Agenda and minutes

85 Piccadilly, W1

17/01572/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 heard from Mr Walsh, representing the Applicant.  He explained that the information relating to the planning application had been submitted as part of the report because many of the objections from residents were of a planning nature.  The report included sound attenuation information.  The view on behalf of the Applicant was that the granting of planning permission in 2013 was material to the current application.  The planning permission was for the use of the basement, ground and mezzanine floors as a restaurant and included the location of the main entrance.  The planning application permitted a capacity of 330 and a closing time of 01:00.  Mr Walsh advised that the Applicant was seeking a capacity of 250 and closure at 01:00.  The sale of alcohol was sought until 00:40.

Mr Walsh referred to the premises history, including that the building had been constructed in 1970.  Permission for restaurant use had been granted at ground and mezzanine floor level and nightclub use had been granted at basement level.  These premises had traded on this basis until 2011 when the nightclub licence was revoked.  However, the planning status for the basement remained as a nightclub until the 2013 planning application.  There was a car park level which separated residents from the restaurants and nightclub.

Mr Walsh advised the Sub-Committee that the Applicant Company, Hedonism Drinks Limited, is a fine wine merchant with a wine shop in Davies Street, Mayfair.  Following the granting of planning permission, £10m had been invested already in the premises with £5m being spent on acquisition and £5m on internal and external improvements, including triple glazing and sound attenuation measures. A further £9m to £10m was due to be spent on the operation.

Mr Walsh stated that assurances had been made to the Council that the premises would operate as a fine dining restaurant.  The Applicant had waited to make an application until they had a chef and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 1.

Crocker’s Folly, 24 Aberdeen Place, NW8

17/00767/LIPV

1.

Conditions being varied, added or removed

Amendments to application advised at hearing:

None.

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

Mr Lisle, representing the Applicant, explained that the purpose of the application was to extend the hours for the use of the external area to the right of the entrance door.  It was currently permitted until 21:00 hours and the Applicant was seeking a terminal hour of 23:00.  Mr Lisle informed Members that the Applicant had been running the premises for two years and it was not a profitable enterprise.  Crocker’s Folly did not open on Mondays.  The additional two hours would make a difference. 

Mr Lisle stated that his client accepted that the use of the external area to the left of the entrance door should not be extended beyond 19:00 hours because of the location of the local residents.  However,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 2.

Foxlow, 8-10 Lower James Street, W1

17/02305/LIPV

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 heard from Mr O’Maoileoin, representing the Applicant.  He informed the Sub-Committee that Foxlow at 8-10 Lower James Street was due to open shortly (8 May 2017).  He referred to the fact that an application for the premises had been granted Core Hours by the Sub-Committee in June 2016 and the conditions attached to the premises licence had included the Council’s model restaurant condition, MC66. 

Mr O’Maoileoin stated that Foxlow is part of the Hawksmoor group and he described it as a neighbourhood premises with a slightly cheaper menu than the Hawksmoor restaurants.  He drew Members’ attention to there being Foxlow restaurants in Balham, Chiswick and Clerkenwell.  There were also a number of Hawksmoor premises across London.  In relation to Westminster there are two Hawksmoor restaurants at Langley Street (Seven Dials) and Air Street.  Mr O’Maoileoin commented that the two Westminster restaurants at Langley Street and Air Street were permitted to open until the proposed terminal hour sought for 8-10 Lower James Street and had limited bar use. 

Mr O’Maoileoin emphasised that a number of the Hawksmoor/Foxlow premises are located in residential areas and that management have a good relationship with residents.  He stated that an example of a good relationship with residents is with Covent Garden Community Association in respect of the Seven Dials premises.  Mr O’Maoileoin advised the Sub-Committee that Liz Callingham who often expresses concerns about applications for new licensed premises in the West End Cumulative Impact Area had discussed this particular application at 8-10 Lower James Street with Foxlow representatives and her concerns in relation to this application had been addressed.  She had not maintained her representation.  Mr O’Maoileoin explained that Mrs Callingham’s concerns for the current application had been in relation to customer dispersal potentially causing a nuisance and that the establishment did not become a bar.  The application had been amended following discussions with her.  A condition had been offered that on Fridays and Saturdays the area immediately outside the restaurant would be monitored by staff so as to ensure that customers leave quietly. He believed that it was significant that Mrs Callingham was likely to be the nearest resident to 8-10 Lower James Street and she had withdrawn her representation.

Mr O’Maoileoin addressed  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3.

Leon, Astoria House, 62 Shaftesbury Avenue, W1

17/01088/LIPN

Application adjourned to a future meeting date.