Castleford developer sought to accelerate regeneration
A new public park is also being built next to the River Aire.Castleford has also been designated as a housing zone with a focus on residential development at key sites close to the river.A report to cabinet members said Castleford had "significant opportunities for economic growth and regeneration" and should take advantage of its "ideally placed" road, rail and bus connections to Leeds, Manchester, York and Wakefield.It added: "Castleford has the capacity to accommodate a significant student and office worker population, along with a substantial number of new homes."This growth will significantly boost footfall and create new opportunities for the town centre."With the right level of investment, the town can fulfil its potential and evolve into a vibrant, sustainable, and distinctive riverside market town, playing a key role in the economic future of both the district and the wider West Yorkshire region."
Earlier this year, the council launched a similar scheme in Wakefield by appointing Muse to help bring forward a range of regeneration scheme planned for the city.According to the Local Democracy Reporting Service (LDRS), council leader Denise Jeffery said: "Castleford has a strong identity, and its residents are incredibly proud of where they come from."Town centres have changed massively in recent years, and I'm determined to ensure we have a thriving and distinctive town centre residents deserve."Jack Hemingway, deputy leader of the council and portfolio holder for regeneration and economic growth, added: "Our strategic regeneration partner will enable us to realise the potential there is for sustained economic growth in Castleford."We want to get the right mix of retail, commercial, residential and leisure to get the town moving forwards and to give our residents what they need and want."Cabinet members will consider the report at a meeting on 22 July.
Listen to highlights from West Yorkshire on BBC Sounds, catch up with the latest episode of Look North.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
3 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Watch shares plummet as tariffs hurt Switzerland
Shares in Watches of Switzerland plunged after Donald Trump whacked a 39 per cent tariff on Swiss imports – hitting it with the toughest tariffs in Europe from August 7. The stock fell 6.8 per cent, or 23.8p, to 326.8p, deepening the gloom around the luxury industry. Shares in the group, which sells brands Rolex, Cartier and Audemars Piguet, and is advertised by actress Dakota Johnson (pictured), have plunged 23 per cent since Trump first announced tariffs on April 2. Analysts at Barclays said this could be a 'significant headwind' for the London-listed company as brands will be likely to raise prices. It had been opening US showrooms after being bitten by waning demand for watches and jewels, especially in the UK and Europe. Swiss luxury group Richemont also fell by 2.6 per cent.
The Sun
3 minutes ago
- The Sun
Donald Trump vows to unleash ‘every tool in our arsenal' in price row with British drug firms
DONALD Trump insists he will unleash 'every tool in our arsenal' if British drug companies don't cut their prices within 60 days. The US President waged war with a total of seventeen firms demanding 'binding commitments' to match the lower prices offered to developing countries. The move comes as the White House hit dozens of countries with a fresh slew of tariffs including punishing levies on neighbour Canada. Two UK drug firms, AstraZeneca and GSK, caught up in the pharma row saw their share price drop as Trump aims to lower prices for American citizens. The move could even have damaging consequences for the NHS whose leverage with suppliers due to its size could be reduced. Mr Trump has demanded the firms apply their 'most favoured nation' rates to Medicaid which is the health system for low-income Americans. He said: 'Make no mistake: a collaborative effort towards achieving global pricing parity would be the most effective path for companies, the government, and American patients. In a letter to the firms, he said: 'But if you refuse to step up we will deploy every tool in our arsenal to protect American families from continued abusive drug pricing practices. 'Americans are demanding lower drug prices, and they need them today.' Around £16 billion was wiped off shares in the sector across Europe as fears grow higher prices in the rest of the world will fund the US reductions. The move comes after Trump said back in May that he wanted drug prices in the US to be reduced by 80 per cent. Moment Trump 'throws shade' at Meghan and Harry during Starmer press conference But experts appeared wary that he has the authority to reduce prices and a previous effort in his first term failed in court. At the time, he said the tactics were 'subsidising socialism' abroad in paying for the same pills from the same factories, which led to spiralling prices at home. The warning came as Mr Trump signed an executive order applying a wave of tariffs to 68 countries and the European Union. Canada was hit with levies – up to 35 per cent from 25 per cent - due to its lack of co-operation in stopping flow of illegal drugs and fentanyl into America. Their PM Mark Carney said that his country was 'making historic investments in border security to arrest drag traffickers and end migrant smuggling'. Switzerland will also keep negotiating with the US after their tariff rate hit 39 per cent, which was far higher than they anticipated. 1
BBC News
3 minutes ago
- BBC News
Car finance payouts limited, but lenders aren't off the hook
There may well be a few sighs of relief from senior finance company and banking executives following the Supreme Court's ruling, but it is unlikely you will hear the champagne corks verdict does almost certainly reduce the potential compensation bill significantly. Lenders no longer face the prospect of having to pay £30bn to £40bn to aggrieved car buyers. The likelihood of the government stepping in also appears to have receded the industry is not off the hook. The Financial Conduct Authority may still open a redress scheme for cases where dealers had a financial incentive from lenders to ramp up interest rates on loans as much as possible. The Supreme Court's ruling also upheld one consumer claim, in which the commission payments were deemed unfair – and that could provide a template for others to follow. All of this means the compensation bill could still be in the Supreme Court's intervention has been eagerly awaited since October, when the Appeal Court issued a verdict in three test cases which could have triggered an avalanche of compensation each case, people who had bought cars on finance claimed they were partially unaware that the deal had involved a commission payment being made by the lender to the car dealer. They claimed that in law the commissions amounted to bribes, or secret Appeal Court judges agreed, essentially saying that commission payments made by a finance company to a dealer for arranging a car loan were illegal if the car buyer had not given his or her "informed consent".They also concluded that a car dealer had a "fiduciary duty" towards the car buyer when it came to arranging a car loan. In other words, the dealer should set his or her own interests aside, and act purely on the customer's meant that millions of car buyers could potentially claim compensation – if they could show that the dealer had not specified what commission payments they were receiving for lining up a finance deal. It was not enough for the details to be buried in small had feared that this would lead to an avalanche of claims against them – and that the same arguments could be used to challenge other kinds of consumer finance agreements as well, potentially increasing the compensation bill still the Supreme Court threw very cold water over those arguments. The President of the Court, Lord Reed, dismissed the idea that car dealers had a "single minded duty of loyalty" to their customers, and insisted they "plainly and properly" had personal interests in the finance agreements they were involved ruling clearly blocks off what could have been a very wide avenue for compensation claims. However, the court did side with one of the claimants. In the case of Marcus Johnson, a factory worker, it decided that the finance agreement was "unfair" under the terms of the Consumer Credit Act. This was because the size of the commission payment was very large, and because Mr Johnson had been misled about the relationship between the dealer and the lender. He was, they said, entitled to say this could open the doors for other cases in which the commission payments are seen to be is also a key question the Supreme Court ruling does not answer. This is what should happen in cases involving so-called Discretionary Commission Agreements (DCAs). These were finance deals in which the car dealer could set the interest rate of a loan, within a set scale. The higher the rate, the more commission they would be paid – and the customer would be unaware of the Financial Conduct Authority banned such deals in 2021. It is now considering whether to launch a redress scheme for consumers who were affected by them. If it goes ahead, millions of car buyers could still have a claim, though it is not clear how much compensation they would to Richard Barnwell, a financial services advisory partner at accountancy firm BDO, the bill could still be substantial."We believe there is still a potential for redress, for example, if discretionary commission arrangements are deemed to be an unfair relationship, redress could still be from to £5bn to £13bn or more," he analysts agree. According to Martin Lewis, who runs the MoneySavingExpert website, "the Supreme Court has certainly narrowed the number of people who will be able to reclaim car finance. I think you're probably talking the lower end of £10bn, as opposed to £40bn."That £10bn would still be a significant figure. But the finance industry appears to have avoided the potential free-for-all rush to claim compensation the earlier verdict had threatened to spark while the Treasury says it will "work with regulators and industry to understand the impact for both firms and consumers", the BBC understands that the likelihood of the government intervening with retrospective legislation to protect financial firms has now diminished law of bribery only applies to persons who owe a single-minded duty of loyalty and are therefore bound to have no personal interest in the matter that they are dealing the present case the car dealers plainly and properly have a personal interest in the dealings between the customers and the finance companies.
