Why would WDC be opposed to a planning application for housing/new road - presumably green belt but if not who would object? The owner of that JVC type vehicle with the parking tickets on its windscreen?
@OakwoodExile said:
Why do so few people cycle to the ground?
I like to cycle, for me it helps keep my newish titanium knees in good shape, plus all the other health benefits, however there are some serious hills in this vicinity which excludes this venture for me, as I would perspire like the proverbial piggy to the slaughterhouse, as such not fair for those sitting in my block!
@Onlooker , I imagine (but don't know for sure), it's probably ANOB and isn't identified in the local area plan as designated for future housing - unlike H7, Abbey Barn North & South.
Therefore it just doesn't fit with the planning authority view on where houses are going to be built.
These decisions aren't made in a day, don't you know? For context see H7 debate above, first identified in 1969 and houses still not built yet.
@ReadingMarginalista said:
A thread about this comes up every few years on the Gasroom in either of its guises as if it hadn't been discussed to death last time.
To summarise, it won't happen because the Dashwoods want planning permission to build houses on any road that gets built on their land. Until the planning permission part isn't a straight up no from the council, there's next to no chance of this happening.
Do the Dashwoods own all the land? Do you or the club have any communication lines with them? The council mentioned in the wake of the Steve Hayes era they’d have welcomed discussions on the AP issues. I’m not sure extensive digging up of green belt is desirable but some improved ground access may be attractive to all parties?
It was at the time they rejected the plans for the Booker site I think.
If no one from the club (or actually the Trust who own the ground) is engaging with the council and local land owners then we have to accept the limitations of the club. (We have to hope politicians are working in the best interests of their communities.) AP is fine as it is for gates circa 5,000.
We must remember Sharky Hayes spent a lot of time 'Courting' our 'uncorruptibl'e' local councillors.
Lesley Clarke and Tony Green enjoying the garden parties that Sharky held, I wonder if they still display the silver framed photographs that 'Honest Steve' kindly gave them ??
No-one ever quite explained how Booker was going to work for Wycombe - with us having to pay rent, and not getting any share of any of the raft of things being bought around it! Would we have had to have paid a share of the catering and gate too?
A later bus from the ground is an excellent shout. I would use it every game.
Just had a quick search. The last number 48 bus from Lane End Road on a Saturday is 16:19!! Strangely the last bus going the other way to Lane End is 17:58. I imagine it would be easy to turn this around and come back to Wycombe?
Exactly, The 'Black&White' campaign asked these question on numerous occasions via email, social media, letters and a leaflet campaign. The only response from Sharky was to send out his personal bully boy 'Fat Stan' and his team to attempt to intimidate members of the Black and white campaign, confiscate their leaflets, and remove where they had issued them.
Democracy and peaceful protest was not very high on Mr Hayes list apparently, anyone would think he would have a huge financial interest in seeing us lose our home ??
The conceivable theory of booker was that the additional revenue from increased gates attracted by better facilities and easier access plus money saved from avoidance of maintenance cost of old ground etc could have more than offset any rent due and any share of catering profits lost.
The devil was always going to be in the detail though and as time wore on and the detail never emerged, the suspicion grew that the business case assumptions didn't stack up for WWFC at least.
While unlikely I would have thought now, it doesn't of course mean that any future proposal should not be judged on its merits.
Whatever Hayes was/is involved in can surely only be viewed with a huge amount of scepticism. I can be pretty sure it would not have ended well for WWFC if he had his way.
Almost like you are better off waiting to see all the detail before you unreservedly suggest something is the only way forward.
No, can't think of any scenarios where this would help.
I think the Booker ship has sailed, but that was the period when club representatives were at least talking to the council. A successful / enjoyable to visit football team is an asset to the area.
Another access idea could be shuttle buses on Toweridge Lane to a car park in West Wycombe? (maybe one of the car boot sale fields). This would take traffic away from Hillbottom Road.
What would be interesting, is if we proposed Booker as as new site now, obviously just for us, would the council be quite so keen?
I suspect we know the answer to that!
I never personally quite saw Hayes as cynically as some people now depict him, I think there was definitely some level of trying to do something for us, it just got massively hijacked admist the uncomfortable Wasps association, mixed in with the "extras" at Booker. Those elements just tainted the whole overall picture of it.
There's a Coventry fan at work. Needless to say you can guess his opinion on the Wasps!
Fan enjoyment on matchday depends on the result, the time to get to or leave the ground may be an issue for some but a successful team playing good football will always swell the number of spectators. When we get a regular crowd of 7000+ and depending in which league we are in will be the time to discuss whether Adams Park is the right place for WWFC.
If we are successful and crowds rise then access will become even more of an issue but for now some more thought round park and ride and management of traffic are probably as far as we can expect.
A road would cost a huge amount that we probably wouldn't see back for decades through increased gates. A new stadium is even less affordable and would almost certainly have to be on the back of other growth or part of another development.
@Username said:
We struggle to half fill our current ground which is not exactly old
That's true but if we remain towards the top of League 1 this season our regular attendances should be higher, at which point the access becomes a bigger issue directly effecting matchday experience each week.
There's also the limitation on ground capacity of 10,000 but I agree we are not close to needing more than that.
I do think another access route would increase the club's potential (and value to an investor) significantly.
I think if we are successful more people will come and pain in the bum as it is...most people will put up with the access. I hate driving and the faff of parking but I would carry on doing it. Away fans will come in coaches and put up with said faff for one game a season (or even two for an exciting cup run!).
If you build a successful team they will come.
Some clubs are physically limited in terms of parking at their ground, so they must have a range of other options - maybe we can look at those clubs for ideas?
One out of the box idea would actually be to stop parking at the ground for all but say staff/officials/volunteers and disabled fans.
You'd then massively beef up the park n ride operation.
A problem with the existing park n ride is that they might not be best pleased with doubling or trebling the cars parking there! But may be there are other sites that could be worked with -or just town centre carparks?
No idea if it'd even be a starter, but maybe. You'd still get people parking down Hillbottom and the carparks near by, but you'd reduce the swell into and out, with a number of busses replacing them.
@Malone said:
Some clubs are physically limited in terms of parking at their ground, so they must have a range of other options - maybe we can look at those clubs for ideas?
One out of the box idea would actually be to stop parking at the ground for all but say staff/officials/volunteers and disabled fans.
You'd then massively beef up the park n ride operation.
A problem with the existing park n ride is that they might not be best pleased with doubling or trebling the cars parking there! But may be there are other sites that could be worked with -or just town centre carparks?
No idea if it'd even be a starter, but maybe. You'd still get people parking down Hillbottom and the carparks near by, but you'd reduce the swell into and out, with a number of busses replacing them.
Problem with all this, is that in general Park and ride just doesn't work for football, the vast majority of people just can't be asked with it.
@Malone said:
Some clubs are physically limited in terms of parking at their ground, so they must have a range of other options - maybe we can look at those clubs for ideas?
One out of the box idea would actually be to stop parking at the ground for all but say staff/officials/volunteers and disabled fans.
You'd then massively beef up the park n ride operation.
A problem with the existing park n ride is that they might not be best pleased with doubling or trebling the cars parking there! But may be there are other sites that could be worked with -or just town centre carparks?
No idea if it'd even be a starter, but maybe. You'd still get people parking down Hillbottom and the carparks near by, but you'd reduce the swell into and out, with a number of busses replacing them.
Problem with all this, is that in general Park and ride just doesn't work for football, the vast majority of people just can't be asked with it.
Worked really well on the way into the Stadium of Light last season, leaving was a little slow with longer waits as everyone leaving at the same time.
Comments
Why would WDC be opposed to a planning application for housing/new road - presumably green belt but if not who would object? The owner of that JVC type vehicle with the parking tickets on its windscreen?
I like to cycle, for me it helps keep my newish titanium knees in good shape, plus all the other health benefits, however there are some serious hills in this vicinity which excludes this venture for me, as I would perspire like the proverbial piggy to the slaughterhouse, as such not fair for those sitting in my block!
@Onlooker , I imagine (but don't know for sure), it's probably ANOB and isn't identified in the local area plan as designated for future housing - unlike H7, Abbey Barn North & South.
Therefore it just doesn't fit with the planning authority view on where houses are going to be built.
These decisions aren't made in a day, don't you know? For context see H7 debate above, first identified in 1969 and houses still not built yet.
Don’t be a nob @Twizz ! AONB surely ?
Oops @micra
Do the Dashwoods own all the land? Do you or the club have any communication lines with them? The council mentioned in the wake of the Steve Hayes era they’d have welcomed discussions on the AP issues. I’m not sure extensive digging up of green belt is desirable but some improved ground access may be attractive to all parties?
The council mentioned in the wake of the Steve Hayes era they’d have welcomed discussions on the AP issues.
Sounds like a typical government press release. AKA, our minds are already made up, it's a no, however we will discuss it to appease the public.
It was at the time they rejected the plans for the Booker site I think.
If no one from the club (or actually the Trust who own the ground) is engaging with the council and local land owners then we have to accept the limitations of the club. (We have to hope politicians are working in the best interests of their communities.) AP is fine as it is for gates circa 5,000.
We must remember Sharky Hayes spent a lot of time 'Courting' our 'uncorruptibl'e' local councillors.
Lesley Clarke and Tony Green enjoying the garden parties that Sharky held, I wonder if they still display the silver framed photographs that 'Honest Steve' kindly gave them ??
No-one ever quite explained how Booker was going to work for Wycombe - with us having to pay rent, and not getting any share of any of the raft of things being bought around it! Would we have had to have paid a share of the catering and gate too?
A later bus from the ground is an excellent shout. I would use it every game.
Just had a quick search. The last number 48 bus from Lane End Road on a Saturday is 16:19!! Strangely the last bus going the other way to Lane End is 17:58. I imagine it would be easy to turn this around and come back to Wycombe?
Exactly, The 'Black&White' campaign asked these question on numerous occasions via email, social media, letters and a leaflet campaign. The only response from Sharky was to send out his personal bully boy 'Fat Stan' and his team to attempt to intimidate members of the Black and white campaign, confiscate their leaflets, and remove where they had issued them.
Democracy and peaceful protest was not very high on Mr Hayes list apparently, anyone would think he would have a huge financial interest in seeing us lose our home ??
The conceivable theory of booker was that the additional revenue from increased gates attracted by better facilities and easier access plus money saved from avoidance of maintenance cost of old ground etc could have more than offset any rent due and any share of catering profits lost.
The devil was always going to be in the detail though and as time wore on and the detail never emerged, the suspicion grew that the business case assumptions didn't stack up for WWFC at least.
While unlikely I would have thought now, it doesn't of course mean that any future proposal should not be judged on its merits.
The problem being with that theory, WWFC had no way of controlling the rent. Affordable today, the next season massive hike and then what?
That depends on the contractual terms etc, @EwanHoosaami.
They never became visible.
Whatever Hayes was/is involved in can surely only be viewed with a huge amount of scepticism. I can be pretty sure it would not have ended well for WWFC if he had his way.
Almost like you are better off waiting to see all the detail before you unreservedly suggest something is the only way forward.
No, can't think of any scenarios where this would help.
To be honest in respect of booker I came to the same conclusion that it wasn't in WWFC best interests.
For what it is worth (as I wouldn't have a vote) I would listen with an open mind to any future proposal.
I think the Booker ship has sailed, but that was the period when club representatives were at least talking to the council. A successful / enjoyable to visit football team is an asset to the area.
Another access idea could be shuttle buses on Toweridge Lane to a car park in West Wycombe? (maybe one of the car boot sale fields). This would take traffic away from Hillbottom Road.
What would be interesting, is if we proposed Booker as as new site now, obviously just for us, would the council be quite so keen?
I suspect we know the answer to that!
I never personally quite saw Hayes as cynically as some people now depict him, I think there was definitely some level of trying to do something for us, it just got massively hijacked admist the uncomfortable Wasps association, mixed in with the "extras" at Booker. Those elements just tainted the whole overall picture of it.
There's a Coventry fan at work. Needless to say you can guess his opinion on the Wasps!
We are miles away from needing a new stadium or being able to fund it.
@StrongestTeam:
Yes but the stadium limits the club's value/potential in terms of fan enjoyment on matchday and maximum allowed capacity.
We struggle to half fill our current ground which is not exactly old
Fan enjoyment on matchday depends on the result, the time to get to or leave the ground may be an issue for some but a successful team playing good football will always swell the number of spectators. When we get a regular crowd of 7000+ and depending in which league we are in will be the time to discuss whether Adams Park is the right place for WWFC.
If we are successful and crowds rise then access will become even more of an issue but for now some more thought round park and ride and management of traffic are probably as far as we can expect.
A road would cost a huge amount that we probably wouldn't see back for decades through increased gates. A new stadium is even less affordable and would almost certainly have to be on the back of other growth or part of another development.
That's true but if we remain towards the top of League 1 this season our regular attendances should be higher, at which point the access becomes a bigger issue directly effecting matchday experience each week.
There's also the limitation on ground capacity of 10,000 but I agree we are not close to needing more than that.
I do think another access route would increase the club's potential (and value to an investor) significantly.
I think if we are successful more people will come and pain in the bum as it is...most people will put up with the access. I hate driving and the faff of parking but I would carry on doing it. Away fans will come in coaches and put up with said faff for one game a season (or even two for an exciting cup run!).
If you build a successful team they will come.
Some clubs are physically limited in terms of parking at their ground, so they must have a range of other options - maybe we can look at those clubs for ideas?
One out of the box idea would actually be to stop parking at the ground for all but say staff/officials/volunteers and disabled fans.
You'd then massively beef up the park n ride operation.
A problem with the existing park n ride is that they might not be best pleased with doubling or trebling the cars parking there! But may be there are other sites that could be worked with -or just town centre carparks?
No idea if it'd even be a starter, but maybe. You'd still get people parking down Hillbottom and the carparks near by, but you'd reduce the swell into and out, with a number of busses replacing them.
Problem with all this, is that in general Park and ride just doesn't work for football, the vast majority of people just can't be asked with it.
Worked really well on the way into the Stadium of Light last season, leaving was a little slow with longer waits as everyone leaving at the same time.