As TRB has pointed out, it was definitely green belt that was mentioned.

Thanks for all your replies and Clan for your essays ! Hope it is read by the PM, the more views and posts we get the more it is likely to do some good or rather it cannot do any harm

Could not recall exactly what they said but certainly land that was previously designated for development has been redesignated greenbelt - I think there was some around Cutsyke and the housing land at Fryston that will never be developed will be greenbelt so its not inconceivable that greenbelt has gone up 1% - all the Council has done is redistributed around.

One of the main purposes or greenbelt is to crate a space between towns cities to stop them merging into one, if it is true what you has been said, then most of these areas will hardly stop Leeds and Wakefield converging.

What is more it is another example of how the process over this whole thing has been poorly managed, we have residents we real concerns and a right to know what is going on, and the council are giving the facts to out at a supporters meeting, rather than trying to quell the fears of those effected. Also playing swapsy on land reclassification at the whim of one developer. I am glad that this is going to inquiry and the people of Wakefield will get an unbiased result.

Fair do's, however not so good for the job creation, regeneration of the areas that are having their land reclassified to suit one development.

No fair comment on this issue I stand corrected. However lets face it you lot have had it explained to you by the councillors where as the rest of us are left in the dark.

Apology accepted!

If that's what it was?

Capitalist you say! You clearly don't have any grasp on my politics... as this would not be a description most people who know me would use at all... pro-development, free market, pro-European and social democracy yes, capitalist no. I know not everybody holds my views but I have explained time and time and time and time again why I hold my views... have you?

I didn't take offence at the way they ran they campaign, I was upset by their take on morality and values in the way they presented their arguments.

As for the 'voluntary' consultation event at the Stanley Church centre, I read about it in the Wakefield Express not on here! I understand that the YEP, Ridings FM and Real Radio also rans stories about the event... hardly low-key. I don't think could afford a full one page add in the Times though! The objection groups keep saying that this was low-key but they have several of there own meetings directly with Yorkcourt, Denise Jefferey and other Wakefield and Leeds councillors. The buggers did not invite me, very low key! They don't like what they heard, so they convert this into no consultation and the classic... we are not been listened to! Do they know that some people hold different views to them... the majority of Wakefield Council and the whole of the planning committee for one!

As for the plans, I saw the same ones as everyone else did, which was the original application drawings... warehouse units and all! Did you actual go, I did, and they were the same (first issues) drawings you will find on the planning portal right now. I saw lots of local people (remember, I know quite a few of them, being a local and all) looking at plans and in general they understood and where happy. Did they not get something like 250 forms completed and only 10 or so anti comments.



Of course they are unclear, you can only estimate and those estimates are based on known statistics for this type of development... and that will include relocation jobs. Morrison's is a bad example, they would only ever want more space as they are expanding as a business. There is a strong rumour Tesco have their eye on the big unit (as well as other sites in the area I understand) and they will be almost all new jobs.

What I said was is that there is not much available space in the Wakefield district and the small amount of space that was available were generally older spec units and mostly not suitable for more modern distribution operations. These units will probably be taken, when growth returns, by low grade warehousing operations for which they are only suitable.

As for the LDF then it is plan period 2011 to 2022 for the additional (you understand this word, it means as well as the stuff already there!) 95ha and I would anticipate the site not being fully occupied until towards the end of this plan period (as do Yorkcourt) as no spec units will be built.



This is your daftest comment yet. Why would Wakefield build an Olympic size swimming pool complex when there is a brand new one for West Yorkshire in South Leeds? I know, I occasional do dive (scuba) training in the dive pit. What Wakefield needs is a community stadium and more so the outdoor and indoor field sports training facilities. This is in the LDF too! As for your Bolton comment, I think that is more daft than your Ponds Forge comment!



I think the other people have already corrected you on what Clan was meaning and I understood what he was trying to say, he is layman and is not deliberately trying to deceive anyone... unlike some of the prominent objectors! He also said 92ha and it's 95ha... did you miss this one. I didn't but decided it would be rather pedantic to point this out!

And as other have said, I never attack peoples spelling or grammar... however, I occasional recommend Firefox!

The meeting was open to all, some objectors were there so they will have heard what was said.
Was it poor management that the cllrs were there? Not in my opinion as the council was unanimously in support of the development.
As for the local residents with real conserns, I don't believe there are really all that many, I work with a lot of people who live in Methley, and they tell me there are only a few "real" objectors who are whipping up a bit of hysteria, many/most residents aren't hugely bothered as they don't really think it will bother them.
Their concerns will be addressed with all the other issues through the proper process.

You are correct... the M62 and A1M do that quite well though! This element of greenbelt argument for Newmarket in particular is not being used, even by the objectors, for this reason. You need to pick one of the other relevant ones to make a coherent argument!



What rubbish, for a start our meeting was a public meeting and a few people who came, came to object, and where allowed to speak and be heard. One of them, the cycle warden guy, changed his whole opinion because of the meeting and his comment was very much 'well most of what I heard (from the objection lobby) was not really true, and he took some Statements of Support away with him! Another guys was someone who I met in Kev's chippy who lived at the end of Watergate. He also changed his opinion quite a bit and when I spoke at length with him after the meeting he voiced some genuine issues about existing LGV/MGV traffic from a quarry using the route against their planning consent. He did not know an actual HGV restriction order was proposed for Newmarket Lane and Watergate because he just believed what he had been told as well. We discussed Wakefield and Leeds CC possibly being pressured into putting in physical restrictions to stop this current problem and new HGV accidentally using this route in future and that I would support and help with that if he wanted. He was contemplating sending a letter to Leeds and Wakefield Councils about this issue asking for this anyway to solve the current issue and future issue.

As I said before, the Newmarket Lane/Watergate/Methley Residents have had more meetings with councillors (Wakefield & Leeds) MP's and Yorkcourt than anyone else about this issue... the truth is they don't like what they are being told. This is fine, they don't have to like it, but then they turn this into no consultation and they don't listen to us! The three ward councillors for Outwood East and Stanley turned up because we invited them... that is part of their role!!! The answered questions and they support the development, so they gave us the same answers they probably gave to the residents outside of their district, never mind ward, but they don't like their answers!

But the M62 might and industrial development on the border of WMDC and LCC is hardly "merging into one".

No it was good management on feline's part... she invited them!

Finally a message to whomever 'Newmarket Resident' is on the 'Have Your Say' link at the start of the thread. You clearly read this forum so here goes!

You need to be very careful about what you post, not one single thing you posted below has any basis in fact and as for your comment about school children, well the only people or organisation that 'used' children in our opinion was the Methley news, who printed a wholly untrue and potentially libellous story about the issue. They have are going to be hearing from us (RFN) and will be asked to retract or update the story based on the facts in their next available issue.

As a North Wakefield resident I hope this development gets the nod from the SOS because a city the size of Wakefield should have a decent stadium and sports facilities and hopefully this opportunity won't be missed. Let's face it Newmarket will be built on and it would be a shame if didn't include the community facilities which will benefit local community. It's out of our hands now what will be will be. Wakefield will eventually get a new stadium hopefully at newmarket or if that doesn't happen Queens Drive has been rumoured as a back up. Newmarket will be built on in some form and the travallers site will have to be moved from Heath common to somewhere else to accommodate the new by pass. Hopefully the Newmarket development will get the go ahead with the community stadium and facilities. It's an opportunity not to be missed and it would be a shame if it was missed

The latest contribution to the debate:

Dear Mr Cameron,

How disappointed I am to see the level that some of these posters will sink to in their attempts to discredit the validity of someone else's opinion.

The Truthisouttheir, how inappropriate is that name, seeks to undermine the valid reasoning put forward a number of other contributors by nonchalantly generalising whilst casting aspersions and insults toward all those who do not share his view.

To dismiss this whole development as some kind of ruse to obtain a stadium for the city's rugby league team is deluded.

The developer will spend tens of millions of pounds providing much-needed warehousing and distribution facilities which will create thousands of jobs yet this particular person believes all that is being done solely for the benefit of Wakefield Trinity rugby league club.

I agree that some peoples motives are driven by their emotional attachment to Wakefield's historical professional sports team, does that make them wrong or bad?

To dismiss everryone in this manner is insulting, shows a lack of intelligence and perhaps betrays a hidden agenda by the poster. Whilst addressing these inaccuracies let me also correct him on other inaccuracies and lies that he and his like have peddled over recent months and once again in this particular thread.

There are many people who live close to this proposed development who desperately need the lifeline that this will offer them. There are families who need the prospect of new jobs to give them some hope of a better future. Not many of them will be Trinity fans, not all of them are hoping for work in the leisure industry, many of them are unskilled and unqualifed and the prospect of new employment within the distribution outlets at Newmarket is a godsend.

Just for once I ask that you step back from your petty crusade and consider whether you really have the right to deny thousands of people the job prospects that this development will bring!

Wakefield Trinity have a new owner and are therefore financially sound, they have an average attendance at games which is comparable to all of the teams in their division with the exception of the top four, they employ an extremely well qualified and professional management team as well as approximately 30 other staff, having purchased the club from the administrator Wakefield Trinity's new owner voluntarily paid a number of the old club's debts meaning local businesses were not left “ out of pocket”.

The club have indeed faced three winding up orders in the last 18 months all solicited by HMRC, two of those tax debts were paid in full and the third was the subject of a settlement agreement as part of the clubs recent Administration. It is entirely pertinent at this stage to point out that the financial difficulties faced by the club can be attributed to the age and condition of Wakefield Trinity's 116-year-old Belle Vue stadium hence the need for new facilities.

To further suggest that an upstanding member of the Wakefield community and a knight of the realm, Sir Rodney Walker, is somehow acting inappropriately or illegally is in my opinion another step too far.
I suggest that The Truthisouttheir seriously considers retracting that statement!

As for Newmarket Resident’s claim of receiving threats, I will take this with a pinch of salt as it has been proven time and time again that using lies and deceit as a tactic are not beyond the small group of people who claim to be residents of Newmarket who are also fighting this wonderful development.

I will finish my one and only response on this matter by offering you a quote in the hope that you will reconsider your tactic of telling lies, spreading untruthes and generally creating false fears about this project.

[i"If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.”[/i-Joseph Goebbels-

It did'nt work out too well for him and I suspect it won't for you.

I see Outwood Tiger has yet another alias ... Thetruthisouttheir (also see his spelling hasn't improved!)

Indeed ,I am not posting on there any more as reasoned arguement seems to have gone out of the window . Just hope it has highlighted the case to the powers that be and leaving it at that.

A poster saying calls are being traced by the police due to abusive and threatening phone calls. I honestly so not believe that fir one minute. Dirty tricks big style I would think. They really are showing signs of desperation. Why I don't know because at the end of the day I don't believe or 'us' or 'them' can now really influence tge decision. If it does get turned down I sincerely hope to god the traveller site gets moved there. Quite why a cas fan is posting the rubbish they are really is baffling and childish

I think the trick is to not publish things like that on here - unfortunately.

If we'd just circulated the idea by e-mail / pm to those we know, then we maybe had a chance of keeping it sane.

These boards are watched by all sorts!

Outwood Tiger for definite, what an objectionable, lying & horrible person it must be.

It was a nice idea and everything is worth trying but I fear any external unmoderated forum like this will just get hijacked. Equally the quality and restraint of the supporting posts was very good meaning, as Feline said, that they have been hoisted by their own petard somewhat. It is probably safe to assume that most if not all of those posters have their IP addresses on the RL Fans 'banned' database list.

It is hard to resist not biting and I am starting to regret doing so in a minor way above over the school issue, but when you know the truth and see someone trying to personally or collectively smear 'you' by posting libellous comments like this, it is hard to stomach. I need to act more like a real Armadillo and let these things bounce of my hard exterior!

if this site is an unmoderated forum its open to abuse, why not with your ability to word a sensible post reply explaining this, I would probably get be engrossed into an argument

Who, when and how springs to mind. Who are 'they' to be receiving calls/emails, when and from whom has this happened and finally how.... what phone number, what e-mail & what address? I don't think they have anything to do with the known 'groups' objecting and the only official contact details anyone has for them is a catch-all e-mail address. I think it is all invention and deceit even down to the claim about being local and then using terms like 'live in Newmarket' which struck me as being odd... no one locally refers to the area in the context of it being an 'area' it is just... Newmarket Lane.

I like the idea but they will just carry on in the same vein irrespective and quite frankly I think are insignificant individuals who even the 'real' objection groups probably try and avoid having involved! They have painted their own picture, they don't need any more help!

yes but one reply would be enough and then leave it to festa