Discussion in 'Dulwich Hamlet FC' started by Fingers, Aug 26, 2015.
Have the actual proposals been made public yet? As far as I’m aware, they haven’t. I may be wrong.
There were no plans at the "consultation" - just an artists impression of the ground. There were no details on layout of the main stand, which was particularly disappointing. Their proposed timeline to have planning approval by summer seems very optimistic.
I would like to hear from the Club and Meadow on what the next steps are for the ground design, i.e. how they will consult with supporters to develop them. The club's badge is on the plans as a partner. It's not clear whether this means the club is backing them from outset? I guess this is a grey area, and support could be withdrawn at anytime.
I would hope the trust / supporters reserve our position, till we have far greater clarity on what is now being proposed, i.e. how it will be financed, who owns the ground after construction, what our long-term security of tenure is on the land and whether the FA confirms the plans would be Grade A compliant. Backing what's on the table currently is illogical, as there are no plans to back!
Other issues of note:
- Previous plans had small covered ends. There is now confusion as to whether these will be included.
- The stadium consultant said fences around ground will be rolled down on non-matchdays to preserve "the openess of the sight" - a fop to MOL and Friends of Greendale? Thus stadium would be prone to trespass and vandalism.
- The training MUGA has been moved from a separate ground-level space in Hadley's plans to behind seating in mainstand or on the roof. Thus reducing potential internal space.
- There are no dimensions, but the artworks gives impression of smaller bar than now...previous plans was for a bigger one than currently exists.
- IIRC previous submitted plans included Meadow delivering 4G pitch, insuring and maintaining for 10 years (part of section 106 agreement). That's now on the club (learnt at forum), and funding applications from Football Foundation will be submitted, but this tends to be 60/70% of funding. I don't now how we will raise other portion - perhaps a bond issue would work? I trust Ben will have a plan.
- The sight is not level, and to deliver the steeped terracing to have capacity of 4000, then will need to dig down. Not clear how this will be managed regarding need to deliver new pitch in 2019 to satisfy lease with Council, and longer-term stadium plans. Hopefully we will learn more on this imminently.
Overall, I am surprised the original plans for the ground have been thrown in the bin and Meadow have started again. I didn't expect this, so we are back to 2014!
Here's a link to pdfs of the boards shown at the exhibition:
I'm by no means an expert on planning applications, so it's purely my own inclination. But it's based on:
- Housing that is 8-storeys high is bound to attract increased public opposition.
- They still want to use Greendale/MOL - land that is not actually their's.
- The stadium they're proposing appears to be rubbish.
- The fact that they're Meadow, and don't appear to be very good at these things, but do seem to be excellent at falling out with the people who you'd think they'd want to have on-side.
I don't think anyone is going to get away with proposing a Sunday league stadium, get planning approval and then build the San Siro on Greendale!.
I'm glad the club has now got a working relationship with Meadow and agree it is probably the best way forward in the short term to co-operate with them (to a degree), and what Tom and Ben have achieved so far is nothing short of miraculous and I love and respect them for it.
However as supporters we need to see much much more before I support a Meadow plan or forgive them for the hell they have put us through the last year.
I'm reminded of the Streatham Hub fiasco. Developer says there will be continuity of leisure facilities, developer gets permission for flats and supermarket, Developer then tries to build flats, superstore first and tries to get out of providing leisure facilities. Admittedly that's a very crude history of what happened, but theres a brief history here:
A "short" history of the Streatham Hub development | Streatham Action
Note how long these things can end up dragging on!
In short, I see the proposals for the stadium, it's not specific enough to judge as it looks smaller yet promises to be bigger, and I note the promises that the stadium will be first phase. I don't believe it, and I think they will pull any trick down the line to get out of it.
Meadows = Developers = Shits
Update from JBP:
I prefer Jack British-Petroleum too.
You just know these wankers are going to get what they want and we'll end up with a shit stadium that leaves no room for growth that we'll eventually have leave for one reason or another.
No, we don't know that, and we don't know the opposite either. I would like to know:
- if/when we will have a proper consultation on more informed plans;
- how these plans are linked to the club's requirement to upgrade the astro by end of 2019 as per current lease with Council; and
- what the legal/ownership/lease structure will be for the club and land will be post-development.
It's all rather confusing at the moment...
That's my belief based on years and years of encounters with developers. I'd be delighted to be proved wrong and my cynicism unfounded.
The club appears to be in a better and stronger position than at this time last year, so I shall continue to trust our directors to act in the club's best interests and advise the rest of us when there's anything else we can do to help secure the club's future.
I trust them too, but developers will be developers and they're the ones holding the almighty wad.
Yes, but that's always been the case, and they now know they'll be in for a hell of a battle if they try to stitch us up again. I don't see the point in a fresh round of ranting and raving about it right now when - on the whole - the club's situation has improved over the past twelve months.
It was made fairly clear at last week's supporters meeting that the latest Meadow publicity material included an architect's impression of the proposed new ground, and that there would be opportunity for the club to have input in any final design, yet people seem to be completely ignoring that and banging on about how inadequate it looks.
I didn't realise I was "ranting and raving." I was just expressing an opinion as to the likely outcome of their proposals.
I wasn't referring to you personally, but it's barely ten days since the supporters-directors meeting which (the consensus seemed to be) was very positive and encouraging under the circumstances, and now following the Meadow event this thread has suddenly restarted with a lot of generally negative and sceptical comments that pay little heed to what was said by Ben Clasper and Tom Cullen.
I'm not naive enough to think Meadow are suddenly our friends and won't put their own interests ahead of ours if push comes to shove, but I'm not sure their exhibition last weekend has a huge significance in the overall scheme of things. I worked in construction in an admin role for five years, those architect's impressions very much represent the preliminary stage, that's not even close to what will need to be submitted before anything is formally considered for approval. It looks like little more than a testing the water exercise to gauge the level of opposition from the local community.
Separate names with a comma.