Showing posts with label FA. Show all posts
Showing posts with label FA. Show all posts

Wednesday 13 April 2022

Two FA semi-finals at Wembley this weekend and Euston Station is closed.

Bus replacement services - Easter Weekend

 It is going to be a busy Easter weekend in Wembley with the Emirates semi-finals taking place on Saturday (Manchester City v Liverpool k.o. 3.30pm) and Sunday (Chelsea vs Crystal Palace k.o. 4.30pm).

Euston Station will be closed throughout the weekend and this will prove particularly difficult for Manchester City and Liverpool supporters who use the West Coast line.

Mayors and supporters of both cities called on the FA to change the venue to no avail. The need for Wembley Stadium to hold as many events as possible to recoup the £757m cost of rebuilding the stadium. Hosting the FA Cup semi-finals was part of that day.

Network Rail say that the FA was given warning of the closure back in 2019.

The upshot is that 50,000-60,000 fans could be heading down to London by road on a Bank Holiday weekend.

On their website Network Rail say:

Over Easter (Friday 15 – Monday 18 April), Network Rail will be carrying out major upgrade works on sections of the West Coast Main Line between London Euston and Scotland. As a result, there’ll be no trains to/from London Euston, some journeys will take longer and may involve a rail replacement service.

We strongly recommend you travel either side of the Easter weekend (15 – 18 April). If you need to travel, please make a reservation, plan ahead, and check the Avanti West Coast website before travelling.

  Fans travelling to the FA Cup Semi-Final are encouraged to consider alternative modes of transport to get to the match at Wembley. Any fans who need to travel by train should plan ahead, allow extra time for their journey, and check the National Rail website before they travel

Things will be easier for Sunday's semi-final as both teams are London-based.

Meanwhile Brent Council states:

We want everyone to enjoy their visit to Wembley and the match. However we will not tolerate anti-social behaviour, so please behave responsibly.

Brent Council and its partners are enforcing a No Street Drinking Zone on Olympic Way and the surrounding area for the Emirates FA Cup semi-finals weekend on Saturday 16 April (Liverpool v Manchester City) and Sunday 17 April (Crystal Palace v Chelsea) as part of the current Public Space Protection Order.

Fans drinking on Olympic Way and the surrounding streets will be asked to hand over their alcohol and enforcement action may be considered.


 

 

Monday 19 July 2021

FA's Independent Review of July 11th Euro2020 welcomed by Brent's Scrutiny chairs

The chairs of both Brent Scrutiny Committee have welcomed the Football Associations decision to set up an independently review of events at the July 11th Euro2020 Final at Wembley Stadium,

 Cllr Roxanne Mashari, chair of the Resources and Public Health Scrutiny Committee, tweeted:

Promising to see the FA announce an independently chaired review of security breaches at Wembley Stadium. Essential that this review includes Brent Council who have yet to commit to reviewing their own actions and producing a report on lessons learned.

Cllr Ketan Sheth, chair of the Community and Wellbeing Scrutiny Committee also tweeted:

Good to see Baroness Casey will lead the Football Association review of security breaches with depth, integrity to ensure the facts and the circumstances are reported, understood and are 'never able to be repeated'.

I was expecting the Brent Council Cabinet today to receive and discuss the recommendation from the Scrutiny Committee that they set up an independent review  of events on the Euro2020 Final at Wembley Stadium on July 11th.

It was not included on the Agenda itself or under Other Urgent Business and the incidents were not referred to by Council Leader  Muhammed Butt, who chairs the Cabinet.

This means it will not be discussed until the next Cabinet meeting on August 16th.  One would  think that riotous and potentially dangerous behavour threatening residents safety and wellbeing would merit some attention from the local council, partially responsible for overseeing the event, when UEFA, Metropolitan Police and now the FA have all reacted.

 

 


FA appoint chair for independent review of Euro2020 Cup Final looking at events inside and outside Wembley Stadium on July 11th

 



Saturday 19 January 2019

FA claims Wembley events in 2017-18 contributed £150m to Brent's local economy



The FA has circulated a report on the economic impact of the Wembley Stadium 2017-18 season. One local resident immediately said, 'Do you belive any of this? I am sceptical.' I leave it to readers to make up their own minds and welcome your comments.
I wanted to share with you the Wembley Stadium economic impact study we commissioned on the back 2017/18 season – a unique season for Wembley Stadium marking the 10 year anniversary of the new stadium, welcoming our 10 millionth stadium visitor and of course hosting Tottenham Hotspur FC for a full Premier League season. 
We entrusted Deloitte to analyse the economic impact of the stadium during this period – 58 major events, which, in addition to football, saw boxing, Rugby League, NFL and music concerts come to London.
We are looking forward to building on these successes with some of the biggest events in world entertainment, such as UEFA EURO 2020 and UEFA Women’s EURO 2021, just around the corner.

Report Summary
§  The 2017/18 season at Wembley saw a record 58 events and was the first time a Premier League football team had taken residency at the stadium. This higher number of event days resulted in an unprecedented amount of visitors to Wembley Stadium and the surrounding area.
§  Findings shows that Wembley’s events led to a boost of £150m to the local economy of Brent, £424m to London and £615m to England.
§  The 58 events attracted 3.8 million spectators, including 350,000 visitors from overseas. The project therefore reaffirms Wembley’s status as one of the leading event venues in the world that attracts significant numbers of visitors to England, London and Brent.
§  Deloitte’s analysis shows that the economic impact from the 58 events supports 1,800 FTE jobs in Brent, 4,900 across London and 6,100 across England.
§  Gross Value Added (GVA) is a common way to look at the value added to GDP by the production of goods and services. The GVA contribution of the 2017/18 event season was £83m to Brent, £231m to London and £334m to England as a whole.
The full report is below. Click bottom right for full screen version.


Wednesday 11 April 2018

Hurry to tell the FA about how Spurs at Wembley has impacted on you




From Danes and Empire Court Residents' Association

We have been asked by the FA to provide feedback to a study they are conducting on the impact of Wembley Stadium, and of Spurs on the local area, London and the Nation. Specifically, they would like input on the questions below, so please provide your feedback AS SOON AS POSSIBLE (i.e. before Friday) as we will be meeting at this point.

What are the positive and negative impacts of Wembley on local residents and local businesses, and your views on the impacts of Wembley stadium with a focus on Tottenham Hotspur, and whether there have been any positive or negative developments as a result of the increased occupation?

What has been done since the start of the season to address any negative issues and how that has worked out?

What future initiatives you would like to see in place for the benefits of local stakeholders?

Answer the Questions HERE before Friday 13th April.

Incidentally this is a comment on the Stadium made in 1986 by a nine year old as part of the Domes Day project (see side panel):
Sometimes I hate Wembley Stadium  because when there is an event like a match on there are nearly always hooligans hanging about.   I live near the Stadium and nearly  every Saturday there’s a match on and lots of people hang about the “Harrow   Tavern”, which is a public house in  front of our house.  I hope that Wembley Stadium buy  security cameras to catch all the hooligans.   The time when I like Wembley is when   there are no hooligans and the match is a friendly game. Concerts like the Live Aid one are held there as well. Next to Wembley Stadium, in the car park, there is a market which is held every Sunday. H.P.( Aged 9yrs)

-->

Thursday 21 December 2017

Wembley FC 'David' takes on the FA 'Goliath' over club's name





After yesterday's coverage on ITN Wembley Football Club have received massive support on Twitter in their battle with the FA over the club's use of the word Wembley. The FA are citing 'Wembley' as their intellectual property despite not objecting when the name of Wembley FC went forward in 2012.

After the EU ruled in favour of the Football Association Wembley FC were ordred to pay the FA's costs threatening the future of the 70 years old club.

I wonder if they will act against Wembley Matters, Wembley Champions and Wembley Futures?

Here is some of the scathingTwitter reaction:


Tuesday 7 February 2017

Petition launched opposing Spurs & Chelsea home games at Wembley



A petition has been launched asking Brent Council to reconsider the use of Wembley Stadium for Spurs and Chelsea home games. (The FA/Spurs are presently consulting on this See LINK)

The petition is HERE and wording below:

We the undersigned petition the council to reconsider the use of Wembley Statium for Tottenham Hotspur home matches and for Chelsea home matches for the Champions League and Premier League

Wembley National Stadiium is a stadium of national importance and as such is designated for matches organised by the Football Association for matches of national importance and also for finals of league cups etc. These matches are very frequent in the spring and summer each year. The residents around the area understand and accept this use of Wembley Stadium for such matches.

The use of the Wembley National Stadium for club matches for the above mentioned clubs mean that for then next few years at least 30 additional matches will be played in the Wembley Stadium for the above mentioned clubs. This will put extreme pressure on public services around the Wembley Stadium area. The roads will be blocked due to the excessive traffic. Access to schools and post school activities for children will be hampered. Elderly people will be especially at risk due to the huge amount of traffic around the stadium area. The traffic will also put emergency access at risk the roads will be absolutely blocked.

Additionally, the football fans will descend on Wembley for 30 additional days in a year. While not demonizing football fans in general, some sections of the football fans cause immense damage to property and intimidate local residents.

As a national stadium, these club level matches are not acceptable.

Started by: Vishal Sinha
This ePetition runs from 30/01/2017 to 13/03/2017.

Saturday 21 May 2016

Future safety concerns overshadow today's Wembley Cup Final

Impression of Wembley Stadium surrounded by flats

As fans pour into Wembley for today's Cup Final Greg Dyke, FA Chairman, has warned of the dangers posed by Quintain's plans for new tower blocks close to the stadium. The £2.5bn scheme was approved by Brent Planning Committee in  controversial circumstances. LINK

The Standard LINK said:
FA  chairman Greg Dyke has warned that a planned £2.5 billion development around Wembley Stadium will have “terrible consequences” for the safety of fans on match days.

The former Manchester United director said the attack on the team’s bus by West Ham fans was “an important reminder that ensuring public order and safety in and around football stadia requires careful planning, good preparation and partnership working between all concerned

Mr Dyke, who steps down as FA chairman this summer, said Quintain’s proposals “as currently planned ... will have some terrible consequences for the public safety and traffic management around the stadium on event days. 

“We will continue to work with Brent, the Greater London Authority and the developer to ensure the problems are addressed, but fan management should not be an afterthought.
We will not drop our responsibility for ensuring that Wembley’s ability to inspire generations with its magical moments is not damaged by a lack of care for our visiting fans and local residents. We hope others will make the same commitment.”

Previously the Standard had reported on the FA's presentation to the Planning Committee:
Julie Harrington, operations director at the FA, told the council’s planning committee the location of the car parks off South Way “created genuine public order and safety concerns which would serve as a retrograde step for the stadium.”

She said: “Tuesday night’s disturbing scenes at West Ham’s Boleyn Ground only go to show that we absolutely cannot be complacent when it comes to fan management around the stadium.”
She said developer Quintain was ”working from a position to maximise profits” rather than to “protect fan safety”.

She said: “The holding of fans, the kettling of fans, that’s a return to the 1970s in my view.
“Even a short amount of time holding people, irate fans from teams that have lost, or rival fans mixing together is too much.”

Transport consultants working for the FA presented analysis showing fans could have to wait for up to three hours to board coaches under the new layout.

Ms Harrington warned that the FA “would not be able to attract major events to Wembley if fan’s can’t leave the car park.”

She said: “If fans can’t get to their coaches and can’t get to their vehicles, if up to 9,000 fans are pooled behind the stadium with nowhere to go, if 15,000 fans are pushed down back streets to their coaches, it’s a recipe for disaster, a public order disaster, and the FA will not stand by and see fans treated in this way.

“We cannot be complacent about the huge steps forward made in stadium safety in the past two decades. No-one should believe that its acceptable to herd fans like cattle. We must learn from past mistakes.”
The FA are in the difficult position of seeking to protect both fans and the Stadium's status  and maintaining a positive long-term working relationship with Quintain and Brent Council. 

 Quintain while retaining its name has been taken over by Lone Star, a Texas based company, and has  adopted a more aggressive approach to Wembley regeneration  as a result, building  higher and more closely packed blocks to maximise profits. Eventually they will complete the development and move on, leaving the FA, football fans, Brent Council and local people to cope with the consequences.

The FA could ask Sadiq Khan, the new London mayor, to call in the plans but there may be opportunities to have further talks about their concerns with the new Brent Cabinet.

Wednesday 11 May 2016

Brent Council rejects Wembley Stadium/FA request for more time to consider tonight's planning application


From Supplementary report tabled for tonight's Planning Committee Meeting LINK
Additional letter received from Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners (NLP) on behalf of WNSL / The FA
NLP have specified that a significant amount of new information was submitted to Brent Council by the applicant on 9 May, only 48 hours before committee, including specialist responses on noise, transport and planning issues. They specify that WNSL as well as Brent Council need further time to review the detail submitted that appears to relate to the impact on the operation and safety of Wembley Stadium.
Information has been submitted to the Council. This information has been submitted by the applicant as a rebuttal to the letters submitted by WNSL and their consultants. It does not provide new information. The Council’s consideration of the proposal is based on the information originally submitted to support the information together with Appendix K which was submitted subsequently, with further consultation carried out.
The submission of the rebuttal letters is not considered to trigger the requirement for additional consultation.

Wednesday 4 May 2016

FA & fans take on Brent planners and Quintain over Wembley redevelopment,

There has been some speculation about the fact that Brent Council is holding two Planning Committee meetings next week. One explanation is that a senior officer is leaving shortly so the meeting was timed to take place before her departure and the second explanation is that following the Labour Group AGM some members of the Committee may be replaced by councillors who are less compliant.

Whatever the explanation there is not doubt that controversial proposals are being pushed through.  The Huffington Post LINK has picked up on an issue I raised over an application to be heard on 9th where officers said the students needed less daylight in their accommodation that ordinary residents.

Now a huge development around Wembley Stadium LINK has been brought forward attracting the opposition of the Football Association and football fans.

This is the area the planning application covers:
Olympic Way and land between Fulton Road and South Way including Green Car Park, Wembley Retail Park, 1-11 Rutherford Way, 20-28 Fulton Road, Land south of Fulton Road opposite Stadium Retail Park, land opposite Wembley Hilton, land opposite London Design


Retail/financial and professional services/food and drink (Use Class A1 to A4) up to 21,000 sqm;

Commercial (Use Class B1) up to 82,000 sqm;

Hotel (Use Class C1): up to 25,000 sqm;

Residential (Use Class C3): up to 350,000 sqm (up to 4,000 homes) plus up to 20,000 sqm of floorspace for internal plant, refuse, cycle stores, residential lobbies, circulation and other residential ancillary space;

Education, healthcare and community facilities (Use Class D1): up to15,000 sqm;

Assembly and leisure (Use Class D2): 23,000 sqm;

Student accommodation (Sui Generis): Up to 90,000 sqm.

The proposals have produced the following comments:



Clive Betts MP has written in relation to the proposal following conversations that he had with the Football Association about the proposed developments adjacent to Wembley Stadium. This letter seeks reassurance regarding the potential impact of the development on fans being able to get away from Wembley at the end of the games, about facilities for people with disabilities and about the potential for fans to be held back in “holding pens” at the end of the game. 

According to the analysis undertaken by the FA, the development could add two hours before fans can get out of the car park onto the roads leading away from the stadium. This amount of time is unreasonable and unacceptable, and could lead to reputational damage to Wembley Stadium, the FA and English Football and therefore an adverse effect on Brent Council. 

The FA have advised that fans with disabilities would take an extra 40 minutes on top of the two hours to get away from the parking facilities that are proposed, which may be a contravention of the Disability Discrimination legislation. It is presumed that an equalities impact assessment will be undertaken. 

The FA has also advised that, because of changes to the flow of supporters necessitated by the proposed development, it would be necessary to hold some fans in an area for a period of time after the game had finished. This is a throwback to the problems football had 30 years ago where away fans were held for long periods of time after the games, with football fans effectively criminalised and held behind in certain areas. This would be a disaster both for the image of football, the image of the national stadium and the Council.

Letter of objection from the FA 


A letter was received from Martin Glen, Chief Executive of the FA raising issues which are summarised as follows:

The proposals which look to develop high rise blocks close to the stadium will severely damage the iconic view and status of the Stadium.

Whilst regeneration is vital, it needs to be balanced with Brent’s and the FA’s duty to protect the spirit of what is a great venue.

Wembley is a part of a national identity and positive celebrations of this should not merely be unhindered, but enhanced.

The aim of the FA’s objection is to retain the visual power of the stadium to help stimulate every aspect of life in Brent, retaining the emotional response Sir Norman Foster intended for the stadium.

If the Stadium is to continue to hold a special place in fans’ hearts, it needs to continue to provide a world class experience. All regeneration plans must place supporters at the heart of every day and that development need to ensure their safety and free movement.

Currently the development does not do this. The parking options and pedestrian and traffic flow are not adequate and need to be reconsidered to ensure Wembley Stadium remains the best venue in the World.

Level Playing Field objection (Brent planners' commentary)


Level Playing Field have expressed concern that the proposal will make access for disabled persons to and from the stadium worse due to the unreasonable waiting times for the lifts, fewer accessible parking spaces being available, the emergency evacuation procedures and the travel distances from the stadium entrance. They highlight that to expect a disabled person to wait 40 minutes to queue for the lifts is a significant worsening of the current situation and is unreasonable.
They also highlight that the proposed 105 blue badge spaces in the multi-storey car park is significantly less than the 174 blue badge spaces currently in place, and that Wembley Stadium has 310 wheelchair spaces, not including the Easy Access and Amenity seats available for ambulant disabled people. Level playing fields have specified that they have been told that the existing 174 Blue Badge spaces frequently fail to meet demand.
They also specify that the capacity of the proposed lifts would be significantly reduced when transporting wheelchair uses, and that these lifts would also be shared with Club Wembley guests. They highlight that a robust emergency evacuation plan for ambulant disabled people and wheelchair users would need to be put in place from the upper levels in the event of the lifts not being in use, with a significant number of people potentially requiring assistance.
The queue times that have been cited for the lifts are identical to those cited by the FA and this has been discussed above and within with the consideration of the objection from the FA, with the Detailed Considerations section of this report. The applicant has committed to the provision of 250 blue badge spaces, some of which are to be located within the Blue Multi-storey car park and others elsewhere in the vicinity of the stadium (e.g. the Red Multi-storey car park). Details of the provision of these spaces are to be secured through the Wembley Park Parking.
Management Plan, discussed within the Detailed Considerations section of this report. Emergency Evacuation Plans are secured through the building regulations. With regard to the distance to the blue badge parking spaces, Quintain initially were looking to propose a ramp from the blue badge parking level to the Stadium Concourse which would have resulted in a significant improvement. However, due to structural and warranty issues with the Stadium Concourse, this could not come forward at this point in time. The ramp was subsequently removed from the proposal.

These are not the only controversial aspects of the application.  A huge car park is planned despite the fact that Wembley Stadium was supposed to be a public transport destination and a new, three form entry primary school is planned on the site of the car park for York House.  The application states that this is to be run by Ark Academies although it is not clear how they were chosen.  Questions are raised about the issue of air quality on the site and only partially addressed.

The demise of the Powerleague facility between the stadium and  Brent Civic Centre is mentioned almost in passing and this may explain why residents have been unable to gain local councillor support for opposition to a Lucuzade Powerleague facility at Kingsbury High School:
The Powerleague 5-a-side football centre is not within the site for this application. It was implemented as a “mean-time” temporary use within a development site. The Council is supportive of its re-provision and the applicant is looking at options to relocate it elsewhere in the vicinity when development comes forward on that site. However, it was only proposed as a temporary use and its loss could not be resisted
Lastly once again officers seem to be playing with the definition of 'affordable housing' to make it virtually meaningless:

Housing mix and Affordable housing: The Affordable Housing proposal are supported by officers. The total Affordable Housing offer proposed within the scheme comprises 34 % of the total number of units. A total of 22 % of the total units are to be provided as permanent Affordable Housing, comprising Affordable Rent, Discount Market Rent (at 65 % of market rent), Intermediate Shared Ownership and Discount Market Sale (at 75 % of market value). A total of 12 % of the total unit are to provided as time limited Affordable Housing (80 % market rent for a 7 year period) through the Mayor’s London Housing Bank. The tenure mix fo Affordable Housing differs from the standard products referred to within Council Policy, but is supported by officers as it looks to provide a wider range of Affordable Housing products which will help to meet housing need whilst maximising the proportion of Affordable Housing that the scheme can afford. The proportion of proportion of family sized private units is below the levels set out within the Wembley AAP, but the proposed mix by unit and tenure results in a significant increase in the level of Affordable Housing and is supported on that basis.
The development includes the maximum reasonable (WM's emphasis) proportion of Affordable Housing including Affordable Rent, Intermediate Shared Ownership, Discount Market Sale and Discount Market Rent units. The price of private units cannot be considered or set within a planning application, other than how it affects the proportion of Affordable Homes.

The same evening planning applications for other projects in the stadium area will also be considered.