|
 |
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 311 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Oct 2006 | 19 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Nov 2022 | Nov 2021 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Letter from WMDC to Yorkcourt.
Associated documents-interim assessment letter 01-10-18
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 3192 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Feb 2006 | 19 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Feb 2022 | Sep 2019 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote Joe Banjo="Joe Banjo"Letter from WMDC to Yorkcourt.
Associated documents-interim assessment letter 01-10-18'"
Application will be determined by full planning committee rather than delegated powers and the Trust, or more likely the Trusts Lawyer, should be able to speak.
Council are noting Gaitleys letter and reviewing. Will be interesting how they react to this. Maybe they will seek independent legal advice from a planning expert or Counsel.
|
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Club Captain | 146 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Apr 2018 | 7 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
May 2025 | Feb 2025 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| I see we finally have objections from Andrea Jenkyns and Antony Calvert now.
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 1692 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Feb 2010 | 15 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Mar 2023 | Mar 2023 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Where can you see the objection letters?
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 2229 | Wakefield Trinity |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Dec 2009 | 15 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
May 2025 | Feb 2025 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote musson="musson"Where can you see the objection letters?'"
Andrea Jenkyns letter is in Associated Documents and Anthony Calvert's in the Public Comments section.
|
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
International Chairman | 5392 | Wakefield Trinity |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Dec 2001 | 23 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Jan 1970 | Jun 2022 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote Droopy="Droopy"I see we finally have objections from Andrea Jenkyns and Antony Calvert now.'" finally they get a wake up call  they are pathetic
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 6315 | Wakefield Trinity |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Jan 2007 | 18 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Apr 2025 | Feb 2025 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote TrinTrin="TrinTrin"Now to reveal the truth, High court ruling, case law, " Millgate developments Ltd. V Wokingham borough council 2011" Quote, " local authorities can enforce a unilateral agreement " which it goes on to explain is a section 106 agreement & ties in the developer to not only meet requirements agreed but also a sum of money, in this case for 14 house they had to provide cash of £170, 500 case upheld and goes on to explain this means case law for the future. It has not been removed. More importantly, copies of case law in particular planning issues are sent to ALL Local Authorities for distribution and to take note & act on. .'"
It is not a legal authority that a unilateral agreement is enforceable, as far as I can tell, but merely states that it is (ie, it is beyond doubt) whilst going on to determine other things.
The crucial difference is that Wokingham Borough Council sought to enforce it and the developer challenged it. Here, WMDC haven't sought to enforce it at all. And that is the crux of everything. A council that does not have any interest in enforcing a promise.
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Club Captain | 870 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Jun 2018 | 7 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
May 2025 | Dec 2022 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Point taken slugger, but the main point is that the, the - council can, could & should have enforced it, I accept your point of view they were not interested,knowingly or un'knowingly. That does not excuse a local authorities duty in carrying out its duties correctly & with due dilligance. Our leader has not made one mistake on/to a similar scheme namely in Castleford. i am not crowing against that scheme, only wanting parity.
Therefore draw your own conclusions, however, the day of reckoning may be upon the leader & the council, they only have a slight chance of a way out & redemption if they can get another scheme to a successful conclusion.
|
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Player Coach | 3192 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Feb 2006 | 19 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Feb 2022 | Sep 2019 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| The issue is not the fact that they have not enforced the UU because there is nothing to enforce yet as the 60,000 sq ft trigger is still at zero.
The issue is whether they were correct in allowing Newcold not to contribute to the trigger as a stand alone application which leads to the current application. Gaitleys letter basically says because the land was taken out of green belt in the LDF then the PI for Newmarket with the condition to build a stadium no longer applies.
The Trust thinks differently and it may take a High Court Judge to decide.
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
International Chairman | 5392 | Wakefield Trinity |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Dec 2001 | 23 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
Jan 1970 | Jun 2022 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| No stadium = no planning permission in the first place...surely it's as simple as that. Or doesn't common sense apply in a court of law?
|
|
|
Rank | Posts | Team |
Club Captain | 870 | No Team Selected |
Joined | Service | Reputation |
Jun 2018 | 7 years | |
Online | Last Post | Last Page |
May 2025 | Dec 2022 | LINK |
Milestone Posts |
|
Milestone Years |
|
Location |
|
Signature |
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Sandal cat is right about the trigger size but misses the point, cllr Box allowed Yorkcourt to dodge the trigger size by building above scale to a height obtrusive to the whole area & it's residents. Only when it was just about built did the facts become know'n. When questioned about permitting this his stance was he could not stop it and the area cover was under the trigger point, even had they have built over the sized trigger point - the council could not enforce the unilateral 106 agreement.
As my previous post, that was simply not true ! The council could have placed a stop notice that the Newcold scheme was not correct & to the original scheme aggregated as per Sec of State permission had understood & granted. Then Yorkcourt faced with that stop notice have a choice - to appeal which the council would have turned down leaving them to apply to the Secretary of state. BINGO, sorted one way or the other.
Newcold wanted the floor space & so could have agreed to build past the figure stated. Quite rightly Yorkcourt could have said no deal to Newcold but then the situation - message sent out to anyone interested there is a problem to this site. Not something Yorkcourt would have wanted when trying to develop a site & maintain cashflow.
The whole problem comes back to our so called council leader having an agenda to not deliver - something now recognized by our MP.
As I have stated, either there is collusion to not deliver or it - the situation has suited both parties, let's not make excuses for them, the two parties.
They are dis-in-genuine, if you are genuine, then you would get on with things - deliver & let your good name bring in more business.
R.I.BA. Have a plan of work document that runs from Quote, " inception to completion, completion = feedback "
Feedback is interesting reading, it's how best parties can learn from the whole process to enable future schemes to be undertaken not only for a smoother overall operation & delivery of the process as a whole, but to benefit society as a whole. Therefore, surely it's not naive to think that Yorkcourt are not aware of this ! I am as a full professional person in these processes, so they must be.
|
|
|
 |
|