After reading through most of this debate it is quite apparent that the vast majority of you have me down as some kind of loon, tree huger or just plain out to stop the world from evolving type of person and in the main you do seem to despise my views which is fair enough because as I said from the start I did not expect my views to be popular so with all that In mind I will make this my last post. Firstly I would like to make it clear that I am not a NIMBY as some of you have labelled me infact I live about 2 miles from the site but I do feel for the people who are living on the edge of the proposed development and it may serve some of you well to take your heads out of the clouds and think of the implications for these people, how would you like it if someone was going to build a dozen warehouses at the bottom of your garden and slash the value of your property overnight. Another of my points that seems to have vexed some of you is the one about the wildlife on the site, just because this area may not be the prettiest Greenland you have ever seen and it is not there for people to walk on it does still support a vast amount of wildlife and once this area has been industrialised and concreted throughout all that life will cease to be, but hey what does that matter as long as we get some nice shiny new warehouses and create a few dozen jobs for some migrant workers oh and get the all important new stadium. Others have asked why I am not opposed to the stadium but am opposed to the industrial side, basically a new stadium and other sports facilities could easily be fitted in to this land and the main green part of the land could remain and the only real traffic into the site would be once every couple of weeks for about 6 months out of the year, but when you industrialise it all the green will go you will get 24 hour heavy goods traffic, nature will be dead and buried and the site will just continue to expand but as long as you don’t live down there and have no respect for wildlife what does that matter. It has also been mentioned that my argument is flawed and poorly structured, well at the end of the day I am just a normal working man I am not a spokesman for the few hundred people who are opposed to this venture hell at the end of the day there is every chance that I work with some of you people on here, all I have tried to do is put my point across, at the end of the day obviously we have sought legal representation and been in contact with various ecological groups who have dealt with these kind of situations in the past and when the time comes these will be the people who put our case across to the council planners. So that’s it really there’s nothing more I have to say I think it’s just a case of we will have to agree to disagree.

At last we have the real reason ! Your command of written english is very poor, my 9 year old could do better !

he'll fit right in then....

It seems to me that the opposition to the project is very small in numbers and will have little influence as the greater good of the community will show through.

What it looks like, as nearly all protesters are from Newmarket Lane, to have any kind of meaningful opposition they need to spread there support to Moorhouse and Bottomboat. That video was made as a deliberate scare tactic, it's saying that them areas will have the problems that Agbrigg have had. It's important a good counter argument gets accross regarding the parking arangements as this the only real scare tactic they have. If things are not communicated clearly reagarding the parking situation the small numbers of protesters could find some sympthy in Bottom Boat and Moorhouse.

By using the phrase "we have sought..." you're basically saying that you are (perhaps closely) involved with the comic work of WCCG. As this group clearly only has concerns about Newmarket Lane you (by default) are a NIMBY even if your own back yard is not necessarily affected from a literal perspective.

Is there any evidence to support the "slashing" of houses prices? I will agree that people looking to sell won't have the added bonus of open fields to offer in the future, but to suggest that it will dramatically affect the value of their home is ridiculous. Regardless of how the development will affect house prices, it's well known that house prices are only just starting a recovery after a couple of years of falling value. As a result, I would be very surprised if the average value of properties of Newmarket Lane is adversely affected for more than a couple of months during this period compared with the rest of Wakefield. By the time the development is complete, the house prices will be rising and falling just like any other property in Wakefield. The only thing that will change in the longer term is the type of buyer of those properties.

There will be an assessment of the environmental impact and I'm sure that WMDC will consider the arguments of both experts and "treehuggers" at the appropriate point.

The main reason for criticism of your argument is that you have no counter-argument to any of the comments made in response to your earlier posts. From everything you have said (and by your apparent representation of WCCG I apply this to all of you) you are not interested in making effective counter-argument on any of the issues (where are your suggestions of alternative sites for the development or sources of alternative funding for a stand-alone stadium?) and would suggest that you all spend more time getting your own house in order rather than trying to convince this forum that WCCG are in the right. At the end of the day you're simply wasting your own efforts on here as almost every one of us has signed the petition in favour of the proposals.

I'm certain that you didn't expect anything other than general opposition to your point of view when you started this thread and that's what you've got.

I'd like to congratulate Stanleyman for coming on here and articulating his opposition to the Newmarket development in a reasoned and fair manner.

We shouldn't demean ourselves by trying to belittle his arguments by being critical of his grammar and spelling (we could all be guilty of that ).

There would have always been opposition to our stadium, wherever it was proposed to put it, but we should take heart that if the Thornes Park proposal had progressed we would have been facing far greater confrontations and probably marches and street protests.

Come on the development is hardly at the end of the garden. They will be built away from houses with more then adequate screening from newly planted tree/hedges. There may be traffic noise but then they live right next to the M62.



Wow, a comment straight out of the Daily Mail.

Although some have gone over the top you can hardly be surprised that people on here oppose your viewpoints. The land around the houses will be developed sooner or later as most Motorway junctions will be. This development is very sympathetic to the surroundings, other proposals may not be. Public footpaths and cycle routes will be improved as part of the scheme. The job boost will provide more then just 12 employment opportunities and the businesses it will attract will be a major boost to the local economy.

As with all new construction projects, extensive planning will have been conducted by the developers to satisfy the environmental concerns of the site. Mitigations to protect the wildlife around the area will have been put in place and will form an integral part of the planning application. Gone are the days when developers could bulldoze their way through a site without a care for the habitats of various species. All this will have been done by the site investigation before any plans were drawn up. They will also have a legal/planning department who advise on what’s likely to get approval and again this will have been incorporated into the designs.

We live in a democracy so it’s your right to oppose the development, just as it’s ours to back it. The industrial development alone is important to Wakefield’s economy, the stadium is important to preserving Wakefield’s heritage.

It's very important to remember this is not, as has unhelpfully been suggested on here, a war between Wakefield Trinity fans and the residents near the proposed stadium site. If anything the representations by local residents are some way down the list in terms of the considerations of the planning authorities.

There is an extremely well established process for the determination of applications for this type of development and it is deserving of all our respect, as are the views of residents who believe the proposal is impacting on their lives.

Funny, up until i saw that site with the video on I did respect and consider the views of those involved in the Anti-Newmarket protest, after seeing it I realised that reasoned debate was not what they were after, its just full of one sided irrational views, obviously heavily edited to put across one view only...newmarket will wreck your lives!

OK an open point here, would they be willing to open up their site to a discussion with us??? Would our view be posted on their site if submitted via the link they have, some of us have sent views and as yet I have seen none up on there!

Think for once we are being quite restrained, and at this point we are the reasonable ones!

I'm afraid I see no point in having a discussion. Stanleyman and his group have their opinion and we have ours and I'm afraid in my opinion no amount of discussion is going to change any opinions. I'm certainly not going to be brought round on the basis of projecting wildlife rather that creating jobs - I'm afraid that whilst I am sympatetic of wildlife I put people first and I believe there is sufficient greenspace in the District for this employment creating development to happen without a serious impact on wildlife.

I do not know what wildlife there will be on the site but Yorkcourt Properties will have done a full Environmental and Ecological Assessment on the site which will have identified flora and fauna and it will have identified if there are any protected species on the site. If there are there are laws for dealing with them which will have to be adhered to if planning is granted.

My opinion on this is that there will be those in favour and those against and I think we should let the planning process deal with the application as indeed it will. I see no point in trying to convince either party on this Board to change their stance as I do not believe any party has any intention of changing.

This is bang on.

As I stated earlier, we can engage this chap, but at the end of the day our desires are poles (is that deliberate?) apart. I have already suggested that the best route available is for those who feel in danger from this proposal make their representations to the council at the appropriate time. I fail to see how we can gain anything from engaging in discussion with this chap - however if his aim was to use the 'divide and conquer' routine - then he has partially worked in that some seem to want to show sympathy and some do now.

For my part, it is printed in black and white in the WE that I have sympathy for those affected, however at the end of the day my job is to try and assist with pushing this application through - as I would hope most on here would wish to see happen.

From what I can see of the proposals, the developers have gone to great lengths to mitigate as many of the possible arguments as possible. They have put great thought into the locations of the various elements; the orientation; the amount of landscaping; the provision of suitable habitats for wildlife and associated landscaping; traffic routes and flows and all the other bobbins involved.

In summary - if we cannot come together in support of this scheme, we risk losing it. Is that a price worth paying?

Exactly why i urged caution posting on it, the "divide and rule" angle.

My position is easy like most on here, i dont care where the stadium goes, so long as we get one, and if we dont I hope and prey my club survives it whichever league or level it survives in.

However, Im not a fan of scaremongering generally, and the video is basically that.

I can't see there being a snowball in Hades chance of any of our responses making it onto the WCCG site - they want to preach, not discuss.

Whwn all said and done, the development proposal is probably the least intrusive option for the site, and makes great efforts to consider the locals. If this fails, I would be seriously worried that in a few years time a much less sympathetic plan is passed by the Tory Government, who are far less likely to put any restrictions on the developers. The stadium should be seen as a buffer against all out development of the site, and if the buffer fails then hello warehouse world!!

I am slightly confused when people say they are being sympathetic to the people who live there... they are building a hotel directly opposite the houses and no amount of puddles and ickle trees is going to hide that. i would have been more happy if they had done half residential and half industrial. I support Wakey thru and thru but on this I can see big troubles ahead, I can see it going to Brussels as it infringes on their rights to have a nice place to live.

This is the only way we can build the stadium so i will support it but I also feel for the people down their... a compulsory purchase on their houses would have been better as they will be worth FA afterwards.