The event celebrates the bicentenary of the first full year of the Regency in Great Britain, its colonies and Hannover. It also celebrates the centenary of Antony Dale, founder of the Regency Society six decades ago and author of many works including Fashionable Brighton, who was born in 1912.

The Regency Society is organising the weekend, working with its partners the University of Brighton and the Royal Pavilion & Museum Foundation (RPM Foundation). They hope to attract the interested general public as well as experts, especially members of the Regency Society, RPM Foundation and University of Brighton.

The weekend divides into four sections: Celebrating the bicentenary on Friday evening; The Symposium on Saturday morning and afternoon; Regency Brighton and Hove – walks, talks and tours on Saturday afternoon and a music and a reception in the Royal Pavilion on Saturday evening; and Living it up in the Regency on Sunday.

Prices for attending the Regency Society Weekend vary from £45 to £114, depending on what days you want to attend – but there are discounts for early booking and a discount on membership of the Regency Society, which will allow you to book at special members’ rates.

Please click to see more information and to book.

Kemp Town Society has written in support. We have also endorsed efforts from Peter Martin, Chairman of the Marina Residents Association, who is also keeping a watchful eye on the “revisions” contained in the above Application by Brunswick.

“We understand that applications have been submitted by DP9 on behalf of Brunswick Developments Group plc with regards to the Marina. We assume that in essence the application is similar to BH2006/04307 which has now expired and will seek to gain approval for various so called ‘minor amendments’. We offer some initial thoughts on the areas that concern us – obviously these are made without sight of the new application.

We do not consider the proposed amendments to be a ‘minor material change’ to BH2006/01124, which received planning approval on 4^th July 2006.  Any application that requires 47 documents (as BH2006/04307 did) is not consistent with the term ‘minor amendments’. It must be a Full Planning application – for the whole development, not simply Block F.

There are fundamental changes proposed to the approved application BH 2006/01124 and several changes in Planning Legislation that must now be considered.                                                            

1 In the approved application BH2006/01124, 491 car parking spaces were located in a three-storey car park beneath the tower blocks including reinforced wave dissipation chambers that were considered necessary and were an improvement on the refused application BH2004/03673/FP.      In the approved application there is a direct relationship between the residential towers and the car parks via vertical elevator cores. Disabled parking is located in close relationship to the base of the elevator cores.  In the amended proposal two levels of car parking (344 spaces) are removed and located on three levels under Block F. Only 152 spaces will now be located beneath the residential towers that house the bulk of the 853 apartments. The result is that many residents will now have to walk in excess of 200 metres from their parking space under Block F to the elevator core serving their apartment. Disabled parking is a considerable distance from many apartments.  The design is a compromise and is functionally a far worse solution than the approved application.  This is a major change involving shifting in excess of 10,000 square metres of floor space from one part of the site to another. It cannot be considered by any stretch of the imagination to be minor and it has repercussions on the whole development rationale.

2 The removal of the wave chambers with perforated walls means that the tower blocks will now be sitting above the Spending Beach on exposed concrete piles (This is what was originally submitted for the refused application BH 2004/03673/FP). We have concerns about the wave climate, the hydrodynamics and the danger to boats entering the Marina as a result of the proposed changes. We are concerned about the accumulation of marine refuse and flotsam beneath the suspended deck. This is a major change.

3 The increase in retail use of approximately 762 square metres is a major change to the approved plans. It is achieved at the expense of community provisions including the removal of the harbour offices, the removal of the Yacht Club and the relocation of RNLI parking from surface level to the basement. We are concerned that these changes may have serious implications particularly the response time of the lifeboat crew.

4 Residential use is introduced on the first floor. Without sight of the new application drawings we are unable to comment at this stage.

5 We are concerned about the noise created by the building of double skin cofferdams.

6 We are concerned that insufficient thought has been given to the interaction with the approved 3T development. This will generate additional car parking pressure on the area and will also affect the principle bus route into and out of the Marina – the No.7.

7 We are concerned about the overshadowing of public space in the Marina by the high-rise towers. Insufficient evidence has been produced in the past to overcome our fears that many public spaces would be unusable.

8 We believe the whole development should be reconsidered in relation to:                                    • Planning and Climate Change – Supplement to PPS 1 published by DCLG in December 2007. And Climate Change Act 2008 published In July 2009                                                                 • PAN 04 adopted March 2008. It contains important new requirements that ‘ key views of the cliffs to the east from the cliff top are protected and/ or enhanced,’ and the development would ‘allow visual permeability through the development to preserve key views of the sea from the cliff top’. PAN 04 Page 31 – 36 (March 2008).                                                                            • The designation of the South Downs National Park on 12^th November 2009/ 31^st March 2010. Views from the National Park are seen as being of national/regional importance.           • The Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009 (MACAA). From 6^th May 2011, Part 4 of the Act notes ‘A Marine License is required for activities up to the spring high tide watermark” in addition to ‘a Terrestrial Planning Permission for development to the Spring low tide watermark”.                                                                                                                                                                                

9 You will be aware that as the overall development exceeds the height of the cliffs it will also be necessary under the 1968 Brighton Marina Act to go to a full meeting of BHCC Council to obtain approval. This is a separate matter to Planning Approval.                                

10 Finally – DP9 make constant reference to the BH2006/01124 having been ‘implemented’ – presumably agreed with BHCC. The common definition of the word means ‘to carry out or fulfill’. It is clear that nothing has happened on the Marina in relation to BH2006/01124 since 4^th July 2006. There have been no boreholes, no site cabins, no hoardings, and no foundations dug – how then could the approval have been implemented?

These are some of our initial concerns – naturally they are somewhat ill formed at this stage as we have not been consulted and we have not seen any drawings. We are concerned about what is sometimes referred to as ‘salami’ planning i.e. slicing up the major development into small ‘minor amendments’. What guarantee do we have that similar applications will not follow?” Robert Powell.

of the unincorporated Society will be held on

Saturday 14th  APRIL 2012 at 10.30 am

at the Brighton Steiner School, Roedean Road, Brighton

(by the mini roundabout junction with Whitehawk Road)

A G E N D A

1.         Welcome and apologies

2.         Minutes of the 40^th Annual General Meeting and matters arising

3.         Chairman’s Report

4.         Accounts for the year ended 31^st December 2011

5.         Treasurer’s Report

6.         Committee elections:  As the unincorporated Society will cease to exist within the next 2 months in accordance with the Resolution of the members passed Friday 8th July 2011 the existing Committee members will continue to hold office until dissolution

7.         Closure

Please note the doors to the hall will not be open for the meeting before 10.10 pm

Documents herewith:

Minutes of AGM held 27 March 2011 – emailed or posted to Members

Chairman’s Report – See Website

Financial Statements for year ended 31 December 2011 – Posted or emailed* to Members

Proxies – Posted or emailed* to Members

(If you have not received emailed Notices attaching the above documents, or have received a Posted version only, it is because our records do not reflect your current email or your membership status. Please email Membership@kemptown-society.org.uk or Chairman@kemptown-society.org.uk to amend our records. We urge AS MANY MEMBERS AS POSSIBLE to attend the AGMs).

NOTICE

The 1st Annual General meeting of the corporate Society will be held on

Saturday 14th  APRIL 2012 at 11.00 am

at the Brighton Steiner School, Roedean Road Brighton

A G E N D A

1.         Welcome and apologies

2.         Chairman’s Report

3.         The company will commence trading immediately following the closure of this meeting

4.         Committee elections:  As this is the first meeting of the new Company the whole committee must retire and offer themselves for re-election

            Paul Phillips

            Tony Hadley

            Joan Griffiths

            Jill Sewell

            Derek deYoung

            Vanessa Minns

            David Gort

            Mark Eynon

5.         Report on the railings project 

6.         Closure

KEMP TOWN SOCIETY

PROXY

I…………………………………………………………………………………….. of ………………………

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

hereby appoint …………………………………………………………………………………………. / the

Chairman of the meeting* to be my proxy to vote for me on my behalf at the  41st and

Final Annual General meeting of the Society as follows:

To receive the accounts for the financial year ended 31^st December 2011     

 FOR / AGAINST*

Signed…………………………………………………………………………………

Print Name……………………………………………………………………………….

*delete as appropriate

KEMP TOWN SOCIETY

PROXY

I…………………………………………………………………………………….. of ………………………

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

hereby appoint …………………………………………………………………………………………. / the

Chairman of the meeting* to be my proxy to vote for me  on my behalf at the 1st

Annual General meeting of the Society as follows:

To elect the following persons to be members of the Board of Directors:

            Paul Phillips                            FOR/AGAINST*

            Tony Hadley                           FOR/AGAINST*

            Joan Griffiths                          FOR/AGAINST*

            Jill Sewell                                FOR/AGAINST*

            Derek DeYoung                      FOR/AGAINST*

            Vanessa Minns                        FOR/AGAINST*

            David Gort                              FOR/AGAINST*

            Mark Eynon                            FOR/AGAINST*

Signed…………………………………………………………………………………

Print Name……………………………………………………………………………….

*delete as appropriate

We can confirm Kemp Town Enclosures have signed on the Surveyors, Frankham. With the transfer of the lands and planning consent in place, pressure is now for the tender documents to be sent out to three specialist in each category of work to be undertaken. This includes the cast iron work, the stone plinths and wall re-construction (in brick and flint). These specialties are to meet high conservation standards to reduce the level of long term maintenance to the minimum.

The role of the Society is to raise further funding for the project. We have approach three already, English Heritage, The Heritage Lottery Fund and Ironmongers Charity, with more being identified and contacted. There is to be an ongoing fundraising programme directed to the major charities, local businesses and the local area throughout the summer until the total costs are covered.

If any Members are experienced in fundraising and have a desire to assist the Chairman in this regards, please kindly make contact with him. chairman@kemptown-society.org.uk

 It was billed as an £80 million development attracting two million visitors a year. But for nearly a decade, plans for the Brighton International Arena have remained little more than a pipe dream. Now the nine-year saga appears to have taken another twist as Brighton and Hove City Council looks likely to give developers another year to submit formal plans to develop the derelict Black Rock site near Brighton Marina.

Ice rink

Despite having no apparent history of bringing forward major multimillion pound schemes, those behind the plans for a 10,000-seater arena and separate indoor ice rink are confident they can meet the new cut-off date of July 2 City leaders, who dubbed it “Billy Bunter’s postal order” for being promised but not delivered, asked whether the local authority should be looking elsewhere.

David Pople, managing director of Brighton Arena Ltd, told The Argus: “You always have to be positive about these things. It’s a major project for Brighton and Hove and will bring big benefits.”

If built, the proposed indoor arena, double the capacity of current Brighton Centre, would host larger sporting and entertainment events. A separate indoor public ice rink, open all year round, would also be built as well as between 111 and 149 flats. A further 25,000sq ft of restaurant, bar, retail and other space will also be provided although this will be finalised if and when a planning application is submitted.

Job creation

Council papers say it will create between 400 and 450 jobs while bringing about £8 million a year into the local economy. The local authority adds space will be provided for the planned Rapid Transport Link despite there still being no firm proposal put forward for this. Town hall papers seen by The Argus show a lock-out deal, which gives Mr Pople’s firm exclusive development rights to the seafront site near Brighton Marina, will continue until the end of May.

It adds that new funders are on board who could become long-term partners in the scheme. The council is required to review the existing agreement and decide whether it will accept a 12-month extension by the end of July 2012. Council papers give a planned on-site start date of spring 2014.

Failed to deliver

Simon Fanshawe, chairman of the Brighton and Hove Economic Partnership, said: “For years now, we have called Black Rock Billy Bunter’s postal order, always promised but never delivered. “The question really is whether Mr Pople has not been able to develop as he does not have the funds or if it is just down to unforeseen circumstances. “I’m guessing the council believes the investment and intelligence they have gathered over the years is worth sticking with for another year. “But if they do not come forward maybe we should look for another provider.”

A council spokesman said: “If we didn’t get a planning application within the 12 months, the council would consider its options. “We’re doing everything practical to move all major projects on but as everyone knows, building and property development all over the country has been badly hit by the recession and raising money is very difficult. “That’s crucial because councils are given nothing like the money they would need to build things themselves and, typically, have to involve private sector partners.” Mr Pople said the arena plans had not changed much from when first put forward in 2003. However, he did say talks were ongoing with a variety of groups, including musical promoters, to discuss use of the non-allocated space, which could include creating a contemporary dance venue.

Arena plans

As for the general arena plans, he said: “We have been given a backstop date of July 2013 to get a planning application in as part of the development agreement. “I would like to think it could be submitted before then. “It’s been a long old process. We have had to relook at the scheme due to the current economic situation. “It has to work but the protocol of developing anything means that as we pass through the process we have to get the backing of the council.”

To help with this, a cross-party panel of city councillors will be set up next month.

Mr Pople said this “project board” was something he had been requesting as a link between the developers and the council officers guiding the proposal. Records from Companies House show Brighton Arena Ltd now has two directors – the Winchester-based Mr Pople and international figure skater Robin Cousins.

The multimillion pound scheme ground to a halt in 2008 when its funders Erinaceous, a property firm which owned Shoreham Airport, saw its shares price fall. Accounts from August 2010 show the Brighton Arena Ltd had liabilities of nearly £500,000. But The Argus can now reveal an agreement has been signed with Edinburgh-based Miller Developments to provide initial funding which could turn into a long term agreement.

The Argus contacted the firm but did not get a response. Its website shows recent involvement in major schemes in Islington, Scotland and the Warrington-based Omega project, which is the one of the largest development projects in Britain.

When asked about Miller Developments, Mr Pople said he was not willing to comment about any financial partners.”

The Society has grave concerns about the cosey relationship which has again arisen between the Brighton International Arena Company (BIA) and Brighton Council. When has any company seeking to gain planning permission for a site managed to gain a lock-out agreement from other contenders without some sort of payment, lasting years. What is it? If there is none, then why has the Council granted this exclusivity? The Council seem blinded by the idea of an alternative arena, come hell or high water, whatever the consequences. Job creation from building it is not one of them. What they should be doing is placing a public notice into the national press inviting another competition for the site. Presumably, they would outline the specifications for this, which would include that the project has to meet the Sustainability requirements as set out by the Major Project Team in 2004 (See below). It does stipulate Heritage and  Conservation. Will this matter when seeking a Stadium?

A building which is inward looking, set in an area which calls for an outward looking buildings, is incongruous!  In the unlikely event the BIA’s ability to fund this project were realised, the funds to design an Arena to suit its remarkable position overlooking the sea and conservation area beach and the Kemp Town Lower Slopes will not materialise. There will be no funds to invest a moment’s thought to attract those seeking to benefit from its magnificent nautral and built surroundings?

The site is not suited for such a major public arena, with access cut off on three sides, hosting upto 11,000 people at a time. It is blindingly obvious. A funder can assess this from miles away! If BHCC, as land owner, spent some money having a consultant write them a full analysis of the site and its suitability and a further report on the effects of this proposal with respect to its long-term impact, it would save alot of valuable hours of their time and halt what can only be described as false expectations. The BIA should consider paying for this, from an independent consultancy, selected from international firms knowledgeable of such endeavours for it to have any claim whatsoever on this site. The Council, if wisdom were to be applied, would hire their own independent consultant to see what development options might be suitable in this area. Then there would be no need for a “project board” until such information was tabled for public scrutiny.

 BHCC Website refers to the following.

Sustainability Commission run by the Major Projects Team, formed in 2004.

These covered the major areas in the City for redevelopment including;

Black Rock

z Development brief: “to provide an economically and

environmentally sustainable development” is one of the

three development objectives

z Sustainability Team part of Evaluation

z Highest priority weighting on evaluation criteria

z Part of Officer Steering Group influencing design

development

z Three areas of conservation – Built heritage, nature

conservation and geological

 Design

z Key Players

yClient/Council

yArchitects

yDeveloper

yFunder

z Key Tools include -

yEnvironmental Management Systems (ISO 14001) EMAS, BREEAM,

Legislation, best practice, lessons learnt (application of experience),

other projects/research

z Key Issues include

yContractual control – involvement of client in design development

yReduce potential of sustainable elements falling foul of value

engineering

yCompliance to Development Brief

yMaterials selection

yAnticipation of decommissioning

It seems, the development brief is not reflected in the proposed plans. Neither is it adequate for the site.

The view expressed above is that of the Chairman of the Society and does not necessarily reflect those of Society Members”

50 years of Chichester Festival Theatre

The Society has managed to obtain tickets for three productions in this special year.

All evening performances!

The first is the Opening production of

Chekhov’s UNCLE VANYA translated by Michael Frayn

This play opened the very first season 50 years ago with a cast including

Olivier, Redgrave, Plowright & the Thorndykes

 DATE: Monday 23rd April 2012

VENUE: Minerva Theatre @ 7.45

Cast includes Roger Allam, Dervla Kirwan & Timothy West

We will depart Sussex Square around 3.30/4.00

The inclusive price will be around £58 to £60.

This will be finalised when the supper costings & venue have been negotiated

In view of the imminence of the date, a provisional list (as with Glyndebourne last year) will be opened so I would be grateful if members can let me know as soon as possible (by any means – phone, email, post) their interest in attending with ticket numbers required

Tickets are limited &, I understand, is already nearly sold out so this production is already a very hot ticket & should be a memorable night out !

The other two dates for your diary are Tuesday 24th July

Shaw’s HEARTBREAK HOUSE with Derek Jacobi &

Tuesday 21st August Porter’s KISS ME KATE directed by Trevor Nunn. 

Both productions are @ 7.30 in the Main House. Full details will follow & will appear on our web-site.

I look forward to hearing from you, David Gort, KTS Events Organiser

dmgort@yahoo.co.uk or 07720443358

The Society has commenced this year with a structural amendment converting it from a Charity to that of a “Charitable Company limited by Guarantee”. It makes no difference as to what or how we do things, except more reporting to the Commission and HMRC, but it allows the Trustees and Members to be limited in their personal financial liability in running the Society. All members are unaffected other than be liable to the vast sum of £1.0 in the unlikely event there are liabilities owing upon winding up the Society. I’m sure it will never happen.

 However, the process in dealing with the change over, which was approved by the Members in an Special General Meeting last year, revealed that the Charity Commission followed a very literal interpretation of the new requirement for the provision of a ‘Public Benefit’. Fortunately they approved the change with the Society’s demonstrable principal activity this year being to assist the funding of the proposed new railings along the seafront being of public benefit. We pointed also to the Thomas Kemp Day as an example of exemplary educational merit. We will be seeking more ways to meet this test on an annual basis.

 Our Society’s primary task is to aid the local community gain knowledge of what to do in making the changes within their property in conformity to the limitations governed by the houses being Grade 1 listed. So communicating with property owners will be a cornerstone of our activity in the coming months

 The Brighton Council is the arbiter of such decisions where planning is concerned, as we know, but equally, the Society is engaging with the Council regularly when circumstances come to a head. We now have a new Conservation officer at BHCC. So the process of communications with BHCC has to be maintained and increased.

 Most of the recent activity last year involved

 1)    Attending and influencing beneficial changes to The Royal Sussex Hospital plans

2)    Attending the regular monthly meetings of the Conservation Area Groups

3)    The change of the legal status of the Society as referred to above

4)    Specifically resisting the planning application for a house in lieu of the garage at the back of Bristol Mansions and 18 Sussex Sq. being within the curtilage of the Conservation Area.

5)    Undertaking co-operative efforts with Kemp Town Enclosures Ltd to launch the railings project.

6)    Bring more information and keeping current with it on our Website.

7)    Gaining a notional grasp of The National Planning Framework and its impact on planning in historic areas.

8)    The Localism Bill and how the local community might engage with local issues and planning.

9)    Organising another successful Garden Party.

10)                       Outings to Chichester Theatres and Glyndebourne and historic houses.

11)                       Local Dinners and Quiz nights

 It is noted that our activities have not expanded this last year. As Chairman, I confess to some frustrations we do not have sufficient “hands on” members to penetrate more deeply into the psyche of the local owners and occupiers of the residences around the Estate. I am very open to have suggestions as to how better we might engage with our neighbours.

 Our membership figures have remained static, which I consider a favourable fact, given the current state of the nation. However, I remain anxious to grow the membership, not by just adding numbers, but by increasing and enthusing membership who will assist the Society in our influence as responsible champions of our heritage locally and nationally. We are always in need of all sorts of talent!

 It is a burden sometimes to be living on the Estate, with the altruistic goal of passing on the condition of the Estate and its houses to be entrusted to future generations as an architectural landmark of national importance. I find it troubling that so many are content to enjoy the benefits of this beautiful area and yet expect others to commit their time freely in a labour of love, whilst not lifting a finger. Who will assist us to change this?

 I look forward to seeing as many of you as possible at the AGM. Equally, if you wish to advise me of useful thoughts and ideas to benefit the Society, I welcome you emailed thoughts.

 Much thought and effort is going into the plans for the Diamond Jubilee Garden Party to be held on Saturday June 2nd. It will be a memorable event, so please put the date in the diary and come along!

 Paul Phillips, Chairman

Chairman@kemptown-society.org.uk

Coach Manager, Brighton & Hove Busses  

Managing Director Brighton & Hove Busses 

I look forward to hearing that you will change the new route to save the Estate from the very real risk of damage, for which, should it occur, your company liable would undoubtedly be liable.

 Yours faithfully, 

The following planning permissions were granted on Friday 27^th January:

 1. Listed building consent demolition of the Bristol Gate piers:

2. Listed building consent- demolition of hospital chapel.

 3. Full planning

 Demolition of existing hospital buildings located to the North of Eastern Road and to the south of the Children’s hospital building and Thomas Kemp Tower. (including the Barry Building)

Addition of helicopter landing pad and associated trauma lift on top of Thomas Kemp Tower:

 Erection of new hospital buildings incorporating Stage 1

 2 floors of underground parking (405 spaces) with new access from Bristol Gate and associated highway works:

 Cycle parking, external amenity spaces, including roof gardens and landscaping:

NB: The development is in 2 stages.

Stage 1 is the new development to be connected with the Thomas Kemp Tower.

Stage 2 is the re development of the Barry Building Block.

 The demolition is planned to start in the autumn of 2013. The period of the development is likely take 10 years.

 Planning permission has to be obtained for the location of a Consolidation Centre and the access routes to and from the Centre to the hospital during the course of the development.