General New Stadium Plans - Stratfield Brake

[NC2U]

Why would it take another 16 months to submit an application?

The club said this is the first step, that could be in the public eye and they already are further in the planning?

Huge huge project and even if the club have done a lot of work already I can imagine there is still heaps to sort out once they get official approval to go for it

 

[Thomas/Brock/Jones]

Why ???

Stop and think ,if you can .

 

[Oxymoron]

Wimbledon Planning granted Dec 2015, construction begins March 2018, opening initially planned for summer 2019

Brentford. Planning approval Dec 2013, construction begins March 2017, completed summer 2020

According to Wikipedia.

 

[OX14]

Huge huge project and even if the club have done a lot of work already I can imagine there is still heaps to sort out once they get official approval to go for it

Clearly have already by the plans. I would think a planning application would go in by the autumn to allow time to rectify if any issues come up. Looking at that plan that's over 2 years building unless we're working round the clock.

 

[Scrongo]

You still appear to be a t**t or at least a pain in the a**e.

Im neither
I only pointed out a couple of opinions.
Which obviously some people didn't like,& they think they're smart & clever to slagg me off. Then have the cheek to call me a troll &scummer.
Unbelievable as I said Clueless. IAM otid. Trust me big time

 

[Fanatica]

A question for those who know about planning.

As the timescale in the proposal is as below, what would be a reasonable time frame from planning being submitted, to actually being approved on a project of this size, so that construction could begin?

May 2022: legal and preplanning due diligence concluded.

May 2023: planning application submitted.

May 2026: construction of the new Stadium to be completed.

This is an area I work in.

This entirely depends on a number of things including the councils and the general drivers. You can usually class these as important requirements (housing/schools/other important infrastructure), general requirements (commercial/retail), and luxury requirements (Aston Martin museum, Bicester Water Park). I would put this slap bang in between important and general requirements, given that based on what we have seen so far (very little), this would free up 25+ acres across two sites for Oxford City Council to build on land that previously was not stated in their development plans. This is potentially a very good position to be in, depending on how OCC and Cherwell Council look at things. Luxury requirements would take years of fighting planning etc.

There is the potential that given this could free up a hell of a lot of land for the city council not outlined in the regional plan, that as part of the agreement going through Cherwell Council may not need to build as many homes. This is a good negotiation piece and would help Cherwell to come to a positive conclusion.

The second obstacle is the Green Belt. Again, 15 years ago this would have never passed, however the recent changes within government for the building of homes (despite the many cock ups they've made) has really opened up more land for development providing there is a substantial wider benefit. Given the number of homes that would be built on brownfield sites in the city, I would argue this is a substantial wider benefit. It would also take a bit of land that is a loss-leader for Cherwell Council, again another favourable outcome.

Despite this, there will be big pressure from Green groups & local residents. There always is. I think the two major concerns will be Green Belt (per above) and traffic. The club will have received advice on a traffic survey by now, and may have already conducted one (we don't know this, but to me it seems like the club has done much more than a typical pre-planning stage would require usually). I would hope given the environmental & sustainability goals we're setting out that this will not throw up any surprises given the expectations of public transport usage. If this survey is positive, the councillors would more than likely disregard traffic concerns, though often the project teams will start with the bare minimum of concessions for traffic, and expect to have to do certain things (employ traffic management companies, pay for better services etc).

I'm blind to the work that has been conducted so far. I honestly can't tell how much work has already been conducted. Given the clubs anticipated timeline, I expect a fair amount, but given that we seem to be between phase 2 & phase 3 of the RIBA stages of works, I would expect that the club will certainly have a good indication by August 2023 as to whether this will go through. The planning application process should be 10-15 weeks for a project of this size, maybe longer due to more public consultation, though naturally if it's rejected and recommendations made this process shall restart.

I think that May 2026 is a stretch; I reckon the end of 2026 is a fair assumption if they just focussed on the stadium build. Given the fact that the council may request things like the cricket/rugby stuff goes up before building commences, it's a lot to do in a little amount of time.

 

[bashamwonderland]

There can also be some self imposed delay. I know Everton did some extensive public consultation all over Merseyside to be sure they got it right. Took a lot of time.

Best not compare ourselves with them though - project is bigger, more complex and (presumably) involved a lot more palm-greasing.

 

[bazzer9461]

Why ???

With your comments, I’ve posted comments about the new stadium on another thread even got heated with 3 other posters, my posts were asking questions which I think we should ask. 99% told me we were moving but 1% said we weren’t ie objections and planning not being granted. But I am chuffed that there is now light at the end of the tunnel and barring some major problem hopefully I will be sat in my seat season beginning 2026-27.
But you have come on and been negative and a few posters have brought this up and you have been awkward.
Have a beer chill and think to the future.

C O Y Y

 

[Big Ron]

A very different part of Hampshire to me, I am so far north in the county that I can walk across the road to Berkshire and down the road to Surrey. But my point still stands, no point in marketing a club to exiles, need to build a ground for local people as they will always make up the majority of the support.

Actually, your dismissal of exile fans raises an interesting question - how many regular fans travel from outside of the immediate Oxford area? There are a lot fans on this forum based some 20+ miles away who attend home games. The forum itself is not a great indicator, as there are a limited number of users and the nature of it means a lot of exiles participate but it would be interesting data to see. I'm part of a group of between 6 and 10 (depending on the game and timing) who largely come from London and Cheltenham.

 

[bashamwonderland]

With your comments, I’ve posted comments about the new stadium on another thread even got heated with 3 other posters, my posts were asking questions which I think we should ask. 99% told me we were moving but 1% said we weren’t ie objections and planning not being granted. But I am chuffed that there is now light at the end of the tunnel and barring some major problem hopefully I will be sat in my seat season beginning 2026-27.
But you have come on and been negative and a few posters have brought this up and you have been awkward.
Have a beer chill and think to the future.

C O Y Y

His future is pretty exciting after all - the skip is getting a bit of roofing!!!!!

 

[Scrongo]

I'm neither
Some people don't like an opinion.
&Think it's smart &clever to slagg you off .
Call you a troll & a scummer. Far from it. I'm otid.
What's the point of a forum for discussions & opinions if key board warriors are gonna rip into you.
I can assure you not many on here has been more loyal than me over the years. 1967 to be precise. Old manor days I almost lived in that place.
Watched the boys, youth, reserves, &1st team
So don't insult my intelligence with I'm a scummer

 

[OX14]

This is an area I work in.

This entirely depends on a number of things including the councils and the general drivers. You can usually class these as important requirements (housing/schools/other important infrastructure), general requirements (commercial/retail), and luxury requirements (Aston Martin museum, Bicester Water Park). I would put this slap bang in between important and general requirements, given that based on what we have seen so far (very little), this would free up 25+ acres across two sites for Oxford City Council to build on land that previously was not stated in their development plans. This is potentially a very good position to be in, depending on how OCC and Cherwell Council look at things. Luxury requirements would take years of fighting planning etc.

There is the potential that given this could free up a hell of a lot of land for the city council not outlined in the regional plan, that as part of the agreement going through Cherwell Council may not need to build as many homes. This is a good negotiation piece and would help Cherwell to come to a positive conclusion.

The second obstacle is the Green Belt. Again, 15 years ago this would have never passed, however the recent changes within government for the building of homes (despite the many cock ups they've made) has really opened up more land for development providing there is a substantial wider benefit. Given the number of homes that would be built on brownfield sites in the city, I would argue this is a substantial wider benefit. It would also take a bit of land that is a loss-leader for Cherwell Council, again another favourable outcome.

Despite this, there will be big pressure from Green groups & local residents. There always is. I think the two major concerns will be Green Belt (per above) and traffic. The club will have received advice on a traffic survey by now, and may have already conducted one (we don't know this, but to me it seems like the club has done much more than a typical pre-planning stage would require usually). I would hope given the environmental & sustainability goals we're setting out that this will not throw up any surprises given the expectations of public transport usage. If this survey is positive, the councillors would more than likely disregard traffic concerns, though often the project teams will start with the bare minimum of concessions for traffic, and expect to have to do certain things (employ traffic management companies, pay for better services etc).

I'm blind to the work that has been conducted so far. I honestly can't tell how much work has already been conducted. Given the clubs anticipated timeline, I expect a fair amount, but given that we seem to be between phase 2 & phase 3 of the RIBA stages of works, I would expect that the club will certainly have a good indication by August 2023 as to whether this will go through. The planning application process should be 10-15 weeks for a project of this size, maybe longer due to more public consultation, though naturally if it's rejected and recommendations made this process shall restart.

I think that May 2026 is a stretch; I reckon the end of 2026 is a fair assumption if they just focussed on the stadium build. Given the fact that the council may request things like the cricket/rugby stuff goes up before building commences, it's a lot to do in a little amount of time.

Good post, we will soon find out how far the club actually have got before it become apparent in the public eye. Once the land transfer is approved things will start moving.

 

[MJB]

This is an area I work in.

This entirely depends on a number of things including the councils and the general drivers. You can usually class these as important requirements (housing/schools/other important infrastructure), general requirements (commercial/retail), and luxury requirements (Aston Martin museum, Bicester Water Park). I would put this slap bang in between important and general requirements, given that based on what we have seen so far (very little), this would free up 25+ acres across two sites for Oxford City Council to build on land that previously was not stated in their development plans. This is potentially a very good position to be in, depending on how OCC and Cherwell Council look at things. Luxury requirements would take years of fighting planning etc.

There is the potential that given this could free up a hell of a lot of land for the city council not outlined in the regional plan, that as part of the agreement going through Cherwell Council may not need to build as many homes. This is a good negotiation piece and would help Cherwell to come to a positive conclusion.

The second obstacle is the Green Belt. Again, 15 years ago this would have never passed, however the recent changes within government for the building of homes (despite the many cock ups they've made) has really opened up more land for development providing there is a substantial wider benefit. Given the number of homes that would be built on brownfield sites in the city, I would argue this is a substantial wider benefit. It would also take a bit of land that is a loss-leader for Cherwell Council, again another favourable outcome.

Despite this, there will be big pressure from Green groups & local residents. There always is. I think the two major concerns will be Green Belt (per above) and traffic. The club will have received advice on a traffic survey by now, and may have already conducted one (we don't know this, but to me it seems like the club has done much more than a typical pre-planning stage would require usually). I would hope given the environmental & sustainability goals we're setting out that this will not throw up any surprises given the expectations of public transport usage. If this survey is positive, the councillors would more than likely disregard traffic concerns, though often the project teams will start with the bare minimum of concessions for traffic, and expect to have to do certain things (employ traffic management companies, pay for better services etc).

I'm blind to the work that has been conducted so far. I honestly can't tell how much work has already been conducted. Given the clubs anticipated timeline, I expect a fair amount, but given that we seem to be between phase 2 & phase 3 of the RIBA stages of works, I would expect that the club will certainly have a good indication by August 2023 as to whether this will go through. The planning application process should be 10-15 weeks for a project of this size, maybe longer due to more public consultation, though naturally if it's rejected and recommendations made this process shall restart.

I think that May 2026 is a stretch; I reckon the end of 2026 is a fair assumption if they just focussed on the stadium build. Given the fact that the council may request things like the cricket/rugby stuff goes up before building commences, it's a lot to do in a little amount of time.

This is an excellent post. Lots of questions and ill-informed comments should be referred to this post lots and lots of times over the coming days, weeks, months and years!

 

[OxfordYankee]

This is an excellent post. Lots of questions and ill-informed comments should be referred to this post lots and lots of times over the coming days, weeks, months and years!

@SteMerritt @eaststandboy @Malc

Can we make the room for a group of sticky posts, such as the one @MJB references?

 

[Fanatica]

This is an excellent post. Lots of questions and ill-informed comments should be referred to this post lots and lots of times over the coming days, weeks, months and years!

I hope I've not come over as too optimistic, it's going to be one hell of a rollercoaster!!

 

[OxfordYankee]

I hope I've not come over as too optimistic, it's going to be one hell of a rollercoaster!!

I didn’t bother to read it properly, but I got the impression that you were guaranteeing a positive outcome in shortish timeframes, no?

 

[ljs]

I hope I've not come over as too optimistic, it's going to be one hell of a rollercoaster!!

As the club have put a timescale of completion by May 2026, then you are no more optimistic than they are. Good post.

 

[PottersRightBoot]

Actually, that is the "master plan of the proposed scheme".

https://twitter.com/x/status/1480582695935692806

This is an area I work in.

This entirely depends on a number of things including the councils and the general drivers. You can usually class these as important requirements (housing/schools/other important infrastructure), general requirements (commercial/retail), and luxury requirements (Aston Martin museum, Bicester Water Park). I would put this slap bang in between important and general requirements, given that based on what we have seen so far (very little), this would free up 25+ acres across two sites for Oxford City Council to build on land that previously was not stated in their development plans. This is potentially a very good position to be in, depending on how OCC and Cherwell Council look at things. Luxury requirements would take years of fighting planning etc.

There is the potential that given this could free up a hell of a lot of land for the city council not outlined in the regional plan, that as part of the agreement going through Cherwell Council may not need to build as many homes. This is a good negotiation piece and would help Cherwell to come to a positive conclusion.

The second obstacle is the Green Belt. Again, 15 years ago this would have never passed, however the recent changes within government for the building of homes (despite the many cock ups they've made) has really opened up more land for development providing there is a substantial wider benefit. Given the number of homes that would be built on brownfield sites in the city, I would argue this is a substantial wider benefit. It would also take a bit of land that is a loss-leader for Cherwell Council, again another favourable outcome.

Despite this, there will be big pressure from Green groups & local residents. There always is. I think the two major concerns will be Green Belt (per above) and traffic. The club will have received advice on a traffic survey by now, and may have already conducted one (we don't know this, but to me it seems like the club has done much more than a typical pre-planning stage would require usually). I would hope given the environmental & sustainability goals we're setting out that this will not throw up any surprises given the expectations of public transport usage. If this survey is positive, the councillors would more than likely disregard traffic concerns, though often the project teams will start with the bare minimum of concessions for traffic, and expect to have to do certain things (employ traffic management companies, pay for better services etc).

I'm blind to the work that has been conducted so far. I honestly can't tell how much work has already been conducted. Given the clubs anticipated timeline, I expect a fair amount, but given that we seem to be between phase 2 & phase 3 of the RIBA stages of works, I would expect that the club will certainly have a good indication by August 2023 as to whether this will go through. The planning application process should be 10-15 weeks for a project of this size, maybe longer due to more public consultation, though naturally if it's rejected and recommendations made this process shall restart.

I think that May 2026 is a stretch; I reckon the end of 2026 is a fair assumption if they just focussed on the stadium build. Given the fact that the council may request things like the cricket/rugby stuff goes up before building commences, it's a lot to do in a little amount of time.

Thankyou for this. Very informative.

Brentford’s ground (and also in years gone by , the Emirates) were both developed in very built up areas. Does the fact that our site is being developed in relative, splendid isolation mean that the consultation, planning and construction process can be concertinad somewhat ?

 

[OX14]

As the club have put a timescale of completion by May 2026, then you are no more optimistic than they are. Good post.

Stadium MK and surrounding area planning 2003, construction started 2005 finished mid 2007 so ours is doable in 4.5 years we have before kassam lease runs out.

 

[SwissYellow]

Lots already covered on the forum - To summarize what a lot of people have taken off me Tweets.

• Stadium move, should be fantastic but isnt enough to get approval.
• The Kassam was built on "polluted land" which wasn't able to take housing
• Now the Kassam has been there 20 years, its now no longer "polluted" and can have housing
• The Kassam will go and be replaced by housing. This will fix quotas that both Vale of White Horse and Oxford City need to fill. Kassam will get a little richer.
• Stratfield Brake can't have housing on it due to a variety of covenants
• Oxford City Council are desperate to redevelop the Ice Rink area of Oxpens and get rid of the rink. its costly, old, too small and has a LOT of very passionate users.
• Moving the rink to the same site, brings in a lot of transport, energy and infrastructure needs
• Oxfordshire needs an indoor arena of size.
• The University needs a conference center and arena of size
• Oxford City Stars have never played higher than 2nd tier because of budget restrictions, increased capacity will enable new investors and potential growth
• One of Oxford Universities Ice Hockey team alumni are billionaires, they could be tempted to get stuck in..
• US Varsity matches have started to be played outside the US https://www.collegehockeynews.com/news/2021/12/04_Belfast-Tournament-Scheduled.php Oxford would be a very attractive host city....
• Offering the Uni use of the Stadium and arena for Varsity matches would be very helpful.
• I think we'll see new exit/entrance to complex from A34
• New train services will service complex from wider, potentially Milton Keynes, Buckingham and Witney* rumour.

Having Oxford City Council, Oxfordshire Council, Vale of WH, Cherwell AND the University onboard is HUGE. Transport links huge. Environmental potential huge.

The negatives will be:

• Local residents who dont want noise, traffic and hooligans.
• CPRE (Campaign for rural England -Oxfordshire)
• Any local landowner who sees a quick buck, loss of land value

its FANTASTIC to finally see this public and hats off to everyone involved.