Glad common sense prevailed. Much as I'm loathe to pick out certain individuals, I'm going to do it anyway: Councillor Smith was dreadful. She clearly hadn't read the report, referred to Boston as 'Pilgrim Football Club', Tytton Lane East as 'Tritton Lane', compared the proposed stadium with Wembley Stadium and on a fundamental level was unable to comprehend why Boston couldn't locate to the PRSA, a point that had been covered repeatedly during the meeting and was explained to her again and again.... and she still voted against it!
Having said that, I do agree that the parking issues do need looking at again - on this, I'm in full agreement with the residents. I know there's a surplus supply of spaces in the car park, but if faced with a queue to get in and even a modest wait to get out the ground at the end of the game, people WILL park on Causeway or Tytton Lane. That's just human nature, and measures need taking to prevent it.
All in all, fantastic news. Boston does need this development, and in the end the councillors - who, apart from one or two exceptions, were not quite the parochial dinosaurs we feared - were inclined to agree, and spoke positively about the message this development would send to the region and the country as a whole about Boston being "open for business". This was good to hear, as for too long it has seemed a closed shop, and a little insular. No exaggeration, but this can change that, not least because with the new ground Boston will surely reclaim the crown of having the best non-league ground in the country. Oooof! That that, Dartford!
