Agenda and draft minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Denis Heathcote, Evelyn Regan, Nigel Willmott (Colin Richell substituted), Denise Feeney, Val Paley (Hugh Williams substituted) and Councillors Newton, Gorrie, Jenks, Gibson, Cooke, Hare and Stewart.

Councillor Williams gave apologies for lateness.

It was noted that the Statutory Advisory Committee was inquorate.  However, as in the past, recommendations could still be made to the Board, and if necessary, ratified at the next quorate meeting.

There were no declarations of interest.

i.          To approve the minutes of the Joint Statutory Advisory and Consultative Committees held on 28 January 2014.

ii.         To note the minutes of the Advisory Committee held on 28 January 2014.

iii.        To note the draft minutes of the meeting of the Alexandra Palace and Park Board held on 13 February 2014.

i)          The minutes of the Joint Statutory Advisory Committee and Consultative Committee held on 28 January 2014 were approved as a correct record.

Matters arising

It was clarified that the ‘herras’ fencing which was referred to in the minutes as one of the concerns about the fireworks was a solid 5 metre high fence.

ii)         The minutes of the Statutory Advisory Committee held on 28 January 2014 were noted.

iii)       The minutes of the Alexandra Palace and Park Board held on 13 February 2014 were noted.

To receive the report of the Chief Executive, Alexandra Park and Palace.

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

NOTED:

·                A review had been carried out of the Consultative Committee membership and it was recommended that the following organisations be removed from the Committee’s membership:

-       Alexandra Palace Amateur Ice Skating Club (ceased to exist)

-       Alexandra Palace Angling Association (withdrawn)

-       Alexandra Palace Garden Centre (withdrawn)

-       New River Action Group (withdrawn)

·                The report also suggested that membership could be opened up to include representatives from the local education sector.

·                The Chair commented that membership of the Consultative Committee was open to relevant national organisations and he suggested The Victorian Society as a possible candidate.  Jacob O’Callaghan suggested English Heritage, and schools from adjoining boroughs might be interested.

·                Duncan added that if members wanted to encourage other organisations to apply then they could do so.

RESOLVED that

i)          The proposal to delete a body which has ceased to exist since the last review be endorsed.

ii)         The proposal to delete a number of bodies who have indicated that they no longer wish to send a representative be endorsed.

iii)       The proposal to seek representation from the educational sector be endorsed.  Similarly, an approach could be made to The Victorian Society and other appropriate organisations.

To receive the report of the Chief Executive, Alexandra Park and Palace.

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

NOTED:

·                A number of events had taken place since the last meeting.

·                Although the Palace had lost the accountancy exams, a number of other events were being booked so it was anticipated that this loss would be covered by the end of the year.

Fundraising

·                Duncan Wilson referred members to the Wonderbird fundraising report as set out in the papers.  Fundraising would require significant investment and it was hoped that a Head of Fundraising would be appointed by Summer.

·                There was a difference between fundraising and sponsorship – sponsorship involved looking at ways of taking advantage of the Alexandra Palace brand to raise money.  The Alexandra Palace name wouldn’t be ‘sold’ but could be associated with a sponsor (eg “Alexandra Palace supported by…”), although there was still some work to be done in terms of deciding which organisations would be appropriate for this.

·                Fundraising wouldn’t just be for the Palace, it was almost certain that the Park would be included as well.

·                Members were generally supportive but raised concerns about sponsorship and naming rights and raised concerns about possible unsuitable associations.  Names like Studios A and B were historic and informative and should not be compromised.  In response, Duncan Wilson said that a number of well known establishments had sponsored rooms, e.g. the Royal Opera House and at Greenwich.  Some areas of the Palace and Park would be more suitable than others for sponsorship, but until it was known what offers might be available then it was best to have an open mind.  The Committee would be kept informed of developments.

Learning and Community

·                There had been a good response to the history tours.  It was intended that they would continue on a quarterly basis.

·                The Transmitter Hall had been refurbished as part of the WW1 project. The exhibition would be opened in September 2014.

Volunteering Update

·                It was reported that the Volunteering Handbook had been circulated to Committee Members, but some Members were concerned that it had not yet been sent to the Friend groups for their consideration as had been expected.

·                The Chair drew attention to the adverse comments on the Harringay Online forum about the appeal for a volunteer photographer.  Other Members noted that there had been particular criticism about the demand that volunteer photographers must surrender copyright to the Palace – and suggested that instead, the Palace could be granted rights for free reproduction.

Casino

·                Members commented on recent stories that had suggested there might have been a change of policy with regard to having a casino at Alexandra Palace.  Members were reassured by the Chief Executive that there had been no change in policy and that there would be no casino.

RESOLVED to note the report and concerns raised.

To receive the report of the Chairman, Alexandra Park and Palace Joint Statutory Advisory Committee and Consultative Committee.

To receive the report of the Chief Executive, Alexandra Park and Palace.

The Chair introduced his report as set out and he explained that his purpose was to clarify aspects of regeneration and commercial development that had given some members cause for concern in recent months.  He introduced the five areas that required clarification and acknowledged that the Chief Executive’s subsequent report helped in this aspect and he welcomed it.

In discussion it was acknowledged that the areas of the Palace assigned for specific usages were still as defined by the 1985 Act and the purposes of the 1900 Act of free (as in affordable) recreation, education and entertainment still applied to the whole Palace and Park (apart from the hotel area).

It was further acknowledged that the recent summary statements of Farrell’s masterplan, which was in terms of basic distinctions between areas dedicated to commercial, or community use, was an over-simplification.

NOTED the responses from Duncan Wilson:

·                The scope for a further HLF bid

There were projects which went beyond the HLF bid that might require HLF funding, for example the WW1 project.  However, any major capital grants would need to wait until the current HLF project was complete.

All funding bids needed to be supported by financially viable business plans, and evidence of this had to be presented to the HLF in order to reach further stages.

·                The extent to which the HLF funding might inhibit commercial development opportunities

The HLF would not provide funding to straightforward commercial activities, so there needed to be a balance between commercial and community activities.

·                The areas of the Palace seen as having potential for commercial development

It was important not to be closed minded with regard to commercial development, as it was possible to have both commercial and charitable activities at the same time.

If the Palace were serious about building a hotel then consideration would have to be given as to how to entice a developer, and this may include giving them some influence over what happens elsewhere in the Palace.

·                The scope for redevelopment partnership opportunities

It should be recognised that a lot of capital would need to be raised to invest in the building – event spaces would need to be renewed in order to continue usage.  It may be possible to reach a long term agreement with current event promoters if the event spaces were improved.

It would be likely that any developers would want to have some say over the types of events that would take place at the Palace.

Duncan Wilson introduced his report as set out.  He introduced Ian Huddleston from Pinsent Masons, an advisor on real estate law.

One point that emerged in discussion were members’ concerns about Alexandra Palace and Park in its entirety being included by Haringey Council in a recent ‘Property Fair / Sitematch’, which was thought to be inappropriate.

NOTED:

·                The HLF had made it clear that they would like to see an arrangement with a commercial operator to demonstrate that the Palace was sustainable.

·                A simple solution to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 158.

To receive the report of the Regeneration and Property Director, Alexandra Park and Palace.

Kerri Farnsworth – Regeneration and Property Director - introduced the report as set out.

NOTED:

·                The HLF project team was in now in place.

·                A regeneration strategy workshop had been held on 7 April to present initial thoughts and principles.

·                A framework activity plan had been put together to identify activities for the running of the Palace following the regeneration work.  More information would be provided to the Committee in due course.

·                The design team were currently working on concept designs, and a statutory public consultation would take place in the second half of September.  The design proposals would be available for the next meeting.

·                Purcell were finalising the 10 year fabric maintenance plan – this would be a priority ordered plan which would require capital funding in order to carry out the work.

·                The work on the Campsbourne area would take another 2-3 months to work through.

·                The owner of Little Dinosaurs has submitted a planning application to the Local Authority for three areas of work – infill of the back wall, triangle of Astroturf to cover the muddy area and the construction of a climbing frame.  Duncan Wilson pointed out that the Board had considered the position on both the proposed astroturf and the filling in of the perimeter timber wall and had agreed the proposals which had appeared in the planning application, in May 2013.  Although the Joint SAC-CC had considered the general approach in May 2013, its endorsement then had been conditioned by concerns about some aspects and these had been minuted. The location of the climbing frame had moved since the Committees had seen the original plans, and would need to be brought back before landlord’s consent was decided on.

It was noted that some members were unhappy about the fact that the final application had been put in without prior sight by the SAC and CC chairs, as had been agreed, and were still unhappy with aspects of the proposal, including the climbing frame, use of Astroturf and signage.

RESOLVED to note the report.

None.

None.

None.

Tuesday 8 July 2014

Tuesday 7 October 2014

Tuesday 20 January 2015

Tuesday 14 April 2015

NOTED the dates of future meetings.