I believe they are more than happy at Featherstone for the medium term. Moving forward long term they may well look to a city centre base but only on a basis where they have some control over the stadium operations.

We'll see, I think it will pass clean or with very minor amends and we will be able to build early next year.

There is always Trinity ladies FC

Looks like the last floodlight has come down at least.

Yes I agree a lot of the document “Planning Statement plot 8” 16th December 2020, contains a lot of similar information as this latest Document “Revised Planning Statement “ September 10th 2021, but this latest document now suggests the building could begin late this year.
Again, I appreciate everything may depend on the Planning committee as to when permission to build goes ahead. We live in hope.

Just listened to the MC and WP interview on Trinity tv, regarding the coaching appointment. At the end, Martin Sadler asked MC a question regarding stadium planning application, and MC said. “We go Planning mid November “.

Must admit reading the last few pages........I'm more optimistic than ever of things moving with the stadium upgrade.

Great stuff!

Yep...there was a large cherry-picker outside the Conny club yesterday and they were using it to remove the old bulbs and now the whole tower has gone

Presuming the new east stand will accommodate the new changing rooms looks like the players will enter the field at the half way line like they used to do in the 70 ans 80s

Yes

Just had a look at the developers application site on WMDC planning portal.
It seems no one has supported this application to date.
I recall John Minards saying earlier in the year, that should Trinity and the Developers reach an agreement regarding funding, the club would ask fans to back the developers application to help getting it passed by the planning committee.
I know the that meeting isn’t until mid November, but perhaps we should be hearing some advice from the club sooner rather than later,

From the developers planning portal
Total Consulted: 0 Comments Received: 16 Objections: 14 Supporting: 0

What you need to do is contact MC via the contact page on the club site and ask him what he wants us to do on this issue. You’ll get a reply he’s pretty good if not instant.

Then if he wants us to support it then put a link on here and I’m sure plenty will.

I can do it for you if you wish but to be honest you seem to have far more idea of how this all works than I do.

Hope that helps

I did ask, and received this reply today. As you have said in the past, the club are Pro-Active,

Thanks for your enquiry.

Plot 8 is indeed the “enabling” development which will provide much of the funding for our redevelopment at Belle Vue.

The intention is that both that application as well as our own will come to Planning Committee in November.

We are currently discussing the detail of the S106 Agreement which links the two Applications. Once we are happy with that Agreement we will let everyone know that we will be supporting the Plot 8 Application and encourage our supporters to do likewise.

It is essentially down to negotiating the best deal we can for the Stadium before we are prepared to support.

Will keep you all informed when we can!

Hope you are keeping well

John

I assumed that they were funding it ALL, but that suggests otherwise, so where is the additional funding coming from then, MC/JM or another source such as grants etc ???

Floodlights, pitch and roofing not paid for by plot 8. The council are making a contribution it seems according to the planning statement.

For the 4G pitch, we are funding that plus a number of more minor bits and pieces. I wouldn't read too much into that comment. He may also be including the floodlights as well.

The deal was and as far as I'm aware still is the same, East Stand/North Terrace and Clubhouse to be funded by the developer's money.

The vital one by a mile is the East stand.

Thought John might answer as he's the driving force regarding the stadium, but MC usually answers most inquiries. Looks like they have a handle on it.

53 pages.
Johnny Nash springs to mind.

Regarding supporting the Plot 8 Application, Deja vous springs into my mind!

These documents were added onto the developers planning application on Monday This week. My usual reliable source informs me these documents needed to be resubmitted with modifications from the original ones, to meet the requirements of the application, hence the delay in the application being heard.
Basically, it’s information of existing power lines above and below ground/ gas supply pipes, around the development area, and the legal requirements of the developers regarding safety etc.

Roll on 18th November

04 Oct 2021 Consultee Comment NORTHERN POWER GRID
04 Oct 2021 Consultee Comment NORTHERN POWER GRID
04 Oct 2021 Consultee Comment. NORTHERN GAS NETWORKS
04 Oct 2021 Consultee Comment. NORTHERN GAS NETWORKS
04 Oct 2021 Consultee Comment. NORTHERN GAS NETWORKS
04 Oct 2021 Consultee Comment. NORTHERN GAS NETWORKS
04 Oct 2021. TPO OFFICER

When are WMDC November’s planning meetings announced?

This month’s planning meeting was due tomorrow the 14th that got cancelled last Friday. The November planning meeting is scheduled for Thursday 18th. The meeting Agenda is published during the week before the meeting.
I had another look at the plot 8 application, and there is another seven documents added today.
These seven are from, The Coal Authorities, Highways England and Yorkshire Wildlife Trust.
The YWT document along with the TPO (tree preservation order) which was added to the application last week, both give me a little concern, due to the enforcement powers they appear to have with Environmental matters. These could be the fly in the ointment for the plot 8 application. It would not help our enabling fund if our application is passed but not the plot 8, as we don’t receive funding until the plot 8 application is also passed.

Yorkshire Wildlife Trust involved, I hope there are no sign of bats, newts, badgers ( protected species etc) habitats on plot 8

I do want to be positive, however that was exactly my first thought

Probably had the same documents with the other applications that all got passed on the same development.

Up the Trin