Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I think this development proposal is appalling.

I have been a Hamlet fan since I moved to the area over 25 years ago. I would love it to thrive, but not at the expense of the local environment. I am extremely concerned that the football club is anxious for all fans to support this application, and to give the impression that it is the unanimous view of all supporters. The few green spaces we have are precious and need protecting. The club have got themselves into an unhealthy relationship with a property company who were only a short while ago were trying to put them out of business. Southwark Council should not collude in it.

I would urge all those who feel strongly about it to register their objection on the Southwark Council planning website.

https://bit.ly/savegreendale

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/258664-dhfc-planning-application/
Share on other sites

squirrelmc Wrote:

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

> That thread hasn't had any proper answers yet.

> Much more to say but busy at the moment. Check

> back at the weekend.


The two DHFC Directors have answered plenty of questions, many of them a response to the same misinformation over and over again.

Dear squirrelmc


I am sorry but your comment that there are no proper answers on that thread just about sums up everything that is wrong with this process. You know full well we have answered every single post in great detail including providing references to all supporting information.


I really don?t mind if you made your mind up before making your first post and no amount of information would change that position or that you didn?t like the answers but I do mind when people mislead the community and imply answers are not forthcoming.


Kind regards


Ben

Dear Cerruty

I would agree that the current position could have been avoided but that is a long time past and neither the current club owners and directors nor Meadow were on the scene when the club lost control of its future. They have both inherited the situation and are both seeking the best outcome possible.


Southwark Council are also seeking the best outcome for the greatest benefit of the community and are in no way ?colluding?, they are fighting for what is best and have made an independent recommendation after long and careful study.


Also the club has always acknowledged and welcomed the fact that there are differing opinions, I have personally had long and respectful chats with fans who oppose the applications. We have also been careful to encourage people to log opinions and speak their own mind. Every communication has acknowledged the presence of valid opposition. To say that we have claimed unanimous support is therefore incorrect.


I feel for you and others in your position, I also want to protect green space and have always told the Local groups that if the Astro turf (our previous stadium plot) becomes our home again they will find the greatest ally in the club in ensuring the areas of Green Dale that have not been part of our stadium site over the years remain natural open spaces.


But I know that is not enough for everyone which I also have to respect.


Kind regards


Ben

Hi Abe


I was asked to help the club survive at its lowest point financially in August 2018. I audited everything in great detail and reported that the club was days from extinction if it could not return to Champion Hill and so secured a return in October 2018. I made it clear at the time that this was a short term stay of execution and the long term future could only be secured by having its own home. We modelled every possible scenario - I was independent and had no history with the club or the stadium owners or the council.


My job was to identify a solution and this application is the only viable path and everyone we have shared the information with has come to the same conclusion. I would urge you to read the supporters? trust statement on this subject.


So, I am a little confused by the fact that you are not convinced and would love to know what else I can provide that has not already been stated? If you have information that would support an alternative that leaves the club in the hands of the fans I would sincerely love to hear from you.


Kind regards


Ben

As someone who has lived here a while and can remember Sainsburys been built,I just can?t believe anything the club/meadows says about the future of the green dale area. In a few years the goalposts will just be moved again,I

love the club and hope it stays but not at any cost

Orange owl Wrote:

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

> As someone who has lived here a while and can

> remember Sainsburys been built,I just can?t

> believe anything the club/meadows says about the

> future of the green dale area. In a few years the

> goalposts will just be moved again,I

> love the club and hope it stays but not at any

> cost


This is exactly my feeling on it. I hope I am wrong.

The club is the people you are currently unwilling to trust. They organise the functioning of the club, the money to recruit and pay the staff and team, the ground, facilities, safety, bar - all of it, without them there is no club.


So when anyone says they don't trust the people who run the club but also "I love the club" one is embracing two opposing arguments which should be mutually exclusive.

It's a fair point, Anotherpaul. "The club", the entity that is evoking such strong feelings is an amalgam of people. The club is constituted by people: their work, support, feelings, and kinship. It is not constituted by architecture. People make places, not buildings. On this view 'the club' could plausibly play football at any number of spaces, it is not limited to the proposition on the table. This is evidenced by 'the club' playing at Tooting but it could be elsewhere.

I think it is clear that Meadow are completely unscrupulous and untrustworthy and also pretty good at getting what they want.


It's not a case of anyone doubting the motives of those running the club. I think the fear is that despite the best intentions of the club and the Council, Meadow will continue to out manoeuvre them in future. This may well be unfounded (I hope so).


I don't know whether or not it would have been possible, but I would have liked to see the Council push ahead with compulsory purchase.


As long as Meadow are in the picture, people are unlikely to feel reassured - and it's not a sign that they don't support the team.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • The coop of Forest Hill Road is very different- cheerful and helpful staff 
    • Would you expose your young people to 'that man'? That is apparently a real question. 'That man' is in fact a retired Oxford Professor of Moral & Pastoral Theology who wrote a book setting out to provide a moral reckoning on the vexed subject of Britain's Empire and its history. What might formerly have been a purely academic matter has become highly contentious, and according to one Cambridge academic "serious shit" that needed to be CLOSED DOWN. It's all rather amazing, the stuff of satire or nightmare but not of the real world. Anyway, Lord Biggar accepted an invitation to visit Peckham and speak to and with a small audience that was due to include young Black students ... who in the end didn't come on the day! Having set the whole thing up to facilitate this encounter for them, the outcome was a disappointment. The conversation with Lord Biggar and audience was not:   
    • Entertaining a visitor from Philippines, she's been here before but I've promised lunch.  Somewhere a little different maybe, quirky?
    • Surely a very simple: "how much does the council receive from the organisers of the Gala festival for payment for use of Peckham Rye" would smoke out a response. The "commercial sensitivity" could be because the council are giving it away or it could be because Gala don't want others to know how much they are paying - it is really tough to make money from any type of festival these days and Wide Awake in Brockwell, for example, sent out a plea for people to buy tickets via a reduced price "Tell a Friend" special offer because (they said much of it linked to the problems Lambeth were having with the High Court) things were entering "squeaky bum time"  and they were struggling to hit their break-even point. It does make me wonder whether expansion is baked-in to the agreements the council has with the organisers for events like Gala as the organisers have to be able to scale the size of the event each year to try to make money. I do also how much of the "revenue" from these events might be swallowed up by the provision of the "free community" event element of them. The comment piece in the Guardian sums it up quite nicely: The heart of this issue seems to be how cash-strapped councils are becoming increasingly beholden to commercial interests to the detriment of the public. A weekend festival that welcomes 50,000 people can expect to raise about £500,000 for local authorities. Councils argue that this money goes back in the public purse, allowing them to continue funding free community events such as Lambeth’s beloved Country Show, though there doesn’t seem to be much transparency over exactly how much cash is raised or where it is allocated.   The issue for councils may well be that if people found out how much was actually being raised by these events that the community would say the disruption is not worth it and I do wonder how much of the revenue is being swallowed up by the provision of the "free event" using the same infrastructure. Any time a council doesn't want to share something openly very much suggests that it is because they think constituents won't like the answer.  
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...