Joined: Oct 13 2004 Posts: 36099 Location: Poodle Power!
Prince Buster wrote:The major turning points for me were Box leaving the council and the fact Yorkcourt had developed all the land at Newmarket other than the stadium site. That bit was 35 acres and they wanted that too for warehousing instead of building a stadium. With Box out of the way , the council at least had a bit of leverage on Yorkcourt to make them pay up if they wanted to develop the stadium site. We got something but we were short changed in all fairness.
Another point is that our development did not stop us continuing to play at Belle Vue. It will be impossible for Cas to remain at their ground so they will need at least one season on the road.
That’s true but there was one other crucial event. My memory is sketchy but YC needed to release the land at NM to facilitate a development in Rotherham of all places, and needed to do it very quickly. If it weren’t for this they would have held out at NM til we were gone.
Added to this a new Council leadership found some backbone and bingo. We didn’t get what we should have but we got what we needed.
Axiom may well operate at a higher standard than YC but the reality is they will be in no rush in the current climate. I don’t revel in this, it’s just reality.
Minard and Carter may not be the most dynamic to some people, but TBF they took their opportunity.
Joined: Oct 11 2004 Posts: 5316 Location: Orange street
vastman wrote: Axiom may well operate at a higher standard than YC but the reality is they will be in no rush in the current climate. I don’t revel in this, it’s just reality.
.
A friend of mine who was involved in the Newmarket issue from the start and who has worked in development all his life has often made the following remark, ' NEVER TRUST A DEVELOPER' I suspect Axiom are no different from the rest
Joined: Oct 13 2004 Posts: 36099 Location: Poodle Power!
[quote="Prince Buster"]A friend of mine who was involved in the Newmarket issue from the start and who has worked in development all his life has often made the following remark, ' NEVER TRUST A DEVELOPER' I suspect Axiom are no different from the rest[/quote
TBH I was trying to give the benefit of the doubt but I tend to agree. For a start, why would they, they are a business, and worse a business that doesn’t need to court public opinion in most cases.
We all love RL and tend to forget that 90% of the population doesn't. It might be wrong but we have very little leverage, certainly compared to football, yet plenty of football clubs have been tucked up by developers.
Joined: Oct 12 2005 Posts: 4231 Location: Barnsley
Looking on the WMDC portal, there is still no agenda listed for the planning committee.
IGNORE - refreshed and updated.
Hybrid application, so the coal removal from Glasshoughton may prove the only stumbling block? If approved, which surely it will be, the stadium can't begin it's build, until the coal is out and the units are up...(or the funding is transferred).
Last edited by dboy on Wed Feb 07, 2024 2:33 pm, edited 2 times in total.
People who live near either of the developments have all got letters today informing them.it is to be heard on that date in case they want to attend. It was expected as they said it was just too late to be included in January's meeting.
Lets wonder, Good luck to Cas, they are being treated differently by the council overall when you look at our treatment right from how the S106 is expedited, further to this, if things have parity then as in the words of the council, the monies paid into the council by the developer becomes owned by the council & ie, "the people local taxpayer" all as stated by the council minuted in a council meeting & splashed across the tabloids & media. So, again then, will ownership of the final development be the council as per Wakefield's in the councils own words " there needs to be protection for the rate payers of our monies & prevent any sale," Are Cas aware & should notice be made to them ? If not then are/is this to be further proof of Wakefield being treated differently when looked upon by a council members favouring ??????
Hi Start@1873,I have little knowledge of what we own or don't own re our stadium,so I am interested in what you are saying. I know we borrowed money to buy the ground from the council and have to pay that back, but does the council effectively own the new stand, etc,which was built with the money from the developer, and as such do they maintain it?
Joined: Oct 26 2006 Posts: 13793 Location: No bowl, stick, STICK!
FOREVERTRIN wrote:Hi Start@1873,I have little knowledge of what we own or don't own re our stadium,so I am interested in what you are saying. I know we borrowed money to buy the ground from the council and have to pay that back, but does the council effectively own the new stand, etc,which was built with the money from the developer, and as such do they maintain it?
The council don't own the stand, Trinity do. The money came through a Section 106 payment from the developer to the LA who then passes the funding to where it was allocated (I think). It is not the councils investment, but they have a duty to ensure the money is used for the purpose it was intended. As I've said before, this is a non issue, Trinity have no intention of selling up. The reason concern for me is S106 funding from other projects not been used by LA's.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
