A recent meeting with the promoter of the £2bn London Paramount Entertainment Resort on the Swanscombe peninsula in Kent helped to suppress thoughts that proposals for the enormous resort north of the Ebbsfleet HS1 station were moonshine.
This is mainly because the Kuwaiti backers have committed to spending up to £40m on consultants’ fees to work up a full planning permission by later next year. The resort has been granted “national significance”, which means the submission goes straight to the planning inspectorate. This week Kuwaiti Europe Holding, controlled by the Al-Humaidi family, released detailed images (see News).
In last week’s Evening Standard I mentioned that the Kuwaitis are prepared to pay full market price for the necessary 700 acres: 400 for the resort and 300 for access. What was not said was that when it came to buying the land from Lafarge Tarmac and Land Securities, the Al-Humaidi family were planning to bring in other Kuwaiti investors to help foot the nine-figure bill. The resort may, of course, disappear in a puff of smoke at the first whiff of recession. But those with the patience to wait out a downturn or two might like to take a trip down to north Kent with an eye towards investing.
Within six months a second special planning zone to the south of the Paramount resort will be up and running. The Ebbsfleet Development Corporation is being set up to build a new town south of the resort. There is revived talk of extending Crossrail down an already-safeguarded route to Ebbsfleet station. Does this still feel a bit risky? Okay, try Thamesmead, a quietly mouldering 1970s new town that’s a bit closer to London. Peabody has hoovered up much of the housing. Crossrail is coming to adjacent Abbey Wood. Architect Allies & Morrison is preparing a masterplan to put a heart and a lot more homes into the place. Again, another long-term bet. But, again, worth a look.
Living with a living wage
Searching for “living wage” on EGi produces zero stories. Hardly surprising. The number of real estate-related businesses paying staff less than £8.80 per hour in London, or £7.65 per hour elsewhere, must be close to zero. This may be why Canary Wharf’s announcement on 22 September that the group was to pay at least the living wage received little coverage, even though the company claimed to be the “first property and construction group to make a living wage commitment”.
This week the recommended “living wage” was upped to £9.15 in London and £7.85 elsewhere, or about £19,000 pa in the capital and £16,300 outside. Still way below salaries paid in the property sector and way below those working in offices, or on the payroll, that is. But what of employees working for those building, managing or guarding real estate? Have a look at the small print of Canary Wharf’s pledge to see if your company measures up to a standard being adopted increasingly by potential clients such as Standard Life and Nestlé.
“Everyone working for Canary Wharf Group, regardless of whether they are permanent staff or contractors, receives a minimum of £8.80 per hour,” said Canary Wharf boss Sir George Iacobescu. Note the key words “or contractors”. “The decision to pay a living wage underlines our appreciation every member of staff and the communities around all our London developments. We’re proud to be taking the lead on this initiative in our industry.” Anyone care to write living wage requirements into agreements with contractors and/or property maintenance and security staff?
Too much PRS funding?
The excellent analysis at the front of last week’s EG showed at least £500m was committed to private rented sector funds last year and £4.1bn so far this year. Enough to buy about 15,000 homes. Almost twice as many as the 8,700 Sir Michael Lyons recommends as a reasonable target in a policy document produced for the Labour party. Too much money already chasing too small a market?
