In message , at 21:07:24 on Thu, 1 Dec 2011,
Nick Leverton remarked:
any successful venture on the site would almost certainly be predicated
on the construction of a tube line, which would cost hundreds of
millions of pounds."

Maybe it turned out that too much of that cost would be laid on the
developer?

I thought the tube line was to be financed by other Nine Elms area
developments?

I don't think there's much chance of a contribution from the new US Embassy :-(

Boris was reported to be looking for £2.5m from the Embassy project,
which is small change and neither here nor there in the grand scheme of
things.

On the other hand, the Battersea Power Station project is supposed to be
grossing £5.5bn, which is almost 20x the loan they are currently
floundering with.
--
Roland Perry

In article ,
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 21:07:24 on Thu, 1 Dec 2011,
Nick Leverton remarked:
any successful venture on the site would almost certainly be predicated
on the construction of a tube line, which would cost hundreds of
millions of pounds."

Maybe it turned out that too much of that cost would be laid on the
developer?

I thought the tube line was to be financed by other Nine Elms area
developments?

I don't think there's much chance of a contribution from the new US Embassy :-(

Boris was reported to be looking for £2.5m from the Embassy project,
which is small change and neither here nor there in the grand scheme of
things.

On the other hand, the Battersea Power Station project is supposed to be
grossing £5.5bn, which is almost 20x the loan they are currently
floundering with.

A lot of business ideas suppose that they can gross a lot of money, and a
lot of them fail to meet their goals. Of more interest, if anyone knows,
would be what contribution the project was actually expected to make to
the Northern Line Battersea extension.

Nick
--
Serendipity: http://www.leverton.org/blosxom (last update 29th March 2010)
"The Internet, a sort of ersatz counterfeit of real life"
-- Janet Street-Porter, BBC2, 19th March 1996

In message , at 21:35:25 on Thu, 1 Dec 2011,
Nick Leverton remarked:
Boris was reported to be looking for £2.5m from the Embassy project,
which is small change and neither here nor there in the grand scheme of
things.

On the other hand, the Battersea Power Station project is supposed to be
grossing £5.5bn, which is almost 20x the loan they are currently
floundering with.

A lot of business ideas suppose that they can gross a lot of money, and a
lot of them fail to meet their goals. Of more interest, if anyone knows,
would be what contribution the project was actually expected to make to
the Northern Line Battersea extension.

The power station developer was the "sponsor and manager" for the
extension.

http://www.northernlineextension.com...ess_report_no_
1_final.pdf

There are some interesting maps, eg p8. The price depends on the route
and I presume it's the £459m one. They seem to have gone for the highest
density development scenario on page 10, but it's possible (if this was
also the announcement of the choice of route) that the developer could
only have paid for the cheaper route option, more on cash-flow than
cost/benefit grounds.

ps A third of the debt that was called in this week is money still owed
to the previous site owners who sold to REO in 2006.

--
Roland Perry

http://lurs.org.uk/meetings.htm
Tuesday 13th December 2011: Treasury Holdings has ambitious plans to
redevelop the Battersea Power Station site and to see the Northern Line
extended from Kennington to Battersea in order to serve the area.
Northern Line Extension Project Manager, Tony Whitehead will be joined
by Jon Kirkup from London Underground to explain the processes involved.

In article ,
Roland Perry wrote:
Nick Leverton remarked:
A lot of business ideas suppose that they can gross a lot of money, and a
lot of them fail to meet their goals. Of more interest, if anyone knows,
would be what contribution the project was actually expected to make to
the Northern Line Battersea extension.

The power station developer was the "sponsor and manager" for the
extension.

http://www.northernlineextension.com...ess_report_no_
1_final.pdf

There are some interesting maps, eg p8. The price depends on the route
and I presume it's the £459m one. They seem to have gone for the highest
density development scenario on page 10, but it's possible (if this was
also the announcement of the choice of route) that the developer could
only have paid for the cheaper route option, more on cash-flow than
cost/benefit grounds.

Thanks, an interesting read. It seems the NLE will be required to cope
with travel needs for any but the residential-only development options
in the area, and even for those it would still be a good idea. So it's
presumably unlikely to die just because the developers have gone under.

However the funding is still a work package to be subsequently delivered !

Nick
--
Serendipity: http://www.leverton.org/blosxom (last update 29th March 2010)
"The Internet, a sort of ersatz counterfeit of real life"
-- Janet Street-Porter, BBC2, 19th March 1996

Chelsea FC, Chelsea FC, Chelsea FC.