Spurs are at it again - Pure Vandalism!

[Duke of York]

Quote:

Migrant_Manor said:
Why is it that the Council feel happy to help the team from down the road yet they do little to help our team in it's own borough? If you are concerned about the plans or are simply frustrated by the inequality of their approach to the two clubs situations you should send your objections to the Council.

Good call Migrant. I've sent my objection in already!

[The Invisible Man]

Perhaps I did not clarify the position well enough. Enfield Council is not "helping" the club "down the road". That club, by which I presume you mean Spurs, has submitted a planning application, just the same as you would if you wanted a kitchen extension. Enfield Council do not own the land, they did not submit an application to themselves, they did ask the applicant to submit an application. As an application has been made they have to consider it. It has nothing to do with ETFC.

 

Enfield Council were the freeholder at Southbury Road. Lazarou as majority shareholder at EFC was the leaseholder and the land could not have been sold without his consent - it was his idea, he is th evillain of the piece. In an ideal world the council would have refused to sell their freehold but there it is.

 

A section 106 is unilkely to be appropriate for a totally unrelated issue that is not strictly a "planning gain".

 

If you wish to object on purely planning grounds that is your business but this has got nothing to do with ETFC.

[Duke of York]

I realise this issue has nothing to do with Enfield Town Footbal Club. I sent my objection in because I like the open space that curently has free public access. I do not like the idea of any organisation taking over the land for a purly commercial use especially becasue it is within the green belt. I had also sent in my objection before Migrant Manor made his post on here.

[lovely stuff]

Quote:

Lazarou as majority shareholder at EFC was the leaseholder and the land could not have been sold without his consent

 

And he could not have sold the land without Enfield councils consent.They both had their noses in the trough to the tune of £1.75m each.Yes, it was Lazarous initial idea,but they were both 50% responsable for actually selling the ground ,and leaving Enfield football club and it fans homeless.

[Bad_Egg]

Quote:

Ron Merlin said:
Class War, then? How about Eat The Rich - a great film and a manifesto all in one.

i dont agree with class we live in a classless society and im livin proof

[Bad_Egg]

Quote:

lovely stuff said:
and leaving Enfield football club and it fans homeless.

wot do u mean leavin the fans homeless just a tad mellowdramatic my Tory friend

[Hawkeye Pierce]

"Eat the Rich" is a very enjoyable book by the comedian P.J. O'Rourke but it isn't a laugh!

[Southport - TOWNER]

Quote:

lovely stuff said:
They are still Enfield's local premiership team. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

aren't Watford one of Enfield's local premiership teams?

[lovely stuff]

Not really.Spurs and Arsenal are both much more local to Enfield.As are probably a couple of other London premiership teams, before Watford.

 

Watford more local to the main fanbase of Spurs and arsenal supporteres??? Thats a differnet matter entirely.

[lovely stuff]

Enfield to:

 

Tottenham 6.5 miles

 

Highbury 9.2 miles

 

West Ham 14.9 miles

 

Fulham 17.9 miles

 

Watford 19.9 miles

[bigboybubs]

i9 see chelsea not metioned on that list.

 

Chelski 16.4 miles

[lovely stuff]

http://www.tottenhamhotspur.com/news/articles/enfieldcalling240506.html

[Hawkeye Pierce]

"ENFIELD CALLING!" - makes a change from "Germany Calling"

[MbrunoB]

If they are concerned about the people of enfield why dont they do something with Whitewebbs instead of taking away another area of green belt land?

[lovely stuff]

Yeah.Lets leave the Greenbelt to fairview and all the other building companies.200x the size of the Bulls Lane will be lost to housing developments on Greenbelt land in the next decade.

 

Should the Greenbelt be totally sacred or not? I believe YES it should be.But if we as a country are going to allow the mass erosion of it, through the overwhelming need for more and more housing,that we have created in this country.Then its a bit hypocritical to not allow other ventures equal oppotunity too build on our 'Green and pleasent' as well.

 

Spurs want to build a training facility near to Tottenham,and in a 'nice' area.

The trouble is ,that this part of North London is vastly overcrowed and every spare bit of NON-greenbelt land big enough to house this development has already been taken.Unfortunately that is systematic of the modern Britain we live in today.

 

[Jim Cunneen]

not being funny but where do Spurs train at the moment....is there anything wrong with that....cannot that be developed if it needs to be bigger / better....

 

Jim

<img src="/forum/images/graemlins/icon_smokin.gif" alt="" />

[Mr Happy]

There training base is in Chigwell. Don't know why they want to leave or why it cannot be developed yet.

[Southport - TOWNER]

why don't they build in on the site of all the disused industrial units by the River Lee? or is that reserved for low cost housing?

[Migrant_Manor]

In all seriousness, please remember to send in objections to Tottenham Hotspurs' plan to their attempts to blight out Enfield landcape with their training centre at Bulls Cross.

 

The planning meeting is set for Monday 5th June. You can find my original posting at the top of this thread along with the address for the obejection.

 

Spurs should build in their own manor, preferably on a brown field site away from green belt.

[lovely stuff]

To be fair.Enfields 'landscape' has already been 'blighted' beyond recognition over the last 4 or 5 decades.

 

Maybe thats why Spurs chose Bulls Cross as a prefured site.Its one of the few areas of Tottenham/Enfield that ISN'T 'blighted'