Chairman's statement

[Sam_BFC]

Fair point he should exercise diplomacy when dealing with the council but shame on any councillor that forms a position based on comments to a newspaper instead of the actual merits of the proposal and its potential benefits to their constituents.

[talldarkslim]

I have only just seen this and am absolutely stunned and delighted. Once this is up and running I will be a season ticket holder once again.

[BeeSuperEagle]

Awesome news!!!

As an architect and designer who worked with planning officers in England, I know most local authorities dislike the green belt area with new buildings. Still, some exceptions would take serious moves to achieve planning permission. The proposals must comply with Paragraph 79 of the NPPF, in which the designs must be high-quality architectural design, fulfil high use of sustainability within the green belt, and protect the existing agricultural landscape setting that can complement facilities for outdoor sport and recreation for the community but that depends on the pre-planning advice outcome. As long as there is no disruption to the agricultural land setting, there is a possibility. We hope to receive the design ideas in detail from the club, and hopefully, WSP Planning Consultancy can give their complete services to get this through the line.

COYB

[Norfolk & Chance]

Fair point he should exercise diplomacy when dealing with the council but shame on any councillor that forms a position based on comments to a newspaper instead of the actual merits of the proposal and its potential benefits to their constituents.

Agreed re the council.
But they're not a court of law.
They are individuals who can occasionally be complete arseholes should they wish.
Brian Coleman is the case in point and in the end, he won.
And he cared not that we thought his conduct was shameful.

[Anthony]

Anthony, I'm not sure my observation deserved that much of your time and effort but if it briefly made you feel good about yourself, then yayy, time well spent.

My point is that yesterday was fairly momentous for our club and Barnet fans up and down the country, with many tears shed. It was exclusively positive.
And then TK made comments about some barnet fans that, in my opinion, were unnecessary, given it was such a huge day.

But you don't agree, fair enough.

Further, on such a great day, TK appeared to almost goad the council.
At the beginning of what is going to be a delicate, tortuous process that could potentially see us back home, he made those comments.
Again, I think it was unnecessary.

In fact, it almost seemed to be self sabotage to me.
He can go no further at the hive, if he's turned down at SU, what are his options?

Answers on a postcard.

I am not sure how much time an effort you think it takes to write what I wrote, but I can assure you it was minimal.

Yes we don't agree. Although I've no no idea what we are not agreeing about. I thought it was TKs comments about Barnet fans, but those same comments are now him goading the council?

No postcards here so I cant answer your other question I'm afraid!


ANYWAY...

If the quotes from the council in todays evening standard are anything to go by, the whole project is a dead duck. If it is, as appears that TK has announced this without any inkling from the council they would be amenable to a stadium at South Underhill, then I will be very disappointed in him

[DerekRocholl]

One thing that could help would be a legal challenge to the status of that piece of land as "green belt. It has built developments on 3 sides and cannot be accurately defined as a "belt" of land. I can't remember who it was (possibly Keith Ferry) but someone with considerable experience of the planning process volunteered this point during a conversation about the B2B campaign.

I would hope that Keith Ferry is playing a central role in this exercise. Apart from the fact that he is very experienced in the politics surrounding planning issues in outer London he also has useful political contacts in influential places.

[Anthony]

https://www.standard.co.uk/sport/footba ... e%E2%80%9D.

BARNET'S PLANS TO RETURN TO BOROUGH IN NEW STADIUM HIT EARLY SETBACK
Local council say the project is “highly unlikely” to be acceptable

Barnet’s plans to build a new stadium and return to its home borough have been dealt a significant early blow, after the local council said the project was “highly unlikely to be acceptable”.

The National League club announced its intention to leave The Hive in Harrow and start the process for a 6,000-8,000-capacity stadium in Barnet.

The ground would be built just metres from the site of the club’s former home, Underhill Stadium, which is now a school.

The project, budgeted at up to £14million, would be funded entirely by chairman Tony Kleanthous. But, although Kleanthous ambitiously said he wanted the club to be in its new home by the start of the 2026-27 season, the process is set to be a complicated one.

A spokesperson for Barnet Council said: “While it would be good to welcome Barnet FC back to their home borough, the club has to be realistic about the planning challenges for situating a stadium.

“To date, we have been unable to move forward as they are yet to propose an acceptable site. In our effort to find them a home in Barnet several sites have been looked at but were considered to be unsuitable.

“The Underhill location is highly unlikely to be acceptable because it is on greenbelt land.”

In order to build on the site, plans must demonstrate that the development benefits outweigh the detriment. That is despite the original stadium, of a similar capacity, previously being on the same greenbelt land.

The council say it is “very hard” to see how Barnet can successfully present that case.

“However, our doors are always open to examine other options,” the statement continued.

Concerns have been raised too over the pressure on local roads, though the project does include plans for a drop-off zone to be built for school pupils in an attempt to alleviate rush-hour traffic.

Barnet left the borough to move to The Hive in 2013, amid long-standing lease issues with the council.

Kleanthous, club chairman since 1994, says he always intended to bring the club back to its “spiritual home”, and hoped to receive the green light after unveiling the South Underhill plans.

“Barnet has had time as a council to realise what they have lost,” he told Standard Sport. “We’re an amazing community asset.

“You hope that Barnet council will look at that and think: ‘Are we mad? Why are we not giving them all the support we can?’”

Kleanthous has urged the club’s fans to play their part in emphasising the strength of feeling behind a long-awaited return to Barnet.

“Ultimately, it will be down to supporters to convince Barnet council that this is the right thing to do,” he said.

“Some haven’t ever embraced the move [to The Hive], because they felt I should have tried harder to find a solution in Barnet. I really did try.

“This is an opportunity for them to stand up and help make it happen. Get on those keyboards that you use so readily to complain about not being in Barnet, and advocate for us being in Barnet. It’s an opportunity.”

After finalising the current proposal for 18 months, Kleanthous maintains the development would benefit all parties, from the local residents and school to the club itself.

“It doesn’t happen very often in life, but sometimes there are things that are actually a win for everybody,” he said.

“We have been plagued in the past by politics. There doesn’t need to be a battle here.”

[beew]

https://www.standard.co.uk/sport/footba ... e%E2%80%9D.

BARNET'S PLANS TO RETURN TO BOROUGH IN NEW STADIUM HIT EARLY SETBACK
Local council say the project is “highly unlikely” to be acceptable

Barnet’s plans to build a new stadium and return to its home borough have been dealt a significant early blow, after the local council said the project was “highly unlikely to be acceptable”.

The National League club announced its intention to leave The Hive in Harrow and start the process for a 6,000-8,000-capacity stadium in Barnet.

The ground would be built just metres from the site of the club’s former home, Underhill Stadium, which is now a school.

The project, budgeted at up to £14million, would be funded entirely by chairman Tony Kleanthous. But, although Kleanthous ambitiously said he wanted the club to be in its new home by the start of the 2026-27 season, the process is set to be a complicated one.

A spokesperson for Barnet Council said: “While it would be good to welcome Barnet FC back to their home borough, the club has to be realistic about the planning challenges for situating a stadium.

“To date, we have been unable to move forward as they are yet to propose an acceptable site. In our effort to find them a home in Barnet several sites have been looked at but were considered to be unsuitable.

“The Underhill location is highly unlikely to be acceptable because it is on greenbelt land.”

In order to build on the site, plans must demonstrate that the development benefits outweigh the detriment. That is despite the original stadium, of a similar capacity, previously being on the same greenbelt land.

The council say it is “very hard” to see how Barnet can successfully present that case.

“However, our doors are always open to examine other options,” the statement continued.

Concerns have been raised too over the pressure on local roads, though the project does include plans for a drop-off zone to be built for school pupils in an attempt to alleviate rush-hour traffic.

Barnet left the borough to move to The Hive in 2013, amid long-standing lease issues with the council.

Kleanthous, club chairman since 1994, says he always intended to bring the club back to its “spiritual home”, and hoped to receive the green light after unveiling the South Underhill plans.

“Barnet has had time as a council to realise what they have lost,” he told Standard Sport. “We’re an amazing community asset.

“You hope that Barnet council will look at that and think: ‘Are we mad? Why are we not giving them all the support we can?’”

Kleanthous has urged the club’s fans to play their part in emphasising the strength of feeling behind a long-awaited return to Barnet.

“Ultimately, it will be down to supporters to convince Barnet council that this is the right thing to do,” he said.

“Some haven’t ever embraced the move [to The Hive], because they felt I should have tried harder to find a solution in Barnet. I really did try.

“This is an opportunity for them to stand up and help make it happen. Get on those keyboards that you use so readily to complain about not being in Barnet, and advocate for us being in Barnet. It’s an opportunity.”

After finalising the current proposal for 18 months, Kleanthous maintains the development would benefit all parties, from the local residents and school to the club itself.

“It doesn’t happen very often in life, but sometimes there are things that are actually a win for everybody,” he said.

“We have been plagued in the past by politics. There doesn’t need to be a battle here.”

As it doesn't provide the name of whom the direct quotes came from ,I think its an article to dismiss as lazy journalism.

[Sam_BFC]

Screenings of The Underhill film. Get it showing at Barnet Everyman.

BeesKnees99's video of the Wycombe game also fantastically encapsulates what this could bring back to the area.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dY0uG-_U8uQ

[Anthony]

As it doesn't provide the name of whom the direct quotes came from ,I think its an article to dismiss as lazy journalism.

Perhaps, but not so lazy as to go not to TK for extra quotes, and those quotes seem to suggest that Tony Kleanthous is far from confident that the application will go through.

Hopefully the update promised at the end of the month will give a bit more clarity about the dialogue with the council.

[talldarkslim]

Great memories thanks

[barnetjohn]

The Evening Stnadard article was not an encouraging read.

Council came across as very sceptical to put it mildly. As others have said- if an article uses the term "Council spokesperson" that means it's an official response: journalist contacts press office, asks for comment on behalf of the council and gets a statement to use. So quotes reflect official view not some random person gossiping anonymously.

TKs response not great either- swipe at fans wasn't ideal and had echoes of previous "keyboard warriors' statements.

Key people to reach out to are local council and broader community. Fans are overwhelmingly on board so the crucial groups to focus engagement on are council decision makers and wider community. That should be the clubs focus I think. By all means call on fans to back the proposal but planning process also requires close engagement between club and council on the planning side.

Its early days and we can only go on what's out in the public domain, but this doesn't look like the best start.

[buzzlightyear]

Maybe TK went public because a lot of work was done since 2021 but then the council has started to cool its support or even became obstructive? Either way the council statement and continuation of the site in Green Belt doesn't sound good.

[hoofer2]

The Evening Stnadard article was not an encouraging read.

Council came across as very sceptical to put it mildly. As others have said- if an article uses the term "Council spokesperson" that means it's an official response: journalist contacts press office, asks for comment on behalf of the council and gets a statement to use. So quotes reflect official view not some random person gossiping anonymously.

TKs response not great either- swipe at fans wasn't ideal and had echoes of previous "keyboard warriors' statements.

Key people to reach out to are local council and broader community. Fans are overwhelmingly on board so the crucial groups to focus engagement on are council decision makers and wider community. That should be the clubs focus I think. By all means call on fans to back the proposal but planning process also requires close engagement between club and council on the planning side.

Its early days and we can only go on what's out in the public domain, but this doesn't look like the best start.

This.

Barnet Council have a grudge with TK on a personal level, as he out smarted them on acquisition of Underhill freehold.

I hope I'm wrong but expect past gripes and rhetoric to surface again

[underhillbovrilstink]

If Barnet council could show us just a smidgen of the warmth and hospitality that they give to non-native Saracens, it would be a ray of light. Your move TK.