Why is the developer apparently keen on getting involved in the re-vamp of Belle Vue, yet is nowhere near as keen to do anything at Newmarket within the terms of the original agreement. ?



Here's a thought: Keep stalling until the original planning permission expires on the 31st December, re-apply and not include any Community Sports Facilities in any new application.

It was wmdc who negotiated both agreements not the clubs so I think we are right to question the recent statements from the council saying no one can expect a ground without paying a commercial rent when they negotiated cas not a community trust, to get one for a quild. Cas will also retain all non matchday revenur from their gifted stadium which was another sticking point on the Wakey deal
I

AFAIAK Tigers aren't just simply getting a stadium for a quid as you put it. Isn't the Cas Tigers deal reliable on taking up retail space (i.e Next, M & S and Primark) ? If WT want a similar deal to Tigers how would that transfer to a re-vamped Belle Vue ?

You are paying a quid for the transfer of ownership, the developer is paying the cost of the stadium build from the profits on the retail build. Obviously not enough retail build no stadium for Cas but if it goes ahead the club which is a private entity will own the stadium and control all revenue streams. Something the council have gone on record stating no club can expect when talking about Trinity.

FWIW trinity aren’t asking for the same deal as Cas, I have raised it to show the hypocrisy of WMDC.

What we want is what was agreed at Newmarket. The stadium to be controlled by the community trust who lease it to us on a full repair and insurance basis meaning we are responsible for all maintenance and insurance costs but in return get to generate non match day income and the rental agreement reflects this and the costs we will have to pay to maintain and insure

The key difference between the Newmarket deal and the revamped BV one is the community trust are a “not for profit” entity so only need to ensure the running costs and upkeep of the stadium are covered whereas the developer of the BV proposal wants to profit from the new stadium.

The point being forgotten is that the BV deal was always supposed to be “in lieu” of the Newmarket one and both developers at Newmarket and BV are getting significant benefits as a by product so wanting to earn off the stadium is motivated by greed

The sheer cheek of the Council and developer (Yorkcourt) by constantly moving goal posts but pointing the finger at Trinity is unbelievable. After gaining the green belt land for free off the back of the original stadium plans/agreement, they first downsize the proposed Newmarket development from 12k capacity to 10k, with whispers of getting rid of the proposed training pitches also (?) so they can build more of their own stuff. Then they move the goal posts entirely by saying if they can have all the Newmarket land, we'll revamp Belle Vue (again 10k instead of the original 12k) again no training pitches or even sufficient parking this time going off the artists impression - Newmarket being the desired option by the club I believe, for obvious reasons...but still the club were willing to take this on the same terms as the original agreement. Not only that, the council/developer then totally disregard the 'peppercorn rent' of the original agreement and change it to commercial rent so they can coin in even more, even after getting a huge chunk of land for nothing. Comments in the media suggest that it is the club that want to have their cake and eat it, however it is actually the other way round!

Plus we must not forget that the initial proposal for a community stadium at Newmarket would benefit the community on many levels. There was talk of educational facilities, a sport science department, 3G pitches. As I see it, a redeveloped Belle Vue wouldn't afford the space for what was initially proposed.

The council are now preparing their documents to make it look like the whole issue is solely about Wakefield Trinity getting a new stadium. This isn't and never was the case. They are doing their best to turn the people of Wakefield against the club while at the same time denying them of what was initially proposed.

As Rodney Walker and Colin Mackie said in 2009...

Sir Rodney Walker says, “We have been working extremely hard with all relevant parties to find a solution to benefit the whole community and a new site for the proposal. We are delighted to have found an opportunity with great access and great potential to move sport on to another level in the district. We very much hope that this is the first step in creating world class facilities and clubs in the district.”

Colin Mackie of Yorkcourt Properties comments, “This is a very exciting opportunity for Yorkcourt to be involved in. We are confident that the project can be delivered in a timescale to guard the future of Rugby League in the district and create a facility for sustained sporting success”.

If you can put your club allegiances to one side for a moment and consider the future of not only Wakefield Trinity, but the future of the district's kids, aspiring athletes, aspiring sportspeople, amateur sports clubs, social groups, you may just realise everyone has been screwed.

I agree with that bit. You must admit though that the way in which the trust is formed doesn't help WT's cause. The trust's members are the 2 owners of the club (MC and CB) plus hard working supporters of WT - where is the public representation in that ? No one has been elected to the trust who doesn't have a WT bias and whose sole aim would be to fight for the public sports facilities only. There is no independent representation from Joe public on the trust.

The average member of public (and I'd go as far as to say a majority of RL fans outside the Wakefield area) see the trust as a vehicle to get WT a new stadium at all costs and the other sports facilities hardly get a mention. I've followed the story for years (as most probably know) and I have never seen a requirements list of what exactly the trust deem as appropriate public sports facilities.

There is actually a Leeds Rhinos fan on the trust if I'm not mistaken.

Tigertroll if you insist on trying to stir the pot you really need to get your facts right, in the space of two posts you've made yourself look so silly once again.

If you're on about the other sporting facilities at Newmaket, you'd need to look through the pages and pages of files on the planning portal for the development, but from what I read the other day, the plans show two full size MUGA's with a seperate changing rooms block and a small stand overlooking the area. I take it the Trust were happy with that at the time, if that's what you mean

The Trust originally had Sir Rodney Walker as head.. It also currently has former Wakefield MP David Hichcliffe and also former WT director Eric Timmins. Has has been pointed out by one of the Trust members on our forum, they've invited representatives from WMDC to join as well as approaching the RFL to appoint someone as well. All these people WMDC and Yorkcourt have agreed to work with and like others have said, Jonathan Stone is 'joe public' with no interest or bias towards Trinity. Ask yourself would anyone with no interest in RL, or just any any other person, be bothered to sacrfice & put the huge amounts of time and effort into it when most people have got work and their on crap to worry about. The average joe public in Wakefield just expects the Council and developer to crack on with what was promised and stop messing around ad that would go with any development. For example when Trinity Walk started getting built & then came to a grinding halt with a big hole in the City for a couple of years, people just expected the Council to get the hole eventually sorted.

Also why would bias be brought up anyway. Yorkcourt wanted the land, they needed the Communities support, they said what they were going to do and build, so WMDC would take a load of land out of being classified as greenbelt and use a s106 agreement. It's them and WMDC that made it all about a Community Stadium and the 2000 jobs the warehousing was going to provide. So as rate payers in the City why isn't it ours and other people's concern, even if they may or may not support Trinity. I'm sure if it was near enough to you and about your Club and local Community, you wouldn't be protesting so much. It's funny because i know a number of Cas fans and they want the same as me, both teams in new stadiums, playing at the top end of the table, creating an even bigger rivalry and fill said new stadia. It would be what's best for RL in general imo.

As WMDC said at the time and I quote-

Thanks for that SC. My concern is the closure of Castleford Baths and Knottingley Sports Centre. They obviously still need replacing but it seems that the facilities your mention are more like football and rugby than swimming, tennis and squash. Pontefract has also lost its municipal golf course due to government cuts. My protest is based on location.

Yes, of course it is

Location is the main problem. Can you imagine the outcry in Cas, Ponte, Fev and Knottingley if new sports facilities were built in Wakefield ? We have just seen WMDC shut everything in our area. I used to be able to book a squash court at Knottingley by just phoning them up. They now tell me my best bet is to join a squash club. As for swimming I've now got to travel to Rothwell.

I don't get the outcry thing. It's not as if Newmaket was getting built by the Council anyway and tbh I haven't a clue what sports facilities they are in Ponte or Knottingley, but I certainly wouldn't care less if any got a swimming pool, sports etc built.

This whole saga with Wakefield's ground has been going on for about 20 years now.
The whole thing should have been sorted years ago

I don't think you'll get many disagreeing with that.
20 years? more like 40.
It can't be a coincidence that the worst 2 grounds in SL are under the WMDC authority.
Leeds and Bradford have also lagged behind the rest.
Fev had the right idea and gave up waiting for assistance and tidied up their own stadium, but doing that for a new SL standard stadium needs at least political support from the LA and/or a friendly neighbourhood soccer team.

The council are contributing 2 million to the project.

Because of the community facilities and it being a real community stadium (not privately owned).
They were getting a bargain. No responsibility for upkeep either.

Correct - I'm just dispelling the myth that the council are not required to pay for any of it.

your objections seem to be more about it being in Wakefield rather than any "genuine" concerns.
Wakefield itself has lost plenty and its facilities generally, for a City the size of Wakefield have been mickey poor for years.
Your comments seem to want to deflect attention from WMDC and their lack of action as regards the COMMUNITY stadium, a phrase stolen and used in connection with the Glasshoughton project, when that facility will belong to CTRLFC and whilst some sections of the local community may use some of the facilities, it was NEVER a community stadium.
As someone so keen that "we" have decent facilities, you too should be outraged at their handling of this situation.

The answer to that conundrum would be to have [uboth[/u Glasshoughton and Newmarket as community stadiums. I know it will never happen but for a district the size of ours both would get good usage.