[url=http://planning.wakefield.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=externalDocuments&keyVal=LDVS9ZQQ06X00Detailed plans and documentation now online[/url.

It looks great but did throw up one or two surprises!

Initial observations that someone might wish to put to the club or make via supporting comments.

I think the home disabled fans who wish to be in the East Stand are getting are bum deal. They have positioned the two disabled viewing areas right at the stand ends on the try lines. I think having them next to the two vomitories around the 20m lines, to still retain easy access (on the side towards the centre line), is a better location as they get a better view and also are part of the crowd as opposed to being slightly remote from it. On lower attendance fixtures like Catalan or London then they are going to be totally left out on a limb. Conversely away and home disabled supporters get a great deal in the centre of the North and South stands, which is very good. The main West Stand disabled viewing area are towards the ends of the stand as well, but I think layout does probably does dictate this in this stand.

Do you guys have a disabled supporter association and if so can someone pass on my comments please?

I am surprised that they have gone for an all seater 'away' North Stand just in cost terms, but this might have something to do with the concert use format that is being proposed?

I am also surprised that they seem to have done away with hospitality boxes altogether (with the exception of the TV studio on non-televised games), while I do think the banqueting model and VIP seats is a better modern option I thought that maybe 4 to 6 hospitality boxes would have been a good shout?

I will have a more detailed look later but just some quick initial thoughts for now.

Very exciting! Even my Loiner colleague is impressed!

Trying to print them seems to be a nightmare though....

They are all probably A1 size, so if you want some full size copies, try these guys at Normanton - [urlhttp://www.easy2plot.co.uk/[/url They charge £1.75 + VAT for an A1.

The design & access statement document is the best all round document to print at home on A4. It gives you all the salient points and smaller plans and elevations.

Managed to export the pdf to a jpeg and get an A4 print. It'll do for me for now! I'll print the design and access statement too. Thanks for the advice IA!

Have to agree about the disabled seating in the 'home' stand, it really needs an area more on the halfway line. I used to assist a guy in a wheelchair who had season tickets for Palace and Wimbledon at Selhurst Park and we were stuck behind the 'home' goal, but the view was cracking. No seating for assistants though, so at least we'll have that!

I believe this is to do with the concert format and also in consideration of the fact that our own fans are forced to purchase a seating ticket at most away grounds these days, and the club intend to do the same for fans visiting ours. Fairs fair I suppose, home advantages and all that...


Given that there are only a few boxes now that aren't always used, I think the club are moving more down the banqueting and Club 50 route; in addition to increasing bar and catering facilities, which is a serious limitation in the current location.

I suspect there may be a cost consideration too since not introducing boxes has avoided the need to fit out the upper floor of the East Stand, simply leaving it as lettable space, which is potentially a greater earner for the club.

The banqueting suite is a much better option and boxes are fast becoming a thing of the past, much better utilisation of space. Love the design!

And it's better than the Leeds approach of forcing away fans into the Western Terrace

Now that is a low blow and just as I was about to praise you an Bonzo for your positive attitudes, what with you already thinking about train-timetables!



The good news is that do get a great view of our new permanent video screen and scoreboard... while still getting rained on!

I have also just seen that I am as popular as ever on the Cas Forum... god bless em! I blame your tb, I didn't even know the place existed till one of your posts told me so! I can't help myself, it is like a car accident!

But I like standing with fans from the opposition - that way you get genuine banter instead of the mindless insults you hear from footy fans. More than anything else that's what I'll miss about BV and WR - I loathe the quasi-apartheid segregation you get in the 'pre-fab' sheds like the Galpharm etc. It's sad ti think that this match day experience will soon be a thing of the past as the RFL force-feed us a sterile, shrink wrapped version of RL.

Thread cleaned up - keep it on topic.

Speedy and IA - please read the [url=http://viewtopic.php?f=1&t=438945AUP[/url.

Thats my worry that we will lose some identidy and atmosphere.

i think it's good to dull out the away atmosphere. As a home side, the last thing you want is the away side creating an atmosphere capable to out doing the home side's. this way by making them sit will help achieve this. this really counts for those who bring big away followings and not the likes of those who fetch a pitiful number!!

One thing that football fans just don't comprehend is how we do not enforce segregation in RL and if you really want to blow their minds tell them the fans change ends at half-time, that one really gets them confused.

It will be a shame when all the old grounds are gone but thats the way it goes, the up side is that we will have better bars, access, toilets etc but you are right mate something that made the sport so special will be lost.

Does anyone who attended the recent shareholders meeting have any update on the new stadium?
A poster on the casforum who attended the meeting says they were told that the stadium will not be ready until 2013!
Is this correct?

I've read that post and what's there is probably the most up to date information anyone has in the public domain. I believe it was also said that there's a phenomenal amount of work going into the project behind the scenes to ensure that it gets delivered.

I've heard from separate sources that the club have been given a build start date in April this year should the reserved matters application be granted, which could see us move in sooner but making our first full season in the stadium 2013.

This is of course all speculation at the moment, but the poster on casforum seemed very confident about what had been said at the meeting, and felt the Chief Exec was more open than he has been previously.

Xscape want more car parking on the site: cominoweb.wakefield.gov.uk/Plann ... nt=obj.pdf

Xscape want more car parking on the site: cominoweb.wakefield.gov.uk/Plann ... nt=obj.pdf

I hope this won't hold up the application for long.

I had a strong suspicion that this issue would raise it's head and thought that Xscape might put in an REM objection in respect of car parking numbers and I said so here - [urlhttp://viewtopic.php?f=2&t=481220&start=45[/url

It will not ultimatley prevent planning being granted and might not even delay things too much... if they anticipated this possible situation with Xscape? It would appear that the REM application has reduced the number of car parking spaces from the outline permission, can someone confirm this? If they have reduced the number of spaces from the original application they could just be trying it on and hoping to get away with providing less... less spaces means less cost! So they could now just increase the number of spaces back to the outline number (if indeed they have reduced the number) and then Xscape's objection is effectively dealt with.

One option I mentioned was shifting Castleford's 'regular' (non-Sky) fixtures to Sunday nights, say 6.30pm K.O and using the shopping outlet car park which closes at 5pm as the overspill. I think Xscape would be supportive of this as an option as they have to cross there site to get to the stadium... but of course Cas would have to come to a financial arrangement with J32 about the use of the car park.

You can't blame Xscape, the more spaces the better for them and they will keep pushing until they can be appeased or the planners tell them to get lost and grant permission anyway. It is the dead-time that is the problem for them, not people using the car park in the first place. I think that their traffic consultant is being generous by putting the dead-time down as 1hr 40mins, I think 2hrs would be the general minimum with 2hr 30min being a more realistic average. If people coming to Xscape can't get a space and the place is has capacity for more punters, you can see the issue!

Oh god he's back Mr Planning Permission himself

Oh God, Lord of Planning Permission is back

You surprise me...



That is correct.

Given the stick I get from the adolescents on here (see above) then I could not resist saying... I told you so! I am back on a winning percentage!





In that case the planners will ask them to put them back I suspect or reject the REM. As the outline was granted on the basis of more spaces then simply putting them back effectively resolves the issue and assuming that Xscape did not object on this basis first time around (?) their objection is countered.

Oh wise one, thank you for clearing the situation up. The dwellers of Castleford can sleep soundly knowing that the fountain of all planning permission knowledge is here to translate to us. Praise the Lord