Home · New Stadium Update

New Stadium Q&A Review

Following the formal proceeding of The Trust AGM on Thursday 22nd April, there was a Question and Answer session where Trust members were able to put questions to Lesley Clarke (Leader of Wycombe District Council) relating to the new Community Stadium. Lesley was supported by Karen Satterford (CEO of WDC) and Charles Brocklehurst, (Head of Property Services) was also in attendance.

A wide variety of questions was posed to Lesley Clarke and the following represent a brief summary of her answers that follow a logical sequence rather than the chronological order.

1. WDC are currently undertaking an assessment of a number of sites in the Wycombe area for a new “Community Stadium”. As the Council have already allocated land in the Core Strategy, they are obliged to consider all options. The feasibility study will take about a year to complete. It is too early to answer questions of detail, and no consideration has yet been given to the finer points of any new Community Stadium.

2. A community Stadium is intended to embrace not only the needs of WWFC and Wasps, but is intended to encourage sporting participation in the Wycombe area, a centre of sporting excellence, to develop Wycombe’s sporting talent, to encourage sport in local schools and clubs, grow other sports such as Badminton, Netball and Hockey. There will be additional synthetic surfaced pitches. It will be a Sports destination.

3. In response to a particular question as to whether the replacement sports centre would be located on the same site as any new Community Stadium, the response was: No, any new Sports Centre (including swimming pool) will not be linked to the new Community Stadium. It is recognised that the different users are incompatible.

4. The Council want to keep Wasps located in Wycombe and their needs are not served by the existing Adams Park limitation on capacity.

5. Asked whether The Council had considered improving access arrangements to Adams Park, it was confirmed that WDC had considered providing a secondary access but this was not possible due to the topography.

6. The access and egress arrangements for any new stadium would be carefully considered to ensure easy departure by car after a match. There will be a travel plan associated with the new stadium.

7. It is not known what will happen to Adams Park. It is not owned by The Council. It is on a site allocated as Employment Land. (i.e. not housing).

8. The size of the new stadium could be in the range 12,500 to 20,000 capacity.

9. To a specific request that there be no running track around the pitch which would mean fans being too far from the playing area, the response was that there will be no running track around the pitch.

10. Unless WWFC in Championship for 3 years then the stadium will have a safe standing area if at all possible, and Steve Hayes stated that he was right behind a safe standing area and would push hard for one, but that any final decision on this matter would not be his alone.

11. It is estimated that when a club moves to a new stadium, attendances increases by about 50%. Thus WWFC need about 6,500 to 7,500 in current league. Wasps require larger capacity.

12. It is recognised by the Council that there are different needs for the 2 Clubs and they are seeking to ensure that in any design for the new stadium a proper atmosphere can be created when the stadium only partly filled. This could be on similar principle to Stadium MK, although recognised that in this particular case, apart from odd exception, the design of Stadium MK does not create a good atmosphere.

13. The cost of the new stadium is unknown. No feasibility study has been completed.

14. The primacy of matches in any new stadium will be a matter for the clubs to agree upon, not for The Council. The stadium could be used for other events, subject to planning permission being obtained.

15. The cost of building a new stadium will be financed by “Enabling Development”, probably on the same site.

16. The shell of the Stadium will be owned by Wycombe District Council and leased to WWFC and Wasps.

17. Wasps and WWFC will fit out the stadium in accordance with their own requirements.

18. WDC are committed to a consultation process and want to hear the views of interested parties such as the supporters of WWFC as well as local residents.

The Trust would like to thank Lesley Clarke, Karen Satterford and Charles Brocklehurst for their attendance at the meeting, particularly to Lesley Clarke for fielding all the questions and hopes that this Q&A session will be the first of a series of such meetings, where the opinions of the fans can be presented and taken on board by the Council.

24th April 2010

Write a comment

Stadium Update 11/03/10

Wycombe District Council set capital budget and proposed timetable for New Stadium Development

“Executive Summary

Wycombe Wanderers Football Club and London Wasps Rugby Club share a constrained site which limits the scope of both clubs’ ambitions and does not reflect their potential contribution to the District’s profile, economy or community. The identification of an appropriate site for a new stadium and associated facilities raises strategic planning considerations that need to be progressed as part of the Wycombe Development Framework, and specifically a Core Strategy Alteration: this reports seeks approval for the work to be undertaken which will result in the Core Strategy Alteration.”

At a special Wycombe District Council Meeting on 25th February the Council resolved that:

(i) the commencement of work on a Core Strategy Alteration to identify a site and planning framework for a new stadium, and associated facilities and development necessary to achieve it, be approved

(ii) approval be given to the inclusion of a timetable based on that attached at Appendix 4 in the updated Local Development Scheme to be submitted to Government for approval (with any detailed adjustments delegated to the Head of Planning & Sustainability in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Planning & Sustainability); and

iii) the release of the identified funds (£500,000) within the major projects/ capital programme be authorised to enable this work to proceed. The proposed timetable (Appendix 4) is as follows:

Date Tasks

2010

Feb • Commence project

March • Finalise project plan/ procure necessary resources

April • Commence formulation of strategic options and evidence-gathering

Sep • Cabinet agrees options consultation

Oct-Nov • Public/stakeholder consultation on options (high level options + high level analysis and evidence)

May-Dec • Technical work continues, with focus on preferred option

2011

Jan • Cabinet agree preferred options consultation document

Feb-Mar • Public/stakeholder consultation on preferred option

Mar-May • Consideration of preferred option representations • Finalise evidence base

May • Local Elections

May-Jul • Finalise CSA submission document

Jul • Cabinet + Council agree pre-submission document

Sep-Oct • Public/ stakeholder pre-submission consultation

Nov-Dec • Consideration of representations • Preparation of topic papers

2012

Jan • Formal submission to Government

May • Public Hearing/ Examination

Jul • Inspector’s report

Jul • Adoption

The following is the full version of the Council Proposed Decision and Resolution of the Special Meeting of 25th February 2010

PROPOSED DECISION

That, subject to a positive decision on Item 7:

(i) the commencement of work on a Core Strategy Alteration to identify a site and planning framework for a new stadium be approved;

(ii) approval be given to the inclusion of a timetable based on that attached at Appendix 4 in the updated Local Development Scheme to be submitted to Government for approval (with any detailed adjustments delegated to the Head of Planning & Sustainability in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Planning & Sustainability); and

(iii) the release of the identified funds within the £500,000 authorised to enable this work to proceed.

Reason for Decision

In order to overcome the problems of the present stadium by allocating an appropriate site for a new stadium and associated facilities, in accordance with the vision for the District set out in the Sustainable Community Strategy.

Corporate Implications

4.1 £500,000 has been earmarked in the Council’s major projects capital programme to enable a Core Strategy Alteration (CSA) to be progressed. Costs would be principally incurred in relation to commissioning the necessary evidence base/ related work, engaging a temporary Planning Project officer for the duration of the CSA, Public Examination costs, consultation and publications.

4.2 The recently updated Sustainable Community Strategy makes reference to the need for a new Stadium. The CSA will follow the appropriate Local Development Framework procedures as defined in the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004. Section 26(1) of the 2004 Act permits a local planning authority to prepare a revision of a local development document (LDD), but the required procedures for the preparation of an LDD in accordance with the local development scheme as set out in this report apply equally to the revision of an LDD. Legal Advice and representation will be sought as appropriate throughout the process which may necessitate seeking Counsel’s opinion and which will collectively have significant financial implications.

4.3 The potential wider community benefits underpin the case for seeking to provide the planning framework for new stadium facilities. The CSA process will itself incorporate full sustainability appraisal, incorporating an Equalities Impact Assessment.

Executive Summary

4.4 Wycombe Wanderers Football Club and London Wasps Rugby Club share a constrained site which limits the scope of both clubs’ ambitions and does not reflect their potential contribution to the District’s profile, economy or community. The identification of an appropriate site for a new stadium and associated facilities raises strategic planning considerations that need to be progressed as part of the Wycombe Development Framework, and specifically a Core Strategy Alteration: this reports seeks approval for the work to be undertaken which will result in the Core Strategy Alteration.

Sustainable Community Strategy / Council Priorities – Implications

4.5 The identification of a site for a new stadium is part of the vision for the District in the Sustainable Community Strategy, and supports the delivery of the ‘sustainable regeneration’ and ‘delivering for younger people’ corporate priorities.

Background and Issues

4.6 In June 2008, Cabinet resolved that the Council would work with both the Wycombe Wanderers Football Club and London Wasps Rugby Club with a view to resolving the issues of the current stadium within the next 5 years. Discussions have continued since then and a separate report (exempt item 7) seeks approval to progress a collaboration agreement with the Clubs. Subject to that approval being given, this report seeks approval for the work to be undertaken to progress the Core Strategy Alteration to identify an appropriate site for a new stadium and related facilities/development.

4.7 The provision of a new stadium is sufficiently strategic that an allocation needs to be made through the Development Plan, i.e. the Wycombe Development Framework (WDF). To ensure that the most appropriate location and framework is identified, all potential sites need to be considered, including those that currently lie within the Green Belt. As the current Core Strategy (adopted in July 2008) does not provide the necessary context for such an allocation, a Core Strategy Alteration (CSA) is required.

4.8 Planning legislation requires that the first step in undertaking such an alteration is the identification of the necessary work within the Council’s Local Development Scheme (LDS), which is effectively the work programme for the Wycombe Development Framework. The LDS is about to be revised to reflect changes in the timetable for another WDF document, the Delivery and Site Allocations Development Plan Document, and the CSA can be added to the LDS before it is submitted for the requisite Government approval in February. Work would then proceed in accordance with the detailed timetable set out at Appendix 4, including one discretionary and two mandatory rounds of public consultation on the emerging proposals, and consideration of the Council’s final proposals at an Examination chaired by an independent Government-appointed Inspector. This timetable would work towards potential adoption of the CSA in July 2012.

4.9 The production of the CSA is beyond the existing, committed WDF work programme. Accordingly, additional funding of £500K is required to resource the project (including consultancy costs relating to evidence gathering, a planning project officer, statutory examination costs, consultation costs, and legal advice where needed), as outlined in the ‘Corporate Implications’ section.

4.10 It should be noted that, in order to deliver a new stadium in a timely fashion, work on the identification of a site through the planning process needs to start before the Council has taken its final decision to proceed with the project. Accordingly, there is a risk that, if the Council subsequently withdraws from the project as a developer, the planning work will have to be abandoned.

Consultation

4.11 Consultation would be integral to the CSA process; this includes three consultation stages as outlined above and in Appendix 4.

Options

4.12 The options for the Council, as a Planning authority, at this stage of this planning project are to:

• Take a pro-active stance and proceed as recommended

• Not be pro-active and, if the project proceeds, consider the matter through the submission of a planning application without the supporting CSA policy being in place.

4.13 Given that the issue has been identified in the Sustainable Community Strategy as a key issue for the District it is considered that the Council should be pro-active in its planning role, and seek to offer certainty and a sustainable framework for a stadium within the development plan. If the Council was not pro-active and merely responded to a planning application when it came in it is most likely that it would be contrary to the development plan and would be at risk of call-in by the Secretary of State.

4.14 At this stage it would be inappropriate for the Council to consider and decide upon specific site solutions as the WDF CSA process requires, as part of it, the consideration of all reasonable spatial options - and consultation on them.

Conclusions

4.15 The CSA route is considered the swiftest and most appropriate way to provide the context for the delivery of this strategic priority.

Next Steps

4.16 Subject to Cabinet’s approval, the next steps include the submission of the LDS to Government for approval, the appointment of a planning project officer/ coordinator and the commissioning of the necessary technical evidence. The first round of public consultation is expected to take place in Autumn 2010. The aim is for completion of the CSA in 2012, which would be expected to be followed by the consideration of any planning application, for determination in light of the new policy.

Background Papers

None

APPENDIX 4

Stadium Planning Project - Core Strategy Alteration – Summary Timeline

The key stages within this timetable are set out below (statutory planning milestones are shaded):

Date Tasks

2010

Feb • Commence project

March • Finalise project plan/ procure necessary resources

April • Commence formulation of strategic options and evidence-gathering

Sep • Cabinet agrees options consultation

Oct-Nov • Public/stakeholder consultation on options (high level options + high level analysis and evidence)

May-Dec • Technical work continues, with focus on preferred option

2011

Jan • Cabinet agree preferred options consultation document

Feb-Mar • Public/stakeholder consultation on preferred option

Mar-May • Consideration of preferred option representations

May • Local Elections

May-Jul • Finalise CSA submission document Jul • Cabinet + Council agree pre-submission document

Sep-Oct • Public/ stakeholder pre-submission consultation

Nov-Dec • Consideration of representations Peparation of topic papers

2012

Jan • Formal submission to Government

May • Public Hearing/ Examination

Jul • Inspector’s report

Jul • Adoption

Minutes of this Council meeting issued subsequent to the Meeting on 25th February resolved as follows

117. STADIUM

Cabinet had before it a report on the progress made since the in-principle decision of Cabinet in November 2009 to enter into negotiations with WSDL in respect of proposals for a new Community Stadium within the District. Tabled at the meeting were elements of an initial Community Needs Assessment and a summary of draft Heads of Terms for a collaboration agreement, which was returned after the meeting. Both documents were read by Cabinet and the Cabinet Member for Customer Services, Property & Procurement and the Head of Property Services explained the proposals and answered questions raised.

The following decision was made as, following the Cabinet decision in November 2009 to negotiate with WSDL, terms were nearing agreement for a Collaboration Agreement which required completion.

RESOLVED: That (i) authority be given for the Council to enter into a collaboration agreement with WSDL based broadly and aspirationally on the heads of terms referred to in the report (but without final commitment by the Council to the project under the terms of the agreement) with the detailed terms (including any amendments to matters included in the heads of terms) being approved by the Head of Property Services in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Customer Services, Property and Procurement and the Section 151 Officer;

(ii) an external law firm (to deal with the drafting and negotiation of the collaboration agreement and to advise as appropriate) and financial and other consultants (to advise as appropriate) be appointed, in all cases within budgetary provision; and

(iii) the balance of the budget provision in the Major Projects Programme be approved for release in pursuance of (i) above.

118. PLANNING PROCESS FOR A NEW STADIUM The report before Cabinet set out the planning process required in order for the Council to be pro-active in its planning role and to seek to offer certainty and a sustainable framework for a stadium within the development plan, given that the issue had been identified in the Sustainable Community Strategy as a key issue for the District.

It was considered that the provision of a new stadium was sufficiently strategic that an allocation needed to be made through the Development Plan which would require a Core Strategy Alteration (CSA). In order to deliver a new stadium in a timely fashion, work on the CSA would have to commence in advance of the Council reaching a final decision on the project but if the project did not proceed, the work on the CSA would be abandoned.

The CSA would consider all potential sites in order to identify the most appropriate location and framework. Consultation would be integral to the CSA process, which included three stages which were outlined in the report and in

Appendix 4 to the report. Members noted that the proposals were not just for a Stadium but included

associated facilities and enabling development.

The following decision was made in order to overcome the problems of the present stadium by allocating an appropriate site for a new stadium and associated facilities, in accordance with the vision for the District set out in the Sustainable

Community Strategy.

RESOLVED: That (i) the commencement of work on a Core Strategy Alteration to identify a site and planning framework for a new stadium, and associated facilities and development necessary to achieve it, be approved;

(ii) approval be given to the inclusion of a timetable based on that attached at Appendix 4 in the updated Local Development Scheme to be submitted to Government for approval (with any detailed adjustments delegated to the Head of Planning & Sustainability in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Planning & Sustainability); and

(iii) the release of the identified funds within the major projects/ capital programme be authorised to enable this work to proceed.

2 comments

New Stadium Update

Wycombe Wanderers ‘The New Stadium ‘

The key players in the decision making process at the present time are Wycombe District Council (WDC) and Wycombe Sports Developments Limited (WSDL), a company understood to be owned 100% by Steve Hayes.

Up until 2007/2008 the Rugby Premiership had imposed a minimum ground capacity of 12,000 for Premiership clubs and a time limit for compliance. Adams Park has a current limit of 10,000 imposed on health & safety grounds due to the lack of an alternative vehicular access/egress route to Hillbottom Road on match days in the event of an incident requiring emergency vehicles to attend the stadium. As WDC wanted to retain Wasps within the District, it was amenable to considering proposals for an alternative stadium that could meet these requirements and cater for perceived increase in demand for both rugby and football attendances.

This minimum ground capacity regulation was dropped in May 2008.

In April 2008 Adams Park was taken out of Green Belt to reflect it’s already built up nature.

The Wycombe District Sports Facility Strategy – Headline Needs Assessment document identifies the need for:

1. Wycombe Wanderers Football Club • Plan to develop a new 20,000 seat stadium with ancillary facilities, shared with London Wasps • Need outdoor training facilities – 6 football pitches and 3x3G covered pitches and changing fitness suite etc

2. London Wasps Rugby Football Club • Need a 20,000 seat stadium with ancillary facilities shared with WWFC • Need outdoor training– 6 rugby pitches and 1 3G STP and ancillary facilities including changing, fitness suite running track (indoor and outdoor), access to 25m pool.

At the meeting of WDC Cabinet on the 2nd November 2009 Minute 68 read:

“68. STADIUM The report before Cabinet sought to confirm the Council’s commitment to the relocation of the current Adams Park football ground in order to trigger the progression of the planning, site assembly and financial aspects of the new Stadium proposals The following decision was made as extensive discussions over the past two years (including a slow-down thereof over the past 12 months as a result of the recession), had now reached a fresh momentum, such that a Council commitment to the principle of financially supporting a new Community Stadium was now required, prior to formalising an Agreement with WSDL and to enable commencement of the planning process required to identify and seek reallocation of a relocation site.

RESOLVED: That in principle approval be given to the Council:

(i) entering into formal negotiations with Wycombe Sports Development Limited (‘WSDL’) to agree Heads of Terms for a new Community Stadium, based on;

(ii) cross-financing most of the cost of a new stadium and associated infrastructure up to the sum referred to in paragraph 13.11 to 13.13 inclusive;

(iii) procuring the works required under (ii), requiring

(iv) identifying an appropriate site and securing control of it, subject to planning considerations and processes, to enable the target programme to be achieved.”

Reference to the Major Projects Programme 2009/2010 – 2013/2014 shows the setting aside of allowances for a Stadium Commercial Feasibility Evaluation as follows: £80,000 in 2009/2010 £140,000 in 2010/2011 Previous reports had shown WDC budgeted expenditure under Stadium Review of Core Strategy (reference EDBC 45) of: £50,000 in 2008/2009, £250,000 in 2009/10 £200,000 in 2010/11, Stadium Planning Feasibility (reference EDBC 54) of: £41,000 in 2008/09 Stadium Commercial Feasibility (reference EDBC 55) of: £250,000 in 2008/09.

Although the latter expenditure may never have been incurred the figures reflect that WDC is taking the Stadium project very seriously.

A further consideration of the Stadium by WDC cabinet was due to be discussed on the 8th February 2010 when Planning and Feasibility Reports were to be considered, but the Stadium Report was withdrawn before the meeting. Further updates will appear on this website as and when we learn of any developments in the process.

22nd February 2010

1 comment