Return to front page

Newest article: Re: I was at this one, too by BoropodToday 17:56Today at 17:56:11view thread

Oldest article: Yeovil 1 Boro 3 by Unnamed Sauce17/8/2025 19:41Sun Aug 17 19:41:54 2025view thread

MenuSearch

Next thread: League leaders are "at home" tonight by Unnamed Sauce9/9/2025 09:44Tue Sep 9 09:44:53 2025view thread

Re: Not going back to nuneaton

By VoR26/8/2025 20:23Tue Aug 26 20:23:13 2025In response to Re: Not going back to nuneaton

Views: 2721

That's a good summary AV.

The new Club need to be aware that even if WCC Highways approve the site, it is likely that highways improvements will be needed under a Section 278 Highways Works Agreement.

That could be anything!

The Town would have to pay for those works, because they are the Developer.

Looking at the depth of excavation in the clay pit & the subsequent depth of landfill & the nature of the fill operation (was it controlled or uncontrolled) I have serious doubts whether this site is suitable to build a new Stadium, without incurring significant additional exceptional costs in dealing with potential problems in the made ground.

An extensive Ground Investigation would be needed...costing at least £25,000

reply to this article | return to the front page

Next article in this thread: Re: Not going back to nuneaton by Lord of the Manor I'm26/8/2025 17:35Tue Aug 26 17:35:57 2025

Previous thread: Re: Today's Team by CockandBear6/9/2025 16:52Sat Sep 6 16:52:38 2025view thread