Jump to content


Rugby League World - Grand Finals Issue

RUGBY LEAGUE WORLD - THE GRAND FINALS ISSUE - OUT 17 OCT OR DOWNLOAD IT NOW!
Try our Fantastic 4-Issue Bundle Offer:
For just £14, a saving of 10% on the regular cover price, you’ll get:

The Grand Finals Issue (out 17 Oct) – Grand Final drama from both hemispheres plus Four Nations preview
The Four Nations Issue (out 21 Nov) – Fantastic coverage of the Four Nations tournament down under
The Golden Boot Issue (out 19 Dec) – A look back at the 2014 season plus the big reveal of the winner of the Golden Boot
The 2015 Season Preview Issue (out 23 Jan) – How will your team perform in 2015? We preview every club.


League Express

Podcast

Photo
- - - - -

Wakefield get planning permission


  • Please log in to reply
66 replies to this topic

#41 MikeFletchersBarmyArmy

MikeFletchersBarmyArmy
  • Coach
  • 459 posts

Posted 07 December 2012 - 06:38 PM

Mate, Im not necessarily disagreeing with your general point but Belle Vue is much closer to Fev than Rothwell is.


Maybe a example too far. However as a Featherstone supporter, who would you say the people of Normanton would support?

With this stadium being built, they will have a super league team next door.

#42 JohnM

JohnM
  • Coach
  • 20,349 posts

Posted 07 December 2012 - 07:18 PM

The logic is you support your local RL team.


What if you move house? Do you have to change team?

What if local govt changes the council boundary?

#43 tonyXIII

tonyXIII
  • Coach
  • 5,000 posts

Posted 07 December 2012 - 07:19 PM

Facts are, the sight was Green Belt when Wakefield council gained it,but now its not green belt and its a coincidence it is going to be built on. The stadium is an excuse for the developer to be granted to build on it. Would he of been so keen to build on it, if it was the stadium only?.

If you are Wakefield trinity wildcats and are proud to be wakefield, then why do they wish to move to the very edge of Wakefield, (Once not part of Wakefield). They have the whole of Wakefield to move to, but seem to want to move as far from it as possible, closer to the other RL areas.


But haven't most of the recent builds been tied into commercial development? Halliwell Jones has a supermarket next door. Salford City Stadium is underpinned by the Port Salford development. I'm sure there are other examples.

Rethymno Rugby League Appreciation Society
Founder (and, so far, only) member.


#44 marklaspalmas

marklaspalmas
  • Coach
  • 11,528 posts

Posted 07 December 2012 - 07:20 PM

Maybe a example too far. However as a Featherstone supporter, who would you say the people of Normanton would support?

With this stadium being built, they will have a super league team next door.


Yeah we've always had Wakey & Cas on our doorstep, and for the best part of the last 20 years we've had to deal with them being in a higher league than us with more money to throw away on players. WE'll just get on with what we're doing.

As far as wakey are concerned, good luck to them. So many false dawns. Perhaps it's finally going to happen.

 

A Fev Blog

 

 

 

 


#45 Forever Trinity

Forever Trinity
  • Coach
  • 634 posts

Posted 07 December 2012 - 08:59 PM

A disgraceful decision by wakefield Council allowing this large site to be built on Green belt land, which in fact use to belong to Rothwell council in Leeds and then was passed over to Wakefield council when the borders were changed when the M62 was built.

However Wakefield council appear to not honour the green belt land passed onto them, granting this construction.

However one thing i do not get from Wakefield Trinity, is why do they wish to re locate their club as close as possible to Leeds and the other prefessional clubs in the region. Surely if they were to move to a new stadium, would it not be best that it actually was in Wakefield? Would not South Wakefield be the best place to re locate to where there are no other professional rugby league clubs in the vacinity?

With Wakefield practically moving to Leeds, should this now affect their super League license? I always thought Super League preferred not to have 2 clubs from the same place

Doesnt belong to Leeds now its in Wakefield
Its not green belt
You been hibernating for the last decade
Ut is in Wakefield
You got somewhere in mind
Leeds can play at newmarket in superior facilities if you are worried about their license and facilities, Oh and its still closer to cas and Fev than Headingley

Thanks for your concern but concentrate in your own District not ours




#46 OMEGA

OMEGA
  • Coach
  • 1,317 posts

Posted 07 December 2012 - 09:39 PM

Is this the same Leeds Council who suggested alternative sites in Wakefield that were 'proper' green belt areas as opposed to an old colliery site that has been downgraded to brown belt?

Is this the same Leeds Council who suggested alternative sites in Wakefield that almost completely eroded the green bellt barriers between Wakefield and the Towns and Villages surrounding them?

Is this the same Leeds Council who's record for building on green belt land is one of the worst in the country?

The net amount of Green Belt in the district will actualy increase as a result of other sites around Wakefield being redesignated and remediated. The fly tippers paradise that currently exists will undergo changes that creates habitat for a wide variety of wildlife.

Like it or not this development is in Wakefield and will have superb access via the M62
The landscaping around the whole site will actualy improve the view for the residents of Newmarket Lane and the development will put an end, once and for all, the threat of the site being turned over to travellers.

The surrounding roads will be massively improved and some particularly dangerous junctions will finally have proper management brought to them. There will be legal restrictions preventing vehicles from accessing roads that lead through Newmarket Lane or into Methley but then again why would they when there's a motorway junction 150yards away.

The City will acquire state of the art sports facilities that will be shared by Wakefield College amongst others and will allow education courses and qualifications that are currently impossible to undertake in Wakefield

Almost 450 temporary construction jobs and approaching 2,500 permanent jobs will be created.

Public Transport links to and from the area will be hugely improved, something which the residents of Bottomboat and Stanley etc have been crying out for.

I'm explaining all this to you but I really don't know why because your faux-protestations are pretty transparent and it's clear you have another agenda here, why not just be honest!




#47 WakefieldCityLoyal

WakefieldCityLoyal
  • Coach
  • 161 posts

Posted 07 December 2012 - 11:04 PM

Fantastic news for the City of Wakefield & Wakefield Trinity RLFC it's been a long time coming and lots of hard work by lots of people to get this far. An old Wakefield coal mine been developed into top class sports facilities & much needed jobs + a few decent pubs in Stanley for a pre match pint.
Trinity Forever


#48 Padge

Padge
  • Coach
  • 18,230 posts

Posted 07 December 2012 - 11:14 PM

But haven't most of the recent builds been tied into commercial development? Halliwell Jones has a supermarket next door. Salford City Stadium is underpinned by the Port Salford development. I'm sure there are other examples.

JJB was part of a bigger sports and retail development which had a lot of grant money as it was in a regional development area.

Leigh's ground is part of the erm Leigh Sports Village development which includes housing along with retail and a Wigan and Leigh College campus

Visit my photography site www.padge.smugmug.com
Radio 5 Live: Saturday 14 April 2007
Dave Whelan "In Wigan rugby will always be king"

 

This country's wealth was created by men in overalls, it was destroyed by men in suits.


#49 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,359 posts

Posted 07 December 2012 - 11:49 PM

If you are Wakefield trinity wildcats and are proud to be wakefield, then why do they wish to move to the very edge of Wakefield.


Because they can get a ground there of magnificent proportions and are on the motorway so they can attract fans from every "WF" postcode going.

It's a business so cobblers to "Wakefield" Glover will take them from Ossett, Stanley, Glasshoughton, Normanton, Dewsbury, Batley, Knottingley, Barnsley, Hunslet, Miggy, Castlefors, Ferry Fryston, Selby, Sheffield, Kippax. Sherburn, Rothwell, Thorpe, Ackworth, Ackton, Tingley, Woodkirk, Bentley, Rotherham (100 other places bored typing them).

If Wakefield people don't like it (actually they are likely to lurve it) they can re-start Wakefield RUFC and become rugby purists.

However this false entity that will be playing almost in Hunslet will no doubt provide plenty of "throw away" entertainment for anyone who wants to latch into them, let them cometh, let them drinketh the beer and throw up on the awful burgers, and have a great time, as long as Rugby League is a winner.....

#50 MikeFletchersBarmyArmy

MikeFletchersBarmyArmy
  • Coach
  • 459 posts

Posted 08 December 2012 - 01:38 AM

Answer to some questions

1, Planning Application for a commercial site - Only granted due to the pressure of a Stadium being built - without the stadium the whole industrial/commercial plan would of been rejected. A small price for the developer!
2, This will improve the roads?- With the increase of traffic to surroundinhg areas,don't see how this is an improvement
3, Jobs being created - Is this for the people of Wakefield to benefit from? With it being almost in another city, there is nothing to guaruntee the majority of jobs will go to the people of Wakefield.
4, Rugby League is a winner- Can't see how this is, it's decreasing the rugby league stronghold and condensing it to a smaller area. If it was a improvement to rugby league, then moving to a site on the M1 would of been the most beneficial to RL, as this is the motorway that links the North to the South.

#51 JohnM

JohnM
  • Coach
  • 20,349 posts

Posted 08 December 2012 - 07:47 AM

Rather than criticise the hard work of so many connected with this redevelopment (really do hope it becomes reality) maybe you should try to persuade your dual-code club to develop some decent facilities of their own,so improving the lot of the paying fans and the local residents whose lives are so blighted on those matchdays when big clubs fromm Lancs. come visiting.

#52 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 17,302 posts

Posted 08 December 2012 - 08:09 AM

Isn't RL all about expansion?


No, it is all about sport.

Wakefield have made what they think is the best decision for their club, why should they consider an "expansion" angle? Especially when we are talking about the difference of a handful of miles.

#53 Forever Trinity

Forever Trinity
  • Coach
  • 634 posts

Posted 08 December 2012 - 09:05 AM

Answer to some questions

1, Planning Application for a commercial site - Only granted due to the pressure of a Stadium being built - without the stadium the whole industrial/commercial plan would of been rejected. A small price for the developer!
2, This will improve the roads?- With the increase of traffic to surroundinhg areas,don't see how this is an improvement
3, Jobs being created - Is this for the people of Wakefield to benefit from? With it being almost in another city, there is nothing to guaruntee the majority of jobs will go to the people of Wakefield.
4, Rugby League is a winner- Can't see how this is, it's decreasing the rugby league stronghold and condensing it to a smaller area. If it was a improvement to rugby league, then moving to a site on the M1 would of been the most beneficial to RL, as this is the motorway that links the North to the South.



Are you for real or just a torn twisted and bitter Leeds resident, look after your own City we'll look after ours thanks, check the map Newmarket is in Wakefield District, there has to be a boundry somewhere.

We are sick and tired of Leeds telling us what and what not to do this is a revival for Wakefield and obviously you dont like it you dont have to come when its done, can you explain why Leeds is trying to sell the greenbelt at the otherside of the motorway oh I remember in order that jobs can be created for that East Leeds white elephant motorway junction.

In the economy as it is who objected to this development bringing in over 2000 jobs at the same time announcing Leeds Council would be losing 600, oh yes was it councillor Wakefield? where is his council ward?

#54 PREPOSTEROUS

PREPOSTEROUS
  • Coach
  • 669 posts

Posted 08 December 2012 - 11:09 AM

Council leader Keith Wakefield is the only reason why LCC objected. His ward is Methley. Tax payers money was wasted on his self preservation.

#55 OMEGA

OMEGA
  • Coach
  • 1,317 posts

Posted 08 December 2012 - 01:28 PM

Answer to some questions

1, Planning Application for a commercial site - Only granted due to the pressure of a Stadium being built - without the stadium the whole industrial/commercial plan would of been rejected. A small price for the developer!
2, This will improve the roads?- With the increase of traffic to surroundinhg areas,don't see how this is an improvement
3, Jobs being created - Is this for the people of Wakefield to benefit from? With it being almost in another city, there is nothing to guaruntee the majority of jobs will go to the people of Wakefield.
4, Rugby League is a winner- Can't see how this is, it's decreasing the rugby league stronghold and condensing it to a smaller area. If it was a improvement to rugby league, then moving to a site on the M1 would of been the most beneficial to RL, as this is the motorway that links the North to the South.


That is such an extremely poorly informed bunch of nonsense it's hard to know where to start but here goes:

1. Within the new LDF for Wakefield the Council are legally bound to provide a site suitable for 90 odd hectares of B8 warehousing, after much deliberation and legal considerations Newmarket was identified as THE ONLY suitable site. So you're wrong to suggest that without the sports facilities this wouldn't have been allowed. Has the inclusion of sports facilities helped this developer to navigate the process, has the path of resistance been softened by the developers willingness to put £Millions back into the districts education &sports facilities that foster healthy lifestyles, of course it has and the SoS report makes it clear that the sports facilities must be delivered hence the 106 agreement.

2. As explained, the surrounding roads will be hugely improved with one particular junction that is currently an accident lack spot being completely altered to make it safe.

3. Does it matter who gets the jobs? There will be up to 2,500 jobs created for someone, how could that be a bad thing?

4. You clearly have zero understanding of how modern day elite sport operates!

Anyway, back to your real agenda, what is it?

Edited by OMEGA, 08 December 2012 - 01:32 PM.


#56 Lobbygobbler

Lobbygobbler
  • Coach
  • 5,809 posts

Posted 08 December 2012 - 04:25 PM

Good luck Wakey! Good for RL this news

#57 getdownmonkeyman

getdownmonkeyman
  • Coach
  • 1,792 posts

Posted 08 December 2012 - 04:37 PM

What does the 106 actually say.

A 106 only usually kicks in when development starts not when permission is granted, usually isn't planning permission valid for 3 years, which means development could start in December 2015, then the 106 would kick in. It could easily be challenged with the planning ombudsman as unfair if having started in December 2015 they were expected to deliver in 3 weeks.

What does the 106 actually say.

A 106 only usually kicks in when development starts not when permission is granted, usually isn't planning permission valid for 3 years, which means development could start in December 2015, then the 106 would kick in. It could easily be challenged with the planning ombudsman as unfair if having started in December 2015 they were expected to deliver in 3 weeks.


Depends if the 106 agreement is a pre-commencement condition to be discharged.

#58 LeeF

LeeF
  • Coach
  • 820 posts

Posted 08 December 2012 - 07:38 PM

Facts are, the sight was Green Belt when Wakefield council gained it,but now its not green belt and its a coincidence it is going to be built on. The stadium is an excuse for the developer to be granted to build on it. Would he of been so keen to build on it, if it was the stadium only?.

If you are Wakefield trinity wildcats and are proud to be wakefield, then why do they wish to move to the very edge of Wakefield, (Once not part of Wakefield). They have the whole of Wakefield to move to, but seem to want to move as far from it as possible, closer to the other RL areas.


But that is where the new stadium is situated and it IS in Wakefield

#59 LeeF

LeeF
  • Coach
  • 820 posts

Posted 08 December 2012 - 07:41 PM

Depends if the 106 agreement is a pre-commencement condition to be discharged.


You need to have the full s106 agreement to fully understand when it kicks in. Until a few years ago they were sorted out at the end of a development, nowadays they usually become due when the first spade hits the ground

#60 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 17,302 posts

Posted 08 December 2012 - 09:22 PM

But that is where the new stadium is situated and it IS in Wakefield


Indeed. It is a bit odd to worry about whether the site has always been in Wakey or not. It is now.

Similarly Headingley probably hasn't always been part of Leeds (if you go back far enough) but it will have been when the stadium was built.