Powerhouse Energy Share Discussion Threads

[cmackay] 30/1/2020 17:52

Also, I have not seen the film to which you refer.

[cmackay] 30/1/2020 17:51

On AIM at least, I have learned to take profit when it is available. I could have bought back in today, but chose not to. I believe I will get a better entry point. If not, so be it. But the probability is in my favour.

[whatsthepoint] 30/1/2020 16:58

As Julia Roberts said in Pretty Women "big mistake, Huge"

[whatsthepoint] 30/1/2020 16:57

Well cmacky you will regret that my friend. You will regret that silly move

[cmackay] 30/1/2020 16:38

WTP, with all due respect (which is much more than you show to others - a telling character attribute) the issue is that the grant is time sensitive on planning being in place. While planning may, IYO, be a foregone conclusion, that isn't what is shaking the share price At this level, its natural to see profit taking, considering some will have been in at the low .3s. I've certainly taken a chunk off the table and I'm happy I did it yesterday rather than today.

[ken chung] 30/1/2020 16:09

So not going to planning committee on 4th Feb and next meeting won't be until 3rd March.

Five more weeks delay.

Lemmings and mushrooms only.

[zeppo] 30/1/2020 16:01

It could not go to the Feb. meeting without the biodiversity feedback.

The evidence would not be seen as complete without out that information.

That is the delay IMHO - after speaking to three people directly involved.

I would not have added a.m. today without my third, confirmatiry chat.


Good luck to all private investors!

[desflurane] 30/1/2020 15:57

Post 11976. Brilliant!

[whatsthepoint] 30/1/2020 15:45

Just gives more people the chance to buy cheaply anyone selling on back of a delay in planning is rather nuts.

[whatsthepoint] 30/1/2020 15:44

And why is that an issue muppet planning is a foregone conclusion anyway. Just a rubber stamp by the planning committee. They obviously have a backlog

[ken chung] 30/1/2020 15:39

So not going to planning committee on 4th Feb and next meeting won't be until 3rd March.

Lemmings and mushrooms only.

[kirkuk] 30/1/2020 15:16

If this application takes any longer the very
beasts we are trying to protect will have died
from climate change or left for more conducive
climes!! Leaving a site ripe for development!!

[vatnabrekk] 30/1/2020 14:54

Have the MMs done fishing for today?

[vatnabrekk] 30/1/2020 14:26

Here's the link, matthaydock:

[tewkesbury] 30/1/2020 14:02

Recovering a little now.

N.B.
English Nature 14/1/2020

European/International Sites – Further information requested

We previously requested that a Habitat Regulations Assessment was produced, however the consultation documents provided by your authority do not include information to demonstrate that the requirements of Regulations 63 and 641of the Habitats Regulations have been considered by your authority, i.e. the document referred to as ‘Information to inform a Habitats Regulation Assessment’ does not constitute a Habitats Regulation Assessment (HRA) and is therefore not compliant with the Habitat Regulations (2017).

The HRA should clearly demonstrate the potential pathways to the habitats and protected species of the internally designated sites. The Appropriate Assessment shouldinclude appropriate mitigation.


Other comments

Noise impacts from construction are not a concern for Natural England in this case, as the birds associated with the SPA are not using the site as FLL (and the site is 920m south from the SPA boundary). However,we note ‘The information to inform a HRA’ references (on page 18)‘The Institute of Estuarine and Coastal Studies’ Waterbird Disturbance Mitigation Toolkit’, andwe would like to highlight that Natural England does not advocate the use of this. Generic noise threshold levels do not offer a suitable approach for assessing the potential effects of noise on birds. As a general rule, if the average noise source is no more than 3dB higher than existing noise levels, it is unlikely to be significant. However, a 3dB increase in the average noise level could mask a significant increase in impulsive noise. Therefore in order to assess whether noise levels are significant and likely to affect birds, we should compare the predicted new noise level to existing noise levels, thus an accurate measurement of existing noise levels in the vicinity of environmental receptors as a baseline is usually required.

[matthaydock] 30/1/2020 14:00

Hi I'm a ecological consultant send me a link to the report/Planning application and I will let you know of what constraints it has such as further surveys (Bats/Newts)and for the Habitat Regulations Assessment I assume the site is next to or near a designated site?

[whatsthepoint] 30/1/2020 13:56

Oh shut up cold spring just be patient it will be 1p soon enough.

[zeppo] 30/1/2020 12:00

Tewkesbury

Thank you for the correction.

I have just added.

A bio-diversity response/report seems to be the only thing awaited.

English Nature are seemingly satisfied.


With the bio-diversity report it is hoped to get this into the March Planning Meeting.

[tewkesbury] 30/1/2020 11:50

zeppo that is not correct. If a planning authority does not determine an application within the statutory time limit, tha applicant can either wait qiietly, agree to an extension of time, or submit an appeal to the planning inspectorate against non-determination (which itself would take further time for an inspector to consider, depending on whether it was dealt with via written representations, hearing or inquiry; and the Inspector would still require the missing information, so there would be no point). There is no legal provision for an applicant to simply procede with construction without planning permission. Such action would result in an enforcement case and possibly a stop notice from the Council. However the applicant could not do this anyway because presumably provision of the development funding is dependent on planning approval being in place.

My assessment is the response from English Nature dated 14/1/2020 said the documentation submitted did not include a proper Habitat Regulations Assessment. Hence the planning officer may have requested one from the applicant (they have the legal power to request anything they feel necessary, and would almost certainly do so if there is a statutory requirement for this particular information to be provided), meaning extra time for preparation, summission, a further consultation with English Nature on the response, and consideration by the planning officer. If the planning officer did not do this, the Council could be open to a judicial review on the determination process. English Nature also requested a reappraisal of noise levels.

The blame may lie with whoever prepared the original supporting material to the planning application.

If they have missed the February Committee meeting then it will now be March at the earliest. Some applications can be determined by planning offficers (or more specifically the Section Head) under delegated powers, but that won't be the case here, as it is simply too big and has attracted several consultation responses, so councillors will need to determine it at Planning Committee.

Just shows the importance of pre-application meetings with the LPA and if necessary statutory consultees like EN, to clarify what exactly is required.

Hope this clarifies some details of the process and is useful for future reference.

[coldspring] 30/1/2020 11:48

Post 11953 Planning is just a formality It will go sailing through. It?s when not if. We will get circular before planning as planning is a given already.the above is a copy and paste from resident ramper whatsthepoint Sorry if you got spiked.

[volsung] 30/1/2020 11:25

Bought a few more on the dip.

[zeppo] 30/1/2020 11:08

Many planning applications have a deadline, after which the applicant can go ahead with whatever if they have not had a response.

I will check if this differs.


One councillor that I have spoken to stated that he had no problem with it but he could not say how others on the Planning Committee may vote.

Possibly they are being affected by 'nimbyism' from residents.

[superbarnet] 30/1/2020 10:54

It appears some councillors are dragging their feet so their submissions are too late for Feb. We need to be in the march meeting to avoid losing the grant.

[2350220] 30/1/2020 10:46

Hi superbarnet,
I thought that the Planning meeting was on the 7th Feb.
Has that been put back then?
John

Ta for the reply superbarnet.

[vatnabrekk] 30/1/2020 09:42

I agree superbarnet.