Excellent work there No1.
Can you see that this gets exposure in the wider media as this type of things seems one of your skills.

Yeah but who's job is it to make sure the LA implement the agreement?

Rodney Walker is a sideline issue thrown in by WMDC to distract attention away from the truth. Rodney may have some questions to answer ......edited

The quoting of "No Objections" is also irrelevant as it too is a distraction from the WMDCs possibly illegal failure to enforce the SOSs ruling. There's also some very suspicious and questionable anomalies surrounding the timing, wording and transparency of WMDCs planning documents pertaining to the Newcold build.

The main question is why did WMDC choose to allow the Newcold build to fall outside the UU (which IS a S106) when they have a legal obligation to to enforce The SoSs ruling.

That ruling stated that the land involved would only be lifted out of the Green Belt on the express provision that the developer built Community Sports facilities and a Community Stadium once 60,000sqm of warehousing was built out.

The SoSs Officer clearly ruled that this was a legal condition and that the land in question could not be disaggregated. What that means is that the ruling is on the land and not any particular planning application. Therefore any planning application is subject to this condition and it is the legal obligation of the ruling Planning Authority (WMDC) to ensure its enforcement!

There seems to be no logical reason whatsoever for WMDC not to enforce the SoSs ruling, indeed they have brought suspicion and possible legal action against themselves by not enforcing it.

The subsequent intransigence, evasiveness and failure to answer the charge against them further increases a feeling of complete distrust in WMDC and in particular its Leader, Peter Box.

Obtuse statements that the WMDC did not sign the UU and it therefore has nothing to do with them, that WMDC are not beneficiaries of the UU which they clearly are and that they are not responsible for enforcing a planning application ruling for a huge development IN WAKEFIELD are so crazy and illogical as to invite suspicion.

Refusing Freedom of Information requests and eventually admitting that legal advice fundamental to their position hasn't been kept on record is at best incompetent and at worst. . . we'll make your own mind up!

Good post, with well reasoned points. The thing that I still can't 'get my head around' is their argument that the height of a building 'disaggregates' the footprint. I understand that the original planning application contained a hotel, if they put a few storeys on this building, would WMDC then see that as being 'disaggregated'?

Nice post Avenger.

Don't say something about an individual you can't prove though. Not fair on them and can get the site in trouble.

Good post Avenger.

Brilliant post avenger

Cas fans still pedalling the myth that we bought BV back from wmdc for £1.

Contracts were exchanged for £1 but on completion we paid more than WMDC paid for it.

Great points there Avenger. How so we push them forward?

League Express has a 'exclusive ' update on the community stadium...

Can't find anything in my League Express!

Follow link re stadium. Hope link works. www.totalrl.com/whats-inside-lea ... h-edition/

Follow link re stadium. Hope link works. www.totalrl.com/whats-inside-lea ... h-edition/

Neither can i. Wakey holding on to Tom Johnstone is about the only bit about Trinity in the online edition of Monday April 10th, apart from the Trinity/Widnes match report.

Quote ="wakeytrin"Follow link re stadium. Hope link works. www.totalrl.com/whats-inside-lea ... h-edition/'" Look at above link for info about article on stadium.

Quote ="wakeytrin"Follow link re stadium. Hope link works. www.totalrl.com/whats-inside-lea ... h-edition/'" Look at above link for info about article on stadium.

The council are to 'present solutions ' to the stadium issue to the community trust in the next fortnight...apparently

Which Community Trust would that be? Ours or theirs?

Or is it both.

Are the council doing a bit of a U-Turn and moving the goal posts.

No pun intended there.

So with that in mind keep sending the e-mails and keep the pressure on, this stalling tactic is Box's favourite weapon.

Keep on shouting folks

Well living overseas this is probably easy for me to say. I would suggest that attendance at this weeks council meeting is a must and ensure relevant matters are brought up by the local Councillors, I am pretty certain if the public gallery is full they will be under some pressure whether they like it or not and regardless of who they are affiliated to. Not due back in the UK until the end of the month or would have made one in.

Ok as long as the goal posts are moved to Newmarket!

This doesn't appear in paper copy of LE as far as I can see.

I was thinking 2 sets of goalposts being moved to one set around the Normanton area.

A lot of people thought that to share somewhere half way would be an amicable agreement, like the Milan football stadium.

How many on here are attending the full council meeting? I am for one. Does anyone know how many the public gallery holds?

Three of us going