Toady wrote:Just a few points.
1 The SoS doesn't grant planning permission, the LPA does.
2 The SoS doesn't accept s106 obligations, the LPA does.
3 There was nothing in the public domain that stated newcold would not count towards the trigger point before the period for objections passed.
4 S106 obligations cannot be disaggregated.
5 The public inquiry report made it clear that the main reason for approval was Wakefield's urgent need for a superleague compliant stadium.
6 The council never owned the land.
7 The PI report made it clear that the stadium would be leased to the trust for peppercorn rent.
8 The anchor tenants would pay rent to the trust to cover their running costs and also take on the maintenance, repair and insurance costs.
1&2 Correct and nobody seemed to have a problem with the deal at the time including the trust and the club.
3 Yes there was as has been proven. And the chairman of the trust was told.
4 Correct. Although they can be altered after time, which conveniently is now.
5 It was part of the reason, community facilities were another. This means alternative options can be considered when looking to alter the S106.
6 No, neither does the developer. There are though i believe contracts in place with the landowner and Yorkcourt meaning nobody else can use the land.
7&8 Only at Newmarket, which the club knows is never going to happen hence the deal struck at Belle Vue. Given Wakey seem to have taken their bat & ball home over the rent at the new Belle Vue development, where there is no such peppercorn agreement, then this seems a pointless exercise. Involving 88M in the arguments and then quoting a deal from another development makes Carter & Co. appear rather stupid.
Now i don't doubt the council could have done more to push things on but they can't force a company to take up plots on a development and neither can they stop a developer from land banking to maximise profit when the time is right. I have no doubt you are hurting at the minute but you are running up a blind alley with this.