NFR - Woking FC

[CottagersOnTour]

Hi All,

Just wondering if people could maybe take 5 mins to sign up to the below link - my local non-league club (who have links with FFC through the likes of Kevin Betsy, Harry Arter and the wonderful Elvis Hammond to name but a few...) are currently going through an application for a stadium regeneration which should secure the future of the club for many years to come.

www.whynotwoking.com

The planning application reference if you want to have a look at the plans in a bit more detail is PLAN/2019/1176 on the Woking Borough Council Planning Portal (https://caps.woking.gov.uk/online-applications) and includes a new GP surgery, with the developer (GoalDev) recently involved in the new Forest Green Rovers "eco" stadium which has just had planning passed.

There's quite a few interesting supporting documents including a financial viability report on football clubs at lower league/non-league level that are a good read as well; some nice stats on stadium attendance increases after redevelopment and potential sponsorship revenue streams that clubs outside of the top tiers of the football pyramid have to consider to survive.

There's also a pretty vociferous local NIMBY group that has been set-up to oppose this as well and are generally spouting absolutely nonsense - so any support from others would be very much appreciated!

Finally - for some reason WFC have obtained a dutch following (there's about 10 lads who travel over most weekends from Amsterdam) and there's been a recent documentary shown over there on life at non-league level; trailer below which I think is a good watch.

Martyn Tyler is currently assistant manager at Woking so who knows it might be aired on UK TV at some point in the future....!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gp_Th0tY-kA

[WokingFFC]

I think an awful lot more needs to be done regarding the road infrastructure in that area before 1,000 new dwellings are built. Also, not sure that the developer should be allowed to get away with a miserly 18% of affordable housing when the govt. min is 50%, with the local people stumping up £10m through the council to get the stadium built. 

[charlieFFC]

Signed it :) Dowson is a good lad

[Gloria Hunter]

Done.  Good luck.

[GlobalWhite]

I wont question then motives of the original post but unfortunately it leaves out many keys facts related to the development. Living in the area I have yet to meet a single nimby who is against the redevelopment of the stadium. It is the extras and overall scale of the project that is being objected to. The entire development goes against so many local, regional and national policies that there are too many to list in this reply.
What the nimbys have highlighted is the concern:

- that the club together with the developers want to build 1048 high-rise flats in a low-rise area
- housing density up to 20 times greater than the surrounding areas
Council guidelines: Buildings should not exceed 5 stories and 70 dwelling per hectare.
The project will be 10 stories and 982 dwellings per hectare.

- only 725 allocated parking spaces for 1048 flats, when councils own stats show that 1400 needed
- 18% affordable housing versus councils own guidelines of 40%
- none of the planned 36 houses will be affordable housing
- segregation of affordable housing tenants
- no additional road development to deal with increased traffic
- only 60 parking spaces in total for officials and disabled visitors on match days for a stadium of 10K

Woking FC seem to understand the issues and the clear fact that they do not need a 10K capacity stadium (Woking FC average attendance never exceeding 2100), but it appears that the local council are driving (and bankrolling) this project forward and not the club...

"We have been told that is the size Council require, not what we might wish for" - Rosemary Johnson (WFC Chair)

Does anyone think that FFC would have been able to redevelop Craven Cottage if their plans had included numerous 10 storey towers around the ground?

If you want to get an idea of the proposed scale of plans compared to existing profile of the area...

https://southwokingactiongroup.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Football-Ground-SketchUp-Make-2017-2019-08-02-17-07-37.png

Having been involved in various fights for FFC to stay at the Cottage in the last 25 years I have every sympathy possible for football clubs looking to improve their stadiums and secure their futures. As stated you will struggle to find many local residents who oppose a redevelopment of the football ground, but this development is about a totally unsuitable housing development and the ££££ the
developer, the local council and the club are looking to earn from it.

[CottagersOnTour]

I wont question then motives of the original post but unfortunately it leaves out many keys facts related to the development. Living in the area I have yet to meet a single nimby who is against the redevelopment of the stadium. It is the extras and overall scale of the project that is being objected to. The entire development goes against so many local, regional and national policies that there are too many to list in this reply.
What the nimbys have highlighted is the concern:

- that the club together with the developers want to build 1048 high-rise flats in a low-rise area
- housing density up to 20 times greater than the surrounding areas
Council guidelines: Buildings should not exceed 5 stories and 70 dwelling per hectare.
The project will be 10 stories and 982 dwellings per hectare.

- only 725 allocated parking spaces for 1048 flats, when councils own stats show that 1400 needed
- 18% affordable housing versus councils own guidelines of 40%
- none of the planned 36 houses will be affordable housing
- segregation of affordable housing tenants
- no additional road development to deal with increased traffic
- only 60 parking spaces in total for officials and disabled visitors on match days for a stadium of 10K

Woking FC seem to understand the issues and the clear fact that they do not need a 10K capacity stadium (Woking FC average attendance never exceeding 2100), but it appears that the local council are driving (and bankrolling) this project forward and not the club...

"We have been told that is the size Council require, not what we might wish for" - Rosemary Johnson (WFC Chair)

Does anyone think that FFC would have been able to redevelop Craven Cottage if their plans had included numerous 10 storey towers around the ground?

If you want to get an idea of the proposed scale of plans compared to existing profile of the area...

https://southwokingactiongroup.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Football-Ground-SketchUp-Make-2017-2019-08-02-17-07-37.png

Having been involved in various fights for FFC to stay at the Cottage in the last 25 years I have every sympathy possible for football clubs looking to improve their stadiums and secure their futures. As stated you will struggle to find many local residents who oppose a redevelopment of the football ground, but this development is about a totally unsuitable housing development and the ££££ the
developer, the local council and the club are looking to earn from it.

The motive of the original post is simple - I was born in Woking (my parents still live 5 mins walk from the ground), I live in Putney and, as we have always reminded Manchester United whenever they have had the pleasure of visiting the cottage, I support my local team(s)...!

I think if you look at the position of SWAG there has been a lot of misinformation posted (as is often the case in this day and age) with little substance behind it. I agree that the original proposed development was over-massing but the current scheme is about as minimal as it can be whilst still remaining commercially viable. For example the height has been reduced to 8 storey's (you have quoted 10) from 11.

With regards to the developers profit - I suggest you read the financial viability report attached to the planning submission; the developers are taking a measly 2.7% profit, with normal profit margins more in the order of 15-20%. On the overall site value it's still a significant amount; but any other developer is simply not going to build out a scheme for less.

WFC have undertaken multiple discussions with local action groups, as well as the council and have altered the application several times to take comments into account; the road network around the ground is far less busy during match days compared to rush hour - very similar to FFC in that respect.

Have you every tried going over Putney Bridge at 17:00pm on a Friday or down the M4? Nightmare!

I work in the property industry and the allocation of affordable homes is easily within the norm - local authorities decide on the allocation depending on mass and unit make-up. A 50% allocation is only required by the London BC's (introduced by Sadiq Khan) and that's why there are currently so many land banks in London; developers simply won't build out unviable schemes.

Parking in town center locations (reasonably within walking distance to the station) at over 1:2 is very generous as well..!

Finally; the 9k capacity is based on safe standing included, this comes down significantly if promoted depending on the leagues policy. Once more I would direct you to the viability and financial reports included within the application submission - this is all included and detailed within the report and additional misinformation on this is just simply not conducive.

Interesting that it's your first post as well pal; nice to see you on the FFC forum!

[MikeW]

Nice to see a (non football related) post by someone who seems to know what they are on about.

[Southcoastffc]

Surely, if the proposed scheme is as objectionable as some say above then planning permission will not be granted.

[GlobalWhite]

My concerns dont relate to match days as I have lived here (150 yds from Kingfield Stadium) for 20 years (moving here from Putney) and have attended matches and supported the club whenever possible.

The concerns relate entirely to the residential development. Your 1:2 parking reference relates to town centres but Kingfield is not considered a town centre location by locals or even by Woking council. The idea that they are going to push 400 vehicles of new residents into free but very limited onstreet parking (wouldnt be free if WBC thought we were even close to town centre) every day of the year is completely unsustainable. Again we are not even talking about match days. These imo would be less of an issue even if average attendances increased significantly, as most WFC supporters do not even think about parking anywhere near Kingfield.

The extra traffic along Westfield Ave and surrounding streets would not even be a discussion point if it were only WFC match days, but again we are talking about pushing a huge number of vehicles into already overcrowded local streets, especially Mon-Fri. Have you ever tried getting to Woking town centre from Kingfield during the day, let alone rush hour? You can walk faster and that is before we have the pleasure of 1000 more flats on the corner of Westfield Ave. Nice of you to compare the neighbourhood to the M4 or even Putney Bridge...could also be described as not conducive misinformation.

The 40% affordable housing figure comes directly from woking Council's own Affordable Housing Delivery SPD 2014. Nothing to do with any London BC or Sadiq Khan.

9K capacity for a club that has never averaged 3K? I can understand they want to grow but then to only have 60 day match day parking spots for officials and handicapped should tell you where their priorities lie.

I stand corrected on the latest new height of the towers, but please do not give the impression that there is only 1 building going up. 1000 flats in an area of just over 1.3 hectares in a neighbourhood where every other building is 2 storey maximum. Not great precedent for future developments in the area.

A frequent reader but new poster on FOF, after many years on TFI. Happy to be here. COYW.