• 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.

Planning Update

Cockle43

Manager⭐
Joined
Mar 20, 2008
Messages
1,195
Location
(Was) Back home on the North Bank now back in W.
Thanks Cockle43. Can you confirm that the officer's report will be published on line when the agenda is made public as usually happens. Just saying this as i think it is likely to be a very very long and thorough read.
Yes, the full agenda will include all of the reports.

If you look on the SBC website and look at some previous DCC agendas, etc., then you'll see the detail that is available.

DCC meetings are public meetings and are currently also going out as a webcast live, so you won't even have to toddle down to the Civic Centre if you don't want to...
 

Cockle43

Manager⭐
Joined
Mar 20, 2008
Messages
1,195
Location
(Was) Back home on the North Bank now back in W.
I was referring to why Ron Martin did not mention the date of the 25th October in his Zoom meeting on Thursday which was before it went public by Ms Mulroney on Saturday morning.
That was probably because Councillors received notification very late Thursday afternoon so Ron probably couldn't be sure that it was in the public domain at that point.
 

Fred

First XI⭐
Joined
Mar 16, 2006
Messages
577
I am in a position to confirm that the two items on the agenda will be Fossetts/Stadium and the redevelopment of Roots Hall. I have cleared that with the Principal Democratic Services Officer.

If DCC approves then there is still the strong possibility of the Secretary of State calling it in, this happened with previous application, 2008?, when SoS called in and then approved.
If DCC rejects application then Club/RM can go to appeal; if he/Club wins then SBC are responsible for all their costs, this can be very expensive so is not something done lightly, or at least shouldn't be...

The reason the meeting is down as provisional is procedural in that the Planning Officers reports to DCC have not yet been signed off for publication, it is unlikely that there will be further delay but one can never be certain in these situations.

Given the amount of time and discussion that has gone on over these reports and submissions I would suggest that they are probably about as squeaky clean as it is possible to be and that the Planning officer's recommendations to DCC will also be very sound.

Incidentally, any Councillor who is a season ticket holder, holds SUFC shares or is a regular attender at games is disbarred from voting on the matter and I'll explain below.



Such matters of bias or pre-determination are taken very seriously and this is the guidance issued to Councillors for their conduct in this matter by the Executive Director for Legal and Democratic Services, aka the Borough Solicitor:-

I need to repeat advice I have given previously about Interests:
  • Councillors who are SUFC season ticket holders will have a disqualifying non-pecuniary interest in matters directly relating to SUFC. In my view this applies to the applications referred to above since they are directly related to SUFC’s plans for a new stadium at Fossetts Farm and the redevelopment of the existing stadium at Roots Hall. This will necessitate withdrawing from DCC while the applications are considered.
  • A councillor who is a very regular attender at SUFC matches will be in the same position as a season ticket holder;
  • Of course, a councillor could have an interest in either application for other reasons (e.g. as a shareholder of SUFC, or living in close proximity to Roots Hall or Fossetts Farm) and I will be pleased to give individual advice if required.
I would also mention the subject of Predetermination and Bias:
  • Members of DCC need to avoid any appearance of bias or having predetermined views when making a decision on a planning application.
  • They must consider all material planning considerations, including representations received, before making a decision.
  • A member of DCC who makes a definitive statement in advance of DCC that they will approve or refuse an application indicates they have a closed mind and so should not participate in the decision-making.
Statements of predisposition towards a particular outcome will not disqualify. However, it is better for members of DCC to be on the safe side and not make statements in advance about the acceptability or otherwise of a planning application.'

This guidance was also issued before the subject coming up in the Full Council meeting back in last December which is why I, and several others, had to leave the Teams call while the matter was discussed. Such things are normal process and if you have attended any meetings you will have seen members declaring their interests before a meeting, or even during it if something is mentioned in which they might have an interest.


Just one further clarification. DCC only determines planning and will approve or reject on clearly defined planning matters only, nothing else. The financials, etc., to date were dealt with at the Council meeting last December because that is a Council function not a planning function, DCC is where the planning bit is decided.


Hope that helps and, as you will appreciate, that is about as far as I can comment, at least for the time being.

Thank you for providing the latest update re the Fossetts Farm and Roots Hall planning applications.

If both plans are approved by the DCC on the 25th, due to their large size, will they still have to be approved at a Full Council meeting or is that hurdle not necessary and SOS approval required before we see the final green light and construction begin?
 

nick12

Southend till I die
Joined
May 16, 2015
Messages
229
Boring 😴 does anyone really care anymore?

FF is tarnished, it has cost us our league status and we are stuck with a chairman who has to see this as his swan song.

What does where we play have to do with the embarrassing position our club is in?

All I care about is the football and that can be played at Chawkwell or Southchurch park for all I care as long as we all have a team to be proud of....
 

londonblue

Topgun Pilot
Joined
Feb 18, 2004
Messages
16,361
I am in a position to confirm that the two items on the agenda will be Fossetts/Stadium and the redevelopment of Roots Hall. I have cleared that with the Principal Democratic Services Officer.

If DCC approves then there is still the strong possibility of the Secretary of State calling it in, this happened with previous application, 2008?, when SoS called in and then approved.
If DCC rejects application then Club/RM can go to appeal; if he/Club wins then SBC are responsible for all their costs, this can be very expensive so is not something done lightly, or at least shouldn't be...

The reason the meeting is down as provisional is procedural in that the Planning Officers reports to DCC have not yet been signed off for publication, it is unlikely that there will be further delay but one can never be certain in these situations.

Given the amount of time and discussion that has gone on over these reports and submissions I would suggest that they are probably about as squeaky clean as it is possible to be and that the Planning officer's recommendations to DCC will also be very sound.

Incidentally, any Councillor who is a season ticket holder, holds SUFC shares or is a regular attender at games is disbarred from voting on the matter and I'll explain below.



Such matters of bias or pre-determination are taken very seriously and this is the guidance issued to Councillors for their conduct in this matter by the Executive Director for Legal and Democratic Services, aka the Borough Solicitor:-

I need to repeat advice I have given previously about Interests:
  • Councillors who are SUFC season ticket holders will have a disqualifying non-pecuniary interest in matters directly relating to SUFC. In my view this applies to the applications referred to above since they are directly related to SUFC’s plans for a new stadium at Fossetts Farm and the redevelopment of the existing stadium at Roots Hall. This will necessitate withdrawing from DCC while the applications are considered.
  • A councillor who is a very regular attender at SUFC matches will be in the same position as a season ticket holder;
  • Of course, a councillor could have an interest in either application for other reasons (e.g. as a shareholder of SUFC, or living in close proximity to Roots Hall or Fossetts Farm) and I will be pleased to give individual advice if required.
I would also mention the subject of Predetermination and Bias:
  • Members of DCC need to avoid any appearance of bias or having predetermined views when making a decision on a planning application.
  • They must consider all material planning considerations, including representations received, before making a decision.
  • A member of DCC who makes a definitive statement in advance of DCC that they will approve or refuse an application indicates they have a closed mind and so should not participate in the decision-making.
Statements of predisposition towards a particular outcome will not disqualify. However, it is better for members of DCC to be on the safe side and not make statements in advance about the acceptability or otherwise of a planning application.'

This guidance was also issued before the subject coming up in the Full Council meeting back in last December which is why I, and several others, had to leave the Teams call while the matter was discussed. Such things are normal process and if you have attended any meetings you will have seen members declaring their interests before a meeting, or even during it if something is mentioned in which they might have an interest.


Just one further clarification. DCC only determines planning and will approve or reject on clearly defined planning matters only, nothing else. The financials, etc., to date were dealt with at the Council meeting last December because that is a Council function not a planning function, DCC is where the planning bit is decided.


Hope that helps and, as you will appreciate, that is about as far as I can comment, at least for the time being.

Thanks for that. From what I understand, even if the DCC approve the plans they still have to go to the full council for final approval. Is that correct? I have also been told that if the DCC approve the plans then the full council approval is pretty close to being a formality, although that might not be the case. Again, are you able to say if that is the case?

I also heard RM on the zoom call say the SoS has 21 days to make a decision, but can ask for an extension. If I remember correctly, last time the plans were called in by the SoS it took 6 months for him/her to approve (by which time the financial collapse was in full swing and Ron lost his funding). Have the rules changed to "force" the SoS to make more timely decisions? If not, are we REALLY likely to get a decision in 21 days, or is it more likely to be nearer the 6 months it took last time?
 

Fairport

Coach⭐
Joined
Jan 21, 2010
Messages
1,889
Location
Shoeburyness
When it goes to the full council there are a few councillors who are Blues season card or share holders who won't be able to cast a vote. Hope there will still be a majority in favour of the project despite this. Nothing is certain though.
 

Fred

First XI⭐
Joined
Mar 16, 2006
Messages
577
When it goes to the full council there are a few councillors who are Blues season card or share holders who won't be able to cast a vote. Hope there will still be a majority in favour of the project despite this. Nothing is certain though.
I’m still waiting for a response to a question about whether the plans have to go to full council, but if they do, I think the councils involvement with both developments, the need to achieve Government housing targets and not least the financial benefits from the applications should help persuade the majority of councillors to vote for it’s approval.
 

Cricko

Zone Owner ⭐
Staff member
Joined
Oct 25, 2006
Messages
32,095
Location
Leigh-On-Sea
When it goes to the full council there are a few councillors who are Blues season card or share holders who won't be able to cast a vote. Hope there will still be a majority in favour of the project despite this. Nothing is certain though.
I think the council want and need the houses/flats as much as RM , so I don't really see a stumbling block there.
 
Joined
Jan 24, 2007
Messages
2,355
Location
leigh on sea
Boring 😴 does anyone really care anymore?

FF is tarnished, it has cost us our league status and we are stuck with a chairman who has to see this as his swan song.

What does where we play have to do with the embarrassing position our club is in?

All I care about is the football and that can be played at Chawkwell or Southchurch park for all I care as long as we all have a team to be proud of....
Nick I was going to let this ride but a serious professional football club which I hope we are needs quality facilities. Roots Hall does not provide these. The training ground is limited. Every time I drive past the Amex on the A27 I am jealous and very ****ed off. I remember watching us play Brighton at the Withdean which is a bit like Southchurch park. Dreadful times for Brighton and their fans. Look at them now.
 
Last edited:

Fred

First XI⭐
Joined
Mar 16, 2006
Messages
577
So long as the plans meet whatever the development rules are.
With it taking so long, surely every stone has been left unturned to ensure all planning regulations have been met to everybody’s satisfaction. The clubs collaboration with a now more cooperative council who can see greater benefits from both these applications compared to past ones, and the need for a positive outcome, will surely mean the planning officers report should only be presented with a recommendation for approval.
 
Joined
Jan 24, 2007
Messages
2,355
Location
leigh on sea
I did forget that at one time Brighton were homeless and I remember watching us beat them at Gillingham's ground. History is bunk as Ford said. You sometimes have to dream and sometimes they come true. As long as you have a proper plan.......
 

MattE

Manager⭐
Joined
Aug 8, 2005
Messages
2,728
I am in a position to confirm that the two items on the agenda will be Fossetts/Stadium and the redevelopment of Roots Hall. I have cleared that with the Principal Democratic Services Officer.

If DCC approves then there is still the strong possibility of the Secretary of State calling it in, this happened with previous application, 2008?, when SoS called in and then approved.
If DCC rejects application then Club/RM can go to appeal; if he/Club wins then SBC are responsible for all their costs, this can be very expensive so is not something done lightly, or at least shouldn't be...

The reason the meeting is down as provisional is procedural in that the Planning Officers reports to DCC have not yet been signed off for publication, it is unlikely that there will be further delay but one can never be certain in these situations.

Given the amount of time and discussion that has gone on over these reports and submissions I would suggest that they are probably about as squeaky clean as it is possible to be and that the Planning officer's recommendations to DCC will also be very sound.

Incidentally, any Councillor who is a season ticket holder, holds SUFC shares or is a regular attender at games is disbarred from voting on the matter and I'll explain below.



Such matters of bias or pre-determination are taken very seriously and this is the guidance issued to Councillors for their conduct in this matter by the Executive Director for Legal and Democratic Services, aka the Borough Solicitor:-

I need to repeat advice I have given previously about Interests:
  • Councillors who are SUFC season ticket holders will have a disqualifying non-pecuniary interest in matters directly relating to SUFC. In my view this applies to the applications referred to above since they are directly related to SUFC’s plans for a new stadium at Fossetts Farm and the redevelopment of the existing stadium at Roots Hall. This will necessitate withdrawing from DCC while the applications are considered.
  • A councillor who is a very regular attender at SUFC matches will be in the same position as a season ticket holder;
  • Of course, a councillor could have an interest in either application for other reasons (e.g. as a shareholder of SUFC, or living in close proximity to Roots Hall or Fossetts Farm) and I will be pleased to give individual advice if required.
I would also mention the subject of Predetermination and Bias:
  • Members of DCC need to avoid any appearance of bias or having predetermined views when making a decision on a planning application.
  • They must consider all material planning considerations, including representations received, before making a decision.
  • A member of DCC who makes a definitive statement in advance of DCC that they will approve or refuse an application indicates they have a closed mind and so should not participate in the decision-making.
Statements of predisposition towards a particular outcome will not disqualify. However, it is better for members of DCC to be on the safe side and not make statements in advance about the acceptability or otherwise of a planning application.'

This guidance was also issued before the subject coming up in the Full Council meeting back in last December which is why I, and several others, had to leave the Teams call while the matter was discussed. Such things are normal process and if you have attended any meetings you will have seen members declaring their interests before a meeting, or even during it if something is mentioned in which they might have an interest.


Just one further clarification. DCC only determines planning and will approve or reject on clearly defined planning matters only, nothing else. The financials, etc., to date were dealt with at the Council meeting last December because that is a Council function not a planning function, DCC is where the planning bit is decided.


Hope that helps and, as you will appreciate, that is about as far as I can comment, at least for the time being.

Is there anything that fans can do to help get positive votes from Councillors?
 

Shrimpergarry

You have no authority here, Jackie Weaver⭐
Staff member
Joined
Oct 24, 2003
Messages
4,262
Location
Chelmsford
The critical thing for me is the officers' report. If they recommend approval then usually councillors will agree as it means all the planning regs etc have been met. Agenda usually is a week before.
Agreed, when I worked as a local authority planning officer, if members overturned an officer's professional recommendation the officers who made the recommendation could not then be asked to fight the appeal on behalf of the council - the onus was on the councillors themselves!
 
Top