Licensing Sub Committee - Tuesday 24 February 2026, 2:00pm - Tower Hamlets Council webcasts

Licensing Sub Committee
Tuesday, 24th February 2026 at 2:00pm 

Agenda

Slides

Transcript

Map

Resources

Forums

Speakers

Votes

 

Welcome to our Webcast Player.

The webcast should start automatically for you. 

Webcast cameras are not operated by camerapersons; they are automated and linked to speaker microphone units. The aim is to provide viewers with a reasonable visual and audio record of proceedings of meetings held in public.

Note: If your webcast link appears not to be working, please return to the Webcast Home Page and try again, or use the help email address to contact us.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this agenda point
  1. Webcast Finished

Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Good afternoon, everyone, and welcome to the Licencing Subcommittee meeting.
My name is Councillor Siligamed, and I'm the chair of the Licencing Subcommittee today.
This meeting is being held in person.
Committee members and key participants are present in the meeting,
in the meeting room and there may be some participants joining remotely.
This meeting is being filmed for the Council website for public viewing.
I remind members at the meeting to only speak on my direction
and to speak clearly in the microphone to ensure that their contribution can be properly recorded.
There are hearing aids available for anyone in public,
public gallery having problem with the sound.
Can members and officers please introduce themselves?
I'll start from my right.
Veenila Johnson, Licencing.
Simi Yasmin, Democratic Services.
Jonathan Milnek, Legal Advisor.
Councillor Mustak Ahmed from Bethnal Green Westward.
Councillor Boddle -Choudry, Bromley Southward.
Thank you.
Have we got any apologies, Semy?
No apologies if I have since chair.
Thank you.
Do members have any declaration of disclusive pecuniary interests?
Chair, not from me.
No chair, thank you.
Thank you.
I don't have any either.
Thank you very much.
Can members please note the rules and procedure on the page 19 to 18 of the agenda?
members also please note the agreed minutes of the meeting held on 8th January 2026, which
is on page 19 to 32.
Item 4 .1 is application for a new premises licence for tobacco, 50 porters walk, London
E1W2SF.
Today, chair, we have Mr Robert Sutherland and Florence Delphish present and representing
the applicant.
As for the objectives, we have Mr John Newland at present as a local resident.
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 objector will also be given five minutes to make their representation.
I will let each speaker know when they have one minute remaining.
Please note that the subcommittee have read the agenda pack in advance.
Thank you.
Thank you, Sumi.
Can I ask Levine Miller -Johnson, licence officer, to introduce the report, please?
Thank you, Chair.
This is an application for a premises licence for Tobacco Dock which is at 50 Porter's Walk London E1W 2SF.
The applicant is wishing for this application to be considered as a shadow licence held by the landlord.
A copy of the application is enclosed at appendix 1 pages 40 to 58.
The hours that have been applied for are set out on page 34 of this report, which is 3 .3.
An active premises licence is in existence and that can be found at appendix 2, pages
60 to 77.
Photographs of the venue and the immediate vicinity is included at appendix 3, page 79
to 80.
The site plan of the venue is included at Appendix 4, page 82 to 85.
The map showing the facility is included at Appendix 5, pages 87 to 88.
Details of other licenced venues nearby can be found at Appendix 6, which is page 19.
Representations have been received from local residents.
These can be found at Appendices 7 -9, pages 92 -99.
Conditions for consideration can be found at Appendix 10, pages 101 -103.
Thank you, Chair.
Thank you, Risa.
Do members have any questions?
You can ask afterwards if you wish to.
We'll give both of them together.
Thank you.
Can I ask the applicant to make their representation?
You have five minutes.
Chair, thank you.
I intend to do most of the talking.
Ms Delpues is present, should there be any questions in relation to current tenants and
operation that you have, and she should be able to assist me in relation to that.
This is an application, CERF, which is for a shadow licence.
Your policy doesn't deal with shadow licences, but I know that it is a concept which is and
has been accepted by the Council in other premises.
In this particular premises, Tobacco Dock, the dock itself I think is owned by the Council
and there is a long -term lease in place for Tobacco Dock Limited.
Tobacco Dock Limited, being that long -term leaseholder, is applying for this licence
in identical terms to the licence which is already in place for the purposes of protecting
the interest of the landlord.
In respect of this particular application, the committee may be aware of other issues
which have happened with the tenant and operation and some of the difficulties that have been
raised.
As a responsible landlord, we have sought to get involved in cases where we can.
And indeed, for example, I know historically there were issues in relation to the light
area, the light bar area.
And as part of that process, we removed that area from the lease,
because they were causing difficulties for residents,
and so we took it away so they couldn't use it.
It's on that basis that we're coming really to the committee
and saying this is a duplicate licence,
and it's really to protect that interest that we have.
There will only ever be one licence in operation at any one time,
At the moment obviously that's with the tenant which is Tobacco Dock Ventures Ltd I believe.
The responsible authorities have been consulted in relation to this.
We've discussed with them any concerns that they have.
They've put no objections in front of you.
I think you may have correspondence between ourselves and the police indicating that if
it assists, then we certainly won't be using the licence without appropriate notice, 14
days notice to the police and to the licencing authority.
As I say, it's not intended that it will be used unless there's an issue with the tenant
and they cause difficulties with the licence that they hold.
The final point that I wanted to raise is just really in relation to any further conditions
that you may require.
But if there are conditions which are thought appropriate to ensure that there's only ever
one licence in play, then of course I can discuss appropriate wording or deal with questions
as in when you raise them.
Chair, I don't know whether you've I'm sure the committee have got questions and I'll
probably best if I leave it to them.
Thank you very much.
Can I ask the objectors to make a representation in five minutes, please.
Thank you very much, Chair.
and by way of a preface just to thank yourselves
and the officers for arranging democratic representation
at this meeting, so thank you.
By way of context, if we look at page 88,
which is being kindly supplied by Tobacco Dock,
50 Porters Walk, although my address has been removed,
The area that I live in is Waterman Way, which is directly opposite.
And hence the context is that we obviously will hear and receive any activity that occurs within Tobacco Docks.
That's just to contextualise why I'm here today in a personal capacity because I live in Waterman Way.
Members will have already received the papers at page 97 and 99.
Those papers represent the objection that I'm raising today.
Again by way of preface, just to acknowledge that tobacco dock as a venue needs to be utilised.
There's not an issue about utilising the venue.
The issue is about ensuring that the activity is contained within the venue and that the
nuisance and the other activities are curtailed outside of the venue.
And I think that comes under the licencing subcommittees remit because the sale of alcohol
is the key issue in terms of what happens outside the venue.
So, keeping with the representation that's been laid before the committee at 97, 99,
I don't want to rehearse that. This all members will have already read it.
What I want to come up with is a solution, a solution focused approach to this.
And my recommendation is that we harmonise the hours, the licencing hours,
to the other area venues that alcohol is being sold from.
So we do have Whopping Wines, we've got Sainsbury's,
we've got a corner shop at the top of Whopping Lane.
So there are other venues.
So my objection is that given that these venues are selling alcohol
at these times, then we should ensure that TobaccoDock ensures that it sells alcohol
within those hours, that it's not available outside of those hours.
And the reason for that is because when it is, then we get the spillover of the nuisance,
we get people who are carrying open cans of alcohol down Wapping Lane and causing quite
a lot of distress to the local residents.
So that's very clearly my arguments
have been put in these papers,
but I'm recommending the solution,
which is the harmonisation of the hours,
in keeping with the other venues that are available,
where alcohol is available within Wapping.
Is that, am I making my,
made the representation?
It's fine. Thank you.
OK, can I just come to members now?
Do you have any questions for either the applicant or the objectors?
Thank you, Chair.
I have a quick question for the applicant.
We have just heard from the objectors that potential nuisance
particularly from the outside of the venue, what do you say, what's your representation
in terms of management of any potential nuisance? Thank you.
Councillor, thank you. In relation to the current operation, of course that's not us,
we're the landlords in respect of that. We don't hold that licence. If there are issues
in relation to the operators, then of course review applications, discussions can take
place with the authorities.
How the landlord has sought to get involved is in relation to the lease.
So in respect of the lease requirements on the tenant, there is an obligation on them
not to cause nuisance to people who live in neighbouring properties.
And as a way of enforcing that, they have set up a management company,
so that the management company can liaise between local residents, local businesses,
and the tenant and deal with those complaints and look to resolve them.
Where it is considered that the tenant is not doing what they should be doing, promoting
the licencing objectives, then the managing agent is able to put pressure on them with
regards to changing that behaviour.
If appropriate, then of course action can be taken under the lease when it is or if it is ever appropriate.
Hopefully it will not get to that stage and hopefully the system of complaints from local residents to the management company will resolve matters.
We're trying to improve the communication certainly between residents and the tenant.
As regards the control of patrons going to the premises, that is something that we don't
have.
If the tenant was to leave or was forced to leave, then of course this licence would kick
in and of course negotiations and conversations and steps will be taken to make sure that
the licencing objectives are promoted, particularly in relation to public nuisance.
I'm hoping that sort of covers the point for you.
I know that Ms Del Puig has had dealings on a number of occasions with residents in the
in relation to her role that she has with the owner of the property.
Thank you, that's helpful.
I have a small question. How do you justify this with the objectives
or how closely you've been with the local residents that they wouldn't have any effect
having this licence granted just in a brief summary.
The licence it is hoped will never be used.
That's certainly the starting point I think.
It's very much as a protection measure for the investment itself, the property.
The intention I think here as well is that it gives the protection to the landlord so that if the tenant doesn't do what they should be doing under their own licence,
should problems arise in relation to it, then the landlord, if necessary, can get involved and can put a bit of pressure onto the tenant in respect of their lease.
Sometimes in situations like that, tenants can do things in relation to their licence which of course puts us in difficulty.
By having the shadow licence it enables us to make sure that they fulfil their obligations under the lease.
It also makes sure that they can fulfil their obligations under the premises licence.
We don't operate the premises. The intention is not to operate the premises.
The intention is to have a responsible tenant.
Where, as I say, issues have arisen in the past, then we've intervened and we've taken
control back of POTS of the premises, such as the skylight area.
That, I would say, works.
That's what I would put forward, Sarah's assurance to the committee, to the residents, that by
granting this application, you won't be adding anything to the pressures on the area because
this licence wouldn't be used as the first intention.
Secondly, it gives us the ability to be able to exert some pressure onto the tenant.
Yeah, Jonathan.
Sorry, can I just clarify, I'm trying to explain, I'm going to have to obviously advise the committee
in due course, but if you're the licence holder, if you're the landlord of the premises, you've
You haven't really got control of your client, pursuant to the terms of the lease,
regardless of whether you hold a premises licence.
I mean, the committee obviously get the protection aspect of a shadow licence,
but not really clear on how having the licence itself
necessarily gives you any additional control over your tenant.
Outside of the normal protection that is given,
And so if the tenant was to do something in respect of the licence and dispose of it in
a way which removes it, then of course we would have the shadow licence there to protect
that interest.
I think it removes that potential.
And that's, I suppose, the extent to which I would put it.
The additional relationship that we have with the tenant is the requirement that is within the lease,
which requires the management company to act between the local neighbours, the residents and that company.
That gives, I suppose, direct communication to the landlord and again enables us to be more involved with it
than being distant.
Thank you very much.
If you don't have any more questions.
Sorry, can I just ask one more thing?
Sorry, I think it's Mr. Newland.
Is that?
Yes, just to be clear and just start,
because sometimes people don't necessarily appreciate this.
I suspect you do, but you do understand
that this is an application for what's called
a shadow licence.
So it's not a brand new licence in the sense of it changing anything that's going on.
Now, that's what I thought. I wanted to be clear, so that's fine.
That's really kind to explain that, and I think it's a really useful clarification, so I appreciate that.
Thank you.
I suppose, just in terms of what the committee can do, particularly if your concern is in relation to what goes on at present,
Obviously the committee can't look at that licence.
That's not what we're here for.
And as Mr. Sutherland mentioned,
there are obviously other mechanisms for that.
Thank you.
Thank you, Jonathan.
Now we move to the concluding remarks.
Objector first, we have one minute for your final.
So I guess just use my one minute to reaffirm
and what the objective is is to attenuate the hours and also the sale off licence sales of alcohol at Tobacco Dock.
Thank you. Can I ask the applicant please for your conclusion?
Sure, thank you. It is a shadow licence. The terms and conditions are identical to the current licence that's in place.
The landlord has indicated through its history that they're prepared to engage and to control the tenant
should they operate in a manner which doesn't promote the licencing objectives.
Ms Deltois would want me to emphasise to the committee that the landlord is open to discussions and communication with the tenants.
There's no intention to make their lives uncomfortable. We very much want to work with them.
Sorry, with the residents, it's very much our intention that we don't make their lives uncomfortable.
All of the responsible authorities are in agreement and I would commend the application obviously to the committee.
Thank you very much. Thank you for your contribution.
Today, the subcommittee will deliver in private session, as usual, after this meeting ends,
and the democratic services will send out the decision to you within five working days.
Thank you very much.
Thank you.
Thank you very much.
We move to our next agenda, which is a location for variation of the licence for Shell Alford
called petrol station, I believe.
445 Warwick Road, London E32TV.
Simi, can you please announce those ingredients, please?
Thank you.
For this application, representing the applicants, we have Sarah Clover and Giuliano Zaffino.
As for the objective, we have Mr Michael Dover present as a local resident.
After the application has been presented, the applicant will be invited to speak and
has requested a total of 10 minutes to make their representation.
The objective will also be given 10 minutes to make their representation.
I'll let each speaker know when they have one minute remaining.
Please note the subcommittee have the agenda pack in advance.
Thank you, Chair.
Thank you, Simi.
Yeah, it's fair.
We just increased the time for both of you.
So, can I ask Levine Miller -Johnson, the licensee officer, to introduce the report?
Thank you.
Thank you, Sher.
This is an application for variation of a premises licence for Shell Old Ford 445 Book
Lane, London, E32TB.
A copy of the variation application is enclosed at Appendix 1, pages 112 to 123.
The applicant has described the nature of the variation as to extend the hours for alcohol
sales for consumption off the premises to 24 hours a day every day.
The hours that have been applied for are sales of alcohol off sales Monday to Sunday, 24
hours.
The premises will be open 24 hours a day.
A copy of the existing licence is enclosed at Appendix 2, pages 125 to 134.
Photographs of the venue can be found at Appendix 3, pages 136 to 137.
Maps showing the local facility can be found at Appendix 4, page 139.
Details of other licenced venues can be found at appendix 5, pages 141 to 142.
This hearing is required as we have received objections from local residents.
These can be found at appendices 6 to 7, pages 144 to 115.
The conditions that are to be considered will be those that are on the current premises
licence.
Thank you, Chair.
Thank you.
Do members, do you want to ask any questions now or do you want to...
Thank you.
Can I ask the applicant to make your presentation, please?
Yes, thank you very much indeed.
Thank you. I'm the barrister on behalf of Shell UK Oil Products Limited.
Mr Zaffino with me is from Lockets & Co who are the consultants,
specialist licencing consultants who have put this application together.
I mentioned that and I've asked for just a tiny little bit more time, thank you,
because the Lockets have been dealing with the Shell sites for a very, very long time
and dealt with the original application for this particular site.
They got their first licence in 2019.
The application went in in 2018.
They got it in 2019.
Mr. Dover was one of the objectors at the time.
And Donna Lockett from Lockett & Co.
has kept in touch with Mr. Dover over the years since.
So there is some knowledge of what's
been happening on the site.
And I might just unpack that a little bit for you
just so you know what the history of this site is.
You may know the site.
It's a petrol station, a fuel station of the typical sort
that you might see.
In 2025, it had a refurb or a makeover
and to turn it into a co -op shop,
you will know that some of these service stations
have little retail units and people pop in for daily goods,
milk, bread, crisps, those sorts of things.
It's always had the alcohol licence from 2019,
but at the time of the grant,
it was restricted to the framework hours.
And I think at the time,
it might've been in the cumulative impact zone.
And if I'm correct about this, the cumulative impact area has changed in the intervening
space of time so that these premises are now no longer in a cumulative impact zone.
And that would make a difference to your consideration in terms of your policy framework.
I think Mr Dover in his representation indicates that everything is the same as it was in 2019.
That would be one thing that has changed.
So the reason for the extension is that this is essentially a shop where people come and
buy different goods.
Alcohol would be part of what we call in the industry a basket of goods.
And since the introduction of the co -op shop, people expect to be able to get all the things
that they would expect if they went into a co -op shop at all the hours that it's open.
And in that regard, I'd like to point out to you, please, the section in your framework
hours policy in section 2 of it, you can obviously look at this later, that says
shops, stores and supermarkets and at 2 .1 it says the licencing authority will
generally licence shops, stores and supermarkets to sell alcohol for
consumption off the premises at any time that they are open for shopping and then
it goes on to say that obviously you will look at any evidence but the word
is evidence of any impacts that are arising, crime and disorder, nuisance and that kind
of thing.
Now the framework hours policy generally does also talk about looking at every case on its
merits.
One of the important things about this site is that it's obviously been open for 24 hours
since 2019 as a retail outlet, as a shop.
So in terms of people coming backwards and forwards and some of the comments that have
been made in the representation.
There was another representation by Mr. Lloyd saying,
oh, this is going to dramatically increase
numbers of people visiting, people
who wanted to come and shop, footfall,
and that kind of thing.
It won't.
The reason for the application is that when people
come into the shop, and they come at all times
of day and night for all sorts of different reasons,
they might be on a journey somewhere,
they might be travelling late at night,
they might be on their way home,
having come back from a journey.
You know the sort of thing, you'll have done it yourself.
They might work night shifts. There's all sorts of reasons why people pop into a shop at later hours, even in the early hours of the morning.
They might be on their way to visit someone and they want to take a bottle of wine for a birthday party or a barbecue the next day.
All of that sort of thing. And when people go into the shop they expect to be able to buy everything in one go.
So they'll put into their basket the bread or the milk or the crisps or the chocolate.
And if they want to buy some alcohol they want to put that in the basket as well.
and if they can't, they'll think,
ah, I won't go to that one, I'll go to the other one,
because I can get everything there.
And thereby the shop loses out on the whole basket,
because people won't go to that one for two things,
and then that one for another thing,
and then that one for the alcohol, and so on.
So that's the reason behind the application,
it fits with customer expectations.
In terms of people coming to buy alcohol
for problematic consumption, alcohol abusive consumption,
these sorts of price points in the fuel stations are usually not very attractive
to people who are abusing alcohol. They want cheap alcohol and they'll go to
somewhere where they can buy their alcohol cheap and that typically would
not be a fuel service station. So obviously Lockett & Co on behalf of Shell
have been watching the premises very carefully over the course of time since
they've had their licence and Mr Dover has also been in touch with Donna Lockett
over the years as well. There was an agreement put in place on behalf of Shell with Lockett's
straight after the application in 2019, December 19, and there were a whole range of agreements
that were reached about delivery times, use of tannoys, and a big sign that was put up
to say please respect our residents. There was no further communication, I think, with
Mr Dover. Donna Lockett promised to be the point of contact for Mr Dover. I think there
no further contact until July 2020. There were some further issues about a rap video
that was being filmed illegally on the forecourt and that was dealt with by the police. And
then in 2021 Mr Dover contacted Donna to say, I hope you're keeping well and safe during
this dreadful pandemic, that frames the time frame, and he was asking about the sign being
replaced because it was blowing and flapping around in the wind and some graffiti being
painted out and that was done.
We haven't heard from Mr Dover since, and so although he does indicate in his representation
and with his partner or his colleague that there have been problems since, that hasn't
been communicated either to the responsible authorities or to Shell themselves.
And my final points then are to say that there have been no representations from the responsible
authorities, neither from the police, environmental health, nor trading standards, nor any of
the other responsible authorities.
And one would expect that if there had been resident impacts in the intervening space
of time since 2019, since this licence was granted.
And that's important for two reasons.
It's obviously some reassurance to you that your professional consultees who receive notification
of this application do not have anything negative that they want to report back in terms of
people complain to them, including Mr Dover, one would assume, but also it has a legal
implication and your legal advisor will be aware of this under the case of Thwaites,
which indicates that where there are no responsible authority representations, then the licencing
decision makers, and that would be you in this case, need to, and I quote, scrutinise
their anxieties very carefully if they wish to disagree with the evidence or the lack
of evidence brought forward by the responsible authorities.
And that brings me back to your framework hours because obviously you're looking for evidence of any negative impacts.
Obviously there's been six or seven years now to be able to observe the premises as they're trading through the night to see what sorts of impacts there might be.
And thankfully we are able to report that the feedback is nil. There's nothing.
I think even Mr Lloyd is talking about what would happen prospectively rather than reporting on things that have happened.
and he's talking about pedestrian impacts.
And obviously this is a fuel service station,
so it's cars predominantly coming and going.
So I hope that that sets out the application for you.
The existing conditions will continue to apply.
You have the operating schedule in your pack.
And if I can help you, or obviously,
Locketts can assist you, we're very, very happy to do so.
Thank you so much, and thank you for the extra time.
Thank you very much. I can now ask Michael Dover. You can use up to ten minutes of your time as well. Please go ahead.
We have lived in our house directly next to the Shell petrol station for 26 years and is by far the busiest petrol station in the East London and Essex area.
With this comes noise problems.
And whilst during the daytime and evenings we have no option
than to grin and bear that noise disturbance,
we do expect that our right to a good night's sleep
and our ability to achieve it
is something that should not be up for negotiation.
Any action that threatens that ability will be resisted at all costs.
This application is not about making it easier
or more convenient for the residents to purchase alcohol,
as we can already easily do that within the current framework hours.
It's not about improving the service to local residents,
and in fact it's not about local residents at all.
If granted, it will be at the expense of local residents and nothing else.
The only plus point will be in favour of the new franchise holders
who take over control of this shell petrol station in one week's time,
who will then see a very slight increase in the huge weekly profits
that this site already makes. If approved, this outlet would become a magnet to young
people passing along what we claim to and from the parties that frequently take place
within the artist's studios and on the many houseboats that line the canals in the area.
From what I have seen, these same people are totally oblivious to the noise disturbance
they create. Many of them use the walls of our house and our garage door as a makeshift
because the toilets within the petrol station building are unavailable between midnight and 6am.
They also appear to have no idea of the correct way to dispose of litter.
I see many of them using nitrous oxide gas which they inhale from balloons while stood near our property.
Shell have one assistant on duty overnight who is stationed at the service window.
This is fine if the only purchase being made is fuel, because then they're not required
to move away from the buttons controlling the petrol pumps and the till.
But if a customer wants anything other than fuel, that assistant has to leave the till,
exit from behind the security counter, wander around the shop doing the shopping for the
person, collect all the goods and bring them back to the till to ring them up.
Every time that assistant needs to use the toilet, which is located at the rear of the building,
they can be gone from the service window from anything up to 8 minutes.
This already causes huge frustration with vehicles waiting to fuel up.
And if there are also to be groups of people on foot queuing to buy alcohol,
the result without doubt will be further noise disturbance.
When this original licence was granted, and I quote,
the licencing subcommittee members were of the view that framework hours would be the most appropriate hours to grant for the area in which the premises are situated.
Members reached that decision and that decision was unanimous.
The objections and concerns that were raised by all parties at that hearing are just as relevant, if not more relevant today, as they were back in 2019.
The sole major change since the original licence was granted is that there are now more residential
properties at risk of being affected by the noise problems than there were back in 2019.
Twenty days ago, on the 4th of February, planning consent was given for a major new development,
Iceland Wharf, consisting of 165 new flats, which are located less than 100 metres from
petrol station and they are on the route towards the bars, clubs and houseboats where all the
parties regularly take place. At least six levels on the upper floors of this 12 storey
building will have an unrestricted view down onto the shelf forecourt and will no doubt
be forced to suffer the almost daily antisocial behaviour such as the sounding of vehicle
horns and even more so by the horrendous noise that takes place when six or eight or more
All hired supercars assemble on the brightly lit forkle in order to video themselves whilst
all revving their engines as loudly as they can. In fact the very bright lights of the
forkle are the thing that attracts those who cause this deafening anti -social behaviour
and if alcohol were able to buy this behaviour would no doubt increase. In addition the new
residents on the lower floors will suffer as well due to loud laughing and shouting
as the young people pass by swinging from drink cans and bottles
and dropping litter as they go.
I am 76 years of age and for me those few hours overnight
when alcohol sales are prohibited are precious hours, very precious hours.
Keeping framework hours licenced in hours will mean for me
the difference between getting a fair night's sleep between midnight and 6am
or the very real risk of being awoken once or more times in the middle of the night
by some idiot banging away at my metal window box in an attempt to remove a beer bottle top.
Approval of this application will only feed the antisocial behaviour
that already takes place in the vicinity of the petrol station.
Whilst considering this application, I ask that you take strong note of all the facts
that I have related to you, both within my original objection letter and this afternoon.
These are facts that represent real life situations that I have seen repeated over and over again
with my own eyes during the 26 years I have lived in that house.
And finally, with regard to the new franchise holders who take control of the facility in
one week on March 3rd, it will mean for every single member of staff at Old Ford next Tuesday
it will be their very first day working at their location.
None of them will have any experience
of the antisocial behaviour that already takes place there.
And yet the very first action this new franchise has
is to apply for an extension to licencing hours.
The first decision today that could be made
is to let Shell retain their existing hours
for selling alcohol and let myself and other residents
keep our precious few hours overnight
when sales log cannot be made.
We therefore request that you refuse this application
on the grounds that it fails in regard to three of the four licencing objectives,
i .e. the prevention of crime and disorder,
prevention of public nuisance and public safety.
Thank you.
Thank you very much.
Members, come to members now.
Do members have any questions either to the applicant or to the objectors?
We're stuck.
Thank you, Chair. For the objector, can you just, if I've missed out from the papers or from your representation,
what close proximity your residence is next to, excuse me.
What proximity is that?
How close are you?
My wall, the wall of my house is the petrol station.
Can you switch on your microphone please?
The wall of my house is a shared wall with a petrol station.
Also just for further clarification, can Jonathan remind me what's the hours outside the framework hours?
Sorry, this framework here was 6 to 11 .30 Monday to Thursday, 6 till midnight Friday, Saturday, 6 to 10 .30 Sunday.
That's framework.
Can I just ask a question?
In regards to the existing licence, have you ever been, have you ever complained or is there any nuisance complaint against the venue, the shop?
Registered?
I am very friendly with the manager there at the moment and I do express my concerns to him.
Facts like the microphone that has speakers in the thing.
It was being used all night long, different hours, and it was waking us up.
So there was a condition put on by lockets, I believe, that it wouldn't be used after 10 o 'clock at night.
Sadly that keeps being broken. It was broken on Sunday this week.
At one o 'clock in the morning it was being used.
The reason I haven't made as many complaints over the last, since the licence has been got,
because I've dealt with problems of noise in my own way.
One of the biggest problems that was facing us was people pressing their hooters.
Another big problem was the people coming on and filming rap videos, which they still do.
One was doing that last week.
And the other one is these people filming themselves revving the engines.
So what I did in the end, when they're filming the rap videos,
I went out and spent £180 on a panic alarm which I fitted to the side of my house.
So when they now start filming videos, I press my panic alarm.
it makes the most horrendous noise and they can't film their video.
So that has worked. They virtually don't film any videos there at all now.
That worked. When they're out there filming themselves with their flashcards, I do the same.
I press my expensive alarm to make the noise on the forecourt to make them go away.
So I'm sort of dealing with it in my way.
I have suggested to Shell that if you're running a business and you get eight of these
huge Lamborghinis, Maserati things coming in the station and they're sitting there
revving as loud as anything, deafening, then what they should do is they should just close
the shop and say to these people, your anti -social behaviour, the shop's closed.
Make them move.
But they don't.
when these people come in, they actually listen to them revving their engines
and then they sell them petrol and they don't say anything to them.
The same as filming. They never say a word, these people filming rat videos.
I called the police once. That's the only time the police have been there.
Thank you. I respect your concern.
Just one more question I want to ask. I know one complaint is too many, I believe.
But how many residents do you have in your locality or nearby as your place exists?
How many more residents?
There's people living next door to us, there's people living above Lofty's shop, which is about 10 metres away.
There's people living above the pub, the Iceland.
There's blocks of people opposite the Iceland, people living there.
And there's this 157 which has just got planning permission to be built.
The street now is very, very busy, much busier than it ever was.
I believe the applicant has something to say on that question.
Thank you, Chair.
I do think it's important, given what Mr. Dover said, to quote to you directly from
the letter that he wrote to Lockett's in 2021 in which he said, and he was saying,
thank you so much, how delighted I am about the dramatic improvements, but he said,
but by far the most noticeable improvement has taken place since the number plate reading
cameras have been installed and the maximum time limit stay of 15 minutes for all vehicles on the
forecourt has been introduced. For us, this simple step has produced excellent results.
Obviously we do still suffer from some noise disturbance, but the days of large groups of youths in high powered sports cars lining up on the forecourt for 40 or 50 minutes at a time, filming each other whilst revving their engines, has thankfully ceased.
Thank you so much for your help in getting this sorted.
And there are some other things in the letter as well about the help that Lockets and Shell provided, but I hope that assists you to put some of these comments into context.
Thank you. Can I ask Consul Budru for your question?
Just a quick question. Was there any consultation done with the local...
I'm not sure if I'm allowed to ask that question.
You can. There is a statutory consultation whereby Blue Crosses have to go...
Was there anything done?
I was going to get to that. So the statutory notices have to go up at the premises
and that will obviously have been done here.
There's got to be an advertisement in a local newspaper circulating in the area again
That would have been done because it's one of the standard things that the licencing
Officers will cheque our own policy says that we mail shot. I think mr. Miller Johnson correctly. I'm wrong. It's 40 metres
Which is go that's more than the statutory consultation
so if we're mail shotting in within a radius of 40 metres around the property that brings the
application to the attention of others who may not necessarily be aware of it.
And then I'm assuming of course that there'll be, you know, we have local newsletters
or people can sign up to licencing alerts on our website.
That I'm not one of those friends.
Maybe not, okay, but certainly there's more than the standards.
Just a quick one, Chair.
I just want to find out, obviously I know the location, I'm not far from where the location is.
I used to fill up there regularly, many years ago.
There are a lot of residents have moved in there.
Obviously there's a lot of towers coming up.
There are some warehouses on the other side.
So I'm aware of those issues.
But my question is,
as the objector has said earlier,
the committee refused without any hesitation before.
So I'm reserving my rights to say anything after.
So I'm not really clear that there's a question there or who gets directed.
Scott, just point out one more question. You mentioned about the queuing up in the toilet area.
So how do you describe that?
In terms of queuing up within the shop area,
what problem or causes to the residents outside?
When the assistant is not at the counter,
people pull into the station, 2, 3, 4 in the morning,
there's no one there. The first thing they do is lean in the window.
Beep beep. Still no one there. Beep.
Then they hold the hooter for ages.
So this happens all night. I wear really expensive ear plugs
to try and stop that noise, but it still gets through.
Yeah, Jonathan has that.
So just a question for Miss Clover, just in relation to that specific point.
I appreciate you may not have instructions, you may need to discuss this, but would there
be scope, for example, to deal with the situation that there's two people on duty after a particular
time?
I don't know if that's feasible or not, but that would certainly seem to resolve that
particular problem.
Well, all I can say about that is that there have been extensive dealings between Mr. Dover
particularly and shelved through lockets over the years and straight after 2019
there was something like a 15 -point plan that was put in place that dealt with
all sorts of different things delivery times, how many people were on duty,
delivery times, time limits placed on vehicles attending, the banner saying
please respect our neighbours, delineation of parking bays, the use of the Tannoy
system, there was an issue with the bin store door removing a car that had been abandoned,
the use of cages with rubbish.
Now you'd appreciate that some of these issues have got something to do with alcohol and
some of them haven't and wouldn't be controllable under an alcohol licence anyway.
What I'm saying is there's no reason why Mr Dover can't continue to liaise with Shell
and with Lockett on any of these issues if he has them.
And Mrs Lockett was concerned that she hadn't heard from Mr Dover in a long time, and the
first we'd heard about a number of these issues was this representation against this application.
That's not helpful to anybody.
Mr Dover says, well, we've got a new franchisee, I get on very well with the manager, but he's
going and we're going to get a new franchisee.
That's not how these sites work.
I'm here for Shell, and it's Shell that holds the licence for all of their sites, and they
They work on the basis of a retailer business agreement, which is like a franchise.
But it's Shell who organises the training, it's Shell who oversees the operation of the sites, as you would imagine.
Otherwise it's their reputation that is shocked if something goes wrong.
So Mr. Dover has got a continuous line of communication or complaint.
Oh, are we down?
He's got a continuous line of communication through Lockett with Shell at all times.
There's no need to be concerned about a change of guard as it were.
I just wanted to come back very quickly on this point about consultation because of course if people had raised their concerns or complaints to the council through licencing, through councillors, through environmental health,
that would also have fed back into this process for the variation,
because those responsible authorities, whether it's licencing,
whether it's individual councillors, whether it's environmental health,
would also have been able to come in front of the committee and say,
we're aware that residents have been complaining,
we're aware that there's an issue here, it comes up in local residents meetings,
it comes up in public forums and that kind of thing.
We do want to add our concerns to it.
So I think Mr Dover says the only thing that's changed about this application
is the dramatic increase in residential dwellings in the locality, that has been accompanied
by a decrease in the numbers of people who are actually raising any complaints and the
numbers of representations that have been made about this application and that is also
important.
In my closing submission, I will have something to say about the Councillor's comment about
what we refused before and so we reserve the right to refuse again.
I'll come back to that later.
That's fine, thank you.
I've got one question between our licencing officer and the applicants.
So, you know, if you can just, because it seems like it's quite a jump from 11 .30pm
to 24 hours, you know, it's just around the clock.
Is there any extra additional condition
that is likely to be implemented,
whether from the licencing side or from the applicants?
I probably need to jump in there,
because Ms Miller -Johnson is here
as the licencing officer presenting the report,
not as a licencing officer representing the licencing authority.
I mean obviously it's for the committee to be proactive with conditions if you think there are conditions
That could address any of your concerns you can obviously that's the whole point of this discussion here
you explore them with the applicant you explore them with the
Objectors off the top of my head. I've certainly not been able to think of any additional
conditions above what's already
On the licence that are obviously relevant to the application. But if you have anything you think might be relevant then obviously, please do
to explain what they are, or even adjust it?
No, I was just trying to say that it's something voluntarily
because it might bring an impact to the timing
since it's all around the clock.
So this one is asking is there anything brought
to the applicant, application itself.
But anyway, because you mentioned that all the conditions
are as before.
You can just add your question and we can...
Just a quick question. Obviously, what is the closest, nearest
24 -hour store that sells alcohol to this location weekly?
The nearest one to it. How far?
That sells alcohol 24 -cent.
With respect, I suspect the answer is that most of us haven't got...
I don't know. I think we generally provide an appendix
that has the nearest licenced premises,
which again I think is a 40 -metre radius.
If there's one that's 42 metres away, that won't appear on that list.
I think the simple answer is if no one here knows, then no one here knows.
So Sarah was going to say something.
Jeremy, you wanted me to come back on the point that was being made about additional
conditions.
Only to say that this is a very comprehensive operating schedule as it is and it controls
licencing impacts on the four licencing objectives up until the licence ends, so up until midnight,
but there's no particular reason to believe that that same suite of conditions isn't going to be equally effective
one hour later, two hours later, three hours later.
So you've got the comprehensive CCTV condition, it would obviously be in effect the whole time.
You've got the training packages, you've got the service packages,
everything that's in there is just as effective through the additional hours as it is in the earlier hours.
and because we've had no feedback from anybody, from the police,
environmental health or residents in the intervening space of time
to say there is a particular problem, there is nothing else to add.
If anyone can think of something that they would wish to add.
Thank you very much. Thank you.
OK, if you don't have any more questions,
we can move to the concluding remarks.
Move to the concluding remarks.
I would ask the objector, you have one minute to say your final concluding.
Thank you.
The lady here describes it as a supermarket co -op, as though you walk in and walk around and buy your own food in that shop.
It doesn't work like that. It's the man behind the counter that has to leave and go and do your shopping for you,
while there's three or four people waiting to pay for their petrol or their petrol will be turned on.
So that's when the noise comes, when people are bibbing their hooters
because the attendant is shopping for someone around the shop.
Also, I would like to thank Lockett for what they have done.
They've done some great improvements over the year.
The lady mentioned about delivery times.
Well, when I moved in 26 years ago, there was a condition on the planning permission
saying that they couldn't have deliveries out of certain hours.
And at the time, for many years, they completely ignored that.
It was only when I went and did a bit of delving that I found out that that was a condition
they weren't actually sticking to.
Fine, the cameras on there has helped.
The reason I haven't complained is not because the nuisance has gone away, it's still there
the whole time. It's because I've done things myself to limit it. I've put real
thick ear plugs in so that I don't get woken as much. I've bought this alarm thing which
I use now and makes a huge noise because that gets rid of the people. Lockets have done
none of that. They haven't refused to serve these people that make the noise. They haven't
refused to serve the people that rev their engines. They've done nothing about that.
If they want me to complain every single time there's something wrong, I can do that. I
can make a diary that will last every day of the week and I guarantee you there will
be something to complain on there and a piece of video or photographic evidence which will
back it up all the time.
Thank you very much.
One minute is over.
Thank you very much.
Can I ask the applicant please, one minute.
Thank you.
Yes, thank you, Chair.
Just to come back to your framework as policy, I am pointing out to you, particularly your
paragraph 1 .8 that the framework, our policies are not, and I quote, the usual or the normal
terminal hour and simply because that was the decision in 2019 does not mean it automatically
applies again now, particularly in circumstances where the premises is no longer in a cumulative
impact zone. That is a key consideration. The policy repeatedly says every case will
be considered on its merits and it also highlights that it's relevant where the premises have
previously been licenced and the past operation of the premises.
And as I've highlighted, Thwaites is an important case in that regard, and the attitude of the
responsible authorities having had the opportunity to observe the premises trading over the last
year, the last six or seven years.
Mr Dover says that this is the busiest petrol station in East London and Essex and all the
profit that they make.
There is no evidence for that whatsoever.
This is a business trying to be a business and trying to be competitive in very difficult
trading circumstances.
We all know about the problems of the costs of doing business.
And on my final point, growth, local economy growth, national economy growth is now a requirement
for local licencing decision makers to take into account when they make licencing decisions.
It's not a bad thing that businesses are making money.
On the contrary, licencing decision makers are required to take it into account and do what they are able to do to support that business growth, which in turn supports their own local growth. Thank you.
Thank you very much. Thank you Sara Clova and Giuliano Zaffrinofor and Michael Dover for your presence here.
Thank you all for your contribution.
The subcommittee will deliver it in private session after this meeting ends.
The Democratic Services will send out the decision to you within five working days.
Thank you very much.
Thank you for your contributions.
Meeting is now closed.
Thank you.