APARTMENTS could be built next to the former home of Darlington Football Club if plans are approved.
But a neighbouring disused sports centre faces a less certain future after being badly damaged in a suspected arson attack.
Following meetings between developers, architects and Darlington Borough Council, proposals have been submitted to build 60 flats in two blocks on vacant land to the south of the disused Feethams stadium.
Plans for the 4,597 square metre site, submitted by Aston Investments Ltd and Rotherham Holdings Ltd, also include basement car parking and traffic measures, including a bridge over the River Skerne.
A decision will be made by the council on September 1.
However, no plans have yet been made on the future of Feethams, or the nearby derelict Quaker Centre sports complex, which was badly damaged by fire on Monday night.
Durham Police are investigating the incident.
Darlington Fire Station crew manager Dave Ibbertson said: "There is a lot of damage inside. Although it is derelict anyway, and there is damage from general vandalism, a lot of panelling came off the floor in the fire, and the false floor has collapsed.
"Structurally, the outside of the building is okay, but inside is badly damaged."
The prospective apartment site is used as a temporary car park, and is directly behind Feethams' South Stand.
Access would be from neighbouring Victoria Embankment and Polam Lane, both of which have been earmarked for development to accommodate extra traffic that would be created.
The prospect of developing Feethams at the same time was raised in planning meetings, but council officials decided that was not a feasible option for the forseeable future.
As a result, the proposed flats are a stand-alone development, and are independent of any future Feethams plans. Access to the site will not be available through the stadium.
The flats, which are in three and four storey buildings, are described by developers as being a "modern, attractive design, to be complementary with the nature and appearance of the adjacent and surrounding properties".
Initial proposals for more contemporary buildings with flat roofs were rejected.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article