BIAS Response?

[Nigel Brooks]

Having read Ron's 'rant' in the programme about the potential development at Lionel Road I have two observations.

Firstly that Ron is incapable of being positive about such a fan-lead initiative, as he appears to take every opportunity to disnmiss ideas to move the club forward.

Secondly, that there was not a 'development supportive' article from BIAS in the same programme.

Now, this may have been 'pulled' for some reason (I do not know) but I believe that BIAS should both through the GPG and the programme exercise a right of reply in order that we can get the 'real' picture.

I am waiting for the BIAS response with interest.

 

[Queen Of The South]

The problem with Ron is he has a them and us attitude towards us, because we argued against Woking and Kingstonian.

As a result, in true Ron fashion he has to demonstrate childish opposition to every idea the supporters have now.

 

[Sweepy]

The problem with Ron is he has a them and us attitude towards us, because we argued against Woking and Kingstonian.

As a result, in true Ron fashion he has to demonstrate childish opposition to every idea the supporters have now.

So you are capable of "coming out" of the chit-chat forum then! A half decent post for once.

 

[Edmundo]

His programme notes made me angrier than Graham Barber did

The poll I've started in General Bees Discussion sums up my views of this piece of sh*t. I hope to god that the number of Bees fans that can't see through his pathetic propaganda is rapidly diminishing.

What the f*ck does he mean by suggesting that the BFC board had seriously considered the Lionel Road site for a stadium? Is this anything other than a blatant lie?

And all of a sudden he is extolling the virtues of the WIM site for a stadium, having dropped it like a hot potato at the first whiff of problems four years ago.

Does anyone know how much the club makes from the programme? Is it time to start a boycott?

And is it possible that the reason there wasn't a comment from BIAS about the proposed stadium/monorail is because Noades wanted to censor it?

 

[Pauly Paul]

Re: His programme notes made me angrier than Graham Barber did

And is it possible that the reason there wasn't a comment from BIAS about the proposed stadium/monorail is because Noades wanted to censor it?

I think this was the case.

 

[timl]

WIM & Improved planning at GP

I have heard a senior member of the LBH planning department (at a public meeting in April 2002 attended by around 15 representatives of local businesses) say, that WIM was/is a no go under any circumstances for a stadium - given the 'green belt' status apparently.

Is it going to be OK to build a terminus for the monorail at WIM or is there going to be a problem for the same reason?

Has anyone mentioned this ('green belt' status) as a problem for the monorail at WIM so far?

It would be helpful if Bees Utd or LBH could make it clear that building the monorail terminus at WIM is going to be OK.

It is interesting to know (from the same source in the LBH planning department) that Feltham Arenas was/is also a no-no, and that like WIM it was never seriously considered - by the professional planners who work at LBH at least, that is.

Whether someone 'misled' the BFC directors by indicating WIM and/or Feltham were possibilties is not clear.

As to the GP planning consent, I think we all appreciate the point that this needs to be 'improved' in order to increase the site's value.

As I understand it - once the Lionel Road site is given the go ahead then this will automatically 'improve' the GP planning consent since the new stadium replaces the current one as a piece of 'public open space' in the UDP.

If true, this has to be one of the more important advantages of the Lionel Road plan and puts it well ahead of WIM and/or Feltham - even if these other sites were a vague possibility.

Again, it would be helpful if this could be confirmed by Bees Utd and/or LBH.

If this is the way the UDP works then it would be logical to expect the directors of BFC to do all they can (ie public support, letters to MP's, some limited funding to get a campaign going etc.) to get the Lionel Road site confirmation.

(Even without the monorail the 'public open space' issue surely makes Lionel Road the best site for BFC's purposes - quite why it was not pursued by BFC in the first place is a bit odd.)

After all directors surely have a duty to do their best for companies that they 'direct' - not to undermine potential success by saying and/or writing and/or doing things that may damage the company's future.

A higher value for the GP site will mean the club's 'creditors' get their money - with the current planning consent this is not guaranteed; this is after all particularly important since most of the 'creditors' are directors (either personally or as representatives of 'creditors').

(As an aside I would have thought that Administration and/or Liquidation would also mean the 'creditors' don't get all their money. The Club's assets would likely be sold for 'fire sale' prices - not the full commercial value.)

More importantly, a higher value for GP increases BFC's potential stake in the new stadium - surely the main aim of a director who accepts his responsibilities.

It has to be said that the standard of refereeing at GP on Saturday was particularly poor, despite the reported expertise and long experience of the referee; hopefully, the apparent standard of 'direction' given at BFC will not prove to be likewise.

 

[readingbee]

WIM

In answer to TIML.

The monorail is not going from the WIM site. It is, from what I have read going along the A4, I think if my memory serves me right this has already been stated ( though I am prepared to be corrected ). As to the ground I think I am right in saying that there is 50% affordable housing in this project. But at present developers are only building 20/25% of this type of housing around london and the 50% figure doesn't become compulsary until next year sometime. I am sure there is somebody who reads this site will be able to comfirm this. Maybe JM can comment.

 

[Gibbee]

But isn't there going to be a "Park and Ride" scheme from WIM which would mean there would have to be a Terminus there?

 

[solobee]

I agree with TIML that the great advantage of building at Lionel Road is that it would allow local open space at GP to effectively be moved to Lionel Road.(PPG 17-national planning guidelines).
The other arguements for Lionel Road are overwhelming.But I
think the present chances of it happening are very small.
If the Club is forced to find a temporary home away from the area this could mean the end of the Club.
Should we not support the Council's conditions that a new home is secured before we build on GP ?

 

[TW8JBee]

Monorail Terminus & Local Politics

Reading Bee - Just to be clear what was meant. The monorail has to start somewhere, which seems to be WIM - passengers would park at WIM and ride the train to Kew Bridge.

Coming back to the 'green belt' status of WIM; a clear unequivocal statement to confirm that the monorail terminus (and the park & ride car park) will be OK on this site is needed.

As an aside it might be interesting to learn what the senior local councillor representing Brentford (Ruth Cadbury) has to say about the plans. Presumably she stands four-square behind her boss - the Labour Group Leader on the Council - but it would be helpful if she would say so loudly enough (without any equivocation) for at least the local press to put her on the front pages.

Surely the economic advantages for her constituents, along with the enviromental improvements offered by monorail should be enough to get a helpful and supportive statement (ie 100% backing!).

It would be nice to know that all the potential 'nay-sayers' are getting behind the project - Ruth Cadbury has previously said that she sees no need for a community stadium in Hounslow, let alone Brentford; although this was something overheard, rather than witnessed, so it may not be entirely correct.

On the plus side there is a strong possibility her husband and children were at the Middlesbro game - so someone in the family likes football!

 

[Russell]

Re: His programme notes made me angrier than Graham Barber did

Does anyone know how much the club makes from the programme? Is it time to start a boycott?

And is it possible that the reason there wasn't a comment from BIAS about the proposed stadium/monorail is because Noades wanted to censor it?

Boycott the programme? Give the money to Bees United instead? Furry muff.

 

[John Mac]

This whole scheme is still at an early stage, and quite frankly if it wasn't for the SRA's insistence that they intend to sell to their "selected purchaser" the whole project would still be confidential. It's nothing to do with keeping things from people, it's just that I'm not in favour of getting people's hopes up just to let them down further along the line. However, in this case I think everyone should know what we're doing and decide for themselves whether it's worthwhile pursuing a stadium at Lionel Road. It seems we have almost universal support.

As far as the questions concerning Ruth Cadbury and green belt are concerned, I can confirm Ruth is as enthusiastic as any of us, and I'm sure everyone will make their views known quite soon. In terms of green belt, there are certain conditions under which development can take place, and monorail will qualify as acceptable. The car parks themselves do not infringe green belt policy.

As for a stadium at WIM, perhaps one day but certainly not in the short term.

In respect of the green space at Griffin Park, it is true that at least some of it could possibly be "transferred" to Lionel Road, and the same goes for affordable housing. The council have indicated this is negotiable so the amount is likely to be significantly less than 50% if we stay in Brentford, and there is also the prospect of building some affordable housing at our new site.

Meeting the conditions in this way will definitely increase the market value of Griffin Park, possibly by several millions of pounds and will put it much closer to the higher figures being quoted earlier in the year.

 

[Gibbee]

As for a stadium at WIM, perhaps one day but certainly not in the short term.

And when we outgrow Lionel Road & upgrade to new 30,000 seater at WIM the transport infrastructure will already be in place!

 

[Edmundo]

It seems we have almost universal support.

Almost????

He's got white hair, he's a millionaire???????

 

[Jay Bee]

Jimmy Saville?

 

['Ayes B]

I agree with TIML that the great advantage of building at Lionel Road is that it would allow local open space at GP to effectively be moved to Lionel Road.(PPG 17-national planning guidelines).
The other arguements for Lionel Road are overwhelming.But I
think the present chances of it happening are very small.
If the Club is forced to find a temporary home away from the area this could mean the end of the Club.
Should we not support the Council's conditions that a new home is secured before we build on GP ?

Welcome to the baord SoloBee. The cahnces of Lionel road happening are actual very good, if we not on beleive but do all that we can to make it happen.

It is importantant that run of the mill supporters like us get involved, write our protest letters and make sure that our voices are heard. Lionel road has a lot opf support, what we all need to do is influence everybody with influence. if we dont then maybe you could be write, the chances of it happening are very small.

BEElive and Make it Happen
BEE IDLE and watch the club die faster than the dream.

 

[solobee]

Thank you 'Ayes B for your welcome.
I agree with you that we should all give 110% to make Lionel Road a reality. But what should we do in the meantime?Temporary home or fight to stay at GP?