Re: Stadium Developments : Tue Dec 06, 2011 11:12 pm  

Gronk! wrote:

Wakefield had the chance and both teams would be in the stadium by now, but they rejected the feasibility study the council proposed.

The thing about the so called feasibility study is the fact it wasn’t feasible. The parameters were complete bias! The study was to look into which ground would be built quickest. It said nothing about what would be the best location to benefit both clubs as a business. More importantly it had no reference at all to funding of the project! Imagine if we had agreed and the study decided on Glasshoughton, what would have happened? Newmarket would have been shelved and still no funding would have been available for Glasshoughton.

How would funding for Glasshoughton be achieved even if we came aboard?

Re: Stadium Developments : Tue Dec 06, 2011 11:16 pm  

Richard Wright is a desperate man the RL family seems a thing of the past. I wonder why he isn't keen on the City of Wakefield having a community Stadium & why is he so bothered about it if his own privately owned stadium is progressing so well?

Re: Stadium Developments : Tue Dec 06, 2011 11:31 pm  

M62 J30 TRINITY wrote:

Richard Wright is a desperate man the RL family seems a thing of the past. I wonder why he isn't keen on the City of Wakefield having a community Stadium & why is he so bothered about it if his own privately owned stadium is progressing so well?

But RW hasn't objected to it.

Re: Stadium Developments : Tue Dec 06, 2011 11:34 pm  

deeHell wrote: The thing about the so called feasibility study is the fact it wasn’t feasible. The parameters were complete bias! The study was to look into which ground would be built quickest. It said nothing about what would be the best location to benefit both clubs as a business. More importantly it had no reference at all to funding of the project! Imagine if we had agreed and the study decided on Glasshoughton, what would have happened? Newmarket would have been shelved and still no funding would have been available for Glasshoughton. How would funding for Glasshoughton be achieved even if we came aboard? Actually you're incorrect: We have suggested an independent assessment of both proposed sites to determine which one is deliverable in the timescale and is the most financially viable. http://www.therfl.co.uk/news/article/18415

deeHell wrote: The thing about the so called feasibility study is the fact it wasn’t feasible. The parameters were complete bias! The study was to look into which ground would be built quickest. It said nothing about what would be the best location to benefit both clubs as a business. More importantly it had no reference at all to funding of the project! Imagine if we had agreed and the study decided on Glasshoughton, what would have happened? Newmarket would have been shelved and still no funding would have been available for Glasshoughton. How would funding for Glasshoughton be achieved even if we came aboard? Actually you're incorrect: We have suggested an independent assessment of both proposed sites to determine which one is deliverable in the timescale and is the most financially viable. http://www.therfl.co.uk/news/article/18415

Re: Stadium Developments : Wed Dec 07, 2011 12:41 am  

Wheels wrote:

I see, thanks.

So what have WMDC put to the project then, just the land?

Nope - not even that; the land is owned by the developer, being the site of the old Newmarket colliery.

WMDC, as far as I'm aware, offered both clubs the opportunity to use land as security to obtain loans, to the value of £2million apiece, on the proviso that the money went to a Community Trust, not a private company; the Wakefield Community Trust (who would operate the proposed Community Stadium at Newmarket) have taken them up on this and CT haven't. My understanding is that CT don't have a Trust, as their stadium proposal is not a Community Stadium but a privately owned venture - as such, WMDC are legally unable to give them access to that money as they don't have the appopriate legal entity.

At planning committee, WMDC were unanimously minded to approve this development; it's widely believed to have been called in to PI due to the objection of Leeds City Council, who appear to be opposed to any development that happens anywhere other than in Leeds; they're now using Leeds council tax payers money to fund a legal objection to the development, having engaged a barrister and employed the services of a specialist planning company called Barton Wilmore.

There - you're up to speed!

Re: Stadium Developments : Wed Dec 07, 2011 12:44 am  

What's the main point to their objection?

Re: Stadium Developments : Wed Dec 07, 2011 1:23 am  

Horatio Yed wrote:

What's the main point to their objection?

They think that the distribution and warehousing business should go to Leeds, not Wakefield.

Re: Stadium Developments : Wed Dec 07, 2011 9:02 am  

Mispost

Re: Stadium Developments : Wed Dec 07, 2011 10:22 am  

BIGAL1 wrote:

Yes but its not an away end.

Its an end, were the away fans always go. Usually in a larger nunber than the Home support.

Re: Stadium Developments : Wed Dec 07, 2011 10:36 am  

Wheels wrote:

Why they can't just groundshare a tidy 15,000 seater stadium in Normanton I'll never know. 18,000 and you'd both make money off Challenge Cup semis and England A games.

Can't we all just get along?

castlefield wildtigers...... it does have a certain ring to it.