Re: The Problem With Newmarket : Tue Jan 26, 2010 9:00 am  

Khlav Kalash wrote:

I believe YorkCourt are in constant dialogue with the residents directly affected.

SWAG’s mission is to campaign for a new stadium, which they have done. The rest of the development is not part of SWAG’s remit, although it is integral to the stadium becoming a reality. However, the SWAG petition directly quotes, ‘the Sports Facilities will form part of an overall strategy for the Newmarket site and cannot happen in isolation to the other functions proposed for the site.‘

One would take from that a development in an area close to the motorway and out of town would entail some sort of industrial units & business park.

but we are not yorkcourt developments, there is nothing wrong with us speaking to people also.
People signed for our new ground not the rest of it, I never explained to people what else was going to be built, because I was not aware of the plans, I would imagine a large percentage where also in the same boat.
If that was made 100% crystal clear I can assure you the 15000+ signitures we got would have been less (if only by those who signed who live in methley!!!)
this issue could cause us a lot of grief, and only because we are campaining for the one point that matters to us, in hindsight maybe the plans should have been released first so as no one was under any doubt, I don't know if that was at all possible (trb??)

Re: The Problem With Newmarket : Tue Jan 26, 2010 9:18 am  

kinleycat wrote:

but we are not yorkcourt developments, there is nothing wrong with us speaking to people also.
People signed for our new ground not the rest of it, I never explained to people what else was going to be built, because I was not aware of the plans, I would imagine a large percentage where also in the same boat.
If that was made 100% crystal clear I can assure you the 15000+ signitures we got would have been less (if only by those who signed who live in methley!!!)
this issue could cause us a lot of grief, and only because we are campaining for the one point that matters to us, in hindsight maybe the plans should have been released first so as no one was under any doubt, I don't know if that was at all possible (trb??)

If what you say is correct then the problem they have is not the stadium but the large development that comes with it. This is everything to do with YorkCourt and it’s an issue they need to resolve. If they don’t have an issue with the stadium so there is nothing that we could say.

We can speak to people but again, we are not the developers and we would not give them as an accurate picture of the overall development to what they could. The complaints people may have over the development are best directed to the developers as they can amend the plans to suit. SWAG can not. Sure if people ask about it or have questions then we could always point out that this will bring new jobs to the area plus bring the sports facilities up to date. The benefits for the region are there to see.

Had the plans been fully released before the petition I’m sure it still would’ve obtained between 14K -15K signatures. Had the petition also said that the plans will bring in thousands of jobs to the area many who didn’t sign it perhaps would’ve done. What you lose with one hand you gain in another.

Re: The Problem With Newmarket : Tue Jan 26, 2010 9:20 am  

kinleycat wrote:

but we are not yorkcourt developments, there is nothing wrong with us speaking to people also.
People signed for our new ground not the rest of it, I never explained to people what else was going to be built, because I was not aware of the plans, I would imagine a large percentage where also in the same boat.
If that was made 100% crystal clear I can assure you the 15000+ signitures we got would have been less (if only by those who signed who live in methley!!!)
this issue could cause us a lot of grief, and only because we are campaining for the one point that matters to us, in hindsight maybe the plans should have been released first so as no one was under any doubt, I don't know if that was at all possible (trb??)

Possible - yes - but at the time we all felt that we needed momentum building up to the submission of the details. As KK says, we did put wording to the effect that there would be more than just a stadium there as we knew that there had to be more involved in order to pay for the stadium.

I know we keep coming back to the idea of SWAG getting involved with the restless natives, but I can assure you that this was never our remit and I am all too well aware that Yorkcourt are speaking directly to the locals with a view to designing things in / out as appropriate to appease them - where commercially viable / practicable to do so. They are the professionals and we will allow them to do their job in this regard.

There are mixed signals coming in re. Methley - some say there is no issue, others say there is an issue - perhaps there is some reflection over who is asking the question and how it is phrased.

I can assure you that we would still have over 15,000 even without the Methley vote!

Re: The Problem With Newmarket : Tue Jan 26, 2010 10:09 am  

TRB wrote:

Possible - yes - but at the time we all felt that we needed momentum building up to the submission of the details. As KK says, we did put wording to the effect that there would be more than just a stadium there as we knew that there had to be more involved in order to pay for the stadium.

I know we keep coming back to the idea of SWAG getting involved with the restless natives, but I can assure you that this was never our remit and I am all too well aware that Yorkcourt are speaking directly to the locals with a view to designing things in / out as appropriate to appease them - where commercially viable / practicable to do so. They are the professionals and we will allow them to do their job in this regard.

There are mixed signals coming in re. Methley - some say there is no issue, others say there is an issue - perhaps there is some reflection over who is asking the question and how it is phrased.

I can assure you that we would still have over 15,000 even without the Methley vote!

Just to try and clear the Methley debate up......l appreciate that some members on here have heard some stories that residents are not happy, but this is all second hand.

l live in Methley, l go to the local pub, l go to the cricket club......l have heard nothing about Newmarket!

Last year (as l previously said) a development company (can’t remember the name) applied for planning permission to build a new estate in Lower Mickletown. This resulted in an action group being put together very quickly, that made a lot of noise...........the planning application was rejected!

No such group, at least as yet, has been formed, and more to the point, what impact will the development have on Methley!??? (Bar maybe creating jobs)

Re: The Problem With Newmarket : Tue Jan 26, 2010 11:27 am  

BIGAL1 wrote:

Joke

Allways chilled me bud! apart from when i have to respond to the inbreds!!!

Re: The Problem With Newmarket : Tue Jan 26, 2010 1:33 pm  

Khlav Kalash wrote:

If what you say is correct then the problem they have is not the stadium but the large development that comes with it. This is everything to do with YorkCourt and it’s an issue they need to resolve. If they don’t have an issue with the stadium so there is nothing that we could say.

We can speak to people but again, we are not the developers and we would not give them as an accurate picture of the overall development to what they could. The complaints people may have over the development are best directed to the developers as they can amend the plans to suit. SWAG can not. Sure if people ask about it or have questions then we could always point out that this will bring new jobs to the area plus bring the sports facilities up to date. The benefits for the region are there to see.

Had the plans been fully released before the petition I’m sure it still would’ve obtained between 14K -15K signatures. Had the petition also said that the plans will bring in thousands of jobs to the area many who didn’t sign it perhaps would’ve done. What you lose with one hand you gain in another.

So to some up if anybody asks anything negative, say you couldnt possibly comment due to your lack of expertise and pass the buck to York court.
But feel free to say what you want about any perceived benefits, despite your lack of expertise.

Thousands of jobs you say. Can you enlighten us all more?

And do you think due to location a fair number of these jobs will go to people in Castleford? If they do that would be great they would only all have to nip thru METHLEY to get there. I cant see why the Methley folk would complain. lets say out of these "thousands" 700 go to people in cas( im just making the figures up like you, so stay with me) I would expect a good 500 hundred to travel by car, and most to go(and return) via methley so thats only an extra 1000 trips aday thru their village.

Re: The Problem With Newmarket : Tue Jan 26, 2010 1:36 pm  

700 people from Cas get a job! PMSL there are some real comedians on here.

Re: The Problem With Newmarket : Tue Jan 26, 2010 1:45 pm  

Barry Clegg 2nd wrote:

700 people from Cas get a job! PMSL there are some real comedians on here.

LOL LOL LOL you may have a point

Re: The Problem With Newmarket : Tue Jan 26, 2010 1:45 pm  

rugbyball wrote: So to some up if anybody asks anything negative, say you couldnt possibly comment due to your lack of expertise and pass the buck to York court. But feel free to say what you want about any perceived benefits, despite your lack of expertise. The benefits are clear to see, new development, new jobs, that’s as much as I know about it. Can I change the plans if the people who live nearby have issues with the design? No? Can YorkCourt? Yes. They are in dialogue with the residents. rugbyball wrote: Thousands of jobs you say. Can you enlighten us all more? Not my words; http://www.wakefieldexpress.co.uk/news/ ... 5928426.jp … and that’s from a newspaper which has so far had a lukewarm reaction towards the proposals. rugbyball wrote: And do you think due to location a fair number of these jobs will go to people in Castleford? If they do that would be great they would only all have to nip thru METHLEY to get there. I cant see why the Methley folk would complain. lets say out of these "thousands" 700 go to people in cas( im just making the figures up like you, so stay with me) I would expect a good 500 hundred to travel by car, and most to go(and return) via methley so thats only an extra 1000 trips aday thru their village. Why wouldn’t they use the M62?

rugbyball wrote: So to some up if anybody asks anything negative, say you couldnt possibly comment due to your lack of expertise and pass the buck to York court. But feel free to say what you want about any perceived benefits, despite your lack of expertise. The benefits are clear to see, new development, new jobs, that’s as much as I know about it. Can I change the plans if the people who live nearby have issues with the design? No? Can YorkCourt? Yes. They are in dialogue with the residents. rugbyball wrote: Thousands of jobs you say. Can you enlighten us all more? Not my words; http://www.wakefieldexpress.co.uk/news/ ... 5928426.jp … and that’s from a newspaper which has so far had a lukewarm reaction towards the proposals. rugbyball wrote: And do you think due to location a fair number of these jobs will go to people in Castleford? If they do that would be great they would only all have to nip thru METHLEY to get there. I cant see why the Methley folk would complain. lets say out of these "thousands" 700 go to people in cas( im just making the figures up like you, so stay with me) I would expect a good 500 hundred to travel by car, and most to go(and return) via methley so thats only an extra 1000 trips aday thru their village. Why wouldn’t they use the M62?

Re: The Problem With Newmarket : Tue Jan 26, 2010 2:06 pm  

Khlav Kalash wrote: The benefits are clear to see, new development, new jobs, that’s as much as I know about it. Can I change the plans if the people who live nearby have issues with the design? No? Can YorkCourt? Yes. They are in dialogue with the residents. Not my words; http://www.wakefieldexpress.co.uk/news/ ... 5928426.jp … and that’s from a newspaper which has so far had a lukewarm reaction towards the proposals. Why wouldn’t they use the M62? Dont be silly man you cant take a horse and trap on the motorways. Why would they go that way when they can come through methley and take twice as long.

Khlav Kalash wrote: The benefits are clear to see, new development, new jobs, that’s as much as I know about it. Can I change the plans if the people who live nearby have issues with the design? No? Can YorkCourt? Yes. They are in dialogue with the residents. Not my words; http://www.wakefieldexpress.co.uk/news/ ... 5928426.jp … and that’s from a newspaper which has so far had a lukewarm reaction towards the proposals. Why wouldn’t they use the M62? Dont be silly man you cant take a horse and trap on the motorways. Why would they go that way when they can come through methley and take twice as long.