Agenda and draft minutes

19A Craven Road, London, W2 3BP (“The Premises”)

18/00975/LIPN

1.

Sale by Retail of Alcohol – Off Sales

Monday to Saturday: 08:00 to 23:00

Sunday: 10:00 to 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 Mrs Praveena Velalakan for a new premises licence in respect of 19A Craven Road, London, W2 3BP.

The Licensing Officer provided an outline of the application to the Sub-Committee and confirmed that the Metropolitan Police and Environmental Health (EH) had withdrawn their representations following the agreement of conditions with the applicant.

Mr Hopkins, representing the Applicant, explained that the Premises was a tourist shop that sold tourist related goods. It was submitted that the Applicant was an experienced operator who had held a personal licence for some ten years at a shop situated opposite the Premises. She was also a local resident and was aware of the issues surrounding street drinking in the local area.

Mr Hopkins advised that following constructive discussions with the Police and EH agreement on appropriate conditions had been reached and subsequently they had withdrawn their representations. The Premises would operate to core hours, two members of staff would be present at the Premises at all times, CCTV would be installed and a condition not to sell super-strength beer, lagers, ciders or spirit mixtures of 5.5 ABV or above, except for premium beers, had been agreed. The representation from The South East Bayswater Residents Association (“SEBRA”) had requested that the private forecourt at the front of the Premises be conditioned to prevent customers drinking alcohol in this area. Mr Hopkins highlighted that there would be no tables and chairs on the forecourt and therefore adding a condition would not be appropriate or proportionate. This area was beyond the applicant’s control and reassurance was provided that no alcohol would be sold in open containers.

Following discussions with SEBRA Mr Hopkins advised that agreement had been reached that no miniature bottles of spirits of 20 cl or below would be sold at the Premises. The only matter in dispute related to the display area. SEBRA had requested that alcohol be restricted to a maximum of 15% of the Premises display area, whilst the applicant maintained that this be 20%.

Mr Brown from the Westminster Citizens Advice Bureau, representing SEBRAaddressed the Sub-Committee. He advised that concern still existed over several conditions. Firstly, the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 1.

Premier Inn, Basement to Eleventh Floor, 1 Neathouse Place, London, SW1V 4LU (“The Premises”)

18/00957/LIPN

1.

Late Night Refreshment

Monday to Thursday: 23:00 to 23:30

Friday to Saturday: 23:00 to 00:00

Seasonal Variations/Non-Standard Timings:

When hours for sale of alcohol are extended hereunder these hours are also extended.

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 Whitbread Group PLC for a new premises licence in respect of Premier Inn, Basement to Eleventh Floor, 1 Neathouse Place, London, SW1V 4LU.

The Licensing Officer provided an outline of the application to the Sub-Committee and confirmed that the Metropolitan Police and Environmental Health (EH) had withdrawn their representations following the agreement of conditions with the applicant.

Mr Shield, representing the applicant, advised the Sub-Committee that Premier Inn operated over two hundred hotels throughout the UK. Eighty of these were situated within London comprising of approximately eleven thousand rooms. Many of these were located in busy, difficult areas, often near train stations, which it was recognised experienced various issues. The Sub-Committee noted that there were already five Premier Inns located in Westminster, several within Cumulative Impact Areas, and a sixth one was due to be opened shortly. This highlighted the applicant’s experience in operating such premises and ensuring they operated successfully in often challenging locations. 

Mr Shield advised the Sub-Committee that the application before them was due to a single representation that had been received from a local resident. Within the representation, the resident had cited disturbance created by other licensed premises in the local area but had provided no evidence that the proposed operation of the Premises would do the same. Mr Shield highlighted that other options were available to the resident if they were experiencing disturbance from existing premises. Concerns had been raised over plant and machinery but reassurances were provided that it would be acoustically enclosed to ensure there was no noise disturbance. The Sub-Committee also noted that the two entrances to the Premises would be supervised twenty-four hours a day. It was noted that no issues had been reported regarding Premier Inn’s existing operations within Westminster and it was suggested that the addition of this Premises to the area, with its increased level of external supervision, would help improve the local area further.

The proposed licenced area was front facing and would operate as a restaurant with a small area permitting the sale of alcohol to those not taking a meal. The non-restaurant area consisted of a maximum of one hundred covers and did not permit vertical drinking. Concerning off sales of alcohol this was simply being sought  ...  view the full minutes text for item 2.

147 Ebury Street, London, SW1W 9QN (“The Premises”)

18/01050/LIPN

1.

Sale by Retail of Alcohol – On Sales

Monday to Wednesday: 09:00 to 21:30

Thursday to Friday: 09:00 to 22:30

Saturday: 09:00 to 20:30

Sunday: 09:00 to 16:30

Seasonal Variations/Non-Standard Timings:

Christmas Eve and New Year’s Eve 09:00 until 23:00 hours. Christmas Day and New Year’s Day – closed.

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 London Grace Ltd for a new premises licence in respect of 147 Ebury Street, London, SW1W 9QN.

The Licensing Officer provided an outline of the application to the Sub-Committee and confirmed that the Metropolitan Police and Environmental Health (EH) had withdrawn their representations following the agreement of conditions with the Applicant. The Sub-Committee was also informed that the Applicant had submitted supplementary information after the deadline and it was at the Sub-Committee’s discretion whether they wanted to view the documents in the interests of fairness and transparency and usually with the consent of the parties. 

Mr Day, representing the Applicant, advised the Sub-Committee that the Applicant had attempted to contact the sole resident who had submitted a representation regarding the application. A letter had been written to the resident providing further information on the type of operation intended for the Premises and what services it provided however, no response had been received. The Premises was described as an up-market nail bar with successful branches already operating throughout London. It was stated that the Applicant used environmentally friendly products with its unique selling point being the ability to provide customers with a glass of wine whilst undertaking treatments. The Premises would primarily cater to wedding parties where alcohol could only be supplied to a customer and a maximum of one guest.

Mr Day advised that there was an error in the report regarding the opening hours on Saturdays and these should have in fact stated 09:00 to 21:00 hours. The opening hours were often shorter than those applied for, however the proposed hours had been requested as they matched the opening hours for the other two salons currently operating in Westminster. The Sub-Committee noted that the opening hours for the sale of alcohol were earlier than core hours and Mr Day was happy to change this to 10:00 hours if the Sub-Committee  considered it appropriate.

One objection to the application had been received which appeared to relate to other licenced premises in the vicinity rather than the application before the Sub-Committee. Mr Day was of the opinion that the resident had potentially misconstrued the application and as such,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3.