Agenda item

London Farmers Market, Orange Square Farmers Market, Pimlico Road, London, SW1W 8NB (“The Premises”)

20/02807/LIPN

1.

Sale by Retail of Alcohol – On and Off Sales

Saturday: 09:00 to 14:00

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 London Farmers Markets Ltd (“The Applicant”) for a new premises licence in respect of London Farmers Market, Orange Square Farmers Market, Pimlico Road, London, SW1W 8NB.

The Licensing officer introduced the application and confirmed that the Police had withdrawn their representation following the agreement of conditions with the Applicant.

Ms Cohen, the Applicant, advised the Sub-Committee that since the Farmers Market had opened in Pimlico in 2002 it had built up an excellent reputation and was supported by the local community. Numerous Temporary Event Notices (TENs) had been granted for the site previously permitting on and off sales of alcohol and these had been operated successfully without any record of any issues arising. The application before the Sub-Committee had been submitted to permit these sales of alcohol on a more regular basis and the granting of a premises licence would allow a greater degree of control to be imposed on site therefore protecting local residents. It was stated that the focus of the market would not be on alcohol with the only alcohol for sale consisting of artisan craft beers and wines. One of the main purposes of the application was to allow customers the opportunity to taste the alcohol for sale before purchasing it. Also, seating would be situated close to the stalls offering alcohol and customers would be encouraged to be seated whilst consuming alcohol. It was hoped to indicate on the plan defined areas or zones where alcohol could be sold. Zoning was already the practice at the other Farmers Market operated by the applicant in Westminster at Marylebone and this had proven successful. It was recognised that the application site was located in a residential area, however no concerns had been raised over the operation of the TENs, a Challenge 21 policy would be put in place and the licensing objectives promoted accordingly.

In response to questions from the Sub-Committee Ms Cohen acknowledged that allowing alcohol to be purchased from 09:00 was outside the Council’s Core Hours Policy, which stated a 10:00 start. However, the Applicant was seeking some flexibility in light of the limited trading hours being requested. The Applicant highlighted how alcohol would not form a large part of the market’s offer and confirmed that she was content to limit the number of stalls offering alcohol to a maximum of 4 if the Sub-Committee deemed this appropriate.

Mr Koduah, representing Environmental Health, confirmed that following discussions between the Applicant, the Police and Environmental Health (EH) a series of conditions had been agreed upon which addressed any public nuisance and public safety concerns raised. The Applicant had operated a number of TENs on the site previously which provided a similar offer to what was being sought through this application. It was submitted that these TENs had not generated any complaints and it was therefore considered that there was no risk of public nuisance if the licence was properly adhered to. EH had maintained their representation to help the Sub-Committee discuss any concerns raised in the residential objections received but following the agreement of conditions with the Applicant was content with the application.

The Sub-Committee duly considered the two representations received from residents and was interested to learn more about how they would be protected from any potential noise or nuisance originating from the Market. Mr Koduah explained that the Premises was not located within a Cumulative Impact Area (CIA) and that the planning permission granted for the market required a detailed management plan to be in place. A market manager was employed, and it was their responsibility to ensure this management plan was strictly adhered to in order to minimise any impact on residents. Mr Koduah suggested that residents be provided with a direct telephone number for the Manager so that they could raise any issues immediately if they arose. In terms of the hours applied for it was recognised that the start time for the selling of alcohol was one hour earlier than those set out in the Council’s Core Hours Policy, however as the Premises was not in a CIA and due to the limited opening hours a degree of flexibility could be implemented. In response to a question regarding the boundary of the Premises Mr Koduah confirmed that the Market was on public highway However, a condition had been agreed between the Applicant and the Police which prohibited customers from taking open containers of alcohol beyond the designated boundary. Finally, it was requested that if the Sub-Committee did consider it necessary to restrict the sale of alcohol on site this did not take the form of only allowing sales to take place from a designated zone. This had the potential to focus footfall to one particular area of the Market and as such it was suggested limiting the number of stalls selling alcohol was more appropriate in order to spread them out around the Market and help ensure an easy flow of customers and aid dispersal.

Ms Cohen confirmed that there was already a strict noise and nuisance management plan in place at the Market to ensure it operated in a manner which had no detrimental impact on local residents. In terms of a direct phone number to the Market Manager being made available Ms Cohen requested that this proposed condition not be enforced. It was stated that the Market Manager was not the same person each week and these employees had previously experienced harassment issues in the past. The Manager on duty was always highly visual. wore a high-visibility jacket on site and kept a noise log. In any case the details for the Designated Premises Supervisor would have to be on public display.

The Sub-Committee then held a detailed discussion over the location of the boundary to the Market in order to clarify the licensable area. Ms Cohen confirmed that the plan submitted did not highlight the proposed licensable area but a revised plan could be resubmitted based on the planning location plan which did designate the boundary of the Market. The Sub-Committee considered this acceptable.

The Sub-Committee carefully considered the application and noted that the Applicant had agreed a number of conditions with EH and the Police. These included ensuring no noise emanating from the Market gave rise to nuisance, any off sales of alcohol had to be in sealed containers and not consumed on the Premises and that no open containers of alcohol would be permitted to leave beyond the boundary of the Market. These conditions were considered appropriate for the area, addressed concerns raised and would help minimise any potential impact on local residents in terms of nuisance. The Sub-Committee also welcomed the Applicant’s agreement to restricting the number of stalls selling alcohol to a maximum of 4 therefore ensuring the supply of alcohol would be limited and it would not become a drink-led destination. The Sub-Committee recognised that the hours applied for were slightly outside of the Council’s Core Hours Policy, however due to the restricted supply of alcohol and the limited trading hours requested it was considered that the hours were appropriate and would not undermine the licensing objectives. The Committee noted that the operator was also regarded as being very experienced, had successfully operated TENs from the Market without any issues arising and had a good track record of operating a similar premises within Westminster. It was also recognised however that clear concerns, highlighted in the representations from residents, had emerged with regards to the proposed operation of the Premises. These concerns had been raised and it was expected that the operator would ensure that they did not become an issue. It was the Sub-Committee’s considered view that the conditions imposed on the licence would mitigate those concerns by residents.

Having taken into account all the evidence (with consideration being given to the representations received from the two local residents), the Sub-Committee was satisfied that the application was suitable for the local area and had addressed the concerns raised.  The Applicant had demonstrated that the application was appropriate, with the conditions proposed restrictive enough to ensure the promotion of the licensing objectives. The Sub-Committee therefore granted the application accordingly subject to the submission of a revised Premises plan. The plan would show the licensed market area hatched in red for the purposes of this application and would be the location plan submitted as part of the Planning Permission granted. The Sub-Committee considered that the conditions it had imposed on the licence would have the overall effect of promoting the licensing objectives, in particular the public nuisance licensing objective.

2.

Hours Premises are Open to the Public

Saturday: 09:00 to 14:00

Amendments to application advised at hearing:

None.

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

The Sub-Committee granted the application (see reasons for decision in Section 1).