By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
I always thought that "Bilderberg" sounded like a mid-range soft cheese. Waitrose-y rather than Sainsbury-ish. Perhaps even in one of those balsa wood style boxes.
if your cheese comes in a balsa wood box it's probably an andy wahol (sic) artwork and worth lots of money - probably enough to save warren farm from being concreted over as it goes. I suggest if you find such a cheese, you take it to your nearest art dealer as a matter of urgency. or send it to save warren farm.
I should add that as far as I can see the present facilities are supposed to be for outdoor sports rather than either wildlife or dog-walking.
Very good point.
Good thread, this. I think savewarrenfarm are in trouble, though. In a huge urban area they have stoked very little support for their campaign. And in any campaign the surge is support comes instantly and enthusiastically or not at all.
"The opposite of love, after all, is not hate, but indifference."
93 people have voted. 94% (87 people) voted that the Council were right to lease the land to QPR.
That more-or-less says it all. There is a small group of NIMBYs (not in my back yard) who are trying to preserve a resource for their own use (walking the dog, etc) over the general good of the wider population. They may be right (that they are going to have decreased access to the site). Afterall, the site is pretty much abandoned, so they have 100% access now. But the site produces almost no benefit to the people of the borough, as a whole. With QPR developing facilities there, the site generates widespread benefits to the people and buinesses of the borough. There argument holds no appeal to the people of the borough and is not in the interest of the borough as a whole.
There is a really good website (Warren Farm Interest Group) that seems to be discussing all sides of the issue: http://www.wfig.org.uk/
The site lists the following community benefits:
"The following facilities and services are proposed as available to the community in the plans submitted to Ealing Council alongside the Training Academy:
-Indoor Hall covering 70m x 50m artificial playing surface marked for multi-sport use. -Community Trust Building attached to the Indoor Hall with changing facilities, WCs, offices, stores, first aid office, and multi-use indoor areas for community activities. -Community Pavilion close to the outdoor community sports pitches with changing facilities, WCs, kitchen, social space and storage for equipment. -3 cricket pitches to club standards (clay loam wickets) when football not in use. -7 football pitches (92m x 55m) levelled, with sand root zone and automatic irrigation. -2 football pitches (54m x 36m) levelled, with sand root zone and automatic irrigation. -1 Floodlit outdoor artificial outdoor adult football pitch (100m x 64m). -1 Multi Use Games Area (MUGA) accommodating 1 tennis / basketball court. -New cycle path and footpath located behind the existing hedgerow on Windmill Lane together with additional native landscape planting along boundaries. -Parking for approx. 500 vehicles (including overspill of 250) and 400 bicycles. -24 hour security with CCTV to protect the facilities from vandalism and theft. -A Community Trust charitable organisation to implement a community development plan and operate the community facilities. -Shuttle mini-bus service linking to public transport hubs. -An improved and safer main entrance off Windmill Lane together with a controlled pedestrian/cycle crossing. QPR will be responsible for constructing, maintaining, repairing and operating the facilities for as long as they hold the lease at no expense to Ealing Council (or the tax payer) who will retain the Freehold and keep the site as Metropolitan Open Land."
And good to see the information about the final agreement is on the Forum. There have been some generous and thoughtful comments understanding the position of those who wish to prevent the development of Warren Farm as proposed. Thank you.
This is no attempt to try and sway people to change their view. This is simply an attempt to share the situation on the ground.
Some general responses. A section of a community that uses Warren Farm in ways far beyond football is up against Ealing Council and, when they choose to engage, QPR. While some may think that in the days of social media it's easy to whip up a campaign, it isn't that simple. At the time of writing, there are only about 18 people on this forum. Are there only 18 QPR supporters? We all know there are many more.
Contrary to the views expressed by some, people do have lives beyond fighting to keep Warren Farm open access.
Also generous of someone to suggest that comments and presence of SWF on this forum is not altruistic. It's not. The purpose is to share a more balanced view to an audience that are (and should be) biased towards the future tenants. Similarly, not expecting to find any nuggets of information that might be useful for a Judicial Review.
So to revisit what the issues are.
Warren Farm is currently open to use. No fence, no controlled access. It's great. You can visit when you like, how you like and do anything legal there that you like. The current proposal fences off the site. I say currently. Ealing has either assisted people to leave or applied very heavy pressure to get them to shut up otherwise they'll lose even more. Access has already been reduced for some. So we don't need to wait for the fence. Someone mentioned you shouldn't walk dogs there. Correct. Another example of Ealing being highly selective about dog control due to dog mess. It would be great if they cared that much about about the pavements that we have to walk on.
The proposals. There are merits to what is being done. Everyone would like to see better facilities there. However, what is being done is only upgrading what is already there (which Ealing let fall to pieces) in return for fencing off the land with no legal guarantee of what will be provided for the community. The community have nothing. Yes, there will be facilities created for community purpose, but there is not legal contract stating this. So what do the community get? Legally, loss of free, open access. Loss of land. No guarantee of anything for the community.
This is a 200 year leasehold. Most home owners only have 150 lease top. It is a ridiculously long lease.
This all adds up to massive incompetence and waste of resources by Ealing Council.
Most people on this Forum will pay tax. Most would probably like to pay less and see their taxes used better.
This is another element of why the current proposals should be stopped. Put aside your QPR scarf for a moment and ask if you would like to see such incompetence by your local Council. And yet we are constantly told about cuts.
It is a great deal for QPR. Repeat. It is a great deal for QPR.
It is a really, really, really crap deal for Ealing Council Tax payers.
And as for that 61 acre green space that has just a small blight of a poorly maintained changing rooms that need redeveloping.
Well if it was your bit of local space, would you happily see it fenced off, handed over and be told to go and get in a car and go a few miles down the road to some other bit of green space?
Honestly? You wouldn't. You pop out to play with the kids, you don't mount a major day out!
So please ask your club why they haven't engaged with local residents? We've asked them to. They don't want to.
And so please ask yourselves if the deal is fair? Not part of the deal, the WHOLE deal.
Only a person with a seriously vested interested could conclude it is fair.
You should want your club to be the best it can. But at what cost.
SWF
Looking for a good deal for Warren Farm - for locals and users
"Put aside your QPR scarf for a moment and ask if you would like to see such incompetence by your local Council. And yet we are constantly told about cuts."
If my local council had a patch of land that was in a state of disrepair, with unsafe changing rooms sitting there as a magnet for anti social behaviour, and a private company said they would build a high-spec sports and leisure facility there, with facilities for the community to use as well, I'd expect them to bite their bloody hands off, which is exactly what Ealing Council has done.
It's win win on all sides. Residents get new facility to use, QPR get new training ground, Ealing Council get community sports facility handed to them on a plate with no need to invest themselves.
Keep moaning. You'll eventually get the retail park/housing estate there that you so sorely deserve.
What's more, your post started off logical but ended up a bit frantic and condescending ('crap deal' - we may be football fans but we were doing fine understanding the long and non-sweary words). And as for your assertion that only someone with vested interests would think this a fair deal, I find it's always better not to assign motive to persons unknown. That way. you can concentrate better on the issues rather than the personal, and you don't insult people either.
"The opposite of love, after all, is not hate, but indifference."
"Put aside your QPR scarf for a moment and ask if you would like to see such incompetence by your local Council. And yet we are constantly told about cuts."
If my local council had a patch of land that was in a state of disrepair, with unsafe changing rooms sitting there as a magnet for anti social behaviour, and a private company said they would build a high-spec sports and leisure facility there, with facilities for the community to use as well, I'd expect them to bite their bloody hands off, which is exactly what Ealing Council has done.
It's win win on all sides. Residents get new facility to use, QPR get new training ground, Ealing Council get community sports facility handed to them on a plate with no need to invest themselves.
Keep moaning. You'll eventually get the retail park/housing estate there that you so sorely deserve.
Exactly.
I may be missing something but why is this a crap deal for Ealing Council Tax payers? Does that mean he'd prefer Ealing Council to spend tax payers' money on rejuvenating the facilities themselves? Or just leave them in their current state?
The whole argument is quite bonkers and it appears that there are half a dozen people that want a semi-private location where they can walk their dogs on a Sunday morning.
I may be missing something but why is this a crap deal for Ealing Council Tax payers? Does that mean he'd prefer Ealing Council to spend tax payers' money on rejuvenating the facilities themselves? Or just leave them in their current state?
The whole argument is quite bonkers and it appears that there are half a dozen people that want a semi-private location where they can walk their dogs on a Sunday morning.
Toilets had no water and f'kin moss in them. (don't mean lewd moss)
Ooops didn't mean to reply to you.
[Post edited 16 Jan 2014 11:40]
Beer and Beef has made us what we are - The Prince Regent
If Warren Farm was so great why wasn't SWF lobbying the council years ago protesting about the dilapidated state of the whole facility, why didn't he at that time look to form some kind of pressure group that would force the council to spend some money on the site, why didn't he form some kind of fundraising group to contribute to the upkeep of the site. As a tax payer, albeit not to Ealing Council I would want the council to make the right decisions for its inhabitants and not be forced to spend my tax money on defending a decision in court against a bunch of interfering nimbies who until recently couldn't give a flying f**k about Warren Farm. SWF you would have a lot more credibility if you had been campaigning about the state of Warren Farm for the last decade.
I've lived within a few miles of it for 40 yrs & have never been, not much of a resource for the local community is it! Horsenden Hill is nice, take your dog there instead!!
1. QPR redevelop the site as planned, providing EC with funding to offset the need for the cuts spoken of above, whilst also providing community facilities.
2. EC redevelop the site, almost certainly funded in part by the placing of a Tesco Express & social housing but mostly by local taxpayers in a 'time of cuts'
3. EC do nothing. They leave the land as it is , with upkeep funded by the local taxpayers in 'a time of cuts', and reject a substantial amount of money from QPR that could be used to offset some of the aforementioned 'cuts'.
I live near Boston Manor - not that far from Warren Farm as the crow flies, further by road.
Over Christmas we went for a walk over there for the first time. What struck me was how large an open space there is in the area. You can get an idea from looking at Google Maps. Very nice it was as well, albeit a bit sodden.
From reading the debate about Warren Farm you might think it's just a series of football pitches. It isn't. There's room for whole armies of dog walkers.
Ok, starting point here is that SWF "the professional campaigner" is using this MB as a marketing tool.
He throws out arguments sees how we respond knowing that our starting point is the opposite of what he is trying to achieve. However, as Jamie's post identifies, quite what their desired outcome is at this point is unclear beyond Not In My Back Yard.
The throwing in of a potential judicial review is interesting. Last time they had limited grounds to challenge and insufficient funding to do so. That last point hasnt changed as far as I was aware. No doubt SWF will say otherwise, but there we are.
Again, best advice is dont respond to the professional campaigner, in doing so you provide a service to him.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
