Joint press release issued by SWAG - Stadium Wakefield Action Group, Residents For Newmarket and Wakefield Trinity Supporters Trust in full [url=http://www.swag-online.co.uk/here[/url.

Wakefield versus Wakefield.



There can only be one winner.

The other face of Wakefield



[url=http://cominoweb.wakefield.gov.uk/Planning/StreamDocPage/obj.pdf?DocNo=5672161&PageNo=1&content=obj.pdfLinky![/url

It all boils down to the final paragraph at the bottom of the first page, if you ask me.

They want every development to be in Leeds.

He also seems to think that the entire development at NM is on greenbelt, and is happy to let everyone else believe that.

Get Jeremy Clarkson in to shoot him!

"high quality, accessible, informal recreational area, full of ecology and

biodiversity and quality agricultural land"...





..aka derelict mineworkings, tgb detritus and dumped tyres !!!



"I have real concern that, if approved, it will lead to pressure from developers

looking to encroach into the green belt on the Leeds side of the M62.".....wasn't there a sign up on said land, Rothwell side of Newmarket roundabout, advertising it as development land ?????

Just to correct you - He is right.



The [uentire[/u development at NM [uis[/u on greenbelt.



That is the main point why it was called in.

I beg to differ on this, I live right next to the site. A huge percentage of this site is made up of the old Newmarket pit spoil heaps that have been leveled off to make them look presentable. This land extends both sides of newmarket lane. The stacks to the right as you go towards Methley and to the left was the rail head and office complex. They talk about green belt and otter droppings, the only droppings on there belong to the locals dogs.

I thought that only the Stadium part was on green belt land and that was soon to be changed?

All the other stuff, warehousing etc was already classified as (B8?) development land?

“It is our contention that the future of this site should be decided by the residents of the City of Wakefield alone and, as has already been stated above, the people of Wakefield have already spoken and our voices demand to be heard!”



As Dboy put it - Methinks they doth protest too much.

That does not make sense. That is not a defense at all. It is saying, why should Leeds get to vito our work just because they want tkeep the developments and new jobs to their own initiatives.

The current planning classification of the whole Newmarket site is Greenbelt. This is a planning designation only, and affords any land contained within it (the greenbelt) a requirement for any planning application to demonstrate the need to develop this land ahead of land outside the current greenbelt.



The current Newmarket site is made up of predominately brownfield land, and the term brownfield means that the site has been previously developed, in this case for industrial usage in the form of the former Newmarket Colliery. The remaining land used proposed for use by the development is greenfield, the term greenfield mean it has not been previously developed; this is where the Stadium and Community Sports facilities will be sited. This land is low grade agricultural land at the moment.



Wakefield Council started the process of taking the brownfield land at the Newmarket site out of greenbelt around 2 years ago. This site will provide 51ha of B8 (warehousing and distribution) development land on the Newmarket site. This process is ongoing and will complete early next year. It look likley that the Newmarket site will be take out of the greenbelt, but of course our objector friends continue to argue that it should be another site.



However, some things that people need to understand.



Wakefield HAS to find at least 95 ha of land for B8 development on the M62 corridor for the period till 2022.



ALL the sites, that were considered suitable for initial assessment were ALL in the greenbelt. Wakefield then selected what they consider to be the most suitable sites, Newmarket being on of them. The other sites that make up the 95ha are also greenbelt.



However, what our objector friends fail to make clear to the public is that ALL the alternative rejected sites are greenbelt too!!! They might be claiming that this development should not be in the greenbelt, but what they are actually arguing (and for some reason they are happy for this not to be that clear to the public) is that they believe that this bit of greenbelt, you know, the one near them, is not as suitable as the greenbelt elsewhere and therefore they chose to build on these bits of greenbelt instead.



Suddenly, if you actually look at what they want in their objections it all becomes very clear... our greenbelt is more important than the greenbelt over there... because we don't live near that bit of greenbelt!



Finally, and another bit our objector friends don't tell you. 75% of the whole Wakefield district is greenbelt, so in order to free-up land then you have to release some greenbelt for development, simple as. What they also don't want you to know is the current LDF plan will see an additional 1% of land brought back into greenbelt by 2022, because other bits of former industrial land will be reclaimed to replace land taken out of greenbelt for development. So, in actual fact, in 2022 we will have 76% of the district within the greenebelt, meaning that even after releasing this and other land for development, we will gain more back in other areas!



Our objector friends are having to show their true colours now... this is not about 'the' destruction of greenbelt, it is just about the greenbelt near them! Hmmm, NIMBY's seems ever more fitting!

Just to add, ALL the land put forward by developers, including the rejected sites, for the legal requirement to find 95ha of B8 land on the M62 corridor, were in the greenbelt. I think we need to be clear on that also, don't you?