Agenda item
Licensing Act 2003: Application for a Time Limited Premises Licence for Nomadic Community Gardens, Fleet Street Hill, E1 5ES
Minutes:
At the request of the Chair, Ms Kathy Driver, Licensing Officer, introduced the report which detailed an application for a Time Limited premises licence for Normadic Community Gardens, Fleet Street Hill, London E1 5ES. It was noted that objections had been received on behalf of local residents.
At the request of the Chair, Mr James Wheale, applicant explained that it was a non-profit organisation and was using permission from land owner to use the gardens to host events, workshops and exhibit art work. He explained that in order to sustain the gardens there was a need to generate income and therefore had applied for a limited sale of alcohol, with a series of regulated entertainment to have a wider opportunity to use the gardens. It was noted that a number of universal activates would be introduced to help generate income to help keep operating the gardens.
Members then heard from Mr Charles Curran, Mr David Knight and Mr David Spurring, local residents who expressed similar concerns about graffiti on walls, noise nuisance, lack of management and security and the fact that it was a residential area. It was also noted that there had been an increase in anti-social behaviour since the gardens had been operating. Concerns were also raised about the sale of alcohol and how this would be managed and the fact that if a licence was granted then in actual fact the Normadic Gardens would be sponsored by loud and disruptive parties causing distress to local residents.
In response to questions from Members the following was noted;
- That noise was monitored on Sundays to ensure that it was at a level that had been agreed by Environmental Health.
- That there was only one speaker where recorded and live music would be amplified from.
- That the speaker was not pointed towards a direction where it would cause a rebound.
- That residents had contacted the Police who advised them to contact the out of hours noise team.
- That the Tower Hamlets Out of Hours Noise Team were called on a regular basis by local residents.
- Universal activities included street art, portrait drawings, educational event, Sunday Camp Fire club which was popular and had grown in the numbers attending.
- That music levels were set according to number of attendees.
- That it was the third summer these gardens had been operating and if there had been so many complaints it was questioned why Environmental Health had not complained.
- That there was no record of statutory complaints having been made.
- That the condition set out on 8.2 of the report was not enforceable.
- That the organisation has had successful TEN applications, where regulated entertainment and sale of alcohol had been granted.
- That the applicant only attended the venue once a week on a Monday.
- Mr Wheale stated that he was aware of how to maintain a safe and happy environment.
All parties were asked to make final submissions, residents echoed how poorly managed the venue was and that all events were extremely loud and caused anti-social behaviour. Mr Wheale assured Members that conditions would be adhered to if the licence was granted. He stated that there was never loud music, the level was set according to the number of attendees.
Members retired at 7.30pm to consider the application and reconvened at 8.15pm.
The Licensing Objectives
In considering the application, Members were required to consider the same in accordance with the Licensing Act 2003 (as amended), the Licensing Objectives, the Home Office Guidance and the Council’s Statement of Licensing Policy and in particular to have regard to the promotion of the four licencing objectives:
- The Prevention of Crime and Disorder;
- Public Safety;
- Prevention of Public Nuisance; and
- The Protection of Children from Harm
Consideration
Each application must be considered on its own merit. The Sub Committee had carefully considered all of the evidence before them and listened to the verbal representations made by the applicant and all objectors present at the meeting with particular regard to the licensing objectives of crime and disorder, prevention of public nuisance and public safety.
The Sub Committee expressed serious concerns over public safety due to a lack of a management structure and believed that the applicant was unable to demonstrate how he would manage and control the number of patrons frequenting the gardens where licensable activities would take place. There were also a number of other concerns which Members noted;
- That there was little indication as to who would be working in gardens and in what capacity as they were referred to as volunteers by the applicant. It was unclear as to what experience they had and what training they would receive in order to sell alcohol responsibly.
- There was no evidence of a strict noise policy in place and how noise would be measured.
- That it is was an open site with three entry and exit points.
- The ad hoc nature of camp fire events with no procedures in place to monitor the number of visitors that attend and the level at which music is played.
- That the applicant was only at the site on Mondays and not present during the weekend which was the busiest time.
- That there had not been an opportunity to hear from the DPS
Whilst Members noted the conditions offered by the applicant members were not satisfied on how the condition relating to employing SIA door staff for events with over 100 persons would be met. As there was no evidence of how this would be monitored or controlled and questioned how practical it was to arrange for an SIA door staff to be present prior to knowing who would be attending. As the applicant during his submissions was unclear on how many people visit the gardens.
Members noted that no formal objections had been raised by Responsible Authorities in respect of public nuisance however Members gave due weight to the representations made by local residents and accepted that public nuisance did occur.
Decision
Members were not satisfied that sufficient evidence was provided by the applicant to alleviate the concerns raised and there were no additional conditions which Members felt that could be imposed to promote the licensing objectives.
Accordingly, the Sub Committee unanimously
RESOLVED
That the application for a Time Limited Premises Licence for Nomadic Community Gardens, Fleet Street Hill, London, E1 5ES be REFUSED.
Supporting documents: