General New Stadium Plans - The Triangle - Land Deal

[YellowSubmarine]

Why are people saying it’s a bad thing that more people will come into the city and spend money in our pubs and restaurants. Surely that is a benefit?

Because the people anti stadium are very good financially & are selfish.

They don’t care about other people as long as they’re fine.

 

[TailsWeWin]

I have written to the editor of The Oxford Mail complaining about their unbalanced coverage of the stadium discussions and the inordinate amount of column inches given to small minority prior to the council’s decision on Tuesday.
I have received a lengthy reply, to be fair to them, but still maintaining the coverage has been fair and representative.
I have replied saying I beg to differ.

 

[The mighty Aldo]

The Layla Moran situation is interesting. Looking at an Oxfordshire map it is strange the triangle is in Oxford West and Abingdon constituency. However, we could use this to our advantage as her constituents in the Abingdon area can also give their opinion to her or other prospective candidates. I believe we have lots of fans in Abingdon and the environs. Lets pursuade her the stadium is a great idea. Get emailing Abindonians

E mailed her this morning saying I was concerned about her statement in the Mail saying she understood the concerns of residents. I said in a survey only 850+ of residents in a population of 12500 said they had any concerns. I went onto say that KPC had deprived the county of a much better development on SB without consulting its residents.
I said that she has a duty to all of her constituents not only those in Kidlington a huge percentage of which follow OUFC .if she was really aware of the plight of OUFC she should back the development because it is hardly going to affect the residents of Kidlington being on a piece of wasteland surrounded by major roads.

I‘ll let you know if I receive a reply

I am an Abingdon resident

 

[Headley]

I have written to the editor of The Oxford Mail complaining about their unbalanced coverage of the stadium discussions and the inordinate amount of column inches given to small minority prior to the council’s decision on Tuesday.
I have received a lengthy reply, to be fair to them, but still maintaining the coverage has been fair and representative.
I have replied saying I beg to differ.

I received this from him....



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.
If there are people who claim to have sent a letter which was unpublished, please ask them to forward this to me to investigate - I cannot see any examples in our system.

I appreciate the opportunity to answer your concerns, but will happily discuss it further.

Kind regards,

Andrew Colley
Regional Editor
Newsquest Oxfordshire
Telephone: 01865 425428
Twitter: @_AndrewColley

 

[YellowSubmarine]

I received this from him....



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.
If there are people who claim to have sent a letter which was unpublished, please ask them to forward this to me to investigate - I cannot see any examples in our system.

I appreciate the opportunity to answer your concerns, but will happily discuss it further.

Kind regards,

Andrew Colley
Regional Editor
Newsquest Oxfordshire
Telephone: 01865 425428
Twitter: @_AndrewColley

I think we should send some letters in.

OxBlogger done a great piece that would go well in that paper!

 

[The mighty Aldo]

I received this from him....



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.
If there are people who claim to have sent a letter which was unpublished, please ask them to forward this to me to investigate - I cannot see any examples in our system.

I appreciate the opportunity to answer your concerns, but will happily discuss it further.

Kind regards,

Andrew Colley
Regional Editor
Newsquest Oxfordshire
Telephone: 01865 425428
Twitter: @_AndrewColley

Ok
Lets get writing into the Mail in support of the development,we all have a part to play
Is there an e mail address to send letters to?

 

[frenchconnection]

1/ so have all the support letters sent in been defamatory or in contempt? i find that very difficult to believe
2/ have they all been sent to the wrong place? i find that even harder to believe

 

[Orkney Islands Yellow]

It's a long one from FoSB...

https://www.facebook.com/100083217646127/posts/pfbid02ccUH4CzUDHS5TtZHho99tv5nBJdMvFnadTz1ymxbtxfsc7UH8qakw5T6v8xjgjMzl

 

[Marked Ox]

It's a long one from FoSB...

https://www.facebook.com/100083217646127/posts/pfbid02ccUH4CzUDHS5TtZHho99tv5nBJdMvFnadTz1ymxbtxfsc7UH8qakw5T6v8xjgjMzl

I like how they lump in North Oxford with Kidlington, I wonder why that is.....

 

[Marked Ox]

Ok
Lets get writing into the Mail in support of the development,we all have a part to play
Is there an e mail address to send letters to?

It is in the article you've linked: letters@oxfordmail.co.uk.

 

[Sarge]

Ha Ha I've had a post sent for review on the Next Door site, sensitive souls. It was a link to a BBC story about Japan and what happens to societies which don't change. I've taken the question on whether anyone in the village identifies with the men in the village in Japan, so I'll see what their mods do now.
It's a badge of honour I feel.

Ah , Kidlington Next Door , inhabited by cllr Middleton, FoSB types n nimbys from in and around the area, people who don't take kindly to being challenged, certainly not on what has, until recently, been perceived as their exclusive domain, I wouldn't be at all surprised if 'someone' has reported your post as 'offensive' @DannyW , 'they' reported my dad (87 year old) after he challenged some of their claims a few weeks ago, he had his account suspended for about 12 hours- its apparently a bit like North Korea or Russia on Kidlington Nextdoor

 

[SteMerritt]

Interesting article on how a new football ground changes property values around it...

The potential economic impact of stadium development - News - ESSMA

The possibilities new stadiums offer to clubs can be stated with various examples: increased stadium attendances, bigger budgets (through higher ticketing revenues, branding and improved revenues of F&B and hospitality) and higher supporter/visitor satisfaction rates.

essma.eu

It seems FoSB may have a point, the prices of their houses will be affected by a new stadium near by...

 

[Orkney Islands Yellow]

Interesting article on how a new football ground changes property values around it...

The potential economic impact of stadium development - News - ESSMA

The possibilities new stadiums offer to clubs can be stated with various examples: increased stadium attendances, bigger budgets (through higher ticketing revenues, branding and improved revenues of F&B and hospitality) and higher supporter/visitor satisfaction rates.

essma.eu

It seems FoSB may have a point, the prices of their houses will be affected by a new stadium near by...

View attachment 11875

Ker-ching!

 

[Wallop]

Ker-ching!

That’s good - my parents live near the proposed site and are getting on in years

 

[Colin B]

@Colin B one thing that has been niggling at me is the idea that as a fanbase we may have taken our eye off the ball in ensuring that the club are protected from the mistakes of the past. When the announcement was made that the club were looking to build a new stadium a year or so ago, one of the things I was very interested in was to hear about the protections we'd have in place to ensure we don't get bitten like we did with Firoz Kassam again.

I believe we were assured that the land lease would contain clauses that committed the club OUFC to a peppercorn rent of £1 per annum. As a member of OxVox I also sought, and was given, assurances that OxVox would be looking at how they can ensure that the club and the stadium can never be separated again (in the same way we have been at the Kass Stad) and that, for example, any future owners would not be able to start charging the club rental payments for use of the stadium.

Obviously with the vocal anti-stadium voices gaining traction, the fanbase has rightly moved to a highly supportive position and lobbied the council to be 100% in favour of the lease., without lobbying for any of these protections

Can we be sure that OCC will still be writing into the terms the peppercorn rent? And perhaps any other protections for the club? e.g. perhaps a requirement of the lease is that it can only ever be owned by OUFC, and not any holding company associated with OUFC? @OxVox and @Paul P for reference and possible response too.

I suppose we will see for ourselves when the heads of terms come back to OCC, but it would be good to get reassurance on these points.

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.

 

[Yellow River]

Ha Ha I've had a post sent for review on the Next Door site, sensitive souls. It was a link to a BBC story about Japan and what happens to societies which don't change. I've taken the question on whether anyone in the village identifies with the men in the village in Japan, so I'll see what their mods do now.
It's a badge of honour I feel.

Could yourself or someone post on Nextdoor Kidlington the YouTube video of the OCC meeting?

That way the residents can see and hear for themselves the arguments for and against for the World Class facilities at the Triangle and what the Sports clubs at SB missed out on.

 

[DannyW]

Could yourself or someone post on Nextdoor Kidlington the YouTube video of the OCC meeting?

That way the residents can see and hear for themselves the arguments for and against for the World Class facilities at the Triangle and what the Sports clubs at SB missed out on.

I'll give it a go

 

[DannyW]

Could yourself or someone post on Nextdoor Kidlington the YouTube video of the OCC meeting?

That way the residents can see and hear for themselves the arguments for and against for the World Class facilities at the Triangle and what the Sports clubs at SB missed out on.

Tis done

 

[TailsWeWin]

That’s almost word-for-word the reply I had.
Colley’s follow up to my follow up (!) said “Get the fans to write to us…. And we will feature them.”

 

[Beckdale16Bicester]

Yeah it will be good for the town, but if it makes it harder for me to get into Shakil's on a Saturday I may have to come across all NIMBY about it .

It's more logistically that will be interesting. We could conceivably have a few hundred home fans and a few hundred away fans all looking to head out back Bicester way. Currently it's 2 trains an hour, so getting everyone moved quickly will be problematic. Would extra trains be available to go into use? If so, where would they terminate? Bicester? Haddenham?. If they go through to Haddenham you are closing the crossing on London Road more frequently, which as a fellow Bicester resident you'll know gets people all annoyed as it is. And that is before you consider any extra train capacity going the other way back into town.

It's this kind of question that OUFC will need to have answers ready for, so I expect discussions with Chiltern Rail further down the line to address this.

I know we’ve been in discussions with both Chiltern Railway and the local bus companies. I avoid the level crossing as much as
possible, but can see your point about extra trains being put on for match days. Personally I’ll probably use the park and ride and get the X5 to Kidlington. Fortunately I’m got a bus pass so can do the journey for nothing.