Possibly at Newmarket.

Maybe balne lane?

Why don’t we wait & see if there is any announcement that has any legs before we start talking about what colour seats we have etc?

Wouldn't want an all -seater stadium myself. Never thought sitting down was the proper way to watch RL. I can count on the fingers of one hand how many times I've sat down at BV in 63 years watching Trin.

I still have a feeling that Neil Fox Way will be where we end up.

Imo yes maybe like Celtic some parts are standing only but im dreaming wake up !!

Imo yes maybe like Celtic some parts are standing only but im dreaming wake up !!

Could that obstacle mentioned it have anything to do with the recent changes at the head of the club.

I had also heard a while back that Manni was losing interest in the site, their from someone who has been a business acquaintance of his in the property industry around Leeds

Aye. Tackle bags and kit bags at the side of the road.

I have a couple of friends who are working on City Fields atm and I've been trying to hit them for any information about it for the past year or two. Tbf one is a bricky for one of the companies, so as he says he doesn't know much more than I do about future plans. The other though is a manager for one of the other building companies and when I've asked him if he's heard anything about sports facilities being built down there, he says not to his knowledge. But says the only real place in his opinion where there's enough land for something like a stadium, is where the old Power Station was, which is currently being advertised for warehousing and retail/fast food outlets - but it is owned by the Council. Which most of the area isn't or has been earmarked for other things, such as housing, school, health facilities and various warehousing projects to provide jobs. He says the road that runs down to Stanley Ferry with the land to the right is earmarked for an old folks community.

Slightly o/t but as a someone who lives near to it and already knows how busy it is atm, plus it's made Aberford Road/Barr lane, especially around Pinderfields even more of a ball ache than it was previously at peak times. His general thoughts on the relief aspect of the road and what's going to happen when it's fully built up were very interesting although slightly alarming tbh. He basically says any relief that it is/has served will be completely lost as City Fields gets more and more built up. He says the road is far too small to be both a relief road and a road to service the 2500 houses and various other things that are going to build. He can't get his head around why the road is so narrow first of all and can't believe that it was built to this spec knowing what else and how much was going to be built after it was completed. Has he said to me, once complete apart from being a relief road, City Field could have around anywhere from 8-10000 people living on it.

It's more an enabling development road right now and, aside from rush hour on an evening, it's great not having to drive through the bottleneck that is Wakefield city centre. I think the relief part was to relieve the city centre of traffic which I feel it has done.

For me the only suitable location on there is down at the Doncaster Road junction but that looks like is been remediated and prepared for residential purposes with a bit of commercial. Shame as it would've been ideal.

This is all lovely but the rumor is the redevelopment of belle vue, not a new stadia off a relief road

not only is it a shame, its never been close to being the beginnings of a rumor.....ever, and is less likely than a wembley of the north being built on the roof of newcold.

Again it's all bullcrap

Stands to reason though, why loan the club £3m (Nutjob forum rumour) to buy back the freehold of BV to allow construction of a community stadium when a) there's a plot of land at NM already earmarked for one and b) the council are land rich so should not really be short of options.

I suppose it's because BV already is a sports ground so shouldn't be quite as time consuming as a completely new development coming to fruition.

it's a start Wollo!!. With a photo of Box and Jeffries stood on top of the bags supping a glass of cheap plonk. It'd still be further than Cas have progressed.

It is about a rumor but I was just telling the poster what little inside info I have about City Fields & why it most probably wouldn't happen there anyway - a few people have mentioned that area before so I agree, it's a non starter.

It has to a certain respect but it's also just removed traffic from one side of town to the other. My main point though as I said previously, was to do with future that road will have and one of the reasons it was built being lost in the years to come when it has to service the 1000's of people living and working on it and the bottleneck in the City will eventually be back to where it was. ATEOTD though it's going to improve things around that side of town towards Donny Road when it's all done and hopefully will make a feature of the Canal and nature reserve - they should have just made the road a dual carriageway where possible.

It’s also the cheapest option. I do have a good knowledge of redeveloping stadia and getting BV to minimum standards would be pretty low. Just an example.

Basic new East stand with bars and bogs to hold say 3k at about 1.75 million.

Extend cats bar right across the end to house all facilities. Base level changing rooms and offices with maybe 8 boxes on second level and a small terace at the front maybe about 1 million if volunteers did the internals aka Fev. The existing bit holds the restaurant, reception and shop.

North stand reprofile terracing maybe 750k again keep existing roof. Maybe put seats on the upper section if it’s plaisible.

East terrace reprofile terrace and rebuild back wall and add a propper TV press box. Add a roof at a later date. About 1 million.

Add 500k for infrastructure and 3 million for the land.

That’s 7.5 million for a much better stadium which is dirts cheap. It can be further improved over time. It will never be the pride and joy of SL but it won’t shame it either. It will be fit for purpose and personally I’ll take that.

The club is saved, the council has a community stadium of sorts, RFL happy. That by my estimate is half the cost of a NM stadium and could easily be done in a close seaon if we could stop playing at home in late August and restart mid March (depend on the winter weather) that how I see it.

Obviously 15 million would get you the full deal at BV but that seems even less likely to happen imo.

You appear to be proposing a bit of a rushed makeover rather than a permanent upgrade, Halton Stadium is a good example of a staggered rebuild Featherstone another excellent example and there is no reason why BV could not benefit from the same. A fair bit of BV is badly used the rear of the North Stand has about 10 metres of unused land to the boundary wall, the North West Corner that houses the old office and changing rooms has much wasted space, I assume your reference to reprofiling the East Terrace you mean the West again much wasted space here, similarly the South West corner and the present hospitality block not fit for purpose the Cats Bar and changing rooms again why retain when the space can be used much better. Moving the North Terrace back would allow moving the pitch back and freeing up valuable space for development at the South end. A little less 'Challenge Anneka' and a lot more lets build to last is a better plan. All costs money but papering over the cracks is simply a waste of money.

No that's not what I suggested at all. I'm talking about bringing BV up to a decent standard ASAP. I've don so by concentrating on the East and south of the ground. My plan provides a modern if basic main stand not disimilar to the stand Fev built where the ild bullock shed used to be, I have concentrated all the main club and corporate facilities into a greatly enlarged and refurbished Cat Bar/Changing Rooms. That makes two parts of the ground complete and all the expensive stuff sorted.

The west and north of the stadium will be made safe and comfortable. Now lets be serious here many trinity fans would be more than delighted to stay in the north stand so long as the terracing wasn't crumbling and the bogs a llittle better. Why create a new stand there that nobody really wants. MC's fear with the north stand has always been one of safety, that can be fixed for a relatively small output. Ditto the west stand, my plan here is to rebuild the base to which most away fans will be happy as most actually love to stand. The staged bit is to roof it when cash becomes available.

So it's not 'Challenge Anneka' as you put it, it's called being realistic and providing whats needed and actually wanted. Most fans want standing so why force them to sit if you don't have too? We currently have 1,200 seats and in 30 years I've only ever seen them all taken twice. I seriously doubt we will ever really need the 3,000 seats I'm offering. We actually have the chance here to create something unique, a modern stadiun built traditionally which IMO is what fans actuall want but are never asked.

If we could get up to an average of say 2,000 sitting and 6,000 - 7,000 standing with an occasional 11,000 sell out we'd be fairly competitive along with the enhanced corporate - we'd gradually be buying the ground back for no more than we pay to rent it and eventually have an asset - that would do me fine.

People are obsessed with numbers and seats and boxes yet it rarely works - Wigan and Hull have great stadia but they are rarely over half full and I doubt they sell every box for every game. We'd have a smaller, cheaper to run stadium that would run far closer to it's full potential (say 11,000), you do the math as to which one would be more profitable.

Like your plan apart from the seats in the North Stand.
As you mentioned in your previous post, you have rightly pointed out, that the seats we have are rarely full, so why put some in the North Stand??
Also would like a roof for the away fans - there's nothing worse than getting rained on! eg at Headingley!!


Although on the other hand.....

Good point just wasn't sure if 3,000 was enough for minimum standards so it's a bit of a contingency.

The west stand roof was the last on my list and one that I thought could come a bit later. With a covered stand of 3000 seats on a bad day we can always offer some of those to away fans and at the end of the day home fans come first. If we could get by with just 3000 seats and manage to get a west stand roof then happy days.

Just need to point out that I'm guessing a lot of this other than the prices, I have no idea what if anything is on offer. It's just my example of what we could do with even a limited amount of cash, other folk will have different ideas. Clearly a full four sided redevelopment would be better though I would prefer to see at least 60-70% remain standing as I think that's what people want - Warrington have gotten close but even they have to many seats for me.

All hypothetical Vasty but before we could do any of the above we'd need to purchase the stadium.

This is the preferred option in my eyes if the money is available. If we are provided £15m to carry out any works, we need to look at longevity of what we are doing. As you say its pointless covering up the cracks to 'make it work' for the meantime knowing we are looking to spend the next century at Belle Vue. There's also the argument that we were promised a new community stadium and simply settling for a tarted up Belle Vue doesn't quite cut it however I'm sure these conversations would be had. There is wasted space all over the footprint of Belle Vue and I suppose it all depends on how much we given by the Council (if anything at all...)

I agree on the seating, less and less people are wanting to be seated and therefore there's no need to go overboard here.

It's never going to be perfect and as practical as a new ground but there's plenty of options depending on the amount of monies we receive.

That's included in the price - there is no re-development without that hyperthetical or otherwise. I'm basing it on the theory knocking about that the Council will lend us the money to both puechace and re-develop BV. All I'm trying to do is give people an idea as to what can be done for the minimum amount to meet minimum requirements.

If you're asking me do I believe the rumour then I'd say noT BY more than 5%, 95% of me things it's another crock

Normally I'd agree with you percentage wise, but, our new director, Michael Carter, (who usually comes over as cynical) and Peter Box have all been saying there have been a few positive meetings. There's something about this that feels that bit different.