What was the purpose of your post-disposal site inspection?
To conduct due diligence for the new licensing instruction on the retained land.
To thoroughly understand the physical and operational implications of the proposed outdoor seating use
Irrespective of my prior site visits.
What physical risk did you identify during inspection, and how were they address?
Potential user conflict between café patrons and cyclists due to the proximity of an active cycle path.
How did your inspection findings influence your advice on user segregation?
Competency - Commissioned a formal risk assessment from the Corporate Health & Safety team, as advising on public safety fell outside my professional competency
Mitigation - Used the findings to select an optimal, sheltered location for seating to ensure natural segregation of space.
Engineering control - commissioned clear wayfinding signage and ensured the new owner implemented safety rules for patrons
How did you determine the appropriate valuation method for the outdoor seating Licence?
Determined the Market Approach (Comparable Method) was appropriate for a fair and transparent fee determination.
Disregarded the temporary £100 KCC licence because it was a concessionary measure and for a different property type (not a true reflection of market value)
The final fee was based only on the justifiable comparable evidence that reflected actual market terms.
What adjustments did you make to comparable evidence to reflect the unique nature of the promenade site?
I had comparable seaside licenses available within the portfolio as we have 21 miles of coast.
Adjusted the rents of the 3 comparable s (the waves, Louisa Bay and Windshack) and adjusted for time passed since the rent was set and awarded a higher weighting to the license which were more directly comparable to the subject property and most recent. (2 from 2025 and one from 2024)
Why was rent per cover chosen as the valuation metric over area-based valuation?
The size and square metres were deemed less relevant, as the utility and value of the space were restricted by the number of tables and chairs (covers), rather than the total area available. The area of one comparable (“The Waves”) was significantly larger due to its unique geographical layout but had minimal impact on value.
How did you justify excluding the KCC £100 licence from your valuation comparables?
£100 fee was a special award or concessionary measure introduced during a time of crisis (COVID-19) to provide support.
Therefore, it did not represent the true estimated amount that an interest should exchange for in an arm’s-length transaction.
Not Directly Comparable (Property Type): The licence was issued for highway land by Kent County Council (KCC). The promenade was not highway land.
What factors influenced your final licence fee recommendation for 2025?
use, and where the value was derived from (cover not sqm), footfall, and popularity of location.
The client’s needs -corporate objectives
of “Creating a thriving place” and “Working efficiently for you.”
highest and best use.
How did you ensure your valuation aligned with RICS Red Book standards?
The table and chairs licence fee valuation was not a Red Book Complaint validation, as it was utilised for agency and negotiation purposes.
What challenges did you face in sourcing comparable evidence for a non-standard asset?
Sourcing comparable evidence for a non-standard asset is challenging due to:
- lack of direct comparables,
- market opacity,
- limited or infrequent transactions, and the
- unique attributes of the asset itself.
This requires using broader sets of evidence,
relying more heavily on a valuer’s expertise, making significant adjustments,
and potentially being less confident in the valuation outcome, which must be disclosed.
Determining the corect metric.
How did you account for seasonal use in your valuation?
By structuring the licence to be of short, term which inherently reflects the typical seasonal use and management flexibility required for this asset type, unlike a longer commercial leases.
The final fee implicitly captures the risk associated with short-term, seasonal reliance on outdoor custom.
The established per-cover rate was derived from other operators who accept these seasonal limitations as part of their business model.
What role did market sentiment and public scrutiny play in your valuation advice?
Enhanced due dilligence. - acting in the public interest.
Public scrutiny, while not a direct valuation component, influences the standards and due diligence required of valuers to maintain public confidence and market stability.
RICS requires valuers to use professional judgment to balance traditional methods with these external pressures to provide a sound and defensible valuation.
Not the case here but, Ignoring market sentiment, such as buyer demand and economic conditions, can result in substantial inaccuracies in the assessed value.
How did you communicate valuation rationale to non-technical stakeholders?
Use clear, non-technical language, tailor the explanation to their level of understanding, and use visuals like plans and visuals or data depicted as colour gradient on maps.
What legal and financial criteria did you use to evaluate offers for the Granville Theatre?
UK Financial Sanctions List Check
Feasibility/Planning History
Unconditional offers vs Offers subject to planning
Timely Completion
Financial Capacity
Best Consideration - Value - highest bidder
Alignment with Objectives
How did you structure the scoring matric to reflect client objectives?
Financial Criteria (Monetary Value): While the consideration amount was a factor, it was not the sole determining factor
Feasibility and Likelihood of Success:
Experience and Expertise
Financial Capacity and Verification: - sanctions list
Social and Economic Benefit
Why was the CAT offer rejected and how did you document that decision?
Prolonged holding costs, no evidence of immediate funds to deliver, planning risks for Airbnb on the roof.
Recommendation report to PWG and subsequent Officer decision note.
What due diligence did you undertake regarding the sanctioned bidder?
Check of the bidder’s information against the UK financial sanctions list.
Rejected their bid - transaction would have been legally impossible.
How did you ensure compliance with Section 123 of the Local Government Act 1972?
Open and transparent marketing, and due diligence.
What were the risks of accepting conditional offers and how did you mitigate them?
Prolonged Transaction
High Holding Costs
LL retains the risk for the duration
Planning uncertainty, even longer if it goes to appeal
risk to sterilise and devalue the site if planning is refused
Offer can fall through/be withdrawn back to square one
Mitigataion
Prioritising unconditional offers
How did you expedite the legal process post-acceptance?
Pre completed CPSEs
Draft HOT
solicitor appointed and on standby
How did you assess and advise on the implications of restrictive covenants?
Worked back from enforcablility to establish how effcetive a restrictive cvenat was:
beneficairy land
successor in title
A proprietey covenat not a personal one.
What alternative mechanisms did you consider to safeguard the asset’s future use?
Pre-emption
Overage
REstrictive Covenant
How did you identify the opportunity for a new income stream post-disposal?
I observed the cafe being full and my commercial acumen kicked in and mixed with my public sector awareness of the land ownership extent.
What operational considerations influenced your licence recommendations?
Public Safety and User Conflict Mitigation
Ancillary Use and Commercial Synergy
Corporate Objectives
wayfinding signage
-
Client Care2
-
AML & Bribery Act 201023
-
Property Management23
-
Data Management19
-
Ethics43
-
Q&A78
-
Valuations - my submission33
-
Landlord and Tenant - my submission35
-
Case Study AMP38
-
Health and Safety9
-
Accounting Principles & Procedures9
-
Business Planning4
-
Conflict Avoidance, Management & Dispute Resolution Procedures6
-
Diversity, Inclusion and Team Working4
-
Sustainability13
-
Inspection and Measurement21
-
Purchase and Sale21
-
My SOE3
