Agenda and minutes

Simply Pleasure.Com, 31 Brewer Street, W1

18/00005/LISEXR

An application to renew the sex establishment licence to operate as a sex shop.

Amendments to application advised at hearing:

None.

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

Mr Timothy Martin Hemming (Applicant Company) began by stating that he had operated sex establishment premises since 1995. As well as these premises, he also operated two other sex establishment premises in Westminster, Prowler Soho in Brewer Street and Fifty & Dean in Old Compton Street. Mr Hemming stated that Simply Pleasure.Com was regularly visited by Council officers who would inspect the store in detail and had expressed no concerns. There had also been no objections from Ward Councillors. Mr Hemming referred to the objector who had raised concerns about the premises being in close proximity to a local nursery and a primary school and the impact this may have on children. Mr Hemming stated that he was a parent of four children and took the issue of protecting children from harmful images very seriously. He also strongly supported the Digital Economy Act 2017 which sought to restrict access to online pornography. Mr Hemming stated that the nearby primary school, whose playground faced the rear entrance of the premises, had neither objected to the application nor made any complaints.

Mr Hemming stated that he took policy seriously, the premise was well-run and staff ensured that no underage people entered the premises. He added that the concerns raised by the objector were more relevant in respect of unlicensed sex establishment premises in the area.

The Sub-Committee asked if any conditions on the licence had ever been breached and clarification was sought in respect of opening hours on Sundays. Members also asked if Mr Hemming had been able to speak to the objector about the concerns they had raised.

In reply, Mr Hemming confirmed that there had been no breach of conditions at the premises and that it opened on Sundays from 11:00 to 22:00. He had not been able to speak to the objector but acknowledged the objector’s opinions.

Barry Panto (Legal Adviser) sought confirmation that there had been no complaints about the premises from the Soho Family Centre Nursery and the Soho Parish Church of England Primary School. Mr Hemming confirmed that there had been no complaints from either of these establishments.

The Sub-Committee granted the renewal of the sex establishment licence with the existing conditions on the licence. In determining the application, the Sub-Committee took into account the representation from the local resident about concerns the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 1.

26 Circus Road, NW8

18/01634/LIPN

1.

Sale by retail of alcohol: Off sales

Monday to Sunday:                                     07:00 to 20:30

Amendments to application advised at hearing:

During the course of the hearing, the Applicant Company’s Representative advised of the following amendments

Monday to Sunday:                                     08:00 to 20:30

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

Shannon Pring (Presenting Officer) confirmed that the Police had withdrawn their representation following agreement of conditions with the Applicant.

Mr Robert Jordan (Applicant’s Representative) began by confirming agreement of conditions with the Police who had subsequently withdrawn their representation. He stated that there were some conditions proposed by Environmental Health that the Applicant was not in agreement with, however he was not sure that the conditions showing as agreed in the report matched those with the email he had received from the Police.

At this point, to provide clarity, the Sub-Committee invited Mr Jordan to go through the conditions in the report requested by Environmental Health and the Police and confirm on behalf of the Applicant whether they were in agreement with them or not. Mr Jordan then confirmed on behalf of the Applicant agreement with conditions 10, 11, 13, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 20 and 21 in the report. In respect of condition 10, he suggested that “in line with data protection law” be added at the end of this condition, as agreed with the Police. Mr Jordan advised that conditions 12, 14, 19 and 22 in the report were not agreed by the Applicant.

The Chairman then invited Mr Jordan to explain why the Applicant did not agree to some of the conditions requested by Environmental Heath in the report. Mr Jordan asserted that in respect of condition 12, which proposed that alcohol be secured in a locked store room or behind locked grilles, screens or cabinet doors outside the permitted hours for the sale of alcohol, the Police had withdrawn their request for this condition on agreement that the Applicant agree to condition 17, as requested by Environmental Health, that there be prominent signage displaying the permitted hours of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 2.