Agenda item

To consider an application for a new premises licence.

Daliah Barrett, Licensing Officer, introduced the application for a new premises licence at The Lord Nelson, 232 High Road, N22.  The application was for a 24 hour licence.  The premises currently held a licence, with opening hours of:

Monday – Wednesday        1100 to 0100

Thursday to Sunday            1100 to 0300

Sunday                                  1100 to 0200

with licensable activities ceasing one hour before closing time.

 

Representations had been received from Enforcement Response, the Licensing Authority, Metropolitan Police, Public Health and Councillor Mitchell as ward councillor.

 

The Licence had been transferred to the Applicant on 2 June 2017.

 

PC Mark Greaves, Metropolitan Police outlined his representation against the application which was set out at pages 55-57 of the agenda pack.  He outlined eight incidents which had been reported to the Police between October 2016 and July 2017.  Three of the incidents had occurred after the Applicant had taken over the premises – 7 June, 2 July and 24 July – one of which resulted in the arrest of a male for a Public Order offence and Drink Driving. 

 

PC Greaves outlined his concern that the premises did not have a fixed number of SIA door supervisors, and suggested that it would be appropriate for the premises to have 3 SIA door supervisors at the premises from 2100hrs if the licence was granted as requested, or 2 SIA door supervisors if the hours were reduced.  It was felt that as the later opening hours would lead to an increase in alcohol consumption, and increase the risk of crime and disorder.  PC Greaves also added that it was likely that if the premises had 24 hour opening then it would encourage drinkers from other licensed premises nearby to make their way to the Lord Nelson to continue late night drinking.

 

Monica Ukandu, Public Health, outlined her representation against the application which was set out at pages 59-62 of the agenda pack.  She provided some background of the local area and informed the Committee that in 2015, Woodside ward was ranked 1^st out of the 19 wards for sexual assault incidents, 1^st for probation clients with alcohol misuse risk, and 3^rd for alcohol illness treated by London Ambulance service for 18+.  There were 208 alcohol related injuries within 500m of the premises in 2015.  Public Health considered that there were sufficient licensed premises in the area to meet the demand for alcohol, and whilst it was accepted that the applicant had provided a number of conditions in the operating schedule to uphold the licensing objectives, it was felt that there would be significant disturbance to local residents from patrons leaving the premises at all times of the morning.  The recommendation from Public Health was to not grant the application, however, in the event that it was granted, a number of conditions had been requested for inclusion on the licence.

 

Charles Buckle, Enforcement Response, outlined the representation against the application.  Enforcement Response did not support the application and had recommended that the premises close no later than 0100 Monday to Wednesday, 0300 Thursday to Saturday and 0200 on Sunday, with all regulated entertainment ceasing one hour prior to closing.  A number of conditions had been put forward for inclusion on the premises licence.  In response to the Committee, Mr Buckle confirmed that there had been no incidents of noise at the premises since 2015.

 

Councillor Wright addressed the Committee on behalf of Councillor Mitchell, who had made written representations on behalf of the Woodside ward.  There had been no justification made for a 24 hour premises licence.  The premises was located in a highly residential area, and Ward Councillors had received complaints from local residents in relation to noise, and it was not clear from the application what additional steps would be taken to deal with existing issues and any potential future issues.  There were 6 schools in the vicinity, and there were concerns that children would be exposed to drunk people leaving the premises, whilst on their way to school. 

 

Councillor Wright referred to existing premises in the area, with closing times of 0300 and 0330 and raised his concern that providing a 24 hour licenced premises would change the offer for the area.  He considered that the proposed hours put forward by the Metropolitan Police and the Licensing Authority were still a step too far.

 

Kevin Baumer, Applicant’s Representative, presented the application for a new premises licence.  The licensees were a responsible company, with many years experience in running licensed premises.  Mr Baumer referred to section 35 of the Licensing Act 2003 and reminded the Committee that representations made should be about the likely effect of granting the application on the promotion of the licensing objectives, and should not be about assuming the worst.  The Applicants were not intending to keep the premises open for 24 hours every day, and had applied for the licence to allow for flexibility in opening hours.  The nature of the premises would not change, and would remain a local pub rather than turning to a late night venue.  Mr Baumer suggested to the Committee that by fixing an artificial early closing time, this would encourage binge drinking and lead to patrons all leaving the premises at the same time which would cause a bigger nuisance to local residents.  Having a 24 hour licence should alleviate these issues. 

 

Mr Baumer referred to the applicants, and informed the Committee that they owned and ran a number of businesses in London, and that the structure of the organisation was such that it was flexible in terms of staffing between the premises and the provision of SIA Officers as necessary.  The company had employed a licensing consultant – Paul Merry – who had been involved in Licensing for many years as a Metropolitan Police Officer.  A number of conditions had been put forward by the applicants which would address concerns raised by the Responsible Authorities.

 

Mr Baumer referred to the objections made by the Police and the Licensing Authority and stated that there had not been a flat out refusal to any extension of hours.  He also referred to the Public Health and Enforcement Response representations and expressed his concern that both objections were generic and not related specifically to the premises in any way.

 

Mr Baumer understood the Committee’s concerns, however he considered that the combination of good management, experience and licensing conditions should alleviate these.

 

In response to questions from the Committee, Mr Baumer explained that the premises would be closed for a period of time each day to allow for staff turnover and for cleaning of the premises.  The premises would only be open at times when there was a demand for it, and the flexibility of a 24hr licence would allow for this.  The applicants currently ran another premises with a 24hr licence, and this premises was closed each day between 0500-0700.

 

In relation to the incidents referred to by PC Greaves, Mr Baumer agreed that the premises was not incident free, but considered that in reporting these incidents to the Police that the SIA Officers were acting responsibly.  Mr Baumer informed the Committee that since acquiring the premises there had been a decline in turnover as the staff had been filtering out the unwanted customers, with a zero tolerance approach.  The applicants had suggested a ratio of 1:100 SIA Officers, and it was felt that the imposition of a condition of 3 SIA Officers irrespective of the number of customers was unworkable.

 

Paul Merry responded to the Committee in relation to risk assessments.  Risk assessments would be carried out on a day to day basis, depending on what was happening at the venue.  The company employed 50-60 SIA Officers across their venues, and these can be redeployed to other venues according to demand.  All of the management team were also SIA qualified, and could step in if required.

 

All parties made a closing statement and the Chair informed the applicant that the decision would be provided within 5 working days of the hearing.

 

RESOLVED

 

The Committee carefully considered the application for a new premises licence, the representations made by the Metropolitan Police, Enforcement Response, the Licensing Authority, Public Health, a Ward Councillor, and the representations made by the Applicants and their representative, the Council’s Statement of Licensing Policy and the Licensing Act 2003 (LA2003) and the LA2003 section 182 guidance.

 

Having heard the parties’ evidence, the Committee resolved to grant the application in part as follows:

 

Regulated Entertainment: Plays, Films, Indoor Sporting Events, Live Music, Recorded Music, Performance of Dance & Anything of a similar nature

 

Monday to Wednesday       1100 to 0030 hours

Thursday to Saturday          1100 to 0230 hours

Sunday                                  1100 to 0130 hours

 

Late Night Refreshment

 

Monday to Wednesday       2300 to 0030 hours

Thursday to Saturday          2300 to 0230 hours

Sunday                                  2300 to 0130 hours

 

Supply of Alcohol

 

Monday to Wednesday       1100 to 0030 hours

Thursday to Saturday          1100 to 0230 hours

Sunday                                  1100 to 0130 hours

 

For consumption ON and OFF the premises.

 

Hours open to the Public

 

Monday to Wednesday       1100 to 0100 hours

Thursday to Saturday          1100 to 0300 hours

Sunday                                  1100 to 0200 hours

 

The Committee added the following conditions as requested by the Metropolitan Police, Enforcement Response, Licensing Authority and Public Health:

 

-           A digital CCTV system to be installed in the premises.

 

-           Cameras must be sited to observe the entrance doors from the inside and outside to protect SIA searching entrants or refusing entry / ejecting clients.

 

-           Cameras on the entrances must capture full frame shots of the heads and shoulders of all people entering the premises i.e. capable of identification.

 

-           Cameras must be sited to cover all areas to which the public have access including any outside smoking areas.

 

-           Provide a linked record of the date, time of any image.

 

-           Provide good quality images - colour during opening times.

 

-           Have a monitor to review images and recorded quality.

 

-           Be regularly maintained to ensure continuous quality of image capture and retention.

 

-           Members of staff trained in operating CCTV at venue during times open to the public.

 

-           Digital images must be kept for 31 days. The equipment must have a suitable export method, e.g. CD/DVD writer so that Police can make an evidential copy of the data they require. Copies must be available within a reasonable time to Police on request.

 

-           All doors and windows will remain closed during the licensed regulated entertainment activities or in any event after 11pm.  The entrance door will be fitted with a self-closing device and staff required to ensure that it is propped open.  A member of staff shall be made responsible to ensure the door is opened for as brief a period as possible.  Where necessary, adequate and suitable mechanical ventilation should be provided to public areas.

 

-           Entry to the premises will be restricted to the main front door whilst the premises is being use for regulated entertainment licensed activity.

 

-           Entrance/exit from the premises whilst regulated entertainment licensable activities are ongoing shall be via a lobbied door to minimise noise breakout.

 

-           The regulated entertainment licensable activity shall conclude one hour before the premises is due to close to prevent excessive noise breakout as the premises empties.

 

-           The rear side doors will be fitted with an alarm that instructs staff when the door has been opened.

 

-           All speakers are mounted on anti-vibration mountings to prevent vibration transmission of sound energy to adjoining properties.

 

-           The licensee shall ensure that no music is played in the licensed premises is audible at or within the site boundary of any residential property.

 

-           All regulated entertainment amplified activity will utilise the in-house amplification system, the maximum output of which is controlled by the duty manager.

 

-           The level of amplified regulated entertainment shall be controlled by means of a limiting device set at a level which upon request may be agreed with the licensing authority.  It will be the responsibility of the premises licence holder to request assistance, in writing and to ensure that the limiter is working effectively.

 

-           No music will be played in, or for the benefit of patrons in external areas of the premises.

 

-           No form of loudspeaker or sound amplification equipment is to be sited on or near the exterior premises or in or near any foyer, doorway, window or opening to the premises.

 

-           Signs shall be displayed in the external areas / on the frontage requesting patrons to recognise the residential nature of the area and conduct their behaviour accordingly.  The management must reserve the right to ask patrons to move inside the premises or leave if it is felt they could be disturbing neighbours.

 

-           The rear external area should be kept clear and not used as a smoking area due to its close proximity to residential properties.

 

-           Deliveries and collections associated with the premises will be arranged during normal working day hours so as to minimise the disturbance caused to the neighbours.

 

-           Empty bottles and non-degradable refuse will remain in the premises at the end of trading hours and taken out to the refuse point at the start of the working day rather than at the end of trading when neighbours might be unduly disturbed.

 

-           All plant and machinery is correctly maintained and regularly serviced to ensure that it is operating efficiently and with minimal disturbance to neighbours arising from noise.

 

-           A complaints book will be held on the premises to record details of any complaints received from neighbours.  The information is to include, where disclosed, the complainant’s name, location, date, time and subsequent remedial action undertaken.  This record must be made available at all times for inspection by council officers.

 

-           Regular liaison meetings will be held where specifically requested by residents to enable neighbours to raise concerns about any aspect of the licensed activities.

 

-           There will be no queuing outside the premises.

 

-           Where people queue to enter the premises, a licensed door supervisor shall supervise and ensure the potential patrons behave in an acceptable manner.

 

-           Signs should be displayed requesting patrons to respect the neighbours and behave in a courteous manner.

 

-           A licensed door supervisor will be positioned on the exit door to ensure, as far as reasonably practical, that patrons do not leave drinks.

 

-           A licensed door supervisor will patrol the curtilage of the premises to prevent patrons urinating in public areas in the vicinity of the premises.

 

-           Adequate litter receptacles for use by patrons will be provided.  The positioning of the receptacles will be agreed with the licensing officer.

 

-           All ventilation and extraction systems shall be correctly maintained and regularly serviced to ensure that it is operating efficiently and with minimal disturbance to neighbours arising from odour.

 

-           Illuminated external signage shall be switched off when the premises is closed.

 

-           Security lights will be positioned to minimise light intrusion to nearby residential premises.

 

-           All staff shall be trained in recognising signs of drunkenness, how to refuse service and the premises duty of care.  Documented records of training completed shall be kept for each member of staff.  Training shall be regularly refreshed and at no greater than 6 monthly intervals.  Training records shall be made available for inspection upon request by a police officer or an authorised officer of the Council.

 

-           Challenge 25 policy to be enforced.

 

-           Challenge 25 posters to be displayed in areas of high visibility to customers throughout the premises.

 

-           Proof of age – only a passport, photo-card driving licence, Armed Forces ID cards or a proof of age card bearing the official “PASS” accreditation hologram should be accepted as proof of age.

 

-           A clear and detailed record of any refusals is to be logged and be made available upon request.

 

-           No children under the age of 18 to be present after midnight (Monday-Sunday).

 

-           There shall be 2 SIA registered officers at the premises Sunday to Wednesday from 2100 until the venue closed and patrons are dispersed.  From Thursday to Saturday there shall be 2 SIA registered officers at the premises controlling the entrance to monitor patrons entering and leaving the premises, and 1 inside monitoring patrons.

 

-           Smokers shall be directed to the area at the rear of the premises, and this area shall be monitored to ensure that there are no more than 5 people in the area at any one time.

 

The committee resolved to grant the application subject to conditions as set out above.  In reaching its decision the committee took account of the representations that it received from all the parties.  The committee took note of the applicant’s concerns regarding whether the representations it heard were merely speculative in nature and was concerned to ensure that its decision was informed solely by relevant considerations, namely those related to crime and disorder, the prevention of public nuisance public safety and the protection of children from harm.

 

In the circumstances, the committee was satisfied that it was appropriate, proportionate and in the public interest to grant the licence with the aforementioned conditions.

 

The Committee accepted that the Applicants had a wealth of experience and did not doubt that they had a strong commitment to running a successful local business.  However the committee did not consider that the representations made by the Responsible authorities in particular the police could be discounted.  The committee was satisfied that there had been incidents of crime and disorder associated with the premises.  In addition to the evidence provided by the Police, the local knowledge provided by the ward Councillor on behalf of local residents, and Public Health both of which raised serious concerns regarding alcohol misuse in the vicinity, and the high level of crime in the ward meant that these conditions were appropriate. The evidence which did not relate specifically to the premises set matters in context regarding the local area and the committee therefore did not feel it could be completely disregarded.

 

The Police representation referred to a number of recent incidents which had occurred at the premises, and the Committee noted that some of these had occurred since the Applicants had taken over the premises. 

 

The Committee did acknowledge the Applicant’s assertion that the premises was not going to be promoted as a destination venue, but felt that in light of the evidence put forward by the Interested Parties, longer hours and close proximity to other late night venues in the area would encourage late night drinkers to move to the premises once these venues had closed with the attendant risk of Crime and Disorder, as well as late night noise and disturbance in what is a residential area.  The Applicant felt that a conscious decision to bar drunks from the premises would be a sufficient means to address this but the evidence from the Police strongly suggested that an incident such as ejecting a patron from the premises can rapidly descend into disorder requiring police attention.  The Committee appreciated the diligence of the Applicant in relation to the reporting of incidents (as set out in the Police’s representation), however, they felt that these incidents served to support the evidence set out in the Interested Parties representations regarding crime and disorder in the local area.

 

The Committee did not accept that the Applicant’s flexible approach to the use of SIA door supervisors was an adequate means of preventing crime and disorder, and considered that it was not practical to rely on SIA door supervisors being able to attend the premises at short notice from other venues should any incidents occur at the premises.  A key point in having SIA was that they should serve as a first line to respond to incidents at premises.  For this reason, the Committee decided that it would be appropriate to include a condition about this on the licence.

 

The Committee noted that the Applicant wanted extended hours for the purpose of having flexibility to operate, and heard the representations regarding staggered closing but was not satisfied that this was an appropriate way to operate.  If the venue was characterised as having 24 hour opening, it would be likely to attract visitors on the off chance that it would be open and with the likely effect of individuals approaching and congregating at the premises at all hours whether open or closed thereby causing nuisance and annoyance to residents.

 

After considering all of the evidence, the Committee considered it to be appropriate not to grant the application in its entirety.

 

The Committee approached its deliberations with an open mind and only took its decision after having heard all the parties’ representations. The Committee considered that the decision was appropriate, proportionate and in the public interest.