Mankover Planning application submitted

I'd tend to agree on the parking front. PCC policy being what it is though, I just don't see it was ever a big issue. The guys putting this together, ADG, are no mugs. They know their stuff, and will know where they can and can't push, especially as the offices would appear to be a big push.

IJN
 Post subject: Re: Planning Posters. Home Park Development (not on the age
Posted: Sun Nov 19, 2017 12:35 pm 



Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2012 9:15 pm
Location: The Janner Nation!!
I have no idea Mike, I see JB referred to it in the recent article, the reference was Central Park Action Plan 2008, but I don't know what part of 2008 that was.

My only take on the hybrid is that it does save us (PAFC) money and if I were JB I'd have done exactly the same. It just makes sense in several ways.

Regarding your 'valuation' on the fees, you're obviously more of an expert than me (which isn't hard) but whatever is saved, whether it be £20k or £50k is better spent within our club than paying for 'professionals'.

It'll all out in the end, if it passed great if it doesn't, several people will no doubt hire an open deck bus and have a banned with 'We told you so" on it.

Internet Ian loves talking shite on a sunday

I talk to a old leader of a political party and a council leader most home games, was surprise that the person is stepping down for the HHP committee meeting and is having a stand in.

the same person that sold Brent pavilions for a pound and bunged him two million quid?

BBC1 wrote:

IJN
 Post subject: Re: Planning Posters. Home Park Development (not on the age
Posted: Sun Nov 19, 2017 12:35 pm 



Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2012 9:15 pm
Location: The Janner Nation!!
I have no idea Mike, I see JB referred to it in the recent article, the reference was Central Park Action Plan 2008, but I don't know what part of 2008 that was.

My only take on the hybrid is that it does save us (PAFC) money and if I were JB I'd have done exactly the same. It just makes sense in several ways.

Regarding your 'valuation' on the fees, you're obviously more of an expert than me (which isn't hard) but whatever is saved, whether it be £20k or £50k is better spent within our club than paying for 'professionals'.

It'll all out in the end, if it passed great if it doesn't, several people will no doubt hire an open deck bus and have a banned with 'We told you so" on it.

Internet Ian loves talking shite on a sunday

So the £150k has now become £20 or £50k? It's almost like he's talking out of his arse and hasn't a clue whether we have saved any money at all? He's so desperate in support of his master it's laughable now.

It's my understanding that under the Central Park Action Plan 2008, the offices were an enabling development providing funding for the building of the Life Centre. The site for this office development was never planned for Higher Home Park. In any case, the 2008 plan has now been superseded by the Joint Local Plan 2017, under which permission only covers offices ancillary to the football club.

To be clear, I was born in the Alexandra Nursing Home and have traced ancestors living in Plymouth back to 1800. I am even sending Christmas cards to 2 friends who were educated at Eton.

Dingle wrote:

It's my understanding that under the Central Park Action Plan 2008, the offices were an enabling   development providing funding for the building of the Life Centre.  The site for this office development was never planned for Higher Home Park.  In any case, the 2008 plan has now been superseded by the Joint Local Plan 2017, under which permission only covers offices ancillary to the football club.  

To be clear, I was born in the Alexandra Nursing Home and have traced ancestors living in Plymouth back to 1800.  I am even sending Christmas cards to 2 friends who were educated at Eton.

Surely Brent would know the 2008 plan has been superseded? Is he stupid or just being dishonest?

Frank Bullitt wrote:

Dingle wrote:

It's my understanding that under the Central Park Action Plan 2008, the offices were an enabling   development providing funding for the building of the Life Centre.  The site for this office development was never planned for Higher Home Park.  In any case, the 2008 plan has now been superseded by the Joint Local Plan 2017, under which permission only covers offices ancillary to the football club.  

To be clear, I was born in the Alexandra Nursing Home and have traced ancestors living in Plymouth back to 1800.  I am even sending Christmas cards to 2 friends who were educated at Eton.

Surely Brent would know the 2008 plan has been superseded? Is he stupid or just being dishonest?

He's both isnt he?

Pleased to see someone on the farm slightly more intelligent then the usual pond life has mentioned the Asbestos issue within the Grandstand redevelopment. Hideously expensive to remove and a complete show stopper if as I and many others predicted a year ago (that its extensive) are correct.....the good or bad bit depending on your point of view is that its difficult to assess the costs until you access it and simply its quite within the realms of possibility (and expense) that the Grandstand simply ends up out of bounds. Dead in the water

The excuses will start rolling out soon. Hallett conspicuous by his absence will retain his loan with interest paying a nice little earner with the Capital going into Akkeron (almost certainly already done or a done deal)

Planning permission granted sooner or later and at which point Brent sells the lot and Newell down the river.....

Bookmark that

Asbestos will not be an issue. Name a development that hasn't gone 'forward' because of it. In the scheme of things it barely registers...

Rickler wrote:

Asbestos will not be an issue.  Name a development  that hasn't gone 'forward' because of it.  In the scheme of things it barely registers...

We'll see

Most likely pipe lagging, didn't they remove some from the Grandstand a couple of years ago? Anyway I don't think it will be a big issue, nice little earner for someone that's all.

Heard this morning on radio four there is a national shortage and backlog of brick orders due to lack of supply.
Oh dear the non developing property developer better get his order in soon, because the average brick delivery for house building and projects is apparently 22 weeks.
Better get a move on Jimmy what with 2020 looming, and the asbestos/brick issues.

harvetheslayer wrote:

Rickler wrote:

Asbestos will not be an issue.  Name a development  that hasn't gone 'forward' because of it.  In the scheme of things it barely registers...

We'll see

Rickler is correct.  Asbestos doesn’t halt developments. You bring in specialist removal experts. Every site in the country has an asbestos register.  They have probably already carried out the asbestos survey already as this will be one of the packages when the project goes out to tender.

akagreengull wrote:

Heard this morning on radio four there is a national shortage and backlog of brick orders due to lack of supply.
Oh dear the non developing property developer better get his order in soon, because the average brick delivery for house building and projects is apparently 22 weeks.
Better get a move on Jimmy what with 2020 looming, and the asbestos/brick issues.

Brent the lip and Silent Si the community guy, will already know this and will have maneuvered this into the excuse list for the imminent announcement on further delays to our very own Buurd Al Arab.

Mind you with trades earning roughly the same as they were twenty years ago thes a good saving to be made on labour.

Sharpy wrote:

harvetheslayer wrote:

Rickler wrote:

Asbestos will not be an issue.  Name a development  that hasn't gone 'forward' because of it.  In the scheme of things it barely registers...

We'll see

Rickler is correct.  Asbestos doesn’t halt developments. You bring in specialist removal experts. Every site in the country has an asbestos register.  They have probably already carried out the asbestos survey already as this will be one of the packages when the project goes out to tender.

"When the project goes out to tender" is interesting.

Haven't we been led to believe it is get planning permission before Christmas and start the refurb after Christmas?

If the tender isn't even out yet that seems unlikely ~ asbestos or no asbestos.

If the refurb doesn't start in January, and this now would seem to be very likely, it won't start before the end of the season so some time in the summer of 2018. At the earliest.

The loan would have been in situ for 18 months at that stage.

I assumed Brent would be recruiting the Green Taveners and an assorted army of dedicated Green volunteers to help out, led by the Pigmaster in chief.

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Sharpy wrote:

harvetheslayer wrote:

Rickler wrote:

Asbestos will not be an issue.  Name a development  that hasn't gone 'forward' because of it.  In the scheme of things it barely registers...

We'll see

Rickler is correct.  Asbestos doesn’t halt developments. You bring in specialist removal experts. Every site in the country has an asbestos register.  They have probably already carried out the asbestos survey already as this will be one of the packages when the project goes out to tender.

"When the project goes out to tender" is interesting.

Haven't we been led to believe it is get planning permission before Christmas and start the refurb after Christmas?

If the tender isn't even out yet that seems unlikely ~ asbestos or no asbestos.

If the refurb doesn't start in January, and this now would seem to be very likely, it won't start before the end of the season so some time in the summer of 2018. At the earliest.

The loan would have been in situ for 18 months at that stage.

Even Brent isn’t stupid enough to actually action the loan to do the revamp and start the repayment process, without even having planning permission? Shorely?

According to his piece in the Herald he already has contractors on board, so no excuse for any delay provided he gets the approval

Czarcasm wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Sharpy wrote:

harvetheslayer wrote:

Rickler wrote:

Asbestos will not be an issue.  Name a development  that hasn't gone 'forward' because of it.  In the scheme of things it barely registers...

We'll see

Rickler is correct.  Asbestos doesn’t halt developments. You bring in specialist removal experts. Every site in the country has an asbestos register.  They have probably already carried out the asbestos survey already as this will be one of the packages when the project goes out to tender.

"When the project goes out to tender" is interesting.

Haven't we been led to believe it is get planning permission before Christmas and start the refurb after Christmas?

If the tender isn't even out yet that seems unlikely ~ asbestos or no asbestos.

If the refurb doesn't start in January, and this now would seem to be very likely, it won't start before the end of the season so some time in the summer of 2018. At the earliest.

The loan would have been in situ for 18 months at that stage.

Even Brent isn’t stupid enough to actually action the loan to do the revamp and start the repayment process, without even having planning permission? Shorely?

The loan was first announced in January 2017, the charge to secure the loan was created with Companies House on 14th February 2017 and completed on 6th March.

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

According to the BBC Hallett just gave us the money: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Then it goes on to say "the loan will be repaid over the next 30 years".

So who knows one way or another?

Graiser wrote:

According to his piece in the Herald he already has contractors on board, so no excuse for any delay provided he gets the approval

Well if thats the case, they are stupid. Why wouldnt you put it out to tender to get the best possible price once planning has been achieved?

Either Brent is cutting corners on Archetics cost's ( which again is stupid because the point in a tender process is to find a contractor that will do it for the least)

or he isnt planning on being around to carry out the works.

I suspect the terms of reference are "build as much as you can for the money". Also, as above, he might just be cobbling together his own building bunch. He used to be big in Worldwide European farming you know

If this goes ahead without a formal tender process i would bet this project will run over budget!

Cutting corners like this will bite Argyle in the backside

Sharpy wrote:

Graiser wrote:

According to his piece in the Herald he already has contractors on board, so no excuse for any delay provided he gets the approval

Well if thats the case, they are stupid. Why wouldnt you put it out to tender to get the best possible price once planning has been achieved?

Either Brent is cutting corners on Archetics cost's ( which again is stupid because the point in a tender process is to find a contractor that will do it for the least)

or he isnt planning on being around to carry out the works.  

It suggests a couple of things, either a) he is so convinced planning will sail through with no objections the contractors are already on board and he has already run a tender competetion. Gary from teh Green Taverners is on standby