they actually do have a vested interest in getting as much payback as possible (quite rightly so in many peoples' eyes) on the sale/redevelopment of the land/freefold to the tune of 75% of any takings.
Housing value is substantially more than airport value. Therefore the Council AND Sutton Harbour have a vested interest to agree with each other to maximise the land value - in this case away from a continuing use as an airport - particularly in these times when the Council has so much demand on its available funds and the SHG who have a duty towards is shareholders first and foremost to maximise their return on their investment.
How is this circle 'broken' to allow a continuation for the airport option ?
I have no idea .....”