Braintree FC help community so council should assist club

It is another example of the benefits a successful football club can bring to Braintree — and another reason to raise the question why, for all their protestations to the contrary, the council has been so unsupportive of the club’s efforts to better themselves?

Recent developments around the long running saga of the club trying to move to a better stadium have now raised the big issue of the commercial value of a covenant held on the club’s site.

During about seven years of working together with Braintree Council on the basis a new stadium would be incorporated in the Panfield Lane development as part of the Local Plan, including financial analysis of the costs of such a move, the issue of a substantial payment due to the council for removing the covenant was never raised.

If the club are now forced to pay for the removal of the covenant this would obviously seriously impact their ability to fully self-fund a new stadium project.

The covenant was originally put in place when Crittals sold the site to the then Urban District Council of Braintree and Bocking in 1973, and was put in place specifically to ensure a site was available for sporting purposes and not to enable the council to benefit financially about 40 years later.

The objective of the covenant could still be maintained if the covenant was transferred to a new stadium site.

The fact that the council is now insisting on a large payment for the removal of the covenant defeats the purpose of the covenant and seems just like asset stripping of the football club.

So, not only was the new stadium at Panfield Lane arbitrarily removed by the council from the Local Plan, the council will now severely limit the club’s options for a new stadium if it insists on such a payment. How is that being supportive?

By Leon Lister of Dunmow Road, Great Bardfield