Discussion in 'Dulwich Hamlet FC' started by darryl, Sep 29, 2017.
Toilets and bins were overflowing today and I can't say I noticed any stewards inside the ground.
They were floating around, but you probably missed them as they were busy texting on their phones every time they walked past me and only had their armband on.
Didn't get my bag searched at the turnstile because the guard was on whatsapp
Meanwhile people were getting soaked by the car wash while queuing.
Wasn't at yesterday's match, but there was one on Tuesday night with her headphones on.
Could these be placed on the trust website when you get them?
Would need to check what can and can't be made public but in principle they could.
Thanks. Hopefully, the more people see them, the more help the trust will get in interpreting them and dealing with them.
It's not that long since people (me included) wee complaining about over-officious stewarding; can't have it both ways!
No reason why they can't hire some portaloos though, seems pretty obvious that 8 urinals, one of which has been busy for two seasons, isn't enough for 2000 fans...
The legal requirement is surprisingly low, although the club should be aiming far higher than the bare minimum (this number is for a non licensed event too).
From: How many portable toilets do you need for an event? - Andyloos
Therefore the legal minimum is covered...
Actually that's not necessarily the case, because those guideleines were for non-licensed events.
But Hamlet shouldn't be about providing the absolute minimum, especially as we're now attracting more young families. Given our massive crowds, we should be looking at leading the way, and providing a better match day experience than other teams at our levels. If families are coming along with their young children, then decent nappy changing facilities would be the kind of thing we should be providing as a matter of course.
I agree, but in the 'real world' with the people who run the Club controlling the purse strings this simply isn't going to happen, unfortunately.
Yes I agree, but you were wrong to state that the link I posted proved that "the legal minimum is covered" because that may not necessarily be the case as those figures were for non licensed events.
Either way, the current facilities are a fucking disgrace.
The sad thing is that it may well be a false economy if even a relatively small number of people are put off returning by inadequate facilities, as well as undermining the hard work of yourself and others in attempting to boost the crowd figures.
I'm increasingly coming round to thinking that we don't actually need a new ground at all - we need new owners who actually care about the club's future and who have the determination and resources to improve the current ground with better terracing, more seating, and converting the squash courts and other underused elements for alternative use.
Both Cliveden Estates (during the previous Homebase redevelopment propossal) and now Hadley/Meadow have insisted that the current ground is economically unviable. Whilst it could certainly have been better designed I can't help thinking that this particular pudding has been considerably over-egged to gain the backing of the club and its supporters for something that isn't actually essential.
That's how I feel too. Some relatively inexpensive upgrades would immediately improve things immeasurably for fans - like some cover on both ends, some stepped terracing and better loos. We've seen from other clubs that providing cover can definitely be done on the cheap. If we knew we were staying at the current ground, I dare say fans could crowdfund basic cover quickly enough.
is...is that a broken record I hear?
To be honest, I don't fall for spiel from developers...but, like it or not our ground is woefully inadequate.
Cover behind goals.
Plumbing and heating need sorting.
General lighting & such like very uneconomic.
Upgrading toilet facilities.
Upgrading PA system.
That's just a few off the top of my head.
Even to do just some of these now...would be a large five figure cost.
To bring the ground completely up to scratch, making it a modern, safe, welcoming ground for 21st Century National League football (as in fit for Step One, which isn't out of the question if we were to gain promotion, as a target over the next five years) would I believe not leave much change, if any, from a million pounds.
No it's the sound of a fan who pays his money and gives a fuck.
Haven't they been upgraded recently? My camera's light meter says so!
Calm down, editor. My point is that we've all listed the improvements we'd like to see on here numerous times over the last few years. It does nothing to change the situation and we're all very aware. The only way this change might come will be to get rid of Meadow. So let's focus on that shall we?
Replaced a good 60% of the bulbs over the summer. (Still not enough, not sticking up for them)
As I said earlier, it would need owners with drive and determination and considerable financial resources, but other clubs seem to find such people from somewhere and I'm not just talking about the high-profile boom-and bust clubs with their five year plans to reach the Football League. Even if it costs £1m to make all the desirable improvements to our current ground that's still got to be a lot less then the cost of building a completely new one, although I fully realise that's inextricably linked to making a fat profit from redeveloping the current one.
Of course if one or two of those things listed had been done every other summer it would be less of a problem now. Our club never seems to have been very good at keeping on top of ground maintenance. Apart from when the place was completely rebuilt a quarter of a century ago I can't remember any noticeable improvements being made to either this ground or the previous one in the last 40 years. Yet each season I go to a familar away ground or two and see a new cover behind a goal, a new stretch of terracing, a new clubhouse or a new stand has srung up since my previous visit.
That's the death knell for the new stadium. Now it all gets very interesting.
That's the appeal over. No chance of redeveloping for Meadow in current guise.
I can't see them spending another 2 years money re-submitting.
Presumably, they'll either offload the club, go for a lesser development of the stadium footprint or (worse case) look to develop Champion Hill and have us ground share with Leatherhead.
Former most likely? turbulent times if so.
Well, if they don't have any interest in owning a football club let's hope someone steps forward to make them an offer ASAP. The last thing we need is disinterested owners running the club down.
As noted above, both planning appeals (covering the Section 106 variations and the redevelopment proposals) have been withdrawn.
Update here (and below for ease):
DHST are aware of a letter from Meadow’s legal team to LB Southwark’s planning officer confirming that following last week’s lease hearing on Green Dale, they have decided to withdraw their planning appeals. In the letter it states:
As you are aware, we act for the above Appellant [Greendale Property Company] and have today notified PINS of the withdrawal of the above linked appeals [3164823 & 3166766].
This decision has been made in light of the outcome of the hearing on Monday in relation to the lease proceedings and what our client considers to be subsequent defamatory statements made against it by the Council. With that background our client regrettably considers it cannot continue with the appeal.
The stance that has been taken by the Council generally is extremely disappointing due to the impact on the deliverability of housing and the future of DHFC. Without the ongoing support of the Council our client’s continuing intervention is, with regret, futile.
DHST are in discussions with Meadow to confirm how they plan to proceed in terms of their support of the Club generally and what they intend to do with the land. We will update as soon as we have further news.
DHST supported the proposals because it offered the Football Club an opportunity for a sustainable future in East Dulwich under the ownership of its fans. We stand by that model of ownership as the preferred option and will continue to act in the best interests of its members and the Football Club. We continue to maintain dialogue with all major stakeholders and will review all available options to ensure the future of the Club is secure.
Purely speculation on my part but, if they were intending to put forward a further planning application, having a pop at the Council for ‘defamation’ is an odd way to prepare the ground.
Separate names with a comma.