Back to top arrow icon Back to top

Agenda, decisions and draft minutes

Venue: Until further notice, all Licensing Sub-Committee meetings will be held remotely

Contact: Rabiya Khatun, Governance Officer 

Items
No. Item

1.

Election of Chair

Minutes:

1.1  Cllr Smyth was duly elected as Chair.

2.

Apologies for Absence

Minutes:

2.1  There were no apologies for absence.

3.

Declarations of Interest - Members to declare as appropriate

Minutes:

3.1  There were no declarations of interest at the meeting.

4.

Minutes of the Previous Meeting

Minutes:

4.1  There were no previous minutes for consideration at the meeting.

5.

Licensing Sub-Committee General Information & Hearing Procedure pdf icon PDF 112 KB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

5.1  The hearing procedure was noted by all present.

6.

Premises Licence: 416-418 Union Walk, London, E2 8HP pdf icon PDF 1 MB

Additional documents:

Decision:

The decision

 

The Licensing Sub-committee in considering this decision from the information presented to it within the report and at the hearing today has determined that having regard to the promotion of all the licensing objectives:

 

The prevention of crime and disorder;

Public safety;

Prevention of public nuisance;

The protection of children from harm;

 

the application to vary a premises licence has been refused in accordance with Licensing Policies LP1, LP2, LP3, LP4, LP6 and LP11 within the Council’s Statement of Licensing Policy.

 

Reasons for the decision

 

The Licensing Sub-committee, having heard from the Responsible Authorities (Environmental Protection, the Metropolitan Police Service, and the Licensing Authority) believed that granting the application would result in the licensing objectives being undermined, and would have a negative impact on the area. 

 

The Sub-committee took into consideration the representations of the Responsible Authorities who objected to this application due the impact it would have on local residents.

 

The Sub-committee heard submissions from the Environmental Protection Team  that local residents are 15 metres from the outside area of the premises. The Sub-committee took into account that Environmental Protection had concerns that local residents would be disturbed and the Applicant needed to consider an outdoor acoustic structure. The Sub-committee heard that the Applicant needed to install sound monitoring equipment, and they noted submissions from Environmental Protection that the noise pollution will have an impact on the flats above and in close proximity to the premises. The Sub-committee took into account that the Police supported Environmental Protection’s objection.

 

The Sub-committee heard that the Applicant did not make contact with the Police regarding their objections until 7 September. However, the Applicant reduced the hours which allayed some of the Police concerns. The Police had received complaints from local residents about this application.

 

The Sub-committee heard submissions from the Licensing Authority that they had also received correspondence from local residents who were unaware of the application.

 

The Licensing Authority made representations regarding noise nuisance,  and the close proximity to local residents. The Sub-committee took into account that the

noise outbreak internally and externally affected local residents, and that the noise issues were too great to overcome the noise nuisance. The Sub-committee heard from the Licensing Authority that no noise systems were in the premises to evaluate the level of noise.

 

The Sub-committee heard representations from the Licensing Authority that the premises had no Planning Permission which is a significant concern. The Sub-committee noted that the Applicant needed, amongst other things,  transport and design assessments to obtain Planning Permission. The Sub-committee heard concerns from the Licensing Authority about the permitted use and activity of the premises with no Planning Permission in place, and there was no mitigation given by the Applicant for the issues arising.

 

The Sub-committee heard submissions from the Applicant’s legal representative that the Tap room would be ancillary to the use of the Brewery, and the Applicant intends to use the space to store pallets. The Sub-committee noted the premises would be a small brewery that intends  ...  view the full decision text for item 6.

Minutes:

6.1 The sub-committee heard from the Principal Licensing Officer and the applicant’s agent. During the course of submissions and a discussion of the application, the sub-committee noted the following:

 

·  The applicant was seeking the provision of late night refreshment, regulated entertainment and the sale of alcohol from Mondays to Sundays.

·  Since the publication of the officer report, the Sub-Committee noted the additional information submitted and amendments to the application including the reduction of the proposed hours in line with the Council’s core hours.

·  The applicant had invested over £500,000 to refurbish the venue and intended to operate a high quality premises employing 11 local people.

·  To address the concerns raised, the applicant had submitted a robust operating schedule, and a range of procedures and policies including Noise Monitoring Plan, Dispersal Plan, plan to manage the smoking area, restricting the capacity in the external areas, and the external areas including the door to the rear would close at 22.00 hours.

·  The applicant had engaged with the local residents during the consultation process and had received positive feedback from the building manager, developer  and locals. There had been no representations from Other Persons to the application. 

·  The applicant and his agent had attempted mediation with the responsible authorities to address their concerns. There was no evidence submitted to support their concerns in relation to the public nuisance.

·  The Environmental Protection’s representative opposed the application on the grounds of public nuisance due to the close proximity of residents living to the premises.  The external rear area was surrounded by three 15 to 16 floor residential blocks and it was approximately 10 to 15 metres away from the nearest residential block  These blocks created an enclosure that would enable noise to travel upwards creating a tunnelling effect causing a noise disturbance for residents living on the upper floors.

·  In order to minimise the impact of public nuisance on local residents, he had recommended that the applicant install a temporary acoustic structure such as an acoustic lobby at the external rear area to minimise the noise breakout from inside and outside the premises, restrict the use of the outside rear area from 12.00 to 18.00 hours, designating the smoking area at the front outside area, replace the doors and windows at the rear with double glazing, and no amplifying devices to be used during live music events. 

·  The Police’s representative indicated that the reduced hours had allayed their initial concerns in relation to crime and disorder. However, they had recently received complaints from local residents and were supporting the Environmental Protection’s concerns in relation to noise nuisance  and the impact on residents living in the area.

·  The Licensing Authority’s representative emphasised that the proposals including the noise  outbreaks from the internal and external areas would lead to a rise in noise nuisance for residents due to the close proximity of the residential blocks, and without planning permission in particular transport and design assessments for the proposed activities it would be difficult to assess the level  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

7.

Premises Licence: 233 Shoreditch High Street, London, E1 6PJ pdf icon PDF 5 MB

Additional documents:

Decision:

 

7.1  The sub-committee heard from the Principal Licensing Officer and the applicant’s Legal Counsel. During the course of submissions and a discussion of the application, the sub-committee noted the following:

 

·  The applicant’s Legal Counsel advised that the applicant was seeking to increase capacity to 325 persons from 200, which was below the permitted capacity of 500 persons, reducing the closing hours to 02.00 hours from 03.00 hours, reducing the use of the outside area to 22.00 hours from 23.00 hours, last entry at midnight, and that advance corporate bookings would be taken for events on the first floor. The  events had been included in the application as this enabled advance planning unlike TENs.

·  The business would employ approximately 65 staff mainly local and the minimum hours being sought would enable the business to be profitable and successful.

·  The applicant had received no complaints directly  related to his premises.

·  The Police’s representative indicated that they had held several meetings with the applicant  due to the number of incidents and crimes that had taken place close to the premises.

·  The Licensing Service’s representative stated that the applicant had not demonstrated that the proposals would not add to the cumulative impact within the Shoreditch Special Policy Area (SPA) and a rise in public nuisance.

·  The sub committee proposed reducing the capacity to 250 persons. The applicant’s Legal Counsel argued that the lower capacity would mean that the premises were operating at half capacity and that people inside the premises would not add to the cumulative impact.

·  The applicant’s Legal Counsel confirmed that the non- standard hours would be removed from the application.

·  The applicant’s Legal Counsel agreed to reduce the hours from Sunday to Wednesday to 00.30 from 01.30 hours but did not agree to reduce the capacity from 325  to 250  persons.

 

RESOLVED:

 

The decision

 

The Licensing Sub-Committee, in considering this decision from the information presented to them within the report and at the hearing and having regard to the promotion of the licensing objectives:

 

·  The prevention of crime and disorder

·  Public safety

·  Prevention of public nuisance

·  The protection of children from harm

 

the application for a premises licence has been approved to in accordance with the Council’s Statement of Licensing and the proposed conditions set out in paragraph 8.1 of the report, with the following amendments:

 

·  The hours for licensable activities, shall be, as agreed:

 

Films

 

Sunday to Wednesday   09:00 - 00:00

Thursday to Saturday   09:00 - 01:30

 

Live Music

 

Sunday to Wednesday   09:00 - 00:00

Thursday to Saturday   09:00 - 01:30

 

Recorded Music

 

Sunday to Wednesday   09:00 - 00:00

Thursday to Saturday   09:00 - 01:30

 

Performance of Dance

 

Sunday to Wednesday   09:00 - 00:00

Thursday to Saturday   09:00 - 01:30

 

Anything of a similar description

(to Live music, Recorded Music, Performance of Dance)

 

Sunday to Wednesday   09:00 - 00:00

Thursday to Saturday   09:00 - 01:30

 

Late Night Refreshment

 

Sunday to Wednesday   23:00 - 00:00

Thursday to Saturday   23:00 - 01:30

 

Supply of Alcohol (on-sales)

 

Sunday to Wednesday   09:00 - 00:00  ...  view the full decision text for item 7.

Minutes:

7.1 The sub-committee heard from the Principal Licensing Officer and the applicant’s Legal Counsel. During the course of submissions and a discussion of the application, the sub-committee noted the following:

 

·  The applicant’s Legal Counsel advised that the applicant was seeking to increase capacity to 325 persons from 200, which was below the permitted capacity of 500 persons, reducing the closing hours to 02.00 hours from 03.00 hours, reducing the use of the outside area to 22.00 hours from 23.00 hours, last entry at midnight, and that advance corporate bookings would be taken for events on the first floor. The  events had been included in the application as this enabled advance planning unlike TENs.

·  The business would employ approximately 65 staff mainly local and the minimum hours being sought would enable the business to be profitable and successful.

·  The applicant had received no complaints directly  related to his premises.

·  The Police’s representative indicated that they had held several meetings with the applicant  due to the number of incidents and crimes that had taken place close to the premises.

·  The Licensing Service’s representative stated that the applicant had not demonstrated that the proposals would not add to the cumulative impact within the Shoreditch Special Policy Area (SPA) and a rise in public nuisance.

·  The sub committee proposed reducing the capacity to 250 persons. The applicant’s Legal Counsel argued that the lower capacity would mean that the premises were operating at half capacity and that people inside the premises would not add to the cumulative impact.

·  The applicant’s Legal Counsel confirmed that the non- standard hours would be removed from the application.

·  The applicant’s Legal Counsel agreed to reduce the hours from Sunday to Wednesday to 00.30 from 01.30 hours but did not agree to reduce the capacity from 325  to 250  persons.

·  The responsible authorities emphasised that the premises were located within the Shoreditch SPA and that the proposed hours in addition to  the proposed increase in capacity would add to the negative cumulative impact in Shoreditch.

 

RESOLVED:

 

The decision

The Licensing Sub-Committee, in considering this decision from the information presented to

them within the report and at the hearing and having regard to the promotion of the licensing

objectives:

• The prevention of crime and disorder

• Public safety

• Prevention of public nuisance

• The protection of children from harm

 

the application for a premises licence has been approved to in accordance with the Council’s Statement of Licensing and the proposed conditions set out in paragraph 8.1 of the report, with the following amendments:

 

• The hours for licensable activities, shall be, as agreed:

 

Films

Sunday to Wednesday 09:00 - 00:00

Thursday to Saturday 09:00 - 01:30

 

Live Music

 

Sunday to Wednesday 09:00 - 00:00

Thursday to Saturday 09:00 - 01:30

 

Recorded Music

 

Sunday to Wednesday 09:00 - 00:00

Thursday to Saturday 09:00 - 01:30

 

Performance of Dance

 

Sunday to Wednesday 09:00 - 00:00

Thursday to Saturday 09:00 - 01:30

 

Anything of a similar description

(to Live music, Recorded  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

8.

Premises Licence: Black Rock Rooms, Basement, 9 Christopher Street, London, EC2A 2BS pdf icon PDF 3 MB

Additional documents:

Decision:

 

8.1  The sub-committee heard from the Principal Licensing Officer and the applicant. During the course of submissions and a discussion of the application, the sub-committee noted the following:

 

·  The applicant stated that the premises licence had been granted 28 years ago and they had been operating a specialist whiskey bar since 2016 without any complaints or issues.  The pandemic had resulted in them not trading for almost two years and significantly impacting on their business. 

·  The applicant confirmed that they offered hot and cold food with alcoholic drinks  and played background music. Tasting sessions would be offered to corporate clients and they would be permitted to take away the whiskey 200ml  or less bottles that they had blended during the session.

·  The Other Persons emphasised that Shoreditch had been suffering from the  cumulative impact resulting from the rise in licensed premises in the area and also expressed concern about the late closing hours and the potential rise in off sales, which would have a negative impact on the special policy area.

·  The Other Persons confirmed that she had not been directly affected by this particular premises. 

·  The applicant replied that he owned a long lease; this was a small premises and business, which was service led; the hours had been reduced to midnight on Wednesdays; the notices had been displayed for patrons to disperse quietly; and a tasting session would be held once a week mainly on Saturdays at 15.00 hours

·  Discussion ensued in respect of Conditions 35 and 37.  The sub committee noted that a dispersal policy was not necessary for this small premises with a capacity  of no more than 26 patrons with approximately 15 patrons expected daily.  The Licensing and Corporate Lawyer indicated that she would liaise with the applicant in relation to Condition 35 and whether it was necessary to revise the condition to include promotional drinking during special events.

·  The applicant clarified that the majority of the whiskey drinks would be sold with appetisers and a few bottles would be sold for off premises consumption after master classes.

·  The sub committee also noted the written representations from the Other Persons.

 

RESOLVED:

 

The decision

 

The Licensing Sub-Committee, in considering this decision from the information presented to them within the report and at the hearing and having regard to the promotion of the licensing objectives:

 

·  The prevention of crime and disorder

·  Public safety

·  Prevention of public nuisance

·  The protection of children from harm

 

the application for a premises licence has been approved in accordance with the Council’s Statement of Licensing and the proposed conditions set out in paragraph 8.1 of the report.

 

Reasons for the decision

 

The application for a premises licence has been approved, as members of the Licensing Sub-committee were satisfied that the licensing objectives would not be undermined.

 

The Sub-committee took into consideration that the Responsible Authorities (the Environmental Protection Team, the Environmental Enforcement Team and the Metropolitan Police Service ("the Police")) agreed conditions with the Applicant in advance of the  ...  view the full decision text for item 8.

Minutes:

8.1 The sub-committee heard from the Principal Licensing Officer and the applicant. During the course of submissions and a discussion of the application, the sub-committee noted the following:

 

·  The applicant stated that the premises licence had been granted 28 years ago and they had been operating a specialist whiskey bar since 2016 without any complaints or issues.  The pandemic had resulted in them not trading for almost two years and significantly impacting on their business. 

·  The applicant confirmed that they offered hot and cold food with alcoholic drinks  and played background music. Tasting sessions would be offered to corporate clients and they would be permitted to take away the whiskey 200ml  or less bottles that they had blended during the session.

·  The Other Persons emphasised that Shoreditch had been suffering from the  cumulative impact resulting from the rise in licensed premises in the area and also expressed concern about the late closing hours and the potential rise in off sales, which would have a negative impact on the special policy area.

·  The Other Persons confirmed that she had not been directly affected by this particular premises. 

·  The applicant replied that he owned a long lease; this was a small premises and business, which was service led; the hours had been reduced to midnight on Wednesdays; the notices had been displayed for patrons to disperse quietly; and a tasting session would be held once a week mainly on Saturdays at 15.00 hours

·  Discussion ensued in respect of Conditions 35 and 37.  The sub committee noted that a dispersal policy was not necessary for this small premises with a capacity  of no more than 26 patrons with approximately 15 patrons expected daily.  The Licensing and Corporate Lawyer indicated that she would liaise with the applicant in relation to Condition 35 and whether it was necessary to revise the condition to include promotional drinking during special events.

·  The applicant clarified that the majority of the whiskey drinks would be sold with appetisers and a few bottles would be sold for off premises consumption after master classes.

·  The sub committee also noted the written representations from the Other Persons.

 

RESOLVED:

 

The decision

 

The Licensing Sub-Committee, in considering this decision from the information presented to them within the report and at the hearing and having regard to the promotion of the licensing objectives:

 

·  The prevention of crime and disorder

·  Public safety

·  Prevention of public nuisance

·  The protection of children from harm

 

the application for a premises licence has been approved in accordance with the Council’s Statement of Licensing and the  proposed conditions set out in paragraph 8.1 of the report.

 

Reasons for the decision

 

The application for a premises licence has been approved, as members of the Licensing Sub-committee were satisfied that the licensing objectives would not be undermined.

 

The Sub-committee took into consideration that the Responsible Authorities (the Environmental Protection Team, the Environmental Enforcement Team and the Metropolitan Police Service ("the Police")) agreed conditions with the Applicant in advance of the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

9.

Temporary Event Notices - Standing Item