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.

There were no declarations of interest.

The rules of procedure were noted.

To confirm as a correct record the minutes of the Licensing Sub-Committee held on 8^th, 22^nd and 27^th September 2022.

The minutes of the meetings 8^th, 22^nd and 27^th September 2022 were agreed and approved as a correct record. 

At the request of the Chair, Ms Corinne Holland, Licensing Officer, introduced the report which detailed the application for a new premises licence for Unit 3 Hampton Tower, South Quay Plaza, 75 Marsh Wall, London, E14 9WS. It was noted that objections had been by local residents in relation to the prevention of public nuisance. The application sought authorisation for the sale by retail of alcohol for consumption on the Premises from 11:30 hours to 22:30 hours seven days per week.

The application attracted one representation from a local resident, Genevieve Woods, on the basis of the prevention of public nuisance. Ms. Woods did not seek refusal of the licence; rather, the issue between the parties was as to the imposition of additional conditions. A number of conditions had been agreed between the applicant and the responsible authorities.

The Sub-Committee heard from Mr.  Buckworth, solicitor for the applicant. He briefly outlined the nature of the application and confirmed that alcohol sales would be ancillary to meals. He addressed the conditions sought by Ms. Woods. As regards smoking, a condition had been agreed with the Noise Officer, which included the number of persons permitted to enter  and re-enter. Conditions had been agreed with the Police, which included no off-sales. There was a restricted time frame for deliveries to the Premises already, which were included in the lease. Finally, there were also conditions in the lease which addressed the issue of waiting delivery drivers. There was no objection if the Sub-Committee was minded to impose a condition dealing restricting deliveries to the Premises, since there was already a more restrictive condition imposed by the lease.

Ms Woods told the Sub-Committee that the building would be the largest residential building in the UK, with 600 residential flats above the Premises. There was the potential for those residents to be disturbed by anti-social behaviour.

As far as smoking was concerned, she already could smell smoke from other premises. She asked that the smoking area be located away from the building. She also asked that agreed condition 3 from the Noise Service, which dealt with people leaving the Premises to smoke, should include staff. She asked that alcohol be sold as ancillary to meals and sought a condition which limited waiting by delivery drivers.

In response to questions the following was noted;

-       Mr. Buckworth confirmed that there was no objection to a condition that alcohol be sold as ancillary to a meal and a condition restricting the emptying of bottle banks.

-       It was noted that having the smoking area located away from the Building was potentially problematic as the lease placed restrictions on where people could congregate and any such smoking area would need to be agreed with the landlord.

-       That the applicant was amenable to seeking to reach an appropriate agreement with the landlord, if possible.

-       It was suggested by the Legal Adviser that one possible way to deal with this would be to prohibit smoking immediately outside  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.1

At the request of the Chair, Ms Corinne Holland, Licensing Officer, introduced the report which detailed the application for a variation of the premises licence for Vout-O-Reenees, the Crypt of 30 Prescot Street London E1 8BB. It was noted that objections had received by a local resident and other persons in relation to the prevention of public nuisance and the prevention of crime and disorder.

The Sub-Committee considered the application by Sophie Parkin to vary the premises licence. The premises are currently licensed for the sale of alcohol from 14:00 hours to midnight Monday to Thursday and from 14:00 hours to 01:00 hours on Friday and Saturday; for late night refreshment from 23:00 hours to 00:30 Monday to Thursday and from 23:00 hours to 01:30 hours on Friday and Saturday; for the showing of films from 12:00 hours to 23:00 hours Monday to Saturday and from 14:00 hours to 21:00 hours on Sunday; and for live music from 12:00 hours to 23:00 hours Monday to Saturday and from 13:00 hours to 21:30 hours on Sunday.

The variation sought was to increase the terminal hour for the sale of alcohol on Thursdays to 01:00 hours and on Friday and Saturday to 02:00 hours. The starting time on Saturday was also to be varied to 13:00 hours. No change was sought to the other licensable activities. The variation also sought to provide recorded music from 17:00 hours Monday to Saturday, with the terminal hour being 00:00 hours Monday to Wednesday, 01:00 hours on Thursday, and 02:00 hours on Friday and Saturday. The opening times were to be varied to mirror the times for the sale of alcohol.

The application attracted two representations. One was from the Flame of Love Praying Group London and the other was from a local resident, David Cleghorn, who was also a member of the Flame of Love. The representations were based on the prevention of public nuisance and the prevention of crime and disorder. Conditions had been agreed between the applicant and the police and the Noise Service.

Ms. Parkin spoke to her application and explained the nature of the Premises, which was a venue for artists. She had been operating from the Premises for about eight years. The primary reason for the variation was because the business, like others, had been severely affected by the pandemic. She explained that she did not permit people to get drunk on the Premises. The additional opening times were also sought because 01:00 hours was not particularly late for some people.

Mr Javier Melin addressed the Sub-Committee. The Legal Adviser had emphasised at the start of the meeting that the decision for the Sub-Committee was whether or not this variation would adversely impact upon the licensing objectives and that the oral submission needed to focus on that. Whether the activities being carried on at the Premises were offensive to others was not a matter that the Sub-Committee could take into account. Mr. Melin stated  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.2

This item was withdrawn prior to the meeting.

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.