Skip to main content

Agenda item

Grosvenor Square Gardens, Grosvenor Square, W1K 6LD

App

No

Ward /

Cumulative Impact Area

Site Name and Address

Application

Licensing Reference Number

1.

West End Ward /not in cumulative impact area

Grosvenor Square Gardens, Grosvenor Square, W1K 6LD

New Premises Licence

18/03517/LIPN

 

Minutes:

LICENSING SUB-COMMITTEE

Thursday 7th June 2018

 

Membership:            Councillor Melvyn Caplan (Chairman) Councillor Jim Glen and Councillor Shamim Talukder

 

Legal Adviser:           Horatio Chance

Committee Officer:   Kisi Smith-Charlemagne

Presenting Officers:Samantha Eaton

 

Relevant Representations:     Environmental Health, The Metropolitan Police and Local Resident’s.

 

Present: Mr Craig Baylis (Solicitor, representing the Applicant), Mr Nick Morgan, Mr Nigel Hughes, Ms Chrissie Cullen all on behalf of the Applicant (“The Applicant”), PC Byan Lewis (Metropolitan Police) and Mrs Dave Nevitt (Environmental Health)

 

Grosvenor Square Gardens, Grosvenor Square, London, W1K 6LD  18/03517/LIPN (“The Premises” also referred in this Decision as the “Square”)

 

1.

Sale by retail of alcohol (both on and off sale):

 

Monday to Thursday: 10:00 to 22:00

Friday to Saturday: 10:00 to 22:30

Sunday: 12:00 to 21:00

 

Seasonal variations / Non-Standard Timings:

 

From the end of permitted hours on New Year’s Eve to the start of permitted hours on New Year’s Day.

 

On Sundays prior to bank holidays/public holidays 09:00 – 23:00.

 

 

Amendments to application advised at hearing:

 

None.

 

 

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

 

The Sub-Committee considered an application by Grosvenor West End Properties for a new premises licence in respect of Grosvenor Square Gardens, Grosvenor Square, London, W1K 6LD (“The Premises”).  The Presenting Officer provided an outline of the application to the Sub-Committee.

 

Mr Baylis, representing the Applicant, confirmed that there would be no off sales of alcohol and this had been removed from the application due to the concerns raised by the lodged representations. Mr Baylis advised that the Applicant had considered a Farmers Market with the possible sale of alcohol, however this was not a necessity and so the Applicant removed this from the application.  Mr Baylis explained to the Sub-Committee that for the last six years the Applicant had been providing licensable activities on the Square and wanted to emphasise that local residents had raised no objection to past events  

 

Mr Baylis then went onto advise that the Applicant had held Summer in the Square for the last six years with no complaints.  It was stated that previous licensing events have operated using the temporary event notices regime.  These are not   small scale events, the average Summer in the Square day has between 1,500 to 4,000 people attending.  Mr Baylis informed the Sub-Committee that in addition to Summer in the Square, the Applicant now wants to offer more events in the form of ticketed events in order to recoup some of the £5 million invested in refurbishing the square. It was stated that all monies raised from those events by way of profit will be re-invested back into the maintenance and up keep of the Square.

 

Mr Hughes described Grosvenor Square as being one of London’s most attractive public spaces.  Mr Baylis confirmed to the Sub-Committee that the Applicant proposes  the following three type of events:- ,

 

  • Free events where the whole square is open to the public,
  •  A limited number of ticketed events for ballet, theatre and jazz
  •  A limited number of private events not open to the public. 

 

The Sub-Committee asked questions and sought further clarification from the Applicant about the number and types of events.  Ms Chrissie Cullen who dealt with marketing matters on behalf of the Applicant, explained that Summer in square had been going since 2012 and attracted healthy numbers over a two week period. Ms Cullen said that the Applicant wished to work with local residents in relation to the events hosted and that support had been gained from local businesses who were willing to provide sponsorship and work with the Applicant to ensure the events were a success for the community as this was an opportunity to engage with the local community and enhance the reputation of Mayfair. Ms Cullen stated that according to the customer feedback the Applicant had received from summer in the square, there was a desire to hold more events, hence the submission of this application.  

 

Ms Cullen advised the Sub-Committee that the expectation was for the Square to hold ticketed events relating to the Arts and Dance, where ballet was given as an example. The Sub-Committee was informed that in relation to the live music events proposed a small stage would need to be erected with the proper safety and risk assessment procedures put in place with a likely terminal hour of 22:00 hours taking into account dispersal time for those customers leaving the Square so that residents were not adversely affected by nuisance. It was envisaged these events would draw in office workers in addition to local residents and those visiting London.

 

In relation to the private events it was hoped that these would be during the daytime. London Fashion week was quoted as being a likely suggestion for the type of event to be held. It was stated that the Square would hold seasonal events at Christmas and Easter. These were likely to be community based that would have a children and family bias. The Sub-Committee was informed also that other temporary structures such as a Marquee would be erected in a designated part of the Square to hold events (to include private) where this was considered appropriate.

 

A discussion took place regarding conditions that the Sub-Committee could consider imposing of the Licence having regard to the conditions the Applicant had agreed with the Responsible Authorities appearing on pages 50-55 of the Committee bundle.  Mr Baylis stated that the CCTV condition had not been agreed with the Police and was still very much a sticking point. Mr Baylis felt that this should be risk assessed because the logistics of having CCTV in the square was not practical and should therefore be reconsidered.

 

The Sub-Committee then heard the concerns raised from Mr Nevett.  Mr Nevett stated to the Sub-Committee that there needed to be a clear understanding of the different types of events to be held in the Square so that the appropriate boundaries could be put in place when considering public safety and the promotion of the public safety licensing objective. Mr Nevett said that the Applicant when considering this aspect of the application should look at the ticket areas in terms of crowd congestion. It was stated that a proper plan should be drawn indicating the proposed stage area and where customers are to be seated and the amplification of live music in terms of sound generated and what impact this was likely to have for residents if the music was played too loud. Accordingly a suggestion that perhaps a noise limit of 75 Decibels was put to the Sub-Committee.

 

The Sub-Committee was of the opinion that it required further information and detail in relation to the proposed private events. It was not clear based on the representations the Applicant had advanced that a great deal of thought had been given in relation to an even management plan that would need to be put in place covering crowd control and dispersal of customers. The Sub-Committee felt that depending upon the nature of the event, whether that be low, medium or high the conditions should properly reflect the class of event in order that the conditions are workable, enforceable and ultimately promote the licensing objectives.  The Sub-Committee was concerned that the Applicant was not able to state how each event was to be risk assessed at this stage and therefore needed assurances what mechanism would be put in place for this to happen during the process.

 

The Sub-Committee felt that it would struggle to make a decision based on the information that it had been presented with by the Applicant and did not want to prejudice the Applicant or indeed the other parties by arriving at the wrong decision. The Sub-Committee was of the view that certain parts of the application lacked the required detail to assess the information on an appropriate basis. The overall view of the Sub-Committee was that the application was not clear and it was not for the Sub-Committee to try and fathom from the application what the Applicant was seeking to achieve due to the lack of detail. The Sub-Committee felt that it could not determine the nature of the application on this basis.   Having considered all matters the Sub-Committee felt that it was in the public interest to adjourn the application until the 27th June. It was hoped that the Applicant would use the intervening period productively with the Responsible Authorities and residents to clarify the nature of the application as it seemed what was being applied for did not quite reflect the discussions during the hearing.

 

The Sub-Committee felt that there was insufficient information provided by the Applicant together with a lack of clarity particularly with regard to the various categories of activities and events proposed at the Square. This information was required in order that the Sub-Committee would properly consider these points as well as the proposed conditions offered during the decision making process. It was hoped that once the Sub-Committee had reconvened the Applicant would be in a position to provide clear information to the Sub-Committee as to its true intentions for the hosting of events at the Square that would help promote the licensing objectives and allow for the Sub-Committee to arrive at a decision that is appropriate and proportionate in the circumstances.

 

2.

Regulated Entertainment:

 

Performance of Dance

Exhibition of a Film

Performance of Live Music

Playing of Recorded Music

Anything of a similar description

 

Monday to Thursday: 09:00 to 22:30

Friday to Saturday: 09:00 to 23:00

Sunday: 09:00 to 21:30

 

Seasonal variations / Non-Standard Timings:

 

From the end of permitted hours on New Year’s Eve to the start of permitted hours on New Year’s Day.

 

On Sundays prior to bank holidays/public holidays 09:00 – 23:00.

 

 

Amendments to application advised at hearing:

 

None.

 

 

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

 

The Sub-Committee granted the application (see reasons for decision in Section 1).

 

3.

Hour open to the public

 

Monday to Thursday: 09:00 to 23:00

Friday to Saturday: 09:00 to 23:30

Sunday: 09:00 to 22:00

 

Seasonal variations / Non-Standard Timings:

 

From the end of permitted hours on New Year’s Eve to the start of permitted hours on New Year’s Day.

 

On Sundays prior to bank holidays/public holidays 09:00 – 23:00.

 

 

Amendments to application advised at hearing:

 

None.

 

 

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

 

The Sub-Committee granted the application (see reasons for decision in Section 1).

 

 

 

Supporting documents: