Members are reminded to consider the categories of interest, identified in the Code of Conduct for Members to determine: whether they have an interest in any agenda item and any action they should take. For further details, see the attached note from the Monitoring Officer.

Members are also reminded to declare the nature of the interest at the earliest opportunity and the agenda item it relates to. Please note that ultimately it is the Members’ responsibility to identify any interests and also update their register of interest form as required by the Code.

If in doubt as to the nature of an interest, you are advised to seek advice prior the meeting by contacting the Monitoring Officer or Democratic Services.

Councillor Suluk Ahmed, declared a personal interest in 4.2 on the basis that he was a ward councillor for Spitalfields and Banglatown, however he confirmed that he had not discussed this application prior to the hearing.  

The rules of procedures were noted.

To confirm as a correct record the minutes of the Licensing Sub-Committee held on 5^th & 19^th April 2022.

The minutes of the meetings held on 5^th April and 19^th April 2022 were agreed and approved as a correct record. 

At the request of the Chair, Mr Mohshin Ali, Licensing Officer, introduced the report which detailed the application for a review of the premises licence for Silver Sockeye, AKA The Terrible Thames, Wapping Pier King Henry’s Stairs Wapping High Street, London E1 2NR. It was noted that the applicant had withdrawn their application following mediation.

The Sub Committee adjourned the meeting at 6.45pm and reconvened at 6.50pm. 

The Licensing Objectives

Consideration

The Sub-Committee had been informed that the applicant for the review had reached an agreement with the premises licence holder and thus wished to withdraw the application. This had also been confirmed by the licence holder.

The Sub-Committee was advised that there is, however, no power to withdraw the review and that the hearing must nonetheless be held to determine it pursuant to s.52(2) of the Licensing Act 2003. Given that there were no relevant representations from any other person and that the parties do not wish any further action to be taken, therefore the Sub-Committee is satisfied that no further steps are needed to ensure the promotion of the licensing objectives.

The decision of the Sub-Committee is therefore to take no action.

Accordingly, the Sub Committee;

RESOLVED

That the application for a review of the premises licence for Silver Sockeye, AKA The Terrible Thames, Wapping Pier King Henry’s Stairs Wapping High Street, London E1 2NR be resolved that no further action is required.

At the request of the Chair, Mr Mohshin Ali, Licensing Officer, introduced the report which detailed the application for a variation of the premises licence for Rapha Racing Cycle Club, Café & Store, Spitalfields Market, 61-63 Bushfield Street, London E1 6AA. It was noted that prior to the meeting a number of objections had been withdrawn including the representation from Licensing Authority, the two Resident Associations and six residents. However, the objections from Environmental Health and four individual residents remained.

At the request of the Chair, Mr Thomas O’Maoileoin, Legal Representative on behalf of the Applicant explained that there had been a lot of work done to engage and work with the objectors, which had resulted in most of the representations being withdrawn. There had, however, been some difficulty in contacting all the objectors due to the Jubilee celebrations. As a result of discussions between the applicant and those making representations, a substantial set of conditions had been agreed taking into account the concerns that had been raised. The Sub-Committee were told that the applicant was trying to change the nature of the premises to a more food led restaurant rather than a drinking establishment which it currently was.

Mr O’Maoileoin informed the Sub-Committee that the Premises currently had a few restrictions on the licence. The quid pro quo if the variation was to be granted was that the licence would become much more restrictive and, as a result of the conditions prohibiting vertical drinking and for alcohol to be sold only with meals, served seated at a table and by waiter/waitress service only. He explained that these conditions would ensure that the Premises could operate only as a restaurant. He also confirmed that these agreed conditions would apply at all times. He also highlighted that the external area would mirror the same conditions as inside of the premises with limited smokers and would be supervised by staff at all times.

Mr O’Maoileoin reiterated the fact that both the Residents Associations had withdrawn their objections, together with the Licensing Authority and some of the residents and that there had been no objections from the Police. He said that there were no objections in regard to the updated plans that had been submitted but the remaining objections related to the extended hours. It was noted that the premises was currently operating as a bar with no restrictions but if the variation were to be granted, there premises would operate as a restaurant and have conditions attached restricting and controlling the premises.

Mr O’Maoileoin then referred to the Cumulative Impact Zone policy and suggested that it met some of the exceptional circumstances to be granted an application in the CIZ, it was a food led premises, hours applied for were less than framework hours, had relevant good practices in place and staff would be undergoing continuous training. He stated that if the licence was granted it would not negatively add to the problems of the CIZ.

Members then heard from Ms  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.2

The Sub Committee may be requested to extend the decision deadline for applications to be considered at forthcoming meetings due to the volume of applications requiring a hearing.  Where necessary, details will be provided at the meeting.

Members agreed to extend the decision deadlines for the applications below to the dates stated;Licensing applications were extended due to the impact of the pandemic, and were adjourned under regulation 11 of the Licensing Act 2003 (Hearings) Regulations 2005, it was in the public interest to do so, and did not require representation from parties to the applications.