Nottingham Forest stadium expansion given green light
Plans for an expansion were first unveiled in 2019, and outline planning permission was initially granted in 2022, but the project has since encountered a number of complications.Council documents published last week said the "extended passage of time" meant the application required "fresh consideration".Construction was originally expected to cost about £94m, but an estimate from January 2025 indicates this has risen to £130m.The latest report, however, states the development is expected to boost the local economy by an extra £13m a year and create hundreds of jobs.As a condition of the planning permission, Forest will be required to make contributions to local infrastructure - what is known as a section 106 agreement.These include paying just over £1m to improve local bus services, £150,000 to upgrade the A60/Cattle Market Road junction, and £200,000 for cycle improvements along Lady Bay Bridge.The club is also set to enter into a legal agreement with Nottingham Rowing Club to replace its Britannia boathouse, which is set to be demolished as part of the plans.Replacement facilities will have to be in place before any demolition work takes place, but it was stated during the committee meeting that a location for the new boathouse has not yet been identified.The club has also been given outline planning permission to build up to 170 flats next to the stadium, but this element will need further consideration at a later date.The plans for the new stand and the flats were "de-coupled" earlier this year, so that the two do not depend on one another to get planning consent.Taking into account the structural roof trusses, the new stand will be approximately 38m (124ft) high, making it the tallest stand at the City Ground.
Neil Clarke, leader of Rushcliffe Borough Council, said: "Forest play such an important role in the community."We are proud they call Rushcliffe home. It's heartening we can support them with their aspirations."A number of objections to the development were raised by local councillors and residents, including increased congestion in the area on matchdays and a lack of parking provision.Councillor Penny Gowland told the meeting the area "grinds to a halt" when Forest play in midweek."Bus services collapse, so a 45-minute commute takes two hours. Bus routes are diverted as they can't get along roads due to appalling parking. People in wheelchairs are stuck at home," she said.The committee report states 2,538 letters of support from the general public were received, along with 116 letters of objection.The approval paves the way for the club to buy the freehold of the land which the City Ground sits upon.Last year, Forest's then-chairman said the club could relocate away from the ground because of a dispute with Nottingham City Council over the rent the club pays.The local authority has since agreed to sell the land, but the club previously said any decision to buy the freehold would be "entirely conditional" on it being granted planning permission for the stadium expansion.No date has been set for construction to start, but planning rules mean it will have to begin within three years of a final decision being signed.Forest owner Evangelos Marinakis has previously said he eventually hopes to increase the ground's capacity to 50,000.
Analysis
By Hugh Casswell, BBC Nottingham political reporter
If you're a Forest fan, you may be asking yourself two things - why has this taken so long, and why have they had to go through it all twice?It's worth noting there is a big difference between the outline planning permission the scheme had before and the full planning permission it has now.It's also an incredibly complex project which has needed all sorts of technical adjustments as well a lot of haggling over those section 106 agreements.But in a funny sort of way, part of the answer may also lie in Forest's success on the pitch.Having spent three years in the Premier League and secured European football since the plans were first considered, the club clearly now has even bigger ambitions.Those ambitions prompted the question - why pump hundreds of millions of pounds into redeveloping a site where the lease will run out in the coming years?That triggered the very public row with the City Council last year, and while that row now seems to have been resolved, it was just one factor of many which combined to slow everything down.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sky News
an hour ago
- Sky News
House of Lords under fire for dropping rule that once caught out cricket legend and historian
Campaigners have criticised a change to the rules around declarations of interest in the House of Lords as a "retrograde step" which will lead to a "significant loss of transparency". Since 2000, peers have had to register a list of "non-financial interests" - which includes declaring unpaid but often important roles like being a director, trustee, or chair of a company, think tank or charity. But that requirement was dropped in April despite staff concerns. Tom Brake, director of Unlock Democracy, and a former Liberal Democrat MP, wants to see the decision reversed. "It's a retrograde step," he said. "I think we've got a significant loss of transparency and accountability and that is bad news for the public. "More than 25 years ago, the Committee on Standards in Public Life identified that there was a need for peers to register non-financial interests because that could influence their decisions. I'm confused as to what's happened in the last 25 years that now means this requirement can be scrapped. "This process seems to be all about making matters simpler for peers, rather than what the code of conduct is supposed to do, which is to boost the public's confidence." Westminster Accounts: Search for your MP Rules were too 'burdensome', say peers The change was part of an overhaul of the code of conduct which aimed to "shorten and clarify" the rules for peers. The House of Lords Conduct Committee argued that updating non-financial interests was "disproportionately burdensome" with "minor and inadvertent errors" causing "large numbers of complaints". As a result, the register of Lords interests shrunk in size from 432 pages to 275. MPs have a different code of conduct, which requires them to declare any formal unpaid positions or other non-financial interests which may be an influence. A source told Sky News there is real concern among some Lords' staff about the implications of the change. Non-financial interest declarations have previously highlighted cases where a peer's involvement in a think tank or lobbying group overlapped with a paid role. 4:23 Cricket legend among peers to breach code There are also examples where a peer's non-financial interest declaration has prompted an investigation - revealing a financial interest which should have been declared instead. In 2023, Lord Skidelsky was found to have breached the code after registering his role as chair of a charity's trustees as a non-financial interest. The Commissioner for Standards investigated after questions were raised about the charity, the Centre for Global Studies. He concluded that the charity - which was funded by two Russian businessmen - only existed to support Lord Skidelsky's work, and had paid his staff's salaries for over 12 years. In 2021, Lord Botham - the England cricket legend - was found to have breached the code after registering a non-financial interest as an unpaid company director. The company's accounts subsequently revealed he and his wife had benefitted from a director's loan of nearly £200,000. It was considered a minor breach and he apologised. 'Follow the money' Lord Eric Pickles, the former chair of the anti-corruption watchdog, the Advisory Committee on Business Appointments, believes focusing on financial interests makes the register more transparent. "My view is always to follow the money. Everything else on a register is camouflage," he said. "Restricting the register to financial reward will give peers little wriggle room. I know this is counterintuitive, but the less there is on the register, the more scrutiny there will be on the crucial things." 'I was shocked' The SNP want the House of Lords to be scrapped, and has no peers of its own. Deputy Westminster leader Pete Wishart MP is deeply concerned by the changes. "I was actually quite horrified and quite shocked," he said. "This is an institution that's got no democratic accountability, it's a job for life. If anything, members of the House of Lords should be regulated and judged by a higher standard than us in the House of Commons - and what's happened is exactly the opposite." Public confidence in the Lords is already at a low ebb after the PPE controversy surrounding Baroness Michelle Mone, who took a leave of absence in 2022. The government has pledged to reform the House of Lords and is currently trying to push through a bill abolishing the 92 remaining hereditary peers, which will return to the House of Commons in September. But just before recess the bill was amended in the Lords so that they can remain as members until retirement or death. It's a change which is unlikely to be supported by MPs. A spokesperson for the House of Lords said: "Maintaining public confidence in the House of Lords is a key objective of the code of conduct. To ensure that, the code includes rigorous rules requiring the registration and declaration of all relevant financial interests held by members of the House of Lords. "Public confidence relies, above all, on transparency over the financial interests that may influence members' conduct. This change helps ensure the rules regarding registration of interests are understandable, enforceable and focused on the key areas of public concern. "Members may still declare non-financial interests in debate, where they consider them directly relevant, to inform the House and wider public. "The Conduct Committee is appointed to review the code of conduct, and it will continue to keep all issues under review. During its review of the code of conduct, the committee considered written evidence from both Unlock Democracy and Transparency International UK, among others."
Daily Mail
2 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Death of Prince William's businessman pal who 'collapsed after swallowing a bee' sparks a £3billion inheritance row
The death of an Indian billionaire and friend of Prince William who swallowed a bee has triggered a feud over a £3 billion inheritance. Sunjay Kapur, 53, collapsed in front of horrified teammates during the game at Guards Polo Club in Windsor. Indian-born Mr Kapur was thought to have suffered a fatal heart attack after being stung in the mouth, potentially triggering anaphylactic shock. Kapur was the heir too the global car parts giant Sona Comstar, a £2.7 billion business founded by his father. Now the company has been plunged into a bitter succession battle, between the businessman's mother Rani Kapur and the firm's board of directors, The Telegraph reported. Rani Kapur reportedly wrote to the board on July 24 saying her son had died in 'suspicious and unexplained circumstances'. It came just a month after the board unanimously appointed a new chairman on June 23. In the letter, she reportedly accused people in the company of exploiting the family's grief to 'wrestle control' of the company. She said she had been forced to sign documents behind locked doors while under emotional distress. Mrs Kapur claimed she had been blocked from accessing her bank accounts and did not authorise appointments to represent her family. In her letter, which was also sent to India's market regulator, she claimed her late husband, who died in 2015, made her the sole beneficiary of his estate as well as majority shareholder of the Sona Group. The company said Mrs Kapur had not been a shareholder for six years and said she was not majority shareholder of the group. Sunjay Kapur's widow Priya Sachdeva also appears to have sided with Sona Comstar. Ms Sachdeva was appointed as a non-executive director at the company's annual meeting on July 25, despite Ms Kapur's objections and request to delay the meeting. Her office last week shared the coroner's report which confirmed that her husband had died of natural causes. The report said he died from ventricular hypertrophy and ischaemic heart disease and the investigation was closed. Ms Kapur wrote to the UK authorities calling for an investigation into his death, which was rejected. Mr Kapur's sister Mandhire Kapur has also been dragged into the dispute. In an Instagram post, she shared a photograph with her brother and mother saying she would 'protect what you would have wanted, and what Dad dreamed' Mrs Kapur claimed there was a conspiracy to take control of the company away from her family. Vaibhav Gaggar the senior advocate who represents Ms Kapur, told The Telegraph: 'It quite clearly reinforces what she's been saying, that her entire legacy is being usurped and no one is willing to look into the cause of death.' 'It may all be very well interlinked and she has quite unequivocally said there is a conspiracy behind her son's death.'
Daily Mail
2 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Sir Keir Starmer would not call shoplifters 'scumbags', No 10 says in the wake of 'data protection' saga
Sir Keir Starmer would not call shoplifters 'scumbags', No 10 has said amid the 'data protection' saga. Last week, a shopkeeper was left stunned after police told him to change his sign in which he called shoplifters 'scumbags' because it may be offensive. Rob Davies, 61, who runs the Run Ragged vintage shop in Wrexham, North Wales, installed the notice to tell shoppers some cabinets were locked against theft. The hard-working retailer put it up after he caught five thieves red-handed in the last 12 months alone and lost roughly £200 of stock to shoplifting. He felt the police did little to help when he reported the five thefts and so he gave up doing so, instead taking matters into his own hands to protect his small business. But officers later showed up at his store, demanding he remove a handwritten note that calling thieves 'scum bags' because it was 'provocative and potentially offensive'. Now, Downing Street has said that the Prime Minister would not use the same word to describe the thieves blighting Britain's retailers. When asked if he resonated with Mr Davies' view, the PM's official spokesman said: 'It is not the language I would directly use', the Telegraph has reported. The spokesman did, however, state that the government had been 'clear through our actions' that they see shoplifting as a 'serious' issue and recognise the detrimental impact it is having on the UK's high streets and local businesses. It comes following a warning from the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) that shaming shoplifting suspects could 'breach data protection' laws. On an advice page for tackling shoplifters, the UK data watchdog warned that putting up images of thieves in a local area could 'not be appropriate' behaviour. As a result, they advised retailers to 'only share personal information that's proportionate and necessary to achieve your purpose'. But shadow justice secretary Robert Jenrick called the advice 'madness' and suggested that shopliters should be 'named and shamed'. He told The Telegraph: 'We should be letting the general public know of the photographs of people who have a track record of stealing in towns.' Meanwhile, Labour MP Alex Davies-Jones admitted that shoplifting across the UK had 'got out of hand'. When asked if it was right to display images of thieves in shop windows, Mr Davies-Jones responded: 'I think it is on all of us to be aware of what is going on in our local communities.' Taking to X, Shadow home office minister Katie Lam recounted a story about a constituent who had been ordered by police to remove pictures of suspected shoplifters. 'He gives police CCTV, card details, licence plates. No action apart from a visit to say he must take down pics of thieves "because of GDPR",' she wrote. 'Our system should crush the lawless and protect the law-abiding. It does the opposite.' The number of shoplifting incidents taking place in pharmacies and chemists across England has also been described as both 'unacceptable' and 'appalling' by Henry Gegg, the National Pharmacy Association (NPA) chief executive. In the past year, around nine in 10 pharmacies experienced an incident of shoplifting, while the number of thefts of drugs and other medical supplies increased by 88 per cent, according to figures obtained by the NPA. Of the 476 pharmacies across England surveyed, 87 per cent reported an increase in aggressive or intimidating behaviour towards staff, while 22 per cent recounted instances of physical assault. Around nine in 10 pharmacies experienced an incident of shoplifting, while the number of thefts of drugs and other medical supplies increased by 88 per cent in the past year, according to the National Pharmacy Association (NPA). Meanwhile, nearly three-quarters of those who had reported an incident to the police described the response as insufficient. Several pharmacy owners have resorted to putting up photos of thieves in their shop windows, wearing body cameras and even paying for security guards. Sanjeev Panesar, who owns a pharmacy in Birmingham, described a 'noticeable rise' in hostility towards staff As a result, several pharmacy owners have resorted to putting up photos of thieves in their shop windows, wearing body cameras and even paying for security guards. Sanjeev Panesar, who owns a pharmacy in Birmingham, described the 'noticeable rise' in hostility towards staff as both 'disheartening' but also capable of having a 'lasting effect on job satisfaction, morale, and feelings of safety at work.' Ashley Cowen, owner of three pharmacies across Leeds and York that have been subjected to incidents, described the lack of police action on the issue as 'shocking'. He also described witnessing brazen thieves going as far as to burn, cut and even sow through 'steel grilles' in a bid to access drug stock. Mr Davies, who says he was driven to put his handwritten sign on his shop door because of escalating shoplifting in Wrexham, told The Mail on Sunday that he had no intention of taking it down. He added: 'The sign is staying – and I may even get a bigger one. 'It's a simple point, in my opinion, and succinctly put, and can't cause offence apart from to anyone intending to steal from me. 'I was even polite and put "Thank you" on the bottom.' Mr Davies, 59, said he put it up a month ago in frustration after discovering that he was losing almost his entire monthly profit because of thieves – but was astonished to then get a visit from the police. He said: 'A police officer and PCSO came in. They said the sign was provocative and potentially offensive. 'When I asked, "Why, who it could be offensive to?" the officer didn't answer. The only person who can be offended by the words "scum bag" is a scum bag who wants to steal from me!' Mr Davies said he had received overwhelming support from fellow shopkeepers in the face of a tidal wave of theft in the town. 'There's been massive support everywhere since the sign went up,' he added. 'Shopkeepers are all in the same boat; everyone is having stuff stolen, even cafes.' A spokesman for the Information Commissioner's Office said: 'We don't set strict requirements on how organisations should respond to shoplifting, as data protection law recognises that circumstances can vary. Instead, we provide guidance to help organisations use people's information in a way that is lawful, fair and proportionate. 'Data protection law enables retailers to share images to prevent or detect crime, as long as it's necessary and proportionate in the circumstances. For example, this could include sharing images with the police, shopping centre security teams, or other relevant authorities. 'Retailers will need to consider the relevant privacy implications, such as having a legal reason and appropriate security measures, when considering publishing any images of suspected shoplifters.' North Wales Police said: 'All reports of shoplifting are taken extremely seriously. We are committed to combatting retail theft.' Shoplifting figures released this week by the British Retail Consortium (BRC) showed just 2.5 per cent of offences were recorded by the police each year. It said 50,000 shoplifting incidents go unreported every day as firms give up on the police. BRC chief executive Helen Dickinson said: 'Many retailers do not see the point of reporting incidents to the police.'
