Agenda and draft minutes

28/50, Basement And Ground Floor, 15-17 and 19 Marylebone Lane, W1

16/03005/LIPV

1.

Layout alteration

Amendments to application advised at hearing:

None.

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

This was an application for a variation of the premises licence to change the layout in the basement and add a bar server, allow the sale of alcohol without food in the basement by up to 12 customers and permit off-sales to either seated customers taking a table meal in the external seating area or in sealed containers.  Mr Thomas, representing the Applicant, stated that 28/50 had opened in 2012 and was owned by Agnar Sverrisson, chef patron and owner of the Textile restaurant group.  He owned two other premises in Westminster.  There was an emphasis on French food at the premises and customers were offered a programme of wine tastings, workshops and themed dinners.

Mr Thomas explained that not only was there a similar area where alcohol was not ancillary to food for approximately ten people at the Maddox Street premises but that there was already a bar area on the ground floor at this Marylebone Lane premises where alcohol was not ancillary to food for up to 12 seated customers.  Alcohol would be supplied in the basement by waiter or waitress.

Mr Thomas responded to the local resident’s written representation.  He expressed the view that the representation was making the case that the application would add to cumulative impact.  Mr Thomas made the point that Policy PB1 was relevant for bar use outside the designated cumulative impact areas.   Applications would only be granted if it could be demonstrated that the proposal met the relevant criteria in Policies CD1, PS1, PN1 and CH1.  He added that there were no grounds to reach a conclusion that the licensing objectives would not be promoted if the application was granted. 

In response to questions from Members of the Sub-Committee, Mr Thomas stated that off-sales were required for any outside area which was not on the private forecourt and also have the capacity to buy a bottle of wine which was in keeping with the concept of the premises offering a wine workshop.  Mr Thomas and Mr Clark clarified that it was not the intention for the basement to be purely a vertical drinking area.  There would be seating at the bar and people would want to eat at the bar counter. A condition had also been proposed to the effect that alcohol could only be supplied  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3.

Dirty Martini, 28A Leicester Square, WC2

16/03431/LIPN

1.

Recorded Music, Live Music, Performance of dance, Anything of a similar description to that above, Private Entertainment consisting of dancing, music or other entertainment of a like kind for consideration and with a view to profit (all indoors)

Amendments to application advised at hearing:

None.

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

The Sub-Committee initially heard from Mr Spiegler, representing the Applicant.  He referred to 28A Leicester Square currently being operated as a nightclub, Club Storm and that the local resident in attendance, Ms Sanders indicated in her written representation that it was a problem premises causing public nuisance.  Mr Spiegler stated that the Police had also indicated to him that Club Storm was associated with crime and disorder.  He added that Mr Matthews of the Applicant Company had agreed a conditional deal to take over the premises in the event there was a successful outcome for the Applicant at the current hearing.

Mr Spiegler explained that his client was seeking a new licence with an increased capacity from 235 people excluding staff to 300 people excluding staff in order to ensure the commercial viability of the business.  However, it was recognised that the venue is located in the West End Cumulative Impact Area.  Mr Spiegler placed an emphasis on the potential new licence holders turning the premises around.  He believed that Ms Sanders’ representation was understandably based on the premises’ past issues rather than how it would be operated in the future.  He also put forward the grounds for the application being an exception to policy.  These included that the existing licence permitted the premises to operate as a substantial nightclub and it was now being proposed that this would be replaced with a less intrusive well managed cocktail bar.  There was also a significant reduction in hours.  These included a reduction in the terminal hour for the sale of alcohol from 03:00 to 01:00 Monday to Wednesday and also a reduction in the terminal hour for Regulated Entertainment and Late Night Refreshment seven days a week, notably a reduction in Regulated Entertainment from 06:00 to 03:45 on Thursdays to Saturdays.  Mr Spiegler drew Members’ attention to more stringent conditions being proposed for the current application, including a minimum of two SIA licensed door supervisors being on duty from 20:00 until closing time Thursday to Saturday, restrictions on smokers and a last entry of 01:30.  The proposed conditions had addressed any  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

Restaurant, Basement and Ground Floor, 1 Grosvenor Gardens, SW1

15/07477/LIPN

1.

Late Night Refreshment (Indoors)

Amendments to application advised at hearing:

None.

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

The Sub-Committee had previously adjourned the application in March 2016 in order that further information was obtained from the Applicant Company as to how its management service plan would meet the licensing objectives.  Goring Hotel and local residents had submitted representations objecting to the use of Grosvenor Gardens Mews East for deliveries and collections at the back of the proposed restaurant site. The hearing on 12 May 2016 was further adjourned due to an indication being given by Grosvenor Estates (the landlord) that it would not give permission for the Mews to be used to service the restaurant. This hearing amounted to a complete rehearing of the application based on a revised service plan.      

At the hearing it was confirmed on behalf of the Applicant that as set out in the revised Servicing Management Plan (which had been approved by the landlord, Grosvenor Estates), Grosvenor Gardens Mews East would not be used for deliveries and collections.  Servicing would instead take place from Beeston Place and/or the loading bay in Upper Grosvenor Gardens.  Incoming supplies would be transported manually along the Lower Grosvenor Place footway, from the delivery vehicle to the Restaurant staff entrance.  This would be via the new stairs (there was planning consent and listed building consent to replace the existing ladder with the stairs) from the street level to the basement of the premises.  It was confirmed in response to a question from the Sub-Committee that off-sales were not required.

Mr Watson, representing Environmental Health, referred to the nature of the application being for the sale of alcohol and late night refreshment for hours that were within the Council’s Core Hours policy.  Alcohol would be ancillary to a table meal except for a hatched area where some bar use was sought on the basement and ground floors.  Mr Watson stated that the emergency escape to Grosvenor Gardens Mews East needed to remain.  The Applicant had now set out in the revised Servicing Management Plan that there would be no deliveries and collections in Grosvenor Gardens Mews East.  Deliveries would now be to the main entrance to the Restaurant or staff entrance on Lower Grosvenor Place.  Mr Watson commented that the ladder to the basement was unsuitable for collections and deliveries.  He had raised this  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.