NEWSLETTER: WINTER 2007
(View previous Newsletter here)
Greetings

By the time you receive this Newsletter Christmas will be over – but it is in time to wish all our members and other readers a very HAPPY NEW YEAR. We much hope that 2008 will be a successful and blessed one for you all, for the Society and for our community as a whole.

Forthcoming Events

Various events are already planned for the coming year. Enclosed with this Newsletter are details of two approaching talks – the first of these is on Sunday 20 January when Alan Hayes will speak to us on Brighton Fishing and the Fishing People of Brighton, and the second on Sunday 17 February when Jackie Marsh-Hobbs will talk to us about the British Seaside Holiday. Both talks promise the addition of interesting new topics to our accustomed programme of talks. You will see that the meetings will be at our usual venue, The Lodge, Hampshire Court.

On 12 February we will hold our Annual Dinner at the City College’s ever popular Gallery Restaurant. An application form is enclosed. We can have up to 60 places (the maximum booking for the restaurant) but even so it is advisable to send your form back as soon as possible as the Dinner is a popular, convivial event and we have had to turn people away in the past.

Finally, our Annual General Meeting is fixed for the morning of Saturday 29 March 2008. Please put this date in your dairy NOW! Details will be circulated in advance of the meeting but we can report that Cllr. Brian Oxley, Leader of Brighton & Hove City Council, has very kindly accepted our invitation to be guest speaker.

At the AGM we will need to fill posts essential to the ongoing life of the Society. All key positions, e.g. Secretary, Treasurer, and Membership Secretary must be filled, as well as finding additional folk who can be contributing members of the committee. Please start thinking now how YOU might be able to play a part, however small, in the life of our Society. Let the Secretary know a.s.a.p!


Brighton Marina

The Marina is much in the news again, on two counts – i) a further planning application for major development has been submitted and ii) the Council has released a draft ‘Masterplan’ for that area. To take the latter first, there is below a longish but informative report from a member of your committee who attended a council organised workshop on the issue last month.

‘The society was one of a range of amenity associations invited by the council’s planning projects officers to attend a workshop on 26 November to consider the emerging draft Planning Advisory Note (PAN) for Brighton Marina. The main purpose was to give local stakeholders’ groups an opportunity to discuss and comment on this draft document. The PAN does not form part of the Local Development Framework but it is intended to be “a material consideration” in determining planning applications; proposals that come forward should accord with its principles.

The existing supplementary planning guidance for the marina, adopted in January 2003, focused specifically on the future of the marina’s western end, whereas the PAN encompasses the whole of the marina, the Black Rock site and the Gas Works site. Since the approval in 2006 of the colossal “outer harbour” development, followed by the current application for the immense “inner harbour” scheme, and in view of the competition winner in 2002 for the Black Rock site, the council, which owns the freehold of the site, aims to establish a vision for it, and to set out objectives. The vision, in summary, is to help to create a unique, high quality and attractive mixed use marina environment.

The document considers what has taken place there over the years, and criticises the piecemeal nature of development. It takes into account the need for local sensitivity, aesthetic enhancement, environmental and ecological safeguards, social and economic progress, emergency services, infrastructure and so on. Generally speaking, the amenity and residents’ groups in attendance (disappointingly few) felt that the vision presented had certain shortcomings. They felt that a higher profile and priority should have been accorded to preserving the marina as a marina. Then, by perpetuating the policies of higher density of development the draft document seemed woefully defeatist especially in the face of the current threat of an incredible degree of over-development. Also, it seemed to reflect a naive overestimation of the capacity of some “rapid transport” buses to provide for the projected increase in transport needs. Conservation groups will find little in the document to reassure them in respect of the government’s and the council’s present policies on transport and tall buildings.

The Kingscliffe Society is naturally concerned at the impact on our own area of “development opportunities” seen by the PAN as potential or likely. Curiously, a revised provisional boundary of the site extends in a lengthy taper along Dukes Mound as far as the Banjo Groyne, therefore adjoining if not entering the East Cliff Conservation Area - depending on whether the text or the illustration (Fig. 4) is the definitive guide. From (literally) our East Cliff point of view, two very troubling statements appear in the analysis of identified sub-areas within the whole site. In the Leisure Area (12.1) i.e. much of the western end, the (Brunswick) scheme and multi storey car park “should set height limits”: hence there might be more monoliths if not towers. Secondly, in the Spending Beach area (12.7), “high density development will be considered” and, not only is the site “considered suitable for tall buildings because of its location out to sea” (!) but, yes, there is “potential for a landmark building on the southern part of the site”.

On the Black Rock site (12.12), “height of development should not exceed cliff height”. In our view, the awful roofscape of the Aquarium Terraces that accompanies pedestrians along the eastern end of Marine Parade should act as a warning to anyone thinking that “not exceeding cliff height” is enough to protect the character of the dramatic east Madeira Drive and Marine Parade areas.

Meanwhile, as an adjacent conservation area we are vaguely mentioned in the single brief paragraph devoted to principles of conservation (though there is rather more elsewhere on nature conservation): “proposed development should be sensitive to the site’s proximity to the [Sussex Downs] AONB, adjacent Conservation Areas and Listed Buildings … development proposals will therefore need to include within their Design and Access Statements an assessment of their impact on key strategic views (as identified by English Heritage and the council’s Conservation and Design Team.” Given the damage that can be done by any larger scale development, we find this a timid approach to some extremely challenging prospects. In respect of both the Black Rock site and the Western Gateway area to its south (12.10), the draft says proposals should be “sensitive to the site’s proximity to Kemp Town Conservation Area”. We could not agree more, but we would like to see the East Cliff Conservation Area included in this sentence.

Of particular interest to us is the reference to pedestrian access points into the marina: “they are difficult to find and are bleak and unpleasant environments.” Quite. Unfortunately, Volk’s Railway receives the attention of a mere two sentences. However, the section of the PAN on ecology (16) includes references to the railway’s nature conservation site of shingle vegetation, and to a proposal for a fresh landscaping scheme for the Kemp Town Slopes as well as opportunities to connect and balance biodiversity among and across the immediate localities.’
RE          


Since the above was written we have learnt that the Savebrighton group, concerned to oppose the current proposal for massive further development at the Marina (see below), has raised with the council questions as to the unequal opportunities among stakeholder groups in respect of involvement in the PAN at an early stage, with an apparent weighting towards developers and landowners. We have not yet seen a response from the Council to this charge. More anon!


Now for the Marina Planning Application.

The application proposes major development at the Marina additional to the ‘Brunswick’ proposals already approved by Council for some 853 residential units, including the 40-storey tower block.
.
This current application is from a different developer – Explore Living – and comments on it should be sent to the Council as soon as possible. The application number is BH2007/03454 and details can be seen in full either on the Council’s web site or by request at Bartholomew House, Brighton or Hove Town Hall. For those with access to the internet, once you have located the council’s web site (www.brighton-hove.gov.uk) key into ‘planning’ and then into ‘planning register’. After a disclaimer you will be presented with an opportunity to ‘search’ – just type in the application number given above and then click on ‘details’ when the application comes up. .You can comment online at that point, or by ‘ordinary’ e-mail to the case officer: maria.seale@brighton-hove.gov.uk Letters by post should go to Maria Seale, Development Control, Brighton & Hove City Council, Hove Town Hall, Norton Road, Hove, BN3 3BQ

For those who have not yet picked up on this application, and in brief, the proposed development includes ‘Marina Point’, a 28-storey tower on the site of the Asda filling station, a 17-storey tower on the MacDonalds site, an 11-storey block on the site of the multi-storey car park and several other buildings. There would be 1,294 new flats – making a total of some 3,000 homes when added to the 850+ recently approved and to those already there (region of 860). We all appreciate the need for homes (at least affordable ones) but the scale and density of any development must be appropriate to its locality and take into account the impact on existing residents and infrastructure. Just the thought of the additional traffic demands generated by such major developments – not to mention the approximate 12,000 seater sports/leisure facility favoured by the Council for Black Rock - is alarming, to say the least. It is hard to see how any ‘rapid transport system’ could cope.

Full information of the group campaigning against the Marina application is also on the web - www.savebrighton.com Those campaigners point out that the proposed Marina Point (28-storey) would be close to the cliff, with 18 of the storeys protruding above the cliff top. Reference is made to the fact that a clause in the 1968 Brighton Marina Act restricts building to cliff heights, but an apparent loophole in the drafting of the Act enabled the council to waive that restriction in respect of the previous application with its now approved 40-storey tower block, so there is a real risk that this current proposal will get the go-ahead.

Those concerned about the new proposals, which indicate massive overdevelopment, should investigate without delay and send comments to the council via any of the means mentioned above.


Other planning matters (selection only!)

Sussex Stationers, St. James’s Street. Many of us are much saddened that this shop will close on Saturday 29 December 2007 (as will the branch in East Street.) A current planning application (BH2007/03433) seeks approval for the floors above the shop to be turned into two flats (currently storage/office) one with balcony probably, and for a disabled lavatory on the ground floor which will be a self-contained unit, quite separate from the other floors. Our information at the time of writing is that the coffee shop chain Starbucks plan to take over the ground floor, which would be yet another regrettable loss of retail to ‘food and drink’ in out district shopping centre. On the other hand, such is life, people are commenting that if we must lose a valued shop then any replacement is better than another alcohol outlet.

Roof terrace – Revenge Club. An application to provide a roof terrace for some 75 persons, including an acoustic screen and balustrade railings, in order to accommodate smokers, was recommended for refusal by the council’s planning officer, its Conservation Advisory Group and your Society. The two former based objections solely on conservation and design issues whilst we added concern about detrimental effects on residential amenity given the proximity of people’s homes and that the applicants had indicated a wish to be able to use the terrace throughout the night. In the event, the application was approved (subject to conditions) by the council’s planning committee, following a site visit. The voting was 7 to 4, with 1 abstention.

Royal Alexander Hospital. Although outside of our area many people may be interested to know that following withdrawal of a first application a second one is currently with the Council to redevelop the site of the ‘old’ children’s hospital (application no. BH20007/04453) – it proposes demolition of building and replacement with 156 residential units and 751 square metres commercial use (doctors’ surgery and pharmacy) plus associated access, parking and public green. There is still time to comment..

102 Marine Parade. The list of decisions taken under officers’ delegated powers presented to the Council’s planning committee on 31 October 2007 states that an application for external paving at the front of this property to provide parking via access drive (retrospective) was refused on 5 October. (Application no. BH2007/03041 refers)

104 Marine Parade. An application (BH2007/03215) to block pave the separated area of land to the front of this property to form car parking area and landscape garden area (resubmission of previously refused application) was approved under officer’s delegated powers on 18 October 2007.
(Reported to planning committee 21 November 2007) A landscape scheme had to be submitted to the local authority for approval within 28 days of permission being granted. We have to check that that happened.

Finally – checking on planning applications.

Although a few planning applications are always included in our Newsletters there are heaps more, including in our area. We urge all those with access to the internet regularly to check the council’s web site as there may be an application that does not ‘hit the headlines’ but which could be important to you. To re-iterate – go to www.brighton-hove.gov.uk, then when the Council’s home page comes up, click on planning then on planning register. Lists of submitted applications for the previous week are posted every Monday. It is also possible to check back over previous weeks or to key straight into an application if you have its number. A less convenient way for those without internet is to check regularly at one of the council’s offices, either at Bartholomew House, Bartholomew Square, Brighton or at Hove Town Hall. Make this a New Year Resolution!

Planning proposals by Government

The Civic Trust, of which Kingscliffe is a member, responded to the government Planning White Paper, greatly assisted by comments submitted to it by member organisations. In brief, and quoting from a summary provided by the Trust, there is support for the principle of reform and simplification of the planning system where necessary, but not at the expense of accountability and community participation. Proposals indicating a commitment to community consultation at an early stage and plans to increase the role of Local Authorities in place setting are welcomed but concern is expressed that in the rush to “streamline” the system at any cost the proposals in the White Paper are balanced too far in favour of developers, with the interests of the community, heritage and environment being accorded reduced importance. “The White Paper seeks predominantly economic solutions, marginalises environment and community issues and shows little evidence that arguments other than the purely economic were taken into account when drafting the paper”. Concern is expressed about a proposed Planning Commission, both its scope and nature of accountability. And the point is made that community involvement must take place at all stages of the planning process and not just at the plan preparation stage. Other key points were made.

Apparently the government received a massive 1,600 written responses to the consultation on the Planning White Paper, plus 31,000 e-mails and a number of petitions on the no. 10 Downing Street website. It seems that the vast majority of comments were along the lines of the concerns put forward by the Trust – i.e. that the proposals threaten local democracy, communities and the environment. The Trust now reports that despite the huge level of public concern the government is pressing ahead with its original proposals, with no significant changes seen so far in the Planning Bill that has followed on from the White Paper. More information is obtainable from the policy section of the Civic Trust website: www.civictrust.org.uk

Licensing

Policy

A revised Statement of Licensing Policy has been approved by Brighton & Hove City Council. The new policy is similar to the previous one although, so we read, there has been some clarification around the separation of planning and licensing, sex encounter establishments and ‘murder music’. Missing from the new policy is the issue of establishing a cumulative impact zone, as had been proposed by the police. The reason for delaying consideration of that option, based on legal advice, is the necessity to consult again on the subject. A revised proposal has been put forward by the police, including reduction in the area to be included in a cumulative impact zone, and comments on the proposal will be received by the Council up to 11 January 2008. Kingscliffe is strongly supportive of the introduction of a cumulative impact (CI) policy. The adoption of such a policy would not mean that no new or varied licences would be issued to premises within a defined zone but that premises applicants would have to show that they would not contribute to any existing cumulative impact in the designated CI area. The zone proposed by the police includes the St. James’s Street area, which is very proper and necessary in our view, since that area is inundated with licensed premises of one kind or another, many with long hours of opening.
.
Premises license applications

City News, 4 St. James’s Street. This convenience store located on the corner of the alleyway leading to St. James’s Place, recently applied for a licence to sell alcohol by retail 24 hours a day throughout the year. At a Hearing held on 6 December 2007 several residents turned up to support their written objections, as did a representative from your Society. Fortunately, after a thorough consideration of the issues, with both ‘sides’ having a chance to make their case and question opposing views, the Licensing Panel of three councillors refused the licence but allowed alcohol sales until midnight from the current 10 p.m. The result was an undoubted victory for the residents who presented their fact based case with eloquence and conviction. The main basis for refusal was in order to promote the licensing objective of ‘prevention of public nuisance’. Well done everyone!

59 St. James’s Street. Hot on the heels of the above application is one submitted by another convenience store in the street, also seeking a 24 hour licence for retail sale of alcohol. A notice in the shop window indicates that representations must be made to the council no later than 16 January 2008. Past experience is that round the clock availability of alcohol purchases brings people to the street from way outside the area. Given the proximity of people’s homes to no. 59 it is hoped that people living in the vicinity will object on the grounds of prevention of public nuisance (a licensing objective should be quoted in making any representation – the others are prevention of crime and disorder, public safety, and protection of children from harm).

V2 Club, Steine Street. Here we go again, with another application for extended opening hours at these premises. Currently the club has to close at 3 a.m. (having been unsuccessful with an attempt at later hours, including ‘round the clock’ on two previous occasions). The present application, due to be considered at a Licensing Hearing on 3 January 2008, seeks permission to stay open until 5.30 a.m. on three days of the week, with alcohol available until 5 a.m. Several objections from nearby residents have been submitted (your society has supported them). The club entrance is only paces away from the bedrooms of residential properties in Dolphin Mews as well as being adjacent to homes in Steine Street itself, consequently many noise and nuisance complaints have been submitted to the council’s Environmental Health (EH) team over the years. At other hearings an EH representative has been present to oppose extensions, but this time the EH objection has been withdrawn following agreement of certain conditions with the applicants. Residents stay with their objections, regarding the conditions as unworkable.

Open All Hours?

This national group set up at the time the Licensing Act 2003 was being debated, and of which Kingscliffe member Roger Rolfe is a part, is meeting with representatives from the government’s Department of Culture, Media and Sport in January in order to discuss proposals for legislative elaboration in relation to minor variations of licences under the 2003 Act. It is good that through our involvement in this group – as well as the splendid National Organisation of Residents’ Associations (NORA) which is now recognised by government as a consultee – we have additional channels for input into government.


Communal Bins

There is much understandable concern across the city, at least among conservation societies, given their visual effects, about the introduction of these large bins and their effect on valued parts of the city. An informal pressure group – Consult and Conserve – is striving hard to ensure that consultation with residents promised by councillors will be meaningful and not just an ‘exercise’. Feedback from our members shows a range of views about the bins, with some folk hostile and others seeing their value in areas where there are properties of multiple occupation, although all agree that the positioning of the bins is crucial. Although we gather that the consultation process is only just starting it is a fact that many bins are already in situ in the East Cliff conservation area. For example, they have been sited in Marine Gardens for some time, following, so we are informed, discussion with residents. And there are three or four in what might be seen as the less sensitive area of St. James’s Street, plus one in Dorset Gardens – the latter, in the view of many, being horribly situated in visual terms. We will be following up this issue in the New Year.

Somerfields Car Park

In our Summer issue of the Newsletter (July 2007) we reported on changes to car parking that had been introduced by Somerfield supermarket in St. James’s Street, possibly in contravention of agreement with the Council. Kingscliffe had raised this with the Council’s Director of Environment who swiftly got the appropriate member of staff to investigate. Not having heard anything for some time our recent follow-up to the Council has elicited the news that the matter is still being investigated. A further attempt to obtain an informative reply will be made in the New Year.

South Downs Campaign

The South Downs Campaign (SDC) of which Kingscliffe is a member is hoping that the future of the South Downs will be finally resolved in 2008, with government confirmation that the South Downs will become a National Park, and that it will include the Western Weald, Ditchling, Lewes and other areas that the Inquiry Inspector has currently proposed should be left out.

SDC, which has instituted and maintained a fantastic crusade, will start the New Year with its largest membership ever, with over 125 organisations in membership - a 50% increase since it first appeared at the start of the South Downs National Park inquiry in November 2003. This is a testament to the strength of support there is for the national park and shows that this is growing even with all the delays to the designation process. The re-opened public inquiry will be on 12 February 2008, in Worthing. Meanwhile, supporters with internet access are urged to sign an on-line petition to the government to persuade it to include the Western Weald in the National Park –go to http:/petitions.pm.gov.uk/western-weald The SDC web site is www.southdownscampaign.org.uk

Meeting with Ward Councillors

Last but certainly not least, we thank most sincerely our councillors from East Brighton and Queen’s Park Wards who gave up a Saturday morning in November to meet with Kingscliffe members for a sharing of views. A well-attended and articulate meeting ensured that a fruitful time was spent. An anticipated range of concerns was put forward (none the less important for that) – e.g. poor condition of seafront; communal bins; deterioration in quality of life, particularly since extended licensing hours; seafront events that prevent its use by many residents and visitors; how to encourage greater ‘green’ lifestyles; regrettable apparent absence of planning enforcement in the city, with consequent adverse effects on residential amenity. Matters will be followed through.

***************************************

RENEWED GOOD WISHES FOR 2008

Janie Thomas (Hon. Secretary) 5 Charles Street, Brighton BN2 1TG
e-mail: lamtom@ukonline.co.uk

Charity Number 291839
Member of The Civic Trust
Kingscliffe web site address:
www.kingscliffe-society.org.uk

Issue No. 4 – 2007 (Winter)
28 December 2007