Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Champion Hill: Proposed Ground Redevelopment

pettyboy said:
Good photo. Shows how dilapidated the pitch is. Really not fit for purpose and the astroturf is becoming more damaged and dangerous without proper maintenance.
Click to expand...
With the current state of affairs - playgrounds closed, exercise areas taped off, skateparks and BMX tracks closed - people aren't going to be fussy where they exercise - so even a shitty slab of usually-ignored knackered astroturf becomes a place to go. The parks and green spaces around me are busier than they've ever been, but when this lockdown is over, some will go back to their near-empty existence.
 
From EDF
Hi all,

Just a note to say that the Planning Committee will hear the application to redevelop Dulwich Hamlet Football Club on 27th July at 6.30pm. The meeting will be online. Details are not public yet but when they are you will be able to find them here: [moderngov.southwark.gov.uk]

Dulwich Hamlet is in Champion Hill ward so we Goose Green councillors do not have the right to attend as ward councillors. But it is very close and will clearly affect some Goose Green residents, hence me sharing here.

Best wishes,
James

--------------------
James McAsh - Labour Councillor for Goose Green ward
James.McAsh@Southwark.gov.uk
[www.jamesmcash.com] [twitter.com]
Click to expand...
www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk

Dulwich Hamlet Football Club planning decision - 27th July

Hi all,Just a note to say that the Planning Committee will hear the application to redevelop Dulwich Hamlet Football Club on 27th July at 6.30pm. The meeting will be online. Details are not public yet but when they are you will be able to find them here: http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/ieListDo...
www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk
 
In case you don't fancy heading over to the EDF, I posted a reply on there this morning which is probably just as helpful being on here incase anyone's wondering about anything in particular around the development still.


---------


Hello everyone, My name is Tom, and I became a director of the club as we managed to gain ownership of the club itself during the battle with meadow a few years ago.





I’m here to dispel some myths and frank untruths i’ve read here.





The stadium will be expanded, then run down for more housing




The ground, which will be sat across two different land owners (Meadow and Southwark) will be leased to the club on an unconditional 125 year lease mirrored by both parties. So, this frankly cannot happen. The club (since 2018) has been owned exclusively by fans that came forward to try and save it in our darkest hour. This now includes a sizeable shareholding and board representation from DHST. The notion that our own fans would want to run down a stadium and build houses on it is not only ridiculous, it’s legally impossible should this dev be approved.





The Astroturf was run down by the club.




This is technically true yes, the owners before us were hardly fit and proper. This is why we fought so hard to gain control of the club, so we could make the positive changes we all wanted to see. Anyone thats been to Champion Hill since our return would attest to how much the match day experience has been improved, thats down to us working hard, listening to fans and improving what we could. The Council took the lease back of the astro turf before returning it to us as part of the deal for us to return, and recommended it be improved by replacing the astro with 3G and putting a fence around it so it can be managed. That’s exactly what we’ll be doing, albeit on a slightly larger scale. The addition of standing terraces around 3 sides and a main building which is predominantly on Meadow’s land. A gentle reminder that the slopes on the side of the astro turf are the remains of our original terracing, the astro is on the site of the first DHFC ground on Champion Hill, from around 1912 to 1929 we think.





The Council is giving Land to Meadow, a private company.




Untrue. The Council is granting the club a 125 extension on the land it has historically leased for over a century. The development of 3 sides of the stadium (standing terracing and associated fencing) will be on council land, that the club leases. The main stadium building will be on Meadow’s land, which they are in turn giving us a 125 year lease on. No land is being given to Meadow, Meadow own the land the club currently sits on.





As a way to try and explain as simply as possible the lease deal, I’ll try and draw it out.





Stadium dev below:


Image linked here: https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/file.php?5,file=358767








Tower Blocks will be built on MOL


Again, frankly untrue. The only thing build on MOL, will be standing terraces for spectators and associated fencing around the stadium. All building will be on land Meadow already own.



The club could redevelop the current stadium

Technically this is true, if we had around 30 million pounds to 1) buy the land back off of Meadow and 2) spend the estimated 6-10 Million we’d need to tear down and rebuild the stadium to make it about the same as we’re proposing now. People do seem to forget that due to the club being run by an array of ‘characters’ over the years with no real interest in the football club, that we’ve been left in a situation where we do not own the ground the club sits on, nor do we have a stadium fit for purpose. The Current stadium building is falling apart. I say that with first hand (normally down a toilet or through a ceiling tile) experience. The costs of just keeping the place safe for the public are astronomical, and not sustainable. It’s just not true in reality that we could redevelop the current stadium. This development (and believe me, I fought against it) is the only way forward for the club, this time round we’ve actually be included in it, it’s a joint application, and we believe it’s good for us AND the local community, and southwark as a whole. We’ll be the stadium of southwark (literally the only one, as we are now) but with far better facilities to supply and support our community with sporting provision it currently lacks.



The Clubs future will not be secured with this deal

That’s a strong disagree from me. The club has operated on the edge since the 70’s, we’ve constantly had issues with tenure, grounds, leases. First B&Q, then the Sainsburys deal. We’ve been controlled by owners who’s focus has been on redevelopment for decades. We as a board, being made up of fans foremost (including DHST) only have the interests of the club at heart. Having a 125 year lease for the club is huge. We can draw down on FA funding we’ve previously not been able to get because we’ve been on short rolling leases, we can plan and run the business with more than a few years planning in advance as we won’t be in the midst of yet another battle. We’ll be able to develop further the academy and links to local schools. The revenue generation possible at the new stadium will allow us to mitigate the financial stress of running a non league football club, a business which is almost crippled by cashflow multiple times a season due to postponements, cup runs and injuries. We are a club that is currently just washing its face purely on our income alone. That means Gate money, hospitality and commercial partnerships. Why’s that so special? I hear some of you ask. In football, even at this level, most teams are bankrolled by their directors or owners. We run on what we make, and thats it, because thats all we have.



The Stadium will never get built/Meadow will reneg on the stadium



As the application states, the stadium has to be COMPLETED and handed over before the housing can even start construction. Again, legally impossible.



I, as all the other board members, DHST members and fans all appreciate concerns about this dev, we’ve had to make this choice given the stark reality that the club faces, but what I personally can’t stand by is just outright untruths. I put my life on hold to save the club, along with many others who volunteered 1000’s of hours of their time to keep us alive and to provide we hope a valuable asset to our part of London. The long and short of it is if we don’t get this through, we’re done. I would hope that despite peoples concerns, keeping a 127 year club at the heart of the community alive may be worth a little more than some concrete and carpet.



If you choose to oppose, you do chose death for the club. It is that simple unfortunately.


We had regular open meetings at the club (pre-covid) and 2 consultation events on this development but understand no everyone would have been able to attend these or get the information without trawling through a massive application, so please get in touch if you’d like to discuss anything.



I’ll check this thread a few more times before the planning date and try and answer any questions that come up. You can also direct any questions to hello@dulwichhamletfc.co.uk if you’d like to ask something privately or send me a DM here.

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





Tom Cullen - DHFC Director.
 
YTC said:
The ground, which will be sat across two different land owners (Meadow and Southwark) will be leased to the club on an unconditional 125 year lease mirrored by both parties. So, this frankly cannot happen. The club (since 2018) has been owned exclusively by fans that came forward to try and save it in our darkest hour. This now includes a sizeable shareholding and board representation from DHST. The notion that our own fans would want to run down a stadium and build houses on it is not only ridiculous, it’s legally impossible should this dev be approved.
Click to expand...

In what way will it be legally impossible?

I don't in any way believe that anyone currently involved in the club would have this intention.

However - what bothers me is that this was supposed to be the case with the existing stadium, wasn't it? That site has a planning condition on it which says it can't be redeveloped for other uses. The council have to over-ride that condition in order to permit the current proposal. What we have right now seems to be a repeat of what happened previously: the old football ground was redeveloped, and some new, previously open land allocated to the club. That previously open land had the stadium built upon it, and it was protected by a planning condition to try and stop what is happening now, from happening. This apparently hasn't worked. So is there a substantially different situation now, in the current proposals, a legal setup that really makes sure it can't happen again?

I feel it's a little unfair to tell those who oppose the development that they are "choosing death" for the club. If the application fails, and the club cannot survive then that's a result of what happened in the club's history, before its resurgence, isn't it? That's what has generated the financial situation where the club's only means of survival is to accept what in effect is a cash handout from a developer, where the developer will only hand out that cash if some public land is made available to the football club. In the end, there are all sorts of organisations who are short of cash, and would like to redevelop their club buildings and so on, but most of them don't happen to sit in the position that you do, where you have a kind of negotiating lever that can potentially get you something worth tens of millions of pounds, in exchange for compromises being made about the use of public land.

This is a trick commonly played by developers - to make out that denying them permission for something will damage the public good - for example, they'll demolish a building and then say, well, if you don't give us permission there's just going to be a wasteland there, or we'll sell it to someone who wants to do something even less popular with it, or whatever. But they deliberately set up that situation, and it seems that they've rather successfully played a similar game here.

Actually, I'm quite sympathetic to your efforts, and I don't doubt you have all the best intentions and part of me hopes you'll succeed. It's probably very annoying to have me say that and then raise these questions and objections. But while part of me wants to see you get a long term solution, the other part of me has a big issue with the developer getting away with this, as a matter of principle, and because of the precedent that it sets.
 
teuchter said:
In what way will it be legally impossible?

I don't in any way believe that anyone currently involved in the club would have this intention.

However - what bothers me is that this was supposed to be the case with the existing stadium, wasn't it? That site has a planning condition on it which says it can't be redeveloped for other uses. The council have to over-ride that condition in order to permit the current proposal. What we have right now seems to be a repeat of what happened previously: the old football ground was redeveloped, and some new, previously open land allocated to the club. That previously open land had the stadium built upon it, and it was protected by a planning condition to try and stop what is happening now, from happening. This apparently hasn't worked. So is there a substantially different situation now, in the current proposals, a legal setup that really makes sure it can't happen again?

I feel it's a little unfair to tell those who oppose the development that they are "choosing death" for the club. If the application fails, and the club cannot survive then that's a result of what happened in the club's history, before its resurgence, isn't it? That's what has generated the financial situation where the club's only means of survival is to accept what in effect is a cash handout from a developer, where the developer will only hand out that cash if some public land is made available to the football club. In the end, there are all sorts of organisations who are short of cash, and would like to redevelop their club buildings and so on, but most of them don't happen to sit in the position that you do, where you have a kind of negotiating lever that can potentially get you something worth tens of millions of pounds, in exchange for compromises being made about the use of public land.

This is a trick commonly played by developers - to make out that denying them permission for something will damage the public good - for example, they'll demolish a building and then say, well, if you don't give us permission there's just going to be a wasteland there, or we'll sell it to someone who wants to do something even less popular with it, or whatever. But they deliberately set up that situation, and it seems that they've rather successfully played a similar game here.

Actually, I'm quite sympathetic to your efforts, and I don't doubt you have all the best intentions and part of me hopes you'll succeed. It's probably very annoying to have me say that and then raise these questions and objections. But while part of me wants to see you get a long term solution, the other part of me has a big issue with the developer getting away with this, as a matter of principle, and because of the precedent that it sets.
Click to expand...

The difference is the length of the lease. A short lease versus a long lease.

To the point isn’t it.
 
teuchter said:
In what way will it be legally impossible?

I don't in any way believe that anyone currently involved in the club would have this intention.

However - what bothers me is that this was supposed to be the case with the existing stadium, wasn't it? That site has a planning condition on it which says it can't be redeveloped for other uses. The council have to over-ride that condition in order to permit the current proposal. What we have right now seems to be a repeat of what happened previously: the old football ground was redeveloped, and some new, previously open land allocated to the club. That previously open land had the stadium built upon it, and it was protected by a planning condition to try and stop what is happening now, from happening. This apparently hasn't worked. So is there a substantially different situation now, in the current proposals, a legal setup that really makes sure it can't happen again?

I feel it's a little unfair to tell those who oppose the development that they are "choosing death" for the club. If the application fails, and the club cannot survive then that's a result of what happened in the club's history, before its resurgence, isn't it? That's what has generated the financial situation where the club's only means of survival is to accept what in effect is a cash handout from a developer, where the developer will only hand out that cash if some public land is made available to the football club. In the end, there are all sorts of organisations who are short of cash, and would like to redevelop their club buildings and so on, but most of them don't happen to sit in the position that you do, where you have a kind of negotiating lever that can potentially get you something worth tens of millions of pounds, in exchange for compromises being made about the use of public land.

This is a trick commonly played by developers - to make out that denying them permission for something will damage the public good - for example, they'll demolish a building and then say, well, if you don't give us permission there's just going to be a wasteland there, or we'll sell it to someone who wants to do something even less popular with it, or whatever. But they deliberately set up that situation, and it seems that they've rather successfully played a similar game here.

Actually, I'm quite sympathetic to your efforts, and I don't doubt you have all the best intentions and part of me hopes you'll succeed. It's probably very annoying to have me say that and then raise these questions and objections. But while part of me wants to see you get a long term solution, the other part of me has a big issue with the developer getting away with this, as a matter of principle, and because of the precedent that it sets.
Click to expand...

I actually agree with quite a lot of what you've said here, but regardless of how the situation came about, and whose fault it is, the fact is that this is the situation the club is in now. Can I ask, do you have a preferred solution that you think wouldn't result in the death of the club?
 
I noticed on the EDF thread, someone brought up the issue of a 3G pitch not meeting the requirements of League Two, should the club end up progressing to that level. I'd have thought a bigger question is whether the new stadium itself will meet League Two requirements. Is the stadium being designed and planned with Football League requirements in mind?
 
blueheaven said:
I noticed on the EDF thread, someone brought up the issue of a 3G pitch not meeting the requirements of League Two, should the club end up progressing to that level. I'd have thought a bigger question is whether the new stadium itself will meet League Two requirements. Is the stadium being designed and planned with Football League requirements in mind?
Click to expand...

Why not make it premier league level? Last time I checked we are a non-league club.
 
blueheaven said:
I actually agree with quite a lot of what you've said here, but regardless of how the situation came about, and whose fault it is, the fact is that this is the situation the club is in now. Can I ask, do you have a preferred solution that you think wouldn't result in the death of the club?
Click to expand...
I think my preferred solution would have involved a compulsory purchase of the existing stadium by Southwark. And the purchase value should have reflected the fact that it is a site with a planning condition on it that means that it can't be developed as housing.
 
blueheaven said:
I don't think it's unreasonable to suggest that over the course of the next 125 years the club might move up a couple of divisions.
Click to expand...

Do you not? Did we move out of non-league in the last 125 years?

And more to the point since 4g is not permitted in the league. Presumably you will be for the ripping up of the pitch and replacing with grass. Oh you are? Lets see where you are getting the extra revenue from now you can’t rent out the pitch or the extra expenditure now you cant train on it. Oh you aren’t in favour of replacing the pitch? You think that the league will change the requirements. Then why wouldnt they change the stadium requirements.

Do me a favour and actually think about something for more than five minutes.
 
teuchter said:
I think my preferred solution would have involved a compulsory purchase of the existing stadium by Southwark. And the purchase value should have reflected the fact that it is a site with a planning condition on it that means that it can't be developed as housing.
Click to expand...

Great. Loads of people are for that as well. Oh the council didn’t want to go through the time and trouble and cost? Thank god you are still talking about it then.
 
B.I.G said:
Do you not? Did we move out of non-league in the last 125 years?

And more to the point since 4g is not permitted in the league. Presumably you will be for the ripping up of the pitch and replacing with grass. Oh you are? Lets see where you are getting the extra revenue from now you can’t rent out the pitch or the extra expenditure now you cant train on it. Oh you aren’t in favour of replacing the pitch? You think that the league will change the requirements. Then why wouldnt they change the stadium requirements.

Do me a favour and actually think about something for more than five minutes.
Click to expand...

Wow you're aggressive.
 
blueheaven said:
Wow you're aggressive.
Click to expand...

Tired of people having thoughts and opinions without thinking for more than five seconds.

I’m against the development because I’d rather let the club die than let Meadow make any money. If you think it has logical issues than point them out.

Where as ooh maybe we might get promoted into league football so we should prepare has so many issues its a worthless opinion.

Are your other opinions equally worthless?
 
B.I.G said:
Tired of people having thoughts and opinions without thinking for more than five seconds.

I’m against the development because I’d rather let the club die than let Meadow make any money. If you think it has logical issues than point them out.

Where as ooh maybe we might get promoted into league football so we should prepare has so many issues its a worthless opinion.

Are your other opinions equally worthless?
Click to expand...

TBH I get the impression from the way you speak to people on here that you think all opinions that aren't your own are worthless.
 
blueheaven said:
TBH I get the impression from the way you speak to people on here that you think all opinions that aren't your own are worthless.
Click to expand...

If you think so. I notice you aren’t capable of backing up your opinion that we should prepare for potential league football.

Not that it matters at this point. The planning proposal was submitted ages ago, and now it will get approved or not.

So good job on explaining why your opionion isn’t worthless.

Perhaps if you thought about your opinions people would think they were less worthless. Regardless, you probably still put your opinions out on social media as you think they are so important and worthwhile.
 
B.I.G said:
Do you not? Did we move out of non-league in the last 125 years?

And more to the point since 4g is not permitted in the league. Presumably you will be for the ripping up of the pitch and replacing with grass. Oh you are? Lets see where you are getting the extra revenue from now you can’t rent out the pitch or the extra expenditure now you cant train on it. Oh you aren’t in favour of replacing the pitch? You think that the league will change the requirements. Then why wouldnt they change the stadium requirements.

Do me a favour and actually think about something for more than five minutes.
Click to expand...
We didn't move out of the Isthmian League for 111 years but we're above that level now. We've been promoted twice in the last 7 years, so it's perfectly feasible that we could be promoted twice more over the next decade or so. I've seen us play Isthmian League matches against Wycombe Wanderers, Yeovil Town, Aldershot Town, Stevenage Borough, and Wimbledon, all of whom subsequently played in the Football League. Just because our club has never achieved something in the past doesn't mean it's beyond our compass in the future. For most of our club's existence there was much less opportunity to progess to Football League level as you had to be elected by existing member clubs, then there was only one promotion place instead of the current two.
 
Pink Panther said:
We didn't move out of the Isthmian League for 111 years but we're above that level now. We've been promoted twice in the last 7 years, so it's perfectly feasible that we could be promoted twice more over the next decade or so. I've seen us play Isthmian League matches against Wycombe Wanderers, Yeovil Town, Aldershot Town, Stevenage Borough, and Wimbledon, all of whom subsequently played in the Football League. Just because our club has never achieved something in the past doesn't mean it's beyond our compass in the future. For most of our club's existence there was much less opportunity to progess to Football League level as you had to be elected by existing member clubs, then there was only one promotion place instead of the current two.
Click to expand...

Its not feasible though, as we don’t have the room for the necessary stadium or a benefactor. And correct me if I’m wrong but effectively this is the same level as its one below the equivalent of the conference, so no higher than our highest level before.

Becoming a league club is not a target I ever heard anyone state as their desire or intention.

We are a non-league club. We don’t even have a secure future so why would we consider a more prosperous future? Not that I believe it would be prosperous.
 
B.I.G said:
Great. Loads of people are for that as well. Oh the council didn’t want to go through the time and trouble and cost? Thank god you are still talking about it then.
Click to expand...
In the event that planning permission is rejected, perhaps it could be back on the table.

If planning permission were denied, and it went through an appeal and so on, and was still denied, then what would happen next? The owners would be sitting on a site with only one way of generating revenue from it, which would be to lease it out as a stadium. Would there be customers other than DHFC who would pay more for it - or would coming to an agreement with DHFC then become in the interests of the landowner? (I have no idea)
 
teuchter said:
In the event that planning permission is rejected, perhaps it could be back on the table.

If planning permission were denied, and it went through an appeal and so on, and was still denied, then what would happen next? The owners would be sitting on a site with only one way of generating revenue from it, which would be to lease it out as a stadium. Would there be customers other than DHFC who would pay more for it - or would coming to an agreement with DHFC then become in the interests of the landowner? (I have no idea)
Click to expand...

Last time there was an issue and the planning application was withdrawn we were kicked out of the stadium. The revenue generated from any user of the stadium wouldn’t make it worthwhile to grant a 125 year lease (which should be 999 years if thats possible).
 
B.I.G said:
Its not feasible though, as we don’t have the room for the necessary stadium or a benefactor. And correct me if I’m wrong but effectively this is the same level as its one below the equivalent of the conference, so no higher than our highest level before.

Becoming a league club is not a target I ever heard anyone state as their desire or intention.

We are a non-league club. We don’t even have a secure future so why would we consider a more prosperous future? Not that I believe it would be prosperous.
Click to expand...
We don't have a secure future because we don't have any control over our home ground. The proposed redevelopment will address this matter if approved.

Becoming a Football League club may not be a target or an ambition but I think most of us want to win whichever division we happen to be playing in. With 7th place qualifying for play-offs we can't compete to finish no higher than 7th in case it results in promotion, and if we find ourselves in the National Division ultimately we should be aiming for another promotion.
 
Pink Panther said:
We don't have a secure future because we don't have any control over our home ground. The proposed redevelopment will address this matter if approved.

Becoming a Football League club may not be a target or an ambition but I think most of us want to win whichever division we happen to be playing in. With 7th place qualifying for play-offs we can't compete to finish no higher than 7th in case it results in promotion, and if we find ourselves in the National Division ultimately we should be aiming for another promotion.
Click to expand...

What likelihood does the development have of being approved if it included a league capable ground as last time I checked it doesn’t even have cover for the terraces in order to gain approval.

And if we find ourselves in the National League we can’t aim for promotion in any realistic fashion as promotion would mean. A. Being prepared to rip up a 4g pitch and somehow replace the revenue. And b. Having a wage bill far in excess of the money generated from a full capacity stadium each home game.
 
teuchter said:
I think my preferred solution would have involved a compulsory purchase of the existing stadium by Southwark. And the purchase value should have reflected the fact that it is a site with a planning condition on it that means that it can't be developed as housing.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately this is not an option. Southwark do not want to do this and given recent events, the coppers of local authorities are likely to be at the lowest for decades so it's never going to be an option

If they had decided the do this, it would have taken many, many years and way to long for the football club to still be in existence. Any action would likely result in our licence to play at Champion Hill to be removed and as it showed when we played at Tooting, not only would we not be able to financially survive but the local economy suffers (many bars, restaurants, take-away etc will tell you that outside of the holiday period their best business days are when we are playing at home in East Dulwich) and looses a massive part of the community.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Paula_G
Transgender Day of Visibility - Tonight at Champion Hill
Replies
5
Views
691
Al Crane
A
Blitzwalker
Free Talk and Book Signing at Champion Hill, Tuesday 30th May 2023
Replies
2
Views
480
Nivag
Nivag
D
Hills!
Replies
24
Views
1K
JohnD58
JohnD58
D
The Big 'Dulwich Hamlet Champions Post 2023/24
Replies
26
Views
2K
Buffalo Bill
Buffalo Bill
Blitzwalker
London Senior Cup Final at Champion Hill
Replies
2
Views
602
HFCJohn
H
Back
Top Bottom