Rugby Club progress...

The truth the whole truth

The truth the whole truth

Well-Known Forumite
image.png


Found it for you Mark here it is now where's that envelope !
 
captainpish

captainpish

Well-Known Forumite
It seems like theres a benefit for both the rugby club and other parties and its being pushed forward mainly for those other parties. Maybe a new housing estate will be easier to push through with a development and bypass already in the vicinity.
 
G

Gareth

Well-Known Forumite
Not sure of the problem with that. A Land owner and agent offering land for sale just off a already outlined trajectory route ( martin drive). What's shady about that.

I wad once offered land off my farm to Derbyshire Council for their county farms, i wanted them to buy it as i am not a charity. they didn't but it but a housing developer did. Nowt illegal about that.
 
tek-monkey

tek-monkey

wanna see my snake?
Gareth said:
Not sure of the problem with that. A Land owner and agent offering land for sale just off a already outlined trajectory route ( martin drive). What's shady about that.

I wad once offered land off my farm to Derbyshire Council for their county farms, i wanted them to buy it as i am not a charity. they didn't but it but a housing developer did. Nowt illegal about that.
Click to expand...

I thinks its more that 18 months ago SBC declared that they wanted that land for houses (preferred allocation), and so from that it could be inferred that the marshes application will get a smoother ride due to mutual benefits, rather than on its own merits. Nobody would give a monkeys if the land became houses but the rugby club went elsewhere, beaconside for example, its more the dodginess of the current application and the planners attached.
 
Withnail

Withnail

Well-Known Forumite
The truth the whole truth said:
They have 40 years left on the current lease !
Click to expand...
I remember this being alluded to on the previous thread - is this correct? If so, does it affect Lord Kerching's 'aspirations for the site', or is he able to turf them out? It is rather an important piece of the puzzle.

If you look at the Masterplan, you'll see that the current pitches are all but built on already. It goes so far as to say -
An early application is also anticipated on the Rugby Club land in order to facilitate the relocation of Stafford Rugby Club. It is expected that the first new homes will start to be delivered from 2015 onwards
Click to expand...
- and when you bear in mind that this is a strategic plan that has targets to be met by 2031, 40 years is a tad too long.

Seems to me that both parties are in a bit of a pickle - Kerching wants his money now, SBC want to fulfil their local planning obligations.

So...

Kerching has this good-for-nothing 'Baron's Pasture' plot that he knows he hasn't a snowball's of getting permission to build houses on, but just might be able to offload as a Rugby Club - i mean plastic pitches are coloured green, aren't they? that's still 'green infrastructure', isn't it? - and a local council keen for him to get on with delivering the houses in their 'Masterplan'. Slight snag with it bordering a SSSI, and also included in the same plan as actual green infrastructure as flood mitigation, but luckily one of the parties-in-this-pickle is actually the body that will decide whether the application is approved or not.

And they all lived happily ever after.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top