Mankover Planning application submitted

Greensam giving Newell a roasting over Bretonside after fatboy once again claimed it scuppered HHP1
He really is a fruit of the highest order

The AFT objected to the first HHP scheme.
No they didn't.
Well they might as well have, and they wanted to even of they didn't, anyway I just don't like them.



Is all I can say is thank fook Newell isn't on our side.

Earwegoagain wrote:

The AFT objected to the first HHP scheme.
No they didn't.
Well they might as well have, and they wanted to even of they didn't, anyway I just don't like them.



Is all I can say is thank fook Newell isn't on our side.

Pure Comedy Gold......he cant help it as he's lied for so many years he cannot remember what he's said before

harvetheslayer wrote:

Earwegoagain wrote:

The AFT objected to the first HHP scheme.
No they didn't.
Well they might as well have, and they wanted to even of they didn't, anyway I just don't like them.



Is all I can say is thank fook Newell isn't on our side.

Pure Comedy Gold......he cant help it as he's lied for so many years he cannot remember what he's said before

This.

He's been peddling delusions, lies and misinformation for so long now he can't remember what the truth actually was/is.

Dont forget the diversionary tactics, which of course is what all this anti AFT stuff and anti fan stauff is all about. Any bit of dust to cover Brent as he sows up the deal he came for and pockets the lion's share of what was supposed to be a football club asset. He's already chuckled at there being not very much uplift profit to share with the club, just like he chuckled on tv when asked about the Liverpool money. Could end up being the biggest earner of his life

harvetheslayer wrote:

Greensam giving Newell a roasting over Bretonside after fatboy once again claimed it scuppered HHP1
He really is a fruit of the highest order

Leigh Rapson and his Keep HP P&R Parking Free campaign did more than most to scupper HHP. NCP then had no interest in underground car park.

The Studio School application was laughed at and for some reason JB thought PCC and Plymouth health care should provide £8M towards the dentist and health centre.

Coupled with retailers being able to understand that the gap between ministand and HHP would resemble the Death Star trench with no natural light and bingo , it was alll those pesky British Lands fault.

green_genie wrote:

harvetheslayer wrote:

Greensam giving Newell a roasting over Bretonside after fatboy once again claimed it scuppered HHP1
He really is a fruit of the highest order

Leigh Rapson and his Keep HP P&R Parking Free campaign did more than most to scupper HHP. NCP then had no interest in underground car park.

The Studio School application was laughed at and for some reason JB thought PCC and Plymouth health care should provide £8M towards the dentist and health centre.

Coupled with retailers being able to understand that the gap between ministand and HHP would resemble the Death Star trench with no natural light and bingo , it was alll those pesky British Lands fault.

I always thought Rappo had blood on his hands over that,once the council got spooked by the reaction to charges it was all over for the car park and therefore the scheme itself. Naughty Rappo, no more leaking work for you!

I see someone has pointed out the obvious bit that HHP had a clear 18 months head start on Bretonside, which Nooly counters with the supposition that all the potential leaseholders would have had their head turned by a rival scheme close to the Barby.

I though Nooly wanted the jobs and investment.

I thought competition was a good thing according to James Brent.

harvetheslayer wrote:

Greensam giving Newell a roasting over Bretonside after fatboy once again claimed it scuppered HHP1
He really is a fruit of the highest order

Can't find any roasting harve...am I looking at the wrong thread?

Hugh Watt wrote:

green_genie wrote:

harvetheslayer wrote:

Greensam giving Newell a roasting over Bretonside after fatboy once again claimed it scuppered HHP1
He really is a fruit of the highest order

Leigh Rapson and his Keep HP P&R Parking Free campaign did more than most to scupper HHP. NCP then had no interest in underground car park.

The Studio School application was laughed at and for some reason JB thought PCC and Plymouth health care should provide £8M towards the dentist and health centre.

Coupled with retailers being able to understand that the gap between ministand and HHP would resemble the Death Star trench with no natural light and bingo , it was alll those pesky British Lands fault.

I always thought Rappo had blood on his hands over that,once the council got spooked by the reaction to charges it was all over for the car park and therefore the scheme itself. Naughty Rappo, no more leaking work for you!

I see someone has pointed out the obvious bit that HHP had a clear 18 months head start on Bretonside, which Nooly counters with the supposition that all the potential leaseholders would have had their head turned by a rival scheme close to the Barby.

I though Nooly wanted the jobs and investment.

I thought competition was a good thing according to James Brent.

As an optimist, I prefer to think the council were never prepared back with Brent's first nonsense to allow car parking charges to access it's main municipal park. Then, as now, I believe it is only Argyle fans that believe it's time charges were introduced to access the park, purely so there will be space left for them once a fortnight when they toodle in from Southway, Plumpton or London. The area isn't just there for once in a fortnight Kyles, Ians  and Jasons, it's a park for everyone. The charges in the town centre are a totally different animal and reasoning, and served by every bus there ever was. Central Park is not.
As for competition, everyone wants it when they're climbing the pole, and no one, once they've got to the top. Uber today is just the latest example of that. I remember how IBM hissed and spat at Microsoft in the 1970s. In the end, there has to be regulation in these matters of "competition", not all of which are economic. Some are social. That is what town planning is supposed to be about

Green tinted fans are very selfish, if Brent wanted ten training pitches for exclusive use they would all nod, park's just for a few dog walkers bhey.....i

As it happens, he only wants another 3 football pitches taken from the publicly accessible space of Central Park.  ONLY !!!!
Basically, feck the football club in this sort of scenario, and feck the fans too. It's not just Argyle. Stanley Park has had to fend off the huge might of Liverpool and Everton FC combined .................. and succeeded. Television has given footy fans an unrealistic view of their importance on the planet.

I know about the three pitches, watch the selfish 'fans' back it, and I don't mean Nool and the gang, the average fan has no regard for the park, as a park.

beesrus wrote:

As it happens, he only wants another 3 football pitches taken from the publicly accessible space of Central Park.  ONLY !!!!
Basically, feck the football club in this sort of scenario, and feck the fans too. Stanley Park has had to fend off the huge might of Liverpool and Everton FC combined .................. and succeeded. Television has given footy fans an unrealistic view of their importance on the planet.

We're Plimuff Argyle were doing our best.
Kyle from Southway.

beesrus wrote:

As it happens, he only wants another 3 football pitches taken from the publicly accessible space of Central Park.  ONLY !!!!
Basically, feck the football club in this sort of scenario, and feck the fans too. It's not just Argyle. Stanley Park has had to fend off the huge might of Liverpool and Everton FC combined .................. and succeeded. Television has given footy fans an unrealistic view of their importance on the planet.

Sadly Argyle missed a huge opportunity when the civil service sports club just up the road came up for sale they could of built as many pitches as they liked up there because they would only be replacing old sports facilities. This would then save central park.

Don't  I know it, Pat. Fortunately, just as with Brent's portfolio, football fans have no say whatsoever. Most would turn the wider park into a car park, an attitude of which has made me rather distanced from Graham Clark's well meaning football club centric position that parking is the big problem, rather than attacking the actual unsuitable business uses proposed at HHP.

lawnmowerman wrote:

beesrus wrote:

As it happens, he only wants another 3 football pitches taken from the publicly accessible space of Central Park.  ONLY !!!!
Basically, feck the football club in this sort of scenario, and feck the fans too. It's not just Argyle. Stanley Park has had to fend off the huge might of Liverpool and Everton FC combined .................. and succeeded. Television has given footy fans an unrealistic view of their importance on the planet.

Sadly Argyle missed a huge opportunity when the civil service sports club just up the road came up for sale they could of built as many pitches as they liked up there because they would only be replacing old sports facilities. This would then save central park.

Come on Lawny, do you really think Argyle could have afforded the price just to put some footy pitches there. I asume you have seen just how many houses have been crammed into what is a reasonably middle market housing opportunity. Same with Beacon Park, same with St Boniface.

to be fair, Brent is attempting to build on private land, however any development should provide sufficient parking to have zero reliance on the publicly owned car parking space. I would actually like a fence to separate Argyle and Akkeron land from the park so that the boundary between private and public is clearly defined.

PatDunne wrote:

I know about the three pitches, watch the selfish 'fans' back it, and I don't mean Nool and the gang, the average fan has no regard for the park, as a park.

I'm really not feeling the passion anymore, blinkered fans, shyster owner, village carnival atmosphere, lack of ambition etc etc.
Feel more distressed about Somerset going down which is almost certain after the loss today.
BRENT OUT

PatDunne wrote:

to be fair, Brent is attempting to build on private land, however any development should provide sufficient parking to have zero reliance on the publicly owned car parking space. I would actually like a fence to separate Argyle and Akkeron land from the park so that the boundary between private and public is clearly defined.

Funny you should say that Pat. At the FOCP meeting I attended last week, much of the their talk was about demarking HHP from Central Park, and nice new granite gates etc where the match programmes are sold by the life centre ! And, wanting Gilbert Lane to be tidied up. Totally missing the point in my mind, but there you go, I'm just one person. Who wants a huge fence put up there ? I don't.
That bit of land was never meant to end up as it has in the hands of a private developer, it was meant to be for the use of the community, and in this case, the local football club who have been tenants for 90 years or whatever. Not some vile person like Brent. Even though I think an "ice arena" is a white elephant, the office block is just a disgrace.

beesrus wrote:

Don't  I know it, Pat. Fortunately, just as with Brent's portfolio, football fans have no say whatsoever. Most would turn the wider park into a car park, an attitude of which has made me rather distanced from Graham Clark's well meaning football club centric position that parking is the big problem, rather than attacking the actual unsuitable business uses proposed at HHP.

Although it will probably be parking that saves the park rather than business use. I could understand your beef more if any of the park is being turned into parking, I thought we were losing existing parking? Have I misunderstood?

I would hate the visual aspect of my fence idea, perhaps a dry stone wall? but it's to prevent any further land being lost, there's plenty fans (most I reckon) who would back 'just another 50 yards all round' to expand the stadium for example.

When someone comes in search of profit before community it's very sad that that very community applauds the would be 'developer' but sadly many in this world would rather have a nandos over a tree.

No, you haven't Earwig, and I hear what you're saying.
I am talking out of a matter of planning principle that includes the ACV, which I believe is more likely to succeed. I don't believe the parking/traffic thing will win the day, I just don't, and it could actually lead to Brent asking for even more parking as an "amendment" down in behind the old Far Post club, where, by the way, he wants more training pitches for private rent. Do you see the thin end of the wedge ? It's a trap waiting to happen. He'll industrialise/brown space yet more land. There's a lot of sleep walking going on.

parking is being 'under provided' on the HHP site and the 'expectation' is that the parking requirement is met by utilising the park and ride car park, or local side streets, the moon - commuters and casual park users are not happy with this.

beesrus wrote:

lawnmowerman wrote:

beesrus wrote:

As it happens, he only wants another 3 football pitches taken from the publicly accessible space of Central Park.  ONLY !!!!
Basically, feck the football club in this sort of scenario, and feck the fans too. It's not just Argyle. Stanley Park has had to fend off the huge might of Liverpool and Everton FC combined .................. and succeeded. Television has given footy fans an unrealistic view of their importance on the planet.

Sadly Argyle missed a huge opportunity when the civil service sports club just up the road came up for sale they could of built as many pitches as they liked up there because they would only be replacing old sports facilities. This would then save central park.

Come on Lawny, do you really think Argyle could have afforded the price just to put some footy pitches there. I asume you have seen just how many houses have been crammed into what is a reasonably middle market housing opportunity. Same with Beacon Park, same with St Boniface.

Never said they could of afforded it just thought it was a missed opportunity. They could of built a great community asset and a great football accademy. Thus saving argyle from building over central park and leaving it as it is and should always be imho.

One thing is foreshore they aint middle market housing when they cost over 300k.

Talking to a well know councilor ex leader of her/his party, that the park and ride should be turned into a multi car parking. The person in question is on the planning committee.

The FOCP has lost it's soul, after the last run in with Brent most of the committee has left after a squabble over paying the person out of FOCP fund who put up the money for cost of the legal spoke person, this was on the under standing they would be paid back.

Not only committee members be some of the membership left, It left about 8 to ten members. Now it is run like a nodding shop and the two meeting with Brent was held back from us members. With this and the support expressed in the comments in planning without a vote ( Brent used this support as a endorsement for his development in the Herald) I have left the FOCP.