Agenda item

As advised by the chair at the beginning of the meeting, items 6, 7 and 8 were heard together and the decisions for each item were made separately.

The licensing officer presented the reports.  Members had questions for the licensing officer.

The applicant and their legal representative addressed the sub-committee.  Members had questions for the applicant and their legal representative.

The local resident objectors were not present.

The meeting adjourned at 12.12pm for the members to consider their decision.

The meeting resumed at 12.26pm and the chair advised all parties of the sub-committee’s decision.

RESOLVED:

That the application made by Lendlease (Elephant and Castle) Retail Ltd for a premises licence to be granted under Section 17 of the Licensing Act 2003 in respect of the premises known as Unit R2, Block H6, Elephant Park, London SE1 is granted as follows:

Conditions

1.  That there is an accommodation limit of 70 inside the premises excluding staff.

2.  That there is a maximum of 5 patrons outside smoking at any one time.

Reasons

The reasons for the decision are as follows:

The licensing sub-committee heard from the representative for the applicant who advised that following the planning consent in 2013 the site where the premises was located is to the southeast of the central area of Elephant and Castle, where the New Kent Road runs to the north of the site and the National Rail railway line runs north/south to the west of the site.

Over the next 12 months the development would move into the operational phase, where community space and employment for residents would become available.  Whilst the lease to Unit R2 had yet to be finalised and signed, it was proposed that Dino Beauty would be the tenants at Unit R2 and already had a lease at the Artworks, London SE17.  The lease at the Artworks expires at the end of 2018 after which they would operate from Unit 2.  Dino Beauty were good licence holders (at the Artworks) with no known issues concerning their operation. Of the concerns raised by the other persons, these had been addressed by proposed conditions set out in the document submitted titled “dispersal policy” at section 10.

The licensing sub-committee noted that licensing as a responsible authority had withdrawn their representation having conciliated with the applicant by agreeing conditions.

The noted the written representations from the two other persons concerning the potential hours for the venue, the potential for noise and the proximity to residential properties. .

Unit R2 forms part of a development that was granted planning permission 14/AP/3439.  It is proposed that the unit will a beauty salon leased to Dino Beauty, who currently hold a late licence premises licence at the Artworks, SE17. The lease at the Artworks expires at the end of 2018.

No evidence was presented to suggest that Dino Beauty were anything but reliable operators. Concerns were raised by residents that they were given explicit assurances prior to the purchase of their homes that licensed premises would not be permitted in the retail units.  This is not a consideration for this sub-committee and alternatively, would need to be raised with the freeholders/developers. 

The applicant has produced a schedule of conditions (within the dispersal policy) which addresses most of the concerns of the local residents. The hours applied for are within the recommended hours as detailed in Southwark’s statement of licensing policy. This licensing sub-committee agrees that these conditions are placed on the provisional statement together with the conditions conciliated with licensing as a responsible authority.  With the added conditions as detailed in this notice of decision, this committee is satisfied the premises, once operating will promote the licensing objective whilst the local residents will have sufficient protection from any adverse interference from the premises.

In reaching this decision the sub-committee had regard to all the relevant considerations and the four licensing objectives and considered that this decision was appropriate and proportionate.

Appeal rights

The applicant may appeal against any decision:

a)  To impose conditions on the licence

b)  To exclude a licensable activity or refuse to specify a person as premises supervisor.

Any person who made relevant representations in relation to the application who desire to contend that:

a)  The  licence ought not to be been granted; or

b)  That on granting the licence, the licensing authority ought to have imposed different or additional conditions to the licence, or ought to have modified them in a different way

may appeal against the decision.

Any appeal must be made to the Magistrates’ Court for the area in which the premises are situated. Any appeal must be commenced by notice of appeal given by the appellant to the justices’ clerk for the Magistrates’ Court within the period of 21 days beginning with the day on which the appellant was notified by the licensing authority of the decision appealed against.