So, can anyone post a link to the Wakefield express article informing people of the new proposed development at NM?

Just had written confirmation from Wakefield Planning that the final date for public consultation is 29th September so a bit more time yet.

Currently 378 objections, keep them coming.

I had a peek in today's Express in Asda with the intention of buying a copy IF there was any coverage. There was quiet a bit about last week's game and ladies rugby but I couldn't see anything related to the planning permission.



I will go back and buy a copy if anyone can confirm

Are you surprised? I'm not!

I hope you washed your hands after

The objection from the Trust has gone in - it ends with giving notice that if the build is approved, a judicial review will be sought!

Investigative journalism in the Wakey Express ? Naah. However if you need to know when the next Bring and Buy sale is on at your local village hall then its the local rag for you.

The Wakefield & District Community Trust has today lodged it's formal objection to the Kitwave planning application submitted by Henry Boot Developments & Yorkcourt at Newmarket - the full text of the objections follows.

I refer to the recently validated planning application (18/01169/FUL) for the erection of a warehouse unit at Newmarket Lane, Stanley and feel that under the current circumstances that I must strongly object for and on behalf of the Wakefield & District Community Trust.

Yorkcourt Properties Limited were granted outline consent (10/00225/OUT) on land adjacent to Newmarket Lane, Wakefield on 5th December 2012 following a Public Inquiry. The permission was for a mixed use development comprising a community stadium (with details of the access, landscaping, layout and scale of the stadium submitted for approval), multiuse games area, B8 warehousing and distribution units, B1b and B1c business units, an hotel, an A3 unit, roads, infrastructure and landscaping.

The Community Stadium was clearly an integral part of the consent and the consent was conditional that no more than 60,000m2 of the B8 development should be occupied unless and until the stadium is completed to its design capacity of 12,000 so as to be capable of staging a Rugby Super League match attended by the public and the stadium and its ancillary elements have received all necessary safety and other certificates to allow it to be used for that purpose.

The Secretary of State, before granting the consent required to see a signed Section 106 Agreement that ensured the delivery of the Community Stadium. He said that he would prefer a Multi-Party Agreement but would be prepared to accept a Unilateral Undertaking. Councillor Peter Box has gone on public record as saying that he and Wakefield MDC wanted a Multi-Party Agreement but the Secretary of State accepted a Unilateral Undertaking. We are at a loss to understand why the Council were prepared to accept a Unilateral Undertaking when both the Council and the Secretary of State both had a preference for a Multi-Party Agreement.

The Unilateral Undertaking dated 26th October 2012 was given by Yorkcourt (200icon_cool.gif Limited to Wakefield Metropolitan District Council and the document names the Wakefield & District Community Trust as the Trust whose purpose is to act all times as a facilitator to the delivery of the Stadium.

Councillor Box and Senior Council Officers have repeatedly said publicly that they are not party to the Unilateral Undertaking and that it is nothing to do with the Council and it's a matter between the Trust, Club and Yorkcourt. They have also repeated that it was their desire to have a Multi-Party Agreement and it was a failing on the part of the Secretary of State that such an agreement was not provided.

Despite the Council's view that this matter is nothing to do with them they are clearly wrong. They are party to the Unilateral Undertaking as it was given by Yorkcourt to Wakefield MDC. The W&DCT and the Club are not party to the Unilateral Undertaking so the Council cannot pass the responsibly for its delivery on to anyone else.

The Trust believe that the Unilateral Undertaking is weak and vague and in particularly has no end date by which the Stadium should be constructed. We agree with the Council that a Multi-Party Agreement involving all parties, including the W&DCT and the Club would have been a much more preferred vehicle to ensure the delivery of the Stadium.

Despite there been a buoyant market in the distribution sector evidenced by numerous developments in the Wakefield District most notably at Normanton and Knottingley, and Newmarket in our opinion being one of the best located sites in the North of England, there has been very little marketing of the site and consequently very little development other than the Newcold Cold Store which also causes us a great deal of concern.

The Newcold Cold Store is 43m high and therefore was outside the parameters of the Outline Consent and the application for its consent was a "stand alone" application rather than a reserved Matters Application. We understand this but what we have difficulty and serious concerns with is the fact that you specifically excluded the floor area of the building from the obligations laid down in the planning consent and the Unilateral Undertaking and the way in which you dealt with the application.
It was only when the application had been approved and the period for legal challenge had passed that we noticed that the Newcold building had specifically been excluded from the obligations of the Unilateral Undertaking. We are at a loss to understand why you excluded it and have investigated the background of the application.

We have looked on your Planning Portal and cannot see any reference to the Newcold Building being excluded from the obligations of the Unilateral Undertaking other than the Case Officers Report. As the Case Officers Report is issued to Planning Cabinet Members around a week before the Planning Meeting any objections would have been out of time. Also the reference to the application being "stand alone" and not contributing to the obligations of the Unilateral Undertaking was contained in a single line in the report and could have easily been missed by Members of the Planning Board - it should have been made far clearer to Members so they were clear what they were voting for and the consequences.

Even more disturbing is why you allowed it to be excluded. The Planning Inspectors Report was clear that disaggregation of planning applications on the site should not be allowed if the stadium was to be delivered as promised and you seem to have ignored this. We challenged you on this and you claimed that the decision was taken only after seeking Legal Advice.

Numerous Freedom of Information requests to you to see the Legal Advice you had obtained have failed to reveal anything other than your claims of "not holding" the advice and we understand that you have now confirmed that it was internal verbal advice but are not prepared to give us the information regarding who provided the advice and their professional background and expertise. On a matter of such importance of this we are amazed that advice was not obtained from Counsel or a Specialist Planning Lawyer and we believe that you may have acted outside your authority in not doing this.

Another matter of concern was that the decision to exclude Newcold apparently was discussed and agreed between Joanne Roney and Andrew Wallhead of the Council and Sir Rodney Walker, the then Chair of the W&DCT rather that the full Trust Board. Sir Rodney kept the matter to himself and failed to disclose it to any Trust members and even denied to the Trust Board any knowledge of the Newcold exclusion which further raises our concerns. However that is not a matter for the Council but something the Trust may have to take further with Sir Rodney.

Nothing has happened on the Newmarket site other than Newcold since Outline Consent was granted on 5th December 2012 despite development taking place on other sites in the Wakefield District. The consent would have expired last year but for a Reserved Matters Application being submitted on 1st December 2017 which was also validated the same day. However 9 months on the application is yet to be determined.

We now have the current application (18/01169/FUL) for the erection of a warehouse unit for Kitwave. We note that this is a full application and not part of the Reserved Matters application so must be outside the Outline Consent and therefore is a new application in accordance with the Local Development Framework.

This new application is the perfect opportunity for the Council to fulfil its obligations as Local Planning Authority and ensure that what Yorkcourt promised HM Planning Inspector at the Public Inquiry and the Secretary of State is finally delivered and that they are not allowed to renege on their obligations.

We therefore object to the granting of planning consent for this application on the grounds that we believe the previous consent granted by the Council to Newcold was at best flawed and at worst outside the power of the Council and that the possible errors made in granting Newcold consent could be repeated again with granting consent to this application.

We would be prepared to remove our objection if approval of the application is conditional upon Yorkcourt (200icon_cool.gif Limited entering into a new Multi-Party Agreement or similar Legally Binding Agreement involving the Council, the Club and the Trust that will ensure the delivery of the Community Stadium to the Wakefield & District Community Trust at Newmarket or some other approved site and on the same terms outlined in the Outline Consent and by a defined date.

Should the Council approve the application without taking notice of this objection then we give notice that we will seek a Legal Challenge to the decision and seek a Judicial Review of the whole planning process at Newmarket.

For and on behalf of the Wakefield & District Community Trust Ltd.

Yours Sincerely,

Jonathan Stone - Chairman
Wakefield & District Community Trust Ltd.

Excellent post IA. Rather than having to view the history of this whole sorry saga in piece meal fashion you have presented the story in it's entirety in a way that can be fully understood by all. The fact that a Legal Challenge shall be put into action should the approval be granted will hopefully provide shock waves amongst the "guilty parties" involved. I personally thank you and The Trust for all the hard work, energy and time that and your colleagues have put into
action during the past years on behalf of Wakefield Trinity fans and the wider community.
Good Luck!!!!

Agreed excerlent post. Could not a copy if that be sent to the wakey express or is it a waste if time to do that?

I would be surprised if they printed it. Don't seem overly interested in their only professional sports team in the city.

How about Rugby League Express and The Rugby Leaguer even. Yorkshire Post or Evening Post??

Any and every media outlet in the country would do.
It's a pity that, so far, only Jeremy Cross is the only journalist to show the slightest bit of interest in Wakefield's plight.

I know that the broadsheets aren't bothered about rugby league but, they may be concerned with the politics of the situation ?

Yeah, an excellent objection letter posted there IA & a great summary of the events for all to see.

Cheers for all the work you continue to crack on with.

Very detailed and understandable objection IA . I sincerely hope it has the desired effect!

Just so you all know - Sandal Cat drafted that submission.

After querying the date for replies with the Planning Dept, we have now had confirmation that the date is 29th September.

Please keep em coming if you haven’t yet submitted!

Thank you

I've notified him of the objection, see if he gets back to me.

Heard today that a new underground reservoir consisting of giant tanks is earmarked for the Balne Lane site in order to prevent flooding when heavy rainfall
flows downhill from St Johns into the Balne Lane area flood plain. The source stated that there will be NO new rugby stadium there.

He did indeed draft it on behalf of the Trust. He did the first draft and then passed it to TRB and I to add to it, but in all honestly it was suberb as it was so we made very minor changes only.

It of course was always intended to come from me as Chairman and I am massivley grateful for this and all the Trustees and SWAG members efforts.

We are up to 400+ and after I double checked with the new planning officer for the scheme, Michael Eaglestone (what a great name!), who drew the shortest of straws in the planning department, we do have until almost the end of September to lodge objections, so keep them coming.

Also, great to see so many people writing their own objections.

Keep it up guys, you are all stars!

Just submitted mine having returned from holiday to see the latest attempt by the YC shysters to wriggle out of their obligation.

It's at well over 400 by now - and having been involved in quite a few contested planning apps, the usual process is to allow objectors to attend, but only certain spokespeople to present to the planning committee. In my experience however, if the committee is minded to approve, which it certainly will be having had their instructions from Mr Box, they will approve regardless of the weight of objections.

What we do have on our side is that the objections are material - they often aren't, being NIMBY based (house prices, view etc) - and with the potential for legal action, WMDC may well be on notice to handle this one with extreme care. Or maybe they'll take their usual attitude, and not give a shiny $hit what the optics are.

With an extended time scale and returning to the publicity side, could something be included in the match day programme?

The following letter has just been added to the planning portal:

Contact: Michael Eaglestone Our ref: 18/01169/FUL
Direct Dial: 01924 303396 Your ref: PP-06573548
Date: 6 September 2018

Yorkcourt (200icon_cool.gif Limited
c/o Mr Richard Bailey
Gateley PLC
Ship Canal House
98 King Street
Manchester
M2 4WU

Dear Sir,
REQUEST FOR COMMUNITY STADIUM CONTRIBUTION PROPOSAL: Erection of warehouse unit (Bicon_cool.gif with associated access, service yard, parking, drainage infrastructure and landscaping
LOCATION: Plot 7A Newmarket Lane Stanley Wakefield WF3 4BU

I refer to the above application. After initial consideration of the application I would formally request that as part of the planning application you commit to making a proportionate contribution
towards the development of a new Community Stadium. Such a contribution should be included in a legal agreement made between yourself and the Council under the provisions of Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended).

The need for a new Community Stadium and your commitment towards providing such a stadium was made as part of the negotiations associated with Outline planning permission ref. 10/00225/OUT granted in December 2012 by the Secretary of State following Call-In and Examination through Public Inquiry. The need for the new Community Stadium remains and there
has not been any formal revocation of your previous commitment to provide for the development of the new Community Stadium through profits yielded from the development of the Newmarket site.

As the site is now being developed piecemeal through separate full planning applications, rather than under the auspices of Outline planning permission ref. 10/00225/OUT, it is considered to be
fair and reasonable for each development which comes forward to contribute proportionately to a fund for the delivery of the new Community Stadium. Although full details can be decided in due course I would suggest that a reasonable amount to contribute towards the development of the new community Stadium as part of planning application ref. 18/01169/FUL would be likely to be within the range of £650,000 to £700,000. This is based upon the following formula/ assumptions:
Formula: C = (T / F) * S
Where:
C = The amount of the contribution
T = Total Floor Area of Profit Making Element of Development Approved under 10/00225/OUT (171,000m2)
F = Floor Area Proposed under application 18/01169/FUL (6,000m2)
S = Approximate Build costs for the Community Stadium Approved under 10/00225/OUT (C. £19,000,000)

The ultimate amount of the contribution may vary depending upon the accuracy of the above assumptions.

I would ask you to respond to this letter by 21 September 2018 confirming whether you agree to the requested Community Stadium Contribution and to providing for the legal costs which would
be associated with the making of the requisite legal agreement under section 106 of the Act to enshrine the contribution as part of any planning permission which ensues from planning application ref. 18/01169/FUL.

I look forward to hearing from you but if you require further clarification, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Yours sincerely,
Michael Eaglestone
Major Projects Officer

Whilst I totally respect the number of people who have bothered to object to the latest planning application, I just cannot see their protestations making a blind bit of difference to the outcome of the application.

No I’m not a planning expert, but I would have thought the application is a stand-alone matter & nothing to do with gross injustices that has been allowed to happen over the years.

Yes the developer has taken the club & it’s supporters for a ride, let’s be fair without the fifteen thousand signatures they probably wouldn’t have got the outline planning permission. But that’s what developers do!

It’s the Council I have the most contempt for, they are supposed to be policing the whole process yet they’ve just lets things go through without a care, & that’s because they don’t care! Not about Wakefield Trinity that is.

All they care about is more jobs being created in the area & more business rates in their coffers.

I believe (in a nutshell) the council have renegade on it’s promise to stump up any cash for the stadium, therefore the whole stadium project has gone belly-up.