Supporters Group News Supporters' Groups open letter to planning officer for Fossetts application

[jphfitz]

The supporters groups of Southend United have submitted the following online comment on the planning application for the Fossetts Farm project.

We are not objecting to the development but we are concerned that the club's interests and future security are not being considered strongly enough. We are urging Southend City Council to consider giving the club more protection in the upcoming new Section 106 agreement.

The current consultation period is the best way for supporters to make their opinions heard. This consultation period ends tomorrow night and we would suggest that comments are submitted before then, although the city council is legally obligated to consider all comments and objections right up until determination date.

If you are similarly concerned about some of the same issues that we are concerned about, then we strongly encourage you to submit a comment on the application through the planning portal here https://publicaccess.southend.gov.u...ils.do?activeTab=summary&keyVal=RR9GIRPAKSK00

Feel free to use our comment as inspiration or a starting point, but please don't just copy and paste it. We believe that identical coordinated correspondence would dilute the strength of the points that we are trying to make.

 

[Spaceman Spiff]

Nice one Great effort by all involved.

It might be worth sharing copies of the text with Tom Lawrence (for info) and Anna Firth and ask her to raise it with the Council directly.

We need to get a proper answer to this, not have it absorbed by the consultation process but no clear response or evidence of any action is ever seen.

 

[bazzashrimper]

Well done to all involved! Brilliant

 

[danbowen]

Decent statement however can some of them points realistically be put in to the section 106 agreement such as asking for a rent free period and who must own it? Fully behind the longer lease and that should be much longer than 20 years.

 

[Holy Joe]

Left a comment in support - but with concerns that phase 1 has a capacity lower than Roots Hall which doesn't meet the conditions for the redevelopment of Roots Hall and hence protections for the club should be tightened.

Website currently shows 2 public comments received - both objections

 

[Holy Joe]

And the temp buildings at the training ground in Rochford is still accepting comments - most public comments are objecting. Just I think 3 or 4 in support. You do not need to live in Rochford to leave a comment in support, link below

Rochford Development Control

maps.rochford.gov.uk

 

[Shrimpergonzo]

And the temp buildings at the training ground in Rochford is still accepting comments - most public comments are objecting. Just I think 3 or 4 in support. You do not need to live in Rochford to leave a comment in support, link below

Rochford Development Control

maps.rochford.gov.uk

Good point @MattE - just left a "no objection" along with a comment saying I support the Rochford application

 

[OldBlueLady]

Good point @MattE - just left a "no objection" along with a comment saying I support the Rochford application

Yes, me too, and pointing out that it is a temporary proposal, not permanent.

 

[defender05]

As nice as it would be to have those things happen the council has no control whatsoever on who RM sells his property to or what terms they agree between them.

Unfortunately as fans the only way we can effect the new stadium would be to buy it ourselves and that's not going to happen.

 

[londonblue]

Left a comment in support - but with concerns that phase 1 has a capacity lower than Roots Hall which doesn't meet the conditions for the redevelopment of Roots Hall and hence protections for the club should be tightened.

Website currently shows 2 public comments received - both objections

It doesn't matter how many rejections are received really. The public seem to think that the ability to submit comments works like a referendum. It doesn't. The only time an objection becomes relevant is if it points out something that the council haven't considered, i.e. they overlooked.

 

[C'mon you Shrimpers]

I think it absolutely does no harm to an application to make a comment. Lots of course are irrelevant and outside the scope of planning regulations. A lot are just people objecting and that's their right and gets it off their chests but is ineffective. I don't think the objections I've seen carry much weight if any. A senior planning officer once told me that an application stands or falls on its merits. Does this application have merit. Does it meet all the planning regulations. If it does then it will be passed. I like the supporters groups suggestion. The chief executive will be able to advise councillors if it is within their powers. If it is controversial or open to debate the council may take barrister's advice.

 

[teabee1]

No objection and a plea to approve from me..

 

[C'mon you Shrimpers]

Council officers do speak to applicants as a means of preventing delay or if they think that an objection may be made and councillors will view the objection sympathetically. I think you can see this with the temporary training buildings. The council are insisting that the buildings will be green to achieve some camouflage and a bund (embankment) will be built by the attenuation pond again so that the good people of Rochford will not have to gaze upon a rather unsightly row of portacabins. The permanent building of course will be a thing of beauty with proper landscaping when built.

 

[kentblues]

Decent statement however can some of them points realistically be put in to the section 106 agreement such as asking for a rent free period and who must own it? Fully behind the longer lease and that should be much longer than 20 years.

In the end if you don't ask you don't get. In reality SCC have very limited scope.

And of course this isn't really a completely new application (substance over form). Its amending a planning approval that went through a very long approval process, including by councillors, and is now a delegated decision addressing some specific changes all be it deemed necessary via a new application. There will be, via a delegated decision, significant reluctance I expect to revisit anything outside the specific changes necessary (even where that is possible/ within their powers). Certainly moving away from a delegated decision would seriously slow down the approval process potentially?? Maybe someone with knowledge of SCC process knows better?...

That said anything that tightens up the position of the club and future owners would be very welcome. So very good the Trust is on the ball and asking the questions. Perfect outcome more protection but no delay.

 

[Holy Joe]

It doesn't matter how many rejections are received really. The public seem to think that the ability to submit comments works like a referendum. It doesn't. The only time an objection becomes relevant is if it points out something that the council haven't considered, i.e. they overlooked.

Yes and no. In theory of course 100% correct, but in practice I've seen councillors go against officer advice and reject applications, largely because of public opinion and fear of being voted out although they may hide behind other reasons. And of course they could still pass plans but with conditions attached.

 

[Evening Echo]

THE combined supporters groups of Southend United Football Club have today issued the following letter to the city council's planning officer for the Fossetts Farm application.Firstly, we’d like to make it abundantly clear that we have no desire to delay nor to object to this planning application.

Read more on this story


Help with Echo links

 

[Medway Blue]

After a few hiccups yesterday and the publishing of a planning application comment which we then discovered was way too long to post on the planning portal, that comment has instead been fashioned into an open letter to the planning officer for the Fossetts application today.

No desire to object or delay, but advice was that the public consultation and comments function on the online application was the best way for fans to make their voices heard.

There are some concerns around the extent to which the club is safeguarded in the application (lease length, wording around who the tenant will be, etc.). Since the club is being used as a vehicle for property development, it's only fair to at least ask the council to help us to safeguard SUFC better as a community asset, either using the new S106 agreement or any other mechanisms they can think of.

If you don't ask, you don't get!

Public consultation ends tonight, although the council is legally obligated to take on board comments and objections right up until decision day. However, if you have similar concerns, then make them known as soon as you can! It doesn't mean you're objecting. I submitted my comment as a supporter and approver of the plans, but as a "miscellaneous letter" as opposed to a "letter of support", and used the 500 characters to make some of my concerns clear.

Link is here if anybody has 5 mins: https://publicaccess.southend.gov.u...ils.do?keyVal=RR9GIRPAKSK00&activeTab=summary

Great way to make our voices heard. We all know the club needs this move - it's backed into a corner now where it has little choice. I struggle to accept its future security being such an afterthought, though, and I think the council can do more to help in the respect. No better time for it to be seen to be doing so either, against the backdrop of the recommendations of the White Paper and the depth of support for it across Westminster.

 

[Callum]

Fantastic work guys I hear we are due to move in the next year so let’s get the spades out start building Ron Martin words not mine

 

[WestyReturns]

The supporters groups of Southend United have submitted the following online comment on the planning application for the Fossetts Farm project.

We are not objecting to the development but we are concerned that the club's interests and future security are not being considered strongly enough. We are urging Southend City Council to consider giving the club more protection in the upcoming new Section 106 agreement.

The current consultation period is the best way for supporters to make their opinions heard. This consultation period ends tomorrow night and we would suggest that comments are submitted before then, although the city council is legally obligated to consider all comments and objections right up until determination date.

If you are similarly concerned about some of the same issues that we are concerned about, then we strongly encourage you to submit a comment on the application through the planning portal here https://publicaccess.southend.gov.u...ils.do?activeTab=summary&keyVal=RR9GIRPAKSK00

Feel free to use our comment as inspiration or a starting point, but please don't just copy and paste it. We believe that identical coordinated correspondence would dilute the strength of the points that we are trying to make.

View attachment 26231View attachment 26232

Excellent stuff. We'll done!