supercity88
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 9 Aug 2009
- Messages
- 13,846
Great find. It is such a common thing, that I quite often wonder why a condition like that is even noted as pre-commencement rather than pre-installation, by default.
That aside, the programme included for the installation of the mock-up is by Sisk, so they may be more advanced with them than we all think.
It is still including a broader commencement date of late October, so there doesn't seem to be much of a planned shift as of yet. The facade mock-up would be ready on site around April, so that will be the time to look at it, so will hold off comments on it just now.
edit, the 'mock-up' on there is just the extents, presumably to agree the size of the real life one that will be installed for inspection. Rather than to approve it off the back of that.
Not to bore too much with planning, but there was a push for only "true" pre-commencement conditions to be imposed on developments to reduce delays in getting construction started. By "true" I mean things that have to be done before works commence - archaeology, contamination for example. Materials only need to be agreed before they're used. To play it safe you could say prior to above ground development, so all the enabling works can be done whilst that's being discharged. The Council's never have a problem with that - hence this application - so it's just a waste of time not imposing it in the first place!
I would expect when the discharge of condition application comes in - as soon as this NMA is approved I'd expect - we will get more of an idea on materials with plans/brochures/specifications.