Skates Off!
Ice Rink and Markets Pulled from Pier as Leaseholders Depart
HUGH SULLIVAN
An ice skating rink and “covered and heated” Christmas markets, which were due to be opened today (Friday) on Hastings Pier, have been shelved.
Leaseholders Piertown had promised on Facebook and other social media “a wonderful selection of festive treats”, and were selling advance bookings over several weeks for timed ice skating sessions (at £10 per adult, £7 per child plus further sums for skate hire) via ticketing partners Skiddle.
But it emerged last weekend that Piertown directors Mark Dickson and Damien Fell have given notice of termination of their lease to Max Wolf, director of The HPier Limited, which holds a superior lease of the whole of the pier premises. They also filed last week a notice at the Companies Registry applying to dissolve their events company Hastings Pier Events Limited.
In a formal statement released on social media at the beginning of this week, they explained that their aim from the beginning of their lease in early 2023 was “to rekindle the musical heritage of the pier with bigger and better shows planned for each year…Unfortunately the overhead costs involved became too onerous and too costly for us to continue any longer.”
In the wake of their departure, both the ice rink and the Christmas markets promised alongside have been cancelled. The booking system at Skiddle has been suspended (though it still seemed on Monday morning to be selling tickets for sessions on Christmas Eve).
Skiddle’s terms and conditions inform ticket holders that if their event is cancelled and not rescheduled, they are entitled to receive a refund of the face value of their tickets, and Piertown’s statement indicates that the ticket-seller will contact them “in the next few days” to arrange this. However, Skiddle’s terms and conditions limit its own liability to cases where it continues to hold the funds at the time that the refund is due. If it has passed them on to the event promoter, i.e. Piertown, customers will presumably have to look to the latter for reimbursement.
It is not known at the time of going to press how many advance tickets were sold. Quite apart from the financial risk, the likelihood of adverse weather conditions on the pier on any given day in winter might surely have caused even the most enthusiastic skater to hesitate in committing to a set day and time more than a short time ahead.
The news of the abandonment of the enterprise is likely to be even more disappointing to prospective vendors from the sheds and other outlets on the pier: they, it seems, were being enticed to stock up in expectation of increased footfall during this period. Over the past weeks of mostly leaden skies, the pier has become – with the waves lapping beneath – a virtual ghost ship.
Licence Amendments Challenged
In a separate development, Hastings Borough Council (HBC) has revealed that Mr Wolf, the Designated Premises Supervisor (DPS) under the events licence granted to the pier, is making a formal legal appeal against the council’s decisions to remove him and to modify the licence conditions. At its meeting on 2 September HBC’s licensing sub-committee, chaired by Cllr Andy Batsford, heard a series of complaints raised by SECAmb (the South East Coast Ambulance Service) that events were being held at the pier which regularly breached public safety conditions. They upheld these complaints, many of which were admitted by the barrister representing Mr Wolf and the freehold owner Sheikh Gulzar, and issued a revised set of conditions. However, Mr Wolf’s appeal to Hastings Magistrates seems to have been accepted by the council as putting on hold both his removal as DPS and the implementation of all new conditions.
On further enquiry to HBC’s legal services department, it was revealed that, due to a backlog in the processes of the Hastings court, appeals of this sort “can currently take up to 12 months for an initial administrative hearing.” Even the receipt of an automated response takes, in HBC’s experience, “a wait of approximately two months before the correspondence will be looked at.” In the meantime, the council has not even been furnished with the grounds of appeal.
Planning Application Stalled
Not only is the licensing issue on hold; the application by Sheikh Abid Gulzar, owner of the pier, for fresh listed building consent and planning permission, issued two months ago, has also stalled.
His plan to erect a new pavilion building on the eastern (left-hand) side to match the block on the western (right-hand) side, which currently accommodates the Casa de Pier restaurant at the front of the pier, had the support in principle of HBC’s Conservation Officer, Steve Tyson.
However, in a document lodged on the planning file last month, Mr Tyson pointed to numerous errors in the drawings submitted on Mr Gulzar’s behalf which would have to be corrected. He also observed that the five-year permissions given respectively for 12 kiosks erected in 2016 and for five more Skinners sheds installed in March 2019 have both expired, that they are thus now unauthorised, and should all be removed. Failure to remove them should be referred to HBC’s enforcement department unless a retrospective application is made to retain them.
Mr Tyson also clearly opposed Mr Gulzar’s proposal to festoon the pier entrance and the twin pavilions with gold paint, describing it as “at odds with the local colour palette…[there was] no clear and convincing justification for introducing such an ostentatious and uncharacteristic colour”. A plan to introduce solar panels to the roof slopes of the pavilions was also opposed as having “a detrimental effect on the character and appearance of the wider conservation area”.
The Council for British Archaeology subsequently lodged comments echoing those of Mr Tyson. Dr Alison Edwards, listed buildings caseworker, concluded: “In its current form, the application does not provide sufficient information to demonstrate that the required ‘great weight’ has been given to the heritage asset’s conservation…If revised documents are not provided, we recommend that this application is refused”.
Last Monday (18 November) the planning application was marked on HBC’s online file as “Decided – Non Determination”. The inference must be that Mr Gulzar was persuaded to withdraw it in its current form before it was rejected outright.
We hope you have enjoyed reading this article. The future of our volunteer led, non-profit publication would be far more secure with the aid of a small donation. You can also support local journalism by becoming a friend of HIP. It only takes a minute and we would be very grateful.
Leave a Reply