Barnet FC has unveiled plans which it says are its last chance to remain in the borough. KEVIN BURCHALL checks out the proposals.

Welcome once again to the great stadium debate.

Last week Barnet FC unveiled plans for a new £12million stadium with a 9,200-capacity, just to the south of its present Underhill site. Club chairman Tony Kleanthous hopes to woo fans with a vision of conferencing facilities, first class stands, and a string of executive boxes where he hopes the prawn sandwich brigade will munch their way to success for Barnet on and off the field.

The arguments for the Bees to increase their revenue-raising potential are there for everyone to see. Only last month the chairman revealed the club is over budget in terms of players and markedly below what it budgeted for in terms of average attendance for the season.

Relegation to the Conference has cost the Bees hundreds of thousands of pounds in lost revenue. With Underhill not up to Football League requirements in terms of capacity and the slope of the famous playing surface, Mr Kleanthous has stated boldly that this is the last chance for the club to remain in the borough.

But the club have been here before. Two failed bids to relocate to a new home at Copthall Stadium in Mill Hill and a further failed move to Hendon FC's ground in Claremont Road, Cricklewood, have resulted in Barnet reeling back on their heels while many clubs have moved forward.

For what non-League clubs can achieve, Barnet need only look to Rushden & Diamonds, the team which replaced them in the league last season. Bankrolled by Dr Martens chief, Max Griggs, a state-of-the-art stadium has helped Rushden make the transition to league football with consummate ease.

Their Director Howard Johnstone, explained what the Bees have ahead of them.

"Barnet would certainly need to have corporate facilities which they could sell on the day," he said. "Every home game we have at least 400 people here for a pre match meal at £25 per head so it is all to do with marketing.

"We have conferencing, sports and exhibition facilities and have a stadium with a capacity of 6,500 2,000 of which are season ticket holders. We are not making a profit but if we didn't have these revenues coming in we would make a big loss," he added.

It's a sobering fact that Rushden & Diamonds don't make a profit despite a fantastic stadium and average gates three times the size of Barnet's. London clubs like Chelsea have managed to make a handsome profit by developing housing and hotel facilities on its ground, but there are no such plans on the table at Barnet.

In fact Mr Kleanthous is faced with the Herculean task of raising £12million for the new stadium. Yet he does not envisage any problems raising the money despite not drawing up a full list of business plans. He said: "We are going to put together a whole load of business plans but we are not prepared to do it just yet.

"It is going to cost us £20-30,000 which I don't want to spend until we have got planning permission. The cost of this planning application is the cost of two strikers alone.

"I never let money stand in the way of a good idea and we will raise the money. I will put some of the money in and hopefully the Football Foundation will put in £3million," he said.

Mr Kleanthous also added the club would be looking at gaining money through food and bar franchises and also through a stadium sponsor and a major sports outlet.

The club would also be eligible for Sports Match Funding which is linked to community projects as well as Lottery funding the chairman intimated the building work on the new stadium could well be staggered so that funding is not required all at once.

And then there is the planning system to overcome. Barnet faces obstacles more akin to Beecher's Brook in the form of Barnet Council and The Greater London Authority. Ken Chapman, chief executive of RPS, the planning consultants working with Barnet, remains hopeful. He said: "The plans were drawn up in consultation with the council and the GLA and they are reasonably confident we are meeting all the requirements.

"We have carried out a survey of all the potential sites within the borough and I think there is a general level of agreement that it is very difficult to find alternative sites."

Mr Chapman added the club were not seeking to take the land south of Underhill out of Green Belt as it would be too complicated but were asking for replacement permission to allow them to carry on using the site. One of the conditions for developing the land is that the current Underhill site is kept 'green', hence the decision to keep the existing pitch.

The East Terrace is to be demolished to enhance the outlook of neighbouring residents and the club has agreed to house both St John Ambulance and the scouts, within the new stadium, to offset the loss of their original homes. There will be a large amount of landscaping but the club say the council will have to find Barnet Cricket Club a new home.

In fact the cricket club have been told by the council they have three weeks to lodge any appeals and have not offered any alternative solution to the club.

Spokesman for the club, Trevor Chambers, said: "We feel as though we have been totally overlooked. If in three weeks time we have had nothing from the council then we will have to object," he added. Mr Kleanthous said he will not build anything unless the cricket club are relocated by the council.

What is more worrying for Bees fans is the possible failure of this latest application.

Mr Kleanthous said: "If this does not go through, we will definitely relocate outside the borough. We have received offers to go elsewhere but are going for this application as our supporters prefer to stay in the borough alongside our spiritual home."

Bees fans will be hoping this is fourth time lucky.

October 23, 2001 15:30

KEVIN BURCHALL