I am just wanting to put across a point of view of a Wakefield resident that is not a wildcats supporter on the proposed new development of the Newmarket site, I have watched on in the media over the last few weeks at all of the proposals for the new wildcats stadium plans and was told about this web site by a friend of mine and I have watched the excitement build as news has come through of the proposed new stadium (which to be honest I think would be very good for the area) but then I have also seen the plans for all of the new factory units and what looks to be a large number of office accommodation too (this I do not think will be good for the area). My problem with this scheme is that the whole of this development is taking up a very large chunk of greenbelt land and in my opinion and many other peoples from the Wakefield district this is totally needles and extremely harmful to our environment, as I have said I would have no problem with the stadium as I think that can be justified for the development of our community but to just go out and create another industrial centre in our city just cannot in my eyes be justified. Why can it not be that the new ground be built at Newmarket and all of the industrial side of the development be located in an already industrialised area of town (of which there are many and with vast areas of acreage to spare). But I realise that this is very idealistic and will not happen, but anyway the main point I am wanting to put across from my message is that Wakefield does not have much if any really greenbelt land where wildlife is in abundance and to just go out and wipe a huge chunk of it out should not be done lightly I realise that most of you wildcats supporters see your new home as a be all and end all but believe me this is not the case and there is a bigger picture of the environment out there and this is why I and others will be urging the local council to take a good long look at these proposals as once the damage has been done there will be no going back. I do hope that your new ground will be realised just not at the expense of our surrounding environment. I realise this may not be a popular viewpoint on your website but it is an honest one and I just wanted it to be known that our I and others like me bares no malice to the wildcats we are just wanting to preserve some of our heritage for future generations.

Welcome to RLFANS and for posting you're views on the proposed site, i'm sure you'll get some reasoned replies to the questions you have layed out.

Stanleyman, you seem to accept that there is virtually nowhere else in Wakefield that the stadium could be built and there are very few who would argue with you. Personally, I can think of only 2 sites however both of these provide greater logistical issues for actually proceeding with the development - hence why there were discounted as realistic sites when the club was considering the various options for a new stadium. My understanding is that the primary focus of the commercial units is for distribution - this inevitably requires very close access to the motorway network in order for the units to be commercially attractive to businesses in this sector given the ever increasing cost of fuel that is affecting us all. Again, there are very few (if any) sites of a size to match this development in Wakefield regardless of proximity to the motorway network. Any development of greenbelt is going to have a large consideration to the environmental impact before being allowed. Given that the site is that of the old colliery my personal view is that the classification as greenbelt is a little generous and is closer to brownfield. www.lrdlimited.co.uk/case_studie ... liery.html I'm sure that if this work hadn't been done you'd be firmly behind the new development as it would be cleaning up something of an eyesore. The use of the site as a colliery was obviously during the existence of Wakefield Trinity and on this basis I would consider the club to be of greater importance to the heritage to the city rather than a piece of "manufactured" green belt. Wherever the stadium was to be built, there would be people in the immediate area of the new ground that would have one objection or another - as the opposition against Thornes Park showed. I'm sure that the council will decide on what they consider to be the best plan for Wakefield as a city rather than just Wakefield Trinity - but of course I hope that the development is granted planning permission. Hopefully we'll see you at some of the matches so you can get to know what you've been missing out on.

Stanleyman, you seem to accept that there is virtually nowhere else in Wakefield that the stadium could be built and there are very few who would argue with you. Personally, I can think of only 2 sites however both of these provide greater logistical issues for actually proceeding with the development - hence why there were discounted as realistic sites when the club was considering the various options for a new stadium. My understanding is that the primary focus of the commercial units is for distribution - this inevitably requires very close access to the motorway network in order for the units to be commercially attractive to businesses in this sector given the ever increasing cost of fuel that is affecting us all. Again, there are very few (if any) sites of a size to match this development in Wakefield regardless of proximity to the motorway network. Any development of greenbelt is going to have a large consideration to the environmental impact before being allowed. Given that the site is that of the old colliery my personal view is that the classification as greenbelt is a little generous and is closer to brownfield. www.lrdlimited.co.uk/case_studie ... liery.html I'm sure that if this work hadn't been done you'd be firmly behind the new development as it would be cleaning up something of an eyesore. The use of the site as a colliery was obviously during the existence of Wakefield Trinity and on this basis I would consider the club to be of greater importance to the heritage to the city rather than a piece of "manufactured" green belt. Wherever the stadium was to be built, there would be people in the immediate area of the new ground that would have one objection or another - as the opposition against Thornes Park showed. I'm sure that the council will decide on what they consider to be the best plan for Wakefield as a city rather than just Wakefield Trinity - but of course I hope that the development is granted planning permission. Hopefully we'll see you at some of the matches so you can get to know what you've been missing out on.

Really not sure what you hope to achieve by posting on here.Unless of course you are open to having your opinions changed .

At the end of your comments,you talk about "heritage".

What heritage are you meaning --- the pit closed in 1983 and the work to restore the land began in 1998 --- not much heritage!!!!!

You also comment that it will wipe out a large chunk of Wakefields greenbelt.

Just how much greenbelt does Wakefield have?

And what % will this development wipe out?

I live very close to the site on Newmarket Lane and have no problem with the stadiium and warehousing/offices being built.

There will still be plenty of green land left for the wildlife as it is very rural around Newmarket Lane/Bottom Boat Road.

Just think of the jobs that these warehouses/offices/hotel is going to bring to the people of Stanley! How fantastic to live on the Moorhouse estate and walk to work every morning instead of having to drive to the other side of town !!!

The land is well overdue being developed and if it's not this development, it'll be another a few years down the line.

I think Yorkcourt have been very sympathetic in their plans and have taken into consideration the local residents who both live on Newmarket Lane already (bypassing the old Newmarket lane and making it restricted access) and the Moorhouse estate (by ensuring the stadium will be blocked from their view)

Anyway, they are my thoughts and I am not just behind the stadium because I am a Wakefield fan, I woul much rather stay at Belle Vue if the truth be known but I know that is not realistic.

TBF does he need to be aiming to achieve anything?
It's always good to hear an alternative perspective on any subject even if only to firm up your own perspective on things.

Its easy for those not affected by the development to criticise so called NIMBYS (not aimed at you turfedout) and it's probably fair to say that people affected by it are less likely to see the bigger picture. However if nothing else I can empathise with their position even if it is counter to my own

You have missed the main issue here, namely that there is no stadium without the industrial development / offices / hotel etc. It is the gain from the development of these items which is funding both the land and, at least partly, the build cost of the stadium.

As mentioned above, I think Yorkcourt have been very sympathetic with the plans. The 'light' use units (pub / hotel / offices) are the ones based around the housing, with the 'heavy' units further away - resulting in lighter traffic movements around the existing housing. There is also attention to detail regarding the roadways and landscaping already. If you don't like something, tell the council - but I would suggest that you look at the details more closely and deal with them.

I never doubted for one minute that there would be complaints, but I have seen nothing yet to suggest that the wider population of Wakefield is not best served in this development occuring.

IMO it is a site ripe for development. Very little residential, easy access from motorways, a site of no value historical or natural or "HERITAGE" don't make me laugh.

If this site doesn't get the green light and goes to a full enquiry because a few dozen nimby's are looking for a cause to fill their drab lives then Wakefield is doomed to remain a back water.

I'm all for fairness and the voice of the little man being heard. But when it's a few dozen reactionaries stopping something 15,000 people want and will provide jobs hundreds who need them then I become hostile. I'm hostile because there come a point where the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the very few in this case. It's a form of reverse bullying, the nobody having there moment for kicking the big guy. This despite the overblown retoric has nothing to to with belief and everything to do with being petty and awkward for the sake of it IMHO.

Just using the word HERITAGE shows you to be a fraud IMHO.

I'm sure some will slap me down for my post but frankly I'm sick of these people getting in the way of genuine progress for the majority for very little reason.

Whilst I think our vasty is being a tad harsh

I do agree that the use of the 'preserving our heritage' slant is completely overboard and without value to this process.

The issue here is one of a few people being disrupted by this development (that and the fact that there are those who would wish to see our progress slowed). I have sympathy with the former, but none with the latter.

The phrase 'the greater good' took a bit of a pounding in the film Hot Fuzz, but in this case I can see no better way to describe the proposals put forward!

Well,if the poster is not looking to achieve anything -- why bother posting a comment.

Surely he is looking for people to support/understand/empathise/sympathise with his viewpoint,with the aim of gaining support to oppose the development .

On top of that,the whole "speech" is littered with contradictions.

How on earth can you think a stadium in isolation would be good for the area -- but not the full development.Only the full development will bring investment and jobs.

He knows if we dont get this stadium --- it wont be the" be all and end all" for the Wildcats --- How does he know that?When most of us know the reality is we are shafted without a new ground and if this doesnt happen,we are out of time.

And as ive already stated,the heritage card!!!!

IMHO,the poster has come on here with an agenda and tried delivering it with a poorly constructed viewpoint,littered with poor and inaccurate comments.

However ,i will take heart that if the poster represents the objectors,they are up a creek without a crested newt

Not a dig at you St.Chunter and Happy New Year.

Sorry for not replying to some of your messages sooner I think I should have picked a better day to post my message when I would have had more time, anyway in reply to your post I realise that the ground can not go ahead without the industrial side and it is all well and good to say as another person has said that this used to be a pit site and so really is brown belt land but the fact is to my way of thinking that it is no longer brown belt and is fully fledged green in my eyes, and this really is in short supply in my eyes. Another concern of mine is that once this area has been industrialised it will be an absolute cert that the site will grow over the coming years with yet more warehouses and what have you, I really do not know what the answer is to all of this because as I have tried to make clear were it just new stadium facilities that were going on this land I would have no problem its just that I can see this whole site escalating because we are talking about a huge acreage of land here and ending up as one of the biggest industrial areas in the district and then all of our green belt or brown if you like will be lost and all that has gone with it, as I said in my first message I never expected my thoughts to be popular I just wanted them to be known and the reasons behind them.

Yep and if i lived in the area i would rather have a sympathetic build like the one on offer, who knows what may be offered in future.

I promise you I have come on here with no agenda other than to put across my point on why I am opposed to the industrialisation of the Newmarket site, I do realise that I am going to get no support for what I believe is the greater good of our community from you folks on here as you are all wildcats fans and you all want this to happen, and I dare say that in the long run you will be proved to be right and this will all go ahead but if I and others just sat back and watched it happen without making our voices heard then we would not be being true to our beliefs, another point you make is that the wildcats would be shafted as you put it if this ground does not go ahead well to be honest I don’t know about that all I do know is that rugby has been played in Wakefield for over 100 years and I am sure this would continue to be the case as I am sure there are other suitable sites. As other people have mentioned about all the hundreds of jobs that would be created by all this, well from what I have seen of this sort of thing in the past you could have a warehouse as big as 3 rugby fields and only have 6 guys on forklifts working in it so I think that number of jobs could be very much exaggerated, but anyway these are just my thoughts and I do realise that I am in a very big minority so I think it will just be a case of wait and see what comes of it all.

My first post was a response to what appeared to be a "reasonable" opposition to the proposals from someone who had no benefit coming from the proposals.

Unfortunately, your second post clearly shows you to be a fully paid up member of the NIMBY brigade and thus not open to a proper debate on the subject.

Many sites which used to be pit sites have been landscaped and returend to nature sites. However this one in particular benefits from it's location adjacent to the motorway, and that, in my view, renders it liable to development as the traffic movements, once off the motorway, will be as small as can reasonably be accomodated.

In comparison to ALL the other motorway junctions, this one has escaped for a long time:
Junction 39 has been developed - partly on old quarry workings, but much of it on arable land (some belonging to my ancestors many moons ago - and no, we didn't sell it for development).
Junction 40 has seen a great deal of development over recent years - again there is history of mine workings in the area, but there is also arable farming which has been lost.
Junction 41 now has the junction 41 estate (some of this land was sold by uncle to allow development, unfortunately he sold it in the 70's because he couldn't make money out of rhubarb at the time) and it has Paragon.
Junction 31 on the M62 has Normantion ind est and the Freeport site.
Junction 32 has - well, everything!

So, why would it not be suitable to develop J30 as the next logical move, on land previously used for heavy, dirty, industry and which in turn offers the opportunity to provide Wakefield with much needed sporting facilities - both to encourage and develop activity in sport for achievers at all levels and to preserve our sporting heritage and prevent the removal of the the most significant 'Wakefield' branded organisation from the top level of it's sport.

It's a no-brainer for me - even allowing for some sympathy for those in the midst of it all.

The problem that Wakefield has is a shortage of industrial/commercial land for the long term future which it needs in order to create the much needed jobs the district requires. I know that there are developments on junctions of the M1 and M62 but these are becomong developed and Junction 30 offers the district a long term opportunity for job creation which needs to be taken. I understand that Leeds are looking at the otherside of the mororway so I suspect the junction will be developed.

With regard to Green Belt, yes part of the site is Green Belt but it is not historic Green Belt or Ancient Woodland or anything of Conservational value. It was the former Newmarket Silkstone Colliery which has gone and the site holds no heritage value. It will have been designated Green Belt when the pit closed and at the time there was no requirement for more industrial/commercial land but times have moved on and we need developments that will create employment and waht better place than at the side of the M62.

This development is not just about a Stadium. Of course we want to see a Stadium that we can call home but Wakefield need this development for its long term future and that of its residents. I only hope the people of Wakefield can see this and it would be nice for the Editorial of the Wakefield Express to see the benefits to Wakefield and give its supports.

There may be other sites suitable for a stadium on its own, but given that the club has already sold Belle Vue and there is a need to have external funding to build a new ground the ONLY solution is for a larger development that includes a stadium rather than a stand alone project.

Whilst a large warehouse may have a relatively small people working in it, there are the other jobs created by the distribution (i.e. drivers) that you won't see within the building.

Rather than spending time posting your drivel on here, you should either get out & appreciate the manufactured green belt while it lasts or get searching for a new house in the middle of a national park.

BTW you still havent answered my original question.

What % of Wakefields greenbelt would this development wipe out?

As you did state it would wipe out a large chunk.

Do you honestly believe that a stadium built in isolation(even if it was financially viable) wouldnt then lead to further development?

Just listen to yourself. That is utterly ridiculous - just which 'community' do you represent? The one that lives on Newmarket Lane, or the one which includes 15,000 folk who have voted to say yes to the need for a stadium, or the one that includes families struggling to find work in these difficult times.

That last phrase is a threat by any other name. If I were you I would keep my powder dry for now, as you clearly wish to de-rail the train - but we will be making sure it stays right on track - and we believe that we have the 'community' interests very much at heart!

1 if theres an award for bravest post of the year, well you left it late but you have won it!
2. I await the arrival of sandal cat with his knowledge of the brown belt issues which will see your argument dissolve in to oblivion.=#FF0000 EDIT SEE ABOVE!!!!!
3. Id happily pay you in to the first game at the new ground should it happen, for being brave enought to at least be honest, trust me its great and youd come back!
4.Industrial units do bring jobs, yes there are 6 people in fork lifts yoou can see outside, most of the people work inside the buildings, its like a house you see, just because you cant see the people does not mean they dont live there, maybe we could build glass industrial units??
5. happy new year anyway!

My sister lives in Stanley, she was dead against the Thornes development, she now wants the thornes developement back on.

Unlucky, be careful what you wish for come sometimes you get it. Nimby's should all be shot , they prevent the world from progressing.

Could you be more specific on the highlighted points.

What are your beliefs?

Where are these other sites that would be commercially and financially viable that you are sure exist?

What other developments in the past are you referring to and did you oppose these sites?

Did you oppose the Thornes Park proposals?

I would presume you are a member of WCCG.
The video is quite laughable and actaully highlights the need to move away from predominately residential areas,yet you state you are happy for just the stadium to be built -- seems to contradict what your little band of followers believe!!!!!

Showing rubbish in gardens -- get real and no disrespect to Belle Vue/Agbrigg,but you could walk down many streets in Agbrigg and find that amount of litter in a garden.That has more to do with the residents than the stadium.

Your own website even highlights the fact that Wakefield need a new stadium to protect their super league survival.

The facts are,you dont give a monkeys about Wakefield Wildcats,the benefits to the wider community of a first class sporting facility,the benefits of job creation.

The simple fact is you just dont want the development next to you!! and are trying to hide behind the greenbelt issues.

God having looked at the wccg site the whole thing turns in to farce, hey everyone theres a crisp packet on the floor on a street in wakefield www.wakefieldccg.co.uk/ anyway for fun lets count the spelling errors and gramatical errors on that page alone,we are not dealing with clever people here! and i withdraw my offer to pay to take you to a game as i dont mix with people who's iq is lower than their weight in tons!

God having looked at the wccg site the whole thing turns in to farce, hey everyone theres a crisp packet on the floor on a street in wakefield www.wakefieldccg.co.uk/ anyway for fun lets count the spelling errors and gramatical errors on that page alone,we are not dealing with clever people here! and i withdraw my offer to pay to take you to a game as i dont mix with people who's iq is lower than their weight in tons!

Quote ="chapster"God having looked at the wccg site the whole thing turns in to farce, hey everyone theres a crisp packet on the floor on a street in wakefield www.wakefieldccg.co.uk/ anyway for fun lets count the spelling errors and gramatical errors on that page alone,we are not dealing with clever people here! and i withdraw my offer to pay to take you to a game as i dont mix with people whis iq is lower than their weight in tons!'" Its worth a chuckle isnt it!!! It was good to see they interviewed a cross section of society,including,crackheads,illegal immigrants ,single parents and for pity sake a Volvo driver!!!!!!!!!!!

Quote ="chapster"God having looked at the wccg site the whole thing turns in to farce, hey everyone theres a crisp packet on the floor on a street in wakefield www.wakefieldccg.co.uk/ anyway for fun lets count the spelling errors and gramatical errors on that page alone,we are not dealing with clever people here! and i withdraw my offer to pay to take you to a game as i dont mix with people whis iq is lower than their weight in tons!'" Its worth a chuckle isnt it!!! It was good to see they interviewed a cross section of society,including,crackheads,illegal immigrants ,single parents and for pity sake a Volvo driver!!!!!!!!!!!

Being a resident of Stanley myself I went 'trespassing' on the the relevant piece of land when it was announced that the stadium was to be there.

It is not a landscaped, parkland, grassy field sort of area in any shape or form - it is rough, waste land which is very difficult to walk over. There are no views at all of this vast area from Newmarket Lane so nothing will change regarding views for residents there and I understand all the new buildings will be low so again will not be eyesores.

The letter in the Express last week talked about losing farmland ... there is most definitely no farmland on the site. There is a 'market garden farm' next to the land where the stadium is going (on the corner of Aberford Road/Newmarket Lane) which belongs to relatives of mine and I am not aware that they have any problems with the plan.

When anything is built anywhere someone will be unhappy - but I cannot think it would be possible to find any site that could be developed in such a way and affect so few people.