Echo News Fossetts Farm 1,300 homes to be decided next week

[Billy Bests boot laces]

Not sure what Councillor Aylen is going on about, Victory Sports and Jones Memorial.

Bloke doesn't even live in that area, he lives near The woodcutters pub in Leigh. Remember the council meeting just before Christmas around 3 years ago, concerning FF?. He was the guy who spent most of the meeting waffling on about his cat attacking his Christmas tree decorations to his colleagues FFS!.

 

[kentblues]

SOUTHEND’S councillors have backed "a way forward" over plans to build hundreds of homes at Fossetts Farm ahead of another crunch meeting to decide its fate.

Southend Council’s policy and resources scrutiny committee met to debate plans to build up to 1,300 homes at Fossetts Farm, which will allow the sale of Southend United to a consortium led by Justin Rees to finally be completed.
If the principle surrounding the homes are agreed by Southend Council’s cabinet next week, the sale of the club is set to be signed off and £20million will be released to the consortium to help improve Roots Hall
The scrutiny committee, which considered the plan ahead of the cabinet meeting on Monday, “acknowledged the report and its recommendations, accepting it as the way forward”.
At the meeting, councillors raised a series of concerns about a lack of affordable homes and the risk to taxpayers over the plan.

The Echo revealed last week that - as part of the deal - Southend Council could be liable to pay the rent on hundreds of new homes at Fossetts Farm if they fail to attract tenants, it has emerged.
Labour leader Daniel Cowan claimed the “job is half done” and stressed the scheme will need work to protect the taxpayer.

Mr Cowan said: “I am delighted that we are edging closer to a deal that will save the club but we must recognise that the job is only half done and will need a lot of work to safeguard the council’s finances while getting a deal that gives us the quality of housing we need and generates the capital required to pay the consortium and finance the development.”
Southend Labour councillor, Matt Dent, added: “I have been clear all along that saving Southend United is a non-negotiable requirement.
“It’s also true that this is a major development, and one which we need to make sure provides what Southend needs in terms of housing and doesn’t expose the council to unacceptable risks.”

Responding to Labour concerns following the meeting, Tory council leader Tony Cox attacked Labour’s willingness to accept the deal without amendment, only to criticise it following the debate.
He said: “The Labour group sat there and agreed to the paper in full.
“This is another example of Labour saying one thing and trying to do something another way, everyone wants the club saved.”

Dear God. You can agree to something because there is an overriding non-negotiable objective (saving the club) whilst still pointing out the things you would like to be different.

What is Captain Gibberish on about?

 

[Tommy2holes]

SOUTHEND’S councillors have backed "a way forward" over plans to build hundreds of homes at Fossetts Farm ahead of another crunch meeting to decide its fate.

Southend Council’s policy and resources scrutiny committee met to debate plans to build up to 1,300 homes at Fossetts Farm, which will allow the sale of Southend United to a consortium led by Justin Rees to finally be completed.
If the principle surrounding the homes are agreed by Southend Council’s cabinet next week, the sale of the club is set to be signed off and £20million will be released to the consortium to help improve Roots Hall
The scrutiny committee, which considered the plan ahead of the cabinet meeting on Monday, “acknowledged the report and its recommendations, accepting it as the way forward”.
At the meeting, councillors raised a series of concerns about a lack of affordable homes and the risk to taxpayers over the plan.

The Echo revealed last week that - as part of the deal - Southend Council could be liable to pay the rent on hundreds of new homes at Fossetts Farm if they fail to attract tenants, it has emerged.
Labour leader Daniel Cowan claimed the “job is half done” and stressed the scheme will need work to protect the taxpayer.

Mr Cowan said: “I am delighted that we are edging closer to a deal that will save the club but we must recognise that the job is only half done and will need a lot of work to safeguard the council’s finances while getting a deal that gives us the quality of housing we need and generates the capital required to pay the consortium and finance the development.”
Southend Labour councillor, Matt Dent, added: “I have been clear all along that saving Southend United is a non-negotiable requirement.
“It’s also true that this is a major development, and one which we need to make sure provides what Southend needs in terms of housing and doesn’t expose the council to unacceptable risks.”

Responding to Labour concerns following the meeting, Tory council leader Tony Cox attacked Labour’s willingness to accept the deal without amendment, only to criticise it following the debate.
He said: “The Labour group sat there and agreed to the paper in full.
“This is another example of Labour saying one thing and trying to do something another way, everyone wants the club saved.”

So does this mean it's likely to get a green light finally next week

 

[Tinks]

The way I am reading it - if it is agreed next week then it is all systems go? Yes?

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

'Still work to do': Southend councillors back Fossetts Farm plan as 'way forward'

Southend Council’s policy and resources scrutiny committee met to debate plans to build up to 1,300 homes at Fossetts Farm, which will allow the…

www.echo-news.co.uk

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

The way I am reading it - if it is agreed next week then it is all systems go? Yes?

Fink so.

 

[Medway Blue]

So does this mean it's likely to get a green light finally next week

The way I am reading it - if it is agreed next week then it is all systems go? Yes?

That's not my understanding.

Next Monday's meeting should see agreement to delegate decision-making henceforth to council officials. A good move to keep things motoring along in the event of a substantial change to the political make-up of the Council administration.

Hope is the deal can maybe be completed in time for the next court date on 15th May, but I'm managing my expectations as I do think that feels like a tall order.

There are several elements to the ongoing due diligence. One of them is the financial aspect. Some of these elements can happen concurrently, but the financial DD can't start until the Fossetts rent and property mix are settled. Once DD finishes, it will also be subject to an external audit.

So a couple of bits to finish, and therefore still a couple of potential causes for further delay.

If it can't quite be finished in time for 15th May then another adjournment will have to be sought or the bill paid.

So no, I can't see it getting the green light next week, and if it is to get the green light in time for 15th May then it'll probably go to the wire.

 

[Crowstone Crevette]

'Still work to do': Southend councillors back Fossetts Farm plan as 'way forward'

Southend Council’s policy and resources scrutiny committee met to debate plans to build up to 1,300 homes at Fossetts Farm, which will allow the…

www.echo-news.co.uk

Am I mistaken or is that a new 'photo' in the Echo article? If so RM is still planning to use the Soccer Domes! Is that the 'enabling' leisure / football bit sorted?

 

[Shrimper]

That's not my understanding.

Next Monday's meeting should see agreement to delegate decision-making henceforth to council officials. A good move to keep things motoring along in the event of a substantial change to the political make-up of the Council administration.

Hope is the deal can maybe be completed in time for the next court date on 15th May, but I'm managing my expectations as I do think that feels like a tall order.

There are several elements to the ongoing due diligence. One of them is the financial aspect. Some of these elements can happen concurrently, but the financial DD can't start until the Fossetts rent and property mix are settled. Once DD finishes, it will also be subject to an external audit.

So a couple of bits to finish, and therefore still a couple of potential causes for further delay.

If it can't quite be finished in time for 15th May then another adjournment will have to be sought or the bill paid.

So no, I can't see it getting the green light next week, and if it is to get the green light in time for 15th May then it'll probably go to the wire.

At this rate Ron to going to ruin another season

 

[united we stand]

Not sure if anyone has seen on the Public pack it does give a quite detailed breakdown of the Due Dilligence bein undertaken (split across 4 main areas such as Market/Property, Financial, Legal and External Audit)

Section 7.7 is the update on where they are with the due diligence in effect. If you was to ask for my honest opinion I think there is a lot to be done within 4 weeks before the next winding up order and a couple of the companies undertaking the due diligence are at the developers cost (Good luck with that!!!)

I've attached the public report for anyone wishing to read, and also the structure chart of the development which was also quite interesting.

The Due Dilgence is being undertaken by 5 companies

Market/Property
For Market/Property the Council has appointed Cortland (a Build to Rent Specialist) to advise on the specific scheme generally including the estimated rents, operational costs and Cushman Wakefield’s Capital Markets team to advise on the wider market and property financing elements.

Financial
At the developer’s cost, the Council has appointed 31Ten to support with the financial analysis and DD

Legal
At the developer’s cost, the Council has appointed Gowling WLG to support with the legal work.

External Audit
It will be necessary for the Council’s external auditors to review the transaction and provide assurance to the Council’s s.151 Officer such that he may be satisfied to progress the transaction to exchange of contracts. In this case, this assurance is likely to be the final piece of pre-exchange due diligence required prior to exchange of contracts.

Latest position on the Council’s DD and areas under development

7.7.1. At this stage there remain a number of moving parts. For example, Cortland have not yet received details of the specification for the properties therefore their figures are based on assumptions on quality. They have also not yet been provided with any information on Citizen’s approach to Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG), including sustainability benchmarks.

7.7.2. Cortland have also not yet received any updated gross areas for the apartments, which include layouts and amenity provision so again, their advice is based on assumptions.

7.7.3. This should be caveated in that the design work, particularly for the houses (Zone C) is young in its development and much of this level of detail would naturally come further into the design process and may require some development during the planning stage but nevertheless, it needs to be fully agreed and settled prior to construction. A plan showing the indicative development zones is attached at Appendix 2.

7.7.4. A significant amount of analysis has now been completed by Cortland on the rental market and where this new type of product should be pitched in the local Southend market. This has been developed from evidence taken from a range of build to rent schemes in other locations and adjusted to reflect the characteristics of Southend. This evidence points to a price point approximately 20% higher than the upper quartile of embedded market rents in Southend due to the high quality of accommodation, environment, and amenity – hence the importance of the specification, ESG, design and amenity. It is important to draw this point out so that Cabinet appreciates that the product in design is a top of the market product, catering to a particular demographic of renters.

For this reason, considerable work has also been done on affordability which indicates that one of the primary markets for the product will be the sharer’s market (i.e. two individuals or 2 couples sharing a 2-bedapartment). These factors also influence both management costs and lifecycle costs and therefore underlines the need for reliable operational expenditure modelling.

7.7.5. The Operational Expenditure modelling Cortland has undertaken by looking in detail at a range of schemes that they and other leading operators are involved in, and has shown that in the current market, operators of a scheme of this nature should expect the operational expenditure to be between 27-29% of the gross rental income (certainly no less than 27%).

7.7.6. The comparatively high rental price point will also have implications on the affordable housing element of the development. The Council has consistently maintained that the scheme must provide the minimum requirement of 30% affordable housing. This position is supported by planning policy. However, to assist with scheme viability and its place in the rental market, consideration is being given to a number of approaches to the delivery of the affordable housing element with a strong preference for maximising the amount of housing delivered with rents capped at LHA rates and this may need to include a reduction in the overall amount of affordable housing provided. The Leader has specified that this must be no less than 13-15%, all at LHA rates (with any movement down from 15% to compensate for variations in the expected rental yields) and in any event will be subject to planning viability testing in due course.

7.7.7. The Council’s DD also needs to be sequenced. For example, the elements discussed in 7.7.1 – 7.7.6 above need to be settled before a reasonable assessment of build cost can be made. Once they are settled and a robust assessment of build cost is available, the development appraisal can be completed and 31Ten instructed to undertake their modelling, value for money and stress testing analysis of the financial sustainability of the development.

7.7.8. Only once the Cortland and 31Ten work is complete can the legals be substantially advanced and the external auditors be invited to review the proposed scheme

7.7.9. Throughout this work as elements evolve or are changed, these need to be evaluated again. Given that as set out above, the housing element was only first seen by the Council on 21 March 2024, this illustrates the amount of work which remains outstanding to reach a settled scheme which meets the requirements of the Council, the developer and prospective funds and therefore the need to provide for the wide delegations to enable adjustments to be analysed and approved as everything is refined up to, during and following planning

7.7.10. At this stage, the working assumption is that in Zone A there will be up to 944 apartments. Zone C is likely to provide around 315 homes, the majority of which will be houses with c.18% flats and c.12%maisonettes where these blocks help to create statement buildings at key locations. So there is a slight rebalancing of numbers between Zones A and C. Affordable housing will be spread across all housing types and across Zones A and C (See Appendix 2). The affordable housing which will be capped at LHA rates, is likely to be located together for management reasons and because the layouts of these will differ (for example with fewer bathrooms to reduce lifecycle costs and the different occupancy type (i.e. not professional sharers). It is hoped that the number of apartments will be limited to 944 in Zone A.

So,
Ron still hasn’t given all of the information the council needs.
The council audit committee/ external auditors can’t sign off without this info ( which I totally agree with)
There is no indication of when this information will be provided.

How is this going to be signed off in mid May

 

[tommy tucker]

We all know that Martin is a comocive lier He would not know the truth even if it was gift rapped to him He hs no intentions of helping get the sale done IF the club folds he can then sell the ground to the highest bidder

 

[Supershrimper]

We all know that Martin is a comocive lier He would not know the truth even if it was gift rapped to him He hs no intentions of helping get the sale done IF the club folds he can then sell the ground to the highest bidder

He could have let the club fold on multiple occasions, take the heat and build houses on both developments with no need for a club.

Selling the club for a nominal value of £1 allows the consortium to take on his debts. He then doesn't have to build a stadium in the new development meaning greater savings in having only 1 site to develop all his houses rather than 2.

As for the £20m, if Ron is holding the lease and renting it to the consortium I wonder if at some point he'll "gift" them the freehold on Roots Hall in exchange for £20m.

PS I think you've fallen onto the "Bold" key when typing

 

[Yorkshire Blue]

All the talk and waffle Its now time for the council to sign off the agreement .To allow the concortium to get on with rebuilding the club . The club need to turn the corner from the dark old days OF Ron Martin and his clan .

It’s not time for the Council to sign the agreement.

It is time for Ron Martin to provide the Council with the information the Council are still waiting for so the Council can conclude their due diligence.

When is the next protest outside Ron or Jack’s?

 

[Hadleigh-shrimper]

He could have let the club fold on multiple occasions, take the heat and build houses on both developments with no need for a club.

Selling the club for a nominal value of £1 allows the consortium to take on his debts. He then doesn't have to build a stadium in the new development meaning greater savings in having only 1 site to develop all his houses rather than 2.

As for the £20m, if Ron is holding the lease and renting it to the consortium I wonder if at some point he'll "gift" them the freehold on Roots Hall in exchange for £20m.

PS I think you've fallen onto the "Bold" key when typing

I thought he was gifting roots hall? Not to be rented why would the consortium do it up otherwise.

 

[Supershrimper]

I thought he was gifting roots hall? Not to be rented why would the consortium do it up otherwise.

I could be wrong (and hope I am) but i thought I read on here by posters with some knowledge of the details that the consortium was going to be leasing the ground from Ron for a while.

Not sure why or for how long.

 

[Shrimpergonzo]

I could be wrong (and hope I am) but i thought I read on here by posters with some knowledge of the details that the consortium was going to be leasing the ground from Ron for a while.

Not sure why or for how long.

This has been explained very well by @Medway Blue in another thread which I've made a screenshot of for ease of reference. COSU will take a lease from Ron on Roots Hall (25 years has been mentioned) until such time as the charge on the land has been satisfied - to do otherwise is like buying a house that someone else has still got a mortgage on.

 

[Evening Echo]

Is Fossetts deal wilful neglect?

Read more on this story


Help with Echo links