EXCELLENT POST.

I'd hazard a guess that if Yorkcourt lost a court case they would just walk away and not build anything if it was going to severly impact their profits. We can't actually put a gun to their head and force them to build anything so as such we still wouldn't get the stadium if they are prepared to sit on the land for a few years or just build up to then trigger and not go beyond it. Whether we like it or not they seem to be holding all the cards on this one and it stinks something rotten.

Out of interest would the plan for Cas' new stadium give a possible get out clause for a future renewal on Belle Vue? Given the relatively close proximity of the Newmarket and the five towns developments (just over 6 miles and 11 minutes according to rac route planner, although it is the m62!) could theoretically the direct link involving condition 38 and the NM development be amended to say any new stadia in the district?

Yes, in my opinion it could. All it would need is an application from Belle Vue's owners to amend the condition and if sucessful then BV could be sold and developed and we'd have to look at playing elsewhere with the Stadium at Glasshoughton being put forward as the alternative and the reason for the conition being amended.

The problem is that the new stadium proposed for Glasshoughton is in my opinion not a Community Stadium as it will be owned freehold by Castleford Tigers and as such we would need their permission to play there and have to pay them rent. That would not work in my opinion and I feel the Club would wither and die.

"That’s why everyone needs to get round the table again to hammer out a way forward. We need a renewed effort to get the stadium back on track.

With my Labour colleagues Mary Creagh and Jon Trickett, I will continue to work with the community stadium trust, fans and the Council to secure the future of the club and the new stadium."

But Box made it quite clear in his condescending interview with SandalCat on Radio Leeds that "it is nothing to do with Wakefield MDC". I suspect he knows full well that the planning committee cocked up when they approved the new 106 agreement, and is now trying to keep his head down and avoid the justified flack that is coming their way !!!!
Do we think the same situation will be allowed to occur across the Common when their 106 is submitted for approval ?????? ....I think we all know the answer to that one.

rlMary Creagh Blogrl

All fair game IMO.

We do have a tentative offer based on £x per m2 developed. But it neither has an overall value, a timescale or includes any benefit from NC. The nett result is that it would be a long way short of a stadium and may never be reached anyway!

We are fighting for our lives here, but if it comes to us getting nothing, then I will do my upmost to make it difficult for others to make the money they think from this site.

A deal is a deal in my book, you break the deal and you should suffer the consequences!

I could handle that. What I can't stomach is them developing the whole area but not delivering the community facilities.

Trb thanks for your courage

Yes thanks TRB. The whole thing is particularly galling for local supporters who can see this monstrosity growing bigger every day. Come to think of it it's now so big you can see it for miles.

Standard response from the Council. We share your frustration but its nothing to do with us.

As TRB has said we will fight and if we get nothing it will not be for the lack of trying. I'd much rather "die like a lion" than "live like a lamb".

The people of Wakefield are being let down and we will not just meekly let this happen.

The council response is disgraceful in that they aided and abetted the circumnavigation of the S106.
If they had really had the interests of the community of Wakefield and its historic professional rugby league club uppermost in their minds they could have halted the whole procedure.
They could surely have seen that the 'Newcold' monstrosity was not within the 'spirit ' of the agreement .
They are trying to talk down to us as if we are little children and they know best!

My concern it that it states the Trust Chair was aware of the proceedings & didn't object.


"I can confirm that there was no Section 106 Agreement to link this development with the funding of a community stadium as the size of development (22,300sqm) is below the 60,000sqm threshold for contributing toward the stadium that was set out in the original outline application issued by the Secretary of State. A meeting with the Trust Chair, myself and Andy Wallhead was held at that time and it was discussed that there would be no linkage with the Newcold development. I can also confirm that no objections to the planning application were subsequently received from the Trust or its members."

The chair of the Trust is Sir Rodney Walker and I believe he has stated that he has no recollection of being informed that Newcold would not contribute to the S106. Other members of the Trust at the time were Andrew Glover and James Elston. I believe that James also was not informed that Newcold would not contribute so would not object.

IA stated at last weeks meeting that he cannot find any reference to the fact that Newcold would not contribute to the S106 in all the papers on the Councils Planning Portal until it appeared in the Agenda pack which was a week before the planning meeting and outside the period for objections.

So every developement at newmarket will be under 60000sqm and a involve a seperate approval every time so the building of a stadium point will never be triggered.