Mankover Planning application submitted

I can't see why anybody would start the refurb while the season is on.

Not only is there the issue of reduced capacity but also the problem of re-locating season ticket holders from the grandstand.

So the earliest possible stating date will be in May.

If we don't start in May then the above issues re-emerge if any refurb to takes place a) during a season and b) once season tickets have been sold.

And if not this May then next May and so on.

Yea Man wrote:

When shall we open the book on excuses for it being delayed?

Yes

the weather has been terrible.

It won't be May, we'll be holding the play-off games then.

When does the planning permission lapse?

Frank Bullitt wrote:

When does the planning permission lapse?

I think it’s three years after being granted.

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

Frank Bullitt wrote:

When does the planning permission lapse?

2 years isnt it? isnt that hat happen with the original clusterfuck aside from the fact Mclaren (yes the f1 guys so its bound to look good but have engine failures) are currently building a better version at bretonside.

If he starts the stand, how long have he got to start the rest of the developments when the stand is finished

Think of Jimmy's previous developments   then ask yerself why this one will be any different?

From memory the officer's report said three years to start development, then start the HHP and vets developments with two years of completing the grandstand/ice rink stages.

sufferedsince 68 wrote:

Think of Jimmy's previous developments   then ask yerself why this one will be any different?

As regards the crapshack2 it wont. He's "struggling" in addition with the refurb and that in my opinion is a generous description as costs have soared

Contrary to popular belief planning permission for the hybrid planning application at Home Park/HHP/Western Gateway site has yet to be granted. On 14th December the Planning Committee confirmed that the Council were minded to grant planning permission subject to a s106 agreement being signed. Just before Christmas PCC extended the time for the agreement to bre signed to 26th January 2018. Only when the agreement is signed can the Planning permission be formally granted.

The s106 agreement requires the applicant to pay £250,000 in two instalments linked to the commencement of the Western Gateway and HHP commercial (non-ice rink) sites. It is a payment required to offset the loss of part of Central Park for additional parking at the Western Gateway site. The payment goes towards strategic green space for the Central Park Master Plan. The payment requirement has nothing to do with the Football Club nor the commencement of the Grandstand refurbishment.

Once planning permission is granted there is a requirement to discharge 12 pre-commencement / pre-construction planning conditions. These conditions relate to a number of issues such as access, contamination, drainage, the programme of works etc.

If work is commenced on the site before any pre-commencement conditions are formally discharged by the Council it can invalidate the whole planning permission. Some demolition works may be exempted. So work cannot commence until all the relevant conditions are formally discharged by PCC.

On the basis of the above, therefore, it is most unlikely that a valid planning permission, including works associated with the grandstand, can be legally commenced until towards the end of the first quarter of 2018.

Graham Clark wrote:

Contrary to popular belief planning permission for the hybrid planning application at Home Park/HHP/Western Gateway site has yet to be granted. On 14th December the Planning Committee confirmed that the Council were minded to grant planning permission subject to a s106 agreement being signed. Just before Christmas PCC extended the time for the agreement to bre signed to 26th January 2018. Only when the agreement is signed can the Planning permission be formally granted.

The s106 agreement requires the applicant to pay £250,000 in two instalments linked to the commencement of the Western Gateway and HHP commercial (non-ice rink) sites. It is a payment required to offset the loss of part of Central Park for additional parking at the Western Gateway site. The payment goes towards strategic green space for the Central Park Master Plan. The payment requirement has nothing to do with the Football Club nor the commencement of the Grandstand refurbishment.

Once planning permission is granted there is a requirement to discharge 12 pre-commencement / pre-construction planning conditions. These conditions relate to a number of issues such as access, contamination, drainage, the programme of works etc.

If work is commenced on the site before any pre-commencement conditions are formally discharged by the Council it can invalidate the whole planning permission. Some demolition works may be exempted. So work cannot commence until all the relevant conditions are formally discharged by PCC.

On the basis of the above, therefore, it is most unlikely that a valid planning permission, including works associated with the grandstand, can be legally commenced until towards the end of the first quarter of 2018.

Whaaat Brent has to pay? Doubtless the club will end up footing that bill.

Thanks for that Graham,

I like this part

It is a payment required to offset the loss of part of Central Park for additional parking at the Western Gateway site.

Shows you cannot trust the Council or Brent when both said in the pass Not one blade of park grass will be built on

and the FOCP said they supported him because he was only building on his land.

Hugh Watt wrote:

Graham Clark wrote:

Contrary to popular belief planning permission for the hybrid planning application at Home Park/HHP/Western Gateway site has yet to be granted. On 14th December the Planning Committee confirmed that the Council were minded to grant planning permission subject to a s106 agreement being signed. Just before Christmas PCC extended the time for the agreement to bre signed to 26th January 2018. Only when the agreement is signed can the Planning permission be formally granted.

The s106 agreement requires the applicant to pay £250,000 in two instalments linked to the commencement of the Western Gateway and HHP commercial (non-ice rink) sites. It is a payment required to offset the loss of part of Central Park for additional parking at the Western Gateway site. The payment goes towards strategic green space for the Central Park Master Plan. The payment requirement has nothing to do with the Football Club nor the commencement of the Grandstand refurbishment.

Once planning permission is granted there is a requirement to discharge 12 pre-commencement / pre-construction planning conditions. These conditions relate to a number of issues such as access, contamination, drainage, the programme of works etc.

If work is commenced on the site before any pre-commencement conditions are formally discharged by the Council it can invalidate the whole planning permission. Some demolition works may be exempted. So work cannot commence until all the relevant conditions are formally discharged by PCC.

On the basis of the above, therefore, it is most unlikely that a valid planning permission, including works associated with the grandstand, can be legally commenced until towards the end of the first quarter of 2018.

Whaaat Brent has to pay? Doubtless the club will end up footing that bill.

Luckily the January transfer window has opened just in time!

What a pleasure it is reading Graham's occasional contributions. Clear facts that the rest of us, everywhere, tend to only speculate about. Thank you GC, as valuable as the other GC.

Charlie Wood wrote:

What a pleasure it is reading Graham's occasional contributions. Clear facts that the rest of us, everywhere, tend to only speculate about. Thank you GC, as valuable as the other GC.

Here here, Charlie.

P.O.I wrote:

Charlie Wood wrote:

What a pleasure it is reading Graham's occasional contributions. Clear facts that the rest of us, everywhere, tend to only speculate about. Thank you GC, as valuable as the other GC.

Here here, Charlie.

He gives the establishment sleepless nights when his keyboard start up - held in high regard both sides of the fence, dont be a stranger GC.

Tgwu wrote:

Thanks for that Graham,

I like this part

It is a payment required to offset the loss of part of Central Park for additional parking at the Western Gateway site.

Shows you cannot trust the Council or Brent when both said in the pass Not one blade of park grass will be built on

and the FOCP said they supported him because he was only building on his land.

Paragraphs 12 and 13 of the Officer’s Report to the Planning Committee on 14th December last year make reference to the encroachment and that the payment of £250,000 was for mitigation of the loss. It is a clear planning principle that financial payment can be made through a s106 for the mitigation of losses or impacts. The land in question enabled an additional 50 or so car parking spaces to be provided adjoining the Western Gateway site. There will be additional tree planting to further mitigate the impact.

With regard to duration of the Planning permissions before lapsing. Phase 1 (Stage 1 of the Grandstand and Ice Rink) and Phase 4 ( Stage 2 of the Grandstand - the quadrant corners) must begin with 3 years of the date of the Planning permission (i.e. the date of the decision after a s106 is signed not the date of the Planning Committee). The submission of Reserved Matters (design, layout, access, landscaping etc.) for Phase 2 (Western Gateway) and Phase 3 (HHP commercial - non-ice rink) must be submitted within 3 years and then must be commenced within 2 years.

Cheers GC

Mr Brent claimed that s106 is a tax, maybe he was trying to deflect any comment on 'encroachment'.....

Although to be fair most green tinted bobble hatted Janners would happily see the peoples park buried under concrete (only a few dog walkers etc).

This is one reason I didn't like the group of fans complaining about the parking issue, as that was never going to stop anything. But then they're fans of the football club, not the park. Typical, and an easy mark for Brent and his ex council turncoat.

So, in the planned for irony, fans complaining about parking have actually helped Brent's cause by adding pressure to give away more of the park. Fans could quite easily once a fortnight make other arrangements to get to the ground, yet more of the park is stolen and put under the jackboot of the car. Shame on everybody involved for being so dim and led down a certain route, and  especially shame on Brent for creating extra parking pressure with thoughtless selfish inappropriate plans. Every bit as bad as Heaney, and in fact worse for lying about his intentions. He hasn't finished yet, so more of the stadium to disappear under his asset strip in the not too distant.

In the past I would have called this sort of thing a result of political imperative. These days, it's blatant corruption, nods and winks. I will go out of my way to bad mouth/leaflet at the next election those councillors who voted for the plans.

Now Toys R Us has gone bust couldn't that building serve for an an ice rink - it must be big enough, surely? There's a nice big car park already there...

Any whispers going as to what might happen to it?

It's certainly got a prime location regarding the rest of the Pavilions/Millbay mullarkey.

It's been talked about for a couple of years now, so you can bet your bottom bitcoin Brent has thought of the idea, so freeing up the rest of "his park" for ultimate residential use. Classic classic sliding agenda.

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Now Toys R Us has gone bust couldn't that building serve for an an ice rink - it must be big enough, surely? There's a nice big car park already there...

Any whispers going as to what might happen to it?

It's certainly got a prime location regarding the rest of the Pavilions/Millbay mullarkey.

It would be ideal and its big enough to have two rinks aswell. one for the public and another for multiple events ie ice skating events, hockey even non ice events too like basketball netball etc etc so it would make alot more money than that cheap one that's planned at home park.

That part of the city centre is desperate for a boost and this could help bring more trade to the shops that tend to be forgotten past kfc.

But the lodge has spoken and his most worshipful has to have his way. masonic Brothers stick together. Plymouth nneeds more student flats despite not one being full not including the two new towers being built as of writing.

beesrus wrote:

This is one reason I didn't like the group of fans complaining about the parking issue, as that was never going to stop anything. But then they're fans of the football club, not the park. Typical, and an easy mark for Brent and his ex council turncoat.

So, in the planned for irony, fans complaining about parking have actually helped Brent's cause by adding pressure to give away more of the park. Fans could quite easily once a fortnight make other arrangements to get to the ground, yet more of the park is stolen and put under the jackboot of the car. Shame on everybody involved for being so dim and led down a certain route, and  especially shame on Brent for creating extra parking pressure with thoughtless selfish inappropriate plans. Every bit as bad as Heaney, and in fact worse for lying about his intentions. He hasn't finished yet, so more of the stadium to disappear under his asset strip in the not too distant.

In the past I would have called this sort of thing a result of political imperative. These days, it's blatant corruption, nods and winks. I will go out of my way to bad mouth/leaflet at the next election those councillors who voted for the plans.

With respect, Bees, the substance of my complaints was this creation of extra parking pressure. In the original plans, it was inappropriately dealt with by assuming it would be ok to commandeer part of the park and ride - which, although it is about concrete and cars, is also about reducing the environmental impact of people getting to and from work, study, hospital and shopping.

Obviously I'd have been happier if the planning committee had instructed the developer to change the plans such that, for instance, the existing car park at HHP was sufficient for all the planned development. As it is, though, it's the old rock and hard place question, and personally I'd say it was more important - given the committee are apparently happy to allow this level of commercial development in the park - to protect the park and ride.

Sir Frankie D wrote:

Now Toys R Us has gone bust couldn't that building serve for an an ice rink - it must be big enough, surely? There's a nice big car park already there...

I don't think it's as cut and dried as that: sure I read something about a compromise being reached on the pension fund and the possibility that shops won't close. If it does, though, I agree it would be ideal for an ice rink (but weep for the people losing their jobs).

And thanks from me, too, for Graham's knowledgeable and timely posts.