brinyhoof
Yeah, I'm pretty certain their plan/expectation/hope was to put the application in immediately following the county decision. But they've only been working towards the Triangle site since December/January, and I think maybe that was quite a big ask to try and turn around in eight months - my work is doing a planning application for a pretty straightforward building (using the same contractor, Ridge), which took well over a year to develop plans for.
Also, the county's net zero requirements might have thrown a bit of a spanner in the works. Read the really flimsy hot air below from the club on that - they've been fudging the net zero thing as 'an aspiration' - I wonder if they're gonna have to bump up the sustainability credentials of the plans to BREEAM Excellent to hit net zero. From my very rudimentary understanding of the BREEAM system, that might require some significant updating to the planning application.
Club guff on sustainability from the website here.
The new stadium development is committed to delivering a facility which achieves a BREEAM accreditation of at least Very Good. We are aware that some will challenge us about why the target isn’t a minimum of Excellent, and the simple answer is that whilst we have the aspiration to achieve this, our focus is on a bespoke sustainability framework, as outlined above, which provides true benefits to those using, neighbouring or are a part of the wider community of the development.
Our focus is developing a sustainable facility which supports the clubs drive towards NET Carbon Zero. By utilising a bespoke framework for design and construction, it allows the us to transfer the themes and values into operation and push the boundaries towards innovation for years to come.
As a result, we see the delivery of a Very Good BREEAM accreditation as the minimum ‘Best in Class’ requirement and see the 360 Framework as the route to seeking further initiatives and opportunities to help drive the target aspirations of the project.
