• 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.

BBC Article - takeover completion still seems 2 months away

Latest News on the sale UPDATED today.


  • Total voters
    108
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
Excellent, well found!

I posted along these lines a couple of months ago, and @cockles43 has been banging the drum for ages too, but I've never found the time to go digging for the document again.


I've had a look at the summary of the original planning decision in 2021 - and I can see where the confusion comes from - some of the site is green belt, some isn't.

1711746294828.png

Source: https://democracy.southend.gov.uk/mgAi.aspx?ID=13000

The site plan is too big to upload but is here.....
 
The due diligence clock is ticking - 6 to 8 weeks, late March, early April we were told.

I've just checked the council meeting planner - as this needs to go to full cabinet for decision. The only cabinet meeting planned in April, is this Thursday - the agenda - refuse.
There appears to be no scheduled meeting to discuss RH/FF in April. One of course hopes meetings can be scheduled at relatively short notice - but imho early April appears out of the window.
 
The due diligence clock is ticking - 6 to 8 weeks, late March, early April we were told.

I've just checked the council meeting planner - as this needs to go to full cabinet for decision. The only cabinet meeting planned in April, is this Thursday - the agenda - refuse.
There appears to be no scheduled meeting to discuss RH/FF in April. One of course hopes meetings can be scheduled at relatively short notice - but imho early April appears out of the window.
Presumably we’re in the purdah period now for the May local elections
 
You are right, this is a bit confusing. However, I am now certain you were correct in stating it is no longer green belt.

I found online an informal development brief, produced by Southend Council, relating to the site immediately to the east of the FF site we have all been interested in. The development brief is undated but I think it was produced in 2016. In the Planning Policy Context section of the document it shows an extract of the 1994 Local Development Plan map, including Martin's land and it is all indicated as green belt. Then, in March 1999, a 'Second Alteration Plan' was adopted which removed the land from green belt but designated it as 'Safeguarded Land' subject to a new planning policy G1a. Although it was removed from green belt, the intention was to not allow any development on it until after 2001. The planning inspector appointed to oversee the Second Alteration recommended that the whole FF site could be suitable for a number of possible future uses but that no development should be permitted that would prejudice or limit options for comprehensive redevelopment. Accordingly, policy G1a was couched in those terms.

The Core Strategy was adopted in December 2007 and in a diagram that shows key growth and regeneration areas, FF was indicated as an Industrial/Employment area. Policy KP1 of the Core Strategy designated FF as a Priority Urban Area and expressed support for the relocation of Southend United to the area. The brief document then shows an extract of the adopted version of the policies map dated June 2015 and as far as I can tell, the land still has its 'Safeguarded' status and it clearly states that policy G1a remained in place at that time pending the Local Plan review.

The latest Local Plan map I have found shows no specific designation for FF, so I guess providing any revised proposal that excludes the football stadium shows a comprehensive development and meets other planning criteria it will be met with a favourable response from the Council. If you wish to view the document referred to above just put Fossetts Farm Development Brief into Google and it should link you to it.
easy for you to say
 
Not sure if that would stop this - normal council business is allowed to continue and the restrictions seems to be around publicity or campaigning rather than stopping decision making.
Plus it has cross party support.
 
I did hear today that Ron and the council are still yet to agree what should be built at FF. Ron wants more flats, council want housing. If so this could rumble on for some time still. Not sure how accurate that is though
Isnt it also the lease lengths that's being altered by ron. Thought I'd heard that once he'd got the informal nod on verbally agreed changes to the no stadium prospective plans, he'd decided to push his luck and see what lucrative other changes he could get included.
It's all typically Ron and i d bet the council are well p'd off with how he goes about stuff.
I suspect the council can't give any kind of permissions to enable completion until flats or houses\terms of lease are in writing and properly presented.
 
Last edited:
The due diligence clock is ticking - 6 to 8 weeks, late March, early April we were told.

I've just checked the council meeting planner - as this needs to go to full cabinet for decision. The only cabinet meeting planned in April, is this Thursday - the agenda - refuse.
There appears to be no scheduled meeting to discuss RH/FF in April. One of course hopes meetings can be scheduled at relatively short notice - but imho early April appears out of the window.
I presume you mean refuse as in garbage collection rather than having the application refused?

I think it might be time to restart protests, just a reminder that we haven’t gone away.
 
I presume you mean refuse as in garbage collection rather than having the application refused?

I think it might be time to restart protests, just a reminder that we haven’t gone away.
Ah yes, refuse as in rubbish - apologies for not being clear
 
Maybe the Rat has added high-rises to the mix ?
The rumour is along those lines.

With so many relying on this decision its no surprise Ron&sons are trying to hold the council to ransom. They should set a firm number of units at FF and get the deal done. If Ron wants to up the numbers or other disputes over access etc that could all be debated once SUFC are sorted and clear of the deal. If not this could drag on forever.
 
The rumour is along those lines.

With so many relying on this decision its no surprise Ron&sons are trying to hold the council to ransom. They should set a firm number of units at FF and get the deal done. If Ron wants to up the numbers or other disputes over access etc that could all be debated once SUFC are sorted and clear of the deal. If not this could drag on forever.
We know the nature of the beast would be to try and leverage something as the deadline approaches. In a way it’s good business regrettably- at the same time they won’t want to jeopardise the deal. And my belief too was that heads of terms were already agreed and it was now DD by the council being completed on the contracts. Those heads of terms surely will have covered fundamentals such as number and description of the additional units, financials including lease terms (including length) etc.

As has been pointed out all parties (politically) want this done. The council will award themselves planning permission (so that’s when not if) and the new government is even less likely than the current to call it in let alone prevent it. The politics tends to trump everything else (wrongly you might suggest but it is nonetheless so).
 
We know the nature of the beast would be to try and leverage something as the deadline approaches. In a way it’s good business regrettably- at the same time they won’t want to jeopardise the deal. And my belief too was that heads of terms were already agreed and it was now DD by the council being completed on the contracts. Those heads of terms surely will have covered fundamentals such as number and description of the additional units, financials including lease terms (including length) etc.

As has been pointed out all parties (politically) want this done. The council will award themselves planning permission (so that’s when not if) and the new government is even less likely than the current to call it in let alone prevent it. The politics tends to trump everything else (wrongly you might suggest but it is nonetheless so).

The simple solution would be if 470 (don't know the exact figure) were agreed at RH then you get 470 units at FF.....Now sign here and release RH to Justin&co.

If Ron wants to argue for 600 thats at his expense and the councils time. The rest of us can get on with all things SUFC whilst they have a 5 year squabble.

If I was on the council I would insist on a caveat that unless the £20m is paid in stages as each housing phase is sold....Then no completion certificate.

Is it too late for me to stand?
 
The simple solution would be if 470 (don't know the exact figure) were agreed at RH then you get 470 units at FF.....Now sign here and release RH to Justin&co.

If Ron wants to argue for 600 thats at his expense and the councils time. The rest of us can get on with all things SUFC whilst they have a 5 year squabble.

If I was on the council I would insist on a caveat that unless the £20m is paid in stages as each housing phase is sold....Then no completion certificate.

Is it too late for me to stand?
THis is exactly what the council should be demanding. 470 now with more potentially later, or nothing
 
From where it is now, and many of the debts paid I wonder if the consortium would carry on buying the club even without fossetts money?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top