I think I'm intercepting this correctly Trev, but the football stadium and the athletics stadium are independent of each other. QPR FC is one thing, the athletics stadium is but a mere satellite of the main arena.
LCS Consultation document
- Thread starter Tramore Ranger
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
I think I'm intercepting this correctly Trev, but the football stadium and the athletics stadium are independent of each other. QPR FC is one thing, the athletics stadium is but a mere satellite of the main arena.
The original draft of this proposal I saw had a Football stadium with a small athletics facility nearby, it's not going to be an Olympics style monolith. It keeps the non-football contingent happy with new facilities and us happy with a new stadium that would double up as a concert venue...
H & F won't give it away. Here's their response to the Economic Impact report...
You must log in or register to see media
That’s an interesting response. Who on here would stump up to own a bit of New Loftus Road?
The use of the word ‘demand’ implies it might not be being received too well.
You must log in or register to see images
Statement responding to Queens Park Rangers’ economic impact report
21 November 20180 Comments
Sport, Planning
Loftus Road Stadium
Responding to the publication of Queens Park Rangers’ economic impact report, the London Borough of Hammersmith & Fulham issued the following statement:
“QPR’s proposals are less about keeping football in the borough – and much more about them playing property developer in White City.
“The Council is a trustee of the Wormwood Scrubs Charitable Trust. And as a trustee we can’t just give away over one hundred million pounds worth of land to QPR’s multi-millionaire owners. Linford Christie Stadium is a vital community asset in an open green space. We want to protect and enhance its use for the environment, athletics, recreation and the long-term benefit of all our residents. We will consult residents early next year about how we can best achieve this.
"The Council is very proud to have QPR in our borough and has long made it clear to their owners and executive team that we will go out of our way to help QPR improve their current stadium or will work with them to look at other alternatives. However, we cannot just give away land for free or hand land to QPR’s owners well below its potential value – and just because QPR’s owners have decided to campaign for the council to do that. We believe QPR deserves to be invested in and call on its owners to do just that.
"We’d be interested in discussing with QPR’s owners the idea that they give up some ownership of the club to ensure the community and QPR’s fans have a greater voice in the club’s future."
Two things from this:
1. The club are clearly trying to do things on the cheap at LCS and have managed to upset the council by doing so. Yet again it would appear that we don't have the negotiating skills to do a commercial deal without getting under somebody's skin. Or...It's possible the owners have already decided to move the club out of W12 to maximise the profit on selling the ground and are using this as a smoke screen.
2. The comments from H&FC about 'playing property developer' are strong words indeed. Having been born and bred in the borough I honestly don't recall a time in my 55+ years of supporting the club when I have truly felt the council have been behind us and I'm sure this has played a role in limiting our development down the years. You only have to look at how Spurs, Arsenal, Millwall, Brentford, etc have been supported by the respective councils in regard to development projects to see the difference. I don't want to see us go down the legal route again but I'm not sure how we get around this kind of blocking attitude.
On the face of it doesn’t look good, but could just be the opening salvos in a negotiation. They have named a price. Obviously QPR football club is not going to be building this stadium, it has to be some owner centric entity.
It seems to me the owners have an over-inflated sense of self-entitlement both in this proposal and in the Old Oak development. By trumpeting what they would like to do almost as a given has doubtless pissed off many in both projects. How our side haven't realised there would be covenants governing the land shows a serious failure of management as our legal side haven't done their homework properly. There is no indication in that statement from H & F that they are considering our use of that site only a rather embarrassing public put-down...
H&F is unique in London - a smallish borough council with 3 football league clubs on its watch. We are (currently) the least successful and most financially constrained of the three. Would they really give a sh*t if we moved out to Ruislip?
Last edited:
And a response to H & F from the StayInW12 group...
https://www.stayinw12.co.uk/news/response-to-council-statement-21-november-2018
https://www.stayinw12.co.uk/news/response-to-council-statement-21-november-2018
I've been to a few meeting's with the club on this issue. QPR have bent over backwards to help develop this site with the local community and to try and accommodate them implicity. We would maintain the whole of the Scrubs and their pitches to a standard way and above of what exists now. We would also rebuild and regenerate the whole site ( which is pretty run down ) but despite this, the club have come against opposition this from professional complainers who live miles from the area with huge financial backing. ( Over 50 miles away. )
As far as I'm aware, QPR are approaching this in an honest and open way as they can and trying to help and aid the local community by supplying them with better facilities than already exists.
As far as I'm aware, QPR are approaching this in an honest and open way as they can and trying to help and aid the local community by supplying them with better facilities than already exists.
It seems any attempts to regenerate the areas of H&FC are met with a negative demeanour.
I would have thought they would be keen to partnership with someone prepared to invest in an area and facility that is both costly to them and at a poor level of maintenance.
Equally we need to learn not to be so cocky about our ambitions like they are a right just because we are in the borough. That said we have spent time courting officials at many levels to communicate / negotiate with them.
We do a lot within the community at many levels and take that commitment seriously (as seen during the Grenfell disaster).
As to the “property developers” statement, surely H&FC are not so naive as to expect us to take on the area without some opportunity to create some kind of cash benefit.
Like all things it needs to be a win-win for all sides - the Council, the club, the community and the fans.
So lighten up and sit down, sort it out and get a bloody move on.
I would have thought they would be keen to partnership with someone prepared to invest in an area and facility that is both costly to them and at a poor level of maintenance.
Equally we need to learn not to be so cocky about our ambitions like they are a right just because we are in the borough. That said we have spent time courting officials at many levels to communicate / negotiate with them.
We do a lot within the community at many levels and take that commitment seriously (as seen during the Grenfell disaster).
As to the “property developers” statement, surely H&FC are not so naive as to expect us to take on the area without some opportunity to create some kind of cash benefit.
Like all things it needs to be a win-win for all sides - the Council, the club, the community and the fans.
So lighten up and sit down, sort it out and get a bloody move on.
I had a drive around Old Oak Common lane area yesterday on a job and couldn’t believe the change. If anyone knows what Stratford was like before the Olympics and what it’s like now, I can only suggest it’s gonna be the same sort of transformation.
Can’t help but feeling we’ve missed a massive chance there
Can’t help but feeling we’ve missed a massive chance there
Agree with the sentiment of this. The council could not have been more rude and dismissive about a serious business proposal if it tried. As I said earlier, the borough have never had any time for QPR and this is yet another manifestation of that. Nothing to be done however, as they hold all the cards. Looks like we'll be moving out sometime in the future.
I completely agree, and I have to say that I find the prissy tone of the borough's response completely unhelpful and childish. Yes the owners of the club are multi-millionaires, so what? Does this really need mentioning? Aren't pretty much all football club owners?
On what do they base their statement that the club are "playing property developers" rather than genuinely trying to keep the club in the borough? They claim that they have gone out of their way to to help QPR look at alternative sites. Have they? Where's the evidence of this?
And what the hell is that bit at the end about being "interested in discussing with QPR's owners the idea that they give up some ownership of the club"!!?? Where in the name of the all that's holy did THAT come from!? They are taking the Mick..
Totally unprofessional and petty IMHO.
Last edited:
OK team, have a read of this and see what you make of it.
Can anyone explain the last sentence in paragraph 3.32?
However you choose to view the sentiments in the document, it shows that the LCS is very far from a done deal for our beloved QPR.
Can anyone explain the last sentence in paragraph 3.32?
However you choose to view the sentiments in the document, it shows that the LCS is very far from a done deal for our beloved QPR.