The Infrastructure Projects

[Sausage Roll]

From Rushcliffe Borough Council this morning:

Rushcliffe Borough Council
@Rushcliffe
Our Leader Cllr Neil Clarke said: “We will continue to work constructively with all partners. It is positive Nottingham Forest and the City Council are continuing discussions and like all commercial negotiations, details remain confidential until finalised. We granted Nottingham Forest planning permission for their latest planning application to extend ground capacity and associated development in 2022 and should any further plans come forward these will go through our usual independent planning process.”

[Tricky]

Having thought about yesterdays announcements, I can't help but feel something isnt quite right.

Did the Council piss the Forest hierarchy off by making their announcement before Forest were ready to go that extra step? Forest's announcement felt cold and slightly threatening. Not something you would expect with a big, positive announcement.

Given the fact that Tom Cartledge is a development guru for one of the countries leading developers, for him (via the club announcement, so he wouldve known the statement before it was released) to suggest the club arent signing anything until they get assurances the Council will accept the clubs proposals for a larger sized stadium at the WFCG just doesnt sit right. 

Cartledge will know that the City Council only need to give approvals to works on the site presently, as they are the Landlords. IF Forest were to buy the freehold from the council, then technically, the City Council has no further say on the matter, as that land will no longer be theirs! So for the club to state " Any decision to purchase the freehold will be entirely conditional on Nottingham Forest first being granted the relevant permissions that will allow us to realise our hugely ambitious plans for a significantly larger stadium capacity, world-class hospitality spaces and associated substantial real estate development in the vicinity of the ground". Those permissions could not come from the City Council. The only concessions the City Council could make are those areas surrounding the conditions attached to the freehold sale.

I suspect, having gone over the Forest statement again, it would appear they are basically threatening Rushcliffe into granting planning permission on the apartments aspect of the planning permission, which haven't as yet been granted planning permission.

Forest initially used the freehold as the stick the Council were beating them with. Now it would seem, that with the Council willing to sell the freehold, for a reasonable fee, the club are now using different excuses to put the CG development on hold. They are continuing to hold the City Council to ransom, even though the Council cannot do anything further to ensure the assurances the club are seeking. That is now down to Rushcliffe and the County Council.

I am beginning to wonder if EM just wants a brand new shiny stadium for the club full stop, OR Cartledge has seen a golden opportunity to make Benoy and himself rich beyond all expectations by moving away from the CG? In order for that to happen and keep the vast majority of fans on their side, they are continuing to put the fault at the feet of the City Council.

But as far as I can make out, this has nothing to do with the freehold. I think the City Council called the clubs bluff by offering the freehold at a reasonable fee, something the club didnt expect.

Like I said at the start, something just doesnt sit right

[Marinakis Red]

Having thought about yesterdays announcements, I can't help but feel something isnt quite right.

Did the Council piss the Forest hierarchy off by making their announcement before Forest were ready to go that extra step? Forest's announcement felt cold and slightly threatening. Not something you would expect with a big, positive announcement.

Given the fact that Tom Cartledge is a development guru for one of the countries leading developers, for him (via the club announcement, so he wouldve known the statement before it was released) to suggest the club arent signing anything until they get assurances the Council will accept the clubs proposals for a larger sized stadium at the WFCG just doesnt sit right. 

Cartledge will know that the City Council only need to give approvals to works on the site presently, as they are the Landlords. IF Forest were to buy the freehold from the council, then technically, the City Council has no further say on the matter, as that land will no longer be theirs! So for the club to state " Any decision to purchase the freehold will be entirely conditional on Nottingham Forest first being granted the relevant permissions that will allow us to realise our hugely ambitious plans for a significantly larger stadium capacity, world-class hospitality spaces and associated substantial real estate development in the vicinity of the ground". Those permissions could not come from the City Council. The only concessions the City Council could make are those areas surrounding the conditions attached to the freehold sale.

I suspect, having gone over the Forest statement again, it would appear they are basically threatening Rushcliffe into granting planning permission on the apartments aspect of the planning permission, which haven't as yet been granted planning permission.

Forest initially used the freehold as the stick the Council were beating them with. Now it would seem, that with the Council willing to sell the freehold, for a reasonable fee, the club are now using different excuses to put the CG development on hold. They are continuing to hold the City Council to ransom, even though the Council cannot do anything further to ensure the assurances the club are seeking. That is now down to Rushcliffe and the County Council.

I am beginning to wonder if EM just wants a brand new shiny stadium for the club full stop, OR Cartledge has seen a golden opportunity to make Benoy and himself rich beyond all expectations by moving away from the CG? In order for that to happen and keep the vast majority of fans on their side, they are continuing to put the fault at the feet of the City Council.

But as far as I can make out, this has nothing to do with the freehold. I think the City Council called the clubs bluff by offering the freehold at a reasonable fee, something the club didnt expect.

Like I said at the start, something just doesnt sit right

Great post Tricky.

[stirred]

It sounds like an element of politicking by the city council, but that’s life. New leader, new govt, etc etc. The club have pointed out it’s not a done deal, and that’s good to provide that info. I must admit I glossed over it myself and thought we were at the races.

So the impediment is can we get approvals to do the work necessary approved by RBC.

At face value we have some progress, and know better the state of play.

As for whether the City Council blindsided us with the announcement, which tbh from the tone of our statement it sounds like, or we’re both happy to put pressure on RBC as being the ones now holding it up, I don’t know. But it’s still a net positive that we have in principle agreement with one of the councils.

Glass half full over here!

[Paplane]

Having thought about yesterdays announcements, I can't help but feel something isnt quite right.

Did the Council piss the Forest hierarchy off by making their announcement before Forest were ready to go that extra step? Forest's announcement felt cold and slightly threatening. Not something you would expect with a big, positive announcement.

Given the fact that Tom Cartledge is a development guru for one of the countries leading developers, for him (via the club announcement, so he wouldve known the statement before it was released) to suggest the club arent signing anything until they get assurances the Council will accept the clubs proposals for a larger sized stadium at the WFCG just doesnt sit right. 

Cartledge will know that the City Council only need to give approvals to works on the site presently, as they are the Landlords. IF Forest were to buy the freehold from the council, then technically, the City Council has no further say on the matter, as that land will no longer be theirs! So for the club to state " Any decision to purchase the freehold will be entirely conditional on Nottingham Forest first being granted the relevant permissions that will allow us to realise our hugely ambitious plans for a significantly larger stadium capacity, world-class hospitality spaces and associated substantial real estate development in the vicinity of the ground". Those permissions could not come from the City Council. The only concessions the City Council could make are those areas surrounding the conditions attached to the freehold sale.

I suspect, having gone over the Forest statement again, it would appear they are basically threatening Rushcliffe into granting planning permission on the apartments aspect of the planning permission, which haven't as yet been granted planning permission.

Forest initially used the freehold as the stick the Council were beating them with. Now it would seem, that with the Council willing to sell the freehold, for a reasonable fee, the club are now using different excuses to put the CG development on hold. They are continuing to hold the City Council to ransom, even though the Council cannot do anything further to ensure the assurances the club are seeking. That is now down to Rushcliffe and the County Council.

I am beginning to wonder if EM just wants a brand new shiny stadium for the club full stop, OR Cartledge has seen a golden opportunity to make Benoy and himself rich beyond all expectations by moving away from the CG? In order for that to happen and keep the vast majority of fans on their side, they are continuing to put the fault at the feet of the City Council.

But as far as I can make out, this has nothing to do with the freehold. I think the City Council called the clubs bluff by offering the freehold at a reasonable fee, something the club didnt expect.

Like I said at the start, something just doesnt sit right

Tricks, I think the club are just using the leverage they have at present to the max. They know the City Council need money quickly and they know that the council cant be seen to be responsible for the club moving out of town. Cartilage will know neither the city council nor Rushcliffe can just wave through a planning application. But what both can do is endeavour to make the planning process as friction-free as possible by not pressing for section 106 monies etc and put political pressure on the planning board members to behave.  And the apartment block does actually have outline permission. The planning app was hybrid, so was asking for detailed permission for the stand and outline permission for the apartments. So maybe Cartilage is anticipating some hassle getting the full apartment scheme approved and wants to try to circumnavigate this.

[Jimmygordon]

Naive, weak as piss new leader of a failed council. She has had her pants pulled down

[Paplane]

Naive, weak as piss new leader of a failed council. She has had her pants pulled down

The statement yesterday was on Labour Party headed paper, so probably just some political games being played.

[Sniffer Dog (Admin)]

Naive, weak as piss new leader of a failed council. She has had her pants pulled down.

Bush, bald or landing strip?

[Paplane]

Naive, weak as piss new leader of a failed council. She has had her pants pulled down.

Bush, bald or landing strip?

Abandoned air field?

[Forest1970]

Naive, weak as piss new leader of a failed council. She has had her pants pulled down.

Bush, bald or landing strip?

::

[wassy04]

I think its less controversial than is being made out. The club just wanted to make it clear that the actual final sale of the freehold is contingent on the planning permission being approved by RBC. Given it sounds like there's lots of clauses to stop us leaving that makes sense. Rather than some PR disaster if they don't make it clear and then we fail to get planning permission.

I guess it just depends on the planning permission now. The Rushcliffe area has a new MP too so that should help with the national mission atm. I think this is just such perfect timing as Pap says for us to max our leverage and get loads more approved than perhaps we'd have got a few years ago.

The combination of the bankrupt council, new govt and also a mission to get large infrastructure projects going is just such a good opportunity.

If this was an intentional strategy from the club to wait until the govt changed and time it perfectly then you could argue they've smashed it.

[Paplane]

I think its less controversial than is being made out. The club just wanted to make it clear that the actual final sale of the freehold is contingent on the planning permission being approved by RBC. Given it sounds like there's lots of clauses to stop us leaving that makes sense. Rather than some PR disaster if they don't make it clear and then we fail to get planning permission.

I guess it just depends on the planning permission now. The Rushcliffe area has a new MP too so that should help with the national mission atm. I think this is just such perfect timing as Pap says for us to max our leverage and get loads more approved than perhaps we'd have got a few years ago.

The combination of the bankrupt council, new govt and also a mission to get large infrastructure projects going is just such a good opportunity.

If this was an intentional strategy from the club to wait until the govt changed and time it perfectly then you could argue they've smashed it.

They seem to be getting an awful lot right at the moment. Who would've thought that 3 or 4 years ago?