Some talk of Bradford Northern and some of Hull and Leeds Of Wigan and St Helens and such great teams as these Of all the teams in Rugby league with me you will agree The best team in the whole wide world is Wakefield Trinity!
- I have reports to finish so this will be my last post- Put it this way in all other areas we BOTH beat Salford hands down- whats the one thing they have neither of us do?- whats the one thing that could take another 3 years to finish for both of us?
A stadium. Are Salford in the running anymore? Not since they started building.
I agree the media have over focused on this particular area of development, but it carries far more weight than most (if not all) other areas of development. I just hope AG and SP have something special lined up they've purposely kept quiet.
"Castleford's biggest home crowd of the 1991-1992 season wasn't quite 12,000 while on average they'd sit around 6000 but the noise, the chanting and the singing just blows you away" - Tawera Nikau "Standing Tall"
"I can tell you the atmosphere was extraordinary at Wheldon Road on big days. The ground held around 15,000 people, every one of them close to the action on the field and the noise would be enough to send a rumble through the town" - Malcolm Reilly "Reilly - A Life in Rugby League"
At the moment The Ground is not classified as anything, it is "White Land", and is covered by the UDP which is the present planning document.
The draft LDF plans (as quoted by Gary Price Sandal Wild Cat fan club) from 2008 proposed that WR was allocated as housing.
After consultations the present (as of now), proposed Site Specific Proposals Document has rejected WR (and other sites in the riverside area) as Housing allocation and incorporated WR and the others into the Special Policy Area N9 Castleford Riverside, which includes housing, but not on any specific part of the whole site.
Cas Tigers could put in a Planning Application now for whatever they want and it would have to be appraised through the planning system taking into account the UDP, not the proposed LDP neither of which specifically classify WR for housing only.
Last edited by bigalf on Wed Jun 08, 2011 10:00 pm, edited 3 times in total.
Change is inevitable ...except from a vending machine!
BillyRhino wrote:
So in best IA mode ..<.Possibley World Class, could be the greatest thing since sliced bread....am personally very excited, and confidently expect him to prove my predictions are bang on target.... Alternatively he could be rubbish>
After consultations the present (as of now), proposed Site Specific Proposals Document has rejected WR (and other sites in the riverside area) as Housing allocation and incorporated WR and the others into the Special Policy Area N9 Castleford Riverside, which includes housing, but not on any specific part of the whole site.
Sorry to do this to you mate... but you are wrong!
Site N101 - Castleford Tigers Ground is designated as providing 105 houses within the Site Specific Proposals Submission. You are looking in the wrong place now! Because this area falls within SPA N9 the housing sites within this area are no longer listed seperatley like the other hosuing sites within the LDF! "Alongside housing allocations, some special policy areas also contribute towards housing delivery and these are shown in the tables below. Special policy areas are capable of accommodating a range of different land uses and not just housing, but where areas within them will contribute towards housing delivery this information is included in the tables. "
Cas Tigers could put in a Planning Application now for whatever they want and it would have to be appraised through the planning system taking into account the UDP, not the proposed LDP neither of which specifically classify WR for housing only.
Yes, true but also you forget that the LDF core strategy is in force so it is not just a simple matter of looking at the old UDP anymore. Plus this document is now 3 years in the making and just suddenly turning a blind eye to it would be foolish because Morrison's and Asda's planning lawyers would be all over this like a rash. Not insurmountable, especially in an SPA, but this is yet another reason that this will take time to reach a conclusion! I do think this is one of the reasons they want to get this moving sooner or later. I understand that they are worried that they planning inspector will not call them to appear, now that in the technical consultation they have changed their mind (Castleford Tigers and Ben Bailey pushed for this to be designated as housing since the start of the LDF process) and that could be a problem. The document now has to go forward to the planning inspector showing WR as housing and that is unlikely to be changed, IMO, by the planning inspector without bloody good reasons for doing so... and no, funding a new stadium is not, in his eyes, a good enough reason I suspect!
bigalf wrote:
Right - let's get things straight - FACTS
After consultations the present (as of now), proposed Site Specific Proposals Document has rejected WR (and other sites in the riverside area) as Housing allocation and incorporated WR and the others into the Special Policy Area N9 Castleford Riverside, which includes housing, but not on any specific part of the whole site.
Sorry to do this to you mate... but you are wrong!
Site N101 - Castleford Tigers Ground is designated as providing 105 houses within the Site Specific Proposals Submission. You are looking in the wrong place now! Because this area falls within SPA N9 the housing sites within this area are no longer listed seperatley like the other hosuing sites within the LDF! "Alongside housing allocations, some special policy areas also contribute towards housing delivery and these are shown in the tables below. Special policy areas are capable of accommodating a range of different land uses and not just housing, but where areas within them will contribute towards housing delivery this information is included in the tables. "
Cas Tigers could put in a Planning Application now for whatever they want and it would have to be appraised through the planning system taking into account the UDP, not the proposed LDP neither of which specifically classify WR for housing only.
Yes, true but also you forget that the LDF core strategy is in force so it is not just a simple matter of looking at the old UDP anymore. Plus this document is now 3 years in the making and just suddenly turning a blind eye to it would be foolish because Morrison's and Asda's planning lawyers would be all over this like a rash. Not insurmountable, especially in an SPA, but this is yet another reason that this will take time to reach a conclusion! I do think this is one of the reasons they want to get this moving sooner or later. I understand that they are worried that they planning inspector will not call them to appear, now that in the technical consultation they have changed their mind (Castleford Tigers and Ben Bailey pushed for this to be designated as housing since the start of the LDF process) and that could be a problem. The document now has to go forward to the planning inspector showing WR as housing and that is unlikely to be changed, IMO, by the planning inspector without bloody good reasons for doing so... and no, funding a new stadium is not, in his eyes, a good enough reason I suspect!
Change is inevitable ...except from a vending machine!
BillyRhino wrote:
So in best IA mode ..<.Possibley World Class, could be the greatest thing since sliced bread....am personally very excited, and confidently expect him to prove my predictions are bang on target.... Alternatively he could be rubbish>
"Castleford's biggest home crowd of the 1991-1992 season wasn't quite 12,000 while on average they'd sit around 6000 but the noise, the chanting and the singing just blows you away" - Tawera Nikau "Standing Tall"
"I can tell you the atmosphere was extraordinary at Wheldon Road on big days. The ground held around 15,000 people, every one of them close to the action on the field and the noise would be enough to send a rumble through the town" - Malcolm Reilly "Reilly - A Life in Rugby League"
Sorry to do this to you mate... but you are wrong!
Site N101 - Castleford Tigers Ground is designated as providing 105 houses within the Site Specific Proposals Submission. You are looking in the wrong place now! Because this area falls within SPA N9 the housing sites within this area are no longer listed seperatley like the other hosuing sites within the LDF! "Alongside housing allocations, some special policy areas also contribute towards housing delivery and these are shown in the tables below. Special policy areas are capable of accommodating a range of different land uses and not just housing, but where areas within them will contribute towards housing delivery this information is included in the tables. "
Yes, true but also you forget that the LDF core strategy is in force so it is not just a simple matter of looking at the old UDP anymore. Plus this document is now 3 years in the making and just suddenly turning a blind eye to it would be foolish because Morrison's and Asda's planning lawyers would be all over this like a rash. Not insurmountable, especially in an SPA, but this is yet another reason that this will take time to reach a conclusion! I do think this is one of the reasons they want to get this moving sooner or later. I understand that they are worried that they planning inspector will not call them to appear, now that in the technical consultation they have changed their mind (Castleford Tigers and Ben Bailey pushed for this to be designated as housing since the start of the LDF process) and that could be a problem. The document now has to go forward to the planning inspector showing WR as housing and that is unlikely to be changed, IMO, by the planning inspector without bloody good reasons for doing so... and no, funding a new stadium is not, in his eyes, a good enough reason I suspect!
Sorry I_A but You are wrong.
I know where the table is thanks, and that table is for information only to show all the available housing supply allocation within the whole of SPA N9, not specific sites such as N101 (WR). The Spatial Policy dept think it may be misleading to have included it (Their words, not mine).
The Cas Tigers Ground has been rejected for specific housing allocation- Page 33 of Technical Paper Volume 2 Rejected Land Allocations.
Have a word with the Spatial Policy team to confirm this if you need, as I have.
I don't see a Red Line around the site on here: (Page 3 Northern Area)
Sorry to do this to you mate... but you are wrong!
Site N101 - Castleford Tigers Ground is designated as providing 105 houses within the Site Specific Proposals Submission. You are looking in the wrong place now! Because this area falls within SPA N9 the housing sites within this area are no longer listed seperatley like the other hosuing sites within the LDF! "Alongside housing allocations, some special policy areas also contribute towards housing delivery and these are shown in the tables below. Special policy areas are capable of accommodating a range of different land uses and not just housing, but where areas within them will contribute towards housing delivery this information is included in the tables. "
Yes, true but also you forget that the LDF core strategy is in force so it is not just a simple matter of looking at the old UDP anymore. Plus this document is now 3 years in the making and just suddenly turning a blind eye to it would be foolish because Morrison's and Asda's planning lawyers would be all over this like a rash. Not insurmountable, especially in an SPA, but this is yet another reason that this will take time to reach a conclusion! I do think this is one of the reasons they want to get this moving sooner or later. I understand that they are worried that they planning inspector will not call them to appear, now that in the technical consultation they have changed their mind (Castleford Tigers and Ben Bailey pushed for this to be designated as housing since the start of the LDF process) and that could be a problem. The document now has to go forward to the planning inspector showing WR as housing and that is unlikely to be changed, IMO, by the planning inspector without bloody good reasons for doing so... and no, funding a new stadium is not, in his eyes, a good enough reason I suspect!
Sorry I_A but You are wrong.
I know where the table is thanks, and that table is for information only to show all the available housing supply allocation within the whole of SPA N9, not specific sites such as N101 (WR). The Spatial Policy dept think it may be misleading to have included it (Their words, not mine).
The Cas Tigers Ground has been rejected for specific housing allocation- Page 33 of Technical Paper Volume 2 Rejected Land Allocations.
Have a word with the Spatial Policy team to confirm this if you need, as I have.
I don't see a Red Line around the site on here: (Page 3 Northern Area)
