Parties at DHFC - noise

[rch]

Yeah, I think you're right, Blah, the venue manager should have realised that an application for a TEN would need to be made.

From memory, I think the astroturf was allocated permission for sports events only, specifically to protect residents' amenity, but all this could have changed over the years.

It sounds like it really needs for Licensing Enforcement to investigate the whole sequence of events...

I do feel sympathy for the Football Committee, which appears to be separate from the site owners... but the basic geographical acoustical issues that affected all of us on Sunday also demonstrate why the stadium shouldn't be moved to the astroturf location, it should stay where it is. So, I think the developers have shot themselves in the foot.

Sorry, happy2, I missed your comment above... I could hear every word the DJ was saying in my bedroom as well, so even his amplification was over the limit. It sounded like everything was turned down at specific times and then turned up again after about 10-15 minutes, possibly to circumvent the dB monitoring.

[fruityloops]

RCH comment regarding acoustics is ridiculous... Comparing that level of noise from amplified soundsystems to a normal match-day environment noise, at 3pm-5pm on a Saturday afternoon, or a 7:45-9:45 (which will certainly be quieter midweek).

You're also comparing noise created on an open sided astro turf to a stadium... Nonsense.

[rch]

I'm actually agreeing with you, fruityloops... there's no problem at all with the stadium noise from the football matches or probably even sports games on the astroturf.

The problem is with amplified music at open air events - sports events and musical events are two completely different definitions with completely different decibel levels.

So, this problem with the amplified music on Sunday illustrates why this venue should only be used as a sports venue.

[JerryDolkeFanClub]

Blah Blah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Just what to DHFC own here. If they own the

> astroturf, they are responsible. If they don't,

> then the company that owns it are responsible.

> DHFC licence applies to music indoors. To have an

> outdoor public event with music would require a

> TEN.

>

> This is what the southwark website says;

>

> 'If your event includes entertainment (music,

> singing, dancing, drama, films or spectator

> sports) and / or the sale of alcohol, it will need

> to be licensed by the council under the Licensing

> Act 2003. This applies to indoor venues (e.g. a

> school hall or theatre) and outdoor locations

> (e.g. public parks, town squares and streets).

>

> In some situations, the venue you are using will

> already hold a Premises Licence to allow these

> activities to take place. You will need to check

> this with the venue manager. If the venue does not

> hold a suitable licence you will either need to

> submit a Temporary Event Notice or a full premises

> licence application.

>

> As of 1 October 2012 the Live Music Act 2012 came

> into effect. This means that some live music is

> now deregulated. Please visit the Licensing News

> pages for details.'

>

> From what I can see, the DHFC licence would not

> extend to using the astroturf for these events. So

> why did the owners agent not apply for a TEN then?

DHFC is owned by Meadow Property.

The football side is run by volunteers on matchday and they look after the football side via whatever means on non natchday.

The hiring of the facilities including the astroturf is down to Meadow and their appointed incumbent Chris Taylor. He and they can make their excuses but ultimately it is down to them to run the site correctly and in the best interests of the name of DHFC........

[edhistory]

JerryDolkeFanClub Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> DHFC is owned by Meadow Property.

There is another thread on the EDF about the property company seeking planning permission to build on Metropolitan Open Land.

If I recall correctly someone checked with the Land Registry and found out that the astroturf field is a completely separate hereditament owned directly by Meadow Property.

DHFC have no legal nexus with this land whatsoever.

Can someone confirm this?

Can Mr Barber use his inside track to examine the MOL Register?

[Blah Blah]

Thank you Jerry for clarifying this.

So Meadow Property should have applied for a TEN and didn't.

We can absolve DHFC from any blame here. They have the correct licence in place for the events they run at the club, and yes there have been problems in the past, but things seem to have sorted themselves out. We should continue to support both the football club and the volunteers that have kept the club going through bad times and good.

So can James Barber look into this? Why did Meadow Property not apply for a TEN and what can Southwark licensing do to admonish this behaviour so this does not happen in future.

[Swit and bold]

How can you say this has nothing to do with DHFC, this event was supported by the club for the passed three weeks.

I've got nothing against the club players or staff, BUT this event was held on DHFC property!!! The charity game & event on the Astroturf... Regardless who own's the football or astroturf, it all comes under the umbrella of DHFC........

This has been going on for three weeks & your telling me don't Point the finger at DHFC.

I like most have revived an Email of apology from

Chris Taylor General Manager

Dulwich Hamlet FC & your still going to stick with nothing to do with DHFC

I have lived directly behind DHFC for 10 years, I've never once complained about DHFC, BUT for the passed three weeks DHFC have to take the blame!!!!

[milk76]

The astroturf is owned by Southwark. It is leased to the owners of the club on the basis that they maintain it and can rent it out to local groups. It used to be a great facility about fifteen years agoand was very widely used. Sadly the club have failed to maintain it to a safe standard. As a result for years now it has been deemed unsafe for schools and youth groups. It is a disgrace.

The council have the funds allocated to take it back and renovate it so that it can be used, all week, by every group that wants to. The property developers trying to appropriate and buldose it seems to have halted the council's efforts for some reason.

The new school being built and this ground is accessable from it without crossing a road. I would have thought that this would strengthen the case for bringing it back under public control.

[BrandNewGuy]

The lease has, in fact, expired and the council and the property developers are currently involved in a legal dispute as to its continuance. The matter is meant to be resolved by the end of the year (at about the same time as the developers' planning appeal for the new stadium and flats), so I wouldn't expect anything to happen before then.

[DulwichFox]

BrandNewGuy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> The lease has, in fact, expired and the council

> and the property developers are currently involved

> in a legal dispute as to its continuance. The

> matter is meant to be resolved by the end of the

> year (at about the same time as the developers'

> planning appeal for the new stadium and flats), so

> I wouldn't expect anything to happen before then.

You might have to share the new stadium with Millwall. Lol :)

Foxy

[Victoria Lister]

NORTH FACE RUCK SACK FOUND WITH MAC BOOK

No name evident, but minutes for a Committee meeting ref. Green Dale; and print out of ED Forum posts ref. PARTIES AT DHFC

Rucksack found in my front garden yesterday Sat 30 Sept - Trossachs Road - please call me 07710 124 064 to reclaim!

Victoria