Page 3 of 8
Re:
Posted: Tue May 24, 2011 11:45 am
by bspittles
Bradford have reached agreement to stay at Valley Parade.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/footbal ... 494920.stm
Re:
Posted: Wed May 25, 2011 9:22 pm
by Snake
Meantime things pass by our Rent Boy. Kassam must be licking his lips at the very remote prospect of even more development on
his land -
http://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/904581 ... _planners/
Posted: Sun May 29, 2011 12:08 pm
by Sideshow Rob
So...if the over-flow car park and Priory car parks are built on and we make it to L1/Championship, where the hell are we all supposed to park?
Re:
Posted: Sun May 29, 2011 12:16 pm
by Baboo
"Sideshow Rob" wrote:So...if the over-flow car park and Priory car parks are built on and we make it to L1/Championship, where the hell are we all supposed to park?
A very good question Sideshow.
Posted: Sun May 29, 2011 9:36 pm
by Snake
A bit more detail here -
http://www.oxford.gov.uk/Direct/104_Ite ... f#page=132
From what I know WPL have been looking at some shops on the overflow car park for many years as part of their bungling and sometimes comical strategy to purchase the Stadium, but while there has been the possibility of housing (with shops) on the other side of Grenoble Road this one has been on hold for ages. Now that the Tories are in power the development on the other side of the road is no-no so it slightly brings back into focus the possibility of development (and profit) on our side of the road.
As for Rob’s parking question, then it’s officially dealt with as vaguely as the ownership issue in the document above i.e. “
The car park is overflow for Oxford United Football Club (OUFC) but OUFC consider that the land, including that around the stadium could be used more efficiently by providing the car parking in other ways and introducing new development around the stadium. The majority of the site is owned by Firoka Ltd but OUFC would like to purchase it and are considering possible uses to complement the stadium.
Posted: Mon May 30, 2011 9:13 am
by Sideshow Rob
If they go ahead with this the Council should create parking bays along the southern side of Grenoble Road. The Science Park owners should also be forced to open up their car parks on match days. The Council should also take care not to mess up any chances of a railway station being built adjacent to the overflow car park site (even though this remains a remote possibility for now).
Posted: Wed Jun 01, 2011 11:32 am
by Sideshow Rob
Why have the council included land to the north of the Northfield Brook? I have found a council planning report from 1999 which confirms what I thought, this land has nothing to do with United. If they want to develop this land I cannot see a problem. If they take away the overflow car park then the council must provide replacement parking and better public transport links.
Re:
Posted: Thu Jun 02, 2011 7:56 pm
by Snake
"Sideshow Rob" wrote:If they take away the overflow car park then the council must provide replacement parking and better public transport links.
It would be nice, yes - but "must". Where did that come from?
If it were up to me I'd scrap the restrictive parking scheme in the Leys as it was only ever set up to pacify Labour voters at the time of the Land Deal. Hey, for 23-25 times a year someone parks outside your house for three hours on a public road and that's no big deal when you take into consideration the Civic Pride, jobs and opportunity that Oxford United brings to quite a deprived area of our City.
Re:
Posted: Thu Jun 02, 2011 11:26 pm
by Maurice Earp
"Snake" wrote:"Sideshow Rob" wrote:If they take away the overflow car park then the council must provide replacement parking and better public transport links.
It would be nice, yes - but "must". Where did that come from?
If it were up to me I'd scrap the restrictive parking scheme in the Leys as it was only ever set up to pacify Labour voters at the time of the Land Deal. Hey, for 23-25 times a year someone parks outside your house for three hours on a public road and that's no big deal when you take into consideration the Civic Pride, jobs and opportunity that Oxford United brings to quite a deprived area of our City.
You don't live in BBL do you Trevor, sorry I mean't Snakey.
Re:
Posted: Fri Jun 03, 2011 8:24 am
by Joey's Toe
"If it were up to me I'd scrap the restrictive parking scheme in the Leys as it was only ever set up to pacify Labour voters at the time of the Land Deal. Hey, for 23-25 times a year someone parks outside your house for three hours on a public road and that's no big deal when you take into consideration the Civic Pride, jobs and opportunity that Oxford United brings to quite a deprived area of our City."
Abso-bloody-lutely. They could also get rid of the unnecessary double yellow lines on all the roads around the science park - plenty of room on one side for a lane of parked cars.
Posted: Fri Jun 03, 2011 9:55 am
by recordmeister
At what point does an "overflow" car park become just a car park? Surely we have used this "overflow" ever single game since moving to the Kassam therefore it should be classed as simply Car Parking and not Overflow Car Parking...
Re:
Posted: Fri Jun 03, 2011 10:45 am
by Kernow Yellow
"Joey's Toe" wrote:"If it were up to me I'd scrap the restrictive parking scheme in the Leys as it was only ever set up to pacify Labour voters at the time of the Land Deal. Hey, for 23-25 times a year someone parks outside your house for three hours on a public road and that's no big deal when you take into consideration the Civic Pride, jobs and opportunity that Oxford United brings to quite a deprived area of our City."
Abso-bloody-lutely. They could also get rid of the unnecessary double yellow lines on all the roads around the science park - plenty of room on one side for a lane of parked cars.
Agree. Many of the yellow lines were painted on after a couple of seasons - there was much more street parking allowed at the beginning. I don't see how it's helped the situation at all.
I don't understand why the science parks don't open their car parks - surely the money they could rake in, at eg two pounds per car, would more than cover the cost of a couple of security guards?
Posted: Fri Jun 03, 2011 12:27 pm
by Yellow-Robbo
It still really pains me that we didn't build the stadium in the Centre of Oxford. It was very nearly voted to be built next to the Ice Rink, NEAR THE TRAIN STATION which made a lot more sense all round. Both home and away fans could get the train in, bus in, park and ride etc etc. Obviously there are other implications, but in my opinion (and many others) it really is infuriating where the stadium is - it's barely Oxford is it!
Re:
Posted: Fri Jun 03, 2011 12:31 pm
by Snake
"Maurice Earp" wrote:"Snake" wrote:"Sideshow Rob" wrote:If they take away the overflow car park then the council must provide replacement parking and better public transport links.
It would be nice, yes - but "must". Where did that come from?
If it were up to me I'd scrap the restrictive parking scheme in the Leys as it was only ever set up to pacify Labour voters at the time of the Land Deal. Hey, for 23-25 times a year someone parks outside your house for three hours on a public road and that's no big deal when you take into consideration the Civic Pride, jobs and opportunity that Oxford United brings to quite a deprived area of our City.
You don't live in BBL do you Trevor, sorry I mean't Snakey.
Trevor? Eh?
Anyway, if you want to come and watch North Leigh I'd have no problem with you parking legally outside my house. After all, it's not my road - it's a public highway paid for by taxpayers money.
Re:
Posted: Fri Jun 03, 2011 6:57 pm
by Baboo
"Snake" wrote:
Trevor? Eh?
Made me laugh.