Agenda item

The Windsor Castle Public House, 98 Park Road, London, NW1 4SH

15/12075/LIREVP

An application was submitted by Mr Neil Packer and Miss Richelle Wilder for a review of the premises on 23 December 2016 on the grounds of Prevention of Public Nuisance. Their concerns related to noise emanating into residential accommodation including children’s bedrooms from music within the premises, noise from customers smoking outside the premises and noise from customers dispersing late at night. The Environmental Health Service supported the review application in regards to the Prevention of Public Nuisance licensing objective.

Decision:

The Sub-Committee carefully considered all of the material received from the parties involved.  The Sub-Committee also heard submissions and evidence at the hearing prior to Members retiring to reach a decision.

Mr Brown of the Citizens Advice Bureau explained that the review of the premises had been sought on the grounds of public nuisance relating to:

i)            Noise generated outside the premises until late into the evening from large numbers of customers drinking and smoking in the outside area;

ii)           Noisy dispersal of customers from the premises after closing; and

iii)         Noise emanating from inside the premises by customers and music.

The noise was so intrusive that residents were often unable to relax at home, work from home or even open windows due to the noise generated. It was recognised that the current licence had been appropriate for when the premises had been operated in the past. However, since 2013 when the current management had operated the premises the clientele had changed and it was now appropriate and proportionate to alter the conditions on the licence to address the number of issues raised in the review application. The layout of the opposite residential block, Rossmore Court, was detailed especially with regard to how noise reflected around the courtyard area.

Councillor Robert Rigby, representing local residents living opposite the premises addressed the Sub-Committee in support of the review. The premise was situated in a residential area and was currently creating noise disturbance to the residents living opposite. It was very popular with students studying at the nearby London Business School and it also attracted patrons from sporting clubs operating out of Regent’s Park. Events being held at Lords Cricket Ground also attracted a large number of customers and these caused substantial noise disturbance. It was highlighted that the current licence was not appropriate and required changing to address the issues raised. Numerous attempts had been made to engage with the licence holder and the London Business School but the issues still persisted. Residents had so far tolerated the noise disturbance but felt that the following conditions needed attaching to the licence to alleviate the problems raised in the application for review:

i)                     Drinking only be permitted in the outside area until 21:00 hours;

ii)                    The number of customers using the outside area be restricted; and

iii)                   Customers drinking in the outside area to be supervised by members of staff.

Mr Brown explained that the review application had been submitted in December 2015 and during that time the Licence Holder had not entered into any meaningful engagement with local residents. The Sub-Committee’s attention was drawn to Appendix 5 which detailed a chronology of issues recorded by residents and several particular events were discussed in detail. It was explained that it was not the applicants’ intention to have the premises licence revoked but rather for conditions to be imposed on the licence so as to limit any further noise disturbance in the future. The Sub-Committee noted that the representations in support for the premises were mainly from students studying at the London Business School and very few had been received from local residents.

The Sub-Committee was shown video evidence taken by residents showing footage of the noise generated from customers drinking in the outside area of the premises. The evidence revealed customers spilling out onto the street and preventing members of the public from using the pavement area. 

Mr Neil Packer, a local resident, explained that he had lived in the property opposite since 2006 and knew the local area well. The pub had always had links with the London Business School but since the change in management in 2013 the clientele had changed to predominantly students and members of local sports clubs. The number of customers had subsequently increased and therefore noise emanating from the property had also increased. Even when customers drinking outside were required to move inside the premises at 22:00, the windows were often open and significant levels of noise were still experienced. The layout of the building meant the noise generated from the premises was amplified and reflected around the courtyard area. Mr Packer worked from home, the noise disturbance he experienced was very intrusive and he requested that it be managed in a responsible and effective way.

Ms Richelle Wilder, a long term local resident, recognised that pubs were a valuable element of a community. The discordant noise emanating from the premises though on a regular basis affected residents especially as it often took the form of loud singing and shouting. It was important that restrictions on the number of customers allowed outside were introduced as she currently had to wear earplugs on a regular basis and it was suggested customers could leave the premises via the rear entrance.

Mr Brown remarked that conditions on the licence should be introduced to limit the hours customers could drink outside to 21:00 hours, an assessment of the current management arrangements in place whilst cricket matches were scheduled at Lords should take place and a reduction in  the hours when music could be played implemented.

Mr Dave Nevitt confirmed that Environmental Health’s representation was maintained due to the significant impact the noise disturbance was having on local residents. Prior to 2013. The Premises had been a quiet pub, but since the change in management noise issues had been reported and subsequently the addition of extra conditions on the licence was supported. Presently there appeared to be a lack of control and effective management over customers drinking in the outside area and as there was nothing designating the premises boundary customers often spilled onto the surrounding pavement and road thereby causing a public nuisance.  The lack of measures in place to control and manage the behaviour of patrons and the subsequent noise generated was an area of concern and required addressing.

Mr Vic Chhabria, the premises owner, addressed the Sub-Committee and informed them that all the information presented had been accurate and he was sorry for any inconvenience caused to residents. The reasons for the issues reported were due to the failings of the previous management and new management had since been installed to ensure there was no disturbance in the future. The previous management did not understand the owners’ concept and ideals and had instead continued to attract student customers. It was submitted that the new management were in the process of attracting a different profile of customer who was more mature and responsible. Mr Chhabria stated to the Sub-Committee that unsociable behaviour would not be tolerated by the management and anyone seen being unruly would be asked to leave. The Sub-Committee was advised that a new chef had just been employed and it was planned to increase the food offer available so as to change the atmosphere of the premises into one which was friendly, cosy and more family orientated.

The Sub-Committee was advised that the summer months were the busiest for the premises and it was important from an economic viewpoint to allow customers to drink outside until 22:00 hours. To address some of the concerns raised regarding the outside area Mr Chhabria reported that portable furniture had now been installed to prevent drinking outside after 22:00 hours. Security staff had also been employed to ensure there was better control over the outside area and to help with customer dispersal.  It was considered that this approach would resolve the issue with regard to managing crowd control and congestion at the front of the premises where most of the noise seemed to emanate from.

Mr Chhabria asked that no restrictions or punishments be imposed on the operation of the Premises and instead it be embraced as part of the local community.

Mr Reinaldo Bispo, the Designated Premises Supervisor provided the Sub-Committee with an overview of the premises background. It was explained that since his appointment as manager in December 2015 various changes had been implemented, due to the previous lack of management control in place. New staff had been employed, the food offer had been changed and it was stressed that the operation of the pub was taken very seriously. An issue relating to noise disturbance following a London Business School Rugby Club event at the premises was regrettable and a letter had been sent to the organisation explaining that such behaviour would not be tolerated in future and a ban would be enforced on them if there was any reoccurrence. It was hoped to work alongside the local community and it had been noted that there had recently been an increase in the number of local residents frequenting the premises. Extra staff had been employed to provide door security on the two busiest nights of the week, Thursday and Friday, and it was hoped these measures would help provide an improved pub for the local community, promote the licensing objectives and give some comfort to local residents.

Mr Jon Payne, representing the licensee, informed the Sub-Committee that the parties involved in the review were very close to reaching an agreement on a way forward on to address the issues raised, including adding extra conditions to the licence. Mr Payne highlighted several conditions which the licensee would include on the licence. In response to a question it was agreed that a copy of the dispersal policy would be provided to the Council in due course. It was felt that the proposals to control customer behaviour were sufficient to prevent problems arising in the future and that the licensee would be diligent in ensuring there would be no more shouting or singing from customers which was accepted as causing a nuisance and disturbance. The licensee was more than happy to engage in conversations with residents to ensure there were clearer lines of communication and this would help, along with the introduction of additional conditions, ensure the issues raised were addressed.

Following a question from the Sub-Committee there was a discussion concerning the floor plan of the premises.

The Sub-Committee was interested in what experience the licensee had in running a licensed premises. Mr Chhabria explained that he did not have a background in the running of licensed premises , however, when he took over the premises he relied heavily upon the knowledge, skills and experience of the previous management and it was due to their failure in promoting the licensing objectives  the management practices adopted at that time were called into question, by local residents raising the various issues complained of in the review application. Mr Bispo had now been appointed as the current manager tasked with improving the running  of the premises so that the premises was operating in a  professional manner promoting the licensing objectives.

Mr Brown addressed the Sub-Committee and expressed the residents’ views that despite the change in management the same noise disturbance problems had still been encountered and were thus affecting the lives of local residents. It was still an on-going issue and it was questioned whether the premises had been turned around as stated. What the residents wanted was a well-run drinking establishment that fitted into the community and did not create a noise disturbance. To help achieve this it was suggested that conditions prohibiting drinkers from using the outside area until 21:00 hours and limiting the number of people allowed outside to smoke would help alleviate the current noise disturbance and public nuisance.

In response to a question Mr Chhabria informed the Sub-Committee that the seated capacity outside was eighteen. It was also explained that it was wished to maintain the 22:00 hour’s curfew for outside drinking as reducing this would have a significant impact on the viability of the business. Mr Brown clarified that the applicants were not seeking a revocation of the licence and the issue of the business’s’ financial viability should not have any bearing on the decision.

The Sub-Committee recognised that the premises was an historic public house and since the change in management in 2013 problems had arisen with the residents in Rossmore Court opposite the premises. The issues involved noise disturbance caused by customers drinking outside the front of the premises, customers drinking inside the building and customers blocking the pavement in front of the premises leading to public nuisance concerns. The Sub-Committee had been provided with photographic, video and witness statement evidence supporting the residents’ claims of noise disturbance. All the options available to the Sub-Committee had been considered and it had reached the decision that imposing conditions on the licence was the most proportionate and appropriate step to take. As several of the conditions referred to the outside area in front of the premises the licensee was invited to submit a plan defining the outside area where customers would be allowed to consume alcohol in front of the premises. All parties accepted and agreed to the submission of the plan and that it would be attached to the conditions. As such a new condition would be added restricting customers to only drink outside the front of the premises in the area designated on the plan.

The conditions sought by the applicant were agreed although the time allowing customers outside with a glass container and the time when outside tables and chairs would be rendered unusable was altered to 22:00. Those customers drinking outside between 21:00 and 22:00 would be limited to a maximum of twenty people at anyone time and they had to be seated. It would also be a requirement for a minimum of one SIA licensed door supervisor to be on duty from 18:00 on Thursday and Friday evenings along with the implementation of a dispersal policy which would be made available on request. Conditions ensuring no noise emanated from the premises so as not to cause a nuisance and requiring all windows to be closed by 21:00 hours were also imposed.

The Sub-Committee was of the opinion that there had been a lack of effective management control at the premises which had caused noise disturbance to the residents living opposite the premises. Through implementing conditions which would limit numbers of customers allowed outside the front of the premises, ensure they were all seated and ensure a dispersal policy was in place would all help uphold the licensing objectives.