westbow Posted February 27, 2013 Share Posted February 27, 2013 Does anybody know if the planning permission granted to cala for flats is open ended or did it have a finite duration? Cannot find anything online apart from some english councils saying it lasts for 3 -5 years. This could presumably have an impact on the value of tynecastle and a bearing on its future. Apologies if this has been answered previously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maroonlegions Posted February 27, 2013 Share Posted February 27, 2013 Does anybody know if the planning permission granted to cala for flats is open ended or did it have a finite duration? Cannot find anything online apart from some english councils saying it lasts for 3 -5 years. This could presumably have an impact on the value of tynecastle and a bearing on its future. Apologies if this has been answered previously. better safe than sorry eh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ulysses Posted February 27, 2013 Share Posted February 27, 2013 better safe than sorry eh. I hope that's not having a go at the OP. Just saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Praha06 Posted February 27, 2013 Share Posted February 27, 2013 Does anybody know if the planning permission granted to cala for flats is open ended or did it have a finite duration? Cannot find anything online apart from some english councils saying it lasts for 3 -5 years. This could presumably have an impact on the value of tynecastle and a bearing on its future. Apologies if this has been answered previously. Why would it have an effect on the value? Anyway we only won 5-1! Viva Kujabi and all the stuff. Think you meant to go east at the bottom of the mound matey! Bye! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Franklin Delano Bluth Posted February 27, 2013 Share Posted February 27, 2013 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hansel Posted February 27, 2013 Share Posted February 27, 2013 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boaby Ewing Posted February 27, 2013 Share Posted February 27, 2013 Even if the OP is a Hibs fan (I don't think he is) it's a perfectly legitimate question. Does anybody know, or shall we just carry on with the shan pictures? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Franklin Delano Bluth Posted February 27, 2013 Share Posted February 27, 2013 Even if the OP is a Hibs fan (I don't think he is) it's a perfectly legitimate question. Does anybody know, or shall we just carry on with the shan pictures? Edit: Seriously though, it is a legitimate question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Praha06 Posted February 27, 2013 Share Posted February 27, 2013 Even if the OP is a Hibs fan (I don't think he is) it's a perfectly legitimate question. Does anybody know, or shall we just carry on with the shan pictures? Ok Dave... Why would an open ended planning permission have an effect on the value of Tynecastle? It certainly isn't going to be what it was originally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hannibal Posted February 27, 2013 Share Posted February 27, 2013 i have recently have had dealing with my local council perth and kinross planning permission usually dictates that the development must begin within 5 years of the consent, before the consent runs out you can apply for an extension otherwise you will have to begin the process again if it expires obviously land with planning is considered more valuable than land without it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boris Posted February 27, 2013 Share Posted February 27, 2013 Not sure if this helps... DURATION OF PLANNING PERMISSION 4.100 The following paragraphs set out the statutory default time periods on duration of planning permission and the powers for planning authorities to set alternative time periods. Planning authorities should consider carefully the nature of the development and issues such as the prevailing economic climate and reach a view whether the statutory default time limits are appropriate in the circumstances of the case or whether they should specify a more suitable period. Planning Permission ( Section 58) 4.101 Section 58(1) specifies that planning permission will expire after 3 years from the date on which it is granted unless the development to which it relates has been started. 4.102 The planning authority may direct that a longer or shorter period than 3 years may apply. Although these time periods are not a condition to the planning permission, it is open to the applicant to appeal to the Scottish Ministers against, or seek a local review by the planning authority of, the 3 year time period, or any different period directed by the planning authority, as if it were such a condition. 4.103 Whilst there is no form for such a direction, planning authorities may wish to consider writing to the applicant citing the relevant powers and specifying the time periods for the duration of permission. Planning Permission In Principle ( Section 59) 4.104 Unless development is started within 2 years from the grant of the last approval of matters specified in conditions attached to the planning permission in principle, the planning permission expires. 4.105 Application for such approval must be made within 3 years from the grant of planning permission in principle, or, if later, within 6 months from when an earlier approval for the same matters was refused or dismissed on appeal. Only one application for approval of matters specified in conditions can be made after 3 years from the grant of planning permission in principle. 4.106 The planning authority can direct that different time periods apply in relation to the 3 year period for making an application for approval or the 3 year period after which only one more application for approval can be made. The authority can also direct that a different time period applies for the 2 year period after the final approval is given and within which development must be started. An applicant can, as appropriate, appeal to the Scottish Ministers against, or seek a local review from the planning authority of, the statutory time periods or those substituted by direction by the planning authority. from http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2009/07/03153034/7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest oldcastlerock2012 Posted February 27, 2013 Share Posted February 27, 2013 The demolition costs and unsafe brewery stuff don't make Tynie an attractive development prospect for anyone. Tesco or another retailer would suffer a huge backlash from the local community (their bread and butter customers) making it a risky project The property market and general economy make luxury flats or any sort of flats a risky development project My guess if Tynie is sold separately from the club it will be as a long-term gamble on property prices rising and so we shouldn't have too much to worry about in terms of being turfed out straight away. Most likely we'd get to rent the ground. Like others say I think Tynie is worth most as part of a football club so hopefully we'll get someone interested in the club but who also sees Tynie as a possible long-term development option, giving them time to find us a new home. Although it wouldn't be popular in the east of the city, it would also make sense for council or government to step in as a last resort if there are no other buyers and become landowners - taking rent off Hearts and keeping an important part of the local community and economy alive, maybe using it for community events as well. If they could pick the land up for a song, they could make decent money long-term back for the city. It would be a tricky one politically though. There is precedent though - Valencia in Spain were saved by their government. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
happyjam Posted February 27, 2013 Share Posted February 27, 2013 Did Cala ever receive planning permission to build houses/flats? From memory, I always thought their offer/valuation was based on planning permission being granted, however happy to accept that I may be wrong.. Think the question is a reasonable one as land values are normally based on what can/can't be developed on them. If no existing planning pemission exists then this will potentially devalue the land. Also, if planning permission was granted 6/7 years for there is no guarantee that the same application would be granted this time around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jezza Posted February 27, 2013 Share Posted February 27, 2013 Cannae see many housing companies wanting the site to be honest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Notbrainwashed Posted February 27, 2013 Share Posted February 27, 2013 I think there may be H&S concerns and regulations with building housing so close to an industrial complex with various chemicals in use, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Francis Albert Posted February 27, 2013 Share Posted February 27, 2013 Did Cala ever receive planning permission to build houses/flats? From memory, I always thought their offer/valuation was based on planning permission being granted, however happy to accept that I may be wrong.. Think the question is a reasonable one as land values are normally based on what can/can't be developed on them. If no existing planning pemission exists then this will potentially devalue the land. Also, if planning permission was granted 6/7 years for there is no guarantee that the same application would be granted this time around. I think you're right . The headline purchase price (about ?20m) was heavily conditional on what planning permission was obtained including how many flats were permitted. They may have had some preliminary approvals, but nothing in detail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gasman Posted February 27, 2013 Share Posted February 27, 2013 Does anybody know if the planning permission granted to cala for flats is open ended or did it have a finite duration? Cannot find anything online apart from some english councils saying it lasts for 3 -5 years. This could presumably have an impact on the value of tynecastle and a bearing on its future. Apologies if this has been answered previously. Cala never had planning permission for Tynecastle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winston Ingram Posted February 27, 2013 Share Posted February 27, 2013 They never had it in the first place. Hence the figure quoted in deal was unlikely to have been received in full because of restrictions (flood plane more than the chemical plant, from memory). The whole thing was subject to planning and would have been scaled down accordingly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simmo Posted February 27, 2013 Share Posted February 27, 2013 I think there may be H&S concerns and regulations with building housing so close to an industrial complex with various chemicals in use, etc. It didn't stop the building of a new school so I think the H & S issues were a smokescreen set up by people who were so ant--Romanov that they would never agree to any redevelopment at Tynie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boaby Ewing Posted February 27, 2013 Share Posted February 27, 2013 Ok Dave... Why would an open ended planning permission have an effect on the value of Tynecastle? It certainly isn't going to be what it was originally. If planning permission has been granted on a site it tends to boost the value of the land given it's likely to speed the process for any future development plans. It can be the difference between a developer buying the stadium/land as a punt in the hope they can do something with it, and knowing they're likely to get approval to push ahead with plans for houses etc. The fact the property market has taken a dive will have affected the overall value, but that's only one part of the equation. If Cala never actually had planning permission (I can't remember either way) then it might be a moot point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibbo Posted February 27, 2013 Share Posted February 27, 2013 As has been said already, CALA did not get as far as actually submitting their planning application. Their offer was widely reported as being ?22m. However, the actual amount paid was to be calculated by a formula based on the number of units that they received planning permission to build. The price would have been ?22m at their base case estimate of the number of units, which was widely believed to be very optimistic from their point of view. If the calculated price fell below ?20m, they had a choice of paying ?20m or walking away. The possibility that they might tear up the deal if they did not get planning permission for enough units to justify paying ?20m for the site received remarkably little attention at the time, even from the many opponents of the proposed move to Murrayfield. However, I'm sure that Tynecastle is zoned for housing, so it might be hard for the Council to refuse an application to build a reasonable number of flats on the site. It may have been zoned for housing as far back as when Mercer was planning to move to a new stadium. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jambali Posted February 27, 2013 Share Posted February 27, 2013 It didn't stop the building of a new school so I think the H & S issues were a smokescreen set up by people who were so ant--Romanov that they would never agree to any redevelopment at Tynie. Those concerns are to the North west corner of Tynie. The school is towards the south east corner (ie furthest away). The issues DO exist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SUTOL Posted February 27, 2013 Share Posted February 27, 2013 It didn't stop the building of a new school so I think the H & S issues were a smokescreen set up by people who were so ant--Romanov that they would never agree to any redevelopment at Tynie. Schools 100+ meters away and houses/flats are different to open stands full of supporters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lost in leith Posted February 27, 2013 Share Posted February 27, 2013 It didn't stop the building of a new school so I think the H & S issues were a smokescreen set up by people who were so ant--Romanov that they would never agree to any redevelopment at Tynie. Nope - first mentioned as part of the notorious "Not fit for purpose" document in 2003. http://www.zinescene.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/MOBpurpose.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glamorgan Jambo Posted February 27, 2013 Share Posted February 27, 2013 The ?6.8 million value of UKIOs security is fairly consistent with a commercial property valuation based on HMFC paying rent of ?400K - ?500K per year. Fairly sure the stadium area was at one time zoned as suitable for residential development although that was in the Pieman era. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
audrey65 Posted February 27, 2013 Share Posted February 27, 2013 I think there may be H&S concerns and regulations with building housing so close to an industrial complex with various chemicals in use, etc. I get this but there are many times when there are 17k+ inside Tynecastle, far more than would be in any properties built on the site, so do they just operate a law of averages thingy and hope nothing happens while the foolball's on? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OTT Posted February 27, 2013 Share Posted February 27, 2013 Why not move the brewery ?, It is the fundamental problem in the area - move it out to the gyle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westbow Posted February 27, 2013 Author Share Posted February 27, 2013 Sorry, presumed cala did get planning permission. I did look through The Scotsman archives and came across this: http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/top-football-stories/and-the-lucky-winner-is-1-1298902 "....The bids are likely to be "subject to gaining of planning permission" but Edinburgh Council sources say that Tynecastle is "zoned" for leisure or housing use and even if there are, as expected, sufficient objections to any planning application for the development of houses, it would merely delay the project by a year or so. " Thanks to the kickback remedial class for initial dumbass responses tho, gave me a warm glow of haughty contempt. I'm third generation Hearts family, doubt if you are third generation from peeling bananas with your feet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Francis Albert Posted February 27, 2013 Share Posted February 27, 2013 I get this but there are many times when there are 17k+ inside Tynecastle, far more than would be in any properties built on the site, so do they just operate a law of averages thingy and hope nothing happens while the foolball's on? It's presumably based on some sort of probable loss of life calculation. Tynecastle as a football ground averages out an occupancy of about 50 people per hour, so on the same average occupancy level there isn't scope for too many flats! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SUTOL Posted February 27, 2013 Share Posted February 27, 2013 Why not move the brewery ?, It is the fundamental problem in the area - move it out to the gyle What brewery? It's stored ethanol (behind the Roseburn stand) for the distillers that's the problem. Part of the problem could be that if there was a serious incident, fans sitting in the open and facing in the direction of the stored ethanol would be exposed to the blast/radiated heat. Whereas kids in a school building or people in a house/flat would not be exposed in the same way or to the same numbers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Munch Posted February 27, 2013 Share Posted February 27, 2013 Does anybody know if the planning permission granted to cala for flats is open ended or did it have a finite duration? Cannot find anything online apart from some english councils saying it lasts for 3 -5 years. This could presumably have an impact on the value of tynecastle and a bearing on its future. Apologies if this has been answered previously. from what i got told new rules mean the distiliry/chemichal plant being to close by mean no houses/flats can now be built on the site pieman/deans plan is dead Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.