Agenda item

The licensing officer presented their report. Members had no questions for the licensing officer.

The applicant addressed the sub-committee. Members had questions for the applicant.

The environmental health officer addressed the sub-committee. Members had no questions for the environmental health officer.

The environmental protection officer addressed the sub-committee. Members had no questions for the environmental protection officer.

The ward councillor addressed the sub-committee. Members had no questions for the ward councillor.

The representative for the Rosler Residents’ Association, objecting to the application, addressed the sub-committee.  Members had questions for the representative.

All parties were given up to five minutes for summing up.

The meeting adjourned at 11.53am for the sub-committee to consider its decision.

The meeting reconvened at 12.18pm and the chair advised both parties of the decision.

RESOLVED:

That the application made by Mr Bertie Watkins for a premises licence to be granted under Section 17 of the Licensing Act 2003 in respect of the premises known as One Night Records, is granted as follows:

Conditions

The operation of the premises under the licence shall be subject to relevant mandatory conditions, conditions derived from the operation schedule highlighted in Section M of the application form, the conditions agreed with the Metropolitan Police Service and this council’s environmental protection team, licensing authority and health and safety team during the conciliation process.

Reasons

The reasons for the decision are as follows:

The licensing sub-committee heard from the applicant (the designated premises supervisor), who had stated that the application was made in respect of the business premises One Night Records. The premises are described as a series of tunnels under the railway linking Waterloo to London Bridge. The applicant advised the sub-committee that the premises would be used for immersive theatre performances, stylised performances with no script, however future performances may have actors performing characters with scripts and that the sale of alcohol was ancillary to the performances. The applicant confirmed that the capacity of the premises would be up to 500 people including staff.

The environmental health team addressed the sub-committee. They raised concerns in relation to trip hazards within the premises and COVID-19. The sub-committee took the view that these were matters which are ordinarily dealt with under separate legislative regimes and therefore should not form part of the licence conditions.

Concerns were raised by the environmental protection team who took issue with amongst other things, the ingress/egress of persons and likely noise it would cause. The environmental protection team suggested that further conciliation in relation to noise was likely to be achieved through the planning application which is in the process of being heard.  During the course of the meeting, The applicant agreed to abide by a noise management plan and other conditions put forward by the environmental protection team which in turn, led to the environmental protection team withdrawing their concerns.

The applicant went on to say he had conciliated with the Metropolitan Police Service and the licensing authority and as a result of the conciliation the Metropolitan Police Service and the licensing authority withdrew their concerns.

Councillor Adele Morris who is a ward councillor, made representations on behalf of the residents she represents.  Councillor Morris withdrew her concerns regarding the cumulative impact area on the basis that the premises was a theatre as opposed to a bar, that the hours of opening were not particularly late for the area and that the capacity of the premises was relatively light.

Councillor Morris was concerned that the noise issue had not been properly mitigated and therefore did not withdraw her concern pertaining to that matter.  Councillor Morris stated that the residence of the Rosler building were on the side of the arch where patron would not exit. Councillor Morris had formed the view that the noise management plan would likely mitigate noise issues raised, but left her representations on this point open on the basis that the residents still had an unresolved concern.

A representative from the Rosler Residents Association raised concerns regarding noise.  The association had not seen the noise management plan and therefore did not feel they were in a position to withdraw there representations. They raised concerns as to how noise would be quantified and measured.  They wanted a limit on the decibels which would be allowed noise to leave One Night Records and were concerned that not all of the internal structures had adequate sound proofing which would lead to noise nuisance. The sub committee were satisfied noise levels had been adequately addressed as the environmental protection team withdrew their representations.

As One Night Records is a theatre, the sub committee stated that the cumulative impact area provisions do not apply to that type of establishment. 

The sub committee noted that as alcohol sales were ancillary to the other functions of One Night Records. The sub committee went on to  recommend that One Night Records adhere to  the Environmental Protection (Plastic Straws, Cotton Buds and Stirrers) (England) Regulations 2020  as the London Borough of Southwark has declared a Climate Emergency and would therefore expect that businesses refrain from using single use plastics.  Mr Watkins agreed that he would follow the recommendation.

On the basis of all the above, all the hours requested in the application were granted.

In reaching its 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.