rye fisheries rock channel eastryepartnership.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/rye... ·...

Rye Fisheries – Rock Channel East – Feasibility Study December 2017

1

Rye Fisheries – Rock Channel East

Site Feasibility Study

December 2017


2

Contents

1. Executive Summary

2. Context

3. Planning History & Context

4. Current Operation

5. Options Appraisal

6. Business Case Summary

7. Commercial Scheme

8. Residential Scheme

9. Modelling Assumptions

10. Action/Outline Project Plan

Appendices

Appendix A – Site Plan

Appendix B – Residential Scheme Layouts

Appendix C – FPP Surveyors Report


3

1. Executive Summary

1.1. This feasibility study sets out how the residential development of part of the Rye Fisheries site can act as an enabler to investment in the commercial assets and the future redevelopment of the site as a whole. An options appraisal, and detailed business case, set out how residential investment will initiate a significant uplift in use and site viability as well as acting as a platform for potential future larger scale redevelopment.

1.2. The site lies on the southern flood plain of the town on land historically claimed from the sea and used for shipbuilding. It sits outside the A259 boundary which separates the historic centre of Rye from more commercial, industrial and mixed use areas.

1.3. TRP commissioned this feasibility study of the peninsula site following a successful bid to ESCC for CaSS (Catalysing Stalled Sites) funds in 2016. The study has been completed by Eastbourne Borough Council’s Housing & Economic Development Partnership (HEDP) over a 6 month period to look at how the use and development potential of the site can be maximised.

1.4. The development potential of the Rye Fisheries site has been acknowledged for some time by The Rye Partnership. (TRP ) This has been supported by both Rother District Council (RDC) and Rye Town Council who have identified that the site, along with neighbouring plots along the river frontage, provides an opportunity for new housing and commercial growth.

1.5. This feasibility study translates this strategic level consensus into a tangible assessment as to the deliverability of the Rye Fisheries site within defined budget and operational parameters

1.6. The report provides some clear recommendations as to how the use of the site can be enhanced to provide much needed affordable residential accommodation and a more vibrant mixed commmercial use.

1.7. The two options explored in the report allow TRP to progress on a phased basis with the proposed housing re-development providing the lead in to an improvement of the commercial offer and of the site as whole.


4

2. Context

2.1. Rye is a small market town in East Sussex and port (pop c9, 000) of national historic importance and character with over 300 listed buildings. Its citadel and architectural heritage give its townscape strong visual character and quality. The town is popular with tourists and visitors.

2.2. As one of the ‘Cinque Ports’ on the south coast, Rye’s maritime connections have always been fundamental to its economic prosperity and social history. A significant proportion of the local economy is geared towards local tourism. In the summer season the residential population can increase by 20,000 people per day.

2.3. Rye is situated within Rother District Council (RDC) whose overall population of c90, 000 residents are spread over a wide geographical area to the east of the East Sussex County Council (ESCC ) boundaries. RDC’s main urban area, and administrative centre, is Bexhill on Sea with remaining concentrations in rurally located towns such as Rye.

2.4. 88% of all Rye visitors are day visitors; the top three activities being: cultural/heritage attractions, exploration/soaking up atmosphere (architecture and scenery) and dining out at restaurants.

2.5. The prosperous feel of the town is contrasted with areas of high deprivation. Rye’s economic weaknesses are a lack of affordable housing for local people, overdependence on seasonal and low income jobs associated with the tourism industry. There is low employment growth and relatively high unemployment, while jobs are predominantly low paid, low skilled and centred on the distribution, hotels/restaurants, public administration, education and health sectors.

2.6. The population profile of Rye is getting older but there is significant growth in the age group 15-29. Young people locally face particularly difficulties with opportunities, education attainment and financial constraints. There are few opportunities for young professional people to remain, especially given the high cost of home ownership, contributing to the migration of young people and their associated spending, skills and energy.

2.7. Local tourism and its maritime connections are supplemented by a significant light industrial sector on the outskirts of the town and towards Rye Harbour. The Rye Fisheries site is located on the southern margins of the town in area of mixed residential and commercial use. The site faces the rivers Rother and Brede and its commercial uses – fish processing plant, wet fish shop and leisure boat moorings - reflect this location and Rye’s overall status as an important local fishing port.

2.8. The freehold of the site is owned by the Environment Agency (EA) and held on a long lease by the Rye Partnership (TRP) TRP is a cross-sector, community based regeneration and strategic economic development organisation in Rye. Formed in the 1990’s, from SEEDA funding, it has a modest asset base, including the peninsula multi-use site, from which it derives its main income.

2.9. TRP draws its board of directors from local stakeholders and community representatives who make up its membership of over forty organisations and individuals.


5

3. Planning History & Context

3.1. There is a clear golden thread running through the planning policy position for this site in that the Supplementary Planning Document (SPD ) July 2007 produced by RDC, and the aspiration of the Rye Town Council Neighbourhood Plan, both recognise the significant development potential for this and neighbouring river frontage sites.

3.2. These policy documents outline, in very broad terms, the development potential of the sites and they outline the ‘placemaking’ potential that redevelopment can bring. Given the extensive public engagement that it takes to deliver these policy documents it is evident that the redevelopment of these sites has wide support in the local community as well as political support at District and Town Council level.

3.3. There have been no significant planning applications for the site over the last 20 years reflecting its established use. The last application was for “Internal alterations and change of use of fish processing unit to light industrial use, formation of new hardstanding and parking area” with a decision date of 19 February 2008.

3.4. The development potential in terms of the golden thread in policy terms (for this and neighbouring sites) is further supported by the understanding that their redevelopment will make a positive contribution to meeting the demands/pressure for housing and employment land.

3.5. It is assumed that in Planning Policy terms the District Council’s Local Plan and the Rye Town Council Neighbourhood Plan are current/relevant and up to date in National Planning Policy Framework terms and therefore they should carry significant weight in the judgement of future planning applications.

3.6. RDC have recently adopted a new Local Plan and Rye is developing its own neighbourhood plan. Both recognise the need for additional housing and all proposals for development must fit within this context. The Hastings & Rother District Strategic Market Review (June 2013) identified that 767 new homes per annum would be required to meet its Baseline Scenario. This is substantially higher than the historic rates of delivery over the past 22 years in the area ( 453 dwellings per annum )

3.7. In the RDC area the figures are a demographic requirement for 363 new homes per annum compared to a historic delivery rate of 235 new home per annum (1991/92 – 2012/13) Within the Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA) June 2013 RDC has identified a potential housing supply of 402 new dwellings in Rye over the plan period 2011 – 2028.

3.8. In this context initial consultation has taken place with all leading agencies (RDC, EA, Town Council and Neighbourhood Plan contributors) and the principle for development of the Rye Fisheries site to include additional housing has been established for the purposes and scope of this feasibility study.

3.9. Despite the clear policy position as outlined above it remains acknowledged that full and detailed consultation will be required at as part of any planning application and the assumptions presented here are for initial viability and options assessment purposes only.


6

4. Current Operation

4.1. This study is based upon a baseline analysis of current operations to acknowledge that any additional development must:

• Take into account current site use and trading and reflect the ambitions/restrictions of existing occupiers and leases

• Ensure that the financial contribution of current operations are maintained and secured to support any additional/new development

• Provide an overall enhanced offer that animates the site and increases footfall without creating constraints which may inhibit future development

4.2. Appendix A sets out the profit and loss account for current trading based on the following occupancy arrangements:

Tenant Name Use Lease Start Years Expiry Date

Chapmans Sevenoaks Fish Processing Plant Apr-15 14 Apr-29

Market Fisheries Wet fish shop Mar-08 20 Mar-28

Various 30 x Moorings annual licence

Residential 2 x flats AST's

4.3. The site is one of 3 assets held by TRP and represents the organisations’ main source of revenue and contribution to overheads. It produces an annual gross surplus of around £36k before reduction for voids, bad debts and overhead contribution.

4.4. Investment is needed in all current facilities to maintain revenue and create a more sustainable platform for additional investment. In particular:

• Chapmans have recently established a more extensive and extended use of the fish processing plant but do not utilise the upper floor areas which are vacant

• The wet fish shop, Market Fisheries, is open to the public but pedestrian and vehicle access is restricted – the public realm is not attractive and does not encourage footfall, vehicle access is via a narrow corner junction off the busy A259.

• Some of the moorings have been up-graded on an incremental basis but the overall condition and ancillary facilities are poor in comparison to alternative nearby offers

• The residential accommodation is dilapidated and in need of either significant renovation or replacement


7

5. Options Appraisal

5.1. An initial feasibility report was commissioned by TRP in 2016 from Bemerton Ltd. This focused on 3 x options for the large scale re-development of the site and a final draft was considered by the TRP Board in November 2016.

5.2. Although the draft report provided useful contextual analysis, and incorporated extensive consultation with local stakeholders, the investment and development options set out were not considered to be deliverable by the Board. This follow on study seeks to address the key requirement for options that are deliverable within the levels of likely borrowing and with minimum reliance on external funding.

5.3. For the purpose of this report the option of larger scale re-development of the site has been set aside, larger scale re-development may be possible in the future but does not represent a short term deliverable option given:

• existing use/lease arrangements and restrictions

• the importance to TRP of sustained and continuing revenue streams

• the level of infrastructure works that would be required (road access and flood defence) to enable residential development beyond the existing footprint

• TRP’s overall financial and borrowing capacity and commensurate limits to external funding

5.4. In consultation with the TRP Board, existing businesses and stakeholders a range of medium and smaller scale options have therefore been considered which seek to meet the following requirements:

• Deliverability: options that are within the immediate financial and delivery capacity of TRP either directly or working with identified partners.

• Current use: The maintained or enhanced use of existing assets, the establishment of more sustainable income streams and a more robust trading platform

• Housing: The provision of new and additional housing within the footprint of the existing residential offer.

• Offer: A change in the site from a difficult to access relatively low quality offer to one which starts to provide a vibrant new addition to the towns tourism and employment facilities

• Future: A development solution which has the potential to unlock future larger scale redevelopment


8

6. Business Case Summary

6.1. Based on the requirements set out above 2 mixed use options have been appraised :

Option 1 £2.4m

Medium level investment in commercial assets to improve and enhance use + provision of 4 x new build affordable homes Commercial total scheme costs £ 1m - Residential total scheme costs £ 1.4m

Option 2 £1.6m

Lower level investment in commercial assets to maintain current use + provision of 4 x new build affordable homes Commercial total scheme costs £ 225k - Residential total scheme costs £ 1.4m

6.2. In summary the proposed options combine better use of existing commercial assets with much needed new affordable housing. The commercial assets are proposed to be retained within TRP’s direct control and investment derived from a combination of TRP reserves, external funding and commercial and other borrowing. The residential scheme is assumed to be delivered by an external partner.

7. Commercial Scheme

7.1. The proposed commercial investment and rental position for both options is set out in the following table:

Option 1 Investment

Option 1 Rents Description Option 1

Fish Processing Plant (FPP) and Wet Fish Shop

46,700

Continued use

FPP 1st Floor 450,000 30,000 Start-up creative/tech units mezzanine

Moorings 150,000 24,000 Patch, repair and part re-new

Facilities 50,000 Up-grade existing toilets + dry dock area

Fees + On Costs 411,000

Includes contribution to enhanced public realm scheme

Total 1,061,000 100,700

Option 2 Investment

Option 2 Rents

Description Option 2

FPP & Wet Fish Shop

46,700 Continued use

Moorings 150,000 24,000 Patch and repair

Facilities 50,000 Up-grade existing toilets + dry dock area

Fees + On Costs

Total 200,000 70,700


9

7.2. Taking each of the commercial elements in turn:

Fish Processing Plant Option 1 seeks to build on the recently established successful operation, and on Chapmans extended use of the building, by also developing the first floor mezzanine area for use as flexible start- up space for creative and tech businesses. A chartered surveyor has undertaken an initial feasibility study of the space and determined that such conversion is possible at a budget cost of around £450,000. (Appendix D) An area of 400 sq m could be created and sub- divided depending on use and individual occupant demand. For the purpose of this feasibility 8 units are assumed at an average size of 500sq ft. per unit with a total rent of £30,000 per annum. This represents a 6.5% gross rental yield and generates rents per square foot of approx. £7.50. These are at the low end of market average to encourage start-up businesses. The re-development of the mezzanine area would create an important new business and employment offer in the town and start the process of longer term site transformation. Option 2 recognises that a phased approach may be necessary to allow time for funding to be raised; the exact use to be explored and the pre-let demand established. It therefore provides a much lower cost option that excludes the mezzanine development at least on an initial basis. Some improvements are needed to the building but these should be recoverable from a more commercially operated service charge regime and are not assumed as a cost to TRP.

Wet Fish Shop The wet fish shop occupies a small corner of the FPP and has been operating successfully under the current lease for nearly 10 years. It represents the main external facing offer to local residents and visitors. Its’ use complements the FPP and the character of the site as a whole. No immediate improvements are required and the rent of approx. £8 per square foot is secured until March 2028. Neither option assumes any change to current arrangements

Moorings + Facilities The moorings do require investment and intervention to sustain income. Although they are well looked after through the on site management, and incremental improvements have been made, more significant investment is overdue. Although almost fully let on an annual licence basis (29 out of 30) alternative offers exist in the immediate proximity at comparable rents - £80 – £133 per linear meter per annum. (TRP rents charged per sq ft. at approx. £100 per sq m equivalent). The operational and administrative management of the moorings is also complex and void/bad debt rates relatively high. Both options assume a total investment of £200,000 to carry out a


10

further remediation/part replacement programme and to up-grade the ancillary facilities of the toilets and dry dock. Although this investment is not assumed to generate additional revenue it will help secure income and make sure that the character of the site is maintained and future development potential enhanced. Other, albeit much larger, schemes such as Sovereign Harbour in Eastbourne have demonstrated how maritime leisure use can support high- end residential development.

Fees & On Costs Option 1 is a larger and more complex scheme which will incur associated fees and on costs to cover items such as architects, structural engineers and project management. A contribution to a more ambitious public realm scheme of £150k is also assumed to reflect additional traffic to the business start-up units, the need to attract tenants and create a change in feel of the current built environment. Some elements of new planting, lighting and signage will help re-animate the site. Option 2 assumes TRP directly commission and manage the works which are an extension of the current maintenance and site management regimes. As such external support should not be required and the public realm contribution is limited to the residential scheme.


11

7.3. In profit and loss terms the following table illustrates that both options generate less profit than projected current operations as they are commercial only and require new borrowing to support the proposed capital investment.

Rye Fisheries Profit & Loss Commercial

Current

Option 1

Option 2

Income

£

£

£

Residential Lettings

18,300

-

-

Moorings

24,000

24,000

24,000

Fish Processing Plant

39,700

39,700

39,700

Market Fisheries

7,000

7,000

7,000

Business Start Ups

-

30,000

-

Office

-

-

Community

-

-

Restaurant/Café

-

-

Total Income

89,000

100,700

70,700

Expenditure

Site Man/Maint

10,000

5,000

5,000

Business Rates

8,700

8,700

8,700

Rent Moorings

3,000

3,000

3,000

Rent EA

25,200

25,200

25,200

Utilities

6,000

-

-

Voids

-

10,630

7,630

Bad Debts

-

-

-

Interest

-

27,169

11,250

Total Expenditure

52,900

79,699 60,780

Profit/Loss - before over-heads 36,100

21,001 9,920


12

7.4. However in terms of long term sustainability and underlying position:

• It is questionable as to how long current profits would accrue without investment

• The two options create longer term, and new, income streams

• The site improvements should help consolidate the anchor tenants

• Re-development of the residential units by a partner developer may facilitate further development that will benefit TRP

• The £36k of profit on current projections is before voids. The actual profit for 2016/17 for the site was only £23,400. Void rates should reduce after investment but are left in at 10% of gross income for prudence.

7.5. The P&L projections for both options also assume a relatively high cost of new commercial borrowing at 5%. As part of bringing forward the commercial investment plans TRP will have the opportunity to explore other forms of borrowing including social investment funds and LA brokered commercial lending at lower rates.

7.6. The availability of external funding should also be explored to reduce the level of required borrowing in particular:

• Art Council grants for the creative business space in the mezzanine area

• and Local Enterprise Partnership/ Heritage Lottery Funding for the development of the maritime facilities and associated skills

• One Public Estate funding for the infrastructure and enabling costs

7.7. TRP is a very well run organisation that maximises its capacity through efficient management and clear strategic direction. This said there are a number of areas where the proposed investment could provide TRP with an opportunity to improve the trading position:

• The service charge regime for all commercial assets could be operated more directly in accordance with the leases as a variable service charge. This increases administration but this in itself is a recoverable cost. Such a regime should mean that a higher proportion of current site costs are recovered. The forward assumptions around site maintenance and utilities assume changes in this area.

• The moorings generate the majority of the voids and bad debts. Improvements to the quality of the offer should support a more robust approach to, for example, the payment of licence fees in advance.


13

8. Residential Scheme

8.1. Rye has an active housing market with around 180 units traded annually and sales taking an average of 3 months from market to completion. The strongest market sector historically has been terraced and semi-detached housing with a very limited supply of new housing coming on to the market. Sales prices vary considerably between £350 -600sq ft.

8.2. The 2 current properties on the site were built around 30 years ago. They are let as market rents (£176 p/w, £763 pcm) on assured shorthold tenancies. Both tenancies have exceeded the original term so vacant possession could be secured relatively quickly. The history of the tenants is not known and TRP may want to give consideration to decant arrangements including options to move back in to the development if there are supporting circumstances.

8.3. Through the feasibility study various tenure options for the proposed new homes have been modelled but, although sales demand in the town is strong, development for sale or market rent have been ruled out because of the:

• local policy requirements to maximise affordable homes

• mainly commercial nature of the site and the impact on sales/rental values

• level of risk involved in speculative development on the particular part of site i.e. proximity to commercial uses

• TRP wish to explore housing options that work more closely with other uses, not constrain future development and which may help unlock further new housing in the future

8.4. It is recommended that an enabling residential development partner is sought to fund, deliver, manage and hold on a long lease 4 x new residential units built for affordable rent – this will represent a loss in current rental income to TRP but greatly enhance the site, protect core commercial income streams and act as a platform for future development.

8.5. The residential scheme appraisal demonstrates that, like most affordable housing, some form of capital subsidy is required for delivery to be viable and that such accommodation does not provide a positive contribution to profit and loss. An external delivery partner is therefore required although, assuming the right partner is engaged, this option will provide some significant benefits to TRP:

• Replacement of low quality accommodation of diminishing viability and which is detrimental to other site investment

• The opportunity to explore innovative build options that match the overall ambitions for the strategic development, architectural improvement, built environment enhancement and more creative use of the site.

• The opportunity to link innovative build solutions to different forms of tenure and associated use such as key worker housing or live work accommodation. Although for initial viability purposes the residential appraisal has been based on affordable housing at 80% of market rent local need, site location/nature and other site uses present a strong case for consideration of a more targeted offer.

• The utilisation of partner capacity to help bring forward non-residential investment plans


14

• The retention of overall site control as lead agency/lessee and the likelihood of reversion of the residential asset to TRP at the end of an agreed investment period.

8.6. The proposed residential scheme of 4 newly built town houses are therefore assumed to be let at affordable rent at 80% of the market rate and to replace accommodation of low quality and increasingly marginal/ low value lettability.

8.7. Utilising the existing footprint the intention of the scheme is to:

• provide affordable housing that reflects the overall use and character of site

• make a significant contribution to site enabling and public realm improvements that will benefit the site as a whole - £132,000 is assumed for built environment and improvements to road/pedestrian access

• acknowledge that currently the site does not support development for market sale and would be unlikely to attract a speculative commercial developer

• provide a baseline deliverable option to bring in a public sector delivery partners with balance sheet capacity and access to grant or other forms of affordable housing funding

• meet initial eligibility criteria for grant/other funding by being of traditional build and minimum expected lifespan

8.8. A simple residential town house scheme is proposed as the basis for further consultation, engaging a partner and a more detailed appraisal and options review which should include:

• The development of the homes as live/work space so that the current non- habitable rooms on the ground floor are redesigned for artisan use

• An assessment of alternative forms of construction/housing such as modular build and “ container homes “ which may prove more financially viable, appear more in keeping with other uses and enable the rents to be set at a more affordable level.

• Further exploration of tenure and priority lettings. ESCC are working on a co-investment basis with EBC on a pilot key worker scheme in Eastbourne and it may be possible to extend the model to Rye to both increase potential funding sources and more directly address local housing need.

8.9. The scheme as represented in Appendix C has been produced for initial viability purposes and as part of the pre-application development work set out above will require detailed planning, site investigation and architectural advice before being submitted for approval.

8.10. The scheme proposes that the existing two residential units are redeveloped to provide four two-bedroom houses for local workers at modern standards of space, insulation and soundproofing. In order to deal with the risk of flooding the ground floor is to be treated as sacrificial space, constructed of engineering bricks and with washable, drained floors.

8.11. The dry dock headwall is moved inland by 3m to prepare for a larger residential development in a subsequent phase of work and to enable a boat lifting facility to be installed if a suitable operating partner can be identified.


15

8.12. Due to the flooding and potential contamination issues, together with the unneighbourly planning use classes of residential accommodation located next to a fish processing plant, the specification of the new houses will be of even greater significance than usual.

8.13. Built in a town house format, as mentioned above the ground floors will be treated as sacrificial space, with highly resilient, washable surfaces wherever possible. The floors will have drainage facilities so that, in the event of a flood, cleaning and restoration can be undertaken at minimal cost and disturbance.

8.14. Sound insulation and airflow management will be important factors, as well, to reduce the likelihood of complaints from future residential occupiers to the noise and smell of the adjacent fish processing plant and other commercial activities on the site.

8.15. In order both to maximise the development potential of the site and to facilitate the phased development approach modelled, the housing is to provide single-aspect dwellings. This has an impact in terms of the potential overheating of south-facing properties and of ensuring adequate sunlight for north-facing rooms. Again, the detailing of the architectural treatment and the specification of both the materials and the mechanical and electrical installation will be critical to the long term success of this project.


16

9. Modelling assumptions:

9.1. Development capital cost assumptions are set out as follows:

Description Amount Note

Land

nil

Build cost

904,000 £1,884 per square metre

On Costs

235,000 26% allowance for fees, contingency and development PM

Site enabling public realm 198,880 Includes improved/widened access from A259

Dev Margin + Interest

nil

Total 1,337,880

• Affordable rents: based on £867 per calendar month for a two-bed house ( 80% of market Rent of £250 per week, £1,083 per calendar month )

• Service charges: have been calculated on the basis of a nominal £5.00 per week to allow for a contribution to the management of the estate.

• Interest Rate: long term assumed at 4.5%. The NPV calculation is based on a discount rate of 4.5% over a period of 40 years.

• Development Period Interest: assumed at 0% on basis of public sector delivery within a wider programme

• Management and Maintenance Costs: £500 per unit per annum

• The total cost of the residential properties is thus forecast at £1,337,880

9.2. Based on current grant rates of around 15% the average affordable home within the social

housing sector takes around 12 years to produce an annual surplus and a further 8 years to reach a cumulative break- even position. At a programme level housing associations have to take a view about how many new homes they can develop and absorb within their balance sheets. Many housing associations have become less active developers over the last 3 – 4 years.

9.3. Current grant rates, and rent restructuring, has reduced the amount of new affordable housing being delivered by housing associations in East Sussex. Firm allocations National Affordable Housing Programme (NAHP) 2016 – 2021: 255 affordable homes including Brighton.

9.4. Local Authorities, like Eastbourne and Lewes, are increasingly taking a direct delivery role to address shortages, generate new supply and meet wider strategic objectives such as place shaping. Over the same period the two councils are committed to delivering 355 affordable homes – 145 of which have already been completed.

9.5. The modelling assumptions for the Rye Fisheries site assume an LA delivered scheme on the basis that TRP would be unlikely to find an RP partner in the current climate especially for such a small number of units. A direct design and build based procurement of a development partner would render the scheme unviable.


17

9.6. The development and funding model for Local Authorities may also be more appropriate for the proposed units at Rye Fisheries as:

• A longer investment period is generally assumed which improves NPV and allows the authority, at a programme level, to take a view on the level of up-front costs and contributions for each scheme particularly on brownfield sites where viability may otherwise be too marginal. For example no developer profit margin or development period interest costs are assumed.

• It may enable access to, and utilisation of, internal funding such as right to buy receipts – average grant rate 30% subject to internal business case for out of Borough application

9.7. Were the development to be incorporated as part of a wider development programme then further efficiencies could be derived to help improve affordability or even generate direct cross subsidy to TRP to help with the commercial elements of the proposals. The affordable housing could be used for example to partially offset S106 requirements on other sites in the town with any financial benefit shared.

9.8. The four residential units described above represents a base plan for the regeneration and redevelopment of this site. More extensive developments have been modelled, partly to ensure that advantage can be taken of additional funds as and when they become available, and partly to ensure that the development can be rolled out in stages and to demonstrate that a smaller development now does not stand in the way of a larger development later on.

9.9. For the base model of four new houses, once an instruction to proceed is issued and assuming no delays with planning, funding or vacant possession, a start on site could be made within twelve months.

9.10. The construction period would be up to one year. It may be possible to reduce this period by up to three months but, given the constraints of the broader site in terms of its ongoing use as a working commercial centre, it would be sensible to take a more cautious approach until the details can be confirmed with a contractor.


18

10. Action Plan – Outline Project Plan

10.1. The following action plan provides a next steps delivery guide which will enable TRP to make immediate progress in bringing forward the proposed improvements to the Rye Fisheries site.

10.2. The plan assumes the larger Option 1 scheme is delivered in 3 distinct phases as follows:

• Phase 1: bring forward and deliver residential scheme. Utilise associated capacity to bring forward latter phases. Introduce new service charge and site administration arrangements

• Phase 2: deliver lower level investment in commercial assets to maintain current use and provision. Bring forward plans for larger scale investment and potential additional development.

• Phase 3: deliver higher level commercial asset investment in mezzanine and bring forward future site development strategy.

Ref Action Timescale

1.1 Review service charge and site administration arrangements ahead of consultation with operators and issuing of new annual mooring licences/consultation on investment proposals

Jan – Jun 18

1.2 TRP Board to adopt report, agree lead resource arrangements and submit feasibility study report to ESCC.

Jan 18

1.3 Initial site and title investigations to confirm development potential and to identify any constraints

Jan- Mar 18

1.4 Launch event TRP Members and local stakeholders Mar 18

1.5 Identify development partner and undertake next phase of detailed appraisal for residential scheme including alternative options

Feb - Jun 18

1.6 Development Partner to lead on detailed consultation with EA, Highways England and RDC on proposed development options/delivery arrangements to cover potential extension of head lease and resolution of title issues.

Feb - Jun 18

1.8 Consultation with existing commercial operators on proposed development options, terms of leases and any required variations

Apr – Jun 18

1.9 Up-date report to Members and local stakeholders Sep 18

1.10 TRP to complete supporting internal business plan and identify availability level of supporting finance to cover:

• Treatment of current assets/depreciation

• Use of reserves

• Commercial borrowing

• Residential partner funding or utilisation of partner guarantees to support cheaper borrowing

• Other funding – grants, regeneration and borrowing

• Links to ESCC strategic initiatives such a key worker housing

Apr – Oct 18


19

1.11 TRP to undertake strategic level opportunity analysis with public sector partners ( RDC/ESCC )to explore how site might be brought forward as an exemplar for:

• New housing investment companies

• Initiatives to examine the strategic level use of public sector assets to maximise social and financial capital

Apr – Oct 18

1.12 Commission and client lead on any required surveys (Flood risk assessments, topographical surveys, contamination reports etc.)

Apr Jun 18

1.13 Consult with internal colleagues including planning to confirm preferred development option/tenure mix

May – Jun 18

1.14 Co-ordination of legal input necessary to investigate/establish any property title issues and to put in place any required contractual arrangements

May – Jun 18

1.15 Produce individual scheme design brief Aug 18

1.16 Procurement, appointment and client lead for employers agent (EA) and all professional services as required

Aug 18

1.17 Provide advice on adoption and contractual incorporation of best practice for added value components such as employment and training outcomes and support to social enterprises

Aug 18

1.18 Confirm site capacity, development option and engage architects to review and produce scheme design to RIBA Stage 4

Oct 18

1.19 Lead on all aspects of consultation with Board and local residents to include pre-application discussions with planners and internal colleagues

Oct 18

1.20 Achieve project sign off and confirm sources of funding to include liaison with internal teams for compliance with design brief standards and other management/maintenance requirements

Nov 18

1.21 Submit planning application - arrange and lead on all public consultations relating to schemes submitted for planning approval

Nov 18

1.22 Co-ordinate production of Employer’s Requirements and establishment of specifications, in conjunction with client technical services and maintenance teams, for inclusion in contractual documents

Nov 18

1.23 Co-ordination of procurement/tender process to appointment of contractor stage in accordance with TRP contract procedure rules

Dec 18

1.24 Start on site residential scheme Mar 19

1.25 Associated help to establish and support internal delivery resources/systems to appraise, confirm funding and bring forward phase 2 schemes within a risk assurance and compliance framework

As required


20

Appendices

Appendix A – Site Plan

Appendix B – Residential Scheme Layouts

Appendix C – FPP Surveyors Report


21


22

Appendix A

Site Plan


23

Appendix C


24

Appendix D

Fish Processing Plant

The building is a reasonably modern portal frame industrial building which we anticipate dates from late 70’s / early 80’s. It has been extended at a later date with a single story extension along the full length the NW side. It utilises fairly typical forms of construction for this age and type of building with both the roof and the elevations provided with profiled metal industrial cladding, insulation layer and internal lining panels. However the perimeter elevations at ground floor level are formed in fair faced blockwork which has been overpainted which is not typical. This blockwork also appears to be lightweight aeriated type block rather than a dense concrete block. Facing cavity brickwork or cladding down to ground floor is far more common industrial buildings of this age.

It is clear that various modifications have been made over the years to the external envelope in order to suite the requirements of occupiers; doors, windows and ventilation louvres have been formed or infilled in places to both the ground level blockwork and metal cladding above. There are currently a serious of roller shutter doors and insulated sliding doors, as well as pedestrian access doors and fire exits serving the current two occupiers.

We understand the roof has been re-clad since the original construction, albeit the presence of vegetation growth in gutters indicates there is no active roof maintenance. This is also evident to the rest of the external fabric which, despite periodic redecoration having been carried out, including basic over painting of the plastisol coated cladding sheets is now tired and aged; isolated damage and dis-repair is now evident. In addition to general maintenance works, the outside of the building would benefit from a general upgrade and modernisation, both to improve appearance and to reduce future maintenance obligations. There will also be a need for various alterations to accommodate the conversion of the 1st floor / mezzanine level into office use. Typical works to the external fabric that will be applicable or should be considered are:

1. General maintenance works to the roof and rainwater goods.

2. Introduction of clear glazed roof lights for natural lighting to the new 1st floor / mezzanine level.

3. Repairs to perimeter blockwork at ground level; possible render or over-clad.

4. Over-cladding of existing elevations to modernise the external appearance in line with the overall redevelopment / re-modelling of the area. These works would mitigate the need for repairs and redecoration of the existing cladding and would allow the potential to increase the thermal insulation value of the walls.

5. Servicing / overhaul or replacement of existing loading doors (roller shutters / sliding).

6. New windows and doors formed at both ground and upper levels to serve 1st floor / mezz level offices; replacement of existing windows and pedestrian doors to provide uniform external appearance.

7. External works to perimeter areas and parking to accommodate intensified use of the building.

A suitable budget range for works to the external fabric is £255,000 - £285,000, to include main contractor’s prelims, overheads and profit (etc). This is on the basis of these external works forming a part of a larger contract involving the internal conversion of the 1st floor / mezzanine level into

office use.

Internally the building accommodates two separate businesses / occupiers. A fish merchant (Market Fisheries) uses the front south-west half of the ground floor, albeit was not actively using all of these


25

areas. They have a public accessible shop / retail counter to the front and further general access along the side extension. A fish processing business (Chapmans) occupies the rear section of the building, accessed from the rear north-east elevation.

The occupation of the building is largely limited to ground floor with sub-division into processing / cold storage / general storage areas and ancillary staff welfare facilities by way of masonry and stud partitions. The majority of the processing and storage areas are clad with hygienic wash down panelling. Nearly all areas have a joist and boarded ceiling which is also clad with wash down panelling to processing / storage areas. Some of the processing / storage areas are cold rooms, with the associated refrigerant plant. These rooms are likely to have insulation in the construction of the partitions and ceiling.

Whilst the joist and boarded ceiling construction over the ground floor rooms does provide a mezzanine storage level above, it will have been designed primarily to support the cladding and insulation to the rooms below. It does not provide a single uniform level as the ceilings are at different heights and it will not have been designed for office loadings that would apply when the space is converted. Works to the 1st floor / mezzanine level will require the introduction of a suitable deck. Ideally this should be independent and not take support off the ground floor layout as

this could restrict future layout changes to the ground floor if / when occupiers change. In addition to this element of work, the need to create an entrance with stair and lift access to the 1st floor / mezzanine level, along with means of escape staircases, will also affect the ground floor. The implications of these alterations will need to be negotiated with the two current occupiers as it will affect their demised space.

Typical works that will be necessary for the conversion of the 1st floor / mezzanine level into office

use are:

1. Construction of separate dedicated entrance for new offices, including staircase and lift to 1st floor / mezzanine level.

2. Creation of means of escape routes, including staircase, for emergency escape from 1st floor / mezzanine level.

3. New floor for office floor loading and supporting structural frame.

4. Alterations and enabling works at ground floor to allow works noted above (1 – 3); strip out and alterations to existing mezzanine storage level.

5. Lining / cladding to underside of roof and to walls, ready for office use.

6. Staff welfare: Toilets – male, female and disabled; Kitchen / tea point.

7. Mains utility connections for offices – electricity, water and drainage.

8. Services: Heating, ventilation & cooling; plumbing; lighting and small power; fire alarm; security alarm, data cabling.

9. Finishes – floor coverings & decoration.

A suitable budget range for the internal works to create offices at 1st floor / mezzanine level is £420,000 - £450,000, to include main contractors’ prelims, overheads and profit (etc). Again this is on the basis of these external works forming part of a larger contract involving the previously noted external works.


26

The current recommended budget for all works (external and internal conversion works etc) is therefore in the order of £675,000 - £725,000. The scheme will need negotiation and agreement with the current occupiers. It will need intrusive investigations to allow the design to be completed. It will need a full project team as the nature of this work is not suited to ‘design & build’; a traditional full design approach is applicable for the procurement of these works. A further 15% - 17.5% should be allowed for to cover likely legal input, the required project team fees (design input – architect, structural, services; project management / contract admin; financial; health & safety; party wall) and cost for statutory approvals (Planning; B. Regulations). The budget figures exclude for VAT.


27

rye fisheries rock channel eastryepartnership.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/rye... ·...

Documents