No dress code at all - well, within reason!

I have massive concerns that they will fake to be a fellow Wakefield supports and cause the disruption that you have talked about.

have any back up plan to stop this happening?

The Barristers will generally refrain from cross examining members of the public.... however, the main speaker tomorrow is a professional, employed by Barton Wilmore and representing Wakefield Residents Interest Group. I suspect that this chap will get the rounds of the kitchen from the 2 Barristers in support of the scheme.

Today has gone well - at least according to James Elstons twitter messages!

Hope all goes well again today and that the opposition don't have it easy!!

gutted there is no sitting tomorrow - i sorted a day off.

i will be following intently on twitter and i am quite looking forward to it

overcome this hurdle and i think we are on the home straight

Could we not get any Methley Wildcats to go, so when they say the whole of Methley is against it, they could reply not all....?

We've already had a speaker saying that!

Good luck today guys. Can't be there this time but will follow with interest.

Talking about the Methley objection, I can't really understand why they are objecting.

I get why the people who live on Newmarket Lane are upset, as the NIMBYs tag implies, it is in their back yard. The designs appear to try and help these people as much as possible, by putting the office units and hotel near to them, with trees in between and the distribution stuff as far away as possible, but Methley is so far away, there is nothing that could be done as far as I can see to help them apart from maybe making the road better, which it will be.
There is no value to traffic going from the business units through Methley, they would go to the motorway, and if that was an issue, either put traffic calming units in place, and that's if the Bridge going towards Cas doesn't stop them anyway.
It will affect them once a year when cas play Wakefield and some fans come through Methley, but many of these people will be from Methley as well.

I haven't looked but are the objections from the different sources detailed on the planning web site?

Flood, famine and pestilence - if you believe what some have been saying!

Not to mention the many deaths that will be caused due to people being unable to access Pinderfields because of the congestion this development will bring.

Exactly.
Hence my previous post re. Cas fans in Methley and Mickletown.

So what exactly is the situation regarding what gets built first, the stadium or the warehousing? Seems to be mixed messages coming out of twitter today? Could someone clarify?

I was under the impression that there is an agreement whereby the stadium must be constructed prior to the units, however, there is a post on Cas forum suggesting that the stadium will not be built until 100,000 square metres of B8 units are built and let.

It’s certainly something that requires clarification

If that is the plan then we aren't going to be playing there for a while yet.

We'll have to wait and see what transpires, as I said I was under the impression that, as a planning condition by WMDC when it was initially granted last year, the stadium will be built first before any units.

don't take this as gospel as i am not at the inquiry, but there are often conditions imposed on planning applications where certain criteria are to be met before the building is BROUGHT INTO USE (different to built)

i think this may be a bit of confusion i.e. the stadium must be brought nto use before the warehousing units

as i did say i could be wrong as i can't see the conditions

A letter was presented at the inquiry this morning by York Court stating that the stadium will be built first. They then went on to say that should we get the nod, building would start mid 2012 and take 59 weeks. The final stipulation following a discussion relating to conditions was an agreement with Leeds Council that should the development be approved, York Court will have to apply for full planning within 4 months of the result of the Public Inquiry .

On the grounds of that, I would suggest that the stadium will be the first thing to be built, but IA/TRB/somebody more involved will probably be able to confirm that.

if lcc have opposed it, why do they want yorkcourt to "get on with it" ?

you tell me???? There is very little in this process from a LCC point of view that makes any sense anymore (if it ever did at all)... I'm struggling to understand what they actually opposed in the first place?!

I take it this is the piece that is causing the confusion.

“That as soon as is reasonably practicable following both the making of the Stadium Payment by the Council to the Trust and one hundred thousand (100,000) square metres of the B8 warehousing and distribution units permitted under the Planning Permission having been [ubuilt out [/uand occupied for commercial purposes, that it will let a contract for the construction of the stadium.”

Please note it says 'built-out' (actually should be build-out if we are being particular) not 'built'. There is a difference. Effectively YCP have estimated how much of the B8 build is needed to finance the stadium and as such need this to be pre-let and have the guarenteed contracts in place before it can commit to building the stadium. This is standard practice in these kind of deals. It doesn't mean they have to be built immediately and have companies working out of them prior to the stadium being built, just they need the commitment of other companies first.

If they already have this commitment, or will on passing of the PP, then the stadium build could start once reserved matters are passed.

Many thanks for the clarification.

so yorkcourt have to get signed up for ~1m sq ft of warehousing in order to fund newmarket? this sounds like a massive ask to me, but could be done with 1-5 big clients. does anyone know how much interest there is in this as it does sound like a tall order.

perhaps i'm being too negative, but in this economic climate, who's signing up for leases on shiny new warehouses?

I know there is one large company committed but it would be nice to know whether there are others involved. I saw a quote saying that the figure was 70% of the whole B8 development. Is that correct because that does sound a lot.

What about the "and [uoccupied for commercial purposes[/u" That seems pretty conclusive.

As is confirmation from the developer saying that construction of the stadium will begin in mid 2012 with a 59 week build should permission be granted. I guess the proof will be in the pudding come July next year if planning is approved.