Once the decition in octoper is given.. it shouldnt be long before outline is granted, providing the detailed drawings have been done. With the correct financial backing it could be fast tracked and we could be laying groundworks early next year

You have a hidden agenda. We know it.

Stop crying and slither away, your desperation seeps from your fingertips.

I remember reading somwhere that the stadium is a 48 week build so this means that so long as we have started building by febuary, which with the timescales that have been mentioned, i see no reason why we can't be in our new home ready for the start of 2012.

Also if we do start building by febuary then surely the build will be far enough advanced to satisfy the RFL that it will be ready in time for 2012 meaning that with everything crossed we should be ok for a franchise.

We were told that it was a 46 week build.

Your right it is 46, i found the article.

Knowing our luck the RFL will bring the season forward by a month or two just to shaft us.

That won't happen first match is 12th 13th February in Cardiff.

And if the taxman winds up the Club?....

Wakefield Trinity (2010) Ltd will no doubt be formed clear of debt and in a lower division.

We're talking about the RFL here. Anything is possible.

46/48, two weeks, 4% slip would be a good project!

In these times just delivering a building would be a story never mind on time, budget etc

Good news this and nothing to add to Sandal Cats excellent explanation of the process.

My only thoughts would be that I don't see any reason why the muck shift and site preparation works could not start once the outline approval was finally granted (assuming no legal challenge & public enquiry) at the end of November, before the reserved matters application is made. It does carry some risk to the developer but in most cases it is very slight?

dont shoot the messenger , but here goes, I saw this on the BBC RL forum and wondered if you know what its about


Can anyone shed any light on this:

ADMINISTRATIVE COURT AT MANCHESTER
Before HIS HONOUR JUDGE WAKSMAN QC sitting as a Judge of the High Court
Friday 17 September, 2010
FOR HEARING
PART HEARD
CO/11016/2009 The Queen on the application of Yorkcourt Properties Limited v Wakefield Metropolitan District Council

Yokrcourt are the prime movers behind the Newmarket site and unless it's unconnected what's the issue being heard?



Just curious

No idea.

Nope

No idea, i cant work out whether or not it is a good thing for us or a bad thing.

My suspicion is that has nothing whatsoever to do with Newmarket.

Clearly Yorkcourt are for some reason challenging Wakefield Council in the Administrative Court over something, but looking at what the Administrative Court hears and rules on (and of course the clue is in the title of the Court) it is likely to be some sort of challenge over some administrative legal decision Wakefield have made that Yorkcourt are challenging them over.

Given that Yorkcourt own lots of land and property in the Wakefield district it could be anything and also it is probably just a routine legal issue. What I mean by that is that Wakefield may have taken a decision that Yorkscourt want to challenge and they only way to do that from a legal perspective is to go through the courts.

Given the recent headlines over the new West Yorkshire Fire and Rescue Control Centre, which is built on a Yorkcourt owned development site, it might something to do with that?

Last minute plea to the planners? cominoweb.wakefield.gov.uk/Plann ... nt=obj.pdf

Last minute plea to the planners? cominoweb.wakefield.gov.uk/Plann ... nt=obj.pdf

Quote ="allmatt"Last minute plea to the planners? cominoweb.wakefield.gov.uk/Plann ... nt=obj.pdf'" Just stressing the urgency required - owing to delays caused by the procrastination of WMDC through the summer!

Quote ="allmatt"Last minute plea to the planners? cominoweb.wakefield.gov.uk/Plann ... nt=obj.pdf'" Just stressing the urgency required - owing to delays caused by the procrastination of WMDC through the summer!

Quote ="allmatt"Last minute plea to the planners? cominoweb.wakefield.gov.uk/Plann ... nt=obj.pdf'" I think he was sending Becky an addendum to the Environment Statement, as they clearly state, but as a law firm representing (I assume) Yorkcourt as developer he has just taken and used the opportunity of having to write to get some pertinent information on the record! Fair play to him, that is what he is appointed to do!

Quote ="allmatt"Last minute plea to the planners? cominoweb.wakefield.gov.uk/Plann ... nt=obj.pdf'" I think he was sending Becky an addendum to the Environment Statement, as they clearly state, but as a law firm representing (I assume) Yorkcourt as developer he has just taken and used the opportunity of having to write to get some pertinent information on the record! Fair play to him, that is what he is appointed to do!

Thought the Leeds Councillors had been told to pipe down? This article would seem to say different. www.guardian.co.uk/leeds/2010/se ... dium-plans

Thought the Leeds Councillors had been told to pipe down? This article would seem to say different. www.guardian.co.uk/leeds/2010/se ... dium-plans

The land on the opposite side of the M62 actually in Leeds territory is currantly up for sale, presumably they will have the same objections, also the article says it's in rothwell!?!?!?!?!

Quote ="Tricky2309"Thought the Leeds Councillors had been told to pipe down? This article would seem to say different. www.guardian.co.uk/leeds/2010/se ... dium-plans'" Quote Smith does not believe that local infrastructure could cope with a development of this size. He argued that existing roads could not cope with the increase in traffic, and that drainage systems would be overwhelmed, increasing the risk of flooding.'" Well the last part of this paragraph shows the councillor has not looked as the drainage strategy. There are plenty of attenuation ponds and ditches are incorporated into the development and the exist foul water drainage has capacity for the extra waste water connections. The pumping station the water goes to also has spare capacity.

Quote ="Tricky2309"Thought the Leeds Councillors had been told to pipe down? This article would seem to say different. www.guardian.co.uk/leeds/2010/se ... dium-plans'" Quote Smith does not believe that local infrastructure could cope with a development of this size. He argued that existing roads could not cope with the increase in traffic, and that drainage systems would be overwhelmed, increasing the risk of flooding.'" Well the last part of this paragraph shows the councillor has not looked as the drainage strategy. There are plenty of attenuation ponds and ditches are incorporated into the development and the exist foul water drainage has capacity for the extra waste water connections. The pumping station the water goes to also has spare capacity.

Yes thought I had heard about the SUDs before. It's not the accuracy of it I am concerned about, because if it was true then we would really struggle to get it passed, its the damage it can potentially do as yet more negative publicity, and cause those not aware of the full plans to form the wrong opinion and become anti the development.