Coastal Industrialised Land Development in the UK
by Diane Awo Dumashie
Key words: Land, Coastal Zone, Project coordination and
In the UK development of industrialised land has reached
the top of the political development and social agenda. Not least because
of the increasing pressures to find additional housing land to provide for
the emerging new social living patterns, but also because of the urgency
to ensure the need for redundant industrialised land to become a clean
environment that will sustain existing and future generations.
This presentation focuses upon coastal industrialised land
and the management process required to regenerate land to meet the
aspirations of sustainable land use. Taussik has usefully categorised ‘spoilt’
land into four definable types. These are brownfield sites, land
contaminated in situ, land degraded by activities elsewhere, and finally
land affected by natural events (J Taussik Littoral Conference 1998
p23-33). Accordingly development projects are drawn from coastal spoilt
land: a former oil refinery site, an aggregate site, and a former naval
By drawing upon the author’s direct project co
ordination experience of coastal spoilt site redevelopment as well as
ongoing cases, the aim is to illustrate the co ordination and appraisal
processes essential to a planned multi disciplinary approach. The key to
success is leadership from the top and delegated leadership to the project
coordinator. In such cases a Surveyor, acting as a project coordinator has
a valuable contribution to make. But it must be emphasised that a range of
key disciplines is needed.
The process requires an understanding of the Approach,
which deals with the contextual background such as government regulatory
control at European, national and local level. Next the Project Assembly
process that encompasses collection of baseline data with respect to the
existing historic industrialised legacy. Following this the Framework for
Action can be drawn up which above all will allocate roles and
responsibilities. Crucial to this is the pattern of landownership, whether
it is in public or private hands, and the relationship and levels of
community participation. It will be seen that this has a direct
implication upon how the process is managed.
The lessons drawn from these projects are focused upon by
reference to a hypothetical case, which illustrates the range of the
issues for analysis. The opportunities for development are interrogated
with reference to an initial market appraisal. At this stage the
environmental effects of each use are audited and the need for gap funding
identified. An initial marketing campaign should also be looked at to
ascertain budgets, time lags and strategic use of world opportunities.
Remember we are now all global players looking to global markets.
The presentation proposes a way forward based on the
technological innovations on the horizon. Such as a decision support tool
which is already being used in the process of Integrated Coastal Zone
development and management. This will seek to facilitate ever more
comprehensive ways to promote the process forward and contribute to the
Diane Awo Dumashie
6f St Catherines Road
Bournemouth BH6 4AA
Coastal Industrialised Land Development in the UK
In the UK development of industrialised land has reached the
top of the political development and social agenda. Not least because of the
increasing pressures to find additional housing land to provide for the emerging
new social living patterns, but also because of the urgency to ensure the need
for redundant industrialised land to become a clean environment that will
sustain existing and future generations.
This presentation focuses upon coastal industrialised land
and the management process required to regenerate land to meet the aspirations
of sustainable land use. Taussik has usefully categorised ‘spoilt’ land into
four definable types. These are brownfield sites; land contaminated in situ,
land degraded by activities elsewhere, and finally land affected by natural
events (1). Accordingly development projects are drawn from coastal spoilt land:
a former oil refinery site, an aggregate site, and a former naval site.
By drawing upon the author’s direct project co ordination
experience of coastal spoilt site redevelopment as well as ongoing cases, the
aim is to illustrate the co ordination and appraisal processes essential to a
planned multi disciplinary approach. The key to success is leadership from the
top and delegated leadership to the project co ordiantor. In such cases a
Surveyor, acting as a project co ordiantor has a valuable contribution to make.
But it must be emphasised that a range of key disciplines is needed.
The process requires an understanding of the Approach, which
deals with the contextual background such as government regulatory control at
European, national and local level. Next the Project Assembly process that
encompasses collection of baseline data with respect to the existing historic
industrialised legacy. Following this the Framework for Action can be drawn up
which above all will allocate roles and responsibilities. Crucial to this is the
pattern of land ownership, whether it is in public or private hands, and the
relationship and levels of community participation. It will be seen that these
have a direct implication upon how the process is managed.
The lessons drawn from these projects are focused upon by
reference to a hypothetical case, which illustrates the range of the issues for
analysis. The opportunities for development are interrogated with reference to
an initial market appraisal. At this stage the environmental effects of each use
are audited and the need for gap funding identified. An initial marketing
campaign should also be looked at to ascertain budgets, time lags and strategic
use of world opportunities. Remember we are now all global players looking to
The presentation proposes a way forward based on the
technological innovations on the horizon. Such as a decision support tool which
is already being used in the process of Integrated Coastal Zone development and
management. This will seek to facilitate ever more comprehensive ways to promote
the process forward and contribute to the appraisal methodology.
Sustainability and environmental concerns are increasingly
reflected in European and individual country government’s policies. In the UK
one of the examples of this is a policy statement that aspires for 60% of the
4.4 million new homes that are estimated to be required by 2016 to be built on
reclaimed brownfield industrial land. Clearly not all of this land can or should
be allocated for housing. There is a need for continuing supply of employment
Estimates identify over 50,000 hectares of derelict
industrial land in England and Wales, but given the legacy of the industrial
revolution this is probably only a fraction of the total contaminated land.
Defining brownfield land is helpful. The former UK Department of Environment
definition is "land so damaged by industrial or other development that it
is incapable of beneficial use without treatment" (1992). Taussak has
usefully expanded this by categorising ‘spoilt’ land into four categories.
For the purposes of this presentation two are used:
- Brownfield land, sites "which have been subject to development but is
no longer in effective use" and is thus land which has ended the
development cycle and is now to be are appraised for redevelopment, and the
second, not mutually exclusive is,
- Land contaminated in situ described as " land where harm is being, or
can be, caused by the nature of substances on, in or under the land".
Three such projects worked on by the author include: 1,000
acres of brown and contaminated coastal land, 11 acres of brown estuary land,
and 100 acres of brown coastal land. All are in single land ownership.
It is the land surveying profession that plays such a central
role in the management of our land and resources. The purpose of this
presentation is to demonstrate the management of the project process for
appraisal of coastal (including estuary waterfront). Clearly sustainability
is wider than the property life cycle, but the focus is the interrelationship
between the traditional economic development appraisal and the process of
achieving consensus between different parties.
This is discussed first by outlining the initial management
approach, next the assembly of information needed for decision making. In this
context the issues gleaned are highlighted with reference to project A (Oil
refinery), and Project B (Aggregate site) and the framework for action is
illustrated by Project C (Naval air station). Finally, project D is the
hypothetical case that draws from the earlier project methodology and set in the
context of an initial development appraisal.
The management approach is concerned about collecting
information about landowner, community and regulatory authorities. Thus it is
dealing with people, their institutions and their needs.
Clearly there are a range of different methodologies to this
approach, but it is attempted here to simply illustrate the process, give an
indication of the complexities, but identifying the objectives and leadership
required for the decision making process. The importance of any approach is to
maintain flexibility and adaptability.
There are probably three main prompts that will drive the
initial development process. First, institutional framework/legislation, second
objectives and delivery, and finally allocation of roles and responsibilities.
Each of these is outlined before describing the salient issues that arose in the
project case studies.
In the UK the overriding framework affecting development is
land allocation, although other important issues include, the institution of
land (3), taxation and the social and economic context. This presentation
focuses specifically upon two key frameworks: the basis of land allocation and
the institution of land. Each is briefly described below.
Land allocation in the UK occurs within the planning
framework. This is traditionally concerned with the resolution of environmental
conflicts, but is a functional development control technique. The concept of
sustainability adds a new dimension and the aim is to meet society's needs
according to this principle.
Implementing planning relies upon local governance through an
area based authority structure. Two principal instruments combine to make up the
planning framework under which control can be effected. These are the
development plans, which are considered the 'heart' of the framework, and
development control. The former comprises the structure, local and unitary
Development plans as planning outputs. These are the statutory documents by
which local authorities through their planning departments undertake their local
These plans represent a link between planning at central and
regional levels; they take account of government policies while also considering
the development plans of neighbouring areas, the character of the local area and
the needs and wishes of the local people. Thus they are permissive, and are
statements upon which planning permission will or will not be issued.
Development cannot occur without planning permission, which is based upon public
consent through land use plans. The planning system applies to land issues above
Mean Low Water Mark (MLWM), implying that authorities are required to consider
different ways of approaching coastal regulation below LWM.
The 1990's is considered as a period of the 'plan led
system', highlighting the importance attributed to the development plan, and
decisions which must be in keeping with it. In addition development
significantly affecting the environment, usually through size and location, is
subject to Environmental Assessments.
The institution of land is the second important framework and
relates to the social structuring of land rights as part of the wider socio-
economic picture. Resource allocation and management inevitably relies upon
freehold land tenure, which is intimately bound up with societal development.
The government upholds the rights of owners to be the 'best judge' of use,
thereby designating privilege in ownership. Thus the landowner’s objective
becomes important and is dealt with next.
These relate to a range of different party’s interests and
agendas. Each must be initially identified, their objectives clarified, before
deciding upon the legitimacy of each. In certain situations monetary value may
not be the overriding objective. Perhaps disposing of land assets consistent
with gaining the optimum value is the strategy because of the need to generate
The landowner’s objective may be the foremost objective,
but the planning framework invites interaction between landowner and government
to agree and sometimes compromise goals. Thus the philosophy and objectives of
land use planning is to control development by planning for the future, and
successfully controls the physical use in the public interest for which it was
It has to be remembered that regeneration projects often
involve multiple parties acting together, even in the case of single
landownership scenarios as presented here. Objectives from the community, local
planning authority, central government and industry bodies need to be
identified. Of paramount importance is what can each party deliver? It is for
this reason that landowners are often key because of their interest in the land.
Although the rise in NGO influence over the last decade suggests that community
representatives will increasingly be speaking out. It is not easy to show the
direct effects of public interest on land and property, but this is set to
increase as a more sophisticated information age is entered into.
An issue, such as sustainability, which fundamentally affects
economic and social structures demands political and intellectual leadership.
The process of change, and meeting various objectives needs managing. The
purpose of leadership is to create a direction for strategy making, determining
the links to implementation, and directing others. Thus leadership is about
managing people both within and out of organisations. The leadership elements
include vision, organisational match, and the strength and ability to implement
processes. The risk to strategy is a failure to perceive conflicts and ignore,
or not having awareness, of the external environment. The projects described
here illustrate project co-ordination by surveyors, on behalf of the landowner.
4. Project Assembly
Project assembly is finding out exactly what the position is.
It is this stage that represents the traditional economic study process of
collecting base line data. But in the context of coastal industrial regeneration
this expands to a multi- tasked process including identifying the correct
professional expertise required. Project assembly may be divided into
information relating to assets and liabilities (or development constraints). It
may be that some liabilities may actually be assets and vice versa!
The project studies below identifies each project by site
size, location and present/ former use together with the purpose of advisory
need. This leads to a brief overview of the salient issues arising in the
context of the Approach and Project Assembly process. This process enables the
calculation of an initial development appraisal. For the purposes of
confidentiality the projects remain coded.
The site comprises about 1,000 acres, and is strategically
positioned in the Southeast UK, and within a Government priority area. Due to
its former use as an oil refinery and 900m of deep-water frontage it has
established industrial and current wharf related use in the local plan.
Immediately adjacent to the waterfront lies a designated environmentally
sensitive area. The client required to maximise monetary receipts by sale of any
potential development value extracted from an appropriate land use.
Thus project managing this process, assembling information
and pulling together, a complex array of specialist advice was needed, as well
First, the interested parties extended to the South East
Regional Development Agency (SEDA), the Local authority as well as the
landowner. SEDA’s objective is in line with national Government policy, which
is supportive of the regeneration of large sites that are not reliant solely on
road transport. The site’s ability to be served by sea and its existing rail
line are significant advantages for its future use. The Local authority
objective is also regeneration and considers this a strategic site because it
represents one of four large brownfield sites in the administrative area, and is
located in a regeneration corridor identified as having priority for high
quality development and job creation.
The landowner’s objective is to maximise value. So if the
greatest value equates to minimal use this would be acceptable. For example a
major power station development only requiring a few acres at an extremely high
land value may be greater than the land value achieved from a comprehensive
development of the total site but which is calculated at a lower value per acre.
This result would fail to meet the regional agencies and local authority
objective to generate employment use. The authorities may attempt to control use
through the local plan, but in this case the site is already allocated for
Second, the landowner initiated a management approach based
on leadership within the corporate framework. This resulted in initial
antagonism between the landowner and local authority. Each approach was
progressed in isolation. The landowner was not updating the local authority of
project assembly actions, albeit that much was being done. Consequently the
authority perceived that nothing was happening to address the long-term future
use of this site, and so their approach was to begin work on a planning brief
that would direct any future development. Developers’ are generally concerned
that these briefs do not always take full account of market feasibility, rather
being inclined towards a planning ideal. At a later date the local property
agent acting on behalf of the landowner, re negotiated and addressed this
A partnership was not formed early on resulting in each party
perceiving conflicts in information thus the cost of consultancy reports were
not shared on the basis that exchange of information may compromise the other
party. Fortunately the landowner after two years of project assembly work, is
now beginning to liase with the Council and other relevant agencies to achieve
regeneration of this major site. It is hoped that active help will be
forthcoming from agencies such as the regional economic development agency.
Most large sites will require complex information in order to
aid decision-making. The third issue refers to the detail and extent of project
information, and the manner in which this is controlled throughout. The
landowner initially assembled a small group of key specialist advisors including
property development and planning, marine resource manager, and inhouse
expertise on environmental liabilities. After a period of 12 months of market
appraisal and initial information assembly, a port economist and coastal
engineer were also included into the team.
The key information needs included the land allocation
framework. The Council’s policies permit General Industrial (Class B2) and
Storage and Distribution (Class B8) activities, together with wharves and port
related development. It acknowledges that the site is also suitable for uses
that would not normally be acceptable near to housing. This placed the landowner
in a favourable negotiating position with the planners given the likely end
market uses and any refusals to detailed planning applications are unlikely.
Port development in the UK requires a number of additional
permissions by virtue of the coastal location. The time required to obtain these
needs to be factored into the project development period. These permissions
include: Environmental Impact Assessment under the Town & Country Planning
Regulations, Discharge consents from the Environment Agency under the Water
Resources Act, Licence from Ministry of Agriculture Fisheries & Food under
the Food & Environment Protection Act, and a Licence Under the relevant Port
Other constraints largely surrounded environmental
considerations were identified at an early stage of the decision making process.
The landowner sought positive approaches and solutions, but the extent of survey
detail reflected ‘a need to know basis’:
- Remediation solutions relied upon several scoping studies which had been
completed it was agreed in partnership with the Environment Agency (EA) that
a phased site investigation and remediation programme be undertaken as
development takes place on a plot by plot basis.
- Drainage is a major issue because of the need for ongoing maintenance of
the system. An improved system will achieve protection against flooding and
the cleaning of leeched contaminants from the surface water prior to entry
into the estuary.
- Ecological and environmental issues are an objective of the landowner.
Development will include ecological improvement incorporating a replacement
wetland area and other improvement of landscape but in tandem with feasible
- Topographical issues will also impact upon the cost of development because
river and estuarine alluvium of varying thickness overlying clay cover the
majority of the site. This will require the load bearing characteristics to
be considered as well as the existing network of pipes and tunnels that may
exist below ground. Full surveys are not yet available.
This process led to additional consultants being recruited to
assist in environmental, drainage and ecological issues, and to prepare an
Environmental Management Plan. This will address the key environmental issues
associated with the site: existing ground contamination, the proximity of
statutory protected nature conservation sites, and the existence within the site
of species of importance. For example, the following environmental impacts could
be considered: potential migration of contaminants, the effects upon local
ecology and surrounding nature conservation sites, exposure risks to humans and
ecological, dust, noise and vibration nuisance from construction vehicles, other
atmospheric pollution, management of waste and contaminated materials, water
discharges, and site materials handling and storage.
Transport economic consultants were also recruited both for
on site roads and rail access but also external roads and rail essential for the
development of a successful port.
Finally the project assembly process was conducted prior to
formerly requesting expressions of interest for the port development. This
contrasts to the approach adopted by the project leaders of site C (See later).
Thus by taking care to recruit the appropriate consultant at the appropriate
time the landowner ensured that cost were controlled and risk limited.
The salient issue highlighted by this project is the
importance of delivering individual party’s objectives. It is not unusual for
industrialist in the coastal and estuarine zone to wish to continue their
business operations. This may be a prime objective and may conflict with the
regulatory authority’s objectives. Thus issues highlighted are the mismatch of
the objectives, the emerging role of leadership, and the impact of environmental
This 11 acre site is located in East London on a peninsula
formed by a loop of the River Thames. It has wharf frontage and is operationally
used for import and export of marine aggregates. Historically the Peninsula has
been used for a variety of industrial/ employment uses maximising the waterfront
and wharf areas. But currently substantial re - development is occurring around
the site including high levels of development in the area, some prompted under
an early SRB grant aid, and the 300 acre adjoining brownfield development.
Advice was needed that recognised that the Company’s
overriding objective is to take a fresh look at how to release value from the
site but maintain an operational presence within the locality.
First the interested parties included the regeneration
agency; the local authority and the Port of London Authority as well as the
landowner. At a later stage a third party developer interest emerged. The local
authority objective appeared to be ambivalent since their agenda was to create
access to the riverside for a public cycle path. The regeneration agency was
keen to purchase the land via a deal based on the open market, hoping to add
this site to the comprehensive regeneration programme being undertaken on the
The landowner’s objective was externally driven because of
the regeneration activity being undertaken in the surrounding area. Initially
this required a strategy that would protect the business interests against the
possible threat of Compulsory Purchase by the regeneration agency, and was thus
reactive. Once project assembly was underway the landowner’s role changed to a
proactive position and took over leadership.
Assembling project information entailed a review of the land
holding, next appraising alternative sites for the business operation. This
identified only one site in a radius of approximately ¾ mile with river
frontage. Followed by identifying other interested parties in the market with
which development deals could be structured.
Second, the diverse objectives of the local authority and
landowner emerged during the review of sites. The local authority land use plan
controlled aggregate use by allocating only existing sites and they were not
favouring opening new sites. This policy by implication could cause friction
with the Port of London Authority as acting harbour authority for the River
Thames, since they wanted to maintain operational wharves for revenue purposes.
This position had to be reconciled by negotiation.
Third, deliverability is illustrated by an informal market
exercise. Although the land use plan allocates industrial and employment uses,
the exercise identified that a leisure development allied to the adjoining
regeneration development would be feasible and provide high end development
This was borne out by interest from the regeneration agency
that wished to purchase via market negotiation, albeit the threat of CPO always
existed. In addition third party developers were demonstrating interest. The
developer was able to deliver a range of objectives: the landowner’s
(operational security), the local authority (riverside cycle path), the Port of
London (revenue and operational wharf) and in the end the regeneration agency
(redevelopment). Terms were agreed for a back to back relocation package.
Finally, linked to the above is the means by which
environmental information was collected. This was during the negotiation
process. The usual scenario arose that while the aggregates operation had been
established for several decades, the present landowner was in possession for a
few years. Consequently during the change of ownership records were lost,
although a history of services existed the extent of ground contamination (if
any) did not. The private developer had greater flexibility to bear ‘up front
risks’, albeit that these risks will always be translated to the eventual land
price! A deal was concluded by the developer undertaking a phase one audit prior
to exchange of contracts, but the structure of payments upon completion related
to a risk sharing arrangement whereby costs would be deducted from the land
This site is illustrative of the framework for action. In
comparison to the two projects above it looks at how the allocation of roles and
responsibilities is affecting the process, and will provide a contrast to the
leadership role due to the pattern of landownership.
It is a 100 acre site located in the South West of England
approximately 150 miles from London. Formerly used as the Royal Naval Air
station in conjunction with the adjoining former naval port it has an extensive
frontage to a Harbour with existing quays and jetties.
The key requirement is to find an alternative regenerative use for this site.
But it represents a most unusual redevelopment opportunity. On the one hand, it
has a substantial area of enclosed water and some excellent access to the
harbour, but it suffers from poor road communications and the closure of the
station will have an impact on the local community.
A multiplicity of parties is interested including the landowner, regeneration
agency, the local authority, the neighbouring port operator, existing
businesses, and the local community who use some of the facilities.
In 1999 the Landowner delegated project co ordination to the South West
Regional Development Agency (SWRDA), a government regeneration agency. This
leadership position grants substantial initial control to the SWRDA enabling
them to drive their own agenda. This is likely to be seeking to re- use local
skills in new employment sectors, thus they will wish to optimise rather than
maximise the profit level. This objective will need to be balanced with
accountability associated with using taxpayers' money in the form of gap
funding. In addition to this the objective to protect the many environmental
attributes of the important Harbour area will persist.
The SWRDA has initiated a project assembly process that is
ongoing in tandem with marketing. Information readily to hand includes a
supportive planning framework which specifically address the reuse of the naval
air station for the development of marine, leisure, tourism, commercial
business, port and related employment uses. But this is subject to adequate
infrastructure provision, and provided that the criteria in policy are met
having particular regard to nature and marine conservation interests. The latter
includes environmentally protected sites that surround the area including Chesil
Beach but also ancient monuments.
Consultants are being used to masterplan a land-based development as well as
assessing the potential reuse of the existing maritime facilities. Within the
plan, the site’s identifiable complex development constraints will be
discussed. These include retaining the current flood water channel (currently
used as a helicopter landing strip), accommodating the neighbouring visually
intrusive tank farm, the need for improved road access both into the site as
well as from the major trunk network, identifying the load bearing capability of
the ground condition, Archaeological and heritage merit of existing buildings
and monuments above and below waterline. Services and power do exist by virtue
of the previous use.
However, deliverability will rely upon market feasibility. The demand for
harbour or coastal sites generally tends to come from two quarters. The first is
for high quality residential development that seeks to benefit from maritime
views is often associated with leisure development. Alternatively heavy
industrial processes, needing access to port/ wharf or use large volumes of
seawater for cooling, or perhaps effluent purposes. Such uses are almost always
bad neighbours and are often sited well away from other development.
The real issue is finding a suitable partner that can prove deliverability
within appropriate timescales. This is recognised by the SWRDA and the site is
now available on the open market as a development opportunity. Initial
expressions of interest were sought from developers late in 1999. This was
occurring while the legal process to delegate the control of land to the SWRDA
was being completed. In Spring 2000 it is envisaged that invited consortium/
developers will submit outline proposals, bearing in mind these are unlikely to
include full detailed analysis due to the dearth of information relating to
A real threat to the project is the appropriate allocation of roles and
responsibilities, and subsequent piecemeal development. This will require co-ordinating
all the parties objectives and interests. There is an urgent need for a strong
lead agency, with access to significant resources to ‘pump prime’ the
development of the site, but applications to obtain external public funds will
dissipate roles and responsibilities thus subjecting the project to delay. The
SWRDA has an opportunity to provide this, but will need a visionary lead
The potential Framework for Action is for a comprehensive master plan and
development of the wider area. This will need substantial vision, leadership and
eventually subsidises probably in the form of gap funding. The development of
this coastal industrial site could involve other accommodated buildings, (HMS
Osprey site), sports facilities (Boscowen Centre and sports field), and Portland
castle a listed ancient monument and visitor attraction. This would be planned
in conjunction with the existing 32 acre port facilities (on the former naval
port) and Mere tank farm.
The purpose of an initial development appraisal is to
illustrate how to get a project to work using an approach that recognises the
multi- disciplinary needs of all.
The lessons learnt from the above projects are combined into
site D, a hypothetical site. This recognises the need for a multi- tasked
approach through out the project life. A leader/ project co- ordinator that
achieves consensus by adopting a sound management approach, conducts a rigorous
project assembly process, and constantly refines development appraisals is of
paramount importance. By progressing on this basis the leader will attempt to
manage the effects of externalities which will impact on project timing and
deliverability. For example, there may be a need to move the process forward say
to reduce the impact of environmental hazards.
A simplistic scenario may be presented thus:
The site comprises 10 acres; it is flat and fronts a minor
Estuary. Access is available and all services and infrastructure to and within
the site, is in place. The former use of the port is incorporated within the
land use plan as uses associated with the harbour operations of fishing and
ancillary import and export of products. Thus employment use is acceptable.
However, it is located away from the main area of commerce, and has
environmentally sensitive areas adjacent.
Two opportunities for development are clarified by an initial
market exercise. There is demand for residential homes but the local residents
are concerned that local house prices will increase disproportionately to
incomes. The planning authority wishes to see employment generating uses and is
also against residential development. Alternatively demand for storage units
each of 1000 ft. sq. together with retail allied with a heritage museum also
exists. The latter development is unlikely to provide such a high return as the
The landowners negotiated with the interested parties,
primarily the local authority. The objectives are merged and the landowner
accepts that residential is not acceptable but is confident that flats above the
retail accommodation will be. Consequently an initial appraisal is calculated,
which basically considers
Development is sensitive to key problem areas. These can be
reflected n the appraisal by use of cash flow analysis. The key problem areas
usually identified during project assembly include Planning, programme,
possession, Site survey information and albeit not dealt with here, taxation
(VAT). Referring to site D the scenario could unfold thus:
Although initial negotiations have taken place there still
remains a need for an application for change of land use for mixed residential
and retail/ museum use. The planning authority may not consider these use as
sufficient generators of employment. The developer will not wish to be in a
position of appealing against a refused application and is likely to negotiate.
This will involve understanding the planning objectives and presenting a true
picture of employment generation. For example, the introduction of mechanised
handling systems into Ports reduces substantially the need for labour. The
heritage use is likely to be presented as a community gain, particularly if the
developer subsidised the rent for a period of years.
This relates to the project timescale. At all stages the
appraisal will take into account the period over which money is borrowed and
when the rental income streams will be received. If rental income is delayed
then the cost of borrowing will over time increase as interest payments mount,
especially if interest is on a compound basis.
All the projects in this presentation are assuming single
ownership. But in instances of the need to assemble land or where the sites are
in multiple occupation then timing and costs need to be managed and mutually
acceptable possession dates need to be agreed with all parties in an attempt to
minimise unexpected delays. For example, business may have to be relocated, or
tenant’s lease purchased or allowed to expire.
Site Survey information
In instances of brownfield and contaminated land this is
perhaps the greatest area of risk. By its very nature quantifying the cost early
in the process is difficult. Although data can be retrieved from existing
records this is often unlikely. Information may be gleaned from land records, if
any, previous or existing business organisation records, maps and databases.
Thus current surveys may need to be commissioned but consideration must be given
to how detailed these surveys need to be, they must be done on the basis of need
to know. In order to structure development deals information will need to be
shared, and mechanisms found that do not compromise either party’s negotiation
At this juncture the management approach has identified all
interests, the gaps in project information identified and the initial appraisal
undertaken. In this instance there is a need for additional funding sources. All
avenues will be investigated and could include Lottery bids for the heritage
site, conventional public sector funding structures under an Assisted Area or
European Objective areas, Land grant or SRB funds, and finally government
Finally, it is important to decide the marketing profile for
the site at a reasonably early stage. The methods used in the projects above
range from, supporting planning authority development briefs and being selective
and controlling the level of interest by requesting expressions of intent from
third parties. Deciding marketing budgets may influence the degree of success in
finding a suitable developer/ operator. Marketing material that seeks to
identify global interest will need to use the appropriate medium.
This presentation is not suggesting a panacea to all the
issues arising, but seeks to reflect practical industrial development experience
along coastal lands. The methodology proposed emphasises that leadership is
important. It requires the identification of the correct management approach,
ensuring appropriate project assembly that will inform the initial appraisal.
This in turn will inform decision making and ultimately provide a structured
framework of an approach that includes a consensus view. There are now
interesting developments in Information technology support tools that are
currently being developed and may aid this process further.
1. J Taussik- Littoral Conference 1998 p23-33
3. D A Dumashie - unpublished research
Diane A Dumashie BSc ARICS is a Chartered Surveyor, has a
degree in estate management, and has considerable experience in land usage,
property management development and appraisal both in a consultancy capacity and
in the corporate sector. For 5 years she has been consulting on a range of
projects, after holding senior business management positions at Scotts Hotels
Limited (Trading as Marriott Hotels) where she was in charge of all property
matters, land acquisition and development projects. She worked as a consultant
at a marine engineering firm, Metoc plc where she combined her knowledge of
coastal zones with her experience in land management to act as International
Coastal Zone Management Consultant.
Now Diane continues to provide client strategic advice and
project co- ordination across a range of industries, and focuses upon the
regeneration of land taking a strategic view with particular emphasis on coastal
and waterfront areas across industrial, and leisure market sectors. She has
special experience in Marine Resource Management, land administration,
waterfront/ property development and feasibility advice, co-ordination of land
regeneration projects, the development of leisure and tourist facilities in a
national and regional planning context and Acquisition.
As an active member of committees Diane maintains a presence at the forefront
of Marine resource management issues including community, development and
planning and marketing surveyors skills. In addition over the period 1995- 8 was
a Committee member of Land Commission 7 (FIG) contributing issues relating to
coastal resource development.
Finally Diane is the author of a range of papers those presented at
- 2000 Littoral: The use of Decision Support and Information Management in
land and economic Regeneration of Coastal Areas.
- 2000 International Federation of Surveyors, Commission 9: Land development
in the Coastal Zone
- 1998 International Federation of Surveyors, Land Commission 7: paper
presentation, Commercial landowner contributions to sustainable management
of coastal areas.
- 1998 Littoral Barcelona – Sustainable waterfront and coastal development
in Europe, socio economic technical and environmental aspects. Paper
presentation leisure and port developments.
- 1995 International Conference Coastal Zone ((Florida) paper presentation,
Building CZM partnerships
- 1994 World Wide Fund for Nature (UK), A Review of UK Coastal Plans
- 1993 Author of A Coastal Directory of Local Planning Authorities: A review
of local planning authority plans and partnerships in Coastal Zone
Management on behalf of the Royal Yachting Association.
- 1993 International Federation of Surveyors (FIG), Marine Policy in the
State of Hawaii.
1992-8 Ph.D. part time research, University of Wales: Thesis: ‘Strategic
management; Land owners, Local Authorities and coastal zone management’. This
is with particular reference to the strategic business approach of coastal
landowner and industry and Government Coastal policy.
Diane A Dumashie
27 March 2000