• Welcome to the ShrimperZone forums.
    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which only gives you limited access.

    Existing Users:.
    Please log-in using your existing username and password. If you have any problems, please see below.

    New Users:
    Join our free community now and gain access to post topics, communicate privately with other members, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and free. Click here to join.

    Fans from other clubs
    We welcome and appreciate supporters from other clubs who wish to engage in sensible discussion. Please feel free to join as above but understand that this is a moderated site and those who cannot play nicely will be quickly removed.

    Assistance Required
    For help with the registration process or accessing your account, please send a note using the Contact us link in the footer, please include your account name. We can then provide you with a new password and verification to get you on the site.

OiRef

Guest
Arrived at the meeting a couple of minutes before kick off to find the public area overflowing. Lots of Blues supporters I thought, only to quickly change my mind as I took in the demographics, I was in amongst the away end !

The whistle blew and expecting, Blues to be the main fixture, I was rather surprised to find the opening game being played over planning permission for a block of flats ! It was a lively if extended match with the public gallery clapping the councillors that they supported and murmuring loudly whenever anyone uttered an opinion that they disagreed with.

Not quite the atmosphere of a local derby but fun enough. And, eventually an hour after the advertised time the subject of Fossetts farm took to the pitch. As it did so, so the hall rapidly emptied leaving a few bemused people behind. So no away end, and a Chairman who had assessed his audience wisely. Everyone had come to hear the flat vote !

Rochford councillors seemed rather disappointed that they could only raise questions about the new ground and not actually vote on it. Anything queries that they did raise would be put to Southend council for them to consider when making their decision, although Rochford would get a vote regarding the training ground pitches etc.

The opening remarks were not encouraging. The obligatory remarks about how ‘green’ and self sustaining it would be were made. There was also concern about Southend soil contaminating Rochford soil during construction. Someone also mentioned flooding !

I was very tempted at this point to suggest that Blues build a hydroelectric plant, using a dam made out of Southend Soil, thus addressing all three concerns at once. But, unlike the preceding crowd, the football supporters were allowing everyone to have their say uninterrupted. A truly democratic performance that those who are so ready to label football supporters as scum should have witnessed !

The main concern was of course traffic levels and car parking. And Southend United better be prepared with complete and accurate response to these questions. Many queried some road survey results that suggested there would only be a 4% rise in traffic levels along Sutton Road. As the club will only be providing 500 car parking spaces those figures are likely to be correct but again Blues should expect some strong tackles going in around this subject.

All twenty or so Rochford councillors were invited to visit the site by Blues, but only five took up the offer. They were quite vocal in their support of the ground, as were others. So there may be a few yellow cards flying around on traffic issues, but I didn’t see much evidence of anyone being prepared to take a dive and so force a red card to be raised against the new ground.

That’s not to say Blues are home and safe. A lot of work on the environmental issues will need to be done to satisfy enough of the council to get an all to rare Blues win !
 
On the plans it doesnt actually show a trainnig complex, only pitches. Anyone know where the players will get changed etc ?
 
I went and left much encouraged. The council had received about 40 letters for the training ground but only about 4 against. However, Sutton Parish Council appeared against the plans on a number of points raised above.

A number of the council members put across their opinions, with about 80% that spoke thinking S.U.F.C. needed a new ground and subject to a number of concerns being addressed seem prepared to vote for the clubs plans when later a full meeting takes place.

There seemed none or hardly any people in the public area who were present that were against the scheme. If so ,it was a very low turn out and nothing was heard from them.

In closing, I left with a spring in my step, as if Southend Council members are as generally in favour as this committee, we might well get a smashing new year present.  
biggrin.gif
 
Very well written report, OiRef, thanks.

Who was there representing the club?
 
I'm amazed and encouraged. It seems my fear of Nimbyism was premature. No mention of archaeological sites? Well done Rochford.
 
just a thought. Is it anticipated that some of the training facilities (I'm sure there will be some all weather pitches) will be open to the public.
 
keep them letters comming in to Rochford and Southend Councils, they are worth the while.
 
How about Saturday being: Support our Southend day. Loads of the free t-shirts have gone, and still many to be given away, make a nice photo to have a majority of supporters wearing them for the game, and spreading the word.
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] (C'mon you Blues @ Dec. 01 2006,00:12)]just a thought. Is it anticipated that some of the training facilities (I'm sure there will be some all weather pitches) will be open to the public.
Not sure if you have looked at the plans closely but you will see there are 4 training pitches one of which is an all weather pitch - shown by the AWP marking. I would hope that this would be open for public use as SZFC currently use the AWP at Boots & Laces, however I know the youth academy will probably being using it most evenings as they would do at B&L but for the condition of pitch is not good enough for the youngsters to use safely.

Regarding Car Parking from the first post the 500 spaces probably refers to the 454 spaces wanting to be built on Rochford soil and not all the spaces available at the site. As there are another 456 in the north west of the stadium plus the 590 in the retail area, not including the underground parking which is situated under the stadium itself.
 
Regarding a few points raised. I did not see any official from S.U.F.C. and in view of the type of meeting no outsider spoke.

No mention of the archaeological was made.

When the retail outlets were mentioned, one council member said that he did not think that the SUFC shops would make any difference to the Rochford shops at all. As he said it a couple said here, here.

One member said that Southend needed a new ground and could get not as big as Man.U!! but might become the size of West Ham. in view of the catchment area.

Even a Rugby supporter said he supported the football club and it would be good for the area.

One said that in View of the Thames Gateway ideas this was a worthwhile project.

However, transport was the main concern, with one thinking that Rochford might be blocked with traffic on match days.

Others pointed out that Sutton Road was a problem but it was pointed out that most of the commercial buildings in the area would be closed on match days.

The point that Prittlewell Railway was only 10 minutes walk away was mentioned as were shuttle buses.

Hope that this addition info. helps
 
Encouraging news, but nothing more..

Let's keep those fingers crossed.

Only around 5 or 6 weeks until the decision could be made...

smile.gif
 
Back
Top