Agenda and minutes

To agree the procedure rules for remote meetings.

RESOLVED –

THAT the guidance on remote meetings be noted.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Matt Cooper. It was noted that the meeting was quorate with two Members present.

There were no declarations of interest.

Broadcast of the meeting

The Chair to announce the following: “In addition to the rights by law that the public and press have to record this meeting, I would like to remind everyone that this meeting is being broadcast live by the Council to the Internet and can be viewed on our website for at least six months after the meeting. After that time, webcasts are archived and can be made available on upon request.

If you have asked to address the meeting, you are deemed to be consenting to being filmed and to the use of those images and sound recordings for webcasting and/or training purposes. If you are addressing the Committee your contribution will be recorded and broadcast.”

Webcasting

The Chair announced that the meeting was being broadcast live to the internet and would be capable of repeated viewing and copies of the recording could be made available to those that requested them. Those participating in the meeting were deemed to be consenting to being filmed.

There were no notifications of items of urgent business.

To approve the minutes of the meeting held on 30 May 2024.

Consideration was given to the minutes of the meeting held on 30^th May 2024.

RESOLVED –

THAT the minutes of the meeting held on 30^th May 2024 be approved and signed as a correct record.

Report of the Executive Director Supporting Communities

This is an application to vary a premises licence under section 34 of the Licensing Act 2003.

This item was withdrawn, as the matter had been resolved.

Report of the Executive Director Supporting Communities

This is an application to vary a premises licence under section 34 of the Licensing Act 2003.

Consideration was given to a report of the Executive Director, Supporting Communities detailing an application to vary a premises licensing under Section 34 of the Licensing Act 2003.

The Licensing Officer introduced the report and explained that the application was to extend the terminal hour for licensable activities in the basement of the premises to 2am from Mondays to Saturdays. The premises was located in the Seven Dials Cumulative Impact Special Policy Area.

Members noted that there was a written submission from an Interested Party who was not present. They noted the written submission.

Jack Speigler, the Applicant’s Representative, made the following points in his submission:

·       The premises was a 220-bed hotel. Their primary interest was in providing a quiet and restful environment for their guests and so they did not intend to operate the basement in a way that would cause noise or other nuisance.

·       The premises had been in operation since 2014 and was part of an international hospitality group.

·       The aim of the application was to align the hours of operation of the ground floor and basement.

·       No objections had been received from Responsible Authorities or residents’ associations.

·       They had been in discussion with the Covent Garden Community Association. They had also attempted to contact the Interested Party but she had not responded.

·       The premises was offering a condition which would state that there could not be a dance floor in the basement and which would state that, with the exception of the designated bar area, service of alcohol would be by waiter/waitress service.  

A member asked about the capacity of the ground floor and basement. The manager of the hotel, Murray Scott, said that the capacity on the ground floor was 200 people in three sections. The seated capacity in the basement was about 65-70 people, but could contain up to 120 people if they were standing.

Mr Scott was asked if any additional security would be required for the premises. He said that they had two SIA registered door supervisors on duty and also a floor manager who would supervise the space and help co-ordinate matters such as the departure of patrons.

Members asked why the variation was being applied for now. Mr Scott said the basement had previously been let to Soho House but that this lease had ended and they were now taking a new approach to the basement.

Mr Spiegler and Mr Scott assured Members that the intention was not to run the premises as a nightclub and so it would not cause the public nuisance or cumulative impact in the area that such a premises might.

Members noted the noise concerns raised by the Interested Party. The Applicant said that one noise incident had been from a live band on the ground floor, and so did not relate to the area the variation covered, and the other related to an old glass-crushing machine which had been generating too much noise and which was being serviced.

The representatives of the premises  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

There was no other business.