Pangea

[Crazyfool01]

11 hours ago, Dukeicon said:

There are only 16 bolts holding the crane to the piles

he should do the job ... 

[Chazwozza]

I'm thinking this might be good.

Edited February 20, 2020 by Chazwozza
add words

[vintagelaureate]

10 minutes ago, crazyfool1 said:

he should do the job ... 

 

[HattersBoy]

17 minutes ago, Chazwozza said:

They better be bloody big ones then

[Crazyfool01]

3 minutes ago, vintagelaureate said:

 

I really need to learn how to photoshop for this site ... I was trying to work out how id do 14 of him !!  ... 

[vintagelaureate]

3 minutes ago, crazyfool1 said:

I really need to learn how to photoshop for this site ... I was trying to work out how id do 14 of him !!  ... 

I lost interest after adding two 😀

[Dukeicon]

The retrospective planning application, to keep the bottom of Pangea on site all year around until 1st August 2023, has been resubmitted with a lot more detail after the first application was refused.

https://publicaccess.mendip.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=documents&keyVal=Q6YWYWKPL7T00

[bombfrog]

Pangea is the thing I'm really looking forward to this year. It was absolutely magnificent last year.

[Dukeicon]

The resubmission of the planning permission to keep part of Pangea up all year around has been refused again.

Refusal Reason

Quote

The site lies in the countryside outside any development limit where development is strictly controlled as a matter of principle in the interests of the character and appearance of the countryside and to ensure a sustainable pattern of development. The proposal by reason of its siting in the middle of a field in an open low lying agricultural landscape; excessive scale; and alien industrial design and material would result in an unacceptable visual intrusion into the countryside that is incompatible with the characteristics of, and thus degrade the quality of, the sensitive agricultural landscape it falls within. The proposal is therefore provided in a manner and of a scale inappropriate to the locality. No compelling argument for the need (specifically in this manner and scale), mitigation nor benefit of the proposal (over other alternative less visually intrusive forms of attaction) has been justified that may override the visual and landscape harm identified and the encroachment into the countryside. Accordingly the principle of development is unacceptable. The proposal is therefore contrary to policies CP1, CP3, CP4, DP1, DP4 and DP7 of the Mendip District Local Plan 2006 -2029 Part 1 Strategy and Policies (adopted December 2014); the National Planning Policy Framework 2019, particularly sections 2,  6, 12 and 15; National Planning Policy Guidance; and the Landscape Assessment of Mendip District (May 1997).

Full Details: https://publicaccess.mendip.gov.uk/online-applications/centralDistribution.do?caseType=Application&keyVal=Q6YWYWKPL7T00

[Ayrshire Chris]

1 hour ago, Dukeicon said:

The resubmission of the planning permission to keep part of Pangea up all year around has been refused again.

Refusal Reason

Full Details: https://publicaccess.mendip.gov.uk/online-applications/centralDistribution.do?caseType=Application&keyVal=Q6YWYWKPL7T00

So I assume that means the part structure that’s still there will have to come down? Surely the build will now have to start sooner. By the way on that link there’s a great brochure describing the festival under the correspondence section of the further info.  

[kalifire]

Well, shit. Arcadia's application strongly implies that unless permission is granted, they can't do it at all. Gutted for them, but I can see the council's perspective. Before they painted it green, I couldn't believe they were considering leaving the bottom bit in the middle of the valley, as it was. It was an eyesore.

[Yeo-vile idiot]

3 hours ago, kalifire said:

Well, shit. Arcadia's application strongly implies that unless permission is granted, they can't do it at all. Gutted for them, but I can see the council's perspective. Before they painted it green, I couldn't believe they were considering leaving the bottom bit in the middle of the valley, as it was. It was an eyesore.

Certainly looks that way. Which if turns out to be the case would be gutting. The crane for me marked a return to a proper wow factor that I’d not got from Arcadia since the original stage they started with. Every time I looked  at the kid in me couldn’t believe the balls and over all feat behind taking it down and re erecting it in a field 

The info on that report  makes a good read especially the Arcadia info the figures are quite something.

[Ayrshire Chris]

5 hours ago, kalifire said:

Well, shit. Arcadia's application strongly implies that unless permission is granted, they can't do it at all. Gutted for them, but I can see the council's perspective. Before they painted it green, I couldn't believe they were considering leaving the bottom bit in the middle of the valley, as it was. It was an eyesore.

Could the spider have to come out of hibernation? 

[stuie]

7 hours ago, kalifire said:

Well, shit. Arcadia's application strongly implies that unless permission is granted, they can't do it at all. Gutted for them, but I can see the council's perspective. Before they painted it green, I couldn't believe they were considering leaving the bottom bit in the middle of the valley, as it was. It was an eyesore.

It reads that way, but I can’t really understand why. Up close, the frame is simply bolted into concrete footings. Why can’t it be taken down and put back up I wonder? 

[watsonjm]

On 5/24/2020 at 11:08 PM, stuie said:

It reads that way, but I can’t really understand why. Up close, the frame is simply bolted into concrete footings. Why can’t it be taken down and put back up I wonder? 

 

I would guess the cost of getting the cranes in twice a year to move it.  If i remember correctly they had a small fleet of very big machines to get it up the first time

[Sawdusty surfer]

It will be allowed to be in place for 28 days a year without needing planning permission. Got a feeling that the foundations will also need PP which could be the issue in the future.

[Tommy101]

1 hour ago, watsonjm said:

I would guess the cost of getting the cranes in twice a year to move it.  If i remember correctly they had a small fleet of very big machines to get it up the first time

If it's one big lump it could be costly to store too. 

[Gnomicide]

 

[Yeo-vile idiot]

On 5/24/2020 at 11:08 PM, stuie said:

It reads that way, but I can’t really understand why. Up close, the frame is simply bolted into concrete footings. Why can’t it be taken down and put back up I wonder? 

Within the link above there’s a detailed break down of the plant required to put it up / take down along with the weights of the components parts. 

[Deaf Nobby Burton]

It’s all objective I know, because to most of us it’s the most beautiful thing in the world, but the pyramid could be considered a much bigger eye sore and not in keeping with the landscape by some, surely?

[incident]

50 minutes ago, Deaf Nobby Burton said:

It’s all objective I know, because to most of us it’s the most beautiful thing in the world, but the pyramid could be considered a much bigger eye sore and not in keeping with the landscape by some, surely?

Sure, and they did have that battle in the past. The Pyramid frame actually got dismantled at least once and I think 2 or 3 times in the 00s because of it.

I can't remember exactly how it was resolved in the end, but I've got a suspicion that the right to keep it up year round is actually written into the festival licence somewhere (ie, it doesn't have permanent permission).

[Dukeicon]

20 hours ago, Deaf Nobby Burton said:

It’s all objective I know, because to most of us it’s the most beautiful thing in the world, but the pyramid could be considered a much bigger eye sore and not in keeping with the landscape by some, surely?

The old versions of the Pyramid has planning as a cow shed from what I understand.

It's right in the middle of the valley, not half way up a hill, so your natural line of sight misses it, unlike with Pangea.

There's a planning document from 2004 about the Temporary "Erection of steelwork frame for the pyramid stage"

https://publicaccess.mendip.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=summary&keyVal=ZZZZPPKPXU914

Edited May 27, 2020 by Dukeicon

[Dukeicon]

19 hours ago, incident said:

Sure, and they did have that battle in the past. The Pyramid frame actually got dismantled at least once and I think 2 or 3 times in the 00s because of it.

I can't remember exactly how it was resolved in the end, but I've got a suspicion that the right to keep it up year round is actually written into the festival licence somewhere (ie, it doesn't have permanent permission).

2009 they got permission to keep it up permanently by the looks of it

https://publicaccess.mendip.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=summary&keyVal=ZZZZP9KPXU737

Quote

4.

Prior to 31 August 2016, all above ground elements of the "Pyramid", as identified on drawing number 520/01 shall be removed from the site, unless a further planning permission having the effect of overriding this condition is granted. A land reinstatement scheme shall be submitted for the consideration by the Local Planning Authority not later than 2 months from the date of the removal of the structure and shall be implemented within 6 months of the date approval of the scheme is granted by the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: Having regard to the provisions of Saved Policies S1 and Q1 of the Mendip District Local Plan 2002, the landscape impact of the Pyramid Stage is only considered to be acceptable due to its use in association with the Glastonbury Festival. Should the justification for the structure cease the harm associated with the structure would be unacceptable and the structure must be removed. In view of the unique circumstances surrounding this application, the granting of a temporary consent is considered to be appropriate.

And that got extended from 2016 until 2024 in line with the current license
https://publicaccess.mendip.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=summary&keyVal=OCVM6YKP03400

Edited May 27, 2020 by Dukeicon

[Neil]

16 hours ago, Dukeicon said:

The old versions of the Pyramid has planning as a cow shed from what I understand

not quite. There's no planning required for a cowshed, which was the whole point of it.

Edited May 28, 2020 by Neil

[Crazyfool01]

unfortunately somerset live was the source of the article ...how incredible might this have  been ?!!