Breaking News Fossetts Farm has a direct competitor

[Jam_Man]

You'd rather they did it at their own (i.e. our) expense ?

Anyone who thinks the council is the reason that FF has not been build after all these years and years and years is sadly deluded.

Indeed, they agreed the plans 7 years ago, then agreed changes 2 or 3 years ago, yet we still never started building.

Council have been fully supportive, other than paying for it themselves I'm not sure what else people expect them to have done.

They are now going to have two sets of similar plans put to them, Im not sure if Rons inability to build (so far) can play any part in their decision, but it will certainly be in their mind.

 

[onceknownasrab]

You'd rather they did it at their own (i.e. our) expense ?

Anyone who thinks the council is the reason that FF has not been build after all these years and years and years is sadly deluded.

I did not say they were the reason. I do suggest though that they can be far more proactive when it suits them. As I recall there is to be a levy on FF to compensate for loss of trade to the High Street. When this new proposal was first mooted it was suggested that it would also benefit the Royals. Does that mean this new development will pay to compensate any further trade being taken from the Victoria shopping centre or that end of the High street?

 

[rigsby]

You'd rather they did it at their own (i.e. our) expense ?

Anyone who thinks the council is the reason that FF has not been build after all these years and years and years is sadly deluded.

The scheme was only passed in 2008. Which is only seven years. Whatever you think of Ron he can't be blamed for what happened in the 90's or the previous councillors deliberate stalling on any stadium plans.

Sainsbury's have also messed us about. I can understand the reasons why they have changed their mind and they would argue that the whole scheme Should have been completed before the credit crunch. But since then they have deliberately dragged their feet with the other purchases like the college site.

 

[onceknownasrab]

Furthermore Mick, try answering these questions, a) Is the council competent? b) Do all councillors work solely for the benefit of the borough? and c) Would private business get away with what councils do? If you can answer yes to any or all three of the questions then that is deluded.

SUFC are told which hoops to jump through for FF and these new characters, council endorsed, have the door held open for them.

 

[Jam_Man]

The scheme was only passed in 2008. Which is only seven years. Whatever you think of Ron he can't be blamed for what happened in the 90's or the previous councillors deliberate stalling on any stadium plans.

Sainsbury's have also messed us about. I can understand the reasons why they have changed their mind and they would argue that the whole scheme Should have been completed before the credit crunch. But since then they have deliberately dragged their feet with the other purchases like the college site.

Only seven years??!?! The stadium was meant to be built in 18 months!

Of course the council pre Ron wasnt helpful but they have not hindered us at all since the latest plans were put to them.

Sainsbury did pull the rug out but we had plenty of time to have had it built by then. Other stadiums have been built since the credit crunch, so whilst thats a reason its not an excuse.

Furthermore Mick, try answering these questions, a) Is the council competent? b) Do all councillors work solely for the benefit of the borough? and c) Would private business get away with what councils do? If you can answer yes to any or all three of the questions then that is deluded.

SUFC are told which hoops to jump through for FF and these new characters, council endorsed, have the door held open for them.

Yet they still agreed all the plans given to them. The new characters havent had any plans agreed yet so not sure why they are considered having an easy ride.

 

[Mick]

Furthermore Mick, try answering these questions, a) Is the council competent? b) Do all councillors work solely for the benefit of the borough? and c) Would private business get away with what councils do? If you can answer yes to any or all three of the questions then that is deluded.

SUFC are told which hoops to jump through for FF and these new characters, council endorsed, have the door held open for them.

Far too easy:

a) no
b) no
c) no

 

[rigsby]

Only seven years??!?! The stadium was meant to be built in 18 months!

Of course the council pre Ron wasnt helpful but they have not hindered us at all since the latest plans were put to them.

Sainsbury did pull the rug out but we had plenty of time to have had it built by then. Other stadiums have been built since the credit crunch, so whilst thats a reason its not an excuse.



Yet they still agreed all the plans given to them. The new characters havent had any plans agreed yet so not sure why they are considered having an easy ride.

No development that size could be completed in 18 months from being granted planning. Are you seriously claiming it was Ron stalling on Sainsbury's

Other stadiums have not had to rely on CP orders around their original ground etc or for Sainsbury's to fund them so you can't compare the problems with Southend to another club.

I know you are against the current plans but if you were Ron and after 4 or 5years it was obvious that Sainsbury's were never going to keep their agreement what would you have done in his place?

 

[Supa Shrimpa]

if you were Ron and after 4 or 5years it was obvious that Sainsbury's were never going to keep their agreement what would you have done in his place?

What agreement have Sainsburys not kept, again ?:unsure:

 

[Wise Head]

Have to say that neither development is ideal. The Seaway car park is needed for the summer day trippers and the nightclubs in the evenings, so really shouldn't be developed much if at all. FF is a massive over development of the site and just puts as much on the site as possible to maximum its value with little regard to parking or the traffic congestion around. While a new stadium and housing are not a big ask of the council, the other parts of the FF development are. A cinema complex and multiple retail units need to be sited where the infrastructure can cope and consideration for the effect on other businesses in town is taken into account.
Before I am criticised for not blindly supporting Ron's latest FF plan, I want a new stadium and felt the original planning permission was fair and proportionate to the size of site. There was adequate parking around the stadium, retail units with adequate parking and residential units. I was disappointed that the council subsequently allowed the delay to the building of the main stand. The redevelopment of RH could now be residential rather a supermarket.
l feel that Ron/BL have no consideration for anyone other than their efforts to line their own pockets. I hate the fact that the club and the stadium seem to be an afterthought on the new plan. Pushed into a corner of the site with no parking around the stadium (it's now at the edge of the site in a field in Rochford), dwarfed by three residential blocks as part of the stadium and the fourth stand to be built on the never never, we are being short changed by Ron.
The club and the supporters are put in the impossible position by Ron of back my plans or the club will be in serious difficulties. I'm fed up of constant moving goalposts and feel that the council need to stand firm and tell Ron that enough is enough and he should be grateful with the planning permission already given and he just needs to get on with it or admit that he can't go ahead and develop FF.

 

[rigsby]

Have to say that neither development is ideal. The Seaway car park is needed for the summer day trippers and the nightclubs in the evenings, so really shouldn't be developed much if at all. FF is a massive over development of the site and just puts as much on the site as possible to maximum its value with little regard to parking or the traffic congestion around. While a new stadium and housing are not a big ask of the council, the other parts of the FF development are. A cinema complex and multiple retail units need to be sited where the infrastructure can cope and consideration for the effect on other businesses in town is taken into account.
Before I am criticised for not blindly supporting Ron's latest FF plan, I want a new stadium and felt the original planning permission was fair and proportionate to the size of site. There was adequate parking around the stadium, retail units with adequate parking and residential units. I was disappointed that the council subsequently allowed the delay to the building of the main stand. The redevelopment of RH could now be residential rather a supermarket.
l feel that Ron/BL have no consideration for anyone other than their efforts to line their own pockets. I hate the fact that the club and the stadium seem to be an afterthought on the new plan. Pushed into a corner of the site with no parking around the stadium (it's now at the edge of the site in a field in Rochford), dwarfed by three residential blocks as part of the stadium and the fourth stand to be built on the never never, we are being short changed by Ron.
The club and the supporters are put in the impossible position by Ron of back my plans or the club will be in serious difficulties. I'm fed up of constant moving goalposts and feel that the council need to stand firm and tell Ron that enough is enough and he should be grateful with the planning permission already given and he just needs to get on with it or admit that he can't go ahead and develop FF.

I'm not saying any one should not have doubts or concerns about FF. Its healthy to question the plans, I certainly have and spoke at length to Ron Woodley.

What I can say as some one who has done a small commercial/residential development in the Town is that you are very much guided by the council before you even submit plans. They may advise you to withdraw or change before the plans are even looked at in the first planning meeting. Some of their staff are excellent whilst others should be sacked for total incompetence.

BL are a massive company and for them to fund our project they, like any builder want their dollar. They will have bumped up the project and I can tell you for a fact that the council are in favour of the High rise residential. We are a fast growing town with zero spare land. In order to meet government targets in the future will see lots more High rise.

Ps For what its worth I am hearing that its Rochford council that may be the problem as the training ground and car park are on their side of the boundary.

 

[mattitouk]

Not sure if its already been mentioned on here, but I picked up on it yesterday on another possible hotel / restaurant development on FF's doorstep at the airport, that was mentioned in yesterdays Echo that could also put a dent in Ron's plans.

http://www.echo-news.co.uk/news/141..._set_for_Southend_business_park/?ref=mr&lp=12

 

[Donal]

I said it about 30 years ago , i ll say it again ..... we will NEVER get a new ground. :nope:

For me the ideal wold be to stay at Roots Hall and rebuild there. There is ample space.

 

[Jai]

For me the ideal wold be to stay at Roots Hall and rebuild there. There is ample space.

Rebuild with what? We don't have any money. The only way we can get a better ground is to move elsewhere with a partner, with enough enabling development to make it worthwhile for that partner to pay for the build.

Roots Hall can only be sold after we've moved to a new stadium. We dont have the money to build a new stadium by ourselves. Therefore, if this rival scheme beats us to it, the club basically has no future beyond the lower leagues.

 

[londonblue]

I'm not saying any one should not have doubts or concerns about FF. Its healthy to question the plans, I certainly have and spoke at length to Ron Woodley.

What I can say as some one who has done a small commercial/residential development in the Town is that you are very much guided by the council before you even submit plans. They may advise you to withdraw or change before the plans are even looked at in the first planning meeting. Some of their staff are excellent whilst others should be sacked for total incompetence.

BL are a massive company and for them to fund our project they, like any builder want their dollar. They will have bumped up the project and I can tell you for a fact that the council are in favour of the High rise residential. We are a fast growing town with zero spare land. In order to meet government targets in the future will see lots more High rise.

Ps For what its worth I am hearing that its Rochford council that may be the problem as the training ground and car park are on their side of the boundary.

But I don't believe that has changed since they gave us planning permission last time?

 

[rigsby]

But I don't believe that has changed since they gave us planning permission last time?

The problem is it is now a bigger scheme which means more traffic. For about 20 years, so long before FF was approved there has been plans for a relief road from the B&Q area to Tesco. It would have meant upgrading Warners bridge but would have needed to go on Rochford land as well. Rochford Council blocked the scheme. Don't no why as it would clearly divert the large volume of cars away from their own town.

The big two hurdles for our club will be the high street effect and the increase in congestion around FF. Obviously if that road had been built we would be half way there. Plus many people like myself would not have wasted hours of their lives stuck in traffic to get past expensive road works that have cost twice as much as a new road.

 

[londonblue]

The problem is it is now a bigger scheme which means more traffic. For about 20 years, so long before FF was approved there has been plans for a relief road from the B&Q area to Tesco. It would have meant upgrading Warners bridge but would have needed to go on Rochford land as well. Rochford Council blocked the scheme. Don't no why as it would clearly divert the large volume of cars away from their own town.

The big two hurdles for our club will be the high street effect and the increase in congestion around FF. Obviously if that road had been built we would be half way there. Plus many people like myself would not have wasted hours of their lives stuck in traffic to get past expensive road works that have cost twice as much as a new road.

So why haven't the plans been sent to Rochford as well, or have they?

If they haven't then there's no need to be concerned? Or are they able to "interfere" with a decision by Southend Council?

 

[rigsby]

So why haven't the plans been sent to Rochford as well, or have they?

If they haven't then there's no need to be concerned? Or are they able to "interfere" with a decision by Southend Council?

Of course they have. RM has had meetings with Rochford. I think you'll find any council can 'interfere' with schemes that are on their land.

If your next door neighbours kitchen extension crept five feet into your garden I suspect you might have something to say about it

Edit: that's why the domes have to be on the stadium side and not the training ground. Rochford say its green belt.

 

[Kevin Hogg]

My immediate thoughts.
Firstly, the seafront relies on sunny Summer day trippers. In my experience these visitors rarely include a trip to the cinema to see a film they can easily watch in their local cinema. A seafront cinema has very few merits.

Where will the sunny day trippers (many, many of whom travel by coaches through organised excursions) who are the lifeblood of the seafront - park????

Finally. There simply has to be an actual, definitive, highly probable date announced for work to commence at FF...and soon - or there simply is no further point in endless years of discussion.

 

[londonblue]

Of course they have. RM has had meetings with Rochford. I think you'll find any council can 'interfere' with schemes that are on their land.

If your next door neighbours kitchen extension crept five feet into your garden I suspect you might have something to say about it

Edit: that's why the domes have to be on the stadium side and not the training ground. Rochford say its green belt.

I think you've missed my point. I was asking if the new plans have been sent to Rochford (i.e. has anything on Rochford's land actually changed), and IF NOT, do they have a right to get involved?

This isn't a swipe, I actually don't know, and am asking a question. However, your answer actually implies that the plans haven't been sent to Rochford, yet at least.

 

[Jai]

No plans have been sent to anyone yet, as far as I know. No planning application, for Southend or Rochford, has been submitted.

In Rochford's case, the scheme on their land has not changed very much IIRC. Therefore, with a precedent already set in 2008, it's highly unlikely they would have a leg to stand on if they refused permission and we appealed.