The current Wakefield Unitary Development Plan (UDP) was agreed in 2003 and for those not aware, they have to review the UDP every ten years. As such, the current Wakefield MDC UDP is due for renewal in 2013. The process take quite a bit of time, so I expect them to start the process in the next 12 to 18 months, if not sooner.
There is no way, in my opinion, that the planners would continue to want to designate this current area of brown-field land as being worthy of Green Belt status in the next UDP. If you take a look at the satellite images of the M62 and M1 corridors in the district you will see that the majority of the currently designated commercial space at J41 M1, J31 M62 is pretty much full. We have to accept that, as a city, we have to exploit our location close to what is now a major motorway cross-roads and good national rail links. Many of the companies that are basing head-offices/northern offices in Leeds also need and want good commercial and distribution space close by. We have to face facts, Wakefield is a distribution city and one of the best things we have done as a district is to exploit our location and labour force to service this need.
A friend at the highways agency has told me that in capacity terms J30 of the M62 is well below capacity and certainly one of the lowest on the whole of the M62 for its good location. The current improvements for a variable speed limit and peak hard-shoulder lane use, starting at J30, means the location becomes ever more ideal.
I think if this does get called in by the secretary of states office (the only real chance the current objectors have IMO), this is the valid argument that I am sure will be used to justify granting the planning permission. This is a NIMBY objection being orchestrated by someone who is clearly objecting for this reason and this reason alone. They are trying to speak to the 'Daily Mail' Readers of the district and I am sure it will get some support BUT... they don't have anything of any real substance. As pointed, out the majority of their 'argument' does not stand to even the simplest of scrutiny and they know that, but you can't blame them for giving it a try. In an ideal world we would not have to build these places close to anybody's house or home, but we simply don't have the room and they have to be built, to create jobs and prosperity for the district. It is like mobile phone masts, no-body wants one close to their home, but they all want a mobile phone and get upset when they don't get a good signal. Well folks, they have to go somewhere and some people will be upset.
You can't object to something, under our planning system, simply because you don't want it near you!
Also, for the SWAG guys, are you aware that a number of people (usually about 3 to 4 per side) have the right to speak in support/opposition of the planning application, (by application in advance) at the planning committee itself? Now the developer, I am sure, will want one of those slots for himself and I also suspect that someone from the Community Sport Foundation/Wakefield Trinity will also want to speak. However, I think that both the developer and Trinity would welcome a couple of people/supporters to speak in support of the application. If they are local to the development, even better. I would get in touch with them and coordinate your efforts. The planning committee do like 'ordinary' people to speak at the meetings and if this has been coordinated with the 'official parties' they tend to give this weight. You can bet that Mr & Mrs Botox will have applied and be allowed to speak.
