Today's most viewed
| LATEST NEWS | | | | | | | | LATEST SPORT | | | | | LIMITED EDITION MAGAZINE
| | Click here for the latest
issue |
|
|
|
Stadium plans receive crushing vote
A huge 91 per cent of readers have rejected plans for a new Braintree Town football stadium and housing.
Hundreds of people have taken part in the Braintree and Witham Times referendum on proposals for a 6,000-capacity stadium in Pod's Brook Road, Braintree, and 500 new homes off Rayne Road in Braintree.
Opponents said the outcome was "brilliant" and showed public opinion was against the development, but The Iron remained confident it was wanted and it would go ahead.
Kevin Fenn, 26, a technical consultant of Springfields, who is behind the group Save Our Fields Today, said the result was "great news."
He said: "I thought the majority of people would be in support of the stadium as that's good for the community, but the way it's being funded isn't - through the housing."
But Lee Harding, chairman of Braintree Town, said he did not believe the result represented public opinion on the issue.
He said: "Of course we are going to carry on and I think the result of this poll will have no relevance to be honest."
12:26pm Wednesday 26th March 2008
Print 
Email this 
CommentPosted by: Matthew Kelly, Bocking on 2:55pm Wed 26 Mar 08
The attitude of the football club compares badly to that of Save our Fields Today. The opponents of the development have the sense to acknowledge that people are broadly supportive of a new stadium for Braintree Town but don't want it brought in as a bribe for a large housing development. The football club on the other hand appear to think that they can ride roughshod over the stated opinions of the many people that are not in favour. No doubt if the result had gone the other way they'd be hailing it as ringing endorsement.
The attitude of the football club compares badly to that of Save our Fields Today. The opponents of the development have the sense to acknowledge that people are broadly supportive of a new stadium for Braintree Town but don't want it brought in as a bribe for a large housing development. The football club on the other hand appear to think that they can ride roughshod over the stated opinions of the many people that are not in favour. No doubt if the result had gone the other way they'd be hailing it as ringing endorsement.
Posted by: roy, Braintree East on 4:31pm Wed 26 Mar 08
The currant results are not suprising.
I believe that at this time BTFC are more involved with our push for promotion.
The passions of SOFT are are the same. The task in hand, the stopping of a new housing development on their doorstep.
If I could get a guarantee that the proposed site would never be built on I would see more favour towards rejecting it.
Without I would always be in favour of a state of the art stadium, as this opportunity may not come again .
Roy.
The currant results are not suprising.
I believe that at this time BTFC are more involved with our push for promotion.
The passions of SOFT are are the same. The task in hand, the stopping of a new housing development on their doorstep.
If I could get a guarantee that the proposed site would never be built on I would see more favour towards rejecting it.
Without I would always be in favour of a state of the art stadium, as this opportunity may not come again .
Roy.
Posted by: D Smith, Braintree on 4:47pm Wed 26 Mar 08
I noticed that a lot of the SOFT members are from Springfields and Sun Lido estate.
I wonder how the residents of Rayne Road and Gilda Terrace felt when that "new" development was built taking away more green land.
I feel the new stadium and facilities will be an excellent addition to the town, and this is just a case of not in my back yard. As long as they are offered an adequate finiancial compensation for potential loss of house value then this would be fair.
I noticed that a lot of the SOFT members are from Springfields and Sun Lido estate.
I wonder how the residents of Rayne Road and Gilda Terrace felt when that "new" development was built taking away more green land.
I feel the new stadium and facilities will be an excellent addition to the town, and this is just a case of not in my back yard. As long as they are offered an adequate finiancial compensation for potential loss of house value then this would be fair.
Posted by: J, Braintree on 7:55am Thu 27 Mar 08
[quote][bold]D Smith[/bold] wrote:
I noticed that a lot of the SOFT members are from Springfields and Sun Lido estate. I wonder how the residents of Rayne Road and Gilda Terrace felt when that \"new\" development was built taking away more green land. I feel the new stadium and facilities will be an excellent addition to the town, and this is just a case of not in my back yard. As long as they are offered an adequate finiancial compensation for potential loss of house value then this would be fair.[/quote] From memory, I recall that the Sun Lido Square Gardens Estate was built on a brown field site formerly the home of a nightclub.
D Smith wrote:
I noticed that a lot of the SOFT members are from Springfields and Sun Lido estate. I wonder how the residents of Rayne Road and Gilda Terrace felt when that \"new\" development was built taking away more green land. I feel the new stadium and facilities will be an excellent addition to the town, and this is just a case of not in my back yard. As long as they are offered an adequate finiancial compensation for potential loss of house value then this would be fair.
From memory, I recall that the Sun Lido Square Gardens Estate was built on a brown field site formerly the home of a nightclub.
Posted by: bodney, braintree on 2:22pm Thu 27 Mar 08
[quote][bold]D Smith[/bold] wrote:
I noticed that a lot of the SOFT members are from Springfields and Sun Lido estate. I wonder how the residents of Rayne Road and Gilda Terrace felt when that "new" development was built taking away more green land. I feel the new stadium and facilities will be an excellent addition to the town, and this is just a case of not in my back yard. As long as they are offered an adequate finiancial compensation for potential loss of house value then this would be fair.[/quote] Sun lido/springfields was NOT built on green field site (it was brownfield).
Gilda Terrace may be not so vocal as WG has offered to buy their properties.
Meanwhile, there is considerable opposition from Guernsey/Jersey Way who will be most adversely impacted by the football stadium and will not be compensated, those at Rayne who will be one step nearer to losing their village status, many others who appreciate the countryside and more at the western edge of town who foresee the inevitable nightmare forthcoming thru lack of infrastructure.
D Smith wrote:
I noticed that a lot of the SOFT members are from Springfields and Sun Lido estate. I wonder how the residents of Rayne Road and Gilda Terrace felt when that "new" development was built taking away more green land. I feel the new stadium and facilities will be an excellent addition to the town, and this is just a case of not in my back yard. As long as they are offered an adequate finiancial compensation for potential loss of house value then this would be fair.
Sun lido/springfields was NOT built on green field site (it was brownfield).
Gilda Terrace may be not so vocal as WG has offered to buy their properties.
Meanwhile, there is considerable opposition from Guernsey/Jersey Way who will be most adversely impacted by the football stadium and will not be compensated, those at Rayne who will be one step nearer to losing their village status, many others who appreciate the countryside and more at the western edge of town who foresee the inevitable nightmare forthcoming thru lack of infrastructure.
Posted by: D Smith, Braintree on 11:33am Fri 28 Mar 08
I find it amusing that Jersey and Guernsey residents are complaining, as when their estate was being built there was a large level of complaints about it ruining the countryside.
Brown field site? It was empty land when the The Barn closed. I am sure the Rayne Road residents wished it stayed that way rather than a horrible cramped estate (Sun Lido/Springfields) being built on it.
Not In My Back Yard!
Braintree will continue to grow in size due to the airport expansion and race course. If people want coutryside I suggest they move north into Suffolk.
I find it amusing that Jersey and Guernsey residents are complaining, as when their estate was being built there was a large level of complaints about it ruining the countryside.
Brown field site? It was empty land when the The Barn closed. I am sure the Rayne Road residents wished it stayed that way rather than a horrible cramped estate (Sun Lido/Springfields) being built on it.
Not In My Back Yard!
Braintree will continue to grow in size due to the airport expansion and race course. If people want coutryside I suggest they move north into Suffolk.
Posted by: Sticks and Stones, Nimbyland on 12:47pm Fri 28 Mar 08
[quote][bold]D Smith[/bold] wrote:
I find it amusing that Jersey and Guernsey residents are complaining, as when their estate was being built there was a large level of complaints about it ruining the countryside. Brown field site? It was empty land when the The Barn closed. I am sure the Rayne Road residents wished it stayed that way rather than a horrible cramped estate (Sun Lido/Springfields) being built on it. Not In My Back Yard! Braintree will continue to grow in size due to the airport expansion and race course. If people want coutryside I suggest they move north into Suffolk.[/quote] i find it amusing that you are so desparate to refer to a development over 15 years ago in an attempt to prove a point.
How about going back a century?
I'm also not convinced a race course will result in a massive influx of new residents.
And we obviously beg to differ re brown and greenfield? Prior to development Sun Lido was empty but far from being a green field. For all but the colour-blind and blinkered it was 'brownfield'.
And as for 'horrible cramped estate' how do you think the new estate will be described if they squeeze 500-600 houses in?
And finally..."Not in back Yard".... Not very original is it?
D Smith wrote:
I find it amusing that Jersey and Guernsey residents are complaining, as when their estate was being built there was a large level of complaints about it ruining the countryside. Brown field site? It was empty land when the The Barn closed. I am sure the Rayne Road residents wished it stayed that way rather than a horrible cramped estate (Sun Lido/Springfields) being built on it. Not In My Back Yard! Braintree will continue to grow in size due to the airport expansion and race course. If people want coutryside I suggest they move north into Suffolk.
i find it amusing that you are so desparate to refer to a development over 15 years ago in an attempt to prove a point.
How about going back a century?
I'm also not convinced a race course will result in a massive influx of new residents.
And we obviously beg to differ re brown and greenfield? Prior to development Sun Lido was empty but far from being a green field. For all but the colour-blind and blinkered it was 'brownfield'.
And as for 'horrible cramped estate' how do you think the new estate will be described if they squeeze 500-600 houses in?
And finally..."Not in back Yard".... Not very original is it?
Posted by: D Smith, Braintree on 1:11pm Fri 28 Mar 08
I didnt have to be original.
The point I am making is that the main objectors to this development are the people who live on relatively new estates built in that area.
Without developments you NIMBY's wouldnt be living there.
I didnt have to be original.
The point I am making is that the main objectors to this development are the people who live on relatively new estates built in that area.
Without developments you NIMBY's wouldnt be living there.
Posted by: Steve, Braintree on 4:04pm Sat 29 Mar 08
[italic][bold]A huge 91 per cent of readers[/bold][/italic]
Quantify 91%
91% of 10 people? 91% of 100 people? 91% of 1,000,000 people?
And of the total number who "voted", what was the turnout in % terms?
As usual these figures mean nothing unless they are put into perspective.
So it looks like the majority are against the proposals, but it has less of an impact if it is 91 people out of 100, out of **** number of the weekly circulation of the B&W Times.
I love journalists lol
A huge 91 per cent of readers
Quantify 91%
91% of 10 people? 91% of 100 people? 91% of 1,000,000 people?
And of the total number who "voted", what was the turnout in % terms?
As usual these figures mean nothing unless they are put into perspective.
So it looks like the majority are against the proposals, but it has less of an impact if it is 91 people out of 100, out of **** number of the weekly circulation of the B&W Times.
I love journalists lol
Posted by: John, Gilda Terrace on 9:53pm Sat 29 Mar 08
I don't care got a promise of money coming my way!
Braintree councillors will vote it through!
I don't care got a promise of money coming my way!
Braintree councillors will vote it through!
Posted by: K, braintree on 3:36pm Sun 30 Mar 08
[quote][bold]Steve[/bold] wrote:
[italic][bold]A huge 91 per cent of readers[/bold][/italic] Quantify 91% 91% of 10 people? 91% of 100 people? 91% of 1,000,000 people? And of the total number who "voted", what was the turnout in % terms? As usual these figures mean nothing unless they are put into perspective. So it looks like the majority are against the proposals, but it has less of an impact if it is 91 people out of 100, out of **** number of the weekly circulation of the B&W Times. I love journalists lol[/quote] i agree BUT you'd be calling a different tune if the vote was 91% the other way.
Steve wrote:
A huge 91 per cent of readers Quantify 91% 91% of 10 people? 91% of 100 people? 91% of 1,000,000 people? And of the total number who "voted", what was the turnout in % terms? As usual these figures mean nothing unless they are put into perspective. So it looks like the majority are against the proposals, but it has less of an impact if it is 91 people out of 100, out of **** number of the weekly circulation of the B&W Times. I love journalists lol
i agree BUT you'd be calling a different tune if the vote was 91% the other way.
Posted by: j, Braintree on 11:22am Mon 31 Mar 08
When I was told by the journalist that the vote was 91% against the development, the firat thing I asked about was the number of votes received. I was told that it was a significant number.
When I was told by the journalist that the vote was 91% against the development, the firat thing I asked about was the number of votes received. I was told that it was a significant number.
What are these links for?
If you liked this article and would like to share it with others on the web who might be searching for good content we've made it easy for you to do it.
At the bottom of all articles, you'll see links to six sites. These sites - commonly called 'social bookmark' or 'social news' sites - have large communities of web users who share and rate interesting, useful and fun things on the web.
Clicking the links will automatically add the address of the story you are reading to one of these sites, letting you share it with others. Each site will ask you to register to share stories. Registration is free and once a member, you can store, recommend and search for stories that interest you.
More on Digg
More on del.icio.us
More on Furl
More on reddit
More on NowPublic/
More on Yahoo!
