Agenda and draft minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Scott, Denis Heathcote and Nigel Willmott.

Apologies for lateness were received from Councillor Williams.

The Chair will consider the admission of any late items of urgent business. (Late items will be considered under the agenda item where they appear. New items will be dealt with at items 14 & 19 below)

There were no such items.

A member with a disclosable pecuniary interest or a prejudicial interest in a matter who attends a meeting of the authority at which the matter is considered:

(i) must disclose the interest at the start of the meeting or when the interest becomes apparent, and

(ii) may not participate in any discussion or vote on the matter and must withdraw from the meeting room.

A member who discloses at a meeting a disclosable pecuniary interest which is not registered in the Register of Members’ Interests or the subject of a pending notification must notify the Monitoring Officer of the interest within 28 days of the disclosure.

Disclosable pecuniary interests, personal interests and prejudicial interests are defined at Paragraphs 5-7 and Appendix A of the Members’ Code of Conduct

Councillors Cooke, Hare and Stewart, declared a personal and prejudicial interest in exempt agenda item 7 -  as Directors of Alexandra Palace Trading Limited and advised that they would not take part in the discussion of the item. 

To consider any questions, deputations or petitions received In accordance with Part 4, Section B29 of the Council's Constitution.

None.

i.                    To confirm the unrestricted minutes of the Alexandra Palace and Park Board held on 7 June 2012 as an accurate record of the proceedings.

ii.                  To receive the minutes of the Alexandra Park and  Palace Advisory  Committee held on 22 May 2012, and to consider any recommendations from that Committee.

iii.                To receive and consider the minutes of the informal joint Alexandra Palace and Park Consultative Committee, and Alexandra Park and  Palace Advisory  Committee held on 22 May 2012.

iv.                 To receive the minutes of the Alexandra Palace and Park Consultative Committee held on 22 May 2012, and to consider any recommendations from that Committee.

RESOLVED

i)          That the unrestricted minutes of the Alexandra Palace and Park Board held on 7 June 2012 be approved as a correct record of the proceedings.

ii)         That the minutes of the Alexandra Park and Palace Advisory Committee held on 22 May 2012 be noted.

iii)        That the minutes of the informal joint Alexandra Palace and Park Consultative Committee and Alexandra Park and Palace Advisory Committee held on 22 May 2012 be noted.

iv)        That the minutes of the Alexandra Palace and Park Consultative Committee held on 22 May 2012 be noted.

Item 7 is likely to be subject of a motion to exclude the press and public from the meeting as it contains exempt information as defined in Section 100a of the Local Government Act 1972; Para 3 - information relating to the business or financial affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information).

RESOLVED that the press and public be excluded from the meeting for the consideration of agenda item 7 as it contains exempt information as defined in Section 100a of the Local Government Act 1972; Para 3 – information relating to the business or financial affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding the information).

Clerk’s note – the press and public were excluded at 19:40hrs.

APBO229      APPROVAL OF STATUTORY FINAL ACCOUNTS  OF APTL 2011/12

                        The recommendations were agreed.

To consider the report of the Director of Finance and Resources, Alexandra Palace and Park. 

Councillor Cooke, as appointed Director of Alexandra Palace Trading Limited, having declared a personal and prejudicial interest in this item, relinquished the Chair. Councillors Hare and Stewart also took no part in the proceedings.

NOTED

Councillor Demirci nominated Councillor Peacock as Chair for the duration of the item.

There being no other nominations it was agreed nemine contradicente that Councillor Peacock take the Chair for the duration of the item.

Councillor Peacock in the Chair

Nigel Watts - Director of Finance & Resources, Alexandra Palace & Park - introduced the report as set out.  He explained that the reports were not circulated with the original agenda packs as matters had not been finalised by the auditors following the Trading Company Board meeting on 13 July 2012.

He informed Members that there were some technical amendments still to be made and requested that the report be approved subject to these amendments, and authority delegated to Councillor Cooke as Chair of the Board to approve such amendments. 

RESOLVED

i)          That approval be given to the written resolutions of the Directors of APTL in relation to the approval of the Directors’ Report and Accounts for the 12 month period ended 31 March 2012, as detailed at Appendix 1 of the report; and

ii)         That approval be given to the written resolution proposed by the Directors of APTL to re-appoint Deloitte LLP as statutory auditor of Alexandra Palace Trading Limited for the financial year ended 31 March 2013.

ii)         That authority to approve the technical amendments be delegated to the Councillor Cooke as Chair of the Alexandra Palace and Park Board.

.

There being no further discussion on the item Councillor Peacock relinquished, and Councillor Cooke resumed the Chair.

COUNCILLOR COOKE IN THE CHAIR

Clerk’s note – Councillor Williams arrived during the discussions of this item.

The Chair invited members of the press and public to re-enter the meeting.

To consider the report of the Director of Finance and Resources, Alexandra Palace and Park. – Alexandra Palace seeking approval of the Trustees’ Report and Consolidated Financial Statements for the year ended 31st March 2012.

Nigel Watts - Director of Finance & Resources, Alexandra Palace & Park - introduced the report as set out.  He explained that the reports were not circulated with the original agenda packs as matters had not been finalised by the auditors following the Trading Company Board meeting on 13 July 2012.

The draft accounts were included at Appendix 1 of the report, and were subject to some technical adjustments.

Sue Barnett – Deloittes – added that there was nothing out of the ordinary to report with regards to the audit. 

The following responses were provided to questions from the Board:

·        The Gift Aid payment for 2010/11 was lower than 2011/12 because profits had been lower in that financial year.  This was in part due to the closure of the ice rink.

·        A rigorous process was in place to ensure that every trading event was profitable.

The Chair thanked Nigel Watts and Deloitte for attending.  He also thanked the team at the Palace.

RESOLVED, subject to technical adjustments,

i)          That the Chair be authorised to sign the letter of representations on behalf of the Charity;

ii)         That the consolidated accounts be prepared on a going concern basis;

iii)        That the Trustees Report and Consolidated Financial Statements for 2011/12 be approved and the Chair be authorised to sign them on behalf of the Board for submission to the Charities Commission;

iv)        That the contents of the report provided by Deloitte on the audit of the consolidated financial statements for the year ended 31 March 2012 be noted;

v)         That Deloitte be re-appointed as auditors to Alexandra Park and Palace Charitable Trust for the financial year 2012/13; and

vi)        That the results against budget for the two months ended 31 May 2012 be noted.

To receive and consider the report of the Chief Executive, Alexandra Palace, detailing:-

• Governance update and Risk Register reviews

• Update regarding trading and events - including Holland Heineken House and Olympic torch relay

Duncan Wilson – Chief Executive, Alexandra Palace – introduced the report as set out. 

NOTED:

·        The written report provided information on upcoming events at the Palace.  Paragraph 7.2 outlined the focus on broadening the range of events.

·        A strategic risk register would be reported at the next Board meeting, with a bi-annual update.

·        Duncan Wilson had been tasked with finding non-voting advisors to the Board.  Members of the Board should pass any nominations to Duncan.

·        A discussion had taken place at the Informal Joint Statutory Advisory Committee and Consultative Committee meeting on 17 July 2012 with regards to grit left behind by Red Bull following the event.  Discussions had since taken place with Red Bull, who would be removing the grit within the next three weeks.

·        A review of the London Mayoral Elections count had been held at City Hall.  The power cuts at Alexandra Palace had been attributed to a sub-contractor testing the sprinkler system.  The Greater London Returning Officer was satisfied that Alexandra Palace had dealt with the problem quickly.

The Chair commented that in the current economic situation, it was a good idea to provide a diverse range of events at the Palace.

RESOLVED

That the report be noted.

Report of the Head of Regeneration and Development – Alexandra Palace

Mark Hopson – Head of Regeneration and Development – introduced the report as set out.

He introduced Daniel Griffiths from PPS Group, who outlined the findings from the regeneration consultation. 

NOTED:

·        There was a broad range of respondents to the surveys – responses were received by the internet, post and over 800 were received through the ‘street teams’.  In all, 2100 responses were received.

·        Nearly half of respondents ranked ‘improving first impressions’ as the most important aspect in the future improvement of the Palace, with ‘upgrading the entrances to the palace’ as the second most important.

·        The top priorities were listed as ‘upgrading the main halls’ and ‘opening up the theatre’.

·        There was a good mix of ages within the respondents, and BME respondents made up 25% of the replies.

·        A postcode analysis had been carried out, with majority of responses received from N22, N10 and N8.

·        268 forms were received after the end of the consultation – the findings mirrored those of the original analysis.

·        Building a hotel in the Palace was the most contentious of all suggestions, with around 70 comments made generally opposed to the proposal, but a small majority were in favour.

The Chair commented that the concerns over whether the whole borough was reached were validated by the postcode analysis of respondents.  He added however, that a significant amount of work had taken place to ensure that residents in the east of the borough had been reached as part of the consultation exercise.

The following responses were provided to questions from the Board:

·        The consultation deliberately left out any questions about the Park, as a major refurbishment had been carried out in 2007.  The regeneration of the Palace was a bigger challenge.

·        In response to whether an analysis against each postcode could be carried out, as certain roads could have different issues to others – for example, responses from N10 may be different to responses from N15 -   Mark Hopson explained that although this analysis could be carried out, not all respondents left their postcodes so the breakdown may not represent all respondents in a particular postcode.

Mark Hopson then referred the Board to the URS report at Appendix 2.  URS were commissioned to provide advice and specialist input to the consultation on the spatial masterplan.  As part of this input, a set of focused discussion groups were held with targeted groups of young people, older people, disabled people and people from diverse ethnic backgrounds.

Councillor Peacock commented that she had not been approached for contact details of people in her pensioners group, which had over 400 members.  Mark Hopson explained that URS had approached groups via the 800 voluntary organisations in the borough and that this information was provided by the Council’s diversity department.  Duncan Wilson added that as responses to the consultation were still be collected, he would attend a meeting and asked Councillor Peacock to provide him with details.

RESOLVED

i)          That the results of the public consultation outlined in  ...  view the full minutes text for item 233.

Report of the Park Manager – Alexandra Palace

Mark Evison – Park Manager – introduced the report as set out.

NOTED:

·        Alexandra Park had achieved Green Flag and Green Heritage site status for the fifth year running.

Closure of gates

·        Due to incidents of ASB, it was proposed to have a trial period where the Park Avenue North gate and Muswell Hill pedestrian entrance would be closed at night.  The trial period would need to be for a year, as different seasons would produce different results.

Cricket club and grounds improvement project

·        Colin Marr reported that the joint SAC/CC meeting a week earlier had welcomed the new proposal that the irrigation tank should be buried and the Board should be encouraged to accept this recommendation, which would be consistent with its duties of responsibility for the Conservation Area.

RESOLVED

i)          That the outcome of the Green Flag Award application be welcomed.

ii)         That, following the consideration of the proposal to begin overnight closures of two Park entrances, a trial period of one year be agreed, with reports of findings made to the Alexandra Palace and Park Board.

iii)        That the proposal to bury the irrigation tank at the cricket ground be agreed.

To receive and consider the report of the Chief Executive, and Head of Regeneration – Alexandra Palace, detailing :

• the Gateway Review

• Presentation of final Conservation  Management Plan

• Regeneration Business Case and Spatial Masterplan

Duncan Wilson – Chief Executive, Alexandra Palace - introduced the report as set out. 

NOTED:

·        The key recommendation of the Gateway Review was detailed at paragraph 6.4 of the report.  The draft copy of the report was attached as a restricted appendix, and could be discussed during the exempt proceedings of the meeting.

·        Thoughts were being given as to the ‘next steps’ and a separate meeting would be arranged for the Board to discuss options in further detail.

·        The HLF bid would be made in November, following the Alexandra Palace and Park Board meeting on 6 November.

The following responses were provided to questions from the Board:

·        Funding was available for current year to cover the costs of advice to get through to the next stage of the HLF bids.

·        The report could not currently be made public, as it contained commercially sensitive information.

Conservation Management Plan

Duncan Wilson introduced Francis Maude – Donald Insall Associates – who provided an update on the key changes to the Conservation Management Plan.  Copies of the presentation are available from the Clerk on request.

NOTED:

·        Consultation feedback had been received from a number of sources:

-          English Heritage

-          Alexandra Palace Television Group

-          Friends of the Alexandra Palace Theatre

-          London Borough of Haringey

-          Key individuals who worked on the post 1980 fire restoration

-          Individual comments expressed as part of the recent public consultation exercise

·        Additional information was received from:

-          Farrells

-          Fourth Street

-          Bonner Keenlyside

-          Friends of the Theatre

-          WSP Group

·        The changes to the CMP were detailed as follows:

-          Buildings

Minor revisions to chronology

Additional text added, particularly in relation to the use of part of the building by the BBC

-          Assessment of significance

Increased emphasis on the importance of the Palace to local residents

Increased reference to the importance of the BBC studios

-          Conservation plan policies

Increased detail arising from a better understanding of what can be achieved, and omission of unfeasible options

-          Implementation

Increased detail in relation to the Theatre

Addition of a note on funding

-          Gazetteer

Minor corrections and additional detail about the 1980s restoration

General revisions to the theatre section

-          Plate list and Plates

Revised for the post fire rebuild images due to copyright clearance issues

The Chair thanked Francis Maude for attending.

Duncan Wilson introduced Gary Young – Farrells – who provided an update on the spatial masterplan following the public consultation.  Copies of the presentation are available from the Clerk on request.

NOTED:

·        Generally, respondents were pleased to see that regeneration was being considered.

·        High priority projects were identified as:

-          Theatre

-          East approach

-          South terrace

-          Great Hall

-          Palm Court

·                    The East/West corridors were considered as low priority, however this could be due to a lack of information / understanding as to why this would be a benefit to visitors at the Palace.

·                    It was important to improve first impressions on arrival at the Palace and work would  ...  view the full minutes text for item 235.

There was no such business.

Tuesday 6 November 2012

Thursday 7 February 2013

NOTED:

Tuesday 6 November 2012

Thursday 7 February 2013

Items 17-18 are likely to be subject of a motion to exclude the press and public from the meeting as they contain exempt information as defined in Section 100a of the Local Government Act 1972; Para 3 - information relating to the business or financial affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information).

RESOLVED that the press and public be excluded from the meeting for the consideration of agenda items 17 – 20 as they contain exempt information as defined in Section 100a of the Local Government Act 1972; Para 3 – information relating to the business or financial affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding the information).

APBO 240     REGENERATION UPDATE

                        The recommendations were agreed.

APBO 241     REGENERATION MASTERPLAN - WAIVER AND AWARD OF CONTRACT

                        The recommendations were agreed.

APBO 242     EXEMPT MINUTES

                        The exempt minutes of the meeting held on 7 June 2012 were confirmed as a correct record of proceedings.

APBO 243     ANY OTHER EXEMPT BUSINESS THE CHAIR CONSIDERS TO BE URGENT

                        There was no such business.

To consider exempt information pertaining to agenda item 13 above.

Following the exclusion of the press and public from the meeting, the Board discussed the exempt parts of the report.

Colin Marr referred to Appendix B of the report and commented that although the recommendations from the Local Partnership/ Gateway Review were to be welcomed, and were clearly important in advancing the regeneration programme, it was regrettable that of the 22 individuals who had been interviewed as part of the Review, 21 of them were either councillors or paid members of the APP team. The concern was that stakeholders and representatives of the wider community had been under-represented and this was unfortunate.

In response, Duncan Wilson explained that as part of the review, ‘stakeholders’ were not defined as they would usually be – in this instance, stakeholders were those who had a financial risk.  There was no lack of willingness to consult with local stakeholders, but perhaps this should have been made clearer in the purpose of the review and definitions of terms could have been included.

Mark Hopson added that the review had looked at a number of key documents and had captured key messages from groups of local stakeholders.

NOTED the discussion in relation to the restricted appendices of agenda item 13.

Report of the Head of Regeneration and Development – Alexandra Palace

Mark Hopson – Head of Regeneration and Development, Alexandra Palace – introduced the report as set out.  The proposal to waive the Contract Standing Order 9.01 (requirement to Tender) as permitted under CSO 10.01.1(b) and award a further contract to Terry Farrell & Partners.

The contract would be awarded to ensure that additional elements of work could be undertaken, in particular, design work to support the HLF bid and progression of critical design solutions for the Event Spaces and Hotel.

RESOLVED

i)          That the waiver of CSO 9.01 (requirement to Tender) as allowed under CSO 10.01.1(a), and in accordance with 10.01.2(d), be approved; and

ii)         That a contract be awarded to Terry Farrell & Partners for further design and architectural services.

To confirm the exempt minutes of the Alexandra Palace and Park Board held on 7 June 2012 as an accurate record of the proceedings

RESOLVED

i)          That the restricted minutes of the Alexandra Palace and Park Board held on 7 June 2012 be approved as a correct record of the proceedings.

The Chair introduced Rosalind McCarthy of Bates Wells & Braithwaite, the new legal advisors to the Trust.

The Chair raised an item of business – potential litigation against Howard Kennedy, and the request from the Board to investigate the likely cost and feasibility of pursuing a claim.  Preliminary discussions had been held with Bates Wells Braithwaite, who had advised that to assess this properly they would need to understand very precisely the claim to be investigated.  Rosalind McCarthy advised that costs needed to be kept proportionate and any investigation / scoping work carried out by the company would incur costs. 

Councillor Hare and Councillor Williams expressed interests in continuing the possibility of exploring potential litigation, as there could still be issues to be addressed.  Councillor Hare suggested that interested Members of the Board could work together to frame the questions to be asked, without incurring expense.  This would provide a list of questions for BWB to assess.  Duncan Wilson added that providing succinct questions would lead to a better assessment with regards to the likelihood of success.

Councillor Demirci added that if this work was to be carried out by Members of the Board then it should include all Members.

The Chair proposed that the Board Members work together to agree specific wording – this would be carried out via email, and the item covered under the exempt part of the next meeting.  If Members could not come to an agreement via email, then a special meeting would be convened.  The Chair agreed to lead the process.

RESOLVED

i.                                That in respect of the pursuing of potential litigation against the former Trust Solicitors - Howard Kennedy, and the likely cost and feasibility of pursuing a claim, that Members of the Board work together to agree specific wording to frame the questions to be asked (to be carried out via email) , and the finalised questions be considered as an exempt matter at the forthcoming Board in November 2012, or if it were not possible to seek agreement by email, then to convene an informal meeting to agree such wording, to then be reported to the Board in November 2012; and

ii.                              That Bates Wells Braithwaite’s initial advice on the likelihood of success and the likely cost of pursuing any claim should be commissioned on the merits of the case once the question had been framed, and that the cost of obtaining this advice for consideration by the Board should be kept to a minimum.