Redevelopment Closer Than Ever?

[Ragdoll Cobbler]

NTFC TRUST UPDATE JUST RECEIVED VIA EMAIL...

Good evening!

It appears that the ongoing work to complete the East Stand at Sixfields will now require a new planning application which, given the minimum consultation period required from the date of the planning application is made, may delay the stand being finished beyond the advertised March 2025 completion date.

We have written to the football club for clarification around this (letter attached) - also attached is correspondence and information relating to the planning discussion, also a Land Registry title plan relating to the NTFC freehold land behind the East Stand.

Best wishes,

NTFC Trust

By email

29 October 2024

James Whiting
Company Secretary
Northampton Town FC Ltd
Upton Way
Northampton
NN5 5QA

James,

As shareholders in Northampton Town Football Club, and at the request of the Trust’s board of directors, I am writing to you on behalf of our membership requesting a response concerning information which has come into our possession in recent days in relation to stand and land matters. 

We understand that an application made by the football club on 6 August 2024 to West Northamptonshire Council (WNC) - to treat changes made to the 2014 planning application and approval of the East Stand as non-material amendments - has been rejected.

The consequence appears to be that a new or revised application for planning approval has to be submitted to WNC with, I would assume, resulting delays and unbudgeted costs being incurred. 

Can you please confirm that this is correct and the financial ramifications?

This situation outlined above does raise an important underlying issue, of how it came about that an application was made to the council several months after work re-commenced on the East Stand, with presumably the contractors following the changed specifications specified in the plans which, internally and externally, deviated from the 2014 planning application approved by the former Northampton Borough Council?

The current position is explained and set out on WNC’s website for our members and supporters to visit and read. Therefore, no further comment is needed by the Trust at this stage.

There is a second matter that also needs to be raised with you. This relates to the land behind the East Stand and, specifically, the area known as the Running Track Lease land.   

The Trust has kept an eye on changes being recorded at the Land Registry and notes that the freehold of the Running Track Area is now registered with the football club as registered owners but with a segment of the land removed in the south-east section.

I refer you to the attached Land Registry plan.   
What is the situation with this piece of land?  Has title been transferred to County Developments (Northampton) Ltd (and therefore there has been a Land Registry delay or oversight) or has it been transferred to another entity?

We are copying this letter to our members for their information and in addition to the Land Registry plan we are also attaching the Notice of Decision made by the council.

We may consider it necessary to comment further once the club provides its response to this letter.
Regards,

John

John Morgan

Secretary for and on behalf of the Board of Directors, NTFC Supporters Ltd.

[Tabasco Kid]

I have just checked my Emails, to see if I had received this, and found that it had gone straight to spam! Says it all really.
And they wonder why the club wants nothing to do with them.

[Baldy]

I would hold my plums.

Hello Shoemaker

[A view from afar]

NTFC TRUST UPDATE JUST RECEIVED VIA EMAIL...

Good evening!

It appears that the ongoing work to complete the East Stand at Sixfields will now require a new planning application which, given the minimum consultation period required from the date of the planning application is made, may delay the stand being finished beyond the advertised March 2025 completion date.

We have written to the football club for clarification around this (letter attached) - also attached is correspondence and information relating to the planning discussion, also a Land Registry title plan relating to the NTFC freehold land behind the East Stand.

Best wishes,

NTFC Trust

By email

29 October 2024

James Whiting
Company Secretary
Northampton Town FC Ltd
Upton Way
Northampton
NN5 5QA

James,

As shareholders in Northampton Town Football Club, and at the request of the Trust’s board of directors, I am writing to you on behalf of our membership requesting a response concerning information which has come into our possession in recent days in relation to stand and land matters. 

We understand that an application made by the football club on 6 August 2024 to West Northamptonshire Council (WNC) - to treat changes made to the 2014 planning application and approval of the East Stand as non-material amendments - has been rejected.

The consequence appears to be that a new or revised application for planning approval has to be submitted to WNC with, I would assume, resulting delays and unbudgeted costs being incurred. 

Can you please confirm that this is correct and the financial ramifications?

This situation outlined above does raise an important underlying issue, of how it came about that an application was made to the council several months after work re-commenced on the East Stand, with presumably the contractors following the changed specifications specified in the plans which, internally and externally, deviated from the 2014 planning application approved by the former Northampton Borough Council?

The current position is explained and set out on WNC’s website for our members and supporters to visit and read. Therefore, no further comment is needed by the Trust at this stage.

There is a second matter that also needs to be raised with you. This relates to the land behind the East Stand and, specifically, the area known as the Running Track Lease land.   

The Trust has kept an eye on changes being recorded at the Land Registry and notes that the freehold of the Running Track Area is now registered with the football club as registered owners but with a segment of the land removed in the south-east section.

I refer you to the attached Land Registry plan.   
What is the situation with this piece of land?  Has title been transferred to County Developments (Northampton) Ltd (and therefore there has been a Land Registry delay or oversight) or has it been transferred to another entity?

We are copying this letter to our members for their information and in addition to the Land Registry plan we are also attaching the Notice of Decision made by the council.

We may consider it necessary to comment further once the club provides its response to this letter.
Regards,

John

John Morgan

Secretary for and on behalf of the Board of Directors, NTFC Supporters Ltd.

Not even a Dear James

I wonder why relationships are non existent
🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡

[Observing]

Related to plans to increase capacity to 10,000 I assume.

[BackOfTheNet]

I imagine that one will be finding its way into the small, cylindrical filing cabinet under James' desk.

[guest3474]

Interesting that the letter reverts to the first person "I" rather than "We" when talking about an assumption halfway through the communication ..........

[Melbourne Cobbler]

In fairness I think it has to be said that the Board obviously feel fully entitled to ask any questions they may feel relevant.

However, it also must be said that the club are also entitled to engage with and respond to any questioning with who they see fit. The owners have apparently decided that they now see the Trust Board as commercial competitors, and as such feel that can justify completely ostracising them from any further direct communication. Consequently, it seems rather preposterous that they have written directly to the club and realistically expect an answer to their questions. They are either oblivious to the fact that once you cross that line there is little prospect of going back, or alternatively they may be using the act as a conduit of communication to whoever.

Therefore whatever your view may be, this is probably only going to go one way which I assume is straight to the deleted items folder.

[guest3474]

Related to plans to increase capacity to 10,000 I assume.

….yes it’s a curious number in the document- I presume it relates to original plans before the money went missing but slightly embarrassing this wasn’t corrected when it was clear the stand was never going to have an additional 2000 seats - nonetheless it really is a nothing story and typical childish gotcha antics from the usual subjects.

[Rushdencobbler]

I thinks its a little bit misleading from the trust on how they have worded the opening paragraphs on email.

Its not a new planning application, which would make you think that we are building without it.

Its an NMA which is an amendment to the current agreed plans that were approved at planning permission, like all good Architects / developers things change and this gets wrapped up in an NMA, it really isn't anything unusual 3 of the 5 jobs I have worked on recently have had extensive NMA applications because Architects draw things that don't work and the client / Builder once on site can see a better way, granted this can still be a pain to get over the line or rejected as this appears so, like always you push as much as possible on what is a Minor amendment and even talking things through with planning departments they are prone to moving the goal posts once the drawings and changes land on their doorstep.

Another way to sprinkle a bit of anti club rhetoric on a standard process in construction.

[Terryfenwickatemyhamster]

I doubt anybody outside of the obsessives will care what they ask.. You can't be a critical, but caring observer, and a business rival. The lines were blurred by the Trust board.

GIVE US OUR TRUST BACK..

[Terryfenwickatemyhamster]

I thinks its a little bit misleading from the trust on how they have worded the opening paragraphs on email.

Its not a new planning application, which would make you think that we are building without it.

Its an NMA which is an amendment to the current agreed plans that were approved at planning permission, like all good Architects / developers things change and this gets wrapped up in an NMA, it really isn't anything unusual 3 of the 5 jobs I have worked on recently have had extensive NMA applications because Architects draw things that don't work and the client / Builder once on site can see a better way, granted this can still be a pain to get over the line or rejected as this appears so, like always you push as much as possible on what is a Minor amendment and even talking things through with planning departments they are prone to moving the goal posts once the drawings and changes land on their doorstep.

Another way to sprinkle a bit of anti club rhetoric on a standard process in construction.

Well said Rushden.. As we know. Desperate people, do desperate things.

[itsme]

Well let's face it there is no chance of the club replying to that letter sent to them

[TVOR]

I'm usually critical of the Trust but I think they have every right to ask this. Its a shame it has to be a public letter and not a quick call to get it clarified if it is as Rushdencobbler explained, but that's where the relationship is. I also agree the club wont reply which further demonstrates the point of how we as fans are the victims of their petty war as there is now no one holding the owners to account or getting these matters clarified.

The Trust board have also alienated so many people that anything like this is instantly met with cynicism. Im sure there will be another letter next week and the week after and then added to the list of things the owners are 'covering up'

[Rushdencobbler]

I'm usually critical of the Trust but I think they have every right to ask this. Its a shame it has to be a public letter and not a quick call to get it clarified if it is as Rushdencobbler explained, but that's where the relationship is. I also agree the club wont reply which further demonstrates the point of how we as fans are the victims of their petty war as there is now no one holding the owners to account or getting these matters clarified.

The Trust board have also alienated so many people that anything like this is instantly met with cynicism. Im sure there will be another letter next week and the week after and then added to the list of things the owners are 'covering up'

It will take time for planning to respond on some of this stuff plus historically things haven't always gone well with the stand so naturally I bet the panners and council are nervous, nothing going on here is unusual with regard to planning, the original application with number seats and general design etc from 2013 would have changed but will always remain on the paperwork, there is always changes to materials and façade based on buildability and availability.

You always try to push an NMA as far as you can go, sometimes too far and you have to go a different route, but again that is not a re submission or applying for planning, unfortunately a phone call with planning wouldn't sort it with planning and it will take some weeks / months to sort but it doesn't detract the misleading statement in the email about a new planning application and no explanation of what an NMA is.


I am no planning expert just basing this on my experience and if I was an expert I would definitely not be doing my current job!!!!but this wont be the builder or the club hiding its just how it works, I'm sure the builder knows where to take the risk in the build and where to hold back, all clubs go through this in building a new stand / stadium and it may well delay but its not out of the ordinary from my experience.

Frustrating, but the trust aren't party to all the site conversations with the club, builder and Architect, what's the point in building something that isn't right and your not happy with surely making those improvements before you finish is the right approach even if the planning does take it close to the wire or over.

[TVOR]

Just read the decision and its been rejected because they used the wrong form.

[BackOfTheNet]

Just read the decision and its been rejected because they used the wrong form.

  So it's Companies-House-gate all over again? A lot of noise about an admin error?

[Terryfenwickatemyhamster]

Just read the decision and its been rejected because they used the wrong form.

So the Trust would/should have known this. 😂😂 Thank fcuk they are getting it for free 😂

[Rushdencobbler]

So the Trust would/should have known this. 😂😂 Thank fcuk they are getting it for free 😂

Had 10 minutes to read again, looks like we have put an NMA in which may push the boundaries, but there isn't really a set of of rules for what constitutes an NMA so its very subjective, the planners have their own set of objectives and seeing there response and considering where it is it does seem a bit short sighted from the planning department, but without knowing what there own set of rules are its tough. I have 2 schemes with similar changes in 2 different areas 1 was accepted which we really expected to be challenged and 1 made us revert back to the original design and it was daft as only the residents would see the changes.

[Deepcut Cobbler]

So the Trust would/should have known this.  Thank fcuk they are getting it for free

Are you talking about their advice, or does that come at a price?