The friends of central park

Cheers Tuggy.

I fixed your link to stop it spreading the page too

If you click on the link you can object to the planning application. But just remember as it says below what you write is not confidential and we all know who will get his hands on our email address's.

IMPORTANT: Any correspondence we receive about an application (or telephone conversations which are noted) are NOT CONFIDENTIAL and can be seen by anybody, including the applicant or other neighbours. Therefore, please avoid writing anything you do not wish to be available for public inspection. Also, if a planning application is to be considered by a Committee of the Council, any comments received will be summarised in a publicly available report submitted to that Committee.



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

Oh how they laughed....

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

lawnmowerman wrote:

If you click on the link you can object to the planning application. But just remember as it says below what you write is not confidential and we all know who will get his hands on our email address's.

IMPORTANT: Any correspondence we receive about an application (or telephone conversations which are noted) are NOT CONFIDENTIAL and can be seen by anybody, including the applicant or other neighbours. Therefore, please avoid writing anything you do not wish to be available for public inspection. Also, if a planning application is to be considered by a Committee of the Council, any comments received will be summarised in a publicly available report submitted to that Committee.



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

But please write

lawnmowerman wrote:

If you click on the link you can object to the planning application. But just remember as it says below what you write is not confidential and we all know who will get his hands on our email address's.

IMPORTANT: Any correspondence we receive about an application (or telephone conversations which are noted) are NOT CONFIDENTIAL and can be seen by anybody, including the applicant or other neighbours. Therefore, please avoid writing anything you do not wish to be available for public inspection. Also, if a planning application is to be considered by a Committee of the Council, any comments received will be summarised in a publicly available report submitted to that Committee.



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

A Snooper's delight. The dogs of war will know exactly who to attack.

Don't care a jot. They can do their worst!

Yes, bring it on. There's usually nappies in the communal bin here. And possibly cat litter. Used.



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

More importantly, though, there's no point in sending objections until the full details go up - and objections can only be made on the grounds T&G posted the other week.

Saying we don't like it because the stand's too small - or whatever - won't work.

Tgwu wrote:

lawnmowerman wrote:

If you click on the link you can object to the planning application. But just remember as it says below what you write is not confidential and we all know who will get his hands on our email address's.

IMPORTANT: Any correspondence we receive about an application (or telephone conversations which are noted) are NOT CONFIDENTIAL and can be seen by anybody, including the applicant or other neighbours. Therefore, please avoid writing anything you do not wish to be available for public inspection. Also, if a planning application is to be considered by a Committee of the Council, any comments received will be summarised in a publicly available report submitted to that Committee.



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

But please write

Don't worry I will be all that grass being lost absolutely sacrilege , being serious for a min as peggy* says no point objecting until the full details go up. I would of thought the road access around the back of the lyndy is a good place to start.

This whole planning application will be very interesting to watch because the dogs of war maybe released against any objectors on football forums but the friends of central park are a totally different group to deal with.From what I've seen of them in the past and confirmed again today they are a very powerful and organised group of people, who will not be walked over or intimidated by developers/dogs of war/councilors.

Angry Andy is gunning for Damon

One more incident that Angry doesn't agree with and he's going to get his multi friend out and stir some shit

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

Andy S - what a tit. Even Jameson is putting him right.

PS Jock is it ok to say tit. please don't smite me with your new powers

shonbo wrote:

PS Jock is it ok to say tit. please don't smite me with your new powers

Damon we only need the FOCP next meeting put on their site or their facebook page, as a follow up

This AndyS character seems to have fallen out the wrong side of the hammock - angry as *uck!! Look out all you giraffe lovers cos don't lions eat ya?!!

Mock Cuncher wrote:

Aww.

It's so sweet that in these times, these times of war being declared, underhand tactics and downright dastardliness, within this keen spirited rebel alliance made up of junkies, smugglers and downright weirdo's, a young love's romance can still flourish.

For the Cherry Tree, see the backwaters of Tattooine.

For Han Solo, see Han Solo's Other Ship.

For Princess Leia, see TGWU.

For Giraffe Vader, see Tony_Cholwell.

For Luke, see Peggy.

I think that's how it went.

Heartwarming.

You forgot the educated wankers.

bagsy Joda.

Will be particularly interested in the road and substandard disabled facilities shown on last CGI.

The arrival of the studio school means the last consultation period shouldn't be considered to be valid.

shonbo wrote:

PS Jock is it ok to say tit. please don't smite me with your new powers

Your'e lucky I haven't worked out how to wield my limp-wristed leftie big hammer yet.

Bandwagon wrote:

This AndyS character seems to have fallen out the wrong side of the hammock - angry as *uck!! Look out all you giraffe lovers cos don't lions eat ya?!!

Funny chap,he was chuntering on the other day about Argyle fans were the worst in the country for moaning and general fickleness,then in his next post said that he didn't give a shit about other clubs in relation to Argyle,which i thought was rather a shaky position from which to judge such matters.I do believe he went to the same school as me,albeit he was from an earlier intake,Tavistock Comp has a lot to answer for in both our cases. I actually believe that Andy is a genuine fan with a deep rootedlove for Argyle but that his loyalty clouds his judgement in many issues and leads to a situation whereby any decision that the powers- that- be at the club must ergo be the right one and defended,sometimes to the point of absurdity.Not an uncommon point of view but quite a damaging one in some cases,IMHO.

From the dark side

Stuart_C wrote:

PCC Planning aren't the only people who will have an input into the scheme approval. Central Government will also have their say if it varies from Central Park Adopted AAP.

PCC baggo link to the Govt Planning Inspectorate Report by Douglas Machin (BSC DipTP MRTPI) an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government which ratified the PCC Adopted Central Park AAP.

I'm sure they will have to check how the access road complies before any Detailed Planning Application was checked by Central Govt for compliance with the Adopted AAP

Quote :

3.16 The possible uses included in CP2 are ones that can be found commonly at
football stadiums around the country. The uses are consistent with the
guidance in PPG17, at paragraph 21, where it states that leisure facilities,
entertainment and retail uses may have similar land use characteristics. The
Policy/Proposal does not require any particular combination of facilities but
provides an indication of those uses that might be permitted subject to
compliance with a number of detailed development control criteria.
Important amongst those is a requirement to produce a plan to manage the
transport and parking needs arising from development to address local
concern over the additional traffic likely to be attracted.

One for Tudor Evans below, bearing in mind this is based on the original AAP Adopted Option including Cottage Field shown in picture below

Quote :

3.13 I am persuaded therefore that Policy/Proposal CP1 would be consistent with
the primary role of Central Park, both as expressed in the original Mawson
plan and as expressed in the Core Strategy and the Vision in this AAP.
Furthermore, Government guidance in the form of PPG 17 is concerned to
protect open space but where open space is to be lost, it also encourages, at
paragraph 13, qualitative improvements to open spaces, sport and
recreational facilities. I am convinced that the Life Centre would bring about
qualitative improvements both to the sport and recreational facilities there
and to the rest of the Park, and therefore accord with this guidance.

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

If you believe the Planning Inspectorate would be interested in the changes from the AAP that PCC took years to produce and have ratified, the report referenced above was sent by

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
0117-372 8000

to Jonathon Bell (Strategy Manager PCC) on 4th July 2008 REF PINS/N1160/429/9

TGWU - straight bat time now. Waiting for docs. to be available so we know what the real plan is and what the admissible objections could be (if any!).

Can I just point out that the internal parts of the designs etc. are for the building inspectors to check. It is up to them to ensure that everything inside complies with the building regulations.

It was noticed that some of the disabled facilities did not appear to comply with part M of the Building Regulations and therefore the building would not comply the Equality Act which superseded the DDA ( Disability Discrimination Act).

I would imagine that as the plans have probably changed several times since then, Akkeron's architects have probably corrected this. Along with other problems like the lifts wouldn't work because the lift shafts were different sizes on different levels.

The building inspectors will probably check the plans before building starts to iron out obvious discrepancies.

The consultation that has taken place was not a statutory requirement. This was something that PAFC / Akkeron decided to do for Argyle fans and is probably why the details of any of the other parts of the development have been lacking in detail. The official consultation period starts when the council have finished checking all the plans have been received etc. and it is all up on line for everybody to see.

I'll reiterate what Peggy has said. You need a reason to object - PCC aren't aware of how evil pasoti is and it's really unlikely they'll throw Brent's plans out of the door if you tell them that someone went through your dustbin or called you a name on Twitter.

It maybe worth a mention to a Councillor or someone in a position of power, the fear of publishing private information and the disgusting reputation that one or two have for abusing that sort of thing.

Greenjock wrote:

Angry Andy is gunning for Damon

One more incident that Angry doesn't agree with and he's going to get his multi friend out and stir some shit

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

Why is he getting worked up about whether a cinema gets built several thousand miles away from his house.

There are one or two people elsewhere who are trying to give the impression that only people with Plymouth addresses can object or support this proposal.

Anybody from anywhere can submit an objection to a planning proposal if they wish, it is not a requirement that you must live in Plymouth.