General New Stadium Plans - Stratfield Brake

[OX14]

That was GWE council Kidlington pay a lot more that that. The split as I posted is KPC 90% GWE 10% I think you'll find KPC stumped up circa 124k last year for SB

Yes I've heard the combined lease yearly is £146k, they do get money from the cricket club, rugby club etc and maintenance/grass cutting is probably done by the sports clubs. If the sports clubs decide to move on that becomes a very expensive green field with zero return for the Parish councils with a lease they can't get out of (works both ways) . So expect OUFC to build a cricket pitch, rugby pitch, running track at the training ground to put the boot in If the parish councils won't play ball

 

[DannyW]

Yes I've heard the combined lease yearly is £146k, they do get money from the cricket club, rugby club etc and maintenance/grass cutting is probably done by the sports clubs. If the sports clubs decide to move on that becomes a very expensive green field with zero return for the Parish councils with a lease they can't get out of (works both ways) . So expect OUFC to build a cricket pitch, rugby pitch, running track at the training ground to put the boot in If the parish councils won't play ball

I don't think the grass cutting us done by the club's. The costs of this to the PCs is key I think to our success

 

[Headley]

Ah, I see. Thanks for the correction. That's quite a lot.

That's a considerable chunk of local taxpayers money, I'd be interested to know what the operating figures of other council run buildings like the leisure centre and Exeter Hall are.

Because if those also run at an operating loss then it makes the Stratfield Brake proposal even more appealing with regard to freeing up money.

Especially if improvements to the infrastructure can be made by outside parties ,safer cycle routes and improved pedestrian access to Oxford parkway at no cost to the taxpayer.

 

[Headley]

I don't think the grass cutting us done by the club's. The costs of this to the PCs is key I think to our success

The site is run by the council, in the early days it was run by the clubs, and the pitches were managed considerably better than they are now

 

[Foley]

I don't think the grass cutting us done by the club's. The costs of this to the PCs is key I think to our success

Councils are struggling financially.
I agree with your comments. The financial benefit to the council as well as fantastic new facilities makes it pretty likely that this will go through

 

[Followtheox1]

The site is run by the council, in the early days it was run by the clubs, and the pitches were managed considerably better than they are now

Are you Headley that used to live in Crendon?

 

[Headley]

Are you Headley that used to live in Crendon?

No I'm from Kidlington, Headley is a nickname from schooldays based on the size of my cranium

 

[ljs]

That sounds more likely. I knew that we'd committed to supporting the clubs finding new space, but had missed that it was linked to the grant. However, could the Parish Council refuse to move and scupper the entire deal? I thought that the lease sat with Cherwell and they could alter the terms of that lease if they wished, but that it was easier all round to do so with everyone on boars rather than a forced move.

Taken directly from the January cabinet report...

4 "OUFC’s proposal requests that the majority of OCC’s freehold land holding at Stratfield Brake be transferred to them for a term of 250 years. The land is currently leased out to three tenants by OCC being CDC (who in turn sub-lease to Kidlington Parish Council and Water Eaton and Gosford Parish Council), The Woodland Trust and Foxcotte Fencing Limited."

From the same report...

14 "Part of the site is a sports ground as shown on the plan above. OCC is not in possession / control of the sports ground, having leased the majority of it out until 2097 to CDC at a rent of £1 per annum, who have in turn sub-let to Kidlington Parish Council (KPC) for a similar term. There are no break clauses in these leases, hence there would need to be a tripartite agreement for any early surrender and all three Councils would need to satisfy themselves that they are receiving bestvalue under any future arrangement."

15 "An area of land to the west of CDC’s interest, which is leased out by OCC to The Woodland Trust, was originally included within OUFC’s proposals. However, this has now been excluded."

16 "The triangular piece of land is let on a short-term basis to Foxcotte Fencing Limited at a rent of £418 per annum, with the ability for OCC to break the lease on 12 months’ notice."


One anomoly/omission is that Water Eaton & Gosford PC are not mentioned in point 14?

 

[Scotchegg]

Taken directly from the January cabinet report...

4 "OUFC’s proposal requests that the majority of OCC’s freehold land holding at Stratfield Brake be transferred to them for a term of 250 years. The land is currently leased out to three tenants by OCC being CDC (who in turn sub-lease to Kidlington Parish Council and Water Eaton and Gosford Parish Council), The Woodland Trust and Foxcotte Fencing Limited."

From the same report...

14 "Part of the site is a sports ground as shown on the plan above. OCC is not in possession / control of the sports ground, having leased the majority of it out until 2097 to CDC at a rent of £1 per annum, who have in turn sub-let to Kidlington Parish Council (KPC) for a similar term. There are no break clauses in these leases, hence there would need to be a tripartite agreement for any early surrender and all three Councils would need to satisfy themselves that they are receiving bestvalue under any future arrangement."

15 "An area of land to the west of CDC’s interest, which is leased out by OCC to The Woodland Trust, was originally included within OUFC’s proposals. However, this has now been excluded."

16 "The triangular piece of land is let on a short-term basis to Foxcotte Fencing Limited at a rent of £418 per annum, with the ability for OCC to break the lease on 12 months’ notice."


One anomoly/omission is that Water Eaton & Gosford PC are not mentioned in point 14?

Thank you, don't know whether I'd missed that or just got confused!!

 

[Orkney Islands Yellow]

Taken directly from the January cabinet report...

4 "OUFC’s proposal requests that the majority of OCC’s freehold land holding at Stratfield Brake be transferred to them for a term of 250 years. The land is currently leased out to three tenants by OCC being CDC (who in turn sub-lease to Kidlington Parish Council and Water Eaton and Gosford Parish Council), The Woodland Trust and Foxcotte Fencing Limited."

From the same report...

14 "Part of the site is a sports ground as shown on the plan above. OCC is not in possession / control of the sports ground, having leased the majority of it out until 2097 to CDC at a rent of £1 per annum, who have in turn sub-let to Kidlington Parish Council (KPC) for a similar term. There are no break clauses in these leases, hence there would need to be a tripartite agreement for any early surrender and all three Councils would need to satisfy themselves that they are receiving bestvalue under any future arrangement."

15 "An area of land to the west of CDC’s interest, which is leased out by OCC to The Woodland Trust, was originally included within OUFC’s proposals. However, this has now been excluded."

16 "The triangular piece of land is let on a short-term basis to Foxcotte Fencing Limited at a rent of £418 per annum, with the ability for OCC to break the lease on 12 months’ notice."


One anomoly/omission is that Water Eaton & Gosford PC are not mentioned in point 14?

Chances of that tripartite agreement are slim I fear. Whilst they'd save a good few quid I think Kidlington Parish Council and some local residents would rather have that expense rather the stadium.

Hopefully there's a legal route that can be explored to break the lease with Kidlington Parish Council.

 

[OX14]

Chances of that tripartite agreement are slim I fear. Whilst they'd save a good few quid I think Kidlington Parish Council and some local residents would rather have that expense rather the stadium.

Hopefully there's a legal route that can be explored to break the lease with Kidlington Parish Council.

It's not about saving a few quid, they will get better facilities on their doorstep at no cost to them aswell as benefiting from contributions they can use for what ever they want in Kidlington. Remember Kidlington Parish represent and should be taking all their 11k population views, not just the loud minority who don't want it.

 

[Orkney Islands Yellow]

It's not about saving a few quid, they will get better facilities on their doorstep at no cost to them aswell as benefiting from contributions they can use for what ever they want in Kidlington. Remember Kidlington Parish represent and should be taking all their 11k population views, not just the loud minority who don't want it.

I get the impression Kidlington Parish Council will sacrifice the facilities (and alot more) for not having the stadium near them. The majority of Kidlington residents weren't supportive in that consultation, that'll be their reason fir not agreeing to break the lease.

 

[Scotchegg]

I get the impression Kidlington Parish Council will sacrifice the facilities for not having the stadium near them. The majority of Kidlington residents weren't supportive in that consultation, that'll be their reason fir not agreeing to break the lease.

I honestly can't see them being that petty. The facilities they could get from moving would benefit the whole community and will have local support too.

 

[SteMerritt]

The majority of Kidlington residents weren't supportive in that consultation, that'll be their reason fir not agreeing to break the lease.

The majority of Kidlington residents didn't register an opinion in that consultation. If you look at it it was about 1% (maybe less) of Kidlington residents who were against the plans.

 

[Oxymoron]

that'll be their reason fir not agreeing to break the lease.

As I alluded to in a previous post, given that the existing leaseholders would have been one of the very first obstacles to be identified, do you REALLY think things would have progressed to this point without these matters having been already resolved?

 

[Orkney Islands Yellow]

As I alluded to in a previous post, given that the existing leaseholders would have been one of the very first obstacles to be identified, do you REALLY think things would have progressed to this point without these matters having been already resolved?

What point are things at? The council cabinet agreed talks could start in earnest and the minutes state an agreement with leaseholders would have to be made to cancel their leases. I'm presuming talks have happened and Kidlington Parish Council may be deciding if they should cancel their lease in tomorrow night's meeting.

It's an obstacle that needs to be overcome that hasn't yet as far as I'm aware. As I said, I'd be surprised if the Kidlington Parish Councillors agree to that and they'll do anything to stop or at the very least delay the stadium from being built near them.

Let's hope I'm wrong though, a new stadium at Stratfield Brake will be just perfect for our club.

 

[Manorlounger]

As I alluded to in a previous post, given that the existing leaseholders would have been one of the very first obstacles to be identified, do you REALLY think things would have progressed to this point without these matters having been already resolved?

All very logical.
We know that all the sports clubs currently involved at Stratfield Brake have indicated that they are in favour of OUFC developing the land. They will all benefit from vastly improved facilities and potentially, the use of an international standard stadium for more prestige events. They are also aware of the costs being covered by OUFC, including the upkeep of the playing surfaces. It's a win, win situation for them. Come to that, it's a real win for any of the local councils as they would no longer have to foot the bills nor would that situation be allowed to change under the terms of the lease from OCC.

 

[Sarge]

All very logical.
We know that all the sports clubs currently involved at Stratfield Brake have indicated that they are in favour of OUFC developing the land. They will all benefit from vastly improved facilities and potentially, the use of an international standard stadium for more prestige events. They are also aware of the costs being covered by OUFC, including the upkeep of the playing surfaces. It's a win, win situation for them. Come to that, it's a real win for any of the local councils as they would no longer have to foot the bills nor would that situation be allowed to change under the terms of the lease from OCC.

..... local jobs for local people during construction and after completion of SB ..... as a non Kidlington resident the only real and legitimate concern I can see is the worry regarding parking on matchdays
If CDC introduce a residents parking zone ( like there is already in place in many areas located in OX1, OX2, OX3 and OX4) , that should alleviate the majority of matchday parking concerns of Kidlington residents

 

[Wallop]

All very logical.
We know that all the sports clubs currently involved at Stratfield Brake have indicated that they are in favour of OUFC developing the land. They will all benefit from vastly improved facilities and potentially, the use of an international standard stadium for more prestige events. They are also aware of the costs being covered by OUFC, including the upkeep of the playing surfaces. It's a win, win situation for them. Come to that, it's a real win for any of the local councils as they would no longer have to foot the bills nor would that situation be allowed to change under the terms of the lease from OCC.

Indeed and the Chair of Gosford All Blacks spoke at the OCC Meeting providing his full backing to the stadium proposal.

 

[Oxymoron]

It's an obstacle that needs to be overcome that hasn't yet as far as I'm aware.

It's a bit naïve to think that everything going on is taking place in the public arena - non-disclosure and confidentiality agreements will have been signed and "pre-contract" agreements will also have been drawn up. The "owners" would have put a lot of effort upfront in firstly identifying and costing this and other sites and then sounding them out. We'll probably never know if SB was their first choice to relocate to, but if they were unable to obtain the guarantees that they needed in order to commit, they would have turned their attention to those places which were viable.

What we are seeing at the moment is the nice face of capitalism but this stadium isn't getting built with a nod and a smile and an "if that's alright with you". There is serious money to be spent and made here and those people spending it will be very serious about achieving their aims. I don't think this will turn into a dirty fight and while not wanting to sound complacent (there will be problems and we all know the name Les Wells), I would be very surprised if the situation regarding the leases' is going to be a showstopper.