Re: Stadium saga solution by Wednesday? : Thu Sep 21, 2017 11:20 am  

jakeyg95 wrote:

Pretty sure it was Sky because you wouldn't have been able to see from their gantry properly.

I seem to recall the same thing.

I'm not an expert - but I'm involved in a lot of build projects through work; in my experience, a weighty tome of objections from neighbours, although scary, can often in large part be discounted, because they're not material objections and are not backed up with any facts or evidence; planners don't like speculative stuff.

A lot of what could be considered material objections to this proposal, will already be the case with the existing use - negative amenity effects, over-development, bulk & mass etc; so I can't see it being too big an issue. Also, if the 88M guy has thrashed this out with WMDC, one has to assume that he's been given some assurances that the planning committee will look at it favourably.

The big issue could be actually getting YCP to cough up - although I would imagine they'll be less inclined to welch on a deal with WMDC than they would with WT.

If it does come off, it could be a big step towards regenerating a part of Wakefield that is an absolute mess and has been for years; I still don't see how it all fits on that site though.

Re: Stadium saga solution by Wednesday? : Thu Sep 21, 2017 11:28 am  

I just hope we aren't playing into the hands of York Court and whatever motives the council have for not enforcing the original deal at Newmarket. Now we have the foot out of the door for Newmarket I presume YC will be able to carry on as they please with that land, I just hope they don't intend on dragging their feet some more when it comes to coughing up funds for our stadium because at that point it will be too late. Cautiously optimistic like everyone else but YC have given us no reason to trust them so far

Re: Stadium saga solution by Wednesday? : Thu Sep 21, 2017 11:36 am  

Jizzer wrote:

I just hope we aren't playing into the hands of York Court and whatever motives the council have for not enforcing the original deal at Newmarket. Now we have the foot out of the door for Newmarket I presume YC will be able to carry on as they please with that land, I just hope they don't intend on dragging their feet some more when it comes to coughing up funds for our stadium because at that point it will be too late. Cautiously optimistic like everyone else but YC have given us no reason to trust them so far

As I understand it the longer they drag it out the longer the council will hold onto the lease as security. This way the funds for the stadium are front loaded as they should've been in the first place rather than back loaded. Stadium first, units second.

Yorkcourt's involvement concerns me too but this way they end up owing the Wakefield public rather than, in the wider perception, the Wakefield Trinity club. This is much more politically damaging to council and developer alike and would generate far more interest in the saga. Were it not for the pressure applied by certain journalists and posters on here we certainly wouldn’t be where we are now. Clearly somebody doesn’t want any further digging on this matter and they have been shamed to pull together. Right now it seems like something will come of it. Once we have it, perhaps that is the time to delve further into the murky goings on here.

Re: Stadium saga solution by Wednesday? : Thu Sep 21, 2017 11:45 am  

bren2k wrote:

I'm in the camp of being cautiously optimistic; I always thought that NM was the better option from a commercial standpoint, with BV, however fancily dressed up, being limiting due to its location and it being landlocked.

But - if this is the best we can get - it's certainly better than nothing.

I'd also question how everything is going to fit on that site - stadium, training facilities, hospitality, retail, leisure, and crucially - parking. It just doesn't add up at this stage - unless they've been able to buy up some surrounding property with a view to bulldozing.

On the question of planning objections - whilst neighbours may well raise objections, I can't see them being material; given that the site has long established use as a sports stadium, it would seem to be an argument that has already been had.

That is pretty much the crux of the argument.

If this were a 'new' development it wouldn't get through, not a chance. Not enough access, not enough, disabled issues, to close to residential etc etc.

However this is the clever bit. I've overlay'd the plans onto the existing site and the footprint is identical or in some cases smaller. Every stand has an historical past. There have always been or at some time been roofed stands on all four sides.

There is absolutely no change of use, no change of size, nothing. Basically it's cosmetic, expensive and wonderful cosmetic but in pure planning terms it's not 'new'.

Put simply if your front wall falls down you just replace it with a new one, you don't need planning permission etc. I know planning isn't as simple as that but what we are doing reduces the chances of any meaningful opposition to a minimum.

I'm not saying it's nailed on but if you're looking for the straightest route from A to B this is it.

As for training facilities they don't need to be on site - I'm sure there are any number of organisations we could do a deal with on that one. Ditto Parking.

It's not ideal but compared to the bomb site we currently play in.....

Re: Stadium saga solution by Wednesday? : Thu Sep 21, 2017 12:16 pm  

Schunter wrote:

Exactly. And I can't shake the feeling all this suits Box down to the ground for some reason, why is he seemingly so positive all of a sudden after years of inertia and often worse than that? Is it that what benefits Yorkcourt also benefits him somehow? It all seems too easy. Is it more diversion for Yorkcourt's sake?

Box and Mackie had backed themselves into a corner and were collectively crapping themselves at the thought of very damaging litigation from the club/Trust - a Court case that they would have likely lost - bearing in mind what we all now know, so to save face they have had to come up with a viable solution, and this appears to be it.
Box, being the manipulative politician that he is, has found a way of digging the two of them out of the brown smelly stuff and has come up with this solution which appears on the face of it, to be satisfactory to all parties concerned and Mackie gets an additional 35 acres of land down at Newmarket to do with as he pleases. Mannie gets to develop the BV site and we get a new stadium...everyone's a winner (hopefully !!)

Re: Stadium saga solution by Wednesday? : Thu Sep 21, 2017 12:19 pm  

Great news on the face of tihngs, but plenty of question marks

What do we know about 88M?

There appears to be dozens of 88 X companies out there that Mansoor Hussain is a director of (Barr88, Air88, Interiors88, Bet88 and several more), very few of which appear to be trading and even less capable of delivering something of this scale - all on paper of course everything is not always as it first appears.

Anybody know anything so us amater sleuths can get on the case?

Re: Stadium saga solution by Wednesday? : Thu Sep 21, 2017 12:26 pm  

Good question Tommy...is it Mannie that will be developing ALL of the site, or are Yorkcourt involved in that too, because the way I read it Yorkcourt were just providing the Heads of Terms agreement ??

Re: Stadium saga solution by Wednesday? : Thu Sep 21, 2017 12:36 pm  

Tommy Duckfingers wrote:

There appears to be dozens of 88 X companies out there that Mansoor Hussain is a director of (Barr88, Air88, Interiors88, Bet88 and several more), very few of which appear to be trading and even less capable of delivering something of this scale - all on paper of course everything is not always as it first appears.

Anybody know anything so us amater sleuths can get on the case?

In and of itself, that's not too unusual and doesn't necessarily mean anything nefarious or suspicious; most companies will own (or have owned) multiple legal entities over their lifetime - sometimes they are special purpose vehicles to own particular elements of a business in a more tax efficient way, such as land, property or vehicles for example; and sometimes they are created to insulate a main business from a new venture that may or may not take off. So I wouldn't read too much into it - and I certainly wouldn't use the companies house info to bring their credentials or integrity into question; that stuff will be for MC and CB to sort out - hence the need for *cautious* optimism whilst the due diligence is carried out.

I guess that MC and MH have proven, in different ways, to be shrewd and successful in their own fields - and PB pretty much always gets what he wants, whether you agree with his methods or not; so if YCP can be forced to deliver on their end, there is every chance that this will finally come off. Whether it comes off without a hitch and within the timescale is in some ways, in the lap of the gods; look at Cas, with their cast-iron, definitely gonna happen new stadium - I'm sure it will, but they seem to be no further forward either.

Both teams in their respective new stadia by 2020? Here's hoping!

Re: Stadium saga solution by Wednesday? : Thu Sep 21, 2017 12:42 pm  

coco the fullback wrote:

Wasn't Glover's original plan to put a roof along the length of the western terrace, but get turned down because of the height?

More to do with obstruction of the view of the Sky cameras I believe.

Re: Stadium saga solution by Wednesday? : Thu Sep 21, 2017 12:48 pm  

Here is a little bit about Manni Hussain. http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest- ... s-millions Could be a good person to have on board with us?

Here is a little bit about Manni Hussain. http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest- ... s-millions Could be a good person to have on board with us?