Planning Updates- All The Latest Details. 28/03/2022

[Supa Shrimpa]

One day I wish to see a positive post from both you and Supa Shrimpa, seem to be going in circles of negativity without even a thought that something might be brewing?

...anything brewing, yet ? ? Exactly how many years do you want to wait for this to happen before you agree that protests need to return ? another 5,10,20 years ?

 

[JAL]

...anything brewing, yet ? ? Exactly how many years do you want to wait for this to happen before you agree that protests need to return ? another 5,10,20 years ?

??? boring posts mate, post something useful for once

 

[rigsby]

I think it's the fact the previously we were told that once all the ducks were lined up ie planning given the green light, the club had the contractors ready and willing to get cracking.

We were led to beleive that this would be quite quickly after planning agreed.

Personally this whole saga is embarrassing. How many clubs have applied to build a ground after our initial application and have been playing for several seasons in a new stadium.

The deafening silence from the club is also a concern.

Did any of them send their applications to Southend council?

 

[Shrimpergonzo]

Interesting article about Forest Green's stadium from December 2019 https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...ed-planning-permission-for-all-wooden-stadium
In which their owner says:

“It’s still going to take several years - I think it’s going to take us a year of detailed design work....The best case [for the stadium opening] is three years if we started tomorrow.”

and this update from January this year when they hope to start work on the training ground in the spring

https://www.fgr.co.uk/news/eco-park-next-stage-plans-revealed

These things do take time. I would imagine the Homes England grant which is essentially unlocking the housing sites through funding the 3 sided stadium will be key for us. Not sure we've had an update on that matter since this which alarmed everybody:

https://www.echo-news.co.uk/news/20022780.southend-united-ron-martin-steps-fossetts-farm-firm/

 

[Shrimper]

I think it's the fact the previously we were told that once all the ducks were lined up ie planning given the green light, the club had the contractors ready and willing to get cracking.

We were led to beleive that this would be quite quickly after planning agreed.

Personally this whole saga is embarrassing. How many clubs have applied to build a ground after our initial application and have been playing for several seasons in a new stadium.

The deafening silence from the club is also a concern.

This. The club were bigging up the earlier ruling and now it's completely concerning. Forget anything happening this year

 

[Supa Shrimpa]

??? boring posts mate, post something useful for once

Just asking a perfectly reasonable question. Your answer, is ?

 

[Spaceman Spiff]

Let’s not let this thread get personal gents, please.

 

[Cricko]

I was told now that RH has recently got full planning we now have to wait a few weeks for the S106 on that site to clear. So I do think things are not that far away.

We shall see of course.

 

[Blue94]

Update: The application for a temporary (3 year) training centre (ref: 21/02072/FUL) was withdrawn by the applicant (PowerHaus Consultancy) yesterday. Not sure whether this is good or bad news.

Link here: Application Details

 

[JAL]

Update: The application for a temporary (3 year) training centre (ref: 21/02072/FUL) was withdrawn by the applicant (PowerHaus Consultancy) yesterday. Not sure whether this is good or bad news.

Link here: Application Details

I wonder if it’s being relocated somewhere else, possible under Rochford Councils side

 

[Cricko]

Update: The application for a temporary (3 year) training centre (ref: 21/02072/FUL) was withdrawn by the applicant (PowerHaus Consultancy) yesterday. Not sure whether this is good or bad news.

Link here: Application Details

That is the first step in the whole process so not good news as it would mean another hold up. It would however make sense to ditch that temporary thing anyway (although I think if i recall correctly that it had temporary offices combined in it?) IMO as it is just money down the toilet and just get on with building the real thing.

 

[Smiffy]

What on earth is going on?

 

[Cricko]

What on earth is going on?

It doesn't say much.

http://publicedrms.southend.gov.uk/...j.pdf?DocNo=11613931&PageNo=1&content=obj.pdf

 

[BirminghamBlue]

Typically an application is withdrawn either at the validation stage because of missing documents or incorrect fees paid ect but this application is far beyond that stage.

The other reason an application is withdrawn is because its about to refused by the planning officer, looking at the reply from PowerHaus to the council there were numerous issues left to be addressed such as parking, highways and ecology. PowerHaus suggested conditions attached to an approval decision to alleviate these concerns.

Given the application has been withdrawn we can assume it wasn't satisfactory but potentially there are different reasons the application was withdrawn as there will be more behind that scenes we won't be privy to.

 

[hlane17]

It doesn't say much.

http://publicedrms.southend.gov.uk/...j.pdf?DocNo=11613931&PageNo=1&content=obj.pdf

Application is likely withdrawn under SBC because the temporary training pitches are meant to be on Rochford Council land are they not?

 

[hlane17]

Rochford Development Control

maps.rochford.gov.uk

Rochford Council has their application for the same pitches up and approved.

Having some (keyword 'some') former experience of planning/legal business in councils I can think of two possibilities:

1. SBC actually needs to approve a separate application because part of the access to the site (or part of the site itself) is on SBC land and necessary approvals will need to happen for works to occur
2. Someone involved in the development of the new training ground has embarrassingly submitted an application to SBC, not checking whether the land is actually under SBC's boundaries or not.

The second possibility is less likely IMO because this application with SBC was submitted in 2021 it appears, 4 years after the other application was lodged with RDC. There must be a reason for this.

The applications for both permissions with SBC and RDC are by the same agency and agent too (Mary Power from PowerHaus Consultancy) so this makes it even less likely that the SBC application was a mistake.

All I can say is I certainly don't miss doing this for a day job, gets so complicated

 

[BirminghamBlue]

The PA surely wouldn't have made it this far if an application wasn't required to be submitted to SBC. That would mean it would have to be missed by the applicant, the registration team when validating the application and the case officer. Your first point seems spot on @hlane17

 

[hlane17]

The PA surely wouldn't have made it this far if an application wasn't required to be submitted to SBC. That would mean it would have to be missed by the applicant, the registration team when validating the application and the case officer. Your first point seems spot on @hlane17

Absolutely I think it would be nearly improbable that the application to SBC was a mistake.

Just trying to assess the plans for any clue as to why this application to SBC is needed. I reckon it's access or part of the site is SBC's but as with all planning portals, it is taking an age.

 

[hlane17]

Really trying to read between the lines here.

I think this temporary training ground is a backstop, should Rochford Council have thrown out the permanent training ground on their land.

But the part that worries me is that for the permanent training facilities, an estimated build time of 2-3 years is required.

The first phase of Fossetts appears to be dependent on SUFC vacating Boots and Laces for the beginning of the new housing estate, which will release the Homes England funding to kickstart the whole project.

We cannot vacate B&L without somewhere else to train. This is where I think this temporary training ground must still be required, but as we have seen the application has been withdrawn.

No alternate training ground = no leaving B&L and as a result most importantly, no Fossetts project due to all the money that is pinned on SUFC vacating the land.

 

[Napster]

Really trying to read between the lines here.

I think this temporary training ground is a backstop, should Rochford Council have thrown out the permanent training ground on their land.

But the part that worries me is that for the permanent training facilities, an estimated build time of 2-3 years is required.

The first phase of Fossetts appears to be dependent on SUFC vacating Boots and Laces for the beginning of the new housing estate, which will release the Homes England funding to kickstart the whole project.

We cannot vacate B&L without somewhere else to train. This is where I think this temporary training ground must still be required, but as we have seen the application has been withdrawn.

No alternate training ground = no leaving B&L and as a result most importantly, no Fossetts project due to all the money that is pinned on SUFC vacating the land.

View attachment 20642

By the by, who owns B&L? I couldn't make it out from the accounts.