Looks impressive, but is it yet another false dawn for us Cas fans

[Dallas Mead]

Can’t even be bothered reading this, seriously, show me some pictures when there are diggers there.

[Tommygilf]

4 hours ago, AB Knight said:

That is what they are proposing. A seated main stand, 3 standing sides. From the pictures the currently open railway end will have a roof and the other 2 terraced stands would have new roofs.

I don't think so. From those photos both sides are seated

[Les Tonks Sidestep]

4 hours ago, Fevrover said:

They aren't staying at W Rd ?

Didn't mean to quote that post of yours . Meant to do the one re minimum standards

[voteronniegibbs]

.

[JohnM]

If redeveloping Wheldon Rd is the most realistic, fundable and achievable outcome, then go with it. No more pipe-dreams, unrealistic ambitions. Just focus on the redevelopment. At least we'll all know how to get to the ground.

[corvusxiii]

54 minutes ago, voteronniegibbs said:

The princess Street toilets are grade 2 listed, so we can keep them as well

King Harold dropped off there on the way to Stamford Bridge. A National Treasure! 

[doc]

Good luck to Cas and Wakey.

I myself will miss the artists impressions.

[voteronniegibbs]

.

[voteronniegibbs]

.

[AB Knight]

4 hours ago, Tommygilf said:

I don't think so. From those photos both sides are seated

Again not the clearest of renders but if you look at ‘pitchside view 1’ and ‘pitchside view 2’ they both show the main stand as it’s intended to be. The terraced stand behind the sticks with the corporate boxes at the back is the railway end with a roof on. 
 

Now if you zoom in on ‘Wheldon Road - View 1) to what is the princess street stand (opposite the main stand), just under the roof you can see the princess street stand is still terracing.

[Les Tonks Sidestep]

8 hours ago, Fevrover said:

I thought SL grounds had to have at least 3000 seats ? Or as it changed?

2016 Facility Standards which I believe are still applicable

https://secure.rugby-league.com/ign_docs/FACILITYSTANDARDS2016 final PDF.pdf

[The storm]

If we landed on the moon in 1969 we can surely upgrade two rugby league grounds 

[fevtom]

Looks decent. Three neat standing sides and one main stand is the ideal for WR in my opinion. It’s a shame that the one seated stand can’t be something more unique but given the budget that’s understandable.

Any indication what this would do to the capacity?

[Fevrover]

6 hours ago, Les Tonks Sidestep said:

2016 Facility Standards which I believe are still applicable

https://secure.rugby-league.com/ign_docs/FACILITYSTANDARDS2016 final PDF.pdf

They aren't going to build a stand for 3000 are they with 3 standing sides ?

[gingerjon]

16 hours ago, Damien said:

Minimum requirements are long gone.

They're not but they are much lighter and not as rigidly enforced. They do still exist in the competition's rules.

[gingerjon]

7 hours ago, Les Tonks Sidestep said:

2016 Facility Standards which I believe are still applicable

https://secure.rugby-league.com/ign_docs/FACILITYSTANDARDS2016 final PDF.pdf

Grounds must have a capacity of 5,000 with a minimum of 2,000 permanent seats.

Not exactly onerous, is it?

[Archie Gordon]

I'm a fan of the asymmetrical, quirky and original re. stadiums. I love the suburban and country grounds in Australia. I hope the Western Terrace remains at Headingley.

Does this Wheldon Road revamp take away some of the place's spirit? 

But a revamp is the right thing to do and great for Cas.

[Damien]

2 hours ago, gingerjon said:

They're not but they are much lighter and not as rigidly enforced. They do still exist in the competition's rules.

If they are not enforced then they may as well not exist.

[gingerjon]

1 hour ago, Damien said:

If they are not enforced then they may as well not exist.

I don't disagree but, technically, they are still there.

Meanwhile, it's that time of year in football where clubs are told that they will - and they will be - relegated to the appropriate level if they don't right now address the reasons why their grounds failed the grading inspection.

[Damien]

17 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

I don't disagree but, technically, they are still there.

Meanwhile, it's that time of year in football where clubs are told that they will - and they will be - relegated to the appropriate level if they don't right now address the reasons why their grounds failed the grading inspection.

That's the thing, rightly or wrongly Football have rules in place and enforce them. RL simply pick and choose and have gone backwards when it comes to enforcing any kind of minimum standards when it comes to its elite competition. If you aren't going to enforce it then just give up the pretence. 

[Wollo Wollo Wayoo]

On 15/04/2022 at 23:25, The storm said:

If we landed on the moon in 1969 we can surely upgrade two rugby league grounds 

Apollo project cost about $26 billion.  Only Fev can get anywhere near that within the Wakefield MDC area.

[Loiner]

The drawings are lovely better than the ones you usually get on the back of a fag packet.

[GUBRATS]

Always said that staying put is better than moving out of town , and yes a single decent seated stand with covered terracing ( preferably steeper than current ) is all they need 

[Tex Evans Thigh]

On 15/04/2022 at 08:28, Damien said:

Why? I think its a great deal and much more preferable for both clubs than some out of town nondescript development.

I think they both wanted and expected to get new stadiums. Neither would have accepted this compromise at that time.

[Fevrover]

On 17/04/2022 at 09:08, Wollo Wollo Wayoo said:

Apollo project cost about $26 billion.  Only Fev can get anywhere near that within the Wakefield MDC area.

$/£26 wouldn't be half enough to bring Belle Vue up speed lol.