Link to the Petition addressed to the Public Works Loan Board

Click here to access the i360 petition !

Aside | Posted on by | Tagged

Considering: A repositioned Waitrose, one revamp & the new Hove branch

Waitrose is repositioning itself to appeal to time-poor and domestically unskilled people who are about ready meals and food bling, whilst still being on top of foods having a serious moment (such as Lionel Poilane-style sourdough bread and vegan ice creams).  Free coffee has been introduced to cynically lure new people in. 

The magazine

Last year Waitrose shockingly dumped the expert and trusted Delia Smith from its house magazine in favour of a royal bridesmaid whose post-wedding, spin-off book was an embarrassment.   Waitrose dumbed the magazine down to a shallow level at the same time that it took on the socialite doing her entertainment food thing.   Is it having an identity crisis?  A mid-life crisis? 
The good news is, they realise the magazine dumb-down went too far and the April issue has real heft.  When this was remarked on, one of the head office suits at the Neville Road opening day admitted they had “recently given it a makeover”.  Recommend getting a copy before the month is out.  It is v. good.

The Western Road Branch revamp

The Western Road, Brighton, branch was unnervingly revamped at the end of 2013 leaving its longstanding and loyal customers shellshocked and, since then, now shunning it.  The revamp destroyed all that was good about the branch, replacing it with bad lighting, complicated stacks in shadow, floor-level product access issues, treasured product lines de-listed, and a jumbled, unfathomable layout that means it is impossible to work out or remember where things are shelved.  Why was the free coffee point put close to fresh flowers, fruit and vegetables – where its overpowering smell increases as the day goes on so you cannot smell the flowers or the fruit and veg?  All is coffee, tension and very bad design in there now. A woman shocked the suits on opening day at Neville Road by telling them her Waitrose devotee friends don’t use Western Road any more; they drive to Burgess Hill or Worthing to use the Waitrose branches there.  Jaws dropped.
Longstanding and treasured product lines previously only available at Waitrose and relied upon by its longstanding customers were  unceremoniously dropped over the last year in favour of a series of new and novelty products which seemed almost manically to be sequentially trialled and  dumped.  Product insecurity and availability began to make shopping at Waitrose a bit challenging. 
The actual Waitrose USP has always been about respect and consideration for suppliers, customers and staff alike wih an emphatic policy of supporting British food producers and its extensive cheese selection used to showcase several varieties of uncut Cheddars for those who take their cheese seriously.  Perhaps still do but less obviously so.  They catered to the pernickety and adventurous who cook from scratch and like to raise their game.  This is changing.  They catered to the pernickety and knowledgeable who separate their washes into colour, whites, delicates and use speciality products for each.  Biologicals eat silk.  Now it is hard to find a handwashing product for it at Waitrose and that is about lowering standards.  Dumbing down.  They dropped gentle Dreft for machine-washing  colours.  Still have Filetti for washing baby things and delicate fabrics that don’t mind bleach.  I expect that will not escape the products cull as it is a bit special, with softening agents in it.  Years ago they trialled a Brazilian soap powder made with coconut oil.  It was stupendous.  And expensive and worth every penny and they dropped it.  Memorable. 
When saveHOVE supporters were asked to comment, all those who replied to the email echoed the above, one after the other – except for the minority of two respondents who see Waitrose as an expensive place for the rich to shop and disapprove of it.  The revamp is done and dusted and the place looks unfixable.  It is very sad.  It is upsetting to feel driven out, to then also give up the security, familiarity and continuity that longstanding customers and staff have had with one another that made shopping there an efficient pleasure….before.

The Neville Road takeover of the Co-op Superstore

The good news is people can go to Neville Road to get back some of why they were Waitrose customers in the first place. Even with those weirdly rammed and complicated product stacks of bottles and tins, it is great.  On the opening day visit, I did not need to ask where anything was.  Logical layout, and wide aisles.  An atmosphere that soothes, relaxes and puts you in a good mood. Will it suffer the same empty shelf stock control problem that Western Road does?  Not on opening day it didn’t.
Something that is seriously off-putting, however, is vehicle access, parking and egress.  Those would-be customers driving south to get to it, who might have been expected to really welcome and pile into Neville Road, thereby helping to reduce traffic down to the Tesco shed or Western Road Waitrose, are unable to get in.  The parking availability is tiny.  Arriving vehicles tail back to the junction in Neville Road as they queue in the road to even enter the site, let alone find a parking space.  On opening day I arrived about 1pm by taxi and all was open.  On leaving at 4pm: gridlock, and a need to quickly get up to Neville Road to head off the taxi so it would not be locked into the site with the meter running for a VERY long time, and unable to exit.  It is open from 7:30am until 9pm so going along either end of the day may make for easier access. There will be a lot of customers from nearby streets and from City Park behind it, which has 2,000 people working in its offices.
An issue of serious concern which Waitrose is hopefully aware of is the second Spanish bilingual primary school planning application for the Hove Park Scrub Nursery in The Droveway.  Waitrose deliveries will  come down the Droveway into the back area.  And one reason for withdrawal of the first application was the officer’s intention to refuse it.  As with the Waitrose takeover of the Co-op, traffic, parking, access and road safety issues were huge.  As Waitrose was a like for like replacement supermarket, there was no planning application issue on that score.  The huge increase in traffic being drawn to Waitrose does, however, make the school application a total no-no threatening existing users of that area around the Woodland Drive/Neville Road junction.
A word of advice:  from May, Neville Road will  be able to offer a delivery service.  Arrive by bus, bicycle or on foot, shop, and get it delivered.  Leave the car at home.  Hopefully it won’t suffer the same booking problems Western Road has.  Waitrose prioritises delivery for online customers.  Personal shoppers are relegated to what is left of the slots.  The charge is £5 if spending under £50 and £3 if spending over £50.
Quite where the free coffee is at Neville Road was not apparent on the first-day visit, so there were not too many juggling it or  sloshing it down the aisles.  There is a coffee shop just inside the entrance – which might extend the length of time people stay, both in the building and in the car park too.
Looking closely at product emphases, however, one gets a little uneasy.  They put a poor selection of cut flowers on a small wall area between the outer and inner entrance doors.  They know it is a mistake which they will alter.  Pot plants had the opposite wall and an island area inside the shop.  Elsewhere, two tiny shelves for light bulbs (de-emphasised product) sit beside a wide, floor to ceiling section full of candles and room scent diffusers (bigged-up bling).  The northern-most corner houses the bakery area with islands of cupcakes and pastries prominently displayed.  That area is a bit eccentric actually.  Feels weird.  In the corner is a small, cramped, display of artisan breads – some horribly overbaked -  including roundels of Poilane-style sourdough.  The sliced, packaged quarters of these are stocked, as at Western Road, but nowhere near this display where you can buy the bread as you would cheese from a deli counter – cut and sold by weight. The heavily seeded sourdough wheat and rye is lovely (gut friendly and nutrient-rich).
On opening day, bunched watercress was available, over where they sell fish, something that used to be in Western Road without fail and now never is.  The long aisle of frozen goods dedicates half of one side to a huge variety of frozen desserts, ice creams and frozen yoghurts.  From organic to vegan and allergy conscious,  from both familiar and obscure brands – it is a little emporium of calorific greed to. die. for.  But don’t get comfortable as a load of it is almost certain to be discontinued just as you get used to seeing it there and trusting it to stay.  Because that is where Waitrose is coming from right now. Rely only on change from them. 
One thing not changing is its ethical employment stance.  It is not a shareholding multinational.  It is owned by John Lewis Partnership profit-sharing partners who are involved in how the business is run.  That is special.  Neville Road is run by a team of 230 partners, including former Co-op employees and 150 new members of staff.  The branch manager is Nick Mort.  
For whatever reason, Waitrose is in a wobble moment and questioning who or what it should be.  It should also be careful of alienating its core, longstanding customer base whose loyalty is beginning to waver.
The actual Waitrose USP has always been about appreciation and respect for food producers, customers and staff, an emphatic support for British suppliers (the meat especially, apparently), supply of ingredients for those who are old-fashioned cook-from-scratch pernickety or adventurous, the best and widest selection of cheeses and breads and yes, gourmet and speciality products. Check out the wall of ice creams at Neville Road! – See more at: http://www.brightonandhovenews.org/2014/04/15/what-do-hove-shoppers-make-of-their-new-waitrose/28827/comment-page-1#comment-97610

The actual Waitrose USP has always been about appreciation and respect for food producers, customers and staff, an emphatic support for British suppliers (the meat especially, apparently), supply of ingredients for those who are old-fashioned cook-from-scratch pernickety or adventurous, the best and widest selection of cheeses and breads and yes, gourmet and speciality products. Check out the wall of ice creams at Neville Road!

Until recently it stocked an amazing range of specialist cleaning products for those who know how to look after their natural fibre clothing and like things to last and still look good. Biological, for instance, eats silk and bleach does silk no favours. Is that customer base dwindling? A whole swathe of them dumped. The old Waitrose would have educated the customers into buying it. Is it snobbery to have domestic skills and knowledge and wish to buy products that cater to using it? It’s just practical and sensible. Waitrose knows younger people can’t be bothered and so its moving on now, repositioning itself to serve them more than its traditional customer. Turning its back on the traditional customer base it seems to some.

Its ethical employment practices are something to be proud of and most employees are profit-sharing partners. That at least is not changing. It pioneered stocking organic fruit and vegetables and stuck with it even when nobody was prepared to pay the extra for it two decades ago. Sadly it has now dumped much of its fresh organic range.

- See more at: http://www.brightonandhovenews.org/2014/04/15/what-do-hove-shoppers-make-of-their-new-waitrose/28827/comment-page-1#comment-97610

The actual Waitrose USP has always been about appreciation and respect for food producers, customers and staff, an emphatic support for British suppliers (the meat especially, apparently), supply of ingredients for those who are old-fashioned cook-from-scratch pernickety or adventurous, the best and widest selection of cheeses and breads and yes, gourmet and speciality products. Check out the wall of ice creams at Neville Road!

Until recently it stocked an amazing range of specialist cleaning products for those who know how to look after their natural fibre clothing and like things to last and still look good. Biological, for instance, eats silk and bleach does silk no favours. Is that customer base dwindling? A whole swathe of them dumped. The old Waitrose would have educated the customers into buying it. Is it snobbery to have domestic skills and knowledge and wish to buy products that cater to using it? It’s just practical and sensible. Waitrose knows younger people can’t be bothered and so its moving on now, repositioning itself to serve them more than its traditional customer. Turning its back on the traditional customer base it seems to some.

Its ethical employment practices are something to be proud of and most employees are profit-sharing partners. That at least is not changing. It pioneered stocking organic fruit and vegetables and stuck with it even when nobody was prepared to pay the extra for it two decades ago. Sadly it has now dumped much of its fresh organic range.

- See more at: http://www.brightonandhovenews.org/2014/04/15/what-do-hove-shoppers-make-of-their-new-waitrose/28827/comment-page-1#comment-9761

Aside | Posted on by | Tagged ,

From Cllr Pete West: The BHCC poverty reason for bankrolling i360

Green Administration Cllr Pete West put a letter in the Argus over the weekend explaining their desperate financial plight and need for the i360 to rescue BHCC from financial disaster.  Read it and weep.
The letter lays out the desperado motivation for Brighton & Hove City Council latching onto the i360 bailout as a somehow constructive move that will help the Council to pay for itself.  How sad is that?  It is a not a constructive, positive investment move.  It is a bailout of a failed private project by Marks Barfield, on private land owned by The West Pier Trust, which failed over an eight year period  to gain or retain sufficient private financial backing from anywhere in the world for it to be built.  As a project it has been SHUNNED – from even before the global financial crisis that began in 2008.  This got planning consent in 2006 in the heady years of financial hubris and insanity.   But never had the finance to put it up.
Most normal people would take this to mean it will not generate a return on investment.
Until 2012 there was some backing, but not enough.  As soon as BHCC agreed in July of that year to borrow £14m to make up the shortfall, the original private finance took flight leaving Marks Barfield with only the £6m worth of their own investment spent on the planning, and on the manufacture of the pole (in storage in parts in Holland).  There is nobody in the world willing to back this project.  Nobody.  But BHCC believe they are going to earn a mountain of money not just from lending £36.2m backing for the building of it (and underwriting the £4m Coast to Capital LEP contribution) but additionally from 1% of ticket sale revenues.  How will that work?  And how might machinations to achieve it impact elsewhere?
The only way to get people into that glass and steel doughnut on a pole (which will sway considerably at the top, inducing vertigo and panic in some people, vomiting from others) or to force people to pay for it – whether or not they go up the pole – is to bundle it into a multi-ticket.  So, you will see The Brighton Centre bookings include a ride up the pole.  You will see tickets to the Aquarium or Royal Pavilion including a ride up the pole.  Travel firms booking people on a package trip will have a ride up the pole.  This of course means making all the other stuff more expensive, which is not helpful.  Advertising and marketing costs will come partly from BHCC budgets.  This was made clear at Policy & Resources on March 6th 2014 when a Marks Barfield representative spoke of joint marketing.
If the project fails to pull in thousands and thousands of visitors daily, year-round daily, it will fail as a business, the loan and interest payments will not be payable.  And BHCC will own it as seized goods.  And then have to sell it on at a knock-down price, leaving local taxpayers to repay the loan and accrued interest on the loan.  Does BHCC think the government is going to write off the Public Works Loan Board debt?
The Marks Barfield website provides an engineering article from 2012 with important details. It tells us that the i360 would be engineered to withstand a maximum wind velocity of 110mph for a few seconds.  One wonders how it would fare in several hours of 100mph gusting winds.  We have had that.  It further indicates that if wind is gusting at 44mph the ride would not run.  We get that quite frequently, actually.  Climate change and altering weather patterns, showing a tendency to extremes, means this pole could topple in years to come during a weather event.  Prevailing westerlies suggest it would land on the Metropole Hotel.  Every once in a while giant wind turbines fail and fall over in high winds.  Why would the i360 be immune?  It is just a pole, using cable car technology to pull the pod up it.
Why isn’t BHCC understanding the extreme folly of bailing out a failure and how this messages to watching developers?  They will, in future, deliberately cost-in a contribution from BHCC when budgeting for a new project proposal.  They’d be silly not to.  Just how much Public Works Loan Board Debt can BHCC service?  Shouldn’t it be taken on for a rebuilt King Alfred Leisure Centre on Council owned land?  Or as a contribution to a new Brighton Centre? Or, or, or?  What about the disgrace of Black Rock, where once a Lido thrived?
Without this loan, Marks Barfield would have to absorb the £6m loss or get some other mug to give it land for its pole.  Without this loan, The discredited West Pier Trust would have to fold up its tent.  Without this loan, the rebuilt West Pier arches would have to be paid for by BHCC.  GOOD!  Borrow from the PWLB to pay for what is genuine regeneration.  Without the £36.2m loan to Marks Barfield and The West Pier Trust, the West Pier wreck remains on the  sea bed.  Wreckage removal is part of the planning consent.  And this is perhaps the biggest of all the reasons why BHCC is panicked into making the loan.  But the West Pier Trust owns and is legally responsible for this; and all its Trustees are personally liable for its debts.  Why should BHCC taxpayers be asked to take West Pier Trustees (including Glyn Jones, a one-time CEO of Brighton & Hove) off the hook ?
If built with public money, that spike would stand, with a pizza parlour at its base, totemically signalling unsophisticated vulgarity -  cementing the image of contemporary Brighton & Hove as that -  an obscene phallus, hypodermic, middle-finger salute to vulgarity,  standing there, cheek by jowl with the architectural legacy of the area’s long gone, genteel, Regency, identity as Belgravia-on-sea.
Aside | Posted on by | Tagged , ,

New Waitrose opening day details

There will be a ribbon cutting just before 7:30am tomorrow, Thursday, 10th April 2014, when the Neville Road Waitrose store opens its doors.  Councillor Geoffrey Bowden, Chair of the City Council’s Economic Development and Culture will be present as will representatives from the Martlets Hospice, Rockinghorse children’s charity, and Hangleton and Knoll 50+ Steering Group – the first three charities to benefit from the Waitrose Community Matters scheme. 
Aside | Posted on by | Tagged

The i360 petition: some use and link issues

*** The Petition link ***

A few issues that need clarification as some people are unable to either access the petition or make the page work if they get there.  
1.  Do not log in.  No need.  No need to register in order to sign a petition there. No need to be on Facebook either.  Just fill in the name & address/comment blanks on the petition page itself.  But please feel free to promote the petition on Facebook if you use it (saveHOVE does not use Facebook). The option to display your name openly or to keep it off the screen is in the tick box below ‘Send’.  If you are a councillor or council officer or dangerously famous, you may wish to avail yourself of this option to sign the petition but not have your name displayed.  Untick the auto-ticked box if this applies to you, before pressing ‘Send’.
2.  Do not copy a petition link from Twitter into Bookmark or Favorites.  If you do, Twitter will be caught in the URL, affecting use for some people when you pass it on to email. Mobile links may not work on laptops either.  Use desktop links only.  Still not getting successful signing?  Go to Google and input “i360 petition”.  This one is first in the list.  Click from there and it may get past the gremlins stopping you signing.  Enabling Java Script is also supposedly helpful according to Change.org itself.  Also, using Firefox or other than Internet Explorer for your browser will make a difference.  IE does not display all details for some reason.
3.  Do tweet this post, email a link to it or Bookmark/Favorite the petition link HERE to pass on.  I think I have been guilty of innocently and ignorantly doing that.  Mea Culpa.  The link above, on this post does not have Twitter in the URL so it can be copied to your contacts or tweeted on.  Just spotted it when putting in this new link.  I have learned!
4.  Don’t be intimidated by the Change.org donation screen that pops up after you sign.  Whilst on the petition site I have seen signatures appear and then disappear.  I hope that is not because of the donation screen that now flashes up. 
Change.org is a magnificent free service to the public which presumably funds itself entirely from donations.  I don’t know about that, but because our stop-the-i360-loan petition has gained signatures quickly,  a screen now flashes up seeking donations to aid the campaign.  This is not there because saveHOVE is making the request and no money will come to saveHOVE.  But by all means help Change.org and whatever they do to help petitions (including ours) if you feel able to do that.  But donation is not compulsory. 
And there are apparently “supporters” doing things which eludes my understanding; so a mega THANKS if you are one of them!!!!  I read the Change.org email when notified about these things and go a bit  blank. 

TIMELINE:

  How this situation developed with links to background papers

1.     The Planning Applications consented in 2006:  Because the West Pier is Grade 1 Listed, a Listed application was needed as well as a normal plannng application:  You can view application detail and drawings in the Planning Register on the council website for: 
BH2006/02369 for Land adjacent to West Pier and 62-73 Kings Road Arches, Kings Road Brighton for partial demolition of the existing pier structure and construction  of an observation spire (approx 183m in height above ordnance datum) and heritage centre (use class D2 with ancillary retail uses at lower promenade level and all works incidental to the development of the site including relocation of two lamp standards and works of alteration to arches 62-73 Kings Road. 
BH2006/02372 is the listed application for the same area for:  Demolition of the ‘root’ end of the West Pier and removal and demolition of the ‘sea wreckage’ and all associatd structures.  Works of alteration to arches 62-73 Kings Road, removal and relocation of two Listed lamp standards and alteration and partial removal of listed seafront railings adjacent to the site. 
2.     The 2 reports to the Planning Committee where planning consent was given for the i360 
3.     In 2009 it was declared by BHCC legal department that the consent had been implemented after items were removed from the seabed.  This prevented the planning consent from expiring…..forever. 
4.      July 2012.  Marks Barfield did not have funding in place when it got planning consent and never achieved enough interest or commitment from anywhere in the world from 2006 onward enabling them to actually build the i360.  The West Pier Trust, who own the site, seem not to have had a time-limited development agreement with Marks Barfield either which effectively left Marks Barfield in the position of sitting tenants with a planning consent that will never expire.  Instead of leaving things be or trying to get Marks Barfield to withdraw, it seems BHCC felt the constructive thing to do was to pay for the build. Here is the 2012 Policy & Resources Report which proposed that BHCC borrow to top-up the funding shortfall, in order to get the i360 built.  And here is the Decision notice to enter into a £14.8m loan agreement with Marks Barfield’s Brighton i360 Ltd. 
5.     Marks Barfield then LOST what private equity funding it had which bolted at the end of November 2012, leaving the project with just the £6m from Marks Barfield themselves, a £3m grant from Coast 2 Capital LEP, and the money BHCC was prepared to BORROW to lend to Brighton i360 Ltd. 
6.     September 2013 saw Marks address the Economic Development & Culture Committee about the lost funding and give assurances they could replace it.  There was no webcast of that meeting, alas.  But at that meeting Selma Montford for the Brighton Society asked a public question and the reply is worth reading at points 20.10 and 20.11   Here  is the Report to that Committee  There are of course Minutes which may give the content of the speech from Marks for what it is worth. 
7.     March 6, 2014 and a Special Policy & Resources meeting is convened which sees BHCC ACCEPTING NOBODY IS GOING TO BANKROLL THE i360, so guess what!  Brighton & Hove City Council WILL.  But of course, they are doing so and accepting the debt risk of £36.2m on behalf of taxpayers who are given NO SAY in whether they want it or not.  If the thing bombs then taxpayers will have to stump up and the security for this loan?  The i360 itself.  BHCC intend to borrow from the Public Works Loan Board at one rate of interest and lend on to i360  at a higher rate which they fully believe will net them an income of £1m at least p.a. Main agenda from the link above is here for handy reference
NB  The P&R agenda report (link above) gives May 2014 as the date by which it expects to finalise and enter into the revised loan agreement with Brighton i360 Ltd and presumably it will have the loan agreed by the Public Works Loan Board which they intend to lend on to i360.  At the time of writng this, 19.3.14 the PWLB have confirmed they are not currently dealing with anythng from Brighton & Hove City Council.
Blog articles warning against the public funding of i360 include the following:                                                Neil Schofield     http://notesbrokensociety.wordpress.com/tag/i360/                                                                  Cllr Ben Duncan     http://www.kemptownben.com/category/i360/
Aside | Posted on by | Tagged , , , ,

Waitrose for Neville Road, Hove – changeover details

The Co-op Superstore in Neville Road, Hove will close on March 13, 2014.  Work will then be done by Waitrose to prepare for its re-opening on April 10th as a second branch of Waitrose in the city. 
It has been pointed out by a twitter follower of saveHOVE that there is likely to be a lot more traffic in Neville Road as people flock to shop at what will become Waitrose and there are concerns about that.  Because it was already a supermarket, there is no planning application issue on that score.  Waitrose are historically very good neighbours.  I know that from their cooperation with neighbours at a planning meeting attended some years ago over delivery times to the Western Road branch.  They are not ruthless Tesco that would not give a stuff.  If any issues arise they will very much want to sort it out to residents’ satisfaction as far as feasible.
The likely increase in traffic we can expect does, however, impact further.  There was already an issue about impact on road use which, in part, led to the Spanish bilingual school withdrawing its last planning application rather than allow it to be refused.  When they come back, the Waitrose factor can only ramp up a problem they would only exacerbate – over and above negative impact on Hove Park and over-urbanising the perimeter.  And that’s without considering the ice rink use of the Engineerium…..lets not go there in this article….
Aside | Posted on by | Tagged , ,

Petitioning the Public Works Loan Board not to lend to BHCC for the i360

There is a lot of roundup information about the i360 that needs to go into a post here; and no time to organise it at the moment.
People do not believe the i360 will be built.  They are incredulous.  But only one thing stands in the way of it happening:  the Brighton & Hove City Council loan from the Public Works Loan Board which they would lend on to Brighton i360 Ltd at a higher rate of interest in order to make money on the difference.  An application has no doubt already gone in.  If it is granted then that is it.  Game, set and match and a horror on the seafront.  If it fails to earn what BHCC expect, then the City is lumbered with ownership of the 1360 and will have to repay the loan from council tax.
A brief summary of issues that concern most people – those horrified to see  Brighton & Hove City Council wanting to bail out Marks Barfield’s failed i360 project and to inflict it on the Brighton seafront in order to try to earn money from it – is given within the petition.  See this on the Change.org petition page by Clicking this:  Please note the link has been altered as it may not have worked properly before.

 The Petition

Petition?  Yes.  Targetting the Public Works Loan Board, and asking them NOT to lend the requested £36.2m when they consider Brighton & Hove City Council’s application along with the business case from Brighton i360 Ltd.  Will it concern them, as it does the public, that the i360 NEVER had full funding from day one of planning consent and lost what it had by 2013?
Will they pay heed to a petition asking them not to give the money?  They must if there are sufficient signatories.  Please sign the petition.  Please give reason for doing so.  If you are reading this and do not live in the area, GOOD!  Say whether this glass lift cage up a huge pole is your idea of an attraction that would motivate you to visit Brighton in order to go up it. And please email, tweet, the petition link to everyone you know who shares your wish to see this stopped.  The jungle drum must beat loudly so those who would sign it actually know it exists.
There are major City regeneration issues which need that money more – the Brighton Centre with Churchill Square and the King Alfred – not to mention Black Rock and unfinished business at the Marina.  Developers will be queuing to get their projects backed by a Council loan and it is important to choose projects with care and without great risk.
Developments that attract investors would be the ones to choose.  Steal a march on them and borrow to lend at a higher rate of interest to gain the income BHCC so badly needs.  But for God’s sake, don’t misuse the opportunity by bailing out losers or the i360.  As well as the local press, both the Guardian and the Daily Mail carried articles about the Policy & Resources decision to borrow to lend to get the West Pier Trust off the hook and to bail out Marks Barfield.  The comment trails give the thumbs down pretty emphatically.  Read them when you have time:   
                                               The Daily Mail                                                                                               
 The Guardian article by John Keenan
Aside | Posted on by | Tagged , , ,