you'll get an email you'll have to click it to verify then login and submit a comment.

Have a look in junk folder just in case.

I think you need to validate your account. Check your spam filter if you've not received an email from them.

Sorted. Thanks KK. Comments added.

If you do you will face imprisonment, Otters are Protected like Great Crested Newts which I haver come accross before.

Seriously though I have read the letter from West Yorkshire Ecology. They are not against the development as such but are objecting the the granting of permission to the scheme as submitted. They are wanting to see a further survey and mitigation measures in respect of the otters habitats.

I would hope that thier concerns can be addressed by YorkCourt and they will then remove their objection.

Otters add little value to my life, and if I had to choose between the global extinction of otters or the extinction of Wakefield Trinity, due to the lack of a stadium, the elongated water rats lose out. And while we're on it, I could imagine a life without newts. Name me one thing that an otter does for anyone, as opposed to a rugby club, which gives a lot to thousands.

Next week, we'll be discussing the Amazon. What are all those trees really for? We want to explore one of the greatest rivers in the world, and you can't build a road anywhere near it for the blooming things. Or a hotel. Or a McDonalds. You've got to eat when you explore.

They (and i don't know who they are) are dropping flyers tomorrow in Stanley/Methely/Rothwell areas, my mates wife has been calling in distributors all day today, for a big drop Friday.


Not seen one yet.

What, the SWAG flyers or the anti flyers?

Anti i'm afraid.

most of the anti brigade wouldn't know a otter if one @@@@ on their head

alan, you need to choose your friends more carefully, or vet their choice of wife more vigilantly, im disappointed in you, thought you were a cause warrior!

He's a wakey fan, won't have been a happy tea time in that house tonight, but its her job.

Anyway i can afford to be fussy can i.

good point, well made!

we need to mobilise the over 90's!!! www.redcafe.net/f8/otter-targets ... an-287906/ if that had been a drug addict there would have been uproar!

we need to mobilise the over 90's!!! www.redcafe.net/f8/otter-targets ... an-287906/ if that had been a drug addict there would have been uproar!

Got a letter from the council, today, acknowledging my comments.

standard issue.

West Yorkshire Ecology's concerns largely seem to deal with issues that will need addressing in a FULL planning application, not an outline application. Some of their comments specifically state this.

I am sure the developers are more than capable of dealing with all these concerns in due course.

not looked through all this thread so sorry if this has already been mentioned but there was a piece in the pontefract and cas express today about the development, basically methley residents raising concerns about the effect of the development as a whole (not so much the stadium) it does just seem to be the industrial side that people have a problem with. i dont know how to put a link on for people to look at but i am sure one of you will be able to look on the p&c web site and do that.

If they are planning on mail-dropping the original flyer I posted, in that form, I think the author may be taking quite a big risk. I am not sure the Wakefield MDC will take to kindly to clearly untrue comments aimed at them that are quite close to being libellous. You can't accuse the council or the developer of not effectively not complying with planning law, when it is clearly untrue.

In some ways this may work against them, as it makes the flyer less credible and indeed clearly shows their objection to be without factual foundation and NIMBY . Unfortunately, not wanting this or any development next to your house is not a valid objection.

As a resident of Stanley I don't think there is any great feeling either way to be honest and certainly most people in Stanley itself seem to be broadly in favour. I think the only real objection is coming from the hand-full of houses on Newmarket Lane itself and some Methley residents further down Newmarket Lane. I understand that quite a few people on the Moorhouse estate and down Bottom Boat are only upset that the plans don't include for signal controlled junctions out onto Aberford Road at both locations! It is a nightmare for them to turn right towards the motorway and they would like traffic lights!

When the developer put his original plans in to convert Stanley Church to flats and build new houses in the Church yard, feeling ran very high and well over 200 people turned up to a public meeting at the Community Centre... and for this... nothing! I think that might tell you all you need to know!

yes i remember the protest / petition against the juntion39 (close to home ) that would of incorporated YCCC , my next door neighbour at the time came round with a scaremongering that 20'000 fans would be around and that kids would be run over by juggernauts and that our house values would drop and fans from across the Yorkshire border would rape steal and pillage our pets.

i swore at her

and a few years later a car garage a couple of pubs , hotels ect were still built , massive opportunity lost we must make sure we succeed with this

VERY WORRIED OVER THIS!!!!

No idea but lets hope so.

Yep, so do i.

Guys, a Giant here in peace. I have read the various planning consultation comments out of professional interest. The West Yorks Ecology issue is a concern - but they are objecting not ask for rejection. They actually appear to ask that it not be determined until greater detail is presented. The danger to WTW is in delay, due to franchising.

I would suggest that supportive comments dismissing ecological concerns are well intentioned but of dubious value, better to honestly support as a trin fan and make no ecological/wildlife comment. The West Yorks Ecology letter does suggest that further detail would help - that is what the developer needs to do. (The other objection is dealt with by a set of traffic lights, I see no need for concern)

Do not forget the council can grant permission based on conditions - one could be satisfying West Yorks Ecology. My suggestion is recognise their concerns and make them your friend - then you will get your stadium

This is correct. OUTLINE permission can be granted, with conditions that have to be met within the FULL planning application.

Whilst these things may be a challenge, they are not insurmountable and shouldn't slow the process down either.

Well put and I think many realise this. A few may jest with regards to the ecological findings but in this day and age they are a body which need to be respected, and rightly so.

I think the plans have gone a long way to preserving any wildlife at the site. The Non-technical summary made no mention of otters so maybe that’s why any mitigation to protect them and their habitat was not included into the design. If it had, as with the water voles, I’m sure it would’ve been.

Hopefully the developers are on to this already and I concur that permission may be granted with strict conditions such as the one you mentioned.

Absolutely correct.



We need to support the positive reasons for this development - rather than rubbish genuine opposition.