Champion Hill: Proposed Ground Redevelopment
- Thread starter Fingers
- Start date
Nivag
Well-Known Member
Seeing as they were lying about actual fireworks I'd say I wouldn't believe too much what that account posts.
Bugpowder Dust
Well-Known Member
Given the stress on the current ground with 3,400 in it, the new stadium is going to be under even more pressure unless the design is adapted to include more facilities - food, drink and toilets; more vantage points; and more space in general for moving around. Which will be tricky unless the overall footprint can be enlarged.
Taper
Mark McGann
Last paragraph of Sunday's programme notes
www.pitchero.com
CHAIRMANS COLUMN - FEBRUARY 6TH (PROGRAMME NOTES)
The latest from Chairman Ben Clasper, from the programme of our Home game against Dartford FC on Sunday, February 6th.
www.pitchero.com
Hamlet Pete
Well-Known Member
I like how it's their beautiful and pollution free astro turf. Seeing as it doesn't belong to them and is situated in Southwark, an inner London borough
editor
hiraethified
Latest update
www.brixtonbuzz.com
Dulwich Hamlet: latest update about progress on the new stadium
The Dulwich Hamlet Supporters’ Trust have today issued an update about the new stadium for the club, which we have reproduced in full below:
www.brixtonbuzz.com
mickydoodle
Halfway to being sh*t hot
Not sure if this is of any significance?
MEADOW RESIDENTIAL LLP | ||||||
| MEADOW RESIDENTIAL LLP (OC400730) The following information is available from the company's filing history.
|
editor
hiraethified
Crispy
The following psytrance is baṉned: All
"compulsory strike-off" means the company is going to be removed from companies house list. On its own it doesn't mean much, beacuse it could just mean that the interesets and assets of Meadow Residential have been moved to another company. Or it could mean they're fucked and are a paper shell.
mickydoodle
Halfway to being sh*t hot
...one to keep an eye on...
mickydoodle
Halfway to being sh*t hot
Panic over....
...as Pinknblue mentioned, it looks like the action was for late filing of accounts.
MEADOW RESIDENTIAL LLP | ||||||
| You have been sent this email because you are following MEADOW RESIDENTIAL LLP (OC400730) The following information is available from the company's filing history.
|
...as Pinknblue mentioned, it looks like the action was for late filing of accounts.
editor
hiraethified
Doesn't instil a sense of confidence in the competency of the company though, does it?
Monkeygrinder's Organ
Dodgy geezer swilling vapid lager
I suspect it's more likely to be some sort of financial dicking around more than incompetency tbh. Which isn't necessarily any better, granted.
editor
hiraethified
They're scumbags anyway. Filthy scumbags.
editor
hiraethified
Such a shitty company. I will never forgiven them - or any of their arsefaced directors - for locking us out of Champion Hill because the spiteful cunts couldn't get their petulant way.
editor
hiraethified
Well, there is that. But I'd imagine there's all sorts of iffiness to be found if you dug around the financial affairs of most property developers.
Taper
Mark McGann
Chairman's programme notes on the judicial review of the decision to agree planning permission for the new stadium. Long threatened, but worrying nonetheless.
www.pitchero.com
CHAIRMANS COLUMN - APRIL 9TH (PROGRAMME NOTES)
The latest from Chairman Ben Clasper, from the programme of our Home game against Oxford City Saturday April 9th.
www.pitchero.com
Chairman's programme notes on the judicial review of the decision to agree planning permission for the new stadium. Long threatened, but worrying nonetheless.
CHAIRMANS COLUMN - APRIL 9TH (PROGRAMME NOTES)
The latest from Chairman Ben Clasper, from the programme of our Home game against Oxford City Saturday April 9th.
This bit was embarrassing tbf.
I believe the bringing of this claim is an insult to what a judicial review is designed to protect. A judicial review is explicitly not there to give people who want to argue that the decision was incorrect a second bite of the cherry, it is there to protect people from an abuse of power. At the end of the planning committee meeting the individual in question made it clear that they thought the decision to approve was incorrect. That is why I believe this is an abuse of the system, despite having their voice heard over and over again none of the concerns they raised were about whether the council had followed the correct process, had they done so then I would have an ounce of respect for this action. Their complaints after the vote were based solely on disagreeing with the decision taken which is not what a judicial review is intended to defend. Presumably they are seeking a judicial review because it is the only instrument they could find to challenge the decision they disagree with and so we look forward to hearing what arguments can be concocted after the fact.
How worried should we be? This was a lengthy and complex process and so there is a risk that if enough lawyers examine every step, document and statement over the three years it took they can find one technicality on which to have the decision cancelled and sent back to be taken again. It is the legal equivalent of being 5-0 up with a minute to go and the opposition announces they are changing the rules to ‘next goal wins’.
As a calmer man than me once said ‘You've won it once. Now you'll have to go out there and win it again.’
Taper
Mark McGann
The "person" he's referring to is Peter John presumably.
Judicial Review is increasingly used in planning decisions, by people who wish to delay. Mais House in Sydenham was one (successful) such. Friends of Greendale have been threatening this for a while. Quite within their rights to do so. Even if it's a pain in the arse. Given the amount of discussion and scrutiny the decision was subject to, it does rankle rather. The best they can hope for I suppose is to delay the inevitable. But who knows. Not cheap to bring a JR. Maybe they have someone doing it pro bono.
Judicial Review is increasingly used in planning decisions, by people who wish to delay. Mais House in Sydenham was one (successful) such. Friends of Greendale have been threatening this for a while. Quite within their rights to do so. Even if it's a pain in the arse. Given the amount of discussion and scrutiny the decision was subject to, it does rankle rather. The best they can hope for I suppose is to delay the inevitable. But who knows. Not cheap to bring a JR. Maybe they have someone doing it pro bono.
Similar threads
