New Stadium New Stadium Plans - The Triangle - Planning

New Stadium Project - Key Details

HELP NEEDED
HERE
Planning Portal: Planning Application - 24/00539/F
Stadium News Digest Thread: Click Here.
Latest from Club: 10/03/2025: Hotel Partners Announced (Click Here).​
Latest from CDC: Consultation extended.
Kassam License Extension:OUFC Communication
Target Decision Date: Earliest 31st July 2025, subject to change.

New Stadium Decision Date
--
Days
--
Hours
--
Minutes
--
Seconds
Triangle Decision Date
 
Last edited by a moderator:
If you read the support document from John Moss the cricket chair who's support submission is from Gowen Lea, I think you will see why I will support it, all the same reasons you would. Nothing to do with jumping on another application I am just in favour of it.
Which is fair enough, we need to provide facilities for the youth of tomorrow, without it we will just continue to see a rise in anti social behaviour, these kids need to have opportunities & chances to do things instead of hang around on street corners causing trouble. That’s half the reason why society is in the state it is today.
 
Lib Dems want as little hassle as possible - professional fence sitters.
then theres the Lib Dem chair of KPC, who is also a District councillor, she isn't on the fence- along will all other KPC councillors she was a signatory to a lengthy letter of opposition to the stadium submitted by KPC, that has been posted up on the CDC planning portal
 
then theres the Lib Dem chair of KPC, who is also a District councillor, she isn't on the fence- along will all other KPC councillors she was a signatory to a lengthy letter of opposition to the stadium submitted by KPC, that has been posted up on the CDC planning portal
Signatory’s of a long letter which is based on zero facts.

They are also predetermined, so have to be very careful how they act.
 
Yes they did but a lot of places outside of the city were small rural hamlets that then had new houses added.
Kidlington is probably a good example pre Garden City which I believe was built early sixties.

I suppose what I’m saying is that if you were a resident of Kidlington up to the sixties it was a small village.
But what makes the bleating of FoSB so hypocritical is that the very houses they live in weren’t wanted by the original residents but now they live there they are quite happy to ban any new development
There is a strange dynamic when it comes to people’s perception of their situation. We had a situation where they wanted to build a new housing estate behind us. The usual NIMBYs protested, came round asking people to sign surveys etc. But really, the vast majority even if a bit apprehensive weren’t too bothered. Fast forward 3 years, most houses are built, but the people in the new houses are now coming round objecting to them extending the estate. What’s more, as part of this estate they removed the staff car park at the local hospital, so they now have to park on the streets. People in the new houses have started putting out signs saying residents parking only, even though it was their houses that created the removal of their car park!

So all in all, some people can only see their own side, or only choose to see their own side.
 
This is a classic case of misrepresentation of facts by ian middleton
i give you paul batt taking another middleton objection apart

View attachment 27915
Who is this Damon B, is he for or against? It's already been shown that the multi million dollar law firm has nothing to do with the company who wrote the report for CPRE. Perhaps Damon was being sarcastic but it's hard to say without seeing the rest of his comment.
 
Who is this Damon B, is he for or against? It's already been shown that the multi million dollar law firm has nothing to do with the company who wrote the report for CPRE. Perhaps Damon was being sarcastic but it's hard to say without seeing the rest of his comment.
It was a sarcastic response aimed at IM, in regards to Steve Hill getting 2 different companies mixed up 🤣
 

To be honest, I think it would be a bit childish to jump on the other application just to get at the instigators of the campaign. We are better than that.
To be honest, this development is much needed for Kidlington. It’s wrong to believe supporting this development would be just a tit for tat move. KCC need this as do local people who would like to live in Kidlington. I therefore have submitted a response in support.
 
To be honest, this development is much needed for Kidlington. It’s wrong to believe supporting this development would be just a tit for tat move. KCC need this as do local people who would like to live in Kidlington. I therefore have submitted a response in support.
Don't get me wrong, if you have reasons to support it then of course do so.
 
Who is this Damon B, is he for or against? It's already been shown that the multi million dollar law firm has nothing to do with the company who wrote the report for CPRE. Perhaps Damon was being sarcastic but it's hard to say without seeing the rest of his comment.
FoSB getting the two Mayer Groups mixed up was pure comedy gold
 
Have a feeling CDC are being pushed into a corner, they either approve it or it gets approved on appeal & they get a massive legal bill.

I wonder how wary they will be of that.

If they vote against it, it can only be on personal predjudice, which will get them in hot water.

CDC isn't being pushed in to anything. It is also not a single large, unwieldy blob that exists simply to p**s people off.

Its planning officers (unelected, but experts in their field) will have been working closely with OUFC to ensure the application meets national planning guidelines (which covers all sorts, including consultations), which is what's led to the delays we've seen. Each delay has been to ensure that the whole process stands up to the highest scrutiny, should that be required. Then, if the final application meets these planning guidelines, those officers will recommend that the Planning Committee - made up of elected Councilors - approves it.

It's then up to those Councilors on the Planning Committee to approve it, refuse it, or approve it with conditions. Those Councilors will be absolutely 100% aware of the potential repercussions, including financial ones, of refusing a perfectly good and legal application.

I said months ago that I expect the vast majority of Councilors at CDC are in favour of the development as a whole, but that for various reasons (primarliy related to their re-election!) some might find it more politically expedient to keep their views to themselves, and appear almost as if they have been forced in to accepting something they've actually wanted all along.

Some will, of course, be dead set against it but most will be aware of the long-term economic benefit it will bring, the jobs it will create, the opportunities it will give young people in the County, and the esteem in which this stadium will be held in the future.

Obviously it's not exactly a shining endorsement of our democratic process that Cllrs might not have the guts to say 'this good thing is a good thing', but sadly we live in a world where politics (like this forum can be at times...!) is black or white, there is no room for nuance, and having a defined stance on anything can be used as a stick to be beaten with.
 
It's quite a few people now!

The friends lost is a who's who of anti stadium cronies. Middleton, Soheili, Mcivor etc

Can't see Blossom Hill or Vicky so I'm guessing they've blocked me.

Blossom was commenting earlier on a story in the mail on Facebook about a congestion charge being introduced for driving into Oxford, he said he will trade in his EV for a diesel, god knows what he means by that but I just assumed he had popped a bottle open early.
 
Blossom was commenting earlier on a story in the mail on Facebook about a congestion charge being introduced for driving into Oxford, he said he will trade in his EV for a diesel, god knows what he means by that but I just assumed he had popped a bottle open early.
I was going to say he'd always be too over the limit to drive it, but then he's probably got his own chauffeur.
 
Councillor one shirt in the mail again, this time about the land behind the Moors, somehow a planning application having some objections is worthy of being in the mail
To be fair they do it on every planning application the only surprise is the stadium wasn't mentioned
 
Councillor one shirt in the mail again, this time about the land behind the Moors, somehow a planning application having some objections is worthy of being in the mail
Maybe he’s moved on from the stadium then…

Found his next lost cause to back with his little band of mates @ FOSB
 
The hobby lobbyists oppose every development near them, all you hear is white noise, their constant campaigning just waters down their cause, they can’t see that any credible reason they have is gone, it’s purely down to them not wanting anything built near them, nothing else.
 
Couldn't have put it better.

Just imagine going to the EFL with the proposal

"so, why would you like to change your name?"

"Oh some tinpot minor councillor doesn't want our new stadium near to one of his two homes"

One mans suggestion is not more important than what thousands of people do every week of the football season. It's farcical that it's been suggested in an official objection.
 
Back
Top Bottom