Can this be allowed for building on Green Barrier / Belt ?
-
Posts
-
@Sam 3258 wrote:
I have asked a councillor who supports the development about the dividend payday, he replied ” it was a business decision !” ( in no uncertain terms).
Eagles meadow, Wrexham village, cefn mawr tescos and Morrisons. Now that’s an interesting take on it. Hopefully our green barrier isn’t going to be added to the list of the above ‘questionable developments’.
to be honest that councillor deserves to be interviewed too. are you willing to name him?
The Councillor who stated “it was a business decision!” was Paul Rogers ( Brymbo & Tanyfron Ward).
He stated this openly at a public meeting, therefore, it’s in the public domain.He has submitted an article to Wrexham.com recently thanking for all the local support for this development.
@Sam 3260 wrote:
The Councillor who stated “it was a business decision!” was Paul Rogers ( Brymbo & Tanyfron Ward).
He stated this openly at a public meeting, therefore, it’s in the public domain.He has submitted an article to Wrexham.com recently thanking for all the local support for this development.
What a surprise he is on the planning committee… And he studied law!
I’ll phone him tomorrow and let him get me up to speed on the subject. :)
I thought it would be useful to clarify a few points.
Firstly can I point out that as a member of the Planning Committee I have not publicly supported these two applications and abstained when they were discussed by Brymbo Community Council.
In relation to the suggestion I have thanked those who have supported the application the Wrexham.Com article actually states ‘I would like to thank those who have taken time to comment upon these two applications’. These applications are very important in shaping the future of our community and I am therefore pleased to see both sides of the argument.
Anyone who would like to discuss their concerns or would like information about the overall development can contact me directly by email at [email protected]
@cllrpaulrogers 3271 wrote:
I thought it would be useful to clarify a few points.
Firstly can I point out that as a member of the Planning Committee I have not publicly supported these two applications and abstained when they were discussed by Brymbo Community Council.
In relation to the suggestion I have thanked those who have supported the application the Wrexham.Com article actually states ‘I would like to thank those who have taken time to comment upon these two applications’. These applications are very important in shaping the future of our community and I am therefore pleased to see both sides of the argument.
Anyone who would like to discuss their concerns or would like information about the overall development can contact me directly by email at [email protected]
You dodged the comment about the company dividend and have avoided giving any opinion.
Would it be okay to do an phone interview with you and put it on youtube?
@cllrpaulrogers 3271 wrote:
I thought it would be useful to clarify a few points.
Firstly can I point out that as a member of the Planning Committee I have not publicly supported these two applications and abstained when they were discussed by Brymbo Community Council.
In relation to the suggestion I have thanked those who have supported the application the Wrexham.Com article actually states ‘I would like to thank those who have taken time to comment upon these two applications’. These applications are very important in shaping the future of our community and I am therefore pleased to see both sides of the argument.
Anyone who would like to discuss their concerns or would like information about the overall development can contact me directly by email at [email protected]
Firstly, thank you for your reply.
I would like to add that, whilst I cannot assume your support for the development, the tone of of your comments seem to constitute support.
I am in total agreement with you on the future shaping of our community. Tanyfron is poised to lose its identity with the over development locally, possibly losing our only large recreation greenfield & all whilst our Local Infrastructure is straining as we speak.
Could you clarify why the 5-6 sites within the development have not been revisited with the same interest as the green barrier field in question?
Could you also clarify what assurances can be given to the community that the spine road and the infrastructure is every built with all the back tracking the BDL is now almost famous for ?
Why were the 4 new documents recently submitted to bolster the proposal after the objection deadline so no one could object to numerous additional points raised within them ?
It is not uncommon for developer’s to provide more information to the Council prior to a decision to be made. Officers may have requested additional information to help ensure their report to the Planning Committee is robust.
It is upto the developer to comment on why they feel the site is most appropriate as an enabling development. Each site has to be considered on its own merit. As it is an enabling development a legal mechanism would have to be agreed to deliver the infrastructure being promised.
On the issue of the dividend I would rather comment once I have seen accounts over a longer period rather than just a snapshot of a period of time.
@cllrpaulrogers 3274 wrote:
It is not uncommon for developer’s to provide more information to the Council prior to a decision to be made. Officers may have requested additional information to help ensure their report to the Planning Committee is robust.
It is upto the developer to comment on why they feel the site is most appropriate as an enabling development. Each site has to be considered on its own merit. As it is an enabling development a legal mechanism would have to be agreed to deliver the infrastructure being promised.
On the issue of the dividend I would rather comment once I have seen accounts over a longer period rather than just a snapshot of a period of time.
you’ve dodged the question about a phone interview. why did you dodge it?
re: accounts
are you telling me that you have not investigated the accounts already?
As all financial accounts of the company from 1996 to the 31st march 2011 have all been publically availably via comapnies house before you came to office in May 2012.And the last accounts of year ending 31st march 2012 have been publically available since mid december, did you know this?
Are you not up to date with accounts of this company that influences your ward greatly?
Shouldn’t you have investigated this before you started the election or don’t you do any research?
What has changed to make you not answer about the dividend when you have answered the question before in public?
And above all why do you keep on dodging issues, you are suppose to be serving your ward who gave you the honour to represent them?
you also dodged the following questions as well…
Could you clarify why the 5-6 sites within the development have not been revisited with the same interest as the green barrier field in question?
Could you also clarify what assurances can be given to the community that the spine road and the infrastructure is every built with all the back tracking the BDL is now almost famous for ?
The context in which I made a comment on the dividend referring to it as a “business decision” is that a past dividend issued by a company is not a material consideration when determining planning applications.
Whilst I might not be familiar with the minute details of the accounts of Brymbo Developments Ltd having been brought up in the community and represented the ward since 2008, I well aware of past and present investments in the community.
As a member of the Planning Committee I feel it would be inappropriate to hold a telephone interview. Not quite sure what there is to dodge?
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
