I like that...no need for the tin hats here

From the planning documents, put on today Quote Subject: RE: CALLED IN APPLICATION BY YORKCOURT PROPERTIES LTD - LAND ADJACENT TO NEWMARKET LANE, ROTHWELL, WAKEFIELD - LOCAL PLANNING AUTHORITY: WAKEFIELD METROPOLITAN DISTRICT Importance: High Dear Mark Further to our telephone conversation this morning, I can confirm that I wish to attend and speak at the Public Inquiry on behalf of Wakefield Residents Interest Group who object to the application. Please could you confirm receipt of this email? Many thanks Regards Mark Jones Senior Planner Planning . Design . Delivery bartonwillmore.co.uk 3rd Floor, 14 King Street Leeds, LS1 2HL Phone: 0113 2044 777 Web: www.bartonwillmore.co.uk '" Who??

From the planning documents, put on today Quote Subject: RE: CALLED IN APPLICATION BY YORKCOURT PROPERTIES LTD - LAND ADJACENT TO NEWMARKET LANE, ROTHWELL, WAKEFIELD - LOCAL PLANNING AUTHORITY: WAKEFIELD METROPOLITAN DISTRICT Importance: High Dear Mark Further to our telephone conversation this morning, I can confirm that I wish to attend and speak at the Public Inquiry on behalf of Wakefield Residents Interest Group who object to the application. Please could you confirm receipt of this email? Many thanks Regards Mark Jones Senior Planner Planning . Design . Delivery bartonwillmore.co.uk 3rd Floor, 14 King Street Leeds, LS1 2HL Phone: 0113 2044 777 Web: www.bartonwillmore.co.uk '" Who??

Looks like some group or indivdual have appointed a firm of architects to lodge an objection on their behalf at the PI.

A firm of architects by the way, who say this on their website:



Can I conclude therefore that we "need to be more vocal in advocating the benefits of growth" unless someone is paying us to advocate against the benefits of growth, in which case it's a very bad thing?

I thought that too, it seems bizarre that a firm that actively promotes new developments, it even quotes "that new development is needed on green belt land in scotland..."!!! would look to object to Newmarket UNLESS somebody is paying them to do so...

I was thinking "clubcard" points TBH.

Your generosity knows no bounds!!

I have my tin hat on!!



but to keep you up to speed (Not that I have any support or involvement with them - just an interest in the whole process, both Cas and Wakey - Ask I_A and I am sure he will confirm)

AFAIK - Barton Willmore represent the local objectors (I presume) their client is Wakefield Residents Interest Group - whoever that may be.

BTW They are representing the same group at the LDF Inquiry also.

No 5h1t Sherlock - that's exactly what it says on the letter.

A letter which you have seen only today but hey!

Whatever!



I'm sure you have known of their involvement for weeks/months.

Whereas I'm certain that you definitely have known about it for weeks/months (which is it?) and I can completely understand that given that level of inside knowledge, you chose not to make a post about it until someone else had posted a public document containing all the details. Furthermore, I think it's totally credible that when you did choose to reveal the extent of your inside information, it amounted to nothing more than was actually in that public document that someone else had posted.

What, and indeed, ever.

Barton Willmore are planning consultants, as I am sure you have gathered, so yes, they are guns for hire by the nature of what they do as consultants. It is unusual for a planning consultant to be asked to speak out against a development, because the overwhelming majority of their work will be for developers, again for obvious reasons, and most objectors to a scheme don't have the money to pay someone upwards of £100 an hour for their time!!!

We have known for sometime that they intended to get a planning consultant/advocate on board but didn't know exactly who they were... but now we do.

As for bigalf, well you can't have known about them for long, because on the very draft LDF programme issued on the 26th October they were not shown on at all (although, we thought it might be D J Taylor as we were not sure who he was), then the programme, issued just yesterday, suddenly this Wakefield Residents Interest Group appears on the LDF documents and then this e-mail (well spotted Wakefield No. 1) appears. I suspect they have not wanted to start the 'fee clock' ticking until as late as possible to keep the cost down, which I assume some of the more affluent residents of Newmarket Lane will be footing the bill for.

Wakefield Residents Interest Group is not quite as emotive as some of their previous group names, but I think the Newmarket Lane Residents wanted to stress that they are indeed Wakefield Residents (and not Leeds) and to counter the valid criticism and known fact that most of the current objectors to the scheme, don't live in Wakefield!

So, no surprise really, we were expecting this consultant to appear and he will clearly speaking on behalf of the Newmarket Lane residents themselves.

We know that June Fender is also going to put herself forward as representing Wakefield & Leeds Community Conservation Group and not Methley Residents Association. We heard that maybe one or two people involved with MRA are not comfortable with how June has used her position and the newsletter but also, we think she is trying to get away from the being in Leeds tag and not Wakefield.

So, like I said, this is the roller coaster and this is what we expected was going to happen.

iA,
how much impact will these late changes have,
how much credibility will the consultants give the Residents Group
Will they bring the expected argument or is it possible they've got something up their sleeve.

My worry here is that for residents to pay a consultant £100+ per hour they must be confident that their money is being well spent.
Do they have some 'game changing' info that they want delivered in the most professional manner they can so as to ensure it derails the whole project?