City Ground | Page 29 | Vital Football

City Ground

mao tse tung said:
I am fairly sure that changed last October.

The appeal process which takes you straight to Central Government was both streamlined and reduced in cost.

I read at the time that Local Authorities would be able to use the change to their advantage; they could kick the can down the road on controversial applications, which may prove vote losers, putting the onus, and I suppose blame, with the Minister.

I would guess that if the application is too controversial it will not get passed regardless of which route is taken
Click to expand...

It was designed to help with the bigger projects and prevent nimby ism for important infrastructure projects.

If RBC find it too big/complex im assuming that is where it will end up and why i think it is forests call if it goes ahead.

Fwiw its a great project that RBC should have been frothing at the mouth to make happen.
 
jbacsta said:
An applicant has the right to appeal to the secretary of state if a local authority takes longer than the statutory time period allowed for determination This is a very expensive and historically long process, this may have been speeded up somewhat by recent legislation but it is a big step for an applicant to take. It does not go down well with local authorities who have to defend themselves in court at enormous cost and obviously the party who lodges the appeal is not flavour of the month with them from then on. Big developers use appeals regularly but i cant see this process being considered by the club.
Click to expand...

It is expensive but not relative to the projects involved. Presume forest have employed big developers. As i said way back, all depends on the will by forest to deliver this project.
 
radfordinlondon said:
It could be for technical reasons connected with building next to a river or it could be covid has slowed it all down or fucked it all up.

They might be waiting to see we are not in league 1 next year.
Click to expand...

There is nothing suspicious about the silence; the matter is totally in the hands of Benoy and RBC.

Until a decision has been made on the outline planning for the apartments, there is nothing for the Club to say.

No apartments equals no stand, its as simple as that.
 
Pope John XXIII said:
What, or who is the actual impediment to this?
Click to expand...

There is one impediment of note: the original application for outline planning for the apartments attracted objections and a revision of the plans was agreed between Benoy and RBC; this in turn led to an agreement on the timing extension.

The bottom line is the apartments will contribute a sizeable chunk of the finance needed to build the stand; without them there will be no stand.

The fact that there is no running commentary on the planning process is causing doubt, which I suppose is human nature.

Personally, I think no news is good news; if the Club are having or had second thoughts they have had ample opportunity to throw the towel in, and every single day that the project carries on incurs additional costs

They could have used the planning rejection or they could have used Covid to walk away form the project but they have not.

RBC stated today that the planning is ongoing; it would be churlish not to take them at their word.
 
mao tse tung said:
There is nothing suspicious about the silence; the matter is totally in the hands of Benoy and RBC.

Until a decision has been made on the outline planning for the apartments, there is nothing for the Club to say.

No apartments equals no stand, its as simple as that.
Click to expand...
Spot on. I have nothing to add.
 
Just picked up an item from a facebook group so i am not claiming to be ITK.
Forest aim to progress the planning application during the first quarter of this year.
Update courtesy of Paul Taylor.
 
mao tse tung said:
There is one impediment of note: the original application for outline planning for the apartments attracted objections and a revision of the plans was agreed between Benoy and RBC; this in turn led to an agreement on the timing extension.

The bottom line is the apartments will contribute a sizeable chunk of the finance needed to build the stand; without them there will be no stand.

The fact that there is no running commentary on the planning process is causing doubt, which I suppose is human nature.

Personally, I think no news is good news; if the Club are having or had second thoughts they have had ample opportunity to throw the towel in, and every single day that the project carries on incurs additional costs

They could have used the planning rejection or they could have used Covid to walk away form the project but they have not.

RBC stated today that the planning is ongoing; it would be churlish not to take them at their word.
Click to expand...

Completely agree. It's not unreasonable to assume covid is slowing an already slow process but if the project was being stopped you would have expected everyone to know, ergo it's still live.

Do hope no major flooding puts another spanner in the works.
 
mao tse tung said:
There is one impediment of note: the original application for outline planning for the apartments attracted objections and a revision of the plans was agreed between Benoy and RBC; this in turn led to an agreement on the timing extension.

The bottom line is the apartments will contribute a sizeable chunk of the finance needed to build the stand; without them there will be no stand.

The fact that there is no running commentary on the planning process is causing doubt, which I suppose is human nature.

Personally, I think no news is good news; if the Club are having or had second thoughts they have had ample opportunity to throw the towel in, and every single day that the project carries on incurs additional costs

They could have used the planning rejection or they could have used Covid to walk away form the project but they have not.

RBC stated today that the planning is ongoing; it would be churlish not to take them at their word.
Click to expand...

I concur, I don't see anything changed from that point, except literally Covid (and associated empty stadiums) and the mutual agreement to kick this can down the road as long as possible until the crisis is over.. obviously not knowing that that would end up being another year down the line and contravenes certain schedules.

Is why I suggested months ago we wouldnt hear anything new until those 'dates' are due to run out OR the whole project is off because Covid literally fooks everything.

Fair cop, I got peed off at Jbacsta over the point of discussing it the last 6 months and no need, just frustration as much as anything. Not exactly the first time we've had big plans
 
paz1967 said:
I concur, I don't see anything changed from that point, except literally Covid (and associated empty stadiums) and the mutual agreement to kick this can down the road as long as possible until the crisis is over.. obviously not knowing that that would end up being another year down the line and contravenes certain schedules.

Is why I suggested months ago we wouldnt hear anything new until those 'dates' are due to run out OR the whole project is off because Covid literally fooks everything.

Fair cop, I got peed off at Jbacsta over the point of discussing it the last 6 months and no need, just frustration as much as anything. Not exactly the first time we've had big plans
Click to expand...
None of that has any baring on a planning application being granted. If planning was granted the club could do fuck all for the foreseeable future if they so wanted.
 
jbacsta said:
None of that has any baring on a planning application being granted. If planning was granted the club could do fuck all for the foreseeable future if they so wanted.
Click to expand...

no, i hear ya, my point there was that planning permission would likely have to include dates of the work being done
 
paz1967 said:
no, i hear ya, my point there was that planning permission would likely have to include dates of the work being done
Click to expand...

They would have to make a start within a timeframe from the application being approved; once they have made that start they could take as long as they like to complete it
 
mao tse tung said:
They would have to make a start within a timeframe from the application being approved; once they have made that start they could take as long as they like to complete it
Click to expand...
Something i picked up on at the time but didn't bother to post about. The clubs latest press release on the subject spoke of a planning submission being submitted in the first quarter of this year. We already have a planning submission in place which covers the contentious issue of the flats in the form of a request for outline permission, this could have been granted with any alterations being the subject of reserved matters. A new submission would suggest possible agreement with the planners on a revised scheme and thus the club is now making an application for full planning to be granted. A step forward i think.
 
To give a good indication of how long things take regarding new stands and new grounds, Everton started the process for Bramley Dock in 2017 and have just received planning permission.

Their process involved buying the land, which took just under a year to complete; the difficult part was gaining approval for their plans.

It goes to show that the length of time our application is taking is nothing out of the ordinary.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.