Agenda and draft minutes

Apologies for absence were received on behalf of Mr Tarpey, Mr Pestell, Mr Tucker and Mr Tucker.

NOTED

There were no items of urgent business.

NOTED

The Clerk advised that he had been notified of 3 items of ‘any other business’, as advised by Ms Hayter.

There were no declarations of interests.

NOTED

(a)               To confirm and sign the Minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 7 November 2006.

(b)               To note the draft Minutes of the meetings of the Alexandra Palace and Park Board held on (i) 14 November 2006. 

(A) Minutes        

(i)         Alexandra Palace and Park Consultative Committee – 7 November 2006

The Chair asked if there were any points of accuracy.

Mr Thompson referred to APPC016 and advised that in respect of point (ii) 9^th line – the word ‘all’ should be changed to ‘the majority of items’.

The Clerk advised that he had been advised by Mr Tucker (who was absent) that in respect of 13^th line the date ‘1989’ should be changed to ‘1981’.

Professor Hudson commented that in respect of APPC016 – point (i) his recorded comment in the 4^th line was incorrect and the words ‘tightened up………’ be replaced with ‘simplified’.

The Chair MOVED and it was:

RESOLVED

That the minutes of the Consultative Committee held on 7 November 2006 be agreed as an accurate record of the proceedings with the following amendments:-

 APPC016 point (ii) 9^th line – the word ‘all’ should be changed to ‘the majority of items’.

APPC016 – point (i) 4^th line – the words ‘tightened up………’ be replaced with ‘simplified’.

 (ii)       Alexandra Palace and Park Board  – 14  November  2006

There being no points of clarification the Chair MOVED and it was:

RESOLVED

That the minutes of the Board  held on 14 November 2006 be noted. 

The Chair asked for a brief introduction of the report.

The General Manager – Mr Holder advised the Committee that he had received notification from the Charity Commission of the receipt of 328 representations by the public in response to the advertisement of the Section 16 Notice.  The Commission had now advised that a Commissioner would make the final decision  on the granting of the order. There were no timescales given as to when this would take place and as previously advised the only part of the process with a set time period imposed was the actual period of advertisement.

Mr Holder advised that the 328 submissions consisted of a considerable number both for and against the proposals. In clarifying queries from Councillor Engert Mr Holder advised that the Commission did not hold meetings in public for the purpose of making these decisions and that the determination may give a response of either yes or no but beyond that it was unclear whether it may quantify or clarify answer given.

In response to questions Mr Holder advised that the Firoka Group were living with the timetable and process. The Chair added that the Council also were living with the timetable and process.  The being no further questions from the Committee the Chair thanked Mr Holder for his summary.

NOTED  

To update on progress made towards the programme of work, and to receive a further update in respect of the previous full audit of HLF work in the Park.

In a succinct introduction to the circulated report the Head of Facilities Mr Loudfoot gave a brief update of each of the areas of HLF work and answered points of clarification.

In particular comments were expressed in respect of:

·        The current vacancy of parks Development Manager to be filled shortly and the need to ensure that the calibre of the candidate was of the same standard as the previous incumbent. Members were advised that the standard and experience of shortlisted candidates could not be commented on but the needs and requirements of the postholder were fully recognised and those requirements would be met ;

·        Whether any remaining monies left within the HLF could be spent on other areas in the park requiring improvement. The Facilities Manager responded that if Members or their respective orgnisations had any views on areas of improvement then these could be considered noting that there may not be that much available once the estimates for the proposed entrance works had been quantified;

·        Comments in respect of either possible overspends or moving finances across the programme and the response that no overspends were allowed and there were very clear restrictions on movement of grant monies;

·        Clarification of work to be completed to the rose garden and fountain;

·        various entrances to the Park to be reviewed and improved including the Muswell Hill entrances to the Park, and improvements to the Park entrances at various locations;

·        Update on the proposed Haringey Heartlands Secondary School and that the matter would be further discussed by the Board on 6 February 2007

·        The issue of CCTV camera use in and around park areas and the areas where there was current CCTV and whether there should be publicity showing that CCTV had been used as a deterrent

The Chair then summarised and it was:

RESOLVED

that the contents of the report and comments expressed be noted.

(a)   Ms Hayter advised that she had 3 issues to raise, which she had given notification of prior to the deadline of 11 January 2007 but these had not been received by the Clerk.  The Chair agreed to hear each of the matters.

(i)                 Ms Hayter referred to the future of the Consultative Committee following the Firoka Group’s take over of the lease, and clarification of its future status.

(ii)               Ms Hayter referred to the inadequate supply of required notices during the period of the Commission’s notice period and that she had not been satisfied with the process to ensure adequate notice. Ms Hayter commented that had it not been for her efforts, as someone in the know there would not have been further adequate advertisement, and the irony that at the close of the advertisement period notices were almost everywhere.  Ms Hayter commented that she had thought that it would be in the Palace’s interest to give ensure that the advertisement was ‘loud and proud’.

(iii)             The future monitoring of the work of Firoka and how the supervisory/successor body would operate in a monitoring capacity.

The Chair asked Mr Holder to respond to the points raised.

In respect of point (i) Mr Holder advised that the Consultative Committee and its function would continue following the lease being signed and the Committee will continue to liaise with the Board of trustees as they would remain as landlord.  The Consultative Committee would continue to have comment in relation to the operation and management of the Park as this function would remain with the Board of Trustees.

In respect of point (ii) Mr Holder commented that the Charity Commission had required 2 notices in the park, and 2 at the Palace and no more.  However the palace had undertaken to display the notices in the local libraries and he had personally delivered notices to the Head of the Libraries Service of LB Haringey but these had been misplaced and not put up. However once his staff had knowledge of this default it was rectified and notices were then displayed within 24 hours. The notice information was then also displayed on the website for Alexandra Palace.

In regard to point (iii) it was the case that the Board of Trustees as Landlord would be appointing a Monitoring Surveyor who would ensure that the work carried out by the Firoka Group complied with the terms of the lease/project agreement and would report to the Board of trustees as landlord.  Ms Hayter commented that whilst she appreciated that there would be initial monitoring etc whether this would be the case in 5 and 20 years and how effective would the Landlord be in stopping the Firoka group from doing exactly what it wanted – this view was shared by a number of representatives present. Mr Holder responded that it was the case that he would be remaining post transfer to oversee the work of the Monitoring Surveyor and see through the development. . In  ...  view the full minutes text for item 26.

3 April 2007

The Clerk advised that the next scheduled meeting – 3 April 2007 may be rescheduled to the latter part of April 2007 in light that the Board meeting on 10 April 2007 may be rescheduled.  The Clerk advised that he would notify Members accordingly.

The meeting ended at 20.44hrs.