Agenda and minutes

Please note this meeting may be filmed or recorded by the Council for live or subsequent broadcast via the Council’s internet site or by anyone attending the meeting using any communication method.  Members of the public participating in the meeting (e.g. making deputations, asking questions, making oral protests) should be aware that they are likely to be filmed, recorded or reported on.  By entering the ‘meeting room’, you are consenting to being filmed and to the possible use of those images and sound recordings.

The Chair of the meeting has the discretion to terminate or suspend filming or recording, if in his or her opinion continuation of the filming, recording or reporting would disrupt or prejudice the proceedings, infringe the rights of any individual, or may lead to the breach of a legal obligation by the Council.

 The Chair referred to the filming of meetings and this information was noted.

To receive any apologies for absence.

There were no apologies for absence. 

It being a special meeting of the Sub Committee, under Part Four, Section B, Paragraph 17, of the Council’s Constitution, no other business shall be considered at the meeting.

The Legal advisor at the meeting stated that the Sub-Committee considered each application on its merits and were concerned solely with the promotion of the licensing objectives and therefore there was no conflict of interest in regard to the revenue derived from the hire of Finsbury Park.

The Chair will explain the procedure that the Committee will follow for the hearing considered under the Licensing Act 2003.

The Chair provided a summary of the procedure for the meeting.

To consider an application for a new premises licence.

Ms Daliah Barrett, Licensing Team Leader, informed the Sub-Committee that:

·                This was an application for a new premises licence.

·                The application was seeking a new premises licence from an additional day of licensable activity per year which would sit alongside the existing premises licence.

·                The application could be found from page 137 of the agenda papers.

·                The licence was to allow for the sale of alcohol and regulated entertainment.

·                The capacity within the regulations would allow for up to 9,999 patrons during the hours shown at paragraph 1.2 of the officer’s report. However, the applicant requested a limit of 8000 patrons.

·                The proposed event site would be to the east of the park and would run parallel to Green Lanes.

·                The events were to be ticketed events pre-arranged with the park.

·                The applicant currently had a licence which allowed them to hold four event days in total. The days would be discussed and prearranged with the park.

·                The site location for the event space would be fully enclosed with fencing.

·                A total of four events were held in 2021 by the applicant at the park.

·                An issue that had been reported was regarding an illegal rave taking place on the site. However, this issue was not related to the event held by the applicant at the time.

·                During the consultation period, Responsible Authorities had been consulted regarding the proposed licence.

·                The agenda papers contained the draft Event Management Plan. This plan covered a wide variety of actions that an event organiser would need to satisfy. On page 28 and 29 of the agenda papers, the index of the various matters covered could be found. This included matters such as adverse weather conditions, fire safety, health and safety and other sections.

·                The draft site plan showed the approximate layout. Events of this nature was subject to a Safety Advisory Group (SAG) and planning process.

·                The grounds upon which representations had been received was based on prevention of crime and disorder, public nuisance, public safety and prevention of children from harm.

·                There were a range of issues raised in the representations including the capacity that was requested, the duration of the occupation, the loss of park space, criminal activity and ongoing issues with the park. Concerns also been raised regarding holding an event during a global pandemic.

·                Any reference to statutory legislation regarding measures taken to alleviate  concerns of the coronavirus was not in the remit of the Sub-Committee.

·                Once an event was planned, the offices that attended the SAG including those from Environment Health and Public Health would be able to provide advice and speak with the applicant regarding any specific requirements. The Licensing Authority would also oversee the process.

·                The use of the park, condition of the park, seeding and the effect on grass at the site were contractual issues and also not in the remit of the Sub-Committee to consider.

·                The representations could be found on pages 153 – 168 of the agenda papers and the representation from Friends  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

To consider an application for a variation of a premises licence.

Ms Daliah Barrett, Licensing Team Leader, informed the Sub-Committee that:

·         This was a variation application to increase the capacity of all the events from 6000 patrons to 8000 patrons.

·         The application also sought to add regulated entertainment such as live music and display of film on Saturday and Sunday.

·         Large events were subject to due process via the Safety Advisory Group (SAG) meetings. These had been attended by blue light agencies and the responsible authorities. The applicant provided the Event Management Plan (EMP) as it was being updated. Meetings were held on a monthly basis in the run-up to the event.

·         Representations could be found from pages 329 and were on the basis of all four licensing objectives.

·         The representation made by Public Health had been withdrawn.

·         There were two distinct processes that needed to be complied with by the applicant. This included the park hire process and the application for a premises licence.

In response to questions from Members, Ms Barrett informed the Sub-Committee that:

·         The infrastructure for the event would be increased and there was likely to be an increase in toilet facilities, security staff, food vendors, medical staff and other areas.

In response to questions, Mr Butterfield, Mr Bowles and Mr Clancy representing the applicant, informed the Sub-Committee that:

·         There was a slight overlap between the event planning and the event licensing process.

·         In relation to the licensing process, the applicant had to demonstrate that adequate systems were in place to promote licensing objectives.

·         For the SAG process, it was important to outline the details of how the event would be managed and operated.

·         The site area was just under 21,500 square metres. In terms of audience capacity, the footprint did not need to be increased. The industry guidance allowed for two people per square metre and this would allow for 8000 people in addition to the infrastructure.

·         The principles in relation to the management process had been set out. The relevant documents would be reviewed by the responsible authorities but this was a separate process to the licensing process.

In response to questions, Ms Barrett informed the Sub-Committee that:

·         Page 318 of the agenda papers set out the conditions that the applicant believed were sufficient to accommodate the application. 

Mr Tom Graham, representing the Friends of Finsbury Park, informed the Sub-Committee that:

·         It was not clear exactly what issues were relevant with regard to the consideration of the application.

·         He would ask that the capacity crowd not be increased from 6000 to 8000 patrons and that no films be displayed during the afternoons when the park was not being used to screen live music and other activities.

Mr Butterfield, Mr Bowles and Mr Clancy, representing the applicant, stated that the applicant had no intention to screen films during the afternoon.

Ms Dianne Burridge, resident, informed the Sub-Committee that:

·         It was not clear how the vehicle movement along the road would be managed for the 20 days in which the applicant would occupy the area as  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.