Interesting interview - one of the people on there mentioned that when the Olympic site was developed the local people were ignored - here from QPR's point of view that isn't the case. I think around 84% of local people supported us in our bid for a stadium alongside the new homes. To me there is no point just building new homes, there has to be infrastructure for the community - are CarGiant proposing anything like that?
That was 84% of 3000 QPR members surveyed by email and those members of the public who turned up to the exhibitions the club held. Or to put it another way, 84% of 25% of QPR season ticket holders, the others couldn't be arsed to give their view. It's hardly a ringing endorsement. Of course any proposal will have to include infrastructure. But I don't think a 45,000 seater stadium is necessarily considered a vital community facility. Otherwise we'd have one in Leamington Spa. And there would be 4 in Coventry, if 24,000 homes house 50-70,000 people. Sorry to be so negative on this, but I think some realism is needed. On the plus side, I'm sure the Mayor will get the green light to manage the whole thing this afternoon, then the process can at least start.
If this is given the go ahead we are still looking years before any stadium is completed, TF should never have mentioned anything about being ready sometime in 2018, that just got everyone's hopes up......if it is ready by 2030 they would have done well..... My own view is that they should look at LR and see if anything can be done within the current footprint to increase the capacity, extending upwards behind the goals, and Ellerslie, SAR could also have another tier added so that all the stands are the same height, just make it a steep sided ground like some of those in Spain and France (Lens springs to mind) Architecture and Engineering have moved on since the 80's when the stands behind the goals were built.. That would give us a capacity of 25k - 30k which should be ample.
My understanding is that has been examined every which way and deemed impossible though you may have a point about Architecture and Engineering moving on.
Here is what they are discussing. Interesting that the visual is from the clubs brochure, including the stadium.... https://www.london.gov.uk/media/assembly-press-releases/2014/12/mayoral-development-area-extraordinary-assembly-meeting-on-old You can watch on the webcast, though my ipad doesn't like it and I'm supposed to be working......
Nothing from what I would call a reputable source as of yet, but some chatter: @andyj1979 · 53m 53 minutes ago Very positive news that despite Greens, Lib Dems & Lab trying to block creation of a Mayoral Dev Corporation at Old Oak it has been approved @NoNW10dump 26m26 minutes ago Mayor's proposal for a development corporation for Old Oak voted through. Labour members pushing for higher targets on affordable homes.
Good to see you back posting Ellers! Like the pic. IASM - looks promising. @NoNW10dump sounds impartial
Am I right in assuming that if Boris gets the thumbs up today, then we negate the CarGiant issue, as we are his prefered partner for this project?
okay just been on this site https://www.london.gov.uk/mayor-assembly/london-assembly/webcasts You need to click on the 17th. And watched a few minutes and they have a vote about 3/4 the way through.
No. Everything will be zero based. Even if he does prefer us and we get the nod if Car Giant don't want to play ball there will be a long legal process (appeals etc) before a compulsory purchase order. And new developers could also take an interest. But at least there will be a single central point for decision making.
