Here is a clue for you squire



although tbh I should have checked first with someone who is held in such high esteem as you are on here, my apologies

No worries. No offence taken!

I wasn't going to enter this debate, but if I want to ask one serious question.

I have some sympathy with the people around the proposed development, and in that regard it is a question of weighing up the greater good. But if you are not from that immediate area, what exactly is your beef with the development, because it seems to be causing you some ire. If it is purely that you are a Cas fan and you are worried about where it puts our clubs in the race to build a stadium, then your objections have no credibility. If there are other more reasoned objections, what are they?

In some way I would be inclined to agree with you about the most controversial ones being more likely to be called in but then of course you are making the leap that many objectors are making, that this is controversial because they think it is! I still don't think it is that controversial in terms of planning applications but it does have the issue of being an application to build un-permitted development on currently green-belt land.

There are lots of things in favour of allowing this land to be developed as proposed. Firstly, the planning policy team at Wakefield have proposed in the LDF that the old pit site land be re-designated as a B8 employment zone. Contrary to popular conspiracy theories, I know that they were going to do this way before the current application was ever muted. I had a chat with one of the planning policy team just after the public consultation meeting in Stanley to discuss legal planning definitions of reclaimed land (I was double checking the current UDP status of the land) and she strongly indicated that this land had been under consideration for redetermination since the legal requirement came back from the 1st draft LDF review over a year previous requiring an additional 95 ha of B8 land within the M62 corridor. I think it is this thought process that triggered Wakefield MDC & Yorkcourt to look at this proposal and not the other way around. Also, given the huge NET gain in Wakefield in reclaimed recreational use land, mainly from similar old pit sites, the argument about green-space is weak, Wakefield does not lack recreational use green-space it has more than it has had for generations!

The number of actual household's who are objecting is reasonably small, they have just been very good at making it look bigger than it is. You always have the issue of NIMBY's and it is very, very difficult for the general public to get their heads around the planning system and planning law. So the law does not care about my view, my house price etc... no, sorry, that does not matter! But it should, why doesn't it, the law is an ass etc, etc. They don't understand that it is not a matter of their choice whether a development, any development gets planning permission, just because they live there doesn't mean things can't change just because they don't want them to. It is not their land, it is not their choice, but the law allows for the plans to be scrutinised by the public with the general intention of giving them input in the nature of the development and only in extreme cases should developments be turned down flat. They still think that the process is about Yes and No answers, and it isn't, and this is where objectors fail. I think there are quite a few things I would have pushed to change, minor things mind, if I was living on Newmarket Lane but as I said right at the beginning of this process, they will become blinded by just getting the thing turned down that they will miss opportunities.

When you look at the actual list of objections this theory of widespread objection breaks-down and that was sort of the reason I started this thread. The level of objection in Stanley, the ward the development is in is, well, very small! It has been a well designed and organised anti-campaign but I also know that probably 95% of the people that have objected have not even seen or looked at the original and even less the updated site plan proposed.

If I went door to door with the actual plan and asked people to look at it and let me have their opinion on the development I would have an overwhelming number of people who would say yes, they are happy with the development. They are of course don't get as passionate as the anti-brigade but it does break down this idea that because probably only 1 or 2% of the actual immediate population have written in makes this huge objection... it really isn't!

Of course we will see if they call it in, I don't think they are going to look a gift-horse in the mouth but it is possible, and we will just have to wait and see.

If you went door-to-door to everyone in the local area with a view of 'what it will look like from my house' I think there would be far more support from these people. The biggest fear these people have is of the unknown. The fact is the vast majority won't be able to see or even hear anything over the M62 background noise.

Two of the main protagonists (you know their addresses from their two websites WHOIS) are really interesting when it comes to this point. They live in a very large semi-detached house set in quite large grounds which is fully surrounded both within and outside of their boundary line, with large mature woodland, all of which is to be fully retained in the proposals. The can see nothing but full sized trees now, that will not change and their view will remain the same, large mature woodland! The new road will run around the back of their boundary with still a reasonable landscaped buffer. They are probably going to get a slightly increased and intermittent traffic noise to the rear of the property but not much, because they are very secluded by the trees. The old Newmarket Lane Road will be the access to the front of their properties and will become access only, serving around, I think, 8 properties. I really don't think they will see any difference on a day to day basis and also think the sort of island 'oasis' the developer is creating for them will make their houses more desirable in the long term because they will be so private!

Hey now that is funny!! So lets get it straight here shall we? if you are from the area then according to you lot you are either mental or a tree hugging nimby BUT (and this is the funny bit) if you are not from the area then its got nothing to do with you..........KIN Priceless

I don't live in Leeds I live in Wakefield as such I care about Wakefield as a city and it moving forward, as someone who has grown up and still lives in the newmarket area I am proud as punch that industry in several forms is coming to the area, the business opportunities are massive and the people of wakefield will do nothing but benefit

If LCC want to build hotels in Leeds then that's up to them, as a Wakefield resident LCC are not of concern to me

Can we not just ban this pond scum from our board.
He has no interest in positive discussion or RL; so why is he here?

Mods please ban him asap.

I second that emotion.

lol

Bren your too funny mate!

Why should being a resident of Wakefield and not wanting this assault on our green belt mean i am a disgrace to my home town or that i'm a loony, listen to yourself fella, you are so immersed in your one agenda which is saving your club from death row, that anybody else who doesn't want what you want is an extremist. Lets face it buddy, those 16,000 signatures are a joke and you know it, from what i have been told very few of those people even know that there is any other buildings going up other than a proposed Stadium they don't know that your proposed bit is just 10% of the whole proposed development, i would love to see how the question was posed to these people?

Probably went something like this:- Please can you sign the following petition which is in support of a Stadium being built at Newmarket in order to save the Wakefield Trinity Wildcats future in Super League and has a rugby league club.

As opposed to this: =#4000BFCould you possibly sign this petition in support of building 200 acres of industrial units on green belt land just next to the little sleepy village of Stanley so that Wakefield Trinity can use 10% of the land to build a new stadium so we can save our Super league status even though we have not got a pot to urinate in and will most probably go bankrupt within the next 6 months anyway and then there will be only 500 people going to watch us in the second division. BUT hey well worth destroying 200 acres of green belt land wouldn't you say?
Ummm, i wonder which i would sign?