Mankover Planning application submitted

Its a race to the bottom development that no other British City would accept, or perhaps Plymouth wants to twin with some former Soviet Shithole?
Vote No Pcc to this Brentigrad nightmare.

So assuming all the Hallett money and the Pavilions sale money is kicked into this project, Brent still needs to find another minimum £25m of new investment to make it happen. Just can't see anybody willing to trust this non-developing business failure.

Peggy wrote:

Yea Man wrote:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Are these the posters that have appeared at HP and the Pavilions? Appeared too late for anybody to make a comment to the decision-makers?

No need Peggy, all the concerns have been addressed it clearly says so on the posters, plus all plans have been approved by a bunch of brain dead ageing social climbers.

Wait goes on for council to hear Plymouth Argyle development plans

A published estimate for Plymouth City Council's planning committee to assess the plans for Home Park, Higher Home Park and The Western Gateway proved to be an error


A spokesperson for the council admitted the date was an estimate which should never have been added to the application and there is no new estimate in place for when the plans will be heard.

The planning committee’s next scheduled meeting is December 14 and beyond that January 11, February 8, March 8 and April 5, all of next year.

That sounds positive for once. Signs of unease at the council ?

Surely enough reason for Brent to sue the Plymouth taxpayer for £8 million ? The nearer it gets to elections, the better, and the more public opinion might grow against his out of order office block plans, let alone six restaurants, but no new free grandstand for the club

'Competition is healthy'

LMFAO, I wondered why Napoleans been getting a bit shirty today. Been having a right go at Gaspo for daring to suggest that lumping all the plans together was a bad plan. So the early 2018 start date is looking like more bullshit. Happy daze.

If you think about the cost of the conjoined plans it is at least £250 k even if work starts in closed season due to the cost of the loan repayments, yet if you believe the nodding donkeys Jimmy has saved us a heap of money with Akkeron helping us out by paying all the fees on this Akkeron project, wankers.

I bet Akkeron are charging bundles of Liverpool pounds to deal with it all, being the building/planning/development kings they are.

Earwegoagain wrote:

LMFAO, I wondered why Napoleans been getting a bit shirty today. Been having a right go at Gaspo for daring to suggest that lumping all the plans together was a bad plan. So the early 2018 start date is looking like more bullshit. Happy daze.

Sniff that Brenty Bullshit uuuuuuuuuuuuuuummmmmmmmmmmmmm!! The soviet Style, Block in the Park plan is never going to happen!

I'd just like to put the following points on record.

1. I couldn't care less about the grandstand, just as I don't care about any building I never intend to go into again.

2. I will always object in the strongest possible terms to any attempt to put things like huge office blocks in a park, no matter who's behind the attempt.

3. I will always object in the strongest possible terms to any attempt to limit space in the park and ride carpark and shut out the people it's there for,  no matter who's behind the attempt.

4. feck off with your nasty little insinuations, Newell.

Relax £10,000 says Brent lays not a single brick of HHP2 on his watch.....not happening all smoke mirrors and bluster. 50/50 that grandstand refurb actually occurs either

MESSAGE TO IAN NEWELL WHO DOESN'T READ THIS SITE.

The Brent brown nosed patsy fag and arse licker said,

Of course people are right to ask questions, people are also right to object, particularly those that live near and fear it could upset their way of life etc.

The big question is, why do the same (Argyle related) names appear to object to everything our Chairman tries to do? Only they can answer that, I have a feeling an awful lot of people have the same thoughts as I do though.

You mean people like me? Maybe we weren't swayed to move our allegiance from the club to the owner upon receipt of silly hats and titles? From day one I voiced my concerns that Brent was more interested in property development than the club that in fact he needed Argyle to develop property. You told us all that Brent WAS NOT A PROPERTY DEVELOPER! You were wrong, the plans for the £35m development make that point quite nicely. Added to that why are you concerned about WHICH people object using powers enshrined in law? Surely both our objections and support are equally valid?
You are a sellout, you are also a bully but you have now been Sussed and even buying the proxy forum and turning that over to the property developer hasn't given him the free ride you have obviously promised him. I hope that when Brent fecks off you and your two faced backstabbing ilk are banned from HP for ever, you are not an Argyle fan you are a sellout and a social climbing count of the highest order.
GO FECK YOURSELF.

Earwegoagain wrote:

MESSAGE TO IAN NEWELL WHO DOESN'T READ THIS SITE.

The Brent brown nosed patsy fag and arse licker said,

Of course people are right to ask questions, people are also right to object, particularly those that live near and fear it could upset their way of life etc.

The big question is, why do the same (Argyle related) names appear to object to everything our Chairman tries to do? Only they can answer that, I have a feeling an awful lot of people have the same thoughts as I do though.

You mean people like me? Maybe we weren't swayed to move our allegiance from the club to the owner upon receipt of silly hats and titles? From day one I voiced my concerns that Brent was more interested in property development than the club that in fact he needed Argyle to develop property. You told us all that Brent WAS NOT A PROPERTY DEVELOPER! You were wrong, the plans for the £35m development make that point quite nicely. Added to that why are you concerned about WHICH people object using powers enshrined in law? Surely both our objections and support are equally valid?
You are a sellout, you are also a bully but you have now been Sussed and even buying the proxy forum and turning that over to the property developer hasn't given him the free ride you have obviously promised him. I hope that when Brent fecks off you and your two faced backstabbing ilk are banned from HP for ever, you are not an Argyle fan you are a sellout and a social climbing count of the highest order.
GO FECK YOURSELF.

I can’t believe that people down on the farm still buy Brent’s schemes. However in the last few months dissent has risen and many were banned or upped and left. I was banned for asking questions that did not comply with the status quo.
I understand that if Brent said to Newell the Sky is green Newell would chew his straw in his mouth and nod in a baldrick-esque manner whilst sycophantically saying” yes my lord ‘tis true innit master yes sir whatever you say, can I hold your hand sir I’m frightened” to which Brent pats him on his head and says “that’ll do pig that’ll do”

Certainly Newell would do well to simply shut his fat mouth usual story of his own forum members clearly thinking he's a complete tool and then Fatboy opens his mouth and removes all doubt.
The best bit is Brent will shaft him one day changing numbers and blocking the oaf.

Peggy wrote:

I'd just like to put the following points on record.

1. I couldn't care less about the grandstand, just as I don't care about any building I never intend to go into again.

2. I will always object in the strongest possible terms to any attempt to put things like huge office blocks in a park, no matter who's behind the attempt.

3. I will always object in the strongest possible terms to any attempt to limit space in the park and ride carpark and shut out the people it's there for,  no matter who's behind the attempt.

4. feck off with your nasty little insinuations, Newell.

Point 1 affects the future of the club, is PAFC completely dead to you?

Les Miserable wrote:

Peggy wrote:

I'd just like to put the following points on record.

1. I couldn't care less about the grandstand, just as I don't care about any building I never intend to go into again.

2. I will always object in the strongest possible terms to any attempt to put things like huge office blocks in a park, no matter who's behind the attempt.

3. I will always object in the strongest possible terms to any attempt to limit space in the park and ride carpark and shut out the people it's there for,  no matter who's behind the attempt.

4. feck off with your nasty little insinuations, Newell.

Point 1 affects the future of the club, is PAFC completely dead to you?

Probably, yes. After all these years of self-banishment I hardly even know when the team's playing at home, and I've found tons of other ways of spending my time and money. Once Brent and his oafs are permanently off the premises I might go to the occasional match, but the bug went long ago.

Forcing 35-year fans out of the club. Perhaps the only thing Newell and Webb are any good at.

Peggy wrote:

Les Miserable wrote:

Peggy wrote:

I'd just like to put the following points on record.

1. I couldn't care less about the grandstand, just as I don't care about any building I never intend to go into again.

2. I will always object in the strongest possible terms to any attempt to put things like huge office blocks in a park, no matter who's behind the attempt.

3. I will always object in the strongest possible terms to any attempt to limit space in the park and ride carpark and shut out the people it's there for,  no matter who's behind the attempt.

4. feck off with your nasty little insinuations, Newell.

Point 1 affects the future of the club, is PAFC completely dead to you?

Forcing 35-year fans out of the club. Perhaps the only thing Newell and Webb are any good at.

Dont give them the satisfaction of reading that as thats exactly what they love to observe.

They already know, Harve. They've known since they did it. That's why Newell makes a point every now and then of reminding people to ignore me because I don't go to matches any more.

Wouldn't do any harm for others to be reminded, though. Especially those who want the club to attract more fans - especially women, apparently - rather than forcing them out. Hopefully it'll be mentioned in the next social media monitoring report.

Peggy wrote:

They already know, Harve. They've known since they did it. That's why Newell makes a point every now and then of reminding people to ignore me because I don't go to matches any more.

Wouldn't do any harm for others to be reminded, though. Especially those who want the club to attract more fans - especially women, apparently - rather than forcing them out. Hopefully it'll be mentioned in the next social media monitoring report.

If I chip in a comment on your post Peggy then you can be sure that it will be noted in a dossier somewhere.
I have received veiled threats about my future of visiting Home Park and that i'm being monitored, which could make next weekends home game with Oxford very interesting indeed. especially as i'm up early for the important PAST&DT AGM. And I've got fans fest tickets to.
Perish the thought that I might bump into anyone, just like they bumped into our PACSA chairman to pass on these veiled threats.

Peggy wrote:

Les Miserable wrote:

Peggy wrote:

I'd just like to put the following points on record.

1. I couldn't care less about the grandstand, just as I don't care about any building I never intend to go into again.

2. I will always object in the strongest possible terms to any attempt to put things like huge office blocks in a park, no matter who's behind the attempt.

3. I will always object in the strongest possible terms to any attempt to limit space in the park and ride carpark and shut out the people it's there for,  no matter who's behind the attempt.

4. feck off with your nasty little insinuations, Newell.

Point 1 affects the future of the club, is PAFC completely dead to you?

Probably, yes. After all these years of self-banishment I hardly even know when the team's playing at home, and I've found tons of other ways of spending my time and money. Once Brent and his oafs are permanently off the premises I might go to the occasional match, but the bug went long ago.

Forcing 35-year fans out of the club. Perhaps the only thing Newell and Webb are any good at.

That's a shame Peggy, but perhaps understandable considering past oafishness. I've not experienced any personal stuff, multiple farm bannings excepted and I'm as disillusioned as the next man(or woman) with the current shower, however the twingeometer still flickers if we win lose or draw and the longterm wellbeing of the club is of concern.

The plan is basically down market shite, cheap hotel, fastfood and bland crap office space plonked onto the fringes of Central Park. Why would anybody want this Turd of a scheme on their doorstep?
Its all about Brent/ Hallet making money, Argyle will just be saddled with a half arsed Mankover and a five million debt.

BBC1 wrote:

Peggy wrote:

They already know, Harve. They've known since they did it. That's why Newell makes a point every now and then of reminding people to ignore me because I don't go to matches any more.

Wouldn't do any harm for others to be reminded, though. Especially those who want the club to attract more fans - especially women, apparently - rather than forcing them out. Hopefully it'll be mentioned in the next social media monitoring report.

If I chip in a comment on your post Peggy then you can be sure that it will be noted in a dossier somewhere.

FFS.

Why TF do you think I need to be told that? Do you really think I don't know? Some of us have been on the receiving end for years now, not sitting on the fence making nice with the bullies before finally deciding who to side with.

Peggy wrote:

BBC1 wrote:

Peggy wrote:

They already know, Harve. They've known since they did it. That's why Newell makes a point every now and then of reminding people to ignore me because I don't go to matches any more.

Wouldn't do any harm for others to be reminded, though. Especially those who want the club to attract more fans - especially women, apparently - rather than forcing them out. Hopefully it'll be mentioned in the next social media monitoring report.

If I chip in a comment on your post Peggy then you can be sure that it will be noted in a dossier somewhere.

FFS.

Why TF do you think I need to be told that? Do you really think I don't know? Some of us have been on the receiving end for years now, not sitting on the fence making nice with the bullies before finally deciding who to side with.

Peggy,Right at the very begining Rather than surround himself with Arselickers and Toadies,if Brent wanted a straight answer to what fans were really thinking he should have listened to you.