Skip to main content

Ingol

Ingol

Agree, but it is implied that houses will be built on the land earmarked for the training ground, which is owned by the football club; this being the case in the first instance any profit from this development should go to the football club not the parent company. The fact the board could legitimately then transfer the money to the Hemmings family is something we cannot influence, but we can question how ambitious the family are to get the club promoted when this money is a profit they had not foreseen and therefore could be kept by the club and used to offset any losses in FFP calculations.
Yeah, I suppose the LEP article might appear to be linking these new houses to PNE - but looking at the planning application, there isn't any link with PNE that I can see. The maps etc. indicate these new houses are not planned for the training ground land.
 
Although I agree with the sentiment, how many of us already live in houses that were built on what was once green land?
 
Although I agree with the sentiment, how many of us already live in houses that were built on what was once green land?
It depends how far you wish to go back in time as a reference point .
( Ultimately.....caves? )
 
For an endangered species, there seem to be a lot of them. Especially where someone wants to build something.
It's when this now-rare wildlife is Exclusively found only in Nature Reserves that its worrying to anyone who's concerned about species biodiversity. There's a lot less House Sparrows, Chaffinch & Robins now than there was even 10 years ago. These used to be very common. New-build houses are built to such fine & standard specifications that there's nowhere for things to colonise. The front gardens are minimal & usually flagged/settled/plastic grass & with their 'garages' built to a size to house the original Fiat 500 - they are on the 'drive'/ front garden instead. Again, no wildlife.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top