General New Stadium Plans - The Triangle - Land Deal

Status
Not open for further replies.
the author Andy Michell isn't very thorough- he refers to Nial Mc Williams as Oxford United MD , a position Nial no longer holds. Also, he refers to Kidlington residents speaking against- of the 4 that spoke against, only 1 is a Kidlington resident. He also avoided mentioning the number of ( certainly more than 1, at a guess more than 4) residents of Kidlington who spoke in favour of and supported the County Council progressing to the next stage. Very poor journalism IMO

Wonder if he's angling for a bit of work for The Oxford Mail?
 
Last edited:
I'll try my best to allay your fears, as you've mentioned me by name.

The intention has always been for a long term lease (250 years has been mentioned) from OCC, as landowner, to OUFC, as lease holder. It would be at a rent similar to that currently being paid by the fencing company (£440 pa) and would be non-transferrable. This means the club could not be separated from the stadium. Furthermore, there would likely be covenants on the lease restricting what it could be used for. There would almost certainly be a clause that would state that in the event of the club going bankrupt, or ceasing to exist, the lease is cancelled and the land reverts to OCC (who would always hold the freehold anyway). All of this is to prevent another Kassam situation occurring. Oxford Park Developments Ltd have been formed as the development/construction company, as is usual in the situations, but would not be the lease holder, merely the developer.

What all of this also does is provide very substantial extra business rates into the council coffers, meaning that from a financial perspective OCC would show that they are getting best value compared to at present. This is important to stop the anti's claims that they're giving away a valuable asset. It's so much of an asset that the council are only getting £440 for it each year!

As you say, it will all be in the Heads of Terms, but certainly from conversations I've had with councillors, it seems as if the two parties could be aligned.
Is it odd if someone gets moist every time they read one of your posts on this thread? Asking for a friend
 
Is it odd if someone gets moist every time they read one of your posts on this thread? Asking for a friend

Was this meant to be a DM?

giphy.gif
 
Bazzer sent one in that wasn't printed?
Is received an email from Andrew Colley yesterday after I resent my original complaint.
This is his first reply.

Thank you for your email and for raising these concerns directly with me.
Firstly, I'd like to thank you for your loyal readership of the newspaper and for getting in touch with this feedback.
I'm disappointed that you feel our coverage has not been balanced and that is something we will take on board for future reports.
The job of a local newspaper, in my mind, is not to take a stance on every subject but listen and report in a balanced way on what people on different sides of the argument think.
Of course there are people associated with the club who back it and there are some local residents who are against it. We can't ignore reports and complaints just to please the majority. In fact, it's important that these issues are debated at the earliest possible opportunity to ensure hurdles are seen and passed early on in the process - to avoid a repeat of the ultimate issues behind Stratfield Brake.
I'd please ask that you highlight specific examples of our reports which you find are unbalanced. Looking at Wednesday's Oxford Mail as an example, I think our coverage is balanced and reflective on news and events.
In terms of the letters page, this is a different subject. We will happily publish all letters sent through to us on the topic as long as it is not defamatory or in contempt.
I can honestly say that we have not deliberately published letters from just one side of the opinion and welcome more letters in support of the stadium move. These need to be sent through, as advertised, to letters@oxfordmail.co.uk to be delivered to the correct place.
Can I check where you sent your letter? I've asked the person who puts the page together and they are not aware of it's submission. I'm keen to investigate and get to the bottom of what happened to that.
I appreciate the opportunity to answer your concerns, but will happily discuss it further.
Kind regards,
Andrew Colley
 
Ok. Step 1 accomplished. Well done all!

Seeing that ‘work streams’ are about to start, may I ask what actions/agreements/safeguards etc will be put in place to ensure the CLUB itself doesn’t get screwed by any future builders/owners of a new stadium built on land potentially being leased by the CLUB?

I am very nervous of a repeat of the sock-less ones agreements which led to the club being in the position it is….The current owners are businessmen after all….as was that nice Mr Kassam.
 
Ok. Step 1 accomplished. Well done all!

Seeing that ‘work streams’ are about to start, may I ask what actions/agreements/safeguards etc will be put in place to ensure the CLUB itself doesn’t get screwed by any future builders/owners of a new stadium built on land potentially being leased by the CLUB?

I am very nervous of a repeat of the sock-less ones agreements which led to the club being in the position it is….The current owners are businessmen after all….as was that nice Mr Kassam.
Read Colin's comments earlier in this thread.
That was fairly positive, but I guess they Oxvox will keep a very close eye on the detail ( and the Council as well)
Hopefully it will be a community asset?
 
Ok. Step 1 accomplished. Well done all!

Seeing that ‘work streams’ are about to start, may I ask what actions/agreements/safeguards etc will be put in place to ensure the CLUB itself doesn’t get screwed by any future builders/owners of a new stadium built on land potentially being leased by the CLUB?

I am very nervous of a repeat of the sock-less ones agreements which led to the club being in the position it is….The current owners are businessmen after all….as was that nice Mr Kassam.
See @Colin B ’s post #3872
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom