Wimbledon Stadium: Some Important News

[iris123]

Might have been a small district but Merton was known around the country and probably the world for a number of important things.Merton Abbey,where Thomas Beckett and the only english Pope studied and one king was crowned,Merton was for a time home to one of the national heroes,Nelson and Merton film studios made such notable films as the Mukkinese battle horn with Peter Sellers and Leather Boys with Rita Tushingham, the Scotland Yard series as well as Edgar Wallace,It!,The Brain Machine,The little red monkey,Invasion and the not to be forgotten,Konga!!!!

I think just by being one of the few places where a king of England was crowned(aren't Kingston-upon-Thames and Westeminster the only other places?)is reason enough,without all the other things.Anyway,enough of this.What are the chances of speedway being included in a new stadium?What really are the chances of dogs and speedway beating football?

[arthur cross]

I recall the complexities of the Wimbledon Stadium and car park falling under the jurisdiction of two councils was highlighted when a Sunday market was first introduced many years. It meant that only those parts of the car park falling in the jurisdiction of the council approving Sunday trading could be used. I think that there were even white lines painted in the car park defining the two boroughs to prevent trading infringements?

I am not sure if this has been resolved but would think that it probably has been.

 

Thanks for that info about the car park white lines ... in that case, as I think the Sunday market probably started after the creation of the London Boroughs in 1965, maybe it took those lines in the car park to persuade the authorities to reset the borough boundary so that the stadium was totally within Merton instead of partly within Wandsworth.

[Parsloes 1928 nearly]

Yes, the stadium's in Merton rather than Wandsworth as its London Borough ... but only because when the London Boroughs were drawn up in 1965, the boundary between the two included the northern edge of the stadium site to keep it totally within Merton instead of partly within Wandsworth !!

 

I'm sure I've seen it reported (probably in the Racing Post) that the historical deeds of the stadium mention that it does straddle the two local authorities that existed when it was built because this quirk has been mentioned as another obstacle towards redeveloping the site.

 

Certainly, anyone living a few minutes' walk north of the stadium is comfortably within LB-Wandsworth ... it's also the case that Wandsworth was well known as a town centre in that part of London before it was picked as one of the 32 names for the London Boroughs whereas "Merton" was a bit of a botch-job for the next-door borough as Merton Park is a small district compared to the sizeable towns of Wimbledon, Tooting, Morden and Mitcham that are all within that borough (neither Wimbledon nor Mitcham would back down over the borough being named after each other, hence the Merton compromise).

 

Given all the above info, I can understand the squash club marketing themselves as being in Wandsworth even if they're offically in Merton.

 

Very interesting I never knew that.

Odd that the boundary isn't the Wandle though... Old borough boundaries very often were rivers - I wonder if at a later point (who knows perhaps when the Stadium was built..?) the river course was altered - that could explain the confusion..

 

I take your point - but tbf 'Merton' was set up in 1965 which really is a long time ago now, so I would think it odd for a local business like the Squash Club to be making some kind of a stand about it!

 

There are a number of examples of odd 'unified' borough names arising from disputes over names in the '65 reorganisation. 'Redbridge' when it should really be Ilford; and 'Havering' when Romford dominates are two. But none as daft as 'Haringey' which is a made up name merging the two previous boroughs, Harringay & Hornsey..!!

[Guest]

Very interesting I never knew that.

Odd that the boundary isn't the Wandle though... Old borough boundaries very often were rivers - I wonder if at a later point (who knows perhaps when the Stadium was built..?) the river course was altered - that could explain the confusion..

 

I take your point - but tbf 'Merton' was set up in 1965 which really is a long time ago now, so I would think it odd for a local business like the Squash Club to be making some kind of a stand about it!

 

There are a number of examples of odd 'unified' borough names arising from disputes over names in the '65 reorganisation. 'Redbridge' when it should really be Ilford; and 'Havering' when Romford dominates are two. But none as daft as 'Haringey' which is a made up name merging the two previous boroughs, Harringay & Hornsey..!!

 

I remember in the 1950s that one meeting at Wimbledon was called off because the Wandle overflowed. There may have been other times not affecting speedway when it overflowed and as a result the river course was changed. I do have a hazy recollection this MAY have happened.

[Parsloes 1928 nearly]

I would be astonished if the old (and by old, could be very old...) boundary between the two original boroughs wasn't the river. There's an exact same issue very near me between Newham (another made up name from 1965!) and Barking & Dagenham (funny enough in '65 called just Barking but Dagenham-ites complained so much they soon changed the name to B&D!) - where the River Roding as it currently runs is NOT the boundary but the original course of the river (now not visible at all..) is.

 

I'd imagine the Wandle was redirected but the old Borough boundaries remained as was and this wasn't then picked up when the various old boroughs simply merged into the larger 'Wandsworth' and 'Merton' in 1965. Slapdash in both of these cases not to have regularised the situation at that time...

[Guest]

Some of you may already be aware that Paschal Taggart has made a bid with National Asset Management Agency (Ireland) for the development of the Wimbledon Stadium site in Plough Lane for a new state of the art greyhound stadium.

Wimbledon Club Chairman when the track closed in 2005, Ian Perkin has had communications with Paschal's legal counsel and if the bid is successful she has indicated that Paschal would be interested in discussing with the previous promotion whether there might be a suitable opportunity for allowing Speedway racing to take place in the new stadium.

 

This is a very long way from actually making this a reality, but clearly this potential development represents the only real prospect of Speedway ever returning to Plough Lane, given that the present owners of the site, Risk Capital Partners and Galliard Homes are trying to maximise the value of the site by putting forward a proposal that would see the end of any multi-sport use.

 

Merton Council have designated the site for the Intensification of Sport and Leisure, but the fight that Paschal's proposals have is making sure that the Council applies total impartiality to the bids being put forward, particularly regarding the AFC Wimbledon bid which would also see the end of any motor sport at Wimbledon Stadium.

 

Where Speedway fans can help and particularly those who live within Merton and the Greater London Area is to write to the Leader of Merton Council and the Mayor of London to make the case for a multi-use stadium that could be potentially used by all the family for a range of sports.

In writing in support of the development we have the opportunity of demonstrating to Paschal Taggart the level of support there is for Speedway racing in Wimbledon and hopefully help secure with the local planning authorities approval to a stadium development that keeps alive the possibility of one day the sport returning to Plough Lane.

 

The contact details if you want to help with this project are listed below.

 

Cllr Stephen Alambritis

Leader of the Council

 

London Borough of Merton

Merton Civic Centre

London Road

Morden,

SM4 5DX

Email: stephen.alambritis@merton.gov.uk

 

Boris Johnson Mayor of London

Greater London Authority

City Hall

The Queen's Walk More London London SE1 2AA

By email: mayor@london.gov.uk

 

(please also provide your postal address in the emails)

 

An important message as seen on the Wimbledon Speedway forum::

:::::

 

--- In wimbledonspeedway@yahoogroups.co.uk, "markaston1" <markaston1@...> wrote:

 

The Mayor's office has made it clear that they will not consider e-mails that do not include an address.

I agree that London addresses would have most impact which is no doubt why the Mayor's will not consider comments unless the address is given.

Ian

 

It would be very much appreciated if responses favouring the return of speedway to Wimbledon Stadium could be followed through as requested in the previous quotes. Time is running out for responses.

Thank you.

 

From the Wimbledon Speedway forum::

:::::::::::::::::::

--- In wimbledonspeedway@..., "markaston1" <markaston1@> wrote:

 

Slightly disappointed to have been copied in on only two e-mails regarding support for Paschal Taggart's proposals for Wimbledon Stadium so far.

If e-mails have been sent it would be very useful to have a copy, as we are inmfrequent contact with his legal team and should his proposals be approved it will be important that we can demonstrate both that we helped and that there is of course a latent demand for the return of speedway at Plough Lane.

If e-mails have not yet been sent time is starting to run out as the Merton Planning meeting to consider proposals is due to take place in early September.

Paschal's team welcomes e-mails being sent from across the UK, so don't feel you can't help if you live outside of London.

This is probably however slim the only chance of speedway returning to Wimbledon, so any help is gratefully received.

Best wishes

Ian Perkin

 

::: Just to clarify - Mark Aston is the Wimbledon forum name of Ian Perkin.

Edited August 12, 2013 by Guest

[Humphrey Appleby]

I'd imagine the Wandle was redirected but the old Borough boundaries remained as was and this wasn't then picked up when the various old boroughs simply merged into the larger 'Wandsworth' and 'Merton' in 1965. Slapdash in both of these cases not to have regularised the situation at that time...

 

Rivers are not normally the best way of demarcating boundaries in urban areas because they tend to straggle commercial centres (look at how many cities grew up across two or more counties), plus they either naturally change course or get redirected. Individual properties would have already been assigned to one authority or another, so it's probably too much of a hassle to transfer them unless there's a good reason to do so.

[arthur cross]

I would be astonished if the old (and by old, could be very old...) boundary between the two original boroughs wasn't the river.

 

I'd imagine the Wandle was redirected but the old Borough boundaries remained as was and this wasn't then picked up when the various old boroughs simply merged into the larger 'Wandsworth' and 'Merton' in 1965. Slapdash in both of these cases not to have regularised the situation at that time...

 

A quick bit of internet-digging (notably a 19th-century pre-railway map) has led me to the following conclusions ...

 

Yes, the ancient boundary between Wimbledon and Wandsworth was almost certainly the Wandle and as the river has retained a relatively straight line near the stadium (flowing from south to north towards the Thames), I don't think it's been significantly redirected.

 

However, the arrival of the railway line between Earlsfield and Wimbledon to the north-west of the stadium in the later 19th-century was followed by various decisions that the land near both the railway and the river would be of much better use for industrial buildings rather than houses (the huge amount of railway sidings next to the original line are an example of the industrial rather than residential thinking).

 

It's at this stage that the simple layout of everything west of the Wandle being in Wimbledon and everything east of the Wandle being in Wandswroth may well have been tinkered with, probably to suit any industrial businesses who developed sites on both sides of the river and didn't want to have deal with 2 different councils for the sake of a couple of hundred of yards ... these days, the industrial area beside the Wandle is split roughly 50-50 between the west bank and the east (stadium) bank with the east side probably marginally the bigger.

 

The only problem with this tinkering is that it doesn't seem to have kept pace with the industrial expansion, leading to the Sunday market car park carve-up that gustix has recalled.

 

Any tinkering with the original river boundary may have been carried over with the 1965 creation of the London Boroughs rather than tidied up at that time ... the whole of the Municipal Borough of Wimbledon was one of the 3 complete boroughs merged together to form the London Borough of Merton in 1965 ... meanwhile, any changes to Wandsworth's layout didn't happen near the stadium (instead, it affected districts further east like Battersea, Clapham and Streatham).

 

= = = = = = = = =

 

There's one extra historical note which I hope doesn't further complicate the greyhound stadium's situation but certainly caused dreadful problems and disputes for Wimbledon FC further along Plough Lane in the mid-1980's.

 

While they were still an amateur but growing club in the 1950's, the directors of Wimbledon FC struck a deal with the Municipal Borough of Wimbledon to fund improvements to their ground.

 

Wimbledon FC then became one of the top non-league clubs in the country before being elected into the Football League in 1977 (automatic promotion at that level didn't start until 1987) and after yo-yoing between the old 4th and 3rd Divisions, embarked on their rapid climb by winning the 1982-83 4th Division, being promoted from the 1983-84 3rd Division (runners-up to Oxford United) and then taking only 2 seasons to clinch promotion from the 1985-86 2nd Division into what we now know as the Premier League.

 

Even in that 4th Division title-winning season, they were already searching for ways to improve what were already very basic spectator facilities on a site much more hemmed-in than at the greyhound stadium (as it turned out, the directives after both the 1985 Bradford fire and the 1989 Hillsborough disaster made sure Plough Lane hadn't a hope of remaining a profitable football ground within the top two divisions as it would have been reduced to only 6,000 all-seater capacity).

 

But it was around Christmas 1982 that the London Borough of Merton, using the paperwork drawn up by their predecessors at the Municipal Borough of Wimbledon, claimed the 1950's deal with Wimbledon FC meant the local council were still entitled to buy back the football ground at its 1959 rateable value of just over £8,000 for whatever redevelopment they fancied ... fair enough, the football ground wasn't worth mega-millions but it was certainly worth a damn sight more than 8-grand !!

 

Where this could matter for the greyhound stadium is on two counts ... firstly, I hope there isn't a similar historical document that could affect the greyhound stadium's development nearly 50 years after the end of the Municipal Boroughs.

 

But secondly, it's the biggest reason why the older supporters of AFC Wimbledon are so wary of anything to do with the London Borough of Merton and that's worth bearing in mind by greyhound/speedway folk in the run-up to 11th September this year ... I know a worthwhile proportion of AFC Wimbledon fans aren't in any great hurry about their team returning into LB-Merton when they've been made so welcome in recent years just a few miles away by everyone at Kingstonian FC whose ground suits their capacity demands for the time being ... Kingstonian have long been one of the most forward-thinking non-league clubs, notably when using their traditional green-&-white colours to attract Jack Charlton's Republic of Ireland squad to use their ground as their ideal training base near Heathrow Airport in the late-80s and early-90's in the build-up to away international games.

 

Relations between Wimbledon FC and LB-Merton remained poor after that £8,000 argument so they struggled to work together to find a suitable new site for the club after Bradford/Hillsborough (Wimbledon FC began ground-sharing with Crystal Palace in August 1991) ... the closest they came was a plan to build Wandle Valley Stadium around 1990 which would have been similar to Sheffield's Don Valley Stadium built for the 1991 World Student Games with around 20,000 capacity.

 

Wandle Valley would have succeeded Crystal Palace's already-outdated athletics stadium that's still been hosting major meetings for another two decades but it was planned to have an artificial pitch for Wimbledon FC to share with the local community just when the top clubs became so fed up with QPR's plastic pitch that they agreed to ban their use in the top divisions ... that ban wrecked what could have been the peace-making community tie-up between Wimbledon FC and LB-Merton, hence Wandle Valley was never built with the knock-on effects a decade later of the schism between Milton Keynes Dons & AFC Wimbledon.

 

I hope all the above info is interesting for speedway fans all over the country/world who care about seeing a revival of the Wimbledon Dons but can't be expected to know much about the sporting history at both ends of Plough Lane and how it could affect any council debates in a few weeks time ... for anyone looking at a google-map, Wimbledon FC's old ground was on the north-east corner of the traffic lights linking Plough Lane with Durnsford Road and it now houses 4 smart apartment blocks named after footballing heroes like former manager Dave Bassett and 1988 FA Cup winning scorer Lawrie Sanchez.

[salty]

I know you will rush to defend the SLP, but that is a wee bit behind the times.

http://www.racingpost.com/news/greyhounds/new-lease-deal-will-keep-the-gra-tracks-racing/1319343/top/

 

Maybe there has been such a glut of sports stories this summer they had to wait the best part of three weeks to fit the GRA story in.

 

Arthur Cross - Interesting stuff regarding the history of Wimbledon, I didn't know of the hstorical reason for the distrust between the footballing Dons fans and the Council. One thing though, Kingstonian's traditional colours are red and white hoops.

[arthur cross]

Thanks to salty for Kingstonian's red-&-white background !! ... i only mentioned the green connection because I remember the Irish media pointing out how useful it was to have a training facility with plenty of green background (seats and paintwork, not just the pitch) so close to Heathrow so maybe the Republic of Ireland helped fund the club's move to that new ground at Kingsmeadow during the Jack Charlton era.

 

Thanks also to gustix for copying across the latest from the South London Press and here are a few background details to go with it.

 

Phil Donaldson is a former racing manager at Catford greyhounds who switched careers to join the Racing Post greyhound desk before the GRA suddenly closed Catford in November 2003 (although in Phil's defence, I believe he just wanted a change of career rather than knowing anything handy about Catford's imminent demise) ... Phil's still with the Racing Post, he also appears a couple of times a week as a pundit on Racing Post Greyhound TV (Sky channel 212) as well as being one of the track commentators at Wimbledon dogs and he's also a lifelong supporter of both Wimbledon FC & AFC Wimbledon.

 

Phi's report in the SLP brings their readers up-to-date with what he and his colleagues have covered in recent weeks in the Racing Post, some of which I've already mentioned in this thread including the leases granted by the GRA to the greyhound operations at their various tracks.

 

While any length of lease is great news for the continued sporting use of Wimbledon Stadium (and so is William Hill's increasing of the 2014 Greyhound Derby prize money), you'll notice Phil has used the phrase "believed to be 5 years" for Wimbledon's lease ... what he doesn't mention in the SLP but has been mentioned elsewhere is that it's also believed that 15-year operation leases were granted for all the other GRA-owned greyhound tracks (Belle Vue in Manchester plus both Perry Barr & Hall Green in Birmingham) so that puts Wimbledon on slightly shakier ground than the rest of those tracks.

 

Belle Vue, Perry Barr and Hall Green all have BAGS-contracts for showing races in the nation's betting shops but the GRA voluntarily re-distributed Wimbledon's BAGS-meetings around the rest of its tracks a few years ago when it said it was cheaper to open up the smaller facilities at those tracks for those daytime meetings ... the current 5-year BAGS contract between the bookmakers and all the tracks shown in betting shops finishes on 31-Dec-2015 so any negotiations for the next BAGS deal are likely to start at the end of 2014 or early 2015.

 

Again, I hope all this info help those of you reading this forum who love your speedway but couldn't be expected to know much about the greyhound racing that's also staged at plenty of speedway tracks in this country.

Edited August 12, 2013 by arthur cross

[salty]

As far as I recall Phil's Grandad used to have a pitch in the main ring at Wimbledon. I also kept him gainfully employed whilst he was doing his degree.

 

The lease thing at Wimbledon (I posted the RP link above) suggests to me that RCP are playing the long game and going to keep the Stadia ticking over (with negligible investment) until conditions are more suitable for development. Feltham talks about spending to upgrade the facilities (much needed) but the place is a disgrace at the moment and if I was Hills and lobbing 200k of prize money at the Derby I'd want a better stadium to hold the event.

Edited August 12, 2013 by salty

[iris123]

A quick bit of internet-digging (notably a 19th-century pre-railway map) has led me to the following conclusions ...

 

Yes, the ancient boundary between Wimbledon and Wandsworth was almost certainly the Wandle and as the river has retained a relatively straight line near the stadium (flowing from south to north towards the Thames), I don't think it's been significantly redirected.

 

However, the arrival of the railway line between Earlsfield and Wimbledon to the north-west of the stadium in the later 19th-century was followed by various decisions that the land near both the railway and the river would be of much better use for industrial buildings rather than houses (the huge amount of railway sidings next to the original line are an example of the industrial rather than residential thinking).

 

It's at this stage that the simple layout of everything west of the Wandle being in Wimbledon and everything east of the Wandle being in Wandswroth may well have been tinkered with, probably to suit any industrial businesses who developed sites on both sides of the river and didn't want to have deal with 2 different councils for the sake of a couple of hundred of yards ... these days, the industrial area beside the Wandle is split roughly 50-50 between the west bank and the east (stadium) bank with the east side probably marginally the bigger.

 

Shouldn't be forgotten that the stadium lies i guess directly on the old Surrey Iron railway which started in 1803.The old path across the road from the entrance and next to the pub follows the line of the railway,so it must have come out and cut through the land.Even at that time the river wandle was heavily industialised hence the formation of the railway to move the goods about.Youngs or i think it was at the time ram brewery was one of the funders.The Wandle also flooded about 1967(i remember having to climb out of my dads car by the window as the car got stuck and people were boating around Summerstown)so if the route was ever altered it was after 1965 and although i doubt it was,then like Humphrey states it would have been to much hassle to alter the border..Also in one speedway book(might be Norbolds)it mentions the land was very marshy and caused some trouble building the stadium

 

Also remember watching Kingstonians in the old stadium when Mickey Droy of Chelsea fame was in charge.Not sure how green + white comes into the equation unless the place they moved into was green + white at the time?

Edited August 12, 2013 by iris123

[arthur cross]

As far as I recall Phil's Grandad used to have a pitch in the main ring at Wimbledon. I also kept him gainfully employed whilst he was doing his degree.

 

The lease thing at Wimbledon (I posted the RP link above) suggests to me that RCP are playing the long game and going to keep the Stadia ticking over (with negligible investment) until conditions are more suitable for development. Feltham talks about spending to upgrade the facilities (much needed) but the place is a disgrace at the moment and if I was Hills and lobbing 200k of prize money at the Derby I'd want a better stadium to hold the event.

 

Yes, Phil helped the earlier generations of his family as track bookies at Wimbledon.

 

I'm sure William Hill would love to hold the Greyhound Derby at a smarter venue but their hands are tied because the GRA themselves own the rights to staging and promoting the Greyhound Derby ... it's not like golf or cricket where the major venues bid a few years in advance to host the Open Championship or Test matches because the greyhound authorities don't have any say in organizing any of their sport's big events.

 

Instead, the rights to stage all the major dog races historically belong to their respective tracks and any switching of their venues is usually only within a group of tracks ... for example, Sunderland's Northern Puppy Derby each autumn was switched a few years ago to be included within Newcastle's All England Cup festival at that time of year because both those tracks are owned by William Hill and it left Sunderland clear to concentrate on William Hill's hefty sponsorship of a new festival each July.

 

It appears William Hill's chequebook doesn't have enough clout to break the GRA's stranglehold so whatever William Hill or the rest of greyhound racing would like, the only potential Derby venues at the moment are the 4 remaining GRA tracks at Wimbledon, Hall Green, Perry Barr and Belle Vue ... another GRA track in West London, White City, always hosted the Derby until 1984 after which that famous venue (it hosted London's first Olympics in 1908) closed for the newer BBC buildings that were built near QPR's ground ... Wimbledon's staged every Derby from 1985 onwards.

 

Since Wimbledon mothballed the bigger spectator facilities along the old home straight (and revamped the Mick The Miller stand along the old back straight and moved the finish line beside it), all 4 of those tracks have fairly similar spectator capacities of between 2,000 & 3,000 but from a purely racing point of view, Wimbledon's track surface remains very highly regarded (they've looked after the dogs' requirements much better than for the spectators !!) and that's by far the best reason for the dump keeping the Derby ... on the down side, it's a traffic nightmare for Midlands/Northern trainers getting their dogs round the M25 and through the London suburbs to Wimbledon if they're drawn in the Friday session of the first two rounds of the Derby rather than on those Saturdays.

 

If you asked me to mix together all the ideal components for a Greyhound Derby (track surface & dimensions, location & easy traffic, spectator facilities & capacity) without being tied to the GRA, I'd probably pick the stadium very well-known to speedway fans at Coventry but their larger-than-life greyhound promoter Harry Findlay has got no realistic chance of getting those rights off the GRA.

Edited August 12, 2013 by arthur cross

[Parsloes 1928 nearly]

Again, I hope all this info help those of you reading this forum who love your speedway but couldn't be expected to know much about the greyhound racing that's also staged at plenty of speedway tracks in this country.

Massively grateful for your really informative postings AC. The posting about the borough boundaries and the complexities it has lead to was one of the best I've ever read on the BSF and really interesting.

Many thanx

[donstrigger]

It seems unlikely to me that the site will be redeveloped for greyhound racing alone, the cost of buying the site and then building a new stadium would make this almost impossible £40+ million at a guess. Even if the site was developed into a multi use stadium used 7 days a week i believe this would never be financially viable. I suspect that additional housing will be required in any redevelopment plans agreed by the council and that will not be good for the prospect of any Motorsport remaining at the site.

However i do believe that it would be possible to built a multi use stadium elsewhere in the borough which could be more acceptable both financially and with any potential noise issues e.g. the Beddington Lane site, should the inevitable happen then maybe this option should be discussed with Paschal Taggart and Merton Council. To me this would make more sense and would seem the most likely way that Speedway could ever return to the borough.

[Parsloes 1928 nearly]

Yes Beddington Lane was looked at then... I can't recall what was said then but I'm guessing residential areas can't be too far away so a new site always has that as a problem.

[Beckford Boy]

If I remember correctly,I think that the problem there was that whoever owns/leases the site were only prepared to grant a short term lease.

[donstrigger]

I understood the site was bought as a long term investment by the current owner and when the right offer come in he would cash in on his investment, In the mean time the site was least for go kart racing. I very much doubt any Speedway promotion could afford to buy the site or offer a substantially better offer on a lease than the go karts, so i suspect is why it was discounted when speedway was removed from plough lane.

If Paschal Taggart is serious about building a new stadium then this could be a much cheaper option should he not obtain plough lane. Transport links are good with tram and train station close. The site is mainly surrounded by common land and the old sewage works with an industrial area between the site and the closest housing and I am sure some noise reduction measures could be designed into a stadium.

[arthur cross]

I understood the site was bought as a long term investment by the current owner and when the right offer come in he would cash in on his investment, In the mean time the site was least for go kart racing. I very much doubt any Speedway promotion could afford to buy the site or offer a substantially better offer on a lease than the go karts, so i suspect is why it was discounted when speedway was removed from plough lane.

If Paschal Taggart is serious about building a new stadium then this could be a much cheaper option should he not obtain plough lane. Transport links are good with tram and train station close. The site is mainly surrounded by common land and the old sewage works with an industrial area between the site and the closest housing and I am sure some noise reduction measures could be designed into a stadium.

 

I've never seen Paschal Taggart's greyhound plans linked in any way with the alternative of trying Beddington Lane and I can see several reasons why that's the case (the last of which is especially likely to interest/amaze Parsloes & gustix !!) ... I seriously recommend all of you have a look at the google map/satellite of the area by putting "Traq Motor Racing" into the search box (and don't be surprised when it gives the address as Jessops Way in Croydon).

 

Firstly, Mr Taggart appears increasingly to want to become the crusading saviour of Wimbledon Stadium's greyhound existence rather than the creator of a new home for greyhound racing anywhere in South London ... clearly, in the same way that he's already played an important part in the revamping of Dublin's traditional top track (Shelbourne Park), there's a lot of merit in modernizing an existing well-known venue to provide the continuity of road-signs and the spectators' habits of how they travel to the venue and where they might eat/drink beforehand or afterwards (you could say the same on a much grander scale, but sadly without greyhounds or speedway, about the redevelopment of Wembley Stadium).

 

Mr Taggart is very attached to the historical aspect of Wimbledon Stadium and still takes part in that sport as an owner (he was in the syndicate for one of the beaten finalists in this year's Greyhound Derby) ... I suspect he would only start considering alternative sites like Beddington Lane once it's totally obvious there's no hope of revamping the existing Wimbledon site.

 

But secondly, even if he has marked his card about Beddington Lane, what would he have found ? ... yes, by far its biggest bonus is the tram stop next door, not only because that would provide easy access for the more locally-based of Wimbledon's existing customers but also because it opens up easy access from Croydon whose population is a good deal bigger than any of the towns to its west like Wimbledon, Mitcham or Sutton.

 

On the down side, although the google satellite map of the site shows at least 3 (maybe 4) go-kart tracks beside each other, their total area is only about 60-percent of the total combined area of the existing Wimbledon Stadium and its car park ... there's no doubt a proper-sized "greyhound-around-speedway" circuit could be built across the various tracks currently used by the go-karters but the major problem is fitting-in the upmarket facilities for a minimum of 4,000 spectators around that circuit (probably the same space as you'd need for 8,000 fans just wanting a seat for watching football/rugby) plus the car park to accommodate those spectators who don't live within walking distance of the trams.

 

Mr Taggart clearly believes (and I agree with him on this) that the only point in going ahead with building a new dog track is if you've got enough room to build facilities that are big enough and lucrative enough to make the whole thing profitable ... hence at Beddington Lane, he needs to buy some of the adjoining land and he can't go north (tramline in the way) or east (existing industrial units in the way) ... he's limited to the north-west by the edge of Mitcham Junction golf course while the railway line nearby on the west is the busy suburban line that links several of London's biggest stations with Sutton and Epsom.

 

Hence the only sizeable extra land is the marshy (probably ex-sewage) land to the south ... even if that marshland can be bought at a fair price, you'd better add on the significant cost of draining it to a safe enough standard for building anything on it that you want to be used by thousands of people at the same time.

 

Noisewise ... the small housing estate to the east of Beddington Lane was built after the railway line first existed (it was the long-established suburban branch line from Wimbledon to Croydon before it was included in the 1990's plans for Croydon's trams) so I doubt those residents could object much to the buzzing-sound of go-karts adding to the regular timetabled-noise of the trains or the slightly extra traffic generated by the go-kart participants getting to the track ... however, as we've seen around the rest of the country, it's a different matter altogether persuading residents that it'll be ok when a speedway meeting turns up every week and several hundred (hopefully, a couple of thousand) cars full of spectators want to squeeze in nearby some rather cramped residential streets.

 

All of which helps explains Mr Taggart's apparent lack of interest is Beddington Lane ... but standby, Parsloes and gustix in particular, because the go-kart site isn't fully in the London Borough of Merton !!! ... at best, only a northern chunk of it is in LB-Merton.

 

It's got a Croydon postal address but it's mostly just inside the London Borough of Sutton because it's close to the junction of all 3 of those boroughs !! ... the marshland extension would definitely be in LB-Sutton.

 

Go to the google-map and here's how the borough boundaries fit in as a T-junction with Merton to the north & northwest, Sutton to the south & south-west and Croydon having everything half-a-mile to the east (the next tram stop at Therapia Lane marks the final few yards of Sutton before Croydon) ... Beddington Lane tram stop is in LB-Sutton by such a small margin that if you stand on the level crossing of the tramline & the B272-road, you can easily see the "Merton" boundary sign looking north ... I dont know whether there's been a tweaking of the borough boundaries here to keep all the industrial units under the same banner but if that's the case, it'll almost certainly have put everything into LB-Sutton because the bigger batch of industrial units further south beside Beddington Lane are all in LB-Sutton but all have Croydon postcodes.

 

Regardless of Mr Taggart, any speedway fans hoping to see the bikes racing around Beddington Lane had better brace themselves for lobbying the London Borough of Sutton and that won't be easy on the environmental front !! ... the Lib-Dems stunned the seemingly-dominant Conservatives by winning control of the council in 1986 and they've held onto overall control in all 6 local elections since then (local elections in London boroughs involve all the seats being contested together once every 4 years, next in May 2014) ... Sutton's Lib-Dems have always been proud of trying to be London's greenest borough and they also captured both of the borough's MP's from the Conservatives in 1997 and have held onto both in all of 2001, 2005 & 2010 ... good luck establishing a new crowd-attracting motorsport against that background !!

 

As usual, I hope this lengthy post proves useful for the rest of you.

[salty]

Interesting post as ever Arthur.

I agree - it's Plough Lane or nothing for Mr Taggart. I'm fairly sure he has declared an interest in Oxford as well.