In all honesty, I hope they do walk away!

The plot is prime building land now and won't be short of interested parties, Peel Holdings have strong ties in Wakefield I think they'd jump at the chance and they've also got form for delivering stadia as part of their developments. Unlike YCP PH are cash rich and literally dwarf YCP in terms of their size.

As long as the S106 is re-established and the new developer comes into it knowing the all the facts then bring it on.

YCP don't deserve to make money off this

I read that article first thing this morning and have spent several hours stewing on it (and waiting for the steam to stop coming out of my ears ), before concocting the below response :-

Neil Rodgers put across a very convincing article in this weeks League Express detailing Wakefield Metropolitan District Council's stance on the disgraceful state of affairs that has been allowed to develop at Newmarket. He must have spent a great number of hours writing his tale, which details from thread-to-needle how the council worked hand-in-hand with all other parties in striving to achieve their aims in relation to the development. It is very eloquently written and leaves the reader in no un-certain terms as to where the council currently stands on the issue. Well done, Mr Rodgers, I would expect nothing less of a highly-paid council official, you can be rightly proud of such an impressive article.

However, the people of Wakefield along with the supporters of the Wildcats, believe you have missed out the most important thing. Correct me if I am wrong, but wasn't the aim of the entire lengthy process to improve sporting facilities in Wakefield by providing the people of the town with a stadium to be proud of, along with associated training pitches to be used by Wakefield College and local sports clubs, and also providing jobs for local people, with this part of the development being facilitated by the warehousing build ?? If it hadn't been for the legally binding S.106 agreement signed by the Secretary of State insisting that the only way the land could be taken out of greenbelt and used for B8 warehousing, was by incorporating a community stadium and associated community facilities, then the warehousing would NOT have been authorised. However, the developers - Yorkcourt - have now deviously circumvented this legally binding agreement, and for whatever reason, the WMDC planning committee approved it !!

So, Yorkcourt have made a nice healthy profit in developing the site, and will no doubt continue to do so....WMDC have created new jobs in the district and gone part of the way to fulfilling their commitment to providing additional B8 development land, and the people of Wakefield have got.....NOTHING !!!

Yes, Mr Rodgers, you may wax lyrical about the Council's legal position on this matter (which is likely to be put under scrutiny in a court of law), but morally the council's position stinks. The people of Wakefield were promised much-needed new sporting facilities, along with a new Community stadium, but are now not going to get either. I hope you are all proud of yourselves.

Although Iv'e read this thread with interest from the beginning, I'd be lying if I said I fully understand what's happening apart from the obvious that is, I was merely pointing out without getting involved out of my depth that to some extent that paragraph contradicted itself, as for your question, I simply cannot answer it but I'm sure that there a some that can.

I have to agree and it probably represents the only chance a stadium would be built there. But Yorkcourt would no doubt bleed every last square metre it could without having to build before moving on, probably just leaving all the part of the site which remains greenbelt. Whether a company, Peel or otherwise, would be interested in the much reduced profit for the possible hassle involved i'm not sure.

Which is why there should have been a levy on every m2 rather than a total cumulative amount of 60,000m2.

That way YCP would have to pay the pro rata amount and any other developers would have to do the same.

For some clarity:

The site is divided in 3 principal areas:

1. The stadium site which remains in GB
2. The B8 development land which is removed from GB
3. The A3, A1, Hotel & Restaurant site which remains in GB

It would seem that WMDC believe that Anyone can develop on the B8 land without reference to the 106 - a point we strongly contest - even if the original OPP lapses. This land is re-designated and can be applied for new PP quite reasonably, albeit we still maintain that there is a land charge on this area.

The Stadium site and the remaining areas can on,y be developed under the original OPP. If the developer does not follow the original OPP and the conditions set, he will lose this area and it will return to GB and will be very difficult to remove from it, just leaving an industrial estate on the former colliery land.

IF he considers the Stadium issue to be too big to fund, he could sacrifice the remainder of the site and just accept the profit he can realise from the B8 land and no more. I'm not saying he will do this, but he might, and this is all brought about by the disaggregation of the site - via a loophole that WMDC claim to have taken legal advice over for which we were told does not exist but is now referenced by Neil Rodgers who was not there at the time! Either Neil has seen something we have been told does not exist OR it still doesn't exist as formal legal advice! Which is it? A further FOI has been submitted!

My new neighbour of two months from Somerset, who has no knowledge of RL , was shown the response of the council in a letter I received from Mary Creagh and also the League Exp letter,and said they seemed to being deliberately obstructive and could not understand why they were not pressing for the new community facility to go ahead.
He said why were they involved in the first place if they do not support it now?
An simplistic, immediate response from someone with no 'axe to grind'.

Without digging around I am not sure, but its reasonably substantial areas which are left. There is plenty of B8 to reach the 60,000m2.

Is there enough to fund a Stadium in full, probably not.

We particularly like the bit where it says about 'if the developer is minded' or something to that effect - it isn't if hes minded, he bloomin well obligated!!!! Otherwise, what is the point of a 106???

I asked this earlier but no one replied

Do we have any other funding in place or if not in place then guaranteed should the project go ahead or funding that we know 100% is accessible to us once we sign contracts to build or more speculative possible sources of funding identified that yet need applying for?

If yes to any of the above, can someone categorise the sources for me and give approximate values?

Thanks

Having contacted Mr Ed Balls regarding the stadium issue, I have now received a reply telling me how he is fully in support of the stadium project and how "everyone" needs to get back round the table and get the stadium "back on track".

I have reminded him that our council have said this is not a matter for them and I will let people know if/when he responds.

Do we know what was said in the meeting(s) between Glover & Elston and the developers?

coughbrownenvelopescough

Finally got a response to my email to Ed Balls on the eve of the election!!!
This is what he had to say:

The Wakefield Wildcats and their supporters deserve a new stadium. That is why from the outset I have supported proposals for a new community stadium.

Back in 2012 we were told this development was the only viable proposal for a new stadium. As well as being a home for the Wildcats, a new stadium would bring badly needed jobs and investment into our part of the district.

I wrote to the Secretary of State, Eric Pickles to back their plan and to urge him not to put planning obstacles in its path. Sadly, plans for the new community stadium have stalled; but the need for a new stadium has not gone away. Fans, the club and local people deserve a community stadium and the whole area would benefit from the new, good jobs it would bring.

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.

Here is the statement we have made to the Council and to the Wakefield Express:

“Wakefield Trinity Wildcats’ proud history is at the heart of the city’s sporting life. We have supported the community stadium process for several years, contacting Wakefield Council on several occasions. We will continue to work with the community stadium trust, fans and the Council to secure the future of the club and the new stadium. We stand ready to support the club in any way we can.”

We need a new stadium and I will always do everything I can to support the club.

Ed Balls