Re: Tick Tock : Mon Jun 18, 2012 11:06 pm  

D Day - no idea on count.

Re: Tick Tock : Mon Jun 18, 2012 11:24 pm  

D-0 ?

and counting

Re: Tick Tock : Mon Jun 18, 2012 11:57 pm  

This country!

Re: Tick Tock : Tue Jun 19, 2012 7:03 am  

coco the fullback wrote:

D-0 ?

and counting

That just made me smile , I dont know which player/ member of staff you will use for -1

Re: Tick Tock : Tue Jun 19, 2012 7:16 am  

newgroundb4cas wrote:

We have waited this long whats a couple of days? Why did they delay it less than 24 hours before the due decision this messes with peoples head, don't agree with that. Common sense must surely prevail !!!

Doesnt say anything about it being a delay of a couple days in the response to IA

Re: Tick Tock : Tue Jun 19, 2012 7:43 am  

Knowing how lawyers and government departments work, if this is the reason for the delay, these are my thoughts on the delay:

Announcement pending on 19th June. Then the LDF thing was announced, which fundamentally changes the focus of the report. Mr Pickles can avoid greenbelt hassle by calling it a local issue once it is out of greenbelt. The meeting to ratify the LDF thing is scheduled for 20th June, this date being set AFTER the 19th June decision announcement was announced.

So those who are making the announcement want the LDF thing to be ratified before they publish the report, which may well contain some amendments to take into account the LDF decision. However, official meetings can be postponed, and so no new announcement date is set until they know the LDF outcome. Further, they cannot publish the report until the LDF ratification has had time to settle, or else it looks like the LDF ratification was done automatically, rather than the due process being followed.

So the decision will be announced a short time after the LDF ratification, taking into account its findings, but not immediately afterwards, announcing that the development is welcomed but is now a local issue as the land is no longer green belt. Pickles avoids the wrath of a few hippies and we all move on. This time next year this small delay won't mean anything.

My only concern would be that the LDF ratification could maybe open to challenges that the public inquiry isn't, and so making it local might cause more delays, but I know nothing about planning law. Politically, the LDF thing is perfect for Mr Pickles, and that will come before a celebratory barbecue at the 9's.

Re: Tick Tock : Tue Jun 19, 2012 7:54 am  

REDWHITEANDBLUE wrote:

Doesnt say anything about it being a delay of a couple days in the response to IA

That's right - the official line is that there is no timescale given - nor any clues whatsoever as to the reason for the delay.

I think Slugger isn't too far off the mark, but we are guessing tbh!

Re: Tick Tock : Tue Jun 19, 2012 10:14 am  

I am trying my hardest to work this one out and struggling.
If the LDF ratification makes it a local issue what was the purpose of the PI?
Why didnt all parties wait to see the outcome of LDF before going to PI?
If the land had been designated as brown belt then Leeds would not have been able to have complained about encroachment on Greenbelt.
Hope someone can clarify things for me.
Not a criticism of anyone on our side by the way.
Am just absolutely frustrated and in no need of any medication to help with digestive transit.
Up the Trin.

Re: Tick Tock : Tue Jun 19, 2012 10:20 am  

jacques wrote:

I am trying my hardest to work this one out and struggling.
If the LDF ratification makes it a local issue what was the purpose of the PI?
Why didnt all parties wait to see the outcome of LDF before going to PI?
If the land had been designated as brown belt then Leeds would not have been able to have complained about encroachment on Greenbelt.Hope someone can clarify things for me.
Not a criticism of anyone on our side by the way.
Am just absolutely frustrated and in no need of any medication to help with digestive transit.
Up the Trin.

Am I right in saying that not all of the site has been re-classified as greenbelt ?

Re: Tick Tock : Tue Jun 19, 2012 10:38 am  

jacques wrote:

I am trying my hardest to work this one out and struggling.
If the LDF ratification makes it a local issue what was the purpose of the PI?
Why didnt all parties wait to see the outcome of LDF before going to PI?
If the land had been designated as brown belt then Leeds would not have been able to have complained about encroachment on Greenbelt.
Hope someone can clarify things for me.
Not a criticism of anyone on our side by the way.
Am just absolutely frustrated and in no need of any medication to help with digestive transit.
Up the Trin.

I think the situation was that when the Planning Application was being formulated the LDF process was in its very early stages and it would have meant wating until now before submitting the application which even following LDF ratification would have taken months so we would not have had Outline Consent untile the end of this year or early next year.

Planning was submitted and whilst it was known that the site was Greenbelt it does not follow that there would automatically have to be a Public Inquiry. As it was a divergence foom the current UDP/LDF it would automatically be called in by Government Office but has there been no objections or the objectors could have been satisfied then Goverment Office could then have passed it back to Wakefield MDC and allowed them to determine the application.

As we know Leeds CC made a statutory objection which meant that a PI was inevitable.

I think the strategy was correct and I fully expect the application to be approved within the next few days after the LDF is formally ratified by Council tomorrow which is at least 6 months earlier than waiting for the LDF. It may be as early as Thursday or Friday or early next week.

Don't think there is anything to be concerned about and we'll just have to put the celebrations back a few days.