September 21, 2019 at 11:51 am #174376
Matt. They have gone back up I believe.
MikeSeptember 21, 2019 at 3:30 pm #174377
What is the problem? , they are entitled to protect their property. Don’t agree with it.September 21, 2019 at 3:45 pm #174378
Parkingmad, yes I agree they have a right to protect their property but they pulled down the posters off some property they don’t own such as the residents Fence and also off the council owned gates and fences at the site..October 4, 2019 at 2:43 pm #175061
It was nice to be name-checked by the Vice-Chancellor in her Q&A session published here today. Unfortunately she doesn’t seem to be aware of my involvement and communications with the University.
Originally I was not invited to the University’s presentation outlining their planning applications. When it was pointed out that I and (and another councillor representing a different ward) should have been invited as a courtesy. A second presentation was made for us at a later date.
We attended and were shown details specifically concerning planning applications in our two wards.
I noticed a serious inaccuracy in the Dean Road presentation. The application stated that the field on Dean Road was a Brownfield site. I pointed out that this was not accurate, and the claim had already been disproved by the Council in 2011 following an earlier application to get the field accepted for the LDP. The earlier application had been thrown out by the Council for a number of reasons, saying the land was not suitable and appropriate for development.
Unfortunately, this “inaccuracy” regarding Brownfield Site, was not removed from the presentation which continued to be circulated, despite me contacting the University on a few occasions.
It was only when I brought up the matter with local media, that Glyndwr were quizzed over this claim. They then replied that it was “a mistake”. Bearing in mind the amount of research involved and the money spent on plans etc. I fail to see how all the experts involved could make such a basic mistake.
There are so many other details in the Q&A session that I will be responding to. Meanwhile, I just wanted to take this opportunity to reply to the remark naming me.
Mike DaviesOctober 4, 2019 at 9:04 pm #175082
It should be pointed out that Glyndwr is a Charity and therefore subject to additional regulations about the disposal of land. There are a number of issues in the case of land disposal that are covered in the Charity Commission document below.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/sales-leases-transfers-or-mortgages-what-trustees-need-to-know-about-disposing-of-charity-land-cc28/sales-leases-transfers-or-mortgages-what-trustees-need-to-know-about-disposing-of-charity-landOctober 5, 2019 at 2:25 pm #175086
It looks like glyndwr have to seek approval from the Charity Commission in respect to the sale of the land- I wonder if this has been done and whether the Vice Chancellor will share any letters.October 5, 2019 at 3:43 pm #175088
Some very good points raised on here & in the interests of a fair & transparent University I hope they can shed light on the discrepancies identified & also their compliance with the Charity Commission for land disposal.October 6, 2019 at 12:35 am #175100
The maintenance’ bill totalled £3,400 a year, which also saw the council owned land being maintained. That work is now being stopped although there will be some minor work to stop it becoming ‘a jungle’.
The fences cost £6276 as a one off cost…
It really costs them £3.4k a year to maintain a bit of grass really? I’d like to bloody see the books on that one.
Slow clap for the £6k spent to stop some kids from playing on a field they’ve known their whole lives when the decision isn’t going to be made for 6 months. What are they going to do vandalise the grass?
I’m not being funny but if they build houses in there the whole area is going to be dug up anyway and the So called green spaces probably returfed.
Is some developer going to so say sorry we won’t buy the plot because some beggar has been digging up clods – absolutely ruined!
Glyndwr is really turning out to be a bad egg. They couldn’t have chose someone more condescending and dismissive to locals if they tried on the Wrexham.com article. They want locals to attend this inshitute but they’ll alienate loads of them and accuse them of being Nimby’s. Profiteering at its finest – you can always tell you are hurting someone in the wallet when they come out that negative. Either that or quite frankly they have nobody media trained there.October 6, 2019 at 8:01 pm #175110
Glyndwr promote themselves as for the community…but in reality they’re only in it for profit…here’s my point. Firstly.
They own the freehold on Colliers park which I believe was part of the deal to acquire Wrexham FC… now on lease to FAW as a training academy.. Who paid for the revamp.?
FAW or Glyndwr.? Either way glyndwr are making a profit as the value of the land has increased vastly + income from the lease.
Secondly. They take away the access to a field that is used by local residents for recreation and sport and have done so for over 50 years which was gifted to them for educational purposes.. now trying to sell at a profit to developers on land that was thrown out in 2011 by the council for development under the LDP..
Now they’ve taken away access for another youth team to use their facility in Northop (please see report in the Leader.. link added)
This is not working for the community it’s working to build a big bank account..
Complaint? Please use the report post tools or contact Wrexham.com .
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.