Hi, good evening and welcome to the license of committee. My name is Consular and I'm in chair in the license of committee meeting. This meeting is held by a person who had basically been joining online today. This meeting will be welcome alive via this council webcam. I will ask everyone to introduce themselves shortly. But before I do that, I'd like to briefly confirm that for the address this meeting. Okay, sorry. I suggest a must address that meeting through my self chair. The committee, when the officer, the president may simply raise their hand or in the introduction by a speech, I will come to you in the order. Before I request, I will now ask the committee member to introduce their self. [BLANKAUDIO] Thank you, chair, good evening, everyone. This is council like both are saying, are you present? Dance party would and member of the license subcommittee, thank you. Thank you, chair. Councillor Amy Lee, St Catherine's and Mopo. [BLANKAUDIO] Please can the officer support this meeting into its their self. Simea's been democratic services. Kathy driver licensing, I'll be presenting this application, chair. Johnathan Malmick, legal's voice is the committee. Yeah, agent apology or absence. No apologies, chair. The declaration for member into this interspaced seven eight. Do member have any declaration for interest? Thank you, chair. I think you're too clear, I think, you're no interest. Nothing to declare. Okay, rule of vote. Yes, I don't have none. So rule of vote, these are phase number eight and 18. Can member please note that rule of procedure applicant? Yes, ma'am. Thank you, chair. We move on to item 3.1, which is the application for a new premises license for code floors 3 and 4, 34 Westbury Circus London, the E-14-8RR. And they can found on pages 19 to 170. Chair members, for this application, we have Mr. Frank Fender, who's the licensing representative, sorry, who's present here today. We also have Mr. Lickenmowerta, the applicant, and Andrew Demster, also present. Persons who have made representations are PC Mark Perry, who's joined us virtually today, and we have Corinne Holland representing nice and single authority. And Mr. Kevin Bell, the lead petitioner, also present. After the application has been presented, the applicant will be invited to speak and will be given a total of five minutes to make the representation. The objectives will also be given five minutes each to make their representation. I will let each speaker know when you have one minute remaining. Please note that the subcommittee have read the agenda back in advance. Thank you. Can I ask Katie Wright, Liza's officer, to introduce their report? Please. Thank you, Chair. As you say, the application is for code that floors 3 to 4, 34 Westbury Circus. The application states that the premises intends to be a restaurant on the full floor, and a lounge bar restaurant on the third floor. The hours applied for our Monday to Sunday from 12 until 2am, the following mornings. And the last interval activities for those timings is alcohol for on-sales, only late night refreshment, plays, films, live music, recorded music, and dance. The opening hours basically allows a 30-minute drink up time from, so the hours are from 12 until 2.30 in the morning. The application can be found at page 33 of the documents. There is a layout plan that's been provided of the third and full floor at page 61, and the map of the area at 65. There's been various photos submitted of the venue for members' information, and refer to those areas at pages 67 of the report in the supplementary agenda at pages 3 to 9, and also amongst the residents' representations in their appendix 3 at page 129. With detailed premises that are licensed in the vicinity, obviously that doesn't necessarily, it's more near the location of the actual premises involved, it's not in the entire list. The noise management plan is at page 76 amongst the eight states that there's no external areas at third and full floor level. Again, in terms of the premises and that management plan, it also states the full floor be used for dining only with third floor as a bar space with background music and occasional live creative contemporary performances. Smokers are to go to the ground floor level by the entrance of the building up to 10.30, and thereafter the customers are then to use the basement car park area and a private lift for access and egress. Environmental health representation is at page 90, however, they have since withdrawn their objection, and they've agreed conditions with the applicant, and those being conditions one to seven, that includes the noise limiter condition that was under dispute, and also the condition relating to smokers limited to 15 in number. The licensed in authority representations is at page 110, they're also a supplementary agenda at pages seven to nine. The residence petition from Canary Riverside is at pages 112 to 139, and there are various additional evidence that they've supplied, but that's all amongst those pages. The additional representation is from a resident, Mr Newton and Ms Sullivan at page 141. The plea subjection is at page 142, they've agreed conditions, and at that point they're still a representation there, but they have agreed some conditions with the police, and those are at page 144, numbered 1 to 15. There are supplementary evidence and documents that have also been supplied since the application, and those are the policies of the premises including a dispersal policy at page 21 of the supplementary agenda, emergency exit policy at 23, smoking and vaping policy at 25, and the planning permission at page 32. Other than that, the guidance is obviously there for you to refer to, concluding that report. Chair, that's my presentation for you, if you have any. Thank you. Do you member have any question of the Legends officer? Thank you, Chair. Hi, Katie. Can I see the building itself, the whole building, the premises that come from the south side, the view of the building? Yeah, there are quite a number of photos that the lawsuits in authorities made of representation as provided photos of the external, the premises, and the areas outside, including where the entrance is, and also the residents have also further supplied photos, detailing those areas, including the basement area where the car park is, which goes into Westbury Circus. Can you confirm how tall the building, how many stores are there? I'm the height of the building, how many stores are there that come from there? I honestly don't know. Of course, Chair, I think it goes through the chair. I think most of the questions you can probably deal with them through the applicant if you've got specific queries about the building. Please ask the applicant to present the application, so, Mr Fender, you have five minutes, and I'll let you know when you have one minute remaining. Thank you. Yes, good evening, Chair. I would, before I start the presentation, like to request just an additional few minutes to those five minutes, if that's at all possible. I do understand that any extension that you grant me will also be afforded to the other parties, the interested parties present today and the objectives. But for an application of this nature, I just think five minutes is rather very, it's very tight, and I don't want to rush it, but just an extra sort of two or three minutes after five, then that's what I'm asking for, if that's possible, please. Excuse me, Councillor, we would tell five minutes, I've done mine, exactly five minutes, if I've done five minutes, it's what we would tell this. I'll also just stop, because otherwise, it starts going off track rather rapidly. If the committee grants the application, then that's something that has to be extended to everybody else as well. All the parties are meant to be given an equal amount of time in which to make their representation. But we were told to prepare five minutes, so I did. So I could have prepared ten minutes myself, actually. The chair hasn't, nothing's actually been decided yet, so... It's quite fine. And so, firstly, to matter for you, Chair, one of the reasons why we give time limits is because it helps to focus on what's really an issue. You and your colleagues will have read the papers. A lot of the time, there's always going to be the questions, are things which explore in greater detail, I would suggest, at this particular stage, and it's a matter for you and your colleagues, you see how you get on and then take of you. The reality is that the vast majority of what is in issue is really about the hours and certain of the conditions. That's really where the focus is in particularly in relation to the licensing objective of public nuisance, but it's a matter for you, if you wish to grant it, and if you do, you need to grant the like corresponding. If you're on, then you give an extension to the other parties as well. The chair would like to stick to the five minutes. You will have that opportunity through questioning and through the concluding remarks to further elaborate. Thank you.

• Okay, Chair, as you've heard, this is an application for a new premises license as detailed by your officer. I would like to remind you that these premises are not located within any cumulative impact zone. Therefore, the default position is that the application should be granted unless there are good and specific reasons for refusing to do so. You've heard that the premises to be licensed comprises of two floors. The third floor and the fourth floor, the intention is to operate the fourth floor as a restaurant only. There will be no music entertainment on the fourth floor, just background music to provide an ambience and an atmosphere. The third floor will operate as a lounge bar and restaurant. Music entertainment is requested to be allowed on the third floor, the third floor only. The premises will be furnished according to the images sent to you and now included in the supplementary agenda of pages 11 to 27. It is hoped that these images give you a flavour of the type of establishment which is proposed through this application. There is no dance floor, there will be no flashing lights, nothing flashing in time with the beat of the music. The entertainment provided will be cabaret-style entertainment, it will be stylish and professional and most definitely not a disco. The main entrance is the riverside entrance which is reached from the Thames pathway which can be seen within your photographs. It was recognised that this entrance and exit had the potential to create noise later in the night so it was proposed within the application from the outset that no customer should be able to access or egress the premises by those doors after 22-30 hours. After 22-30 hours, access and egress from the premises would be via the basement car park only well away from any residential accommodation which in turn mitigates the potential for noise nuisance. Customers wishing to smoke up until 22-30 hours would be directed from those doors to the riverside. Customers wishing to smoke after 22-30 hours would have to leave the premises via the underground car park, they'd actually have to leave the car park as well where it's forbidden to smoke. Security staff from the premises will be located within the car park to ensure no one smokes down there. It is true to say that smokers would be required to walk quite away in order to smoke, that's their choice. But these arrangements are specifically to ensure that residents are not disturbed. The representation from the police is agreed, several conditions, all conditions have been agreed. I spoke with the police license in officer yesterday and it was explained that he was still waiting to see a policy in respect of transport management detailing how customers would leave the area via the underground car park. You will note from the papers that policies in respect of security, access, egress, searching and dispersal have already been incorporated into conditions. The applicant therefore would be prepared to accept a further condition requiring a transport management plan to be produced and agreed with police prior to the premises being open and prior to providing any licenceable activity. The environmental health officer proposed a series of conditions, all of those have now been accepted and as a result the environmental health rep has been withdrawn. The licence and authority representation is very similar to the representation from the environmental health in respect of concerns of nuisance and residents and we believe those matters have now been addressed. The residents representation is in the form of a petition. What is not known of course is how many of those 79 signatories were fully aware of what they were signing. It is my experience that petitions that people, it is my experience of petitions that people are happy to sign them in order to appease the people that have created them. Having said that the representation does express concerns about the potential for nuisance and antisocial behaviour and their right to make a representation is respected by the applicants. However there are also aspects of the representation which have no relevant to a licence in application and those are matters in particular in respect of planning permissions. We do believe that the measures agreed with the police and the environmental health officers address many of the concerns expressed in the petition in particular not using the doors from riverside terrace for access or egress after 22-30 hours. You have one minute remaining. In particular incidentally in further dialogue with Mr Beld one of the objectives he appears to have misinterpreted the noise management plan. He interprets a noise management plan to say there would be no new admissions or readmittance after 22-30. The noise management plan should say no admissions or readmissions via those main front doors after 22-30 and the noise management plan will have to be amended to avoid that ambiguity. I'll finish by addressing the information provided in the additional information sent yesterday. In respect of the residents' additional information there is criticism of me for not answering 18 questions. Chair, I'm not obliged to answer any of those questions. In respect of the licence and authorities' additional information they may play on the references to the current planning permissions that are in place of these premises. I can point out that this application is for the premises as per the layout plans that were submitted with the applications not based on the planning permissions. Should those works be carried out that have been granted planning permission then the applicants would need to vary their licence and make a do a different application. Chair, that's within the five minutes I believe. I'll give away for questions. Thank you. Thank you. Can now ask the objector to present their objection. Please. Please have Mr. P.C. Mark Perry to present first. P.C. Perry you have five minutes. Thank you. Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Committee. I'll be as brief as I can. It's right to say that we have agreed conditions with the applicant. Apologies for the technical malfunction. I need to put my laptop in for a pair. The applicant is right. We have agreed the vast majority of conditions and we are happy to do so. However, the only remaining point of contention is a serious one and it's how people will leave the premises at two o'clock in the morning. I also committee to turn to the supplemental agenda and look at pages seven and eight where you'll see some photographs of the underground car park. Now, this car park is situated and the access to it is underneath Westbury Circus at the roundabout which is a main arterial road into Canary Wharf and used by emergency services. The problem we have is that the people we believe that the most of the people who are going to be attending these premises will be leaving at that hour of the morning by taxi, Uber and otherwise. And this car park is not for the sole exclusive use of the premises. It is shared with Virgin active gym members and also shared with the residents as well. Now, if you imagine a large number of taxis turning up at roughly the same time to pick up their guests, then trying to get into their car park with congested spaces and waiting for customers, other taxis coming in, other cars trying to leave. It's easy to imagine it would soon be blocked. There would be beeping of horns, there would be arguments, there would be disagreements. But also, we have concern that taxis would simply pull up outside and block the circus, block the underground roundabout, which would of course cause great concern for us because it increases the risk of road traffic collisions, increases the risk of injury and it increases the risk of crime or disorder taking places in a potential violence taking place. This is the issue that has not been resolved to our satisfaction. This is a unique premises in that the access for leaving the premises is an underground car park and is bought via an underground roundabout and we have not seen a plan in place that would sufficiently mitigate the risks I've identified. Having worked in a nighttime economy for as a police officer for many years, I know all too well that when people are leaving a premises and have had alcohol to drink and there are numerous taxis turning up, it's very easy for that situation to escalate and evolve into a situation where there are collisions, where there are the risk of violence, where there is the risk of personal injury and until such a plan is put in place, it's difficult to see how people can leave without those risks being too high. I appreciate the offer by the applicants representative with regards to the police having say over whether a plan is acceptable or not but that's not the responsibility of the police. It's removing the responsibility from the local authority from the licensing subcommittee. It should be the subcommittee that decides whether a plan is acceptable or not and this is something that we feel should be in place before a license is granted. There has been several months since the applicant put the application in and the date of this hearing and so far no acceptable plan has been submitted. I put it to you that if a plan was to be, if the time that's elapsed is sufficient for a plan to come forward to be put in place, the fact that it hasn't yet to me indicates that perhaps it's because there isn't a plan possible that manages the risk that I've identified. So until unless a plan comes forward that is acceptable that manages that risk, the very real risk and a very serious risk that we say that this license cannot be granted, all the other conditions have been granted, all the agreed, all the other policies have been agreed is however this egress policy which you know perhaps one of the most serious that we do have the greatest concern about. Thank you. Thank you. The licensing, well my representation is on page 110 of the main agenda and then there's two supplementary agendas. One is the first supplementary and then the second one in the second supplementary. There's photos in supplementary one and the planning permission document as well. The licensing authority opposes to the late hours requested due to the location of the premises which is surrounded by residential flats and a hotel. The lateness of the license application, there's a high probability that customers are likely to cause a public nuisance as they leave at 2.30 in the morning. Also, Aquarian, the third floor plan shows that they're on the plan, it shows that there's bifold indoors that have been put in by the windows where it says window gathering point and there's a dark line which I'm guessing is where the bifold indoors will go in which is why I put the planning permission in because they've been granted planning permission for those doors and it will create an internal terrorist area. As Cathy Driver mentioned in the noise management plan says that there are no external areas but it's counted as an internal terrorist but it would be open to the side of the building or the front of the building. With it open towards the Thames it could lead to noise escape throughout the evening and there's no reference to this in the noise management plan. The application covers all licence of all activities and therefore lends itself to being a nightclub bar style of operation on the third floor. Obviously as stated it's be a restaurant on the fourth floor and believed waitress service to the tables for drinks. Facilitating smokers is another matter which needs to be addressed with the main entrance closed at 10.30 pm. Smoking will be via the underground car pop and onto the West Ferry circus roundabout. In fact the noise management plan on page 83 of the agenda states that the premises cannot accommodate smokers after 10.30 but then there is a smoking policy that's been submitted subsequently that says smokers will be escorted turn from the premises to the smoking area. This will involve at least four security staff in various positions. As people go in and out to smoke this will be done continually throughout the evening so I'm not sure practically how this will work. Will patrons be held at certain locations by the lift doors or in the car park until the security comes back from a sporting and other group of smokers and as people going in and out of smoking as a continual thing I'm not quite sure how this will work and it could cause friction between the staff or the security staff and the patrons who don't want to wait and they could lead to smoking within the car park. If this application is granted a condition should be placed on the licence to ensure that the security manage the smoking area as per their smoking policy. It should be noted that planning permission and I appreciate planning is a separate matter but planning permission has been granted for an external roof terrace without door seating. I appreciate that this would be a variation that would need to be done but the hundred people have been granted permission up there between the hours of 8 a.m. and 9 p.m. and although this isn't part of the license application at the moment it could be used for non-licensable activities. If you have one minute remaining okay thank you such as the smokers might go up there which could cause an additional nuisance to residents. I've put in my supplementary about a business called Nine Lounge in Greenwich as the applicant agent gave me these details to show that they had experience running a premises. In fact this premises is Shisha Lounge so it doesn't hold an alcohol licence but it does hold a licence for late night refreshments and this company was prosecuted in 2022 for allowing smoking within the premises and breaching their CCTV conditions on their licence. The current director there is a current director that's on both of these companies at the moment so I wanted to bring that to your attention as obviously they are linked together. Customers leaving the premises who have consumed alcohol late at night can be rowdy on leaving not necessarily being disorderly but often shouting to their friends as they hang around waiting for Cabs to arrive. This could be two to three in the morning and the last 30 bills the hours granted are likely to lead to public nuisance. Thank you. Oh good evening Councillors I'm speaking on behalf of the residents who object to this licensing application. It will cause significant public nuisance increase the risk of crime and disorder and it presents a serious risk to public safety. The application does not meet the conditions of the planning consent granted to the property in December 23 and is non-compliant with Council policies. We request that you reject the application unconditionally. These premises are entirely within the gardens of our estate. Our 325 flats contain a thousand residents with families and people of all ages living there. Many flats are only 30 metres away from the premises. 200 look directly into it and we will suffer an unacceptable reduction in privacy. The licence will allow the venue to open until 2am seven days a week with the fourth floor restaurant and the third a nightclub with live and recorded music and a DJ. The applicant says he will restrict the noise level in the club but in their application it says that only from 1 30am onwards will music be decreased in volume. Before 1 30 we must assume that they want to play it at maximum volume. The other local restaurants in the area have either no music or played background music only. If they want to put in a noise limiter they should withdraw this application and change it to say no music will be played. A bigger problem though sir is that nothing is being done to prevent light damage from light pollution from the fourth floor which has floor to ceiling glass panels. I can look directly into it and people in 30 metres away will be able to tell who is having fish and chips and who is eating pizza. Unbelievably they propose to turn the light of the fourth floor on to full brightness from one in the morning. This will be like us having a starship enterprise landing in the middle of our garden at one o'clock in the morning. The planning consent breach is that details of lighting and a lighting strategy were to be submitted and approved by the local planning authority. This has not been done. There is no suitable space for smokers. The last two planning applications accepted this and said that a terrorist would be constructed within the third and fourth floor. Smokers can't use the space outside the front entrance. I doubt if you want groups of people walking down to the Canary Wharf promenade in groups of people to smoke and the applicant is refusing to implement the advice of their own consultants that after 10.30 the premises may not accommodate smokers. Instead they make the ridiculous claim that the narrow pavement next to the underground car park can be used as a smoking area. This cannot be serious. It is unsafe. It's not their property. The pavement will be crowded and there will be litter problems. There is no transport plan. There is no public transport in the area past midnight. Where will taxi pick up B? They say there is a taxi rank by the car park entrance. There is no taxi rank by the car park entrance. Cars and taxis cannot stop on the round about. It's double yellow lines and an arterial road leading from the island gardens through to the Limehouse link. The nearest taxi rank is at Cabot Place, a 15-minute walk away. I'm sure Mr Fender couldn't find it if he tried. The planning consensus of development cannot be occupied until a waste management plan has been submitted. None has been provided. Waste will be considerable as there could be more than 1,000 meals and snacks served every day. The premises will be the only local licence venue after 10.30. Late night drinking venues are associated with issues of disorder and the lack of public transport available in the area is likely to exacerbate this as the exit via the car park has no pedestrian crossings. Crowds of people who have perhaps had too much to drink will congregate in the unlit, dangerous pavements underneath West Circus. There will inevitably be trouble. There are no public conveniences in the area at that time. No discussions have taken place with estate management as to how the car park for which estate management, not the premises, have responsibility. To summarise, the application fails the licensing criteria in every respect. Our estate is completely unsuitable for the activities on operating hours requested by the applicants. They have no knowledge of the location and have shown no consideration for the welfare of our community. The applicant has never contacted us. I have tried twice. I have suggested that he limit opening hours to 10pm, like the gym and the cafe prayer and they refuse to do so. Thank you very much. Thank you Kevin. Now, remember we'll have the opportunity to ask questions. And I just want to clarify some basics just to start with. So there are a couple of times floating around. So can we just confirm what is closing time and what is drink up time? Because I was hearing 2/2/3/3. So if you could just clarify that for me and then if it's okay, just to clarify the actual capacity of this venue. So including the two floors. Yet the application is to allow licenceable activity until 0/200 hours each day. All licenceable activity will cease by 0/200 hours and the premises will be closed by 0/230 hours. That effectively gives customers the opportunity to finish their last drinks if they're still there. It allows them to leave staggered times and not en masse. And that there's also within the noise management plan, Mr Bell talks about raising the lights, etc. Raising lighting is an approved method to sort of tell the customers that the lights come into an end and it's time to consider departing. And that's the reason for that. And in respect to the capacities, you're looking at about 160 people on each floor as a capacity. Yes, that's making a total. But between 160 and 170, so between 320 and 340 people, if they're running to capacity. Question to the applicant. Have you considered a workout? How long would it take to disperse the 320 people once they close the door? After the finishing, how long would it take to exit all these people from the premises? I think there's an assumption that everyone will leave all together, but I think the reality is that people will egress over a period of time. It's been insinuated that this is some sort of vertical drink in nightclub activity, when in fact it's a restaurant and will provide an area for members. So people will leave at various different times and not going to all leave at the same time, which I think also plays into the management of people getting home at various times in the evening. Excuse me. That hasn't actually, sorry, Mr Bell, it's going to be questions from members, if members need to ask, they will come to you. But that's not how this works, I'm afraid, Mr Bell. The people now need to speak when the chair or one of the members asks, please. Otherwise, as I say, it becomes very difficult. But assume that people do leave at the same time, which is effectively the Councillor's question. Could you answer how long it might take to get all those people through? I wouldn't be able to answer it at this time, but it's something that we can come back to the committee with. It does look like the main issue here is this egress route and this smoking issue. I think it's clear that you do understand that. And I think what PC Perry had to say is quite important. I think this point about how it will be physically managed in terms of staffing is a really important point. So can you just elaborate on that about how that actually will be physically managed that people after half ten will be taken escorted? How many people, how that can actually be physically managed in that situation? We are currently in talks with the landlord to obtain the car box base and have a 24 hours and our staff from code will be operating from there as well and be able to divert customers from the exit and safely on. I think the applicant appreciates that it is quite intensive on security, but they're prepared to put those security measures in, which have been included in one of the policies which was sent to the police. For so people, customers would be escorted down a lift from the premises to the car park. They would be escorted from the lift to the entrance of the car park. At no time would they there will always be security in that area ensuring that nobody smokes in the car park because they're not allowed to, it's sign-bosted. And the smoking area which is deemed sort of near to the entrance on the footpath, near to the entrance to the car park, would also be supervised by their security staff. Any more questions? The council like one of the years. Thank you Chair. Have you taken into consideration the impact of presence of 320 people each time in the music and their movement, the impact on the resident around that, the impact on the well-being and safety and health and well-being on the resident, the impact on the health and well-being and safety of the resident? Sorry, Councillor, do you do you mean in respect of the potential for noise and the music noise? At the noise and all kinds of noise, there are presence intimidation, intimidation, but 320 people present, don't do things going to have an impact on people's mental health and their PVC and like they will feel their home. They are in a place of, in the middle of the middle of their estate, a nightclub causing nuisance, public nuisance and noise, all this impact on the resident? The premises itself is not in the middle of the residence estate, it's on the edge of the residence estate. The potential for noise is largely mitigated by the agreed condition with the environmental health officer in respect of a noise limiter. Can you refer to the pages, the mitigation condition? Can you refer to the pages? I think it must be in the information sent to you yesterday in this supplementary agenda, too. I'm guessing the reason being that the representation was only withdrawn yesterday. I will try and find it for you, Councillor interjecting. Your licensing officer is able to quickly grab it. The first supplemental agenda, page 12, but if I may, just in respect of that, since we are discussing that condition, my advice to members would be that it should be set at a level determined by the satisfaction of the Council's environmental health service, because we're the ones who get, we're the ones who are going to be enforcing, it shouldn't be set by an independent third party over whom there is effectively no control. I don't know if Mr Fender may wish to come back on that, but… The condition is not just about installing a noise limiter, it goes on to include aspects that the noise limiter must be installed by an independent noise acoustic. Yeah, and that basically, the way that that would work, there would be testing carried out to achieve the obvious level, or the maximum level that the noise could make, so that it couldn't be heard by the residents, and if it went above that level, then obviously the power to the music supply would be cut, hence reducing the noise. I'm also further instructed that in terms of people, 320 people gathering, etc. It is proposed to close the restaurant on the fourth floor about between one and two hours before two o'clock, so you're looking at a midnight or one o'clock finish on the fourth floor, so that will have an effect of separating people and staggering people's journey home, so that you don't get this whole mass of people, all gathering all at the same time, at finish time, fighting for taxes, etc. Is that proposed later, is that, I suppose, why can you be clear on whether it's one midnight or one o'clock, and secondly, is that going to be seven nights a week, or just particular nights, please? I mean, obviously the restaurant operation will trade, in my experience, and plan is that it will trade, and one day the first day will finish earlier, but the weekends, obviously, people do stay out later, but like I say, again, there's the notion of this being a vertical drinking nightclub is not what we're proposing, and we urge, obviously, the committee to look at the substance of what we're actually proposing as a proposition for this operation, because you're not going to have 340 people egressing on mass, and I think that's a misrepresentation of our application. Yes, really. And so just related to that, so you talked about occasional live events, because, you know, you may well be correct that on a Monday, you know, you're not going to have 320 people leaving at three or two thirty in the morning, but how often is occasional, essentially, is the question. Is that weekly? Is it monthly? Is it quarterly? What kind of, because these are going to be, I imagine, the events where you are going to see coming up to that capacity level. Yeah, I'll ask the applicants to explain the frequency of entertainment for you in a moment, but I'm asking for a license for seven days a week until two o'clock in the morning doesn't mean that the premises would operate till that time, but what it does do it affords flexibility in the nature of the operation for the premises. It gives the operators the flexibility so that you can be assured that whenever license of activity does take place, all the conditions attached to the license get complied with no matter what time of day. It's just whether the license of activity is being carried out at that time. In respect to the frequency of entertainment, do you want to elaborate on that? Frequency of entertainment would generally be on, I'll say, from Thursday to the Sunday days only Monday to Friday, I can take it. Everyone's working and obviously wants peace of mind, but we won't really see customers staying up to two in the morning during the week, but we do hope to obviously have their license there to be flexible anyway. Thank you. Mr. Bell, just a quick question for you. I'm going back to the sort of the car park issue and the egress issue. So can you just sort of describe for us because I think there's some dispute of the location of a taxi rank? Can you just explain to us from your perspective, just sort of... I think you have to understand, there's 600 spaces in the car park. This isn't a tiny car park. 400 of those car park spaces are ours. They're leased for 999 years to ours. The exit route that they're talking about goes through our cars. I roughly worked out. There's 12 million pounds worth of our cars through there, and this kind of idea that you can just sort of breeze in and out, and this is going to be suitable for everything they want to do. Move people in and out. The lift, by the way, carries about six people. You can have this constant flow of people. The place where they intend to smoke is on the right hand side, they save the car park, but that's Laurie's park there. There's unloading. It's in use 24 hours a day, double yellow lines. There are big pillars in the middle of the pavement. There's no room for a... they don't own there. We'll be up to you guys to pay for keeping it clean or the Canary Wharf management. It's not theirs. They're just going to send people down there 30 at a time to smoke. It's not theirs. It's a huge car park. It's used 24 hours a day by the residents. As I said, it's got its own security, by the way. We have our own security. We don't need their security. We've never needed it. Why they can have 74, 4, 5, 7 people walking around our car, but we've already got car park security. What's next thing happens? An incident happens in the car park. Who's responsible? I've asked that of Mr Fender. No reply. Never applies to anything we ask. So, does no management plan? There's no... It's just assumptions that they can do things. It's ridiculous. I promise you, go and have a look at it yourself. It's a really strange. It's unlit. It's unlit. It's unsafe. There's no pedestrian crossing. They don't... pedestrians are not encouraged to be down in that car park. I live there. I never use it. We always go out up the top. No one goes down there because traffic is continuous. Lories are unloading. There is no taxi rank. PC Perry has pointed out, and I agree with him. There's no... There's no... They have to walk. Near this taxi rank, I promise you, and I've done it. I've looked at it. I've surveyed the area. It's in Cabot Square 15 minutes away. You can't get Uber's car park on that car. It'd be incredible to think that you could use the underground, the unlit, unsafe, no pedestrian crossing car park as a place for taxi pick up. It doesn't work. There isn't a taxi rank there. What he says in his thing is a taxi rank. It isn't. It's a place where lorries unload for the restaurants. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. My question is to understand if we have, say, 320 people and also you don't know the exit plan, but if we work out a taxi can carry 6 or 5 people at a time, say for 300, 200 people, you need 60 taxi. And I understand from the applicants, from the objector presentation that there is no taxi rank around here. So that's a big question. How are you going to manage this 300 exit plan? 320 people who need 60 taxi. And where are they going to stand? Where are they going to wait? Where's the waiting place? And that's going to cause a serious havoc in the area. I understand the concern, Councillor, but please do not fall into the trap of thinking every single person leaves the premises at the same time, all wanting taxes at the same time. That is not how premises operate. You've heard that the restaurant on the fourth floor would be closed considerably earlier than the restaurant on the third floor and the bar on the third floor. Not everybody will filter from the fourth floor into the third floor, because if the third floor is at capacity, they have to leave. So arguably, they will be leaving a totally separate time to the people on the third floor. So that reduces the numbers. They will be security personnel, not only escorting the smokers, which incidentally, the agreed condition with the environmental health is a maximum of 15 smokers at any one time, not the 30 or 40 that's being alluded to by Mr Bell, a maximum of 15. That can be easily managed. How can they manage that? And the licensing authority, Ms Holland, comments, she doesn't think it can be managed. Well, it's up to the applicants to manage it. They've got to manage it. And sometimes, there are venues out there that operate certain policies that discourage people from smoking. They actually have no smoking policies. So customers would have the choice. Do I go for a cigarette or do I stay? It's their choice, but the facility would be offered. The other alternative, of course, is to allow customers to smoke by the front and the main entrance at the top of the riverside path, even after half past 10. But they don't want to do that because they know that could cause more nuisance to the residents. So there won't be this mass gathering of people, all trying to get 60 rubers. That just will not happen. What we have offered in my presentation is a condition. The police have criticized us for not having a transport management plan at the moment. It will cost between three, four, five thousand pounds to get a transport management plan in. The applicant is prepared to make that cost if this license is granted. But would you spend three, four, five thousand pounds on a transport management plan if you then weren't guaranteed on getting a license? It's a considerable expense, a considerable expense for anybody. But by conditioning it, as I proposed, a transport management plan to be in place in agreement with the police, a transport management company will be aware of the ways to get around the potential for build-up of traffic, for dangers, et cetera. And they will come up with the solutions for it. The applicant is confident that it can be managed without causing the kind of havoc that Mr Bell or the police suggest might happen. And I respect the police. They are dealing with that day in day out. I get that. But the management plan will be arranged so as to make sure those problems which could be perceived do not become a reality. Is there anything else that you want to add to that? Good quick. Just regards to the car parking spaces as well. The residents do have barriers separate away from the private usage of the car parks, i.e. the gym, code in the future, and the public car parks. So their cars are safe, secure, and away from any damages or any crowd of customers or public nuisance they are worried about. They also have separate lanes in and out lane. I think they share much of the exit, but they do have a separate lane to go in the car park when they use their fault. If they don't use their fault, they have to come through the public car parking. Thanks. Look, they keep changing their mind about the hours. I mean, they should really withdraw this and come up with a sensible plan. This bill, this premises are not suitable for this. I know you've going on about noise in the car park. You're completely ignoring a massive thing. It's like over there. That's from here to you, nearly, is where our flats are. Light and you talk about mental health. People need a light and night sleep. We have school children there. We have babies. We have doctors, nurses. We have a great range of people. How do they get to night sleep? When, one o'clock in the morning, they turn the lights full blast on in the fourth floor. No consideration for us. They just want to get their people out of the restaurant. What about us? Why don't they spend some of their money on curtains? Why don't they put glazing on the windows? None of that's in here. There's some kind of luxury fittings being fitted. I've seen nothing for us that haven't spoken to us. Mr Fender is not the applicant. He'll say anything to you to get this through. He's not going to be compliant with it. Actually, Mr Mo Adler isn't either. The people who have to comply are the directors of the company. Where are they? Where is Miss Hogan? A one-pound company formed about six months ago. I mean, this is ridiculous. It's ridiculous. It's unsafe. It's unsuitable. It will cause massive problems for us. I've put it to them that they should restrict the hours to 10.30. Light the mega restaurant, light the couch out, light the cafe brayera, light the gym and that would be fine. We would use it and we would help them make it viable. But two o'clock in the morning is just ridiculous. It's unsafe and a public nuisance. Thank you very much. That was my minute. Was it? It's all India. Thank you, Chair. I won't go over anything. I've already said the only thing I would raise is the noise limiter that's been offered up. We'll only control music. Music noise. It doesn't control people noise. So, obviously, with 300 people in there might cause an issue. Obviously, I've said the restaurant will close earlier, a couple of hours earlier, but they haven't reduced the hours in the applications. Obviously, they say they want flexibility. So, the fact that they might say that it will shut a couple of hours earlier, if it's on the licence, it's allowed to be open till two. Obviously, in the photos that I submitted in the supplementary agenda, there is only one of the lifts is their premises. The other lift belongs to the Virgin Gym. So, there is one lift, and I guess some stairs for people to come down from the fourth floor. So, thank you, Chair. Mark, Mark, Mark, Barry, yes. B.C. Mark, Barry. Thank you, Chair. I think this committee has nailed down to the nub of this, which is the egress plan. And, quite frankly, the rest of the premises can be fine. But when you've got the only egress of 10.30 at night is an underground car park leading out to a main arterial road and an underground roundabout, and there isn't a plan in place. No matter how much it costs, we say that it would simply be reckless to grant a licence until you are satisfied there is a plan in place to manage it. When people have been drinking alcohol, we know their decision-making is impaired. What we cannot have is a nightmare scenario of drunk people wandering out onto main arterial underground, poorly lit roundabout, and being involved in a road traffic collision. It simply doesn't bear thinking about. The fact that this plan hasn't been included is very worrying. It is simply not believable to say that a car park having 60 taxis at a time turning up at 2.30 to get people out is in any way a viable plan to get these customers away. It simply is not doable. If you imagine a car park with 50 to 60 taxis turning up at 2.30, how that would be managed in an underground car park is beyond belief. It will result in people parking in the underground roundabout. It will result in road traffic collisions, and this is simply not acceptable. The premises is fine. It's just in the wrong location. The egress through the underground car park makes it untenable in our position, and unless the applicant can come before this committee with an acceptable plan that you can look at, and you can judge and you can scrutinise and be satisfied with, then this application should be rejected. Thank you. Thank you, Mark. Thank you, Chair. The comments from the police in respect to the transport management plan, you've heard our response to that. I think it's absolutely perfectly balanced to impose a condition requiring a transport management plan to the satisfaction of the police prior to any licence and reactivity being carried out. The way the police would have, you believe it, is let's reject this application, and then when you get a traffic management plan, come back to the table and present it again. You've heard our response. This is a new application for a premises. It has previously had a licence, albeit for a different operator, and if it is granted, this premises will be brought back to life, offering a first-class venue with a first-class service to many members of the community and employing in excessive 100 people. It is not believed that the hours applied for our excessive. They are actually less than the hours permitted at the nearby Canary Riverside Plaza Hotel. They can actually sell alcohol and provide entertainment seven days a week, up until three o'clock in the morning. So it can be managed by these premises, which are a little bit further away from the residential properties than the hotel. The robust measures proposed within the application and the addition of the conditions agreed with the police and the Environmental Health Officer will ensure the licence and objectives are promoted and that they are not undermined, and we would ask you to grant accordingly. Thank you, Chair. Thank you, your contribution today. The subcommittee will decided in a private session after this meeting, and Simi Uldomodosa will be right to you with the five working days. Thank you, Chair. Thank you. Thank you. [end] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Thank you, Chair. For this application, we have Mr. Robert Sutherland, representing the applicants today. We have Adrian Stud, who is the crime and disorder expert, Owen Blackwood, who is a traffic and manager, the co-founder and operations director, who are present here at the meeting. Persons who have made representation today are Cathy Driver from Licensing Authority, Nicholas Kadsow from Environmental Health, Mr. Michael Dover, who is one of the local residents, and Samantha Clark, who is also representing a local business. After the application has been presented, the applicant will be invited to speak, and will be given a total of five minutes to make their representation. The objectives will also be given five minutes each to make their representation. I'll let each speaker know when you have one minute remaining. Please note that the subcommittee have read the agenda packet in advance. Thank you, Chair. Can I ask Colonel Holland Licensing Officer to introduce their report? Thank you, Chair. Listen application for a new premise license for, I've got Little London, a studio to Unit 3A 39, Autumn Street. The applicant has described the premises as a new cultural hub and entertainment venue will primarily be used for music events with the possibility of private hire. For other activities such as fitness classes, private functions, photoshoots, but it says there's likely to be one or two club night music events a week. The application is shown in Appendix 1 on page 184. The hours that have been applied for are sale of alcohol Monday to Sunday, 9am to 3am. Regulated entertainment for films recorded music dance from six a.m. to three a.m. to three a.m. to three a.m. the following day, every day. Live music from 12 mid-day to 3am. There's non-standard hours in the application as well for specific days as shown in the report to five a.m. and then opening hours six to three a.m. as well. The site plan is shown in Appendix 2 on page 209. Photographs are shown in Appendix 4 on page 214. And then other licensed premises in the vicinity are shown in Appendix 5 on page 218. There's a number of representations to this application. The licensing authority and that's Appendix 6 on page 222 environmental health noise team, Appendix 7-225. The London Legacy Development Corporation, that's their planning team down in that area, Appendix 8 and that's 238. And then Appendix 9 to Appendix 16, so that's page 241 to 305. It's resident representations and businesses in the vicinity. The applicant's response to the object is shown in Appendix 17 on page 307. Appendix 18 has sort of been taken over by the supplementary agenda, which the applicant has submitted. As that contains the event management plan, traffic management plan, security plan, also their proposal and various information within the supplementary packet. Conditions which been agreed with police are in Appendix 19 on page 402. And then there's guidance for members which go from 412 to 433, appendices 20 to 27. Thank you, Chair. Do you remember have any question through license officer? No? No, Mr. Incredible. Can I now ask the applicant for the representative, their applicant, please? Yes, Chair, before I start with the five minutes, could, if it was possible, just deal with some amendments to the application, which may take me a little bit of time to go through, and I wouldn't want it to eat into the five minutes. Sorry, can I deal with the amendments though to the application? I think it may help. Sorry, Mr. Sutherland. Can I just check these amendments? I haven't been brought to anyone's attention before now. Absolutely correct. I would suggest that you might want to hear that, because it might help to shorten the meeting. It may not. I can be hopeful that it may help. If you allow me to amend, if you look at the second page of the report, it sets out the details, and I'll follow them in order, because it may well help everybody by doing that. For the purposes of the application today, the sale of alcohol will be amended so that on Sunday to Thursday, it would end at, sorry, Monday to Thursday, it will end at 23.30, and on Sunday, it will end at 22.30, which would bring it in line with your framework hours. In relation to regulated entertainment, the next heading down, the intention is to remove regulated entertainment on Sunday to Thursday. It doesn't change anything on Friday and Saturday, but it removes regulated entertainment on Sunday to Thursday. Also, in relation to live music, again, for the purpose of the day, the regulated entertainment of live music is amended so that the application does not apply on Sunday to Thursday. I hope that assists for the purposes of the changes to the application. Do you need any clarification on that? I think the problem is to travel and non-standard timings of a-staying. Absolutely. I'm not changing anything on that. I'm just really focusing so that the hours on the Sunday to Thursday would fit in with framework hours. The only other thing that arises, as a result, is obviously the opening times are they going to be amended as well, because otherwise, of course, based on this, someone could buy lots of alcohol at half past ten on a Sunday and then consume it to two or three o'clock in the morning, which probably won't really do very much. You make it very clear, and of course, you're absolutely right, so the opening times would reflect that too. 30 minutes after the cessation of licensed activity, the normal. Yes. Thank you. I'm grateful for that opportunity just to clarify those points, and hopefully that will assist. People making representations have got an agenda pack in front of them. Do you have a copy of the agenda pack? Would it help if I made a note of those timings for you? No, I appreciate that. I'm just wondering if it's going to assist. If I make a note of those times for you and give you my page, you can feel when you're doing it. No, absolutely, but I don't know if you manage to get all that down or not, so if it might help you for when you can't, I can give you a note of that. I'm grateful to Mr Malik for that, and my apologies that we weren't able to provide that information before today. Mr Sutherland, you have five minutes. Thank you, sir. In relation to this application, there are five points that I wish to cover. I need to look at the main use of the premises. I need to look at the experience team, which is led by Mr Blueitt. I want to look at the reduced capacity of the premises. Fourthly, the traffic management plan, and fifthly, the conditions. So moving quickly in relation to the use of the premises, that's set out if you were looking at Appendix 17 in the documentation that's contained there. There is a presentation which sets out the use of the premises during the day, and which will be for a multifarious uses, including business users, workspace users, community users, filming, I believe the premises has been used for filming of Harry Potter. So there are a number of uses which will be used, and obviously the license will enhance those uses during the day, and mainly from during the hours that I've amended the application to on a Sunday through to Thursday. In respect of the use of a nightclub, which is what many have referred to, in essence, it's for events which will take place in the evening, and the modus operandi in relation to those events has been set out in the paperwork. In essence, the daytime use would come to an end at around about six or seven o'clock, people would leave the premises, and then the premises would close down until they reopen at nine o'clock, when patrons would be allowed to be in, staff would be in, would manage the process all the way through till they close at three o'clock. Now Mr. Lewitt, who is sitting on my right, he is the gentleman who is responsible for ensuring that the premises operates, promotes the licensing objectives, and operates in the way that he's agreed with the police, and should the committee grant a license, obviously in line with the terms of the license. He's very experienced, you can see that, his details are briefly set out again within the Appendix 17. He's also responsible for a new license that he's just obtained in Chelmsford for 3,000 people on a festival site, he also is involved in bars and restaurants around the area, including Canning Town, where he has a thousand capacity venue. In the relation to this premises, references be made to a previous operator with a previous premises license, the premises license was surrendered, it wasn't taken away at all, it was surrendered, and I believe the capacity of that premises was something in the region of five to six hundred. You will note that the capacity in relation to these premises is three hundred. One of the keys, because one of the main issues which is raised is in relation to the noise and disturbance and nuisance caused by people who are leaving the premises. One of the key documents to address that is the traffic management plan, that sets out the detailed proposals of how people get into the site and how they leave the site. I'm sure there'll be questions in relation to that, and we can deal with those questions as and when they arise. The next main point that I wanted to focus on is in relation to the conditions. Now the conditions you have seen set out on the papers and are set out at part six and seven of your report. And the main ones that I wanted to focus on are the ones which have been agreed with the police, that's at Appendix 19 and also part seven. Now in relation to those conditions, the police are satisfied that with these conditions, the premises will promote the licensing objectives so much so that they've been able to withdraw their representation. You have one minute remaining. I want to focus on a few of those conditions if I may, and they are number 19 and 21, which are contained just towards the end of part seven. And those conditions are very important because basically what they are saying is that the transport management plan is important. If it's not working, which we say it will, but if it doesn't work, then the police and the local authority can give us notice, say it's not working. And if we don't respond, if we don't address those points, the hours are automatically cut back to framework hours. So it's a very quick process by which what at the moment we're asking for is three o'clock, could reduce back to midnight. And I would commend those conditions to you. In addition, there's an issue which is raised by licensing by environmental health, about noise escape, a noise limiter condition can be offered along with standard lines that is often imposed by your committee. And again, that would be agreed in relation to preventing the noise escape. An issue is raised about refuse and detritus up and down the street, autumn street, and certainly at the junction with Wick Lane. Again, a condition can be proposed in relation to dealing with that. Mr. Bluitt, who's sitting to my right, as I've said, he will provide his mobile number to the resident so that if there are any concerns when the premises is open and trading, they can contact him and he will be at the premises in order to respond. Thank you. Can we now have a Miss Cathy driver? You have five minutes. Oh, just a chair. Acting as a licensed in authority, in terms of this application, obviously we appreciate the reduction in hours that the applicant has provided. I think our main concern is ultimately one I understand the planning permission actually only allows them to operate from 9 to 11 30 throughout the week. You have their representation, obviously they're not in attendance on this evening, but in terms of my communications with them, the permission obviously was granted for those hours. Taking into account the local amenity and the residents that are in the area. And from my representation, the area has obviously is and is still changing in terms of Wick Lane and Hackney Wick area in terms of a lot of residential going up in that area. And we know from experience, and I'm sure you'll hear from the residents that the premises was previously operated as a nightclub. And during that period of time, we did receive a large number of complaints from residents that reside close proximity to the venue. And that essentially is an obviously looking at their traffic management plan and egress plan is that the expectation is that people will exit either via walking, night buses or taxi. And the problem that we had on occasion when these nightclubs operated was that people did walk, they did pick up taxis, but a lot of the time it was close to the residential properties would cause the disturbance. And obviously in this day and age with Uber and various apps pulling up, I think the concern will be that they're pulling up close to residential and ultimately those late hours are going to cause disturbance to those residents again. With a large capacity of 300, I think people leaving and walking, there isn't really many local buses along that route. And most of those finish, I think the latest one is around one o'clock in the morning. There is nothing after that. So it would purely be either walking to a location to get when there isn't public transport even near there. That would be again through walking towards residential properties or across sort of the fly over towards bow and that area. So there could be walking and the majority obviously will is likely to be taxis and I think it's the management of the taxis and where they pull up. The additional problem that I'm not saying that is necessary going to happen on this occasion, but the problem is with if it operates as a nightclub even at weekends, we found that people saw the garage, the petrol garage near close proximity, which is very close to a residential property. The easy point of pickup was the garbage and people would use to hang around there. Then there was the urination and these were all the reports that we got over that period of time. And obviously what we want to do is prevent that from happening again. I think a late night venue here is will be a problem. The planning permission reflects that in its hours. And I think I'm sure the residents will add to that, but I think having a club operation and I appreciate that it may not always be a club operation. But how it operate before was a did community and music events, but ultimately the money came in through the nightclub operation with promotion and various events taking place there. I appreciate obviously all the documentation provided for the policy, but I just don't think that the venue is suitable. And I think the management plan really would make the venue difficult with those times of hours to manage properly without causing a disturbance to local residents. Thank you, Chair. Any clap? You have five minutes. Thank you. My representation is on page 225227. Following on from Kathy's representation, I appreciate the hours, framework hours during the week. Obviously there's public transport these times. I mean, a big concern for me with regards to public nuisance is it's the disturbance, the residents. They're looking at potentially 300 persons in the venue at weekend, Fridays and Saturdays. I know from getting a bus down there that the last one, when looking at it, the last one's around one o'clock and the buses don't start again till five in the morning. So, as Kathy has said, this is going to mean a lot of people walking, probably many, many taxes, Ubers down there. Now, Autumn Street is very small street and you've got the potential, maybe 75, 100 vehicles, drivers going down there. I think there's going to be, I think that's going to be blocking up around there. I think the SO garage itself has a lot of traffic. I think this is going to, this is going to be increase the public nuisance from people getting in and out cars or the time people walking down the street. As Kathy has said, there's a lot of residents already down there. If you look at page 225, 227 of my application, you will see highlighted on there. The closest residential in Wick Lane in court, you've got residents on the corner of Autumn Street there. And so, from my perspective, I think there's potential, a highly, likely potential of public nuisance, increase in public nuisance by the hours till three o'clock in the morning, Fridays and Saturdays. Thank you very much. The obvious fact with regard to this application is the amount of opposition it has generated. In this case, noise disturbance is not a likely effect of the grant of a license. It will be a guaranteed outcome. This application seeks to implement a road closure, footway restrictions and the suspension of all parking bays in Autumn Street just to enable a nightclub to operate. These measures are completely disproportionate and unacceptable. Unit 3A is very different to the applicants' other venues, one of which is a field on a farm in the middle of nowhere, and the other is in a solely industrial area with the nearest residential properties half a mile away. The LBTH statement of licensing policy mentions access and egress from premises as a potential area that could very likely cause public nuisance. And that is exactly the situation that all nearby residents would be facing if this application is granted. The same policy states, we would generally expect applicants to have planning and other permissions required for lawful operation of the premises in place at the time of the licensing application. As far as I know, the applicant does not currently have permissions from either the LLDC or the parking section or the highway section of the local council to either suspend parking bays or to implement road closures. And yet they present a travel plan to you that relies 100% on them obtaining all those permissions. Any conditions that could be imposed have already proven to be ineffective in addressing noise issues from patrons leaving events at Unit 3 Autumn Yard over the year, who have congregated on Wicklane outside the residential properties. My previously submitted photographic evidence is proof of the antisocial behaviour and noise problems we have suffered in the past when the venue is operating at the same premises. I'm a 74 year old pensioner and all I want to be is able to go to sleep in my own home without being disturbed by noise and antisocial behaviour. Is that really too much to ask? The applicant has presented what they believe is a solution to the noise problem that everyone seems to agree has previously taken place at the junction of Wicklane and Autumn Street. Their plan involves the suspension of 12 permit parking bays on two days every week in Autumn Street. And as there is already a lack of permit parking bays in the area, to think this will be acceptable to local residents and businesses is outrageous. Also to enable the applicants traffic and transport management plan to work, they are relying 100% on not only the approval of both the park in and highway sections of council, but on you this subcommittee to agree with them that suspending every parking bay in Autumn Street is a proportionate measure to take to enable their club to operate without the noise traffic and noise nuisance problems that has previously taken place in the area. I certainly do not think it is. They also seek in permission to install traffic barrier at the junction of Autumn Street and Wicklane to restrict who will be allowed access and who will be refused entry. This is also completely disproportionate and unacceptable to local residents and businesses. Autumn Street is a public highway, not their own private drive. The placing of traffic cones and direction signs are all actions that would need approval from the highway section of the council. And currently I read on the council website the average time to process a planned road closure is 9 weeks from the time they receive payment. Within the general advice section of the licensing policy, it states very clearly, if members believe there is a substantial problem of antisocial behaviour which cannot be proportionally addressed by licensing conditions that they should refuse the application. These proposed measures cannot be described as proportionate in any way, shape or form. That would mean the only appropriate decision in this case is to refuse the application in its entirety. Additionally, the police have insisted that the submitted traffic management plan shall be strictly followed. Also, any modifications to the plan must be approved by the Metropolitan Police Service prior to implementation. If the applicant is confident that both the highways and the parking sections will agree to their proposals, may I respectfully suggest that you defer this meeting and a decision on the application until such time as the applicants can supply confirmation to yourselves, and then a final decision can be made, or that the applicants withdraw the application until such a time as they have obtained those permissions that they need to carry out the traffic management plan that they are suggesting. Thank you. Thank you. Someone take a look. Hi, thank you. Hello, my name is Samantha Clark. I am the freehold owner of two of the units, two of the warehouses and autumn yard, units one and two. There are two other units unit three discussing this evening, and then there is one more furniture factory unit for as the freehold owner, and also an operating business owner. There are three businesses that myself and my business partner run out of autumn yard. One is warehouse similar size to unit three, which has 14 registered studios that we have leases with our tenants. That access and those leases have 24/7 access to those studios. Many of them work within that 24/7 framework. The warehouse, there is a furniture warehouse in unit two, it's main operating hours of Friday, Saturday and Sunday, which is open to the public. And myself in unit two, we have an A3 license where we have a small restaurant, which we open to the public and also is for private high, which is within the normal frameworks of the hours. I have 30 years experience running three restaurants in London and I've had an alcohol and A3 license for those 30 years. To allow this warehouse, this nightclub and everything else along with it to operate will bring severe disruption to the three businesses that are directly related to me. Not only access to all premises on the land registry, we have five parking spaces in autumn yard. We are not going to have any access to that with the parking management and taxi plan laid out, so I don't see how any of my tenants can get to their premises during these hours. Nor any of my customers going to my restaurant that's been operating for the last three or four years. When it's completely accessed, it's completely blocked off. It's on the land registry, we are the freehold owners of those parking spaces, so I don't see how on our fact can work. I think there is severe noise disruption, noise pollution, light disruption. We have permanent moorings on the other side on the river lee where we have residents who live in the canal boats there. I mean, this is directly opposite and will be directly disrupted by the plans to have a terrace out onto the river lee. These people live here permanently. We are all aware that there is a license application planning application has been approved for 120 flats, which is a stone throw from autumn yard. It hasn't started to be bought yet, but it will, and obviously that will bring in a huge number of residents, including young families. We all are very aware that TechniWig is becoming increasingly residential, and the nightclub that used to operate there, there is no rumble space of that nowadays. I just feel we've got no notice about this application originally. No one came to ask us to discuss this, and I am in complete objection, as are all my residents and my tenants, to this application. I just get some clarity on this road closure issue. We're obviously talking about lots of issues related to traffic management, but just specifically, what is the plan in terms of closing off a road? Have you set times for this? Is this only during pick up and drop off? Is there any more further details on what you would propose to do in terms of closing that road off? Thank you, Councillor. I'll start off, if I may, dealing with the documents that you've got, and then I'll hand over to the author of the document, Mr Blackwood, is sitting on my left. In short, there is no intention of closing a road, not set out in the plan, no intention of doing it, and certainly no barrier would be placed at the junction of Wick Lane and Autumn Street. Not sure where that has come from, but it's certainly not within the traffic management plan. The key, I think, behind the traffic management plan is that it does depend on a number of things. I think Mr Dover has touched on those in relation to the suspension of the parking bays down Autumn Street. My understanding is that the use of those bays at night time on Fridays and Saturdays is minimal if at all. The plan does depend on the suspension of those bays. If the suspension doesn't take place, which we believe it would from the discussions that we've had, but if it doesn't take place, then what applies are the conditions which we have proposed. Whilst we have a proposal with regards to the traffic management plan and, as I say, Mr Blackwood will take you through that, what I would refer you back to is the conditions which we've set out and we've agreed with the police. In relation to these two methods, conditions 19 and 21, I'm going to take out of numerical order simply because 21, I think, applies before 19, but be that as it may. The submitted traffic management plan should be strictly followed, subject to annual review, or in the event of a significant incident, any modifications to the plan must be approved by the Metropolitan Police Service prior to implementation. In relation to that, if we're looking at changing the traffic management plan, forgive my teeth. If we're looking at changing it, we need the police permission and approval. If we don't come up with a plan which is approved by them, then we fail on condition 21. If we come up with a plan which on the face of it appears to work, or indeed we're able to implement the plan which we put in front of you because we think it works. Then condition 19 is applicable because if something goes wrong or it doesn't operate, then the local authority and all the police can serve notice on us basically saying 28 days, get your ax sorted out, you don't sort it out, then you're down to framework out. That's how it would work. That's how we see it working. What is different, I think, from what happened in the past is a number of things which are contained within the plan. One of those things which didn't happen in the past is that one of the operatives who would be positioned at the end of the autumn street junction with which lane would be what's known as CSAS approved, so they have a qualification and approval as it were to be able to control traffic, move traffic on, report any offenders to the authorities with regards to prosecution. So that's an important change. The other thing which I think has changed since the previous operators were there is that the apps which deal with private high vehicles, Uber app, for example, are much more sophisticated than they were. And by that, I mean that as part of the process by which they get their license from TFL, they have a system which means that they can block out certain areas, which means that the vehicles cannot park, stop, pull up within those blacked out areas. And it's touched on in the report and allows Mr Blackwood to cover a little bit more depth. That is what we would put in place with regards to the main app operators so that the only place that an individual can be dropped off and the only place that an individual could be picked up is actually in the yard itself. And we can do that, it's sophisticated enough to do that, and so that's what would happen. The other issue which I know has come up is about people walking. I think the intention was that that may happen at the earlier times and during the operation of the community space and the workspace in the evening times, as you will have seen from the traffic management plan. The intention here is that 80% plus will arrive and leave by means of a vehicle. And that's how we control the means, the access to and the egress from, how we control the noise volume, it's how we avoid any nuisance being caused to Mr Dover, which I, and there's nobody on this table. If I may assure Mr Dover, there is nobody on this table who does not want him to go asleep in his own home on a Friday and Saturday night. Mr Blackwood, just pick up on your, on the traffic management plan, pick up on any things that I've missed or you think are going to help the community understand how that would operate. Absolutely, thank you. So I'll just touch on how the Europeans work, just very well, it's not familiar. So, we also have great reputations and relations with both popular PHV companies. What happens is we'll send them a blackout zone, for example, so we'll pick the area close to the venue where people will be egressing. And we can say to them in this area, anyone that attempts to book a vehicle here, it must tell them that it's going to pick up in the yard. And so that's really successful because drivers are very keen to follow those. And obviously we, which is stated in the plan, we have a waste in area for customers to wait, but it was to come to them so there's no need for them to vote anywhere. And we'd have that system in the yard where we are matching up the drivers with the customers and I've seen that work at various different venues, small, large, faithful sites, all around the country, actually. So that's a really key development in how we do that. And obviously, PHV's Uber is probably the number one app that people go to. So they're really good and they're really responsive. We can change things if it doesn't work. So that's a really good advantage that we have in terms of that. And then I'll just pick up on, obviously, we don't have a road closure in place. But what we are relying on is new suspensions. So I've had a brief discussion with the network team who directed me to the parking development team. And we're looking at the possibility of getting those suspensions in place just on Autumn Street, not anywhere else, not to take away from anywhere else at the parking. And that's a long-term process, but we'd look to have those suspended just for those late night shows, which would be the Friday and the Saturday. And then sorry to just address the barrier. The barrier that we have is just to segregate the footway and the walkway. And that is just on Autumn Street. It doesn't impose onto Wick Lane as well. So that's just number one, public safety. And number two, just so that we don't have people walking in a road when we're trying to get out. It was to the yard because it's really vital that that roadway is clear for that system to work, for us to get drivers down to the yard, to get them out back to Wick Lane. And that will keep our customers in the venue if they can see that that's happening and that their clubs will come into them. So the barriers, I think, from what the way you're describing would run parallel to the road, either side of the road, just to keep the cars segregated from pedestrians. That's correct. I'm hoping Council that I've covered all of the points that you raised. Sorry. So just touching back onto this issue. So when you say, when you're talking about road closure, you mean the suspension of the parking? And do you mean the fact that there's going to be somebody there telling people you can't come down the street unless you're a nooper? Is that what you mean when we're talking about road closures? In their documents, they state that they will restrict access to Autumn Street. So to do that, they have to have some sort of power. To put any sort of barrier on the public highway, you need permission from the highway section. To place any cones in the road you need permission from the highway section to suspend any barriers you need permission from the parking section. They have none of these permissions in place. And it's not a process that's easy to do. I worked in highways myself for the Towners Council. I worked in parking on Towners Council. I know it's seven weeks to get a road closure put in place. So also the gentleman there said that the parking bays are very rarely used in the evening. That's absolute rubbish. I mean, I've lived there nearly 25 years. I know everything about that street who goes up and down. Those bays are full up all the time. Lots of people who can't get a residence permit because they're in a car-free development, depend on the bays using the bays after the times that they are regulated because that's where they can park. Then they go out in the morning before the bays start again. Those bays are full up all the time. If I want to park my, if someone comes to visit me and they want to park in that park bay, what are they going to do? Lift my visit as car away and take it away somewhere else. It's absolutely ridiculous idea, completely disproportionate. Thank you. I just want to reiterate. I'm sorry, but this is when members ask the questions, you made your representation and that's where it stands. Kathy, the objecting remarks here, one minute. I won't add anything further to what I've already said, but I think just the point of the road closures in my experience is not necessarily going to be the solution to the problem. We've had even unlicensed, if you could call it, road closures in other venues, and actually all it does is encourage more people to hang around the street rather than actually move away from the area. I don't necessarily think a road closure put in place. It actually gives a bit of a wider area for people to sit around in the street because it's closed. There's no traffic coming through. Obviously, the cabs will come through, but I think it'll just encourage people to sit and hang around even more from experience. I don't necessarily think of that. Also, obviously, in terms of the suspension, then you're talking about lifting vehicles and that to make a clear way through to that area. So, again, is that what the intention of other premises is to do? Is to lift residents' vehicles off of that street so that they can clear their way for the cabs? I think also, in terms of experience, even with Uber and the various, they're on numerous apps now that you can use to get your taxis. And I think even from large-scale events, you can plot an area that you want them to pull up, but ultimately they will pull up the nearest area where that customer is. And I think that won't necessarily mitigate those problems. And from our experience, so that venue is that they'll stop in Wickline and stop wherever they can in order to get that. So, I think there's those issues just to consider. I think that's all really for me. Thank you. Nickle, you have one minute. I don't really have much more to say than what Kathy has already said. I mean, there's a big concern with a number of vehicles potentially going down the road. If the space is suspended, that's still going to be a problem. If they're not suspended, people will stop, start. You can't control people in high spirits having drunk in high spirits from actually speaking or, you know, excited, you know, because people tend to get louder or they're drinking. And I can see this, I hold up, people getting stopped behind each other, doors slamming closed, people in high spirits getting in the taxes. Those walking away, I just think that overall, this is going to be a major public nuisance by granting this license. Thank you. A little work here, one minute. The gentleman said that in his experience, there was little parking on all some street in the evening. That's rubbish, it's full up, definitely full up in the evening. What the experience I've had in the past, three times when the previous nightclub was open, I was threatened with physical violence purely for asking people to be quiet outside my house. I was threatened three times and it really, really affected me. In the end, I wouldn't look out the window because the last time I was threatened I was looking out and I was asking a guy to turn off the raid on his car and he was shouting at me, I know where you live. I couldn't even look out the window, I should just go away at weekends to get away from it. It was an absolute nightmare. When that previous club closed down, I thanked the Lord, I really did, that all finished. Since that other club closed down, I've had no problems at all. I've had no rubbish thrown in my plant display at the front. I've had no plants pulled out and I've had good night's sleep every night and I dread the salt that they're actually going to get a license again. Thank you. Miss Clark, you also have one minute. Thank you. I just wanted to finish by making you aware actually how small autumn yard is. It is a colder sack. I do not, cannot understand how taxis can go down that when myself as a free holder has 24/7 access to that courtyard. Forget about my businesses. But legally, I have access to that courtyard and it is a serious concern for any emergency services. There would be no chance of turning in that courtyard. It is not the tall wig. I don't know if you've been to autumn yard, but it is an impossibility. Thank you. The applicant's chair. It's applicable for one minute. Chair, thank you. There's a number of points that I probably do need to pick up which have been said and I need to address. One of them I'm a bit surprised at in relation to planning. It's very clear that planning is very separate and different to licensing. There is a planning application that will be dealt with by the planning committee or colleagues there and is not a matter which is relevant for the purposes of today when you're focusing on the promotion of the licensing objectives. In relation to access to the premises, we've talked about general vehicles in obviously in relation to people who have premises along Autumn Street and need access to their premises. That of course is not an issue and is not a difficulty in relation to emergency vehicles. Of course, that is not an issue or a difficulty of course they have access to the premises down that road. I come back to the five points that I started off with as to why the committee should grant the application that's been made. Look at the main use of the premises throughout the week and obviously the main contentious part which is on the Friday and Saturday night. But I'd ask the committee to look at the full use, to look at the width of the uses and times and everything that's proposed and jotted on that basis. Secondly, look at the applicant, look at his experience, look at the team that he's put together. You've already heard this evening though not from me or from anyone on this application about how difficult it is in relation to traffic management plans. You've actually got a traffic management plan which has been provided to you to determine and help you determine this application. The capacity is reduced to 300. The traffic management plan we've talked about and will be implemented. There are conditions to make sure that that happens in relation to the road, if there are road repairs that need to be done in the yard then that will happen. And the conditions, the conditions are set out. I propose some additional conditions so that's it. Thank you for your contribution today, this subcommittee will be this private discussion privately and meeting end of this session. See me, the committee of service will be right to the five working days. Item number five, extra declaration. Thank you chair, I'd like members to please and agree the extension of decision deadlines for the following applications. We are broad books, three, four, one, two, three, four, eight, Roman road, London E-35QR, perfecto pizza, three, nine, one, Cambridge road, London E-29RA, Fabwick, Queen's Yard, 43 white post lane, London E-9, the yard theatre, unit two, Queen's Yard, 43 white post lane, London E-9. London E-9 and the Victoria Park Market in Gore Street, London E-35TB, members can please agree to extend them to the 30th of June, 2024. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor. Thank you. This subcommittee in now is closed. Thank you for your contribution today. [BLANK_AUDIO]

Hi, good evening and welcome to the license of committee. My name is Consular and I'm in chair in the license of committee meeting. This meeting is held by a person who had basically been joining online today. This meeting will be welcome alive via this council webcam. I will ask everyone to introduce themselves shortly. But before I do that, I'd like to briefly confirm that for the address this meeting. Okay, sorry. I suggest a must address that meeting through my self chair. The committee, when the officer, the president may simply raise their hand or in the introduction by a speech, I will come to you in the order. Before I request, I will now ask the committee member to introduce their self. [BLANKAUDIO] Thank you, chair, good evening, everyone. This is council like both are saying, are you present? Dance party would and member of the license subcommittee, thank you. Thank you, chair. Councillor Amy Lee, St Catherine's and Mopo. [BLANKAUDIO] Please can the officer support this meeting into its their self. Simea's been democratic services. Kathy driver licensing, I'll be presenting this application, chair. Johnathan Malmick, legal's voice is the committee. Yeah, agent apology or absence. No apologies, chair. The declaration for member into this interspaced seven eight. Do member have any declaration for interest? Thank you, chair. I think you're too clear, I think, you're no interest. Nothing to declare. Okay, rule of vote. Yes, I don't have none. So rule of vote, these are phase number eight and 18. Can member please note that rule of procedure applicant? Yes, ma'am. Thank you, chair. We move on to item 3.1, which is the application for a new premises license for code floors 3 and 4, 34 Westbury Circus London, the E-14-8RR. And they can found on pages 19 to 170. Chair members, for this application, we have Mr. Frank Fender, who's the licensing representative, sorry, who's present here today. We also have Mr. Lickenmowerta, the applicant, and Andrew Demster, also present. Persons who have made representations are PC Mark Perry, who's joined us virtually today, and we have Corinne Holland representing nice and single authority. And Mr. Kevin Bell, the lead petitioner, also present. After the application has been presented, the applicant will be invited to speak and will be given a total of five minutes to make the representation. The objectives will also be given five minutes each to make their representation. I will let each speaker know when you have one minute remaining. Please note that the subcommittee have read the agenda back in advance. Thank you. Can I ask Katie Wright, Liza's officer, to introduce their report? Please. Thank you, Chair. As you say, the application is for code that floors 3 to 4, 34 Westbury Circus. The application states that the premises intends to be a restaurant on the full floor, and a lounge bar restaurant on the third floor. The hours applied for our Monday to Sunday from 12 until 2am, the following mornings. And the last interval activities for those timings is alcohol for on-sales, only late night refreshment, plays, films, live music, recorded music, and dance. The opening hours basically allows a 30-minute drink up time from, so the hours are from 12 until 2.30 in the morning. The application can be found at page 33 of the documents. There is a layout plan that's been provided of the third and full floor at page 61, and the map of the area at 65. There's been various photos submitted of the venue for members' information, and refer to those areas at pages 67 of the report in the supplementary agenda at pages 3 to 9, and also amongst the residents' representations in their appendix 3 at page 129. With detailed premises that are licensed in the vicinity, obviously that doesn't necessarily, it's more near the location of the actual premises involved, it's not in the entire list. The noise management plan is at page 76 amongst the eight states that there's no external areas at third and full floor level. Again, in terms of the premises and that management plan, it also states the full floor be used for dining only with third floor as a bar space with background music and occasional live creative contemporary performances. Smokers are to go to the ground floor level by the entrance of the building up to 10.30, and thereafter the customers are then to use the basement car park area and a private lift for access and egress. Environmental health representation is at page 90, however, they have since withdrawn their objection, and they've agreed conditions with the applicant, and those being conditions one to seven, that includes the noise limiter condition that was under dispute, and also the condition relating to smokers limited to 15 in number. The licensed in authority representations is at page 110, they're also a supplementary agenda at pages seven to nine. The residence petition from Canary Riverside is at pages 112 to 139, and there are various additional evidence that they've supplied, but that's all amongst those pages. The additional representation is from a resident, Mr Newton and Ms Sullivan at page 141. The plea subjection is at page 142, they've agreed conditions, and at that point they're still a representation there, but they have agreed some conditions with the police, and those are at page 144, numbered 1 to 15. There are supplementary evidence and documents that have also been supplied since the application, and those are the policies of the premises including a dispersal policy at page 21 of the supplementary agenda, emergency exit policy at 23, smoking and vaping policy at 25, and the planning permission at page 32. Other than that, the guidance is obviously there for you to refer to, concluding that report. Chair, that's my presentation for you, if you have any. Thank you. Do you member have any question of the Legends officer? Thank you, Chair. Hi, Katie. Can I see the building itself, the whole building, the premises that come from the south side, the view of the building? Yeah, there are quite a number of photos that the lawsuits in authorities made of representation as provided photos of the external, the premises, and the areas outside, including where the entrance is, and also the residents have also further supplied photos, detailing those areas, including the basement area where the car park is, which goes into Westbury Circus. Can you confirm how tall the building, how many stores are there? I'm the height of the building, how many stores are there that come from there? I honestly don't know. Of course, Chair, I think it goes through the chair. I think most of the questions you can probably deal with them through the applicant if you've got specific queries about the building. Please ask the applicant to present the application, so, Mr Fender, you have five minutes, and I'll let you know when you have one minute remaining. Thank you. Yes, good evening, Chair. I would, before I start the presentation, like to request just an additional few minutes to those five minutes, if that's at all possible. I do understand that any extension that you grant me will also be afforded to the other parties, the interested parties present today and the objectives. But for an application of this nature, I just think five minutes is rather very, it's very tight, and I don't want to rush it, but just an extra sort of two or three minutes after five, then that's what I'm asking for, if that's possible, please. Excuse me, Councillor, we would tell five minutes, I've done mine, exactly five minutes, if I've done five minutes, it's what we would tell this. I'll also just stop, because otherwise, it starts going off track rather rapidly. If the committee grants the application, then that's something that has to be extended to everybody else as well. All the parties are meant to be given an equal amount of time in which to make their representation. But we were told to prepare five minutes, so I did. So I could have prepared ten minutes myself, actually. The chair hasn't, nothing's actually been decided yet, so... It's quite fine. And so, firstly, to matter for you, Chair, one of the reasons why we give time limits is because it helps to focus on what's really an issue. You and your colleagues will have read the papers. A lot of the time, there's always going to be the questions, are things which explore in greater detail, I would suggest, at this particular stage, and it's a matter for you and your colleagues, you see how you get on and then take of you. The reality is that the vast majority of what is in issue is really about the hours and certain of the conditions. That's really where the focus is in particularly in relation to the licensing objective of public nuisance, but it's a matter for you, if you wish to grant it, and if you do, you need to grant the like corresponding. If you're on, then you give an extension to the other parties as well. The chair would like to stick to the five minutes. You will have the opportunity through questioning and through the concluding remarks to further elaborate. Thank you. Okay, Chair, as you've heard, this is an application for a new premises license, as detailed by your officer. I would like to remind you that these premises are not located within any cumulative impact zone. Therefore, the default position is that the application should be granted unless there are good and specific reasons for refusing to do so. You've heard that the premises to be licensed comprises of two floors. The third floor and the fourth floor. The intention is to operate the four floors a restaurant only. There will be no music entertainment on the fourth floor, just background music to provide an ambient and an atmosphere. The third floor will operate as a lounge bar and restaurant. Music entertainment is requested to be allowed on the third floor, the third floor only. The premises will be furnished according to the images sent to you and now included in the supplementary agenda of pages 11 to 27. It is hoped that these images give you a flavour of the type of establishment which is proposed through this application. There is no dance floor, there will be no flashing lights, nothing flashing in time with the beat of the music. The entertainment provided will be cabaret-style entertainment, it will be stylish and professional and most definitely not a disco. The main entrance is the riverside entrance, which is reached from the Thames pathway, which can be seen within your photographs. It was recognised that this entrance and exit had the potential to create noise later in the night, so it was proposed within the application from the outset that no customers should be able to access or egress the premises by those doors after 22-30 hours. After 22-30 hours, access and egress from the premises would be via the basement car park only, well away from any residential accommodation which in turn mitigates the potential for noise nuisance. Customers wishing to smoke up until 22-30 hours would be directed from those doors to the riverside. Customers wishing to smoke after 22-30 hours would have to leave the premises via the underground car park, they'd actually have to leave the car park as well where it's forbidden to smoke. Security staff from the premises will be located within the car park to ensure no one smokes down there. It is true to say that smokers would be required to walk quite away in order to smoke, that's their choice. But these arrangements are specifically to ensure that residents are not disturbed. The representation from the police is agreed, several conditions, all conditions have been agreed. I spoke with the police license in officer yesterday and it was explained that he was still waiting to see a policy in respect of transport management, detailing how customers would leave the area via the underground car park. You will note from the papers that policies in respect of security, access, egress, searching and dispersal have already been incorporated into conditions. The applicant therefore would be prepared to accept a further condition, requiring a transport management plan to be produced and agreed with police prior to the premises being open and prior to providing any licenceable activity. The environmental health officer proposed a series of conditions, all of those have now been accepted and as a result the environmental health rep has been withdrawn. The licence and authority representation is very similar to the representation from the environmental health in respect of concerns of nuisance and residents. We believe those matters have now been addressed. The residents' representation is in the form of a petition. What is not known, of course, is how many of those 79 signatories were fully aware of what they were signing. It is my experience of petitions that people... It is my experience of petitions that people are happy to sign them in order to appease the people that have created them. Having said that, the representation does express concerns about the potential for nuisance and antisocial behaviour and their right to make a representation is respected by the applicants. However, there are also aspects of the representation which have no relevant to a licence in application and those are matters in particular in respect of planning permissions. We do believe that the measures agreed with the police and the environmental health officers address many of the concerns expressed in the petition, in particular not using the doors from riverside terrace for access or egress after 22-30 hours. You have one minute remaining. OK. In particular, incidentally, in further dialogue with Mr Behold, one of the objectors, he appears to have misinterpreted the noise management plan. He interprets a noise management plan to say there would be no new admissions or readmittance after 22-30. The noise management plan should say no admissions or readmissions via those main front doors after 22-30 and the noise management plan would have to be amended to avoid that ambiguity. I'll finish by addressing the information provided in the additional information sent yesterday. In respect of the resident's additional information, there is criticism of me for not answering 18 questions. Chair, I'm not obliged to answer any of those questions. In respect of the licence and authority's additional information, they may play on the references to the current planning permissions that are in place of these premises. I can point out that this application is for the premises as per the layout plans that were submitted with the applications not based on the planning permissions. Should those works be carried out that have been granted planning permission, then the applicants would need to vary their licence and make a new, a different application. Chair, that's within the five minutes, I believe. I'll give away for questions. Thank you. Thank you. I can now ask the objector to present their objection. Please. Please have Mr. P.C. Mark Perry to present first. P.C. Perry, you have five minutes. Thank you. Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Committee. I'll be as brief as I can. It's right to say that we have agreed conditions with the applicants. You should not have come around. Come around and say thank you, I'll talk to you on his camera. I apologize for the technical malfunction, I need to put my laptop in for a pair. The applicant is right, we have agreed the vast majority of conditions and we are happy to do so. However, the only remaining point of contention is a serious one, and it's how people will leave the premises at two o'clock in the morning. I also committed to turn to the supplemental agenda and look at pages seven and eight where you'll see some photographs of the underground car park. Now, this car park is situated and the access to it is underneath West Ferry Circus at the Roundabout, which is a main arterial route into Canary Wharf and used by emergency services. The problem we have is that most of the people who are going to be attending this premises will be leaving at that hour of the morning by taxi, Uber and otherwise. And this car park is not for the sole exclusive use of the premises, it's shared with Virgin Active Gym members and also shared with the residents as well. Now, if you imagine a large number of taxis turning up at roughly the same time to pick up their guests, then trying to get into their car park with contested, with congested spaces and waiting for customers, other taxis coming in, other cars trying to leave, it's easy to imagine it would soon be blocked. There would be beeping of horns, there would be arguments, there would be disagreements. But also, we have concern that taxis would simply pull up outside and block the circus, block the underground roundabout, which of course cause great concern for us because it increases the risk of road traffic collisions, increases the risk of injury, and it increases the risk of crime or disordered taking places in a potential violence taking place. This is the issue that has not been resolved to our satisfaction. This is a unique premises in that the access for leaving the premises is an underground car park and is bought via an underground roundabout. And we have not seen a plan in place that would sufficiently mitigate the risks I've identified. Having worked in a nighttime economy for as a police officer for many years, I know all too well that when people are leaving a premises and have had alcohol to drink and there are numerous taxis turning up, it's very easy for that situation to escalate and evolve into a situation where there are collisions, where there are the risk of violence, where there is the risk of public or personal injury. And until such a plan is put in place, it's difficult to see how people can leave without those risks being too high. I appreciate the offer by the applicants representative with regards to the police having say over whether a plan is acceptable or not. But that's not the responsibility of the police. It's removing the responsibility from the local authority, from the licensing subcommittee. It should be the subcommittee that decides whether a plan is acceptable or not. And this is something that we feel should be in place before a license is granted. There has been several months since the applicant put the application in and the date of this hearing. And so far, no acceptable plan has been submitted. I put it to you that if a plan was to be, if the time that's elapsed is sufficient for a plan to come forward to be put in place, the fact that it hasn't yet to me indicates that perhaps it's because there isn't a plan possible that manages the risk that I've identified. So until unless a plan comes forward that is acceptable, that manages that risk, the very real risk and a very serious risk, that we say that this license cannot be granted, all the other conditions have been granted, all agreed, all the other policies have been agreed. It is, however, this egress policy, which, you know, perhaps one of the most serious, that we do have the greatest concern about. Thank you. Can we please have Miss Corinne Holland to now present? Thank you. Thank you. The licensing, well, my representation on page 110 of the main agenda and then there's two supplementary agendas. One is the first supplementary and then the second one in the second supplementary. There's photos in supplementary one and the planning permission document as well. The licensing authority opposes to the late hours requested due to the location of the premises, which is surrounded by residential flats and a hotel. The lateness of the license application, there's a high probability that customers are likely to cause a public nuisance as they leave at 2.30 in the morning. Also, Aquarian, the third floor plan shows that they're on the plan, it shows that they're by folding doors that have been put in by the windows, where it says window gathering point and there's a dark line, which I'm guessing is where the by folding doors will go in, which is why I put the planning permission in, because they've been granted planning permission for those doors and it will create an internal terraced area. As Kathy Driver mentioned in the noise management plan, it says that there are no external areas, but it's counted as an internal terrace, but it would be open to the side of the building, or the front of the building. With it open towards the Thames, it could lead to noise escape throughout the evening and there's no reference to this in the noise management plan. The application covers all licence of activities and therefore lends itself to being a nightclub bar style of operation on the third floor. Obviously, as stated, it's be a restaurant on the fourth floor and believed waitress service to the tables for drinks. Facilitating smokers is another matter which needs to be addressed, with the main entrance closed at 10.30pm. Smoking will be via the underground car pop and onto the West Ferry Circus roundabout. In fact, the noise management plan on page 83 of the agenda states that the premises cannot accommodate smokers after 10.30pm. But then there is a smoking policy that's been submitted subsequently that says smokers will be escorted turn from the premises to the smoking area. This will involve at least four security staff in various positions. As people go in and out to smoke, this will be done continually throughout the evening. So I'm not sure practically how this will work. Will patrons be held at certain locations by the lift doors or in the car park until the security comes back from a sporting and other group of smokers? And as people going in and out of smoking is a continual thing, I'm not quite sure how this will work and it could cause friction between the staff or the security staff and the patrons who don't want to wait and they could lead to smoking within the car park. If this application is granted, a condition should be placed on the license to ensure that the security manage the smoking area as per their smoking policy. It should be noted that planning permission-- and I appreciate planning is a separate matter-- but planning permission has been granted for an external roof terrace without door seating. I appreciate that this would be a variation that would need to be done. But the 100 people have been granted permission up there between the hours of 8 a.m. and 9 p.m. And although this isn't part of the license application at the moment, it could be used for non-licensable activities. If you have one minute remaining, OK, thank you. Such as the smokers might go up there, which could cause an additional nuisance to residents. I've put in my supplementary about a business called Nine Lounge in Greenwich. As the applicant agent gave me these details to show that they had experience running a premises. In fact, this premises is she/she lounge that doesn't hold an alcohol license, but does hold a license for late-night refreshments. And this company was prosecuted in 2022 for allowing smoking within the premises and breaching their CCTV conditions on their license. The current director-- there is a current director that's on both of these companies at the moment. So I wanted to bring that to your attention. As obviously, they are linked together. Customers leaving the premises who have consumed alcohol late at night can be rowdy on leaving. Not necessarily being disorderly, but often shouting to their friends as they hang around waiting for cabs to arrive. This could be two to three in the morning. And the last three sorority bills, the hours granted are likely to lead to public nuisance. Thank you. Kevin, Kevin, a resident five-minute down. Kevin, a resident in five-minute. Thank you. Oh, good evening, Councillors. I'm speaking on behalf of the residents who object to this licensing application. It will cause significant public nuisance, increase the risk of crime and disorder, and it presents a serious risk to public safety. The application does not meet the conditions of the planning consent granted to the property in December 23 and is non-compliant with council policies. We request that you reject the application unconditionally. These premises are entirely within the gardens of our estate. Our 325 flats contain a thousand residents with families and people of all ages living there. Many flats are only 30 metres away from the premises. 200 look directly into it and we will suffer an unacceptable reduction in privacy. The licence will allow the venue to open until 2 a.m. Seven days a week with the fourth floor of a restaurant and the third and nightclub with live and recorded music and a DJ. The applicant says he will restrict the noise level in the club, but in their application it says that only from 1.30 a.m. onwards will music be decreased in volume? Before 1.30 we must assume that they want to play it at maximum volume. The other local restaurants in the area have either no music or played background music only. If they want to put in a noise limiter they should withdraw this application and change it to say no music will be played. A bigger problem no sir is that nothing is being done to prevent light damage from light pollution from the fourth floor, which has floor to ceiling glass panels. I can look directly into it and people in 30 metres away will be able to tell who is having fish and chips and who is eating pizza. Unbelievably they propose to turn the light of the fourth floor on to full brightness from one in the morning. This will be like us having a Starship Enterprise landing in the middle of our garden at one o'clock in the morning. The planning consent breach is that details of lighting and a lighting strategy were to be submitted and approved by the local planning authority. This has not been done. There is no suitable space for smokers. The last two planning applications accepted this and said that a terrace would be constructed within the third and fourth floor. Smokers can't use the space outside the front entrance. I doubt if you want groups of people walking down to the Canary Wharf promenade in groups of people to smoke and the applicant is refusing to implement the advice of their own consultants that after 1030 the premises may not accommodate smokers. Instead they make the ridiculous claim that the narrow pavement next to the underground car park can be used as a smoking area. This cannot be serious. It is unsafe. It's not their property. The pavement will be crowded and there will be litter problems. There is no transport plan. There is no public transport in the area past midnight. And where will taxi pick up B? They say there is a taxi rank by the car park entrance. There is no taxi rank by the car park entrance. Cars and taxis cannot stop on the roundabout. It's double yellow lines and it's an arterial road leading from the island gardens through to the Limehouse link. The nearest taxi rank is at Cabot Place, a 15 minute walk away and I'm sure Mr Fender couldn't find it if he tried. The planning consensus of development cannot be occupied until a waste management plan has been submitted. None has been provided. Waste will be considerable as there could be more than a thousand meals and snacks served every day. The premises will be the only local license venue after 10.30. Late night drinking venues are associated with issues of disorder and the lack of public transport available in the area is likely to exacerbate this as the exit via the car park has no pedestrian crossings. Crowds of people who have perhaps had too much to drink will congregate in the unlit dangerous pavements underneath West Circus. There will inevitably be trouble. There are no public conveniences in the area at that time. No discussions have taken place with estate management as to how the car park for which estate management not the premises have responsibility. To summarise, the application fails the licensing criteria in every respect. Our estate is completely unsuitable for the activities on operating hours requested by the applicants. They have no knowledge of the location and have shown no consideration for the welfare of our community. The applicant has never contacted us. I have tried twice. I have suggested that a limit opening hours to 10pm, like the gym and the cafe barrier, and they refuse to do so. Thank you very much. Thank you, Kevin. Now, a member will have the opportunity to ask a question. I just want to clarify some basics just to start with. So, there were a couple of times floating around, so can we just confirm what is closing time and what is drink up time, because I was hearing 2/2/3/3. So, if you could just clarify that for me and then, if it's OK, just to clarify the actual capacity of this venue, so including the two floors. Yet, the application is to allow licenceable activity until 0, 200 hours each day. All licenceable activity will cease by 0, 200 hours, and the premises will be closed by 0, 230 hours. That effectively gives customers the opportunity to finish their last drinks if they're still there. It allows them to leave staggered times and not en masse. And that there's also, within the noise management plan, Mr Bell talks about raising the lights, et cetera. Raising lighting is an approved method to sort of tell customers that the lights come into an end, and it's time to consider departing. And that's the reason for that. And in respect to the capacities, you're looking at about 160 people on each floor as a capacity. Yes, that's making a total. But between 160 and 170, so between 320 and 340 people, if they're running to capacity. Question to the applicant, have you considered a workout? How long would it take to disperse the 320 people once they close the door after the finishing? How long would it take to exit all these people from the premises or...? I think there's an assumption that everyone will leave all together, but I think the reality is that people will egress over a period of time. It's been insinuated that this is some sort of vertical drink in nightclub activity, and in fact, it's a restaurant and will provide an area for members. So people will leave at various different times. They're not going to all leave at the same time, which I think also plays into the management of people getting home at various times in the evening. Excuse me. That hasn't actually, sorry, Mr. Bell. It's going to be questions from members. If members need to ask, they will come to you. But that's not how this works, I'm afraid, Mr. Bell. The people now need to speak when the chair or one of the members asks, please. Otherwise, as I say, it becomes very difficult. But assume that people do all leave at the same time, which is effectively the councillor's question. Could you answer how long it might take to get all those people through? I wouldn't be able to answer it at this time, but it's something that we can come back to the committee with. [ Pause ] And it does look like the main issue here is this egress route and this smoking issue, and I think it's clear that you do understand that. And I think what PCPerry had to say is quite important. I think this point about how it will be physically managed in terms of staffing is a really important point. So can you just elaborate on that about how that actually will be physically managed, that people after part 10 will be taken, escorted, how many people, how that can actually be physically managed in that situation? We are currently in talks with the landlord to obtain the car box base and have them in 24 hours, and our staff from code will be operating from there as well, and be able to divert customers from the exit and safely home. I think the applicant appreciates that it is quite intensive on security, but they're prepared to put those security measures in, which have been included in one of the policies which was sent to the police. For so people, customers would be escorted down a lift from the premises to the car park. They would be escorted from the lift to the entrance of the car park. At no time would they, there will always be security in that area ensuring that nobody smokes in the car park because they're not allowed to, it's sign boasted. And the smoking area which is deemed sort of near to the entrance on the footpath, near to the entrance to the car park, would also be supervised by their security staff. Yeah. Any more questions? The council like one of the others. Thank you Chair. Have you taken into consideration the impact of presence of 320 people of time and the music and their movement, the impact on the resident around that, the impact on their well-being and safety and health and well-being on the resident, the impact on the health and well-being and safety of the resident? Sorry, Councillor, do you mean in respect to the potential for noise and the music noise? The noise and all kinds of noise, the presence in intimidation, intimidation, but 320 people present, don't do things going to have an impact on people's mental health and their PVC and like they will feel their home. They are in a place of, in the middle of their state, a nightclub causing nuisance, public nuisance and noise, all this impact on the resident? Yeah, the premises itself is not in the middle of the residence estate, it's on the edge of the residence estate, okay? The noise, the potential for noise is largely mitigated by the agreed condition with the environmental health officer in respect of a noise limiter. That condition, the-- Can you refer to the pages, the mitigation condition? Can you refer to the pages? I think it must be in the information sent to you yesterday in this supplementary agenda too. I'm guessing the reason being that the representation was only withdrawn yesterday. I will try and find it for you, Councillor, and if I-- whether your licensing officer is able to quickly grab it. The agreed condition-- You can call for the first supplemental agenda. Page 12. Thank you, Councillor. But if I may, just in respect of that, since we are discussing that condition, my advice to the members would be that it should be set at a level determined by into the satisfaction of the Council's environmental health service because we're the ones who get-- we-- they're the ones who are going to be enforcing it, it shouldn't be set by an independent third party over whom there is effectively no control. I don't know if Mr. Fender may wish to come back on that, but the condition is not just about installing a noise limiter. It goes on to include aspects that the noise limiter must be installed by an independent noise acoustic, yeah. And that basically-- the way that that would work, there would be testing carried out to achieve the apparent-- the obvious level or the maximum level that the noise could make so that it couldn't be heard by the residents before-- and if it went above that level, then obviously the power to the music supply would be cut hence reducing the noise. I'm also further instructed that in terms of people, 320 people gathering, et cetera, it is proposed to close the restaurant on the fourth floor about between one and two hours before the-- before two o'clock. So you're looking at a midnight or one o'clock finish on the fourth floor. So that will have an effect of separating people and staggering people's journey home so that you don't get this whole mass of people, all gathering all at the same time at the finish time, fighting for taxes, et cetera.

• Is that proposed or is that-- I suppose why can you be clear on whether it's midnight or one o'clock? And secondly, is that going to be seven nights a week or just particular nights, please?
• I mean, obviously the restaurant operation will trade. In my experience, and our plan is that it will trade and one day the first day will finish earlier. But the weekends, obviously, people do stay out later. But like I said, again, there's a-- the notion of this being a vertical drinking nightclub is not what we're proposing. And we urge, obviously, the committee to look at the substance of what we're actually proposing as a proposition for this operation, because you're not going to have 340 people egressing on mass. And I think that's a misrepresentation of our application.
• Yes, really. So just related to that, so you talked about occasional live events, because you may well be correct, that on a Monday, you're not going to have 320 people leaving at three or two 30 in the morning. But how often is occasional, essentially, is the question. Is that weekly? Is it monthly? Is it quarterly? What kind of-- because these are going to be, I imagine, the events where you are going to see coming up to that capacity level.
• Yeah, I'll ask the applicants to explain the frequency of entertainment for you in a moment. But-- I'll ask him for a license for seven days a week until two o'clock in the morning. Doesn't mean that the premises would operate till that time. But what it does do, it affords flexibility in the nature of the operation for the premises. It gives the operators the flexibility. So that you can be assured that whenever a license of activity does take place, all the conditions attached to the license get complied with no matter what time of day. It's just whether the license of activity is being carried out at that time. In respect to the frequency of entertainment, do you want to elaborate on that?
• Frequency of entertainment would generally be on, I'll say, from Thursday to the Sunday days only, Monday to Friday, I can take it. Everyone's working and obviously wants peace of mind, but we won't really see customers staying up till two o'clock in the morning during the week, but we do hope to obviously have their license there to be flexible anyway.
• Thank you. Just a quick question for you. So I'm going back to the, to the sort of the car park issue and the egress issue. So can you just sort of describe for us, 'cause I think there's some dispute of the location of a taxi rank, can you just explain to us from your perspective?
• Sure, I think, you have to understand, there's 600 spaces in the car park. This isn't a tiny car park, 400 of those car park spaces are ours. They're leased for 999 years to ours. The exit route that they're talking about goes through our cars. There's, I've roughly worked out, there's 12 million pounds worth of our cars through there. And this kind of idea that you can just sort of breeze in and out and, you know, this is going to be suitable for everything they want to do. Move people in and out. The lift, by the way, carries about six people. So that, you know, it can have this constant flow of people. The place where they intend to smoke is on the right-hand side, they save the car park. But that's Laurie's park there. There's unloading, there's, it's in use, 24 hours a day, double yellow lines. There are big pillars in the middle of the pavement. There's no room for a, they don't own the, be up to you guys to pay for the, for keeping it clean or the Canary Wharf management. It's not theirs, they're just going to send people down, they're 30 at a time, to smoke. It's not theirs. It's a huge car park. It's used 24 hours a day by the residents. Yeah, as I said, seven, it's got its own security, by the way. We have our own security. We don't need their security. We've never needed it. Why they can have 74, 4, 5, 7 people walking around our car, but we've already got car park security. What's next thing happens? An incident happens in the car park. Who's responsible? I've asked that of Mr Fender. No reply, never applies to anything we ask. So, there's no management plan, there's no, it's just assumptions that they can do things. It's ridiculous, I promise you. Go and have a look at it yourself. It's a really strange, it's unlit, it's unlit, it's unsafe, there's no pedestrian crossing. They don't, pedestrians are not encouraged to be down in that car park. I live there, I never use it. We always go out up the top. No one goes down there because traffic is continuous, lorries are unloading, there is no taxi rank. PC Perry has pointed out, and I agree with him. There's no, there's no, they have to walk. Near is taxi rank, I promise you, and I've done it, I've looked at it, I've surveyed the area, is in Cabot Square 15 minutes away. You can't get Uber's car park on that car. It'd be incredible to think that you could use the underground, the unlit, unsafe, no pedestrian crossing car park as a place for taxi pick up. It doesn't work, there isn't a taxi rank there. What he says in his thing is a taxi rank, it isn't, it's a place where lorries unload for the restaurants. Okay, thank you. Go constantly, what is it? Thank you. My question is to understand, if you have, say, 320 people, and also you don't know the exit plan, but if we work out a taxi can carry 6 or 5 people at a time, say for 300, 200 people, you need 60 taxi, and you need 60 people at a time, say for 300, 200 people, you need 60 taxi, and I understand from the applicants, from the objector presentation, that there is no taxi rank around here. So, that's a big question, how are you going to manage this 300 exit plan, 320 people who need 60 taxi, and where are we going to stand, where are we going to wait, where is the waiting place, and that's going to cause a serious havoc in the area. I understand the concern, Councillor, but please do not fall into the trap of thinking every single person leaves the premises at the same time, or want in taxes at the same time. That is not how premises operate. You've heard that the restaurant on the fourth floor would be closed considerably earlier than the restaurant on the third floor and the bar on the third floor. Not everybody will filter from the fourth floor into the third floor, because if the third floor is at capacity, they have to leave. So, arguably, they will be leaving a totally separate time to the people on the third floor, so that reduces the numbers. They will be security personnel, not only escorting the smokers, which, incidentally, the agreed condition with the environmental health is a maximum of 15 smokers at any one time, not the 30 or 40 that's been alluded to by Mr Bell, a maximum of 15. That can be easily managed. How can they manage that? And the licensing authority, Miss Holland, comments, she doesn't think it can be managed. Well, it's up to the applicants to manage it. They've got to manage it. And sometimes there are venues out there that operate certain policies, that discourage people from smoking. They actually have no smoking policies. So, customers would have the choice. Do I go for a cigarette or do I stay? It's their choice, but the facility would be offered. The other alternative, of course, is to allow customers to smoke by the front and the main entrance at the top of the riverside path, even after half past ten. But they don't want to do that because they know that could cause more nuisance to the residents, okay? So, there won't be this mass gathering of people all trying to get 60 Ubers. That just will not happen. What we have offered in my presentation is a condition. The police have criticized us for not having a transport management plan at the moment. It will cost between three, four, five thousand pounds to get a transport management plan in. The applicant is prepared to make that cost if this license is granted. But would you spend three, four, five thousand pounds on a transport management plan if you then weren't guaranteed on getting a license? It's a considerable expense, a considerable expense for anybody. But by conditioning it, as I proposed, a condition in a transport management plan to be in place in agreement with the police, a transport management company will be aware of the ways to get around the potential for build-up of traffic, for dangers, et cetera. And they will come up with the solutions for it. The applicant is confident that it can be managed without causing the kind of havoc that Mr Bell or the police suggest might happen. And I respect the police. They are dealing with that day in, day out. I get that. But the management plan will be arranged so as to make sure those problems which could be perceived do not become a reality. Is there anything else that you want to add to that? Yeah. Good, great. Just regards to the car parking spaces as well. The residents do have barriers separate away from the private usage of the car park, i.e. the gym, code in the future, and the public car park. So their cars are safe, secure, and away from any damages or any crowd of customers or public nuisance they are worried about. They also have separate lanes in and out lane. I think they share much at the exit, but they do have a separate lane to go in the car park when they use their fault. If they don't use their fault, they have to come through the public car park lane. Yeah. Thank you. Gentlemen, yes. Nothing. Is there a... Thanks. Look, they keep changing their mind about the hours. I mean, they should really withdraw this and come up with a sensible plan. This bill, this premises are not suitable for this. I know you've going on about noise in the car park. You're completely ignoring a massive thing. It's like over there. That's from here to you, nearly, is where our flats are. Light. And you talk about mental health. People need a light and night sleep. We have school children there. We have babies. We have doctors, nurses. We have a great range of people. How do they get to have night sleep? When, one o'clock in the morning, they turn the lights full blast on in the fourth floor. No consideration for us. They just want to get their people out of the restaurant. What about us? Why don't they spend some of their money on curtains? Why don't they put glazing on the windows? None of that's in here. There's some kind of luxury fittings being fit. I've seen nothing for us that haven't spoken to us. Mr. Fender is not the applicant. He'll say anything to you to get this through. He's not going to be compliant with it. Actually, Mr. Mo Adler isn't either. The people who have to comply are the directors of the company. Where are they? Where is Miss Hogan? A one-pound company formed about six months ago. I mean, this is ridiculous. It's ridiculous. It's unsafe. It's unsuitable. It will cause massive problems for us. I've put it to them that they should restrict the hours to 10.30. Light the mega restaurant, light the couch out, light the cafe brayera, light the gym, and that would be fine. We would use it and we would help them make it viable. But two o'clock in the morning is just ridiculous. It's unsafe and a public nuisance. Thank you very much. That was my minute. Was it? It's all in, yes. Thank you, Chair. I won't go over anything. I've already said the only thing I would raise is the noise limiter that's been offered up will only control music. Music noise. It doesn't control people noise. So obviously with 300 people in there might cause an issue. Obviously, I've said the restaurant will close earlier, a couple of hours earlier, but they haven't reduced the hours in the applications. Obviously, they say they want flexibility. So the fact that they might say that it will shut to a couple of hours earlier. If it's on the licence, it's allowed to be open till two. And obviously, in the photos that I submitted in the supplementary agenda, there is only one of the lifts is their premises. The other lift belongs to the Virgin Gym. So there is one lift and I guess some stairs for people to come down from the fourth floor. So thank you, Chair. Mark. Mark. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Thank you, Chair. I think this committee has nailed down to the nub of this, which is the egress plan. And quite frankly, the rest of the premises can be fine. But when you've got the only egress of 1030 at night is an underground car park leading out to a main arterial road and an underground roundabout and there isn't a plan in place. No matter how much it costs, we say that it would simply be reckless to grant a licence until you are satisfied. There is a plan in place to manage it. When people have been drinking alcohol, we know their decision-making is impaired. What we cannot have is a nightmare scenario of drunk people wandering out onto main arterial underground, poorly lit roundabout, and being involved in a road traffic collision. It simply doesn't bear thinking about. The fact that this plan hasn't been included is very worrying. It is simply not beyond, it's simply not believable to say that a car park having 60 taxis at a time turning up at 230 to get people out is in any way a viable plan to get these customers away. It simply is not doable. If you imagine a car park underground car park with 50 to 60 taxis turning up at 230, how that would be managed in an underground car park is beyond belief. It will result in people parking in the underground roundabout. It will result in road traffic collisions and this is simply not acceptable. The premises is fine. It's just in the wrong location. The egress through the underground car park makes it untenable in our position. Unless the applicant can come before this committee with an acceptable plan that you can look at and you can judge and you can scrutinise and be satisfied with, then this application should be rejected. Thank you. Thank you, Mark. Thank you, Chair. The comments from the police in respect to the transport management plan, you've heard our response to that. I think it's absolutely perfectly balanced to impose a condition requiring a transport management plan to the satisfaction of the police prior to any licence and reactivity being carried out. The way the police would have you believe it is, let's reject this application and then when you get a traffic management plan, come back to the table and present it again, you've heard our response. This is a new application for a premises. It has previously had a licence, albeit for a different operator and if it is granted, this premises will be brought back to life, offering a first-class venue with a first-class service to many members of the community and employing in excessive 100 people. It is not believed that the hours applied for our excessive. They are actually less than the hours permitted at the nearby Canary Riverside Plaza Hotel. They can actually sell alcohol and provide entertainment seven days a week up until three o'clock in the morning. So it can be managed by these premises, which are a little bit further away from the residential properties than the hotel. The robust measures proposed within the application and the addition of the conditions agreed with the police and the environmental health officer will ensure the licence and objectives are promoted and that they are not undermined and we would ask you to grant accordingly. Thank you, Chair. Okay. Thank you. Do you want to speak any more? No. Thank you, your contribution today. This subcommittee will be decided in a private session after this meeting and Simi Uldomodosa will be right to you with the five working days. Thank you, Chair. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. 4.2 applicant for the new premises license for the little LND studio two unit three, three, a 39 auto state, a London E3, two TT paid number one, seven, one, one, three, four, three, four. Yes. Thank you. So we do announce those application. Thank you, chair. For this application, we have Mr. Robert Sutherland, who's representing the applicants today. We have Adrian Stud, who's the crime and disorder expert. Owen Blackwood, who's the traffic and transport manager and Matthew Blight, the co-founder and operations director who are present here at the meeting. Persons who have made representation today are Cathy Driver from licensing authority, Nicola Cazzo from environmental health, Mr. Michael Dover, who's one of the local residents, and Samantha Clark, who's also representing a local business. After the application has been presented, the applicant will be invited to speak and will be given a total of five minutes to make their representation. The objectors will also be given five minutes each to make their representation. I'll let each speak and know when you have one minute remaining. Please note that the subcommittee have read the agenda packet in advance. Thank you, chair. Can I ask Colonel Holland, ladies and gentlemen, to introduce their report? Thank you, chair. This is an application for a new premise license for, I've got little London, a studio to Unit 3A 39, Autumn Street. The applicant has described the premises as a new cultural hub and entertainment venue will primarily be used for music events with the possibility of private hire and for other activities such as fitness classes, private functions, photoshoots, but it says there's likely to be one or two club night music events a week. The application is shown in appendix one on page 184. The hours that have been applied for are sale of alcohol on Monday to Sunday, 9am to 3am, regulated entertainment for films, recorded music, dance from 6am to 3am. 6am to 3am, following day, every day, live music from 12pm a day to 3am. There's non-standard hours in the application as well for specific days, as shown in the report till 5am and then opening hours 6 to 3am as well. Site plan is shown in appendix two on page 209. Maps showing the vicinity of this premises is in appendix three on page 212. Photographs are shown in appendix four on page 214. And then other licensed premises in the vicinity are shown in appendix five on page 218. There's a number of representations to this application. The licensing authority and that's appendix six on page 222. Environmental health noise team, appendix seven, 225. The London Legacy Development Corporation, that's their planning team down in that area. Appendix eight and that's 238. And then appendix nine to appendix 16. So that's page 241 to 305. It's resident representations and businesses in the vicinity. The applicant's response to the object is shown in appendix 17 on page 307. Appendix 18 has sort of been taken over by the supplementary agenda which the applicant has submitted. As that contains the event management plan, traffic management plan, security plan, also their proposal and various information within the supplementary packet. Conditions which been agreed with police are in appendix 19 on page 402. And then there's guidance for members which go from 412 to 433. Appendices 20 to 27. Thank you, Chair. Do you member have any question through license officer? No? No, Mr. Scott, could if it was possible just deal with some amendments to the application which may take me a little bit of time to go through and I wouldn't want it to eat into the five minutes. Sorry, can I deal with the amendments though to the application? I think it may help. Sorry Mr. Sutherland, so can I just check these amendments I haven't been brought to anyone's attention before now? Absolutely correct. I would suggest and you might want to hear that because it might help the shorts in the meeting. It may not. I can be hopeful that it may help. Sorry, if you allow me to amend, if you look at the second page of the report, it sets out the details. And I'll follow them in order because it may well help everybody by doing that. The purposes of the application today, sir, the sale of alcohol will be amended so that on Sunday to Thursday, it would end at, sorry, Monday to Thursday. It will end at 23.30 and on Sunday it will end at 22.30 which would bring it in line with your framework hours. In relation to regulated entertainment, the next heading down, the intention is to remove regulated entertainment on Sunday to Thursday. It doesn't change anything on Friday and Saturday but removes regulated entertainment on Sunday to Thursday. Also in relation to live music, again, for the purpose of the day, the regulated entertainment of live music is amended so that the application does not apply on Sunday to Thursday. I hope that assists for the purposes of the changes to the application. Do you need any clarification on that? I think the problem is to travel and non-standard timings of a-staying. Absolutely. I'm not chaining on that. I'm just really focusing so that the hours on the Sunday to Thursday would fit in with framework hours. The only other thing that arises as a result is obviously the opening times are they going to be amended as well because otherwise, of course, based on this, someone could buy lots of alcohol at half past ten on a Sunday and then consume it to all three o'clock in the morning, which probably won't really do very much. And, of course, you're absolutely right. So the opening times would reflect that. Thank you. 30 minutes after the cessation of licensed activity, the normal. Yes. Thank you. I'm grateful for that opportunity just to clarify those points and hopefully that will assist. People making representations have got an agenda pack in front of them. Is that the people over there? Do you have a copy of the agenda pack? Would it help if I made a note of those timings for you? No, I appreciate that. I'm just wondering if it's going to assist. If I make a note of those times for you and give you my page, you can feel when you're doing it. No, absolutely. But I don't know if you managed to get all that down or not. So if it might help you for when you can't, I can give you a note of that. I'm grateful to Mr. Malik for that and my apologies that we weren't able to provide that information before today. Mr Sutherland, you have five minutes. Thank you, sir. In relation to this application, there are five points that I wish to cover. I need to look at the main use of the premises. I need to look at the experience team which is led by Mr. Bluitt. I want to look at the reduced capacity of the premises. Fourthly, the traffic management plan and fifthly, the conditions. So moving quickly in relation to the use of the premises, that's set out if you were looking at Appendix 17 in the documentation that's contained there. There is a presentation which sets out the use of the premises during the day, which will be for a multifarious uses, including business users, workspace users, community users. Filming, I believe the premises has been used for filming of Harry Potter. So there are a number of uses which will be used and obviously the license will enhance those uses during the day and mainly from during the hours that I've amended the application to on a Sunday through to Thursday. In respect of the use of a nightclub, which is what many have referred to, in essence, it's for events which will take place in the evening. And the modus operandi in relation to those events has been set out in the paperwork. In essence, the daytime use would come to an end at around about six or seven o'clock. People would leave the premises and then the premises would close down until they reopen at nine o'clock when patrons would be allowed to be in, staff would be in, would manage the process all the way through till they close at three o'clock. Now, Mr. Bluitt, who is sitting on my right, he is the gentleman who is responsible for ensuring that the premises operates, promotes the licensing objectives and operates in the way that he's agreed with the police and should the committee grant a license, obviously in line with the terms of the license. He's very experienced, you can see that his details are briefly set out again within the appendix 17. He's also responsible for a new license that he's just obtained in Chelmsford for 3000 people on a festival site. He also is involved in bars and restaurants around the area, including Canning Town, where he has a thousand capacity venue. In relation to this, references be made to a previous operator with previous premises license, the premises license was surrendered, it wasn't taken away at all, it was surrendered, and I believe the capacity of that premises was something in the region of five to six hundred. You will note that the capacity in relation to these premises is 300. The keys, because one of the main issues which is raised is in relation to the noise and disturbance and nuisance caused by people who are leaving the premises. One of the key documents to address that is the traffic management plan, that sets out the detailed proposals of how people get into the site and how they leave the site. I'm sure there'll be questions in relation to that, and we can deal with those questions as and when they arise. The next main point that I wanted to focus on is in relation to the conditions. Now the conditions you have seen set out on the papers and are set out at part six and seven of your report. The main ones that I wanted to focus on are the ones which have been agreed with the police, that's a Appendix 19 and also part seven. Now in relation to those conditions, the police are satisfied that with these conditions, the premises will promote the licensing objectives so much so that they've been able to withdraw their representation. You have one minute remaining. I want to focus on a few of those conditions if I may, and they are number 19 and 21, which are contained just towards the end of part seven. Those conditions are very important because basically what they are saying is that the transport management plan is important if it's not working, which we say it will, but if it doesn't work, then the police and the local authority can give us notice, say it's not working, and if we don't respond, if we don't address those points, the hours are automatically cut back to framework hours. So it's a very quick process by which what at the moment we're asking for is three o'clock, could reduce back to midnight, and I would commend those conditions to you. In addition, there's an issue which is raised by licensing by environmental health, about noise escape, a noise limited condition can be offered along with standard lines that is often imposed by your committee, and again, that would be agreed in relation to preventing noise escape. An issue is raised about refuse and detritus up and down the street, autumn street, and certainly at the junction with Wick Lane. Again, a condition can be proposed in relation to dealing with that. Mr Blueitt, who's sitting to my right, as I've said, he will provide his mobile number to the resident so that if there are any concerns when the premises is open and trading, they can contact him and he will be at the premises in order to respond. Thank you. Can we now have a Miss Cathy driver, you have five minutes. [inaudible] Acting as a licensed in authority, in terms of this application, obviously we appreciate the reduction in hours that the applicant has provided. I think our main concern is ultimately one, I understand the planning permission actually only allows them to operate from nine to 1130 throughout the week. You have their representation. I see they're not in attendance on Sunday's evening, but in terms of my communications with them, the permission obviously was granted for those hours, they're taken into account the local amenity and the residents that are in the area. And from my representation, the area has obviously is and is still changing in terms of Wick Lane and Hackney Wick area in terms of a lot of residential going up in that area. And we know from experience, and I'm sure you'll hear from the residents that the premises was previously operated as a nightclub. And during that period of time, we did receive a large number of complaints from residents that reside close proximity to the venue. And that essentially is an obviously looking at their traffic management plan and egress plan is that the expectation is that people will exit either via walking, night buses or taxi. And the problem that we had on occasion when these nightclubs operated was that people did walk, they did pick up taxis, but a lot of the time it was close to the residential properties that caused the disturbance. And obviously in this day and age with Uber and various apps pulling up, I think the concern will be that they're pulling up close to residential and ultimately those late hours are going to cause disturbance to those residents again. With a large capacity of 300, I think people leaving and walking, there isn't really many local buses along that route. And most of those finish, I think the latest one is around one o'clock in the morning. There is nothing after that, so it would purely be either walking to a location to get when there isn't public transport even near there. That would be again through walking towards residential properties or across sort of the fly over towards bow and that area. So there could be walking and the majority obviously will is likely to be taxis and I think it's the management of the taxis and where they pull up. The additional problem that I'm not saying that is necessary going to happen on this occasion, but the problem is if it operates as a nightclub even at weekends, we found that people saw the garage, the petrol garage near close proximity, which is very close to a residential property. The easy point of pickup was the garbage and people would use to hang around there, then there was a urination and these were all the reports that we got over that period of time. And obviously what we want to do is prevent that from happening again. I think a late night venue here is will be a problem. The planning permission reflects that in its hours. And I think I'm sure the residents will add to that, but I think having a club operation and I appreciate it may not always be a club operation, but how it operate before was a did community and music event. But ultimately the money came in through the nightclub operation with promotion and various events taking place there. I appreciate obviously all the documentation provided for the policy, but I just don't think that the venue is suitable. And I think the management plan really would make the venue difficult with those times of hours to manage properly without causing a disturbance to local residents. Thank you, Chair. Any clap? You have five minutes. Thank you. My representation is on page 225227. Following on from Kathy's representation, I appreciate the hours, framework hours during the week. Obviously there's public transport these times. I mean, a big concern for me with regards to public nuisance is it's the disturbance to residents. We're looking at potentially 300 persons in the venue at weekend, Fridays and Saturdays. I know from getting a bus down there that the last one, when looking at it, the last ones around one o'clock and the buses don't start again till five in the morning. So, as Kathy has said, this is going to mean a lot of people walking, probably many, many taxis, oobas down there. Now, Autumn Street is very small street and you've got the potential, maybe 75, 100 vehicles, drivers going down there. I think that's going to be blocking up around there. The SO garage itself has a lot of traffic. I think this is going to be increase the public nuisance from people getting in and out of cars or the time people walking down the street. As Kathy has said, there's a lot of residents down there. If you look at page 225, 227 of my application, you will see highlighted on there. The closest residential in Wick Lane is in court. You've got residents on the corner of Autumn Street there. From my perspective, I think there's potential, a highly, likely potential of public nuisance, increase in public nuisance by the hours till three o'clock in the morning, Fridays and Saturdays. Thank you very much. The obvious fact with regard to this application is the amount of opposition it has generated. In this case, noise disturbance is not a likely effect of the grant of a licence. It will be a guaranteed outcome. This application seeks to implement a road closure, footway restrictions and the suspension of all parking bays in Autumn Street just to enable a nightclub to operate. These measures are completely disproportionate and unacceptable. Unit 3A is very different to the applicants' other venues, one of which is a field on a farm in the middle of nowhere and the other is in a solely industrial area with the nearest residential properties half a mile away. The LBTH statement of licence in policy mentions access and egress from premises as a potential area that could very likely cause public nuisance, and that is exactly the situation that all nearby residents would be facing if this application is granted. The same policy states, we would generally expect applicants to have planning and other permissions required for lawful operation of the premises in place at the time of the licence in application. As far as I know, the applicant does not currently have permissions from either the LLDC or the parking section or the highway section of the local council to either suspend parking bays or to implement road closures, and yet they present a travel plan to you that relies 100% on them obtaining all those permissions. Any conditions that could be imposed have already proven to be ineffective in addressing noise issues from patrons leaving events at Unit 3A, Autumn Yard over the year, who have congregated on Wicklane outside the residential properties. My previously submitted photographic evidence is proof of the antisocial behaviour and noise problems we have suffered in the past when the venue is operating at the same premises. I am a 74 year old pensioner, and all I want to be is able to go to sleep in my own home without being disturbed by noise and antisocial behaviour. Is that really too much to ask? The applicant has presented what they believe is a solution to the noise problem that everyone seems to agree has previously taken place at the junction of Wicklane and Autumn Street. Their plan involves the suspension of 12 permit parking bays on two days every week in Autumn Street, and as there is already a lack of permit parking bays in the area, to think this will be acceptable to local residents and businesses is outrageous. Also, to enable the applicant's traffic and transport management plan to work, they are relying 100% on not only the approval of both the park in and highway sections of council, but on you this subcommittee to agree with them that suspending every parking bay in Autumn Street is a proportionate measure to take to enable their club to operate without the noise traffic and noise nuisance problems that has previously taken place in the area. I certainly do not think it is. They also seek in permission to install traffic barrier at the junction of Autumn Street and Wicklane to restrict who will be allowed access and who will be refused entry. This is also completely disproportionate and unacceptable to local residents and businesses. Autumn Street is a public highway, not their own private drive. The placing of traffic cones and direction signs are all actions that would need approval from the highway section of the council. Currently, I read on the council website, the average time to process a planned road closure is 9 weeks from the time they receive payment. Within the general advice section of the licensing policy, it states very clearly, if members believe there is a substantial problem of antisocial behaviour which cannot be proportionally addressed by licensing conditions that they should refuse the application. These proposed measures cannot be described as proportionate in any way, shape or form. That would mean the only appropriate decision in this case is to refuse the application in its entirety. Additionally, the police have insisted that the submitted traffic management plan shall be strictly followed. Also, any modifications to the plan must be approved by the Metropolitan Police Service prior to implementation. If the applicant is confident that both the highways and the parking sections will agree to their proposals, may I respectfully suggest that either you defer this meeting and a decision on the application until such time as the applicants can supply confirmation to yourselves, and then a final decision can be made, or that the applicants withdraw the application until such a time as they have obtained those permissions that they need to carry out the traffic management plan that they are suggesting. Thank you. Thank you. Someone take a look. Hi, thank you. Hello, my name is Samantha Clark. I am the freehold owner of two of the units, two of the warehouses in autumn yard, units one and two. There are two other units, unit three discussing this evening, and then there is one more furniture factory, unit four. As the freehold owner, and also an operating business owner, there are three businesses that myself and my business partner run out of autumn yard. One is warehouse similar size to unit three, which has 14 registered studios that we have leases with our tenants. That access and those leases have 24/7 access to those studios. Many of them work within that 24/7 framework. The warehouse, there is a furniture warehouse in unit two, it's main operating hours of Friday, Saturday and Sunday, which is open to the public. And myself in unit two, we have an A3 license where we have a small restaurant, which we open to the public and also is for private hire. Which is within the normal framework of the hours. I have 30 years experience running three restaurants in London and have had an alcohol and A3 license for those 30 years. To allow this warehouse, this nightclub and everything else along with it to operate will bring severe disruption to the three businesses that are directly related to me. Not only access to our premises, on the land registry, we have five parking spaces in autumn yard. We are not going to have any access to that with the parking management and taxi plan laid out. So I don't see how any of my tenants can get to their premises during these hours, nor any of my customers going to my restaurant that's been operating for the last three or four years. When it's completely accessed, it's completely blocked off. On the land registry, we are the three homeowners of those parking spaces, so I don't see how on our back and work. I think there is severe noise disruption, noise pollution, light disruption. We have permanent moorings on the other side on the river Lee, where we have residents who live in the canal boats there. I mean, this is directly opposite and will be directly disrupted by the plans to have a terrace out onto the river Lee. These people live here permanently. We are all aware that there is a license application planning application has been approved for 120 flats, which is a stone throw from autumn yard. It hasn't started to be bought yet, but it will. And obviously that will bring in a huge number of residents, including young families. We all are very aware that TechniWig is becoming increasingly residential and the nightclub that used to operate there. There is no rumble space of that nowadays. I just feel we've got no notice about this application originally. No one came to ask us to discuss this, and I am in complete objection, as are all my residents and my tenants to this application. I just get some clarity on this road closure issue. We're obviously talking about lots of issues related to traffic management, but just specifically, what is the plan in terms of closing off a road? Have you set times for this? Is this only during pick up and drop off? Are there any more further details on what you would propose to do in terms of closing that road off? Thank you, Councillor. I'll start off if I may, dealing with the documents that you've got, and then I'll hand over to the author of the document. Mr Blackwood is sitting on my left. In short, there is no intention of closing a road, not set out in the plan, no intention of doing it, and certainly no barrier would be placed at the junction of Wick Lane and Autumn Street. I'm not sure where that has come from, but it's certainly not within the traffic management plan. The key, I think, behind the traffic management plan is that it does depend on a number of things, and I think Mr Dover has touched on those in relation to the suspension of the parking bays down Autumn Street. My understanding is that the use of those bays at night time on Fridays and Saturdays is minimal if at all. The plan does depend on the suspension of those bays if the suspension doesn't take place, which we believe it would from the discussions that we've had, but if it doesn't take place, then what applies are the conditions which we have proposed. So whilst we have a proposal with regards to a traffic management plan, and as I say, Mr Blackwood will take you through that, what I would refer you back to is the conditions which we've set out, and we've agreed with the police. So in relation to these two methods, conditions 19 and 21, I'm going to take them out of numerical order simply because 21 I think applies before 19, but be that as it may. So the submitted traffic management plan should be strictly followed, subject to annual review, or in the event of a significant incident, any modifications to the plan must be approved by the Metropolitan Police Service prior to implementation. So in relation to that, if we're looking at changing the traffic management plan, forgive my teeth, if we're looking at changing it, we need the police permission and approval. If we don't come up with a plan which is approved by them, then we fail on condition 21. If we come up with a plan which on the face of it appears to work, or indeed we're able to implement the plan which we put in front of you because we think it works. Then condition 19 is applicable because if something goes wrong or it doesn't operate, then the local authority and all the police can serve notice on us, basically saying 28 days, get your ax sorted out, you don't sort it out, then you're down to framework out. And that's how it would work. That's how we see it working. What is different, I think, from what happened in the past is a number of things which are contained within the plan. One of those things which didn't happen in the past is that one of the operatives who would be positioned at the end of the of Autumn Street Junction with Whitley would be what's known as CSAS approved. So they have a qualification and approval as it were to be able to control traffic, move traffic on, report any offenders to the authorities with regards to prosecution. So that's an important change. The other thing which I think has changed since the previous operators were there is that the apps which deal with private high vehicles, Uber app, for example, are much more sophisticated than they were. And by that, I mean that as part of the process by which they get their license from TFL, they have a system which means that they can block out certain areas, which means that the vehicles cannot park, stop, pull up within those blacked out areas. And it's touched on in the report and allows Mr Blackwood to cover up a little bit more depth. That is what we would put in place with regards to the main app operators so that the only place that an individual can be dropped off and the only place that an individual could be picked up is actually in the yard itself. We can do that, it's sophisticated enough to do that and so that's what would happen. The other issue which I know has come up is about people walking. I think the intention was that that may happen at the earlier times and during the operation of the community space and the work space in the evening times, as you will have seen from the traffic management plan. The intention here is that 80% plus will arrive and leave by means of a vehicle. And that's how we control the means, the access to and the egress from, how we control the noise volume, it's how we avoid any nuisance being caused to Mr Dover which I, and there's nobody on this table. If I may assure Mr Dover, there is nobody on this table who does not want him to go asleep in his own home on a Friday and Saturday night. Mr Blackwood, just pick up on your on the traffic management plan, pick up on any things that I've missed or you think are going to help the committee understand how that would operate. Absolutely, thank you. So I'll just touch on how the European's worked, it's not familiar, so we also have great reputations and relations with either of our popular PHV companies. What happens is we'll send them a blackout zone, for example, so we'll pick the area close to the venue where people will be egressing and we can say to them in this area, anyone that attempts to book a vehicle here, it must tell them that it's going to pick up in the yard. And so that's really successful because drivers are very keen to follow those. And obviously we, which is stating in the plan, we have a waste in area for customers to wait, but it was to come to them so there's no need for them to vote anywhere. And we'd have that system in the yard where we are matching up the drivers with the customers and I've seen that work at various different venues, small, large, festival sites, all around the country, actually. So that's a really key development in how we do that and obviously PHV's Uber is probably the number one app that people go to, so they're really good and they're really responsive. We can change things if it doesn't work because that's a really good advantage that we have in terms of that. And then I'll just pick up on, obviously we don't have a road closure in place, what we are relying on is the suspensions. So I've had a brief discussion with the network team who directed me to the parking development team and we're looking at the possibility of getting those suspensions in place just on Autumn Street, not anywhere else, not to take away from anywhere else at the parking. And that's a long-term process, but we'd look to have those suspended just for those late night shows, which would be Friday and the Saturday. Yeah, and then sorry to just address the barrier. The barrier that we have is just to segregate the footweight and the walkweight, and that is just on Autumn Street, it doesn't impose onto what cleanest rules. So that's just number one, public safety. And number two, just so that we don't have people walking in a road and we're trying to get out of it, it was to the yard because it's really vital that that roadway is clear for that system to work for us to get drivers down to the yard to get them out back to weekly and that will keep our customers in the venue if they can see that that's happening and that their clubs have come into them. So the barriers I think from what the way you're describing would run parallel to the road, either side of the road, just to keep the cars segregated from pedestrians. Yeah, that's correct. I'm hoping Councilor that I've covered all of the points that you raised. Sorry. So just touching back onto this issue. So when you say, when you're talking about road closure, you mean the suspension of the parking, and do you mean the fact that there's going to be somebody there telling people, you can't come down the street unless you're a nooper, is that what you mean when we're talking about road closures? In their documents, they state that they will restrict access to Autumn Street. So to do that, they have to have some sort of power to put any sort of barrier on the public highway you need permission from the highway section to place any cones in the road you need permission from the highway section to suspend any base you need permission from the parking section. So they have none of these permissions in place, and it's not a process that's easy to do. I worked in highways myself for the town council. I worked in parking on town council. I know it's seven weeks to get a road closure put in place. So also the gentleman there said that the parking bays are very rarely used in the evening. That's absolute rubbish. I've lived there nearly 25 years. I know everything about that street who goes up and down. Those bays are full up all the time. Lots of people who can't get a residence permit because they're in a car-free development depend on the bays using the bays after the times that they are regulated because that's where they can park. Then they go out in the morning before the bays start again. Those bays are full up all the time. If I want to park, if someone comes to visit me and they want to park in that boat bay, what are they going to do? Lift my visitors car away and take it away somewhere else. It's absolutely ridiculous idea. Completely disproportionate. Thank you. I just want to reiterate. Sorry, but this is when members ask the questions. You made your representation and that's where it stands. Sorry. Kathy, the objecting remarks here, one minute. I won't add anything further to what I've already said, but I think just the point of the road closures in my experience is not necessarily going to be the solution to the problem. We've had even unlicensed, if you could call it, road closures in other venues, and actually all it does is encourage more people to hang around the street rather than actually move away from the area. I don't necessarily think a road closure put in place. It actually gives a bit of a wider area for people to sit around in the street because it's closed. There's no traffic coming through. Obviously, the cabs will come through, but I think it'll just encourage people to sit and hang around even more from experience. I don't necessarily think of that also obviously in terms of the suspension, then you're talking about lifting vehicles and that to make a clear way through to that area. So again, is that what the intention of other premises is to do is to lift residents' vehicles off of that street so that they can clear their way for the cabs? I think also in terms of experience even with Uber and the various, they're on numerous apps now that you can use to get your taxis. And I think even from large-scale events, you can plot an area that you want them to pull up, but ultimately they will pull up the nearest area where that customer is. And I think that won't necessarily mitigate those problems. And from our experience, so that venue is that they'll stop in Wickline and stop wherever they can in order to get that. So I think there's those issues just to consider. I think that's all really for me. Thank you. Nick, you have one minute. I don't really have much more to say than what Kathy has already said. I mean, there's a big concern, the number of vehicles potentially going down the road. If the space is suspended, that's still going to be a problem. If they're not suspended, the people who have stopped start. You can't control people in high spirits having drunk in high spirits from actually speaking. Or, you know, excited, you know, because people tend to get a bit louder or they're drinking. And if they, I can see this, I hold up, people getting stopped behind each other, doors slamming closed, people in high spirits getting in the taxis, those walking away. I just think that overall this is going to be a major public nuisance by granting this license. Thank you. A little work here. One minute. The gentleman said that in his experience, there was little parking on all some street in the evening. That's rubbish. It's full up. Definitely full up in the evening. What the experience I've had in the past, three times when the previous nightclub was open, I was threatened with physical violence purely for asking people to be quiet outside my house. I was threatened three times and it really, really affected me. In the end, I wouldn't look out the window because the last time I was threatened, I was looking out and I was asking a guy to turn off the raid on his car and he was shouting at me, I know where you live. I couldn't even look out the window. I used to just go away at weekends to get away from it. It was an absolute nightmare. When that previous club closed down, I thanked the Lord. I really did. That all finished. Since that other club closed down, I've had no problems at all. I've had no rubbish thrown in my plant display at the front. I've had no plants pulled out and I've had good night's sleep every night and I dread the thought that they're actually going to get a license again. Thank you. I just wanted to finish by making you aware actually how small autumn the yard is. It is a colder sack. I do not, cannot understand how taxis can go down that when myself as a free holder has 24/7 access to that courtyard. Forget about my businesses. Yeah, but legally, I have access to that courtyard. It is a serious concern for any emergency services. There would be no chance of turning in that courtyard. It is not the tall wig. I don't know if you've been to autumn the yard, but it is an impossibility. Thank you. It is applicant for one minute. Chair, thank you. There's a number of points that I probably do need to pick up which have been said and I need to address. One of them I'm a bit surprised at in relation to planning. It's very clear that planning is very separate and different to licensing. There is a planning application that will be dealt with by the planning committee or colleagues there and is not a matter which is relevant for the purposes of today when you're focusing on the promotion of the licensing objectives. In relation to access to the premises, we've talked about general vehicles. Obviously in relation to people who have premises along Autumn Street and need access to their premises, that of course is not an issue and is not a difficulty. In relation to emergency vehicles, of course that is not an issue or a difficulty. Of course they have access to the premises down that road. I come back to the five points that I started off with as to why the committee should grant the application that's been made. Look at the main use of the premises throughout the week and obviously the main contentious part which is on the Friday and Saturday night. But I'd ask the committee to look at the full use, to look at the width of the uses and times and everything that's proposed and jotted on that basis. Secondly, look at the applicant, look at his experience, look at the team that he's put together. You've already heard this evening though not from me or from anyone on this application about how difficult it is in relation to traffic management plans. You've actually got a traffic management plan which has been provided to you to determine and help you determine this application. The capacity is reduced to 300. The traffic management plan we've talked about and will be implemented. There are conditions to make sure that that happens. In relation to the road, if there are road repairs that need to be done in the yard, then that will happen. And the conditions are set out. I propose some additional conditions so that's it. Thank you for your contribution today. This subcommittee will be a private discussion, a private meeting end of this session. See me, the medical service will be right to the five working days. Item number five, extra declaration. Thank you chair. I'd like members to please and agree the extension of decision deadlines for the following applications. We are board books, 341-348, Roman Road, London E35QR, perfecto pizza 391, Cambridge Heath Road, London E29RA, Fabwick, Queen's Yard, 43 white post lane, London E9, the Yard Theatre, Unit 2, Queen's Yard, 43 white post lane, London E9 and the Victoria Park Market in Gore Street, London E35TB. Members, please agree to extend them to the 30th of June, 2024. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor. Thank you. This subcommittee now is closed. Thank you for your contribution today. [BLANK_AUDIO]