Tuesday, 2 December 2014

New Stadium Plans are a Legal Minefield

Following the helpful explanation by developers Henry Boot Developments of their plans for 'enabling development' to build a Stadium for Cornwall, I have had the opportunity to read the various documents to which they have referred me. This is a legal minefield.

Some questions that arise:

1.  It must be highly questionable as to whether this is enabling development so that the provision of money for the Stadium can properly be taken into account. The QC representing the developer in this case took the other side of the argument in the Supreme Court recently on behalf of Sainsburys and won. The connection between the two sites looks a bit contrived.  So, the Council will need to be sure of their legal ground here.

2. If the Planning Committee are allowed to take account of the contribution to the Stadium then they will want to be assured that this Development is viable. This will be difficult to judge without any tenant signed up for the supermarket. If  the site at West Langarth ends up getting developed for something other than a supermarket, this whole deal would fall away.

3. The Memorandum of Understanding signed today is good PR but is not legally binding as it states any party can pull out.

4. We better not end up swapping the Stadium site, to which the Council is now entitled, for the prospect of open space at West Langarth and ending up with nothing. So, if the Committee goes down this route, all the legal paperwork will need to be in good order!

1 comment:

  1. I posted a comment to this post that - after over 27 hours of 'moderation' - hasn't yet been published. I have re-sent this as it's replacement.

    Given that A supermarket will be constructed in this area, regardless of the Strategic Planning Committee's final decision.

    Why has Inox's application been singled out - again - for such scrutiny?

    There are 4 applications involving supermarkets in the mix - the others being proposed by Walker, LXD & Hendra - are these so squeaky clean as to be exempt from any form of comment nor call for investigation?

    I - and I suspect many others doubt it?

    Further - there are only 2 (known) supermarkets expressing interest which by default means that 2 of these applications will not have a supermarket "signed up". Will not the other 2 only be "signed up" subject to permissions being granted anyway?

    Due diligence is commendable but this must be applied equally - your latest blog on this matter once again flies in the face of such a notion.

    The Inox application offers an Enablement for the Stadium for Cornwall to at last be built and funded solely with private money - something on your (& others) instigation nearly 3 years ago - was a must.

    This plan therefore is the only plan that gives anything back to the community by a mile - Cornish, country or otherwise.

    The Duchy needs this Stadium built - fact. There are objectors - as you would reasonably expect in a democracy - but on EVERY occasion public opinion has been tested, this Need is supported overwhelmingly.

    This show of support has to be adhered to if the very principle of democracy is to be upheld - or are we to suspect an even more sinister minefield is there to be uncovered?