Agenda item - Deputations from members of the public.

A list of deputations received by the due date of the 27 November 2008 will be circulated separately as part of an addendum at the meeting.

34.1       The Mayor reported that two Deputations had been received and invited Mr Barrenechea as the spokesperson for the first deputation to come forward and address the council.

34.2       Mr Barrenechea thanked the Mayor and stated that:

“Starbucks has been refused change of use planning permission, but has been trading for over six months now. 

Today Councillor Fryer has presented our petition with over 2,000 signatures which calls on Starbucks to respect planning law and close and calls upon Brighton & Hove City Council to enforce its decision on whether it will open.  I have learned, just in the past hour that Brighton & Hove City Council has served an Enforcement Notice on Starbucks.  I would like to thank the Council for their action and congratulate it but also I would like to highlight that given Starbuck’s history of opening without planning permission and continuing to trade contrary to planning law that it’s most likely that they will fight this.  I implore the Council to monitor this place closely through their Planning Department, because obviously Starbucks has deep pockets when it comes to legal representation and I would also like to point out that this is also part of a larger problem I think that we face in Brighton & Hove. 

Brighton & Hove is a unique town.  I live here, I love it and I think it is one of the reasons it is so great a pleasure for me to open a business.  You must fight to protect your small businesses from large corporations who operate unfair trading practices like advertising, like raising the rents in certain areas so the traders can’t afford those rents. 

I think that Councillors and citizens need to stand up for their local traders, especially in these hard economic times so I want to thank the Council for that.

I would like to ask a question, if possible, of Councillor Hyde, in terms of the timeline for Enforcement Notices: because Starbucks are most likely to appeal this Enforcement Notice, perhaps you can tell me what would it mean if they do appeal within the timeline and what would happen after that?”

34.3       Councillor Hyde stated that “The Enforcement Notice requires Starbucks to remove all customer seating and tables from the public areas, completely cease the A3 operation in that there should be no sales of food and drink for consumption on the premises and restore the use of the property back to an A1 retail use in that all sales are for consumption off the premises.

The Notice takes effect on 9 January 2009 (a 28 day “kick in period” is required in law) and we have thereafter given Starbucks 6 weeks to comply.  Full compliance with the Enforcement Notice is required by Friday, 20 February 2009 unless an appeal is received before 9 January 2009.

You are absolutely correct they may carry on trading until determination.  It is likely that they will appeal the latest enforcement notice, and thereby have two outstanding appeals.  It will be for the Planning Inspector to determine whether to link them and hear both together and it usually takes about nine months for an appeal to be heard.  However, if the second appeal is linked with the outstanding one, the hearing maybe earlier which would be helpful to the council.”

34.4       The Mayor thanked Mr Barrenechea for attending the meeting and speaking on behalf of the deputation.  He explained that the points had been noted and the deputation would now be referred to the Planning Committee.  The persons forming the deputation would be invited to attend the meeting and would be informed subsequently of any action taken or proposed in relation to the matter set out in the deputation.

34.5       The Mayor then invited Mr Phillips as the spokesperson for the second Deputation to come forward and address the council.

34.6       Mr Phillips thanked the Mayor and stated:

“My name is Paul Phillips and I am Chairman of the Kemp Town Society. I appreciate the opportunity to present this deputation on behalf of the Society and residents of Kemp Town.  The Presentation Material provided is the essence of the deputation.

Rev. Thomas Kemp brought the citizens of London to Brighton. It is time to encourage tourists – the wealthy ones – to return to Brighton. And return tourism as the top economic driver for Brighton’s prosperity.

The Heritage Seafront is the Crown Jewel of the Cityand the primary reason for Visitors to come here. 4.5 miles long and considered the most important heritage seafront in the UK, arguably in Europe and certainly unmatched anywhere else in the world.  But it is in decay – as the photos show – no less in Kemp Town.  No money, no pride and perhaps unloved – why has it been left to decay?  How many years will it be before these and other street lights are rebuilt? The lamps are Grade 1 listed.

The recent Core Strategy fails to place Heritage as the fundamental platform for Brighton’s economic prosperity - it is our trump card. IT SHOULD BE AND WE NEED TO PLAY THAT CARD AGAIN IN THESE ECONOMIC STRESSFUL TIMES.

The Core Strategy is essentially a housing policy document. This has its value, of course, but unless the foundation of the City’s prosperity is protected, the tourist will dwindle away. It is the Built Heritage, which needs to be placed into a PRIMARY policyas part of the City’s economic strategy moving forward, so it is protected for generations to come. I love housing – good housing. It is vital for the well-being of all. But economic activity does not come from it - once built.

I encourage those who have authority in such matters to insert the Heritage Seafront to be protected on a statutory basis and annually funded to ensure it’s regular and consistently planned maintenance.  It is great that the bandstand has been funded, but it should have been as a matter of course.  Roll out the red carpet for tourists.  With more visitors staying for longer the city’s businesses will thrive – even in the off-season

The proposed Marina development is a dark cloud for those who treasure heritage. We are not against redevelopment. I single it out, as we have had waves of highly significant planning procedures, which seem to come out with little warning – the immediately affected residential community seemingly the last to be consulted and the most affected by it.  The result of this is that despite soothing words in the planning application documentation, there is a seething discontent at having this immense project thrust upon us.  The imposition of such a massive development on such an exposed, constrained and sensitive location impacting on our sea horizons and skyline is unconscionable.  The loss of key strategic views for all of Brighton and its damage to the image of Regency Brighton for the sake of squeezing in much needed houses, as I am led to understand, is highly detrimental to the overriding character of Brighton’s SEAFRONT image and character.  All the SPDs, SPFs will become all but worthless if their guidance – the spirit of the guidance - is ignored. English Heritage is not happy – neither is the Society.

There is a better solution. Not least to resist all current applications there until the new SPD is developed for the area.  A new one with this development underway will render it virtually pointless.  The Marina Act is there to protect the City from such sacrilege. I hope this does not become the fulcrum of decision for a heavy weight contractor to push its way to achieve its ambition to build a new (free) supermarket and the highly compromised housing estate off the backs of the presumed wealthy – who are most unlikely to be the primary purchasers there.

Shoe-horning a modern poorly laid out development, with no iconic architecture to justify its special treatment, is not welcome.

I hope all will see the wood for the trees in the potentially disastrous outcome should it be passed by the planning sub-committee in its current form. Or rather natural and built heritage values to be obliterated by a new sea of towering blocks of concrete.  Lets instead rebuild our prize attraction of iconic heritage, and build only sensitively styled, quality buildings which integrate with the vase historic canvas already in place and roll out the red carpet once again for visitors and strategise ways to keep them coming throughout the year, for years to come.”

34.7       Councillor Theobald stated that

34.8       The Mayor thanked Mr Phillips for attending the meeting and speaking on behalf of the deputation.  He explained that the points had been noted and the deputation would now be referred to the Environment Cabinet Member Meeting.  The persons forming the deputation would be invited to attend the meeting and would be informed subsequently of any action taken or proposed in relation to the matter set out in the deputation.