Rocksuperstar
Isn't this fun? Isn't fun the best thing to have?
- Jun 6, 2005
- 53,374
- 67,026
Considering our predicament, unable to build a new stadium because of the massive, massive amounts of beuracracy and red-tape involved, i wonder if this is a sign of things to come for the capital?
It appears that, even when a private company come in and volunteer to revitalise one of the poorest, underfunded boroughs in London, it's still not viable - well, what is then?
Similar to my complaint about the red-house and EH (that it would've rotted into the ground without so much as a second glance, had we not proposed knocking it down), it seems that now there are so many hoops for big companies to jump through before being allowed to make an area better, with little or no cost, that i can't see why any organisation, sports team or developer would want to plough millions over the going rate into developing an area.
I can only see this going one way now - the poorest boroughs will continue to degrade, continue to be ignored by the department that doles out government cash and eventually degrade into little more than slums. They might spend all their time schmoozing with big investors (such as Levy et al) but, unless someone with some balls comes in and addresses the situation then it'll lead to parts of London being uninhabitable through deprivation, the other half because it costs too much.
We need a London Mayor who will stop f*cking about to please those with the cash - why does Kensington & Chelsea get such massive investments and a huge slice of the pie, yet Haringey, amongst others, are offered the crumbs? I would imagine it's something to do with local wealth or some other factor but this is just encouraging the divide and non-investment into the areas that need it most.
As of this moment, places like Tottenham rely on the residents to spend or raise their own money if they want anything done - the council will readily point out how skint they are - where others are handed cash to redevelop this, or repaint that.
Equally, how come it's so much hard work and expense to get the NLD stadium ok'd and built, yet the Olympic Stadium appeared to breeze through in comparison, with little/no opposition and plenty of help from those in charge? Oh, that's right, because it'll be really important for London, for about a fortnight, for one event. :|
Someone explain to me how all this works please, as from where i sit, any club that hasn't already expanded and bought all the land as far as the eye can see already will be required to up sticks and either a) move to a site where a stadium and all the necessary transport links already are, or b) leave the capital altogether, a la Wombles because to develop your own... well, anything really, not just stadium, will be comparable to moving the houses of parliament in ease of application and execution.
It appears that, even when a private company come in and volunteer to revitalise one of the poorest, underfunded boroughs in London, it's still not viable - well, what is then?
Similar to my complaint about the red-house and EH (that it would've rotted into the ground without so much as a second glance, had we not proposed knocking it down), it seems that now there are so many hoops for big companies to jump through before being allowed to make an area better, with little or no cost, that i can't see why any organisation, sports team or developer would want to plough millions over the going rate into developing an area.
I can only see this going one way now - the poorest boroughs will continue to degrade, continue to be ignored by the department that doles out government cash and eventually degrade into little more than slums. They might spend all their time schmoozing with big investors (such as Levy et al) but, unless someone with some balls comes in and addresses the situation then it'll lead to parts of London being uninhabitable through deprivation, the other half because it costs too much.
We need a London Mayor who will stop f*cking about to please those with the cash - why does Kensington & Chelsea get such massive investments and a huge slice of the pie, yet Haringey, amongst others, are offered the crumbs? I would imagine it's something to do with local wealth or some other factor but this is just encouraging the divide and non-investment into the areas that need it most.
As of this moment, places like Tottenham rely on the residents to spend or raise their own money if they want anything done - the council will readily point out how skint they are - where others are handed cash to redevelop this, or repaint that.
Equally, how come it's so much hard work and expense to get the NLD stadium ok'd and built, yet the Olympic Stadium appeared to breeze through in comparison, with little/no opposition and plenty of help from those in charge? Oh, that's right, because it'll be really important for London, for about a fortnight, for one event. :|
Someone explain to me how all this works please, as from where i sit, any club that hasn't already expanded and bought all the land as far as the eye can see already will be required to up sticks and either a) move to a site where a stadium and all the necessary transport links already are, or b) leave the capital altogether, a la Wombles because to develop your own... well, anything really, not just stadium, will be comparable to moving the houses of parliament in ease of application and execution.
