Agenda and draft minutes

Black's, Basement to First Floor, 67 Dean Street, W1

14/07347/LIPV

1.

Alterations to layout of premises

To add a bar counter to the ground floor as shown on the plan attached at Appendix A3.

Amendments to application advised at hearing:

None.

Decision (including reasons if different from those set out in report):

Granted, subject to conditions as set out below.  Members of the Sub-Committee noted that there was a very narrow focus within the application.  The first aspect of the application was to change the layout of the ground floor to add a bar servery, enlarging the kitchen.  This proposal had not attracted significant opposition.  PC Sollars stated during the hearing that he did have concerns that a bar was being placed where a bar did not currently exist and that it would be better to keep the bar in the basement where it was less conspicuous.    

The second aspect of the application was to permit guests of members to purchase their own alcohol.  The basic principle of this had not been objected to by any of the parties who had made representations.  As PC Sollars had stated it was very difficult for inspectors to assess who was buying drinks on the premises.  Mr Bieda and Mr Brown who was representing him had asked the Committee to specifically look at the number of guests per member.

In respect of both aspects of the application, the Sub-Committee took into account in their decision to grant the application that as a result of the proposed conditions alcohol could only be sold for consumption by members of a private club and their bona fide guests.  There would, as Mr Thomas stated, be no changes to the existing membership conditions on the licence.  Mr Thomas had also agreed that there would be no more than four guests per member on the premises at any time save for guests of members taking a table meal or attending a pre-booked and bona fide private function or event.  It had been agreed with the Police that a member would have to book the event no less than 24 hours in advance.

The Sub-Committee did consider that the additional conditions attached to the licence demonstrated that the objectors’ representations  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3.

Co-operative Food, 18-22 Park Road, NW1

14/07378/LIPV

1.

To remove the following condition 26 from the licence:

All deliveries and collections to take place at the rear of the property marked 'x' on the plan.

Amendments to application advised at hearing:

None.

Decision (including reasons if different from those set out in report):

Members of the Sub-Committee were aware that an application by Co-operative Food to permit off-sales of alcohol at 18-22 Park Road was granted by the Sub-Committee in July 2014.  One particular aspect of that application, that deliveries and collections could only take place at the rear servicing area, had caused concerns.

The Applicant’s concerns as set out by Mr Arnot at the hearing were that there was restricted access for deliveries to the rear servicing area in Sussex Place.  This meant that the number of deliveries increased as the Applicant Company was required to use smaller vehicles.  Mr Arnot stressed that his client’s preference was to use larger delivery vehicles accessing the front loading bay on the A41 (Park Road) resulting in fewer deliveries.  It was his view that the fact that the A41 was already very busy would mean there would be less disturbance than the use of Sussex Place South, a private road. However, it was appreciated that local residents in Park Road had concerns regarding deliveries to the front.  It was therefore proposed that there were deliveries to both the rear and the front.  The Applicant had commissioned a report by BWB Consulting which had made a number of recommendations.  These included the size of the vehicle to the rear servicing area being restricted to a 7.5 tonne box van and deliveries to the front taking place between 10:00 and 16:00 and loading at the front being restricted to a maximum of twenty minutes.  The Applicant had discussed with Mr Brown prior to the hearing use of the front loading bay from 10:00 to 19:00.  Mr Arnot’s position was that in theory it is wrong to condition deliveries where alcohol is not involved.  Mr Arnot made the point that his client was trying to find a way to cause least disturbance and it would be very difficult to keep everyone happy.  In response to Members’ questions he clarified that refuse was collected from inside the store and there was no need for it to be picked up from an external area which might impact  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

Basement And Ground Floor, 39 Great Windmill Street, W1

14/07220/LIPN

1.

Late Night Refreshment:

Monday to Saturday – 23:00 to 01:00

Sunday – 23:00 to 00:00.

Amendments to application advised at hearing:

None.

Decision (including reasons if different from those set out in report):

Granted, subject to conditions as set out below. 

Members of the Sub-Committee noted that the application was contrary to the Council’s policy in the West End Stress Area.  This was due to the fact that the Applicant, Mr St Aubyn, wished to establish a fast food premises at 39 Great Windmill Street with operating hours beyond 11 pm. Takeaway would be the main element of the business with hot food and hot drink also being provided on the premises.  The Sub-Committee however, granted the application as an exception to policy on the basis that the hours applied for by Mr St Aubyn at Great Windmill Street were identical to those on the premises licence for 4 Brewer Street which had also operated as a fast food premises.  As the Brewer Street area is being redeveloped and Wok to Walk at 4 Brewer Street is currently closed, the Applicant who was in the process of having the Brewer Street premises licence being transferred to him, wished to operate from 39 Great Windmill Street for approximately three years until the works are completed and then return to the premises at 4 Brewer Street.  The Sub-Committee stipulated in the conditions attached to the licence that no licensable activities would be permitted to take place at 39 Great Windmill Street in the event that licensable activities were carried on at 4 Brewer Street.

Members, in reaching their decision, took into account that the conditions that the Applicant agreed with Environmental Health promoted the licensing objectives.  Mr Watson for Environmental Health advised the Sub-Committee that the Great Windmill Street establishment was smaller than the Brewer Street one and that Mr St Aubyn had agreed a maximum of capacity of ten on the premises.  Members noted that this was five fewer than the Brewer Street premises, which was also in the West End Stress Area and it was therefore potentially reducing cumulative impact in the Stress Area.  The Sub-Committee’s concerns regarding the potential for disturbance in the event of people congregating around the fast food premises was eased by the fact that Mr St Aubyn had agreed Mr Watson’s proposed condition that a SIA licensed door supervisor would be on duty at the premises from 21:00 until the respective closing times of 01:00 Monday to Saturday and midnight on Sunday.  In order to prevent the potential for public nuisance, Mr Watson had proposed that any amplified music was turned off after  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

Initial consideration for any interim measures pending the full review of the premises licence for:

Madame JoJo’s, 8-10 Brewer Street, W1

14/09263/LIREVX

An application had been made by the Metropolitan Police Service to review the premises licence for Madame JoJo's under Section 53A(1)(b) of the Licensing Act 2003 (premises associated with serious crime or disorder).

The Committee after considering the report and the evidence presented at the hearing may take such interim steps as it considers necessary for the promotion of the licensing objectives.  These steps are:

(a)       modification of the conditions of the premises licence (modify, delete or add conditions);

(b)       to exclude the sale by retail of alcohol from the scope of the licence;

(c)       to remove the designated premises supervisor;

(d)       to suspend the licence;

Decision (including reasons):

The Sub-Committee initially heard from Ms Hanif.  She stated that there had been a grievous assault perpetrated by employees from Madame JoJo’s and Escape Nightclub on Friday 24 October 2014 at approximately 00:35 hours.  There had been a series of failings which showed a complete disregard for the licensing objectives.  A number of interim steps had been proposed by the Licence Holder.   It was the view of the Applicant that these steps were inadequate and did not address all of the Police’s concerns.  A number of the steps were measures that management of premises would be expected to follow in any event. 

Sergeant Partridge and PC Guerra took Members through the CCTV footage of the incident.  This included the incidents recorded on CCTV outside Madame JoJo’s and also CCTV from inside the venue directed towards the street.  The footage from the external camera included the discussion between a member of security from Escape and a black male escalating to the point where the male is head-butted and then pinned against the wall by the security manager of Madame JoJo’s only to be punched a number of times by a man the Police believed to be Madame JoJo’s taxi operator.  When the black male returned with a group of males seen throwing glass bottles towards Madame JoJo’s door, the indoor camera showed security staff producing baseball bats wrapped in bin liners.  The black male was attacked again by security staff, including with a baseball bat by the man believed to be the taxi operator.  The Police were of the view that the footage clearly demonstrated that the security  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

Initial consideration for any interim measures pending the full review of the premises licence for:

Escape Nightclub, 10A Brewer Street, W1

14/09252/LIREVX

An application had been made by the Metropolitan Police Service to review the premises licence for Escape Nightclub under Section 53A(1)(b) of the Licensing Act 2003 (premises associated with serious crime or disorder).

The Committee after considering the report and the evidence presented at the hearing may take such interim steps as it considers necessary for the promotion of the licensing objectives.  These steps are:

(a)       modification of the conditions of the premises licence (modify, delete or add conditions);

(b)       to exclude the sale by retail of alcohol from the scope of the licence;

(c)       to remove the designated premises supervisor;

(d)       to suspend the licence;

Decision (including reasons):

The Sub-Committee initially heard from Ms Hanif.  She stated that there had been a grievous assault perpetrated by employees from Madame JoJo’s and Escape Nightclub on the Friday 24 October 2014 at approximately 00:35 hours.  There had been a series of failings which showed a complete disregard for the licensing objectives.  A number of interim steps had been proposed by the Licence Holder.   It was the view of the Applicant that these steps were inadequate and did not address all of the Police’s concerns.  A number of the steps were measures that management of premises would be expected to follow in any event. 

Sergeant Partridge and PC Guerra took Members through the CCTV footage of the incident.  This included the incidents recorded on CCTV outside Madame JoJo’s and also CCTV from inside the venue directed towards the street.  The footage from the external camera included the discussion between a member of security from Escape and a black male escalating to the point where the male is head-butted and then pinned against the wall by the security manager of Madame JoJo’s only to be punched a number of times by a man the Police believed to be Madame JoJo’s taxi operator.  When the black male returned with a group of males seen throwing glass bottles towards Madame JoJo’s door, the indoor camera showed security staff producing baseball bats wrapped in bin liners.  The black male was attacked again by security staff, including with a baseball bat by the man believed to be the taxi operator.  The Police were of the view that the footage clearly demonstrated that the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.