Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence had been received from Councillor Lorna Russell and the Chair informed those present that the meeting was quorate with two members present.   

No declarations were made.

There were no announcements made.

There was no urgent business.

To approve the minutes of the meetings held on 5^th July 2018 and 9^th August 2018.

Consideration was given to the minutes of the meetings on 5th July 2018 and 9^th August 2018 

RESOLVED

i)             THAT the minutes of the meeting held on Thursday 5^th July 2018 be agreed as a correct record and

ii)            THAT the minutes of the meeting held on Thursday 9^th August 2018 be agreed as a correct record

To Note: All

Action By: Executive Director Supporting Communities

Report of Executive Director Supporting Communities

This is an application for a new premises licence under section 17 of the Licensing Act 2003.

Consideration was given to a report of the Executive Director Supporting Communities that was summarised by the Licensing Officer. The Panel was told that the application had been amended to reduce the trading hours to 9pm with a 30 minutes further opening time to allow the public time to leave the premises. 

Toby Daynes, Licensing Authority Responsible Authority welcomed the reduction in trading hours to 9pm and summarised the Authority’s written representation about the application being in the Camden Town Cumulative Impact Policy Area (CIPA). The impact on local residents and community concerns about the growth to saturation point of late-night premises in the area.  There was also a concern from the licensing authority that applications for smaller premises were being submitted to circumvent the licensing policy restrictions in the CIPA.

           Patricia Thomas, Harmood Clarence Hartland Residents Association and Mark Neal a local resident, were attending as Interested Parties and summarised the points they had made in their written representations. They were grateful for the reduction in trading hours that the applicant had made. However they were concerned about the application that had been submitted by the same applicant, at the same time, at Unit 5 Stable Market that would result, if granted, in an additional 100 covers in the Cumulative Impact Policy Area. The Interested Parties did not view these as separate applications and were concerned about their cumulative impact on public nuisance issues, the lack of toilet facilities generally and the effect on the lives of local residents. They also expressed concerns about the proximity of the premises to new residential properties.  

            The applicant Liam O’ Hare was represented by Mr Paddy Whur, of Woods Whur, who described the application.  The premises was in a redundant part of the market. The operating hours had been reduced and the application was a genuine exception to the presumptions to refuse all applications in a CIPA.  The food offer at the premises was described as a series of development kitchens, with a different type of freshly prepared food served in each of the 4 archways. The most popular/successful foods would then be served in Unit 5 (item 7 on this agenda). The idea was that customers should be able to try the different foods available and that there would be a modest artisan alcohol offer paired with the food on offer. The premises was aimed at an older clientele and alcohol would only be purchased by seated customers eating food. There would be a waitress/counter service at each archway. Dispersal from the premises would be effectively managed and would not impact on local residents. There were toilets close to the premises from two directions.

            With regard to multiple applications the Panel was told that each of the applications (item 6 and 7) were very much separate and each stood on their own merits.

            This application included SIA supervisors, CCTV, a modest artisan alcohol offer, the applicant had offered 36 conditions, it was a small passageway surrounded by buildings, no music would  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

Report of Executive Director Supporting Communities

This is an application for a new premises licence under section 17 of the Licensing Act 2003.

Consideration was given to a report of the Executive Director Supporting Communities that was summarised by the Licensing Officer. The Panel was told that the application had been amended to reduce the trading hours to 9pm with a 30 minutes further opening time to allow the public time to leave the premises. 

Toby Daynes, Licensing Authority Responsible Authority welcomed the reduction in trading hours to 9pm and summarised the Authority’s written representation about the application being in the Camden Town Cumulative Impact Policy Area (CIPA). The impact on local residents and community concerns about the growth to saturation point of late-night premises in the area.  There was also a concern from the licensing authority that applications for smaller premises were being submitted to circumvent the licensing policy restrictions in the CIPA.    

           Patricia Thomas, Harmood Clarence Hartland Residents Association and Mark Neal a local resident, were attending as Interested Parties and summarised the points they had made in their written representations. They were grateful for the reduction in trading hours that the applicant had made. They spoke again about the links to the application that had been considered in agenda item 6 above. They were concerned about the two premises being next to each other and that the two applications had been submitted by the same applicant at the same time. If both applications were granted it would result in an additional 100 covers in the Cumulative Impact Policy Area. The Interested Parties did not view them as separate applications and were concerned about their cumulative impact on public nuisance issues, the lack of toilet facilities generally and the effect on the lives of local residents. They also expressed concerns about the proximity of the premises to new residential properties.  The Interested Parties did not consider either of the applications to be an exception to the policy to refuse new applications in the (CIPA).   

            The applicant Liam O’ Hare was represented by Mr Paddy Whur, of Woods Whur. Mr Whur told the Panel that not all licences granted for Stables Market were proceeded with.  This application was part of the redevelopment of the area and the premises was a traditional restaurant and dining area, with a limited alcohol offer available to customers.  The design of the premises would be branded to ensure that it looked significantly different to the application for Units 1-4 (item 6 on this agenda).   It would have its own staffing and CCTV system, operate within framework hours and would be a fantastic addition to the area.     

 In response to questions the Panel was told that:

·   The application was part of the same ethos as the adjacent Units 1-4.        There would also be fast dining at this premises but in a more tradition   restaurant setting

·  The application was an exception to the policy to refuse all applications      in the CIPA because it was a small premises with a small alcohol offering that would not add any cumulative impact

·  There was no potential for public nuisance with the modest  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

Report of Executive Director Supporting Communities

This is an application for a new premises licence under section 17 of the Licensing Act 2003.

Consideration was given to a report of the Executive Director Supporting Communities that was summarised by the Licensing Officer.

The Interested Parties speaking at the meeting were local residents, a local business representative, members of the Russell Square Management Group and friends of St Georges Garden, David Marchant, Robert Osborne. Who summarised their written representations and concerns about the application with the following points:

·         That there were  legal permissions that would be required from the Russell Square Commission before the event could go ahead  and that consent from the commission would not be forthcoming

·         That the application had been submitted prematurely ahead of all the agreements that needed to be in place

·         A number of local residential groups had not been consulted and were opposed to this event taking place

·         There needed to be a clear and transparent process for managing parks and open spaces that provided clear guidelines for applicants

·         There had been a lack of consultation and local accountability and the application had come before the Panel before all matters were in place

·         There was a risk of harm and damage to the square that would make it unusable and exclude residents and local regular users of enjoying and using the space

·         There would be a long 3 month period of restoring the space after the event to make it suitable for other users

·         What, if any, assessment of public order issues or nuisance had been carried out?  

·         There would be overwhelming numbers of people coming into the local area with associated security issues. The lack of policing in the area had not been taken into consideration

In response to question the Panel was told that:

·         There needed to be policy in place for openness and transparency in this process. There had been very little information to local people about the application 

·         Repairs to Hyde Park after their summer festivals took 3 months, not being able to use Russell Square for 25% of the year was unacceptable 

The Applicant was represented Robert Sutherland solicitor, Niall Forde licensing agent and Adrian Studd Event consultant. They provided the following information about the background to the application and the experience of the event organisers: 

·         The Evening Standard held 30 live events each year that had included London Food Month, a night market and other large events. The application for Russell Square would be part of the Love London event in 2019 and one of Camden’s arts and culture events    

·        The applicant had agreed a number of conditions to address points raised about possible nuisance, noise. Taken as a whole, all the measures  proposed and agreed to should provide some reassurance to residents       

·        The applicant would take specific measure to address issues of crime and disorder and would put in place checks to ensure that the event was properly run   

·        Residents should be assured that security for the site would be of a good standard and carried out by an experienced Designated Premises Supervisor and security staff

·        The Panel was also told  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

There was no such business.