accthejambo Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 I am a die hard jambo (who stayed until the end last night) and am an eternal opptomist, however i am now starting dis-Believe!! Taking the utter rubbish performance by all players, lack of any tactics and leadership aside, i have one larger concern! I now believe that on acceptance of our planning application (which will happen next month) our little piece of heaven will be sold off! At the moment tynecastle is only a football stadium, however once planning is approved Mr Romanov will be able to sell the site with developemt approval for a hotel, conference facility, flats, shops and other building types that will add substantial value to any sale price. This could be a piece of very good business for Romanov - adding ?10m (at least) to the value of the existing site for an outlay of only ?50k (taking into account architects and planning fees etc)! UBIG will make the profit whilst Hearts will take the added debt! This is a standad developers strategy! Add that to the asset stripping of the best players and Mr Romanov could make alot of money. And before anyone starts, i am a very worried jambo and not a hobo and have sat in section e 25 of the Weat Stand since it was built! FTH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Gosling Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 I am a die hard jambo (who stayed until the end last night) and am an eternal opptomist, however i am now starting dis-Believe!! Taking the utter rubbish performance by all players, lack of any tactics and leadership aside, i have one larger concern! I now believe that on acceptance of our planning application (which will happen next month) our little piece of heaven will be sold off! At the moment tynecastle is only a football stadium, however once planning is approved Mr Romanov will be able to sell the site with developemt approval for a hotel, conference facility, flats, shops and other building types that will add substantial value to any sale price. This could be a piece of very good business for Romanov - adding ?10m (at least) to the value of the existing site for an outlay of only ?50k (taking into account architects and planning fees etc)! UBIG will make the profit whilst Hearts will take the added debt! This is a standad developers strategy! Add that to the asset stripping of the best players and Mr Romanov could make alot of money. And before anyone starts, i am a very worried jambo and not a hobo and have sat in section e 25 of the Weat Stand since it was built! FTH What? Surely if he sells the land, it's for the value of the site that currently sits there. Anyone else wanting to build residential flats/hotel there would need to re-apply separately Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToadKiller Dog Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 He could sell the land if he wishes but my understanding that part of the acceptance of planning permision is that a stand is built,and for any future developer to change that they would have to get permision from the council which would be very difficult ,so at worst they would have to rent a stadium to us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coco Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 Hard to see anyone else wanting to take on this financial millstone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
accthejambo Posted February 28, 2008 Author Share Posted February 28, 2008 What? Surely if he sells the land, it's for the value of the site that currently sits there. Anyone else wanting to build residential flats/hotel there would need to re-apply separately No, thats not the case, you can use the planning approval as an asset on the land. The application is for the site not the person! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sherlock Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 No, thats not the case, you can use the planning approval as an asset on the land. The application is for the site not the person! I was under the impression the existing planning approval was also for a new stand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pivotno1 Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 must admit to being really worried about he situation,i do believe toaster is correct,that the planning application will only get the green light,if it involves a new main stand,if they get the goahead from the council,which i think they will,then they have to go with what they have applied for,if romanov tried to then sell on,which i also think is possible,then surely the council would have the power to veto the sale of the land deals which are in place,but have not been paid for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ando Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 must admit to being really worried about he situation,i do believe toaster is correct,that the planning application will only get the green light,if it involves a new main stand,if they get the goahead from the council,which i think they will,then they have to go with what they have applied for,if romanov tried to then sell on,which i also think is possible,then surely the council would have the power to veto the sale of the land deals which are in place,but have not been paid for. everything will work out pal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JamboRobbo Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 He could sell the land if he wishes but my understanding that part of the acceptance of planning permision is that a stand is built,and for any future developer to change that they would have to get permision from the council which would be very difficult ,so at worst they would have to rent a stadium to us. Not quite. It was in the documents to do with the land sale that they'd have to pay a sum to the council if they use the land for developing anything other than the stand. But, the sum was only about 500-750k. Not insurmountable in the context of a 51M development..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
accthejambo Posted February 28, 2008 Author Share Posted February 28, 2008 must admit to being really worried about he situation,i do believe toaster is correct,that the planning application will only get the green light,if it involves a new main stand,if they get the goahead from the council,which i think they will,then they have to go with what they have applied for,if romanov tried to then sell on,which i also think is possible,then surely the council would have the power to veto the sale of the land deals which are in place,but have not been paid for. I just hope that one of the main conditions of the application is that the main stand must be built first! The application will be for staged developments. It is common that certain parts of developments do not go ahead for cost reasons etc and this would not contravene the statutory approval. I really hope that everything will be ok and will go ahead as it seems to be a sound proposal and would be good for gorgie! Maybe im just becoming more cinical due to the on pitch antics! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pivotno1 Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 i certainly hope so ando,am going to have to put a self imposed ban on coming on here pal,its depressing me bigtime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToadKiller Dog Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 Not quite. It was in the documents to do with the land sale that they'd have to pay a sum to the council if they use the land for developing anything other than the stand. But, the sum was only about 500-750k. Not insurmountable in the context of a 51M development..... Was that rule not for the land that was to be bought from the council,the old nursery and the likes,not for the area of the new stand? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luckydug Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 Not quite. It was in the documents to do with the land sale that they'd have to pay a sum to the council if they use the land for developing anything other than the stand. But, the sum was only about 500-750k. Not insurmountable in the context of a 51M development..... I was trying to remember what the penalty was for developing the land. It is a thought that I never gave much consideration to UNTIL RECENTLY. I now think the only way to rationalise Romanov's recent attitude towards Hearts is to BE AFRAID VERY AFRAID .The penalty for using the land for something other than football is peanuts.Perhaps Hearts fans should club together and hire a private detective to infiltrate Romanov's empire.Its the only way we would get to know what he is up to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boris Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 Was that rule not for the land that was to be bought from the council,the old nursery and the likes,not for the area of the new stand? That's how I understood it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pivotno1 Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 accthejambo,i know up to now,it will be well over a ?1m to have got to this stage in the planning application,so you would like to think,everything is on course,but why on earth do you alienate the very people you would like to fill it,its total madness.maybe david southern our communications manager who has possibly the easiest job in scotland should earn his wages and tell us what the hell is going on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JamboRobbo Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 Was that rule not for the land that was to be bought from the council,the old nursery and the likes,not for the area of the new stand? I'm not certain to be honest mate. My read on it at the time was that UBIG had to pay this penalty if they developed anything on the new land without building the main stand also. I took this to mean developing on any of the newly bought land, as opposed to one or the other of the two stages we are purchasing it in?? As far as the other land (i.e. where the stand is now) i'd imagine he can do whatever he likes on it regardless, as he owns it just like Robinson could've done whatever........... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
portobellojambo1 Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 accthejambo,i know up to now,it will be well over a ?1m to have got to this stage in the planning application,so you would like to think,everything is on course,but why on earth do you alienate the very people you would like to fill it,its total madness.maybe david southern our communications manager who has possibly the easiest job in scotland should earn his wages and tell us what the hell is going on. If I have read the application details correctly it will not be getting looked at until early May at the earliest, this is the target date - http://citydev-portal.edinburgh.gov.uk/publicaccess/tdc/DcApplication/application_detailview.aspx?caseno=JUU5NIEWR0000 Not honestly sure what else they can tell us at this time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billy52 Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 I'm not certain to be honest mate. My read on it at the time was that UBIG had to pay this penalty if they developed anything on the new land without building the main stand also. I took this to mean developing on any of the newly bought land, as opposed to one or the other of the two stages we are purchasing it in?? As far as the other land (i.e. where the stand is now) i'd imagine he can do whatever he likes on it regardless, as he owns it just like Robinson could've done whatever........... There would be a penalty but it would be peanuts. The ground and the land UBIG have acquired would be worth a fortune to a developer and you don't have to be a genius to think that the council would not rather have flats with all the council tax revenue and probable affordable housing on that ground rather than a football stadium. What chance the council would negotiate with Vlad over a ground at the edge of the city and, would he be interested? Doubt it! Robinson was on the right lines and it appears from some posters on here that they would be happy to watch at Saughton or Murrayfield in the first division . what has been the difference? We would have probably been well on the way to a new stadium of our own with the opportunity of building a team able to compete under a competent manager. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boris Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 I'm not certain to be honest mate. My read on it at the time was that UBIG had to pay this penalty if they developed anything on the new land without building the main stand also. I took this to mean developing on any of the newly bought land, as opposed to one or the other of the two stages we are purchasing it in?? As far as the other land (i.e. where the stand is now) i'd imagine he can do whatever he likes on it regardless, as he owns it just like Robinson could've done whatever........... Given that the planning application says "Replacement of the main stand" as the first objective on the form, would I be correct in saying that if the main stand was not replaced and some other building was erected in its place then that would in fact breach the planning permission? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
felix Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 Given that the planning application says "Replacement of the main stand" as the first objective on the form, would I be correct in saying that if the main stand was not replaced and some other building was erected in its place then that would in fact breach the planning permission? Indeed. If he were to sell the land, whoever took it on would HAVE to build a new stand - exactly like the one presented or They could re-apply for something else, but that's pointless because; a. It's a requirement of the Permission a new stand's erected and b. Why buy land with permission for X but you really want to build Y ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
accthejambo Posted February 28, 2008 Author Share Posted February 28, 2008 Indeed.If he were to sell the land, whoever took it on would HAVE to build a new stand - exactly like the one presented or They could re-apply for something else, but that's pointless because; a. It's a requirement of the Permission a new stand's erected and b. Why buy land with permission for X but you really want to build Y ? das hodge Part of the planning application will be for hotel, flats and all the other stuff, which will then have approval under this multi-use application. One of the conditions will be that it has to be constructed within 10years or the application runs out! They could chose to build the stand last! In the grand scheme of things a developer shelling out 200-500k to obtain planning permission to then sell it on is comon practice. The point is that they will have approval to build flats and the like on the site, which could be used as precident for any further applications to change the use of the entire site. I believe that the sale of the school site and areas around roseburn (brewery) has been agreed (gone through) but hysterical scotland will not allow the school facade to be altered! I dont think anything as depressing or radical will happen. This was only my thoughts on very unlikely circumstances and i hope to be able to watch the construction from my leatheret coated seat ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
portobellojambo1 Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 Given that the planning application says "Replacement of the main stand" as the first objective on the form, would I be correct in saying that if the main stand was not replaced and some other building was erected in its place then that would in fact breach the planning permission? They will build from the inside out Boris, i.e. start with the construction work nearest the pitch and work out, so even common sense, never mind how the application is worded/works, should make it clear the stand will go up first. Logistically it makes sense, you don't complete a new hotel, open it, and then have workmen trailing through the lobbies taking building equipment with them to build the stand round the back. This new hotel complex/office building will be flush with McLeod Street, it will be the last part completed, unless it is a bunch of fruitcakes who put it all up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auld Reekin' Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 accthejambo,i know up to now,it will be well over a ?1m to have got to this stage in the planning application,so you would like to think,everything is on course,but why on earth do you alienate the very people you would like to fill it,its total madness.maybe david southern our communications manager who has possibly the easiest job in scotland should earn his wages and tell us what the hell is going on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
felix Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 das hodge Part of the planning application will be for hotel, flats and all the other stuff, which will then have approval under this multi-use application. One of the conditions will be that it has to be constructed within 10years or the application runs out! They could chose to build the stand last! In the grand scheme of things a developer shelling out 200-500k to obtain planning permission to then sell it on is comon practice. The point is that they will have approval to build flats and the like on the site, which could be used as precident for any further applications to change the use of the entire site. I believe that the sale of the school site and areas around roseburn (brewery) has been agreed (gone through) but hysterical scotland will not allow the school facade to be altered! I dont think anything as depressing or radical will happen. This was only my thoughts on very unlikely circumstances and i hope to be able to watch the construction from my leatheret coated seat ! The future permission hinges around a new stadium - Flats/Offices/Hotel etc are supplimentary so no development by anyone will be possible, without a new Tynie. I look forward to watching a decent team in my leatherette seat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
accthejambo Posted February 28, 2008 Author Share Posted February 28, 2008 The future permission hinges around a new stadium - Flats/Offices/Hotel etc are supplimentary so no development by anyone will be possible, without a new Tynie. I look forward to watching a decent team in my leatherette seat. What a thought that would be!!! Fingers crossed we will here some news re new manager - right & left back and some strikers and then the stadium! In that order of importance!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunks Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 I now believe that on acceptance of our planning application (which will happen next month) our little piece of heaven will be sold off! Unlikely - the Council's own target date for a decision is 8th May and that assumes there is no further details sought by committee or even a public enquiry. I'd be very surprised if there is a decision before the end of the season. That decision will then be "called in" by the Scottish Government to be rubber stamped as it is in the Council's interest to award permission in that they gane financially. Expect a final answer nearer to Christmas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Le Chat Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 They will build from the inside out Boris, i.e. start with the construction work nearest the pitch and work out, so even common sense, never mind how the application is worded/works, should make it clear the stand will go up first. Logistically it makes sense, you don't complete a new hotel, open it, and then have workmen trailing through the lobbies taking building equipment with them to build the stand round the back. This new hotel complex/office building will be flush with McLeod Street, it will be the last part completed, unless it is a bunch of fruitcakes who put it all up. I'm amazed that it took so long for someone to point this out. It would be a logistical nightmare (if not an impossibility) for them to construct a stand after building the hotel slap bang in the way. And I thought that it was common knowledge that Planning Permission would only be granted subject to the stand being built ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redm Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 das hodge Part of the planning application will be for hotel, flats and all the other stuff, which will then have approval under this multi-use application. One of the conditions will be that it has to be constructed within 10years or the application runs out! They could chose to build the stand last! In the grand scheme of things a developer shelling out 200-500k to obtain planning permission to then sell it on is comon practice. The point is that they will have approval to build flats and the like on the site, which could be used as precident for any further applications to change the use of the entire site. I believe that the sale of the school site and areas around roseburn (brewery) has been agreed (gone through) but hysterical scotland will not allow the school facade to be altered! I dont think anything as depressing or radical will happen. This was only my thoughts on very unlikely circumstances and i hope to be able to watch the construction from my leatheret coated seat ! Another one, and not even well disguised. Sheesh. Nice try Fido but not happening this time. Go and read your copy of the local plan and then come back to us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.