WWW.RLFANS.COM • View topic - Objections by 29th September Please!

Board index Super League Wakefield Trinity Objections by 29th September Please!

Re: Objections by 29th September Please!
Post Mon Sep 10, 2018 11:39 am
Posted by bren2k on Mon Sep 10, 2018 11:39 am
bren2k User avatar
Gold RLFANS Member
Gold RLFANS Member

Reputation Points: 640
Rep Position: 19th / 77,955

Quiz Score: 0

Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 6:32 pm
Posts: 15340
Location: Ossett
Droopy wrote:
As the site is now being developed piecemeal through separate full planning applications, rather than under the auspices of Outline planning permission ref. 10/00225/OUT, it is considered to be fair and reasonable for each development which comes forward to contribute proportionately to a fund for the delivery of the new Community Stadium.


Good spot Droopy!

The above excerpt is massive - effectively putting YC on notice that WMDC will no longer allow them to duck around the obligation by submitting separate applications; and requiring them to sign up to a properly enforceable s106 agreement - exactly as Mr Box outlined some months ago.

What's less encouraging, is the funding formula - at that rate, the site could be filled with smaller developments, and there never be enough in the pot to build anything like what was promised.
Re: Objections by 29th September Please!
Post Mon Sep 10, 2018 11:40 am
Posted by bren2k on Mon Sep 10, 2018 11:40 am
bren2k User avatar
Gold RLFANS Member
Gold RLFANS Member

Reputation Points: 640
Rep Position: 19th / 77,955

Quiz Score: 0

Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 6:32 pm
Posts: 15340
Location: Ossett
The Devil's Advocate wrote:
No I’m not a planning expert, but I would have thought the application is a stand-alone matter & nothing to do with gross injustices that has been allowed to happen over the years.


Not any more!
Re: Objections by 29th September Please!
Post Mon Sep 10, 2018 11:42 am
Posted by Droopy on Mon Sep 10, 2018 11:42 am
Droopy User avatar
Stevo's Armpit

Reputation Points: 27
Rep Position: 293rd / 77,955

Quiz Score: 0

Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2018 8:38 am
Posts: 95
bren2k wrote:
Good spot Droopy!

The above excerpt is massive - effectively putting YC on notice that WMDC will no longer allow them to duck around the obligation by submitting separate applications; and requiring them to sign up to a properly enforceable s106 agreement - exactly as Mr Box outlined some months ago.

What's less encouraging, is the funding formula - at that rate, the site could be filled with smaller developments, and there never be enough in the pot to build anything like what was promised.


I was thinking the same, whilst it is a step in the right direction, the amount of payable is a drop in the ocean.

On the other hand, this particular planning app is for a relatively small unit. I would like to know how much £££ the Newcold development would have generated using the funding formula!
Re: Objections by 29th September Please!
Post Mon Sep 10, 2018 11:56 am
Posted by bren2k on Mon Sep 10, 2018 11:56 am
bren2k User avatar
Gold RLFANS Member
Gold RLFANS Member

Reputation Points: 640
Rep Position: 19th / 77,955

Quiz Score: 0

Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 6:32 pm
Posts: 15340
Location: Ossett
Droopy wrote:
I was thinking the same, whilst it is a step in the right direction, the amount of payable is a drop in the ocean.

On the other hand, this particular planning app is for a relatively small unit. I would like to know how much £££ the Newcold development would have generated using the funding formula!


I can't work out what Newcold would have contributed, because I can't recall the square footage, but my rough workings out suggest that if Mr Eaglestone's formula were applied to the whole site, it would yield £19.6 million - so as piffling as this small development is, it does look like the formula has been created in such a way as to properly fund the originally proposed stadium and facilities in full.

I won't get too excited though - it will be years before that happens, if at all.
Re: Objections by 29th September Please!
Post Mon Sep 10, 2018 11:59 am
Posted by Sandal Cat on Mon Sep 10, 2018 11:59 am
Sandal Cat User avatar
Bronze RLFANS Member
Bronze RLFANS Member

Reputation Points: 36
Rep Position: 284th / 77,955

Quiz Score: 0

Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2006 6:35 pm
Posts: 3192
Droopy wrote:
I was thinking the same, whilst it is a step in the right direction, the amount of payable is a drop in the ocean.

On the other hand, this particular planning app is for a relatively small unit. I would like to know how much £££ the Newcold development would have generated using the funding formula!


Seen the letter Droopy and are on with it.

It a load of cobblers. Firstly they can’t even get the formula right. Using their formula we would get £545m, think that is unlikely and even if they don’t spot it think Yorkcourt will.

Using their approach is unlikely to produce the funding required in my lifetime and I know I’m an old sod but not that old.

We will be issuing an addendum to the objections in due course.
LOOKING FOR ACCOMMODATION IN ORLANDO, FLORIDA
//www.orlandovilla.org.uk
Re: Objections by 29th September Please!
Post Mon Sep 10, 2018 11:59 am
Posted by Droopy on Mon Sep 10, 2018 11:59 am
Droopy User avatar
Stevo's Armpit

Reputation Points: 27
Rep Position: 293rd / 77,955

Quiz Score: 0

Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2018 8:38 am
Posts: 95
bren2k wrote:
I can't work out what Newcold would have contributed, because I can't recall the square footage, but my rough workings out suggest that if Mr Eaglestone's formula were applied to the whole site, it would yield £19.6 million - so as piffling as this small development is, it does look like the formula has been created in such a way as to properly fund the originally proposed stadium and facilities in full.

I won't get too excited though - it will be years before that happens, if at all.


Another way to think about it...how much would a re-development of Belle Vue cost?
Re: Objections by 29th September Please!
Post Mon Sep 10, 2018 12:03 pm
Posted by bren2k on Mon Sep 10, 2018 12:03 pm
bren2k User avatar
Gold RLFANS Member
Gold RLFANS Member

Reputation Points: 640
Rep Position: 19th / 77,955

Quiz Score: 0

Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 6:32 pm
Posts: 15340
Location: Ossett
Sandal Cat wrote:
Using their formula we would get £545m


How are you working that out SC - one of us is doing our sums wrong, and it's very likely to be me!
Re: Objections by 29th September Please!
Post Mon Sep 10, 2018 12:12 pm
Posted by Droopy on Mon Sep 10, 2018 12:12 pm
Droopy User avatar
Stevo's Armpit

Reputation Points: 27
Rep Position: 293rd / 77,955

Quiz Score: 0

Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2018 8:38 am
Posts: 95
bren2k wrote:
How are you working that out SC - one of us is doing our sums wrong, and it's very likely to be me!


I work it out the same as Sandal Cat! Sssshh, dont tell anyone!

:CHEERS:
Re: Objections by 29th September Please!
Post Mon Sep 10, 2018 12:24 pm
Posted by Sandal Cat on Mon Sep 10, 2018 12:24 pm
Sandal Cat User avatar
Bronze RLFANS Member
Bronze RLFANS Member

Reputation Points: 36
Rep Position: 284th / 77,955

Quiz Score: 0

Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2006 6:35 pm
Posts: 3192
bren2k wrote:
How are you working that out SC - one of us is doing our sums wrong, and it's very likely to be me!


C = (T/F) * S

C = 171,000/6,000 * £19m

C = £541.5m

The formula should be

C = (F/T) * S

C = 6,000/171,000 * £19m

C = £0.67m

If you put Newcold back in C = £5m

We will be many, many years to get the £19m and without Newcold probably never.
LOOKING FOR ACCOMMODATION IN ORLANDO, FLORIDA
//www.orlandovilla.org.uk
Re: Objections by 29th September Please!
Post Mon Sep 10, 2018 12:25 pm
Posted by bren2k on Mon Sep 10, 2018 12:25 pm
bren2k User avatar
Gold RLFANS Member
Gold RLFANS Member

Reputation Points: 640
Rep Position: 19th / 77,955

Quiz Score: 0

Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 6:32 pm
Posts: 15340
Location: Ossett
Droopy wrote:
I work it out the same as Sandal Cat! Sssshh, dont tell anyone!

:CHEERS:


Then I defer - it was a very simplistic back of the fag packet kind of approach in an attempt to look clever; I'm big enough to admit it, rather than going back and editing out my duncery! :CRAZY:
PreviousNext

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: coco the fullback and 70 guests

Quick Reply

Subject: Message:
   

Return to Wakefield Trinity


POSTSONLINEMEMBERSRECORDYOUR TEAM
4,997,38697377,9554,559SET
LOGIN HERE
or REGISTER for more features!.
Fri 31st Jan 19:45
SL
HULL KR
v
WAKEFIELD
Sun 9th Feb 15:00
SL
WAKEFIELD
v
CATALAN DRAGONS
Sun 16th Feb 15:00
SL
WAKEFIELD
v
WARRINGTON
Fri 21st Feb 19:45
SL
CASTLEFORD
v
WAKEFIELD
Sun 1st Mar 15:00
SL
SALFORD
v
WAKEFIELD
Fri 6th Mar 19:45
SL
WAKEFIELD
v
HULL FC
Fri 13th Mar 19:45
SL
WAKEFIELD
v
HUDDERSFIELD
Sun 22nd Mar 18:00
SL
TORONTO
v
WAKEFIELD
Fri 27th Mar 19:45
SL
WAKEFIELD
v
WIGAN WARRIORS
Thu 9th Apr 19:45
SL
LEEDS RHINOS
v
WAKEFIELD
Fri 17th Apr 19:45
SL
WAKEFIELD
v
CASTLEFORD
Fri 24th Apr 19:45
SL
ST.HELENS
v
WAKEFIELD
Sat 2nd May 17:00
SL
CATALAN DRAGONS
v
WAKEFIELD
Sun 17th May 15:00
SL
WAKEFIELD
v
TORONTO
Sun 24th May 17:00
SL
WAKEFIELD
v
HULL KR
Fri 29th May 19:45
SL
HUDDERSFIELD
v
WAKEFIELD
Thu 11th Jun 19:45
SL
WAKEFIELD
v
WIGAN WARRIORS
Sun 21st Jun 15:00
SL
LEEDS RHINOS
v
WAKEFIELD
Fri 26th Jun 19:45
SL
WAKEFIELD
v
HUDDERSFIELD
Thu 2nd Jul 19:45
SL
HULL FC
v
WAKEFIELD
ALL SCORES PROVIDED BY RLFANS.COM (SETTINGS)





33