Interactive webcast player

Licensing Sub Committee
Tuesday, 22nd September 2026 at 1:41pm

 

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 very much.
Good afternoon.
Welcome to this meeting of the Licencing Committee.
My name is Peter Golds and I am the chair of the Licencing Committee and therefore chair
of the subcommittee this afternoon, which is being held on Tuesday the 22nd of September.
The meeting is held in person and committee members and key participants are present in
the meeting.
I believe there is nobody officially joining us online, which would only be a council officer.
The meeting is being filmed for the council's website for public viewing.
Therefore, there will be no necessity or indeed it will not be appropriate for anybody to
attempt to take photographs on a mobile phone or anything else because these
could include council officers who will be doing their job and that is not right
or correct. Anybody who wish to see anything can see it on the public
broadcast which will be available online in perpetuity. May I remind everybody at
the meeting to only speak my direction and to speak clearly into the microphones
to ensure their contributions can be recorded. If you look at my microphone
There's a little red light so it shows I'm speaking when I finish speak
The red light disappears it means and somebody else can speak if there are two red lights on at once
Then all that you'll get on the broadcast is a noise that sounds like somebody is drowning in a bathysphere bathyscope
All that will happen is I will be constantly saying please switch your light to please switch your microphone off
please switch your microphone off.
It is for the purposes of the broadcast.
I'd now like to invite members and officers
to introduce themselves,
starting with my colleague, Councillor Martin.
Councillor Martin Parker, I am from both ways.
Councillor Shabir Hussain, Bromley South,
and nothing to declare.
Good afternoon Jonathan Millig legal advice into the subcommittee Simi has been Democratic Services
Thank you very much I will introduce other council officers at the appropriate time
technically we receive apologies for absence and as the
Quorum of the committee is three and the membership is three and we're all here. There's no apologies
They can't be or else there wouldn't be a meeting
Formerly do we come to item 9 is members declaration of interest do members have any declaration of?
disposable peculiar interest in this application
No
Thank you, there are no decorations if that could be recorded in the minutes
Can I invite everybody to note the rules of procedure on pages 9 to 18 in the agenda? I?
My colleagues always try and conduct licencing meetings in a collegiate fashion.
We're not in either the council chamber or in the House of Commons,
so there is no point in having a ding -dong.
Please, if somebody says something you don't agree with,
you can wave at me and I will call you.
Please don't start talking across somebody else,
because I will ask you to stop instantly.
I'm sorry about that, but we do try and do this collegiate.
So if everybody understands that we will get a good meeting and
Hopefully a decision
These pleases please yourself the majority of people
We now move on to the applications and I'm going to take a piece of advice on this
Because I am looking at
applications 3 .1 3 .2 and 3 .3
which are a series of applications for Wixide development.
And rather than listening to the same presentation
three times, I think it would be appropriate,
and I have taken the advice on this,
and I should get Mr. Melnick to confirm this,
but we have one presentation from the officers
and one presentation from the applicants.
and one presentation from the objectors and effectively roll all three together because
otherwise we would be sitting here hearing the same thing three times because it will
be terribly repetitive. But I get advice from Mr Melnick and then confirmation with everybody.
Mr Melnick.
Thank you, Jay. Yes, the very, very short answer is that's perfectly permissible. You're
going to hear exactly the same information in relation to all three. They've got to be
considered holistically. You're effectively going to have to make separate decisions for
each premises, although they're not likely, I suspect,
to be radically different from one another,
but this will certainly short circuit the process.
And so I know I've spoken to Mr. Speigler about that
as of Ms. Jezmin previously, and there's no objection.
I don't know if we've got any objectors present.
No objectors are present at the meeting chair.
We do have two supporters here,
and we have the licencing authority
and the environmental health team as objectors, but no resident objectors.
I think that generally has consensus, so let us proceed with that. May I invite Ms. Yesmin
to confirm those in attendance? I think I pretty well worked it everybody. Simi,
would you like to identify people? When your name is given, could you wave so we know who you are?
Thank you, Chair. For the items for 3 .1, 3 .2 and 3 .3 we have Mr. Jack Speigler representing
the applicants. We also have Mr. Rennold Lee and Mr. Liam O 'Hara who are all supporting
him. As for the objectives as mentioned previously, the objectives aren't present, however we
have Ms. Kathy Driver representing Licencing Authority and Ms. Nicola Cadsor representing
the Environmental Health Department. In terms of supporters, we have two supporters present,
Mr James Sandoval and Mr Tom Keel, and that is the attendees for today's meeting. After the
application has been presented, the applicant will be invited to speak and will be given a total of
10 minutes to make their representation. The objectors will also receive the same amount of
time to make their representation and so will the object supporters. Please note that the subcommittee
have read the agenda pack in advance thank you chair and we've received a
supplementary I had a signal that Miss Cachau wants to speak so the floor is yours.
I just wanted to make it clear the only one that I've got an objection to is the
public realm outdoor and not the others. I think we'd have got clear on that on
the presentation but thank you for putting it on record so early in the
meeting thank you
I'm now going to invite Corinne Holland, who is a licencing officer, to effectively present
the papers.
And if you'd like to just do what you would have done as if we were meeting three times
Yeah, I was wondering whether or not to sort of do all the
application appendices all in one and try and do it that way and
amalgamate them on the hoof
that I think that would be much appreciated. Apologies for the first two
reports obviously on the front page of them I put that they're objectors of the
licencing authority and environmental protection and obviously they're not.
There are two residents objecting and they're supporting residents so that's
mistake. Right, so this, well these reports relate to 12 premise licences within the Wickside
development in Hackney Wick and then there's one public realm licence for the outdoor area.
The developers applied for 13 licences altogether, like I say 12 being physical properties and
one being outdoor space.
It's not known currently what tenants will occupy each unit.
So there's a description of each unit and the sort of premises in this as a unit plan,
and the sort of premises they expect to take up occupation from them.
So if I do initially, there's an application for one market walk.
That's shown as a large casual neighbourhood restaurant and that's in appendix one on page
26, starts on page 26.
There's an application for four market walk, which is shown as a flagship restaurant or
a large market hall. That's appendix 2 on page 41. 5 Market Walk is a market hall, food
hall, multi -operator operation. That's appendix 3 on page 56. There's 46 Hepscot Road, which
which is shown as a creative workspace with an ancillary bar and cafe.
That's appendix 4 and that starts on page 71.
There's 10 McGrath Place which is shown as a pub.
That's appendix 5 on page 86 to 99.
And then our jump to 1 Lock Road.
They're the larger premises of the first five for the larger premises of the all 12
And the smaller premises that I've listed them under is one lock Road
That's a cafe bar and that's on page
176 obviously my appendices go going a bit strange there, but
It's shown as appendix one of the second report
2 Lock Road is also a cafe bar, that's shown in the second report as Appendix 2, page 191.
4 Broadwalk is a kiosk cafe bar, so more of an outdoor kiosk space.
That's appendix 3 on page 206, 7 Broadwalks, a neighbourhood restaurant, appendix 4, 2 on page 220.
14 Broadwalk is a cafe bar, appendix 5, page 236.
14 McGrath Place is a neighbourhood restaurant, appendix 6, page 251.
And then 10 Davies Square is shown as a café, artesian bakery, appendix 7 on page 266.
And then the Public Realm licence application is shown on page 358.
So the hours of operation are for the sale of alcohol, of the 12 premises, for the sale of alcohol on and off sales Monday to Thursday 10 till 11pm, Friday to Saturday 10 till midnight, Sunday is 12 till 10 .30 and late night refreshments are Friday and Saturday only.
until midnight and then the opening times are 30 minutes after the closing
and from 8 o 'clock in the morning. There are non -standard timings in the
application. I think there was an error in the applications because it says Easter
Thursday and bank holiday Sundays for late night refreshments but in the
alcohol it says Easter Thursday and bank holiday Thursdays so I think that's
meant to be Sunday and obviously the committee can make a decision as to
whether or not the non -standard timings are bank holiday Sundays which match
with the opening hours so I think that was a typo. The plans are shown on page
I've put in remarks, a comment, if there's plans that we feel are missing.
Going on the unit profile, it says what floors, whether it's ground, first, second floor.
So within that appendix, you'll notice that there's a few comments where I think the plans
are missing. The unit profile, which is page 106, is what the applicant submitted saying
what they thought every premises would be, and it's got capacities on there as well.
Maps showing the location, as these are all duplicated, I'll just go from one report with
the appendices, it will get confusing. So the maps showing the location and there's
a master plan in there which the applicant showed so you can see where all the premises
are and the public realm space is in appendix 8 on page 108. Photographs of the site are
in appendix 9 on page 111 and details of other licenced premises in the vicinity in appendix
10 on page 122. This hearing is required as there has been opposing representations for
the 12 premises. Two residents, Charlie Jennings and his representative, the former president
is appendix 11 on page 125 and Amelie Roy is appendix 12 on page 128. And then there's
representations to the public realm as well as those two resident objectors. There's the
licencing authority and that's on page 387 and environmental protection is 389. And then
There's six supporting representations and these are in appendix 13 to 18, page 130 to
142 and they're supporting across all of the applications.
For all the reports, the agent has corresponded with the two resident objectors and the correspondence
can be seen in appendix 19 and 20 on a page 145 to 152.
And then the licencing authority sent emails to both objectors, sending the conditions
that had been agreed with the police, being agreed with the other responsible authorities,
and their responses can be seen on a page appendix 21 on page 154 to 161.
Essentially the representations cover drunken behaviour, increased noise and disturbance,
intoxicated patrons close to the canal and congregation of patrons in the street.
Any conditions volunteered in the application, the majority of them have been superseded by
agreed conditions with the responsible authorities. There was one for the smaller premises,
is part B of the condition shown in appendix 24, which is page 343. The part B wasn't included,
so I've put the condition in there. Conditions agreed with the police, licencing authority
and environmental protection are shown in appendix 22, page 163 to 168.
The police included five market walk in the smaller premises when the conditions that
they agreed. Going on, we then got this capacity for the unit profile capacity, five market
walk, that was felt to be a larger premises. So it was agreed, the conditions agreed with
the police was for the smaller premises, but for the purposes of this report, I'd put it
the larger premises so that's the only one that's slightly different and
obviously the committee would decide what conditions are agreed to that and
then the public realm the conditions agreed with the police are on page well
That report the third report appendix 18
page
430 the police represent police conditions agreed with that. I
think that's
the report chair
Thank you very much miss Holland
I've got no questions to you. Thank you for produce
Actually bring it everything summing everything up. I should say formally we have had both the agenda
I have received and members will have been through them.
I certainly have one or two questions to ask on the reports.
Do either of my colleagues have any questions for the licencing officer?
Thank you very much.
As I said, we're going to try and look at this in a whole,
So I would invite the applicant now to speak to address us which is mr. Speaker and you will have ten minutes
then I will
invite your two supporters and
In the interest of fairness, I would give them five minutes each which is a total of ten minutes
But brevity is always appreciated. So there's no point of this simply to repeat something I've seen in here
Mr. Speigler has said
We do not have the objectors. We do have of course the two objectors there.
We will then hear from them and then we will put questions to everybody if that is okay.
Everybody happy with that? So I now call Mr Speaker with direct exercise. He's ten minutes.
And Simi will time you.
Thank you, Chair, Councillors. Please may we start with a big and sincere thank you
to your licencing authority, officers, your Environmental Protection Noise Officer, the
Police, your Democratic Services Officer, your Legal Advisor and of course yourselves
for the time spent considering these 13 applications and for arranging this extraordinary licencing
subcommittee hearing. Wickside is a new mixed use development and creative hub comprising
a new home, local shops, offices, a gym, gallery spaces and in terms of the proposed licenced
use of the restaurants, you've heard a market hall, a creative work space, an exhibition
venue, cafes and a bakery. In addition the applicant proposes originally a 9pm now amended
to 8pm public realm licence to authorise some regulated entertainment but no alcohol for
up to five cultural and community events per calendar year.
The applications represent an essential part of the applicants thoughtfully curated plans
agreed with the council for a new town centre and community heavily influenced by the area's
rich heritage in the creative and artistic sectors.
Rather than letting the future hospitality tenants run away with multiple different applications
on different terms with separate consultation periods and separate licencing subcommittee
hearings, this proactive developer applicant has proposed to you a uniform set of licences
agreed with the responsible authorities and supported by members of the local community
to be considered as a whole in the context of the entire development with one consultation
and one hearing. We hope you agree this is an efficient use of everyone's time and provides
importantly a level playing field for the new independent hospitality tenants
moving in and indeed for your officers consistency across the estate to aid
compliance and enforcement. Also indicative of this applicants
community -minded approach is their impressive and far -reaching programme of
stakeholder engagement led by Mr O 'Hare which included five individual meetings
and drop -in sessions for local residents attended by over 200 local people and
and four tours of the development attended by a range of persons including stakeholders, local residents and the responsible authorities.
At page 50 of the supplemental pack you can see the stakeholder engagement report setting out the great lengths the applicant has gone to in order to engage with the local community in Agnewick.
Following this tireless engagement and statutory consultation, the applications attracted six
representations in support from local residents and just two objections. And in the grand
scheme of things, Chair, and highly relevant to the issue of proportionality in your decision
making, we say that is quite remarkable for a development of this scale and demonstrative
of the applicant's hard work and commitment to building a development that works for the
residents moving in but also existing residents alike. Also relevant to your decision making
is the fact there are no outstanding responsible authority representations in respect of the
12 individual unit applications after the applicant readily agreed about 30 robust conditions
with your officers. In my written submissions, I'm grateful you read them, Chair, we sought
to summarise, particularly bearing in mind
the objectives aren't here, their concerns as follows.
At firstly, cumulative impact type concerns.
Chair, you'll know that the premises are well outside
your cumulative impact zone,
and cumulative impact focuses on the type density
and number of licenced premises likely
to have an adverse impact in a local area.
The applicant is certainly not proposing the type
of late night alcohol -led premises likely
to contribute to cumulative impact.
It is instead a carefully curated selection of modest and controlled uses spread evenly
across the development.
Indeed, the conditions agreed with your officers are the type of conditions you may impose
on a new licence in the cumulative impact zone.
And, Chad, I guess it goes without saying that it is of course not in the applicant's
interest to introduce the type, number and density of licence premises that will disturb
new residents moving into the developments 475 new homes. Secondly on
the objectives current concerns chair the terminal hours the proposed terminal
hours are close to those suggested by one of the objectives and less than the
framework hours Monday to Thursday the proposed hours were carefully considered
by the applicant with existing and new local residents in mind and again chair
it's not in the applicant's interest to introduce late -night disturbance to the
475 new homes and their residents as well as the existing residents in the wider area.
Thirdly on the objectives concerns crime and drunken behaviour related concerns,
the applicants engage with the police, agree new conditions to promote prevention of crime
and disorder licencing objective and the applicant estate management team will work in partnership
with the police to help drive out crime and the licence premises will provide a natural
the community. Finally, on objective concerns, noise, the applicant consulted closely with
Ms Cazzo, very grateful to her for her expert input, conditions were agreed and then in
addition the applicant commissioned an independent noise impact assessment which is included
in your papers at page 34 of the supplemental pack and that confirms that the proposals
are unlikely to adversely impact on the licencing objectives.
On policy, Chair, I've mentioned already we're outside the CIZ and the hours are within and
in fact less than framework hours and all the conditions agreed promote your licencing
objective policies at sections 9 to 12 of your policy.
In my written submissions I've cited paragraphs 1 .18 and 9 .5 of the statutory guidance which
require you to consider the need to promote growth, deliver economic benefits and take
a proportionate approach to your decision making. Chair, we say there is absolutely
no doubt that by granting the applications you would be promoting growth with an entirely
proportionate decision taking into account the scale of the proposals, the level of local
support, a lack of local authority opposition and just two local residents against.
Moving now specifically onto public realm, the public realm application as you've heard
is the only application with a licencing authority and environmental health representation.
It's very important to bear in mind that the application does not propose a sale of alcohol.
It proposes a limited range of regulated entertainment until 9pm only in order to authorise occasional
seasonal community activations and events of national celebration, for example community
celebrations of Hackney Wicks heritage as an artistic and creative hub, Christmas markets
with carol singing, fashion week or art activations and other seasonal activations such as Easter,
Halloween or Pride.
Following further consultation with the licencing authority, the applicant is willing to reduce
the proposed turn -al -hour for licenceable activities from 9pm to 8pm and limit the number
of events to no more than five events per calendar year and suggests that three of these
five events occur in conjunction with the London Borough of Tower Hamlet Arts and Events
team to help build partnerships and ensure the events are Tower Hamlets appropriate.
As you can see at pages 430 to 434 of your report, 35 conditions have been proposed to
ensure the events are tightly managed, in particular condition 1 and 24, which require
a three month notification period ahead of events and in that condition there's a built
in veto for the responsible authorities if they don't like the sound of the event, and
a comprehensive event management plan agreed with the authorities.
So, Chair, we therefore please invite you to grant that application as well as the others.
It's a low risk, 8pm, no alcohol, five events per year, subject to tight conditions and
in doing so you can help facilitate and promote community arts and culture in the local area
with a respectful nod to Hackney Wick's history.
To bring everything to a conclusion, Chair,
thanks again to everyone for their time
engaging in this process,
which represents a rare opportunity
for stakeholders working closely together
to contribute to the success
of a brand new town -centering community
that catalyses economic growth,
provides new homes and a platform for creatives
to showcase their art.
The applicant's approach and thoughtful approach to uniformed licencing applications in State
management genuinely promotes the licencing objectives in a manner consistent with the
Council's own approach set out in the policy. We therefore ask you to please grant the 12
individual licence applications on the terms agreed with the responsible authorities and
the scaled back public realm licence as amended. Thank you for listening, Chair.
Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
What was the time?
You fitted beautifully.
That was absolutely perfect.
We now come to the supporters and you have five minutes each.
And as I said, you heard us congratulate Mr. Speaker for being less than ten minutes.
Can you identify yourselves when you speak?
Thank you for having me, chair and councillors.
I really appreciate it.
My name is James Sandoval.
I am a resident of Hackney Wick on the Fish Island side in Tower Hamlets.
Don't mind the slightly tinny American accent.
I've been in London for about 25 years and I love it here.
I especially love where I live on Fish Island.
It really is special in Hackney Wick too.
So I'm here to voice my support for the applications because I think they're incredibly important
for future business founders, owners to find it easier to move into these spaces that will
be available within the WIC site development. And by the way, I don't have any prepared
remarks. I'm just making this up on the fly. But I am genuinely passionate about seeing
Hackney WIC and Fish Island continue to be robust in its culture, community, and change,
which happen to be the three words that underpin a coffee table photo book that I co -produced
with Tom Keel here on my right to celebrate the history of Fish Island and Hackney WIC
recently.
I spent about the majority of last year with Tom helping to develop the WIC newspaper.
So I've gotten to know the community I think quite well.
I enjoyed it a lot.
I think that the applications that are pending here are going to be really important for
the future development of the community.
Thank you very much.
I really appreciate it.
That was a great thank you.
Your colleague.
Hello, yes.
As James has trailed, I'm the editor of The WIC, which is a culture -first local publication, print and digital, which we've been doing in the area for six years.
It's part of a larger project seeking a permanent, creative, sustainable, creative local economy.
And as part of that we have a series of stakeholder meetings once a month.
The applicants have come along to those stakeholder meetings on a number of occasions.
And it was very clear from the start that it was a very professional approach to this process,
including the drop -in sessions.
Myself and James also attended some of those drop -in sessions.
And a lot of locals were there, a lot of people within our business network were there.
And I think a lot of their concerns were put at ease right then and there,
which is probably why they're not sitting here today.
And certainly from my standpoint, we're very pro -culture, we're pro the growth of the area.
and to my mind what is proposed in the licence premises is exactly the kind of
new business opportunity that it feels that the Fish Island area particularly
really needs is there's quite a lot of empty units in Fish Island at the moment
so something that is going to bring independent businesses in feels
particularly important what was very impressive during the drop -in sessions
was how the blanket licence application was the most likely thing to encourage independent
operators as opposed to chains who would have to look at licencing on a case -by -case basis.
I also was then made aware that the same team were behind the public realm application in
Camden Market a few years ago and although I may work in Hackney Wick I
actually live one street away from the public realm in Camden and it's been a
great success the way that that is operated and the way that the community
get an asset so I think yes overall I was very happy to come and support the
application because I genuinely think is a great opportunity for the local area
Thank you very much. I'm now going to invite Kathy Driver, who is one of the objectors, to exercise her ten minutes.
Thank you, Chair. Obviously we're not objecting to the 12 premises applications. This is purely on the public realm application.
and the other applications in terms of conditions but this one obviously is a unique one, it's
an application for an open space effectively within the estate and obviously referring
to the applicant supplementary points 19 and 20 obviously we accept and obviously appreciate
that the hours have offered to reduce to 8 o 'clock with a limit of the number of events
to five per calendar year. I think the issue with the licencing authority in the supplementary
21 the examples of singing and chorale singing etc which wouldn't exactly be licence for
activities. I think for us in terms of this application there's been no, it's unclear
what the events will be, what will entail for us to accept any sort of licence and there's
no limitations in terms of those events. In terms of the application, obviously you can
have effectively up to 5000 on this application as a capacity and there's been no indication
of what sort of numbers we're expecting on one of these events where licenseable activities,
admittedly not alcohol, but there's going to be obviously alcohol premises in the area.
So effectively there's going to be potentially up to 5 ,000 people, not suggesting it will
be, but obviously a licence being granted in this, without that, could entail an event
up to that scale so I think that's obviously a large element of our
objection in terms of that is the capacity and obviously a 10 would cover
four nine nine but this would obviously cover anything
Sorry, I do apologise.
Sorry chair, it's an alarm, sorry.
Sorry, sorry, apologies.
But in terms of the residents, obviously there is a question that the residents are not going to be able to have any say on this application.
If an event obviously happens, any sort of review would have to happen after the event's already taken place and already impacted them.
In terms of some of the police conditions as well, obviously you're pointing to their condition one, all events will be presented to Tower Hamlet's Safety Advisory Group for consideration three months prior.
Our safety advisory groups that happen on a demand -only basis, they're not a regular
occurrence and obviously we would have to ensure that that meeting would have to take
place and we would have to organise that. And obviously the police are suggesting that
the right to veto in a SAG and obviously in a SAG it's, by determination, it's an advisory
group and I don't think we would have any status to actually say we have the right to
say no you can't have that event. If the licence is granted obviously there's questionable
as to how the event's going to take place and whether that would actually happen or
not in terms of what we would advise them on those meetings. So I think there's an element
of obviously some of those conditions are somewhat ambiguous. I think also in terms
of obviously these five events, there's no indication of when these events would occur.
Is it going to be during the summer months when it's nice and hot, but there's also residents
above with their windows and balconies open, the impact of those that's going to take place.
Obviously they've agreed a 1 to 150 in terms of SIA, but I think there's, I'm not sure whether the persons present may be able to indicate,
but we don't know whether there's going to be regular security on this development site, obviously in terms of events taking place or after the events.
If an event takes place, you know, about the clear up, are people going to be moved away,
are they going to be permitted to hang around into the licenced venues till later, which
is going to keep the people around, even though the event finishes at 8, are people going
to be milling around afterwards to enjoy the activities, but activities are in the premises
as well. Again, that's due to how we don't know the capacities, we don't know what the
probably
Think really deals with my presentation
Thank you my representation is on page 389
Now I
mean a lot of it has been brought up by Kathy because
There is concerns. I've looked at the supplementary and you've reduced the numbers of events and the hours for the events.
But when I was doing my representation there was no information to say what the predicted noise levels would be at each event.
if there's going to be live music DJ events.
I think even at, whilst it's reduced to eight o 'clock
in the evening, will there be conditions on site,
anyone controlling the music levels?
There are five events and as Cathy has said,
there's no indication of what these five events will be
or the expected numbers.
if there's expecting that or you know people moving away to even if some of
these events are not alcohol led obviously you've got the premise the
other premises that are open where they can come in and there's just I've just
to get out okay I've just that's that's my main concerns the fact that I don't
know what the noise levels are and the types of events are going to be I think
There was some I think I did speak to Liam in the past and said there were going to be community events
But there is going to be a lot of residential in there and there is a concern
That this could cause a public nuisance
If the noise levels and of these events are not controlled and also it does travel across and there are residents
across the canal
It's just from my application there was a lack of information at the time to satisfy
myself that these events outside could be controlled and that we wouldn't cause a public
nuisance.
But I'm very pleased that the applicant in the supplementary agenda has reduced the hours
to 8 o 'clock rather than 9 .30 and minimise the events.
Obviously if the application is agreed then I think maybe more stringent conditions with
regards to noise levels should be provided.
Thank you.
Thank you very much.
That was quite comprehensive.
If we now go over to questions and I will begin to the applicant.
And I've got a couple here.
On page 372 of your application, you are applying for adult entertainment from 11 to 21 .30.
What do you mean by adult entertainment?
I can see on that page the pro forma template box adult entertainment and none is listed
in there unless I'm missing something, chair.
Can you switch off?
I was going to say, because of course adult entertainment, I was going to say are you planning pole dancing between 11 and 9 .30 of the night, which of course is adult entertainment.
So can we say that you are withdrawing the adult entertainment?
I looked at that and I looked at it and I was open to the public.
I thought, goodness gracious, you're definitely doing no adult.
That's okay.
Then that solves that particular problem.
That looks slightly confusing underneath, I was going to say.
It would have been quite interesting on that.
Excellent.
You've heard the various objection from the council officers and you've heard the written
objections which we've had from members of the public.
What in the light of what you've heard from council officers and what you've heard from
members of the public.
Although you submitted substantial conditions,
I think all of us sitting here today might be concerned
at the possibility of 5 ,000 people standing in there
in this area hoping for a drink,
particularly if West Ham had just won the premiership
or something, it could be quite an exciting afternoon
and not necessarily one to everybody's benefit.
So what sort of condition would you accept for times and numbers?
Thank you, chair.
They've got to get out of the championship first.
That may take some time.
Firstly, we're very grateful for the comments because they're helpful.
So on capacity, there is no intention to run events up to 5 ,000 capacity.
If it assists, the applicant could agree a condition along the following lines.
The number of persons attending the premises at any one time for licenseable activities
pills at Drupal dunking on the ground people connexions messaged the building as memories
and gone completely entities but not KNOW flawed Constitutionyy altogether the the
save time.
and Ms. Driver's right, we ask you to please note
that the applicant has readily agreed it
as they're confident that they're not going to propose
the type of events that the responsible authorities
would want to veto.
In fact, the type of events being proposed,
we'd hope everyone would welcome.
In respect of concerns of future local residents,
we say very significantly, firstly, there's no alcohol,
That of course has a big impact on the dynamic of an event.
So there's not going to be outside bars promoting the sale of alcohol.
It's all about community entertainment.
The second point is the hours.
Local residents, we say, are unlikely to be disturbed
at the latest possible point of 8 o 'clock in the evening.
Thirdly, the event management plan condition 24 requires a whole host of carefully thought
out management plans, including a noise management plan, which I hope helps to address Ms. Cazo's
concerns. And then, fourthly, just to emphasise, these are absolutely about the community.
It's for the community and absolutely not the type of events that would disturb them.
Even if there is some noise, it's not going to be that level that causes them nuisance
and it will all be finished by 8pm.
Do I get that the applicant would accept that condition on numbers?
On numbers, Chair? Yes, yes, Chair.
Recorded in that. Mr Milner?
Just very quickly and before I forget if mr. Speigler could email me the proposed wording you've got my email address, I think so
That would be helpful this is my second and my last contribution before I hand over to my colleagues
I've looked at your schedule of proposed uses and
they're very I
Mean they are
They look quite impressive things a neighbourhood restaurant flagship restaurant market
but of course there are always events. My concern is slightly that they could end up
with nothing like those descriptions. Thank you, Chair. On that point, you've heard
that there is an objective here to help fledgling independent operators move into a premises
that already has the benefit of a tightly conditioned licence.
In terms of the proposed use, we put them forward to you here.
They're on the record.
But we took time to agree a condition.
And the conditions are repeated across all the 12 individual units.
I'll jump, for example, to page 163 of your report.
The first condition is that the incoming new tenants, the incoming licensee, will submit
to the authorities new plans via a minor variation application showing internal layouts, locations
of all fire safety equipment, permanent fixtures, sanitary, and the consideration by the authorities
before commencing operation of the licence premises.
On that, Chair, we say that if there is what is perhaps described as a neighbourhood restaurant
the papers to you today, the plans come in for something much larger with no furniture,
no fixed counters and it looks perhaps like a big bar or a nightclub, then the responsible
authorities at that stage have an opportunity to object to that. Also, on top of that, each
individual application has one tailored, one to two tailored conditions controlling the
use. So some of them will require, like the flagship restaurant condition, that alcohol
and the other licences have conditions requiring seating. For example, the art and exhibition
venue requires that the licence for activities to be ancillary to that use. So that's what
we say as the chair, is the level of control for you together with this proactive developer
that's carefully curating the tenant mix.
Thank you. I note in conditions agreed with police for larger premises the
issue I'd like to put it on record depending on our decision you have one
on number two I was going to raise this agreed with the police the provision of
alcohol for match days which I think is extremely important. Okay I now hand over
to my colleagues for questions.
Councillor Schuber.
As we plan to give 13 licences,
what measures will you take to ensure that all of the operators are obviously keeping the standards,
but at the same time, are we giving it, I want to ask the officer, are we giving it as Jonathan,
Jonathan, are we given as a whole that if one messes up that affects all 13 or is it 13 individual?
There'll be 13 individual licences counts so if your decision is to grant and an operator comes in and then breaches their licence conditions act in a way that undermines the licencing objectives
then they'll be liable to enforce an action as appropriate by the responsible authorities.
it won't affect those others who might well be operating entirely in accordance with their licence.
And in terms of the consultation you did,
and the how many people on average were you speaking to on these dropping events?
Thank you Councillor. Just if I may just to touch upon your first question
and the applicant is hoping to do now is to set out from the outset what hours and conditions
they expect the tenants to comply with rather than letting individual tenants perhaps going
off and applying for later hours or more flexible licences.
And the other point that hopefully I've made is that it's absolutely in the applicant's
own interest to make sure these tenants operate professionally because of the residents as
well.
This isn't like your typical high street with lots of different residents, lots of different
landlords under different levels of control.
it's all carefully overseen by one applicant. On the consultation, perhaps I'll hand you
to Mr O 'Hare because he was the one that ran that programme.
Hello. So the stakeholder engagement was really central to the application process because
this was a large area, previously unused. There was a lot of building happening there
for a long time and people just wanted to get it finished and we thought they also needed
to know what was happening there. It's also a placemaking project which sits under the
2003 Licencing Act and the public realm is a social cohesion project where we want the
people from Hackney Wick, Fish Island, to meet the new residents in the middle during
times in national celebrations. So we wanted to sell that vision and we wanted to start
that process early. So we joined a cultural interest group and there was a lot of encouraging
noises made the first time. The second time Councillor Ady was there and he suggested
that we go to public consultation as well which we had always planned to do. And they
were great because we were able to speak to people and demystify the licencing
project, explain to people who are maybe not aware of licencing why having a
uniformed suite of conditions and you know lease controls on tenants coming in
would give the state the best opportunity to have independent
operators probably adjacent to or thinking about moving in. We wanted to
promote small independence coming and setting up fledgling businesses and to
be able to show them a licence with the tight conditioning that we expect in the
standards would be good for everyone. It would be good for the residents around
this site, it would be good for the residents within the site and it would
be good for the Hackney Wick local business to flourish and see a buy -in
opportunity. The events were well attended with lots of people come and I
think we helped demystify the the process and sell the estate social
cohesion and that's probably reflected in the amount of objections we had but
I'm speculating.
Just to clarify, I think really the question was if you're able to say how many people attended the various events that you've got.
And I think it says that's really what the council's asking.
Sorry, it's in the pack.
I think we had 200 across six events
and the events were the cultural interest group
and then we had the one event in Hackney Wick,
one event in Fish Island, which were drop -ins.
And then we also invited everybody who attended those
to do walk arounds this site as well.
And just to add on to that,
other than the Wick newspaper,
did you use other ways of trying to encourage residents to attend those
consultation meetings? Yes, well we couldn't actually advertise the premises
licence in the WIC so we used traditional press, Wharf Life, so that
was a substantial page of notices that was circulated. We also put very large
notices beside the boards advertising all 13 showing that you could come and join in
at these events. We also encourage people at the cultural interest group and at the
events to circulate my details on WhatsApp groups if they couldn't attend a meeting and
wanted to learn more.
I'm looking at the map of the public realm.
I notice Ferris Yard.
Is that all surrounded by residential properties?
Thank you, Councillor.
We've now found the page.
Which part were you referring to?
380.
But where did you want to know where the residents were, Councillor?
Sorry.
Fair Rose Yard.
That's fair.
Fair Rose Yard.
Can you hear me?
Your question is there residential in that area or?
Yeah, on Fair Rose Yard.
Yeah, the entire master plan has residential blocks
sort of dotted around.
So there is a block just between Ferrer's yacht and Habscourt Square where there are residents
My point is that
Felsi odd would appear to be surrounded by
residential
Units and your propose your proposing making that
part of the public realm for the purposes of this which would seem to
to disturb the residents.
Sorry, to clarify, it's only the block to the north west of Farrows Yard
and then the south west of Farrows Yard where there are residential units
but the residential units are facing Habscourt Square away from Farrows Yard.
Then the blocks to the top, to the right and to the bottom are commercial blocks.
And they are low rise.
Okay, thank you.
The other question I have is that since there would be independent licences on all of these,
the 12 businesses, they could potentially apply for temporary entertainment notices
and this which could be in addition to what you're proposing.
So we could have quite a problem here where there's a conflict between what you're proposing
and what a particular venue might sort of want to add on. What are your thoughts on that?
Thank you Councillor. So firstly to say that again it's not in the applicant's interest to enter into leases with the type of licence uses that might have I don't know late night entertainment that could potentially cause a disturbance to the local residents.
If they did that and it was causing problems, then of course the Environmental Health Officer,
the police and the licencing authority have an opportunity to object.
And as an extra layer of control in this case, which I would say is unique and not what you'd get on your typical high street,
is that if local residents are being disturbed, they could of course complain to the council,
but they also have the onsite estate management team to complain to as well.
So that provides an extra layer.
It means that estate managers can go and talk to the licenced unit
and hopefully save some time with your officers in the unlikely event that these events,
which we don't think are going to happen, but in the unlikely event they do,
there's safeguards there to prevent it.
It was more that if one particular venue decided to hop on your event, so you're holding your
event which is finishing at eight, they get a ten which then extends it.
so then that sort of defeats part of the object of the...
Unless I'm misunderstanding something.
Yeah, I suspect. So at the end of the day, there is a capacity limit on Thames.
Now obviously if a restaurant or one of the other operators wanted on the back of one of these events to run a bit later,
and bear in mind obviously what they're applying for in any event is later than the public realm anyway,
they're perfectly entitled to do that but then if the environmental health or
the police think there's going to be an undermining of the licencing objectives
and I have no doubt they'll be very much alert to that sort of thing you know
they can certainly object but obviously the tens are effectively an essential
part of this I mean do they are limited at the moment I can't remember I think
it's 15 a year at the most it's going up to 20 I think with effect from next year
So that they are by their very nature temporary, they certainly can't do it to effectively extend regularly what they don't in fact have.
Does that assist in any way? I hope it does.
Okay, thank you.
Any further questions, Colleagues?
Thank you, just a few matters of clarification on I think certainly some of the proposed
conditions in depending whether it's a larger or small premises conditions seven and eight
no spirit mix is above 6 % ABV.
Then normally I see conditions with that that are really predominantly aimed at dealing
with street drinking.
and it's obviously for bar if a restaurant's going to be providing
mixers or cocktails I'm wondering how they're going to control that is is it
really aimed at pre -mixed drinks in cans because if so then we can clarify that
in the condition it's a good point and it's exactly that's what it's trying to
end it's controlling thank you just in relation to 14 and 15 again it's more
that the wording needs to be clarified so these are relating to the monitoring
of toilets and outside spaces I suspect in relation to the toilets it's probably
the usual in relation to drug use which unfortunately may occasionally happen
and outside spaces to ensure that people are doing that but there's going to need
to be a degree of frequency in terms of how often those are monitored I don't
know if mr. speaking you have instructions on that and there may also
be a need for logs in order that the responsible authorities can cheque
compliance. I don't know if that's how you want to have a quick discussion with
your client about in terms of what could be proposed.
Thank you. It's a tricky one because if it is a coffee shop during the
daytime that might sell a little bit of alcohol in the evening then we'd hope
that we don't have to cheque toilets every 15 -30 minutes so I mean the police
were happy with that condition if it helps we could perhaps add some wording
to both of those conditions to say that the frequency of cheques will be subject
to a risk assessment and documented and available for local authority inspection
Probably make sense. Thank you
I'm going to suggest to the licencing stuff. I afraid I showed my ignorance at the pre -meet
But I think we're going to need to define what a match day is. I'm not a football fan. So I
Think I'm persona non grata here at the moment
And just in relation to number five market walk
I don't know if you'd had any thought obviously there was a question of whether that's going to fit in with the larger premises my
to the committee I think is going to be when you look at the capacity and when
you look at the footprint of the first floor it's going to be but it might be
just easier if that's if that's agreed or if you've got any observations before
I give the committee any advice on that
Yeah, I think that's okay but what conditions specifically are you wanting to attract that?
I mean, there is the eagle -eyed, if I may say,
eagle -eyed Miss Holland who picked up on page 343,
for example, that the small premises conditions,
the police didn't require limb B of the SIA test.
So I think we wouldn't feel too strongly
about that one being added specifically to that unit.
Is that, were there any other specific conditions?
No, it's just that because obviously there's a bit of a question mark over what had been agreed with the police in relation to that one was much more in relation to smaller premises, but when you look at the first floor in particular in the capacity, it is probably a larger one.
The police aren't in the room.
I think we don't want to go back on something that has been agreed with them.
We would prefer to keep that within the small premises but ultimately it is a matter for
you or perhaps that could be subject to a risk assessment on that one depending on what
the final capacity might be.
Yeah, yeah tenant profile
okay, fine just the
last question relation to the open space
And the licencing authorities concerned about whether or not the plan is compliant
I mean, obviously the plan may well change depending what's going to happen
so I was going to suggest that if the if that licence is granted a condition requiring a
Compliant plan to be submitted 28 to 14 days in advance
It may well be that this is all going to be covered within any event management plans anyway.
That's a great idea. It would exactly be part of the event management plan, that can be agreed. Thank you.
I have one other question. Sorry, just to the responsible authorities.
Obviously you've heard the suggestion that the events are limited, not only in capacity,
but to five days in the year anyway, of three of which are then going to be in conjunction with TOW,
of internal control anyway because I see that the parks and events team are quite
used to putting on and they're very ranging for events I don't know if that
lays your concerns in in any way just want to get your views out as well
.
With regards as is there gonna be any stages any
Amplify any speakers outside. I mean I've
Over time. I've had a lot of issues with
outdoor areas and particularly over a river
With a greater distance from residents and I'm a bit concerned if there are going to be any events whether it's a council event or not
They may they may have there's nothing to say they're not going to have speakers as stages
So I do have concerns about that.
And also, I know you can't control this, but weather conditions can have a...
When you're near a canal or rivers and it's quite...
Weather conditions can actually have effect on residents further down the river.
I've had issues like this before and I know we're talking about a specific outside area,
but I do have grave concerns about speakers, amplified music outside, five events a year.
what and also I know they weren't there saying about limiting the numbers to 999
but how are they gonna do this people how how is that gonna be managed that
there's only 999 because the effect of another group walks in that takes over a
thousand how are they gonna know that there's more than 999 there in the first
place how's that gonna be managed that's thank you could we come back on that
briefly chair thank you chair and I'm gonna hand over to mr. hair but
hopefully just to reframe the conversation that this is not about
attracting large capacity concerts with bars and alcohol going late into the
night it's 8 p .m. community events with now our cockpit mr. and of course event
management management plan all of all of the concerns raised can be controlled by
Yes, thank you, Cher. Thank you. The layout of the park does not lend itself to these large events where you're going to have a huge stage throwing noise in any area.
What we see it as being like pocket events running along the park and going into the square where there's a journey by people where they can perambulate through like you would in a market.
I've had some experience with this. I was on the advisory group for Camden High Street pedestrianisation plan.
Year one we tried to do some events like that. They didn't work for the residents, they didn't work for the shops,
didn't work for the retail. So we repurposed it into small pocket stages, almost like bus caressed,
and that made the ergonomics throughout the space much, much better. We've taken learnings from that.
In terms of the noise in Hawley Wharf, which is another public realm premises licence,
these are public highways.
We don't want to start barrelling off everything to ensure capacity control.
But what we will have with a curated journey like that is movement.
And you'll have people passing through the area.
You'll also have people going to the shops, people going back to their homes.
and our learnings from that, the most complaints we got about amplification
was when we were doing daytime events from people who were working from home
and didn't get the memo that you know this was happening so we tweaked that
and circulated a news around to all the residents that there will be an event
this weekend there will be an event in a month's time come and join us so at
least if you were working from home that evening you could go to the back room or
close the door but the message we got out was the events are happening come
and join us it's social cohesion we're not doing anything radical because of
the times we're suggesting them we also think that the WIC and Fish Islanders
already well served with those types of events what we're trying to do is social
cohesion and bringing people in and you do that gently family -friendly events
for everyone
I
Noted that you were talking of off sales for the dozen or so your dozen
Correct. So you'll be set there'll be offset. Yes, chair subject to conditions agreed with place
Well that
include
I'm bearing in mind you have an ever -increasing
residential population
And as Kadshal mentioned, that we've got blocks of flats there
that are, at the moment, unoccupied, that will soon
be occupied, that you're going to have 12 premises, all
of which will be blocked up with people on bicycles and mopeds
with deliveroo, just -stop -ee, causing a heck of a lot of,
causing, frankly, the enormous social problems
that bicycles and mopeds with deliveroo and just -stop -ee
calls across London and is causing increasing concern across the city.
And we already have 40 ,000, apparently there are 40 ,000 of them worrying about causing chaos on pavements,
highways, one -way streets, traffic lights, the Greenwich foot tunnel, the Blackwall tunnel, anything you call to name
is that you have got, frankly, restaurants,
cabs and Lord knows what, taking orders
and extracting somebody on a moped or a bike
to get that order while it's still hot,
regardless of the rest of the population.
If you've got 12 of them with groups of people,
that's gonna be a lot of noise and a lot of pollution.
Thank you, Chet.
One of the objectives of Wixside
is to provide a new self -sufficient town centre and community. So we're very much hoping that
the residents of the 475 new homes will predominantly buy their food and drink from the shops and
restaurants that we're proposing to you today. Equally that means that the shops and restaurants
we're proposing to you today will not be as reliant on Deliveroo selling their products
further afield. Of course you're absolutely right everybody knows that
delivery etc comes with its challenges. Again unlike a disparate high
street with lots of individual ownership this is a centrally managed development
with a central management team so if there are issues arising from the
behaviour you've described then before it gets anywhere near the council the estate
management team can help to think of solutions to address any of those concerns.
This is a difficult one because as we've been sitting here it's sort of got more and more
concerns with me and I sit at these applications constantly, my colleagues sit at these applications
constantly listening to these concerns. I mean we may well be mindful of putting fairly
fairly strict limits on what could be put outside these shops because come what may,
you can walk down Whitechapel Road now and there are bicycles sitting there and at two
o 'clock in the morning you've got young men on mobile phones chatting away, talking amongst
themselves, smoking, whilst residents are sitting on residential blocks complaining
and deliver a pizza. I suppose the first point to make is it won't be happening at two o 'clock
in the morning because we're not proposing hours anywhere close to that. But if the third
party delivery companies are on site and causing a nuisance then there are safeguards in place
to address that chair and that's not your typical going straight to the council as I've
There are ample estate management procedures in place to to deal with that and tight lease controls
It's gonna have a word with mr. Melnick
I mean what the chair's asked is about putting conditions on that and I think my advice would have to be
Yes, in theory you can, but you've also heard from Mr Spiegel as to why that might be different from your average high street.
And I do also have to remind the committee that as a general rule it shouldn't be straying into areas that aren't in dispute.
That's in the statutory guidance and none of the responsible authorities have really raised any issues about these particular premises doing that sort of thing.
if there are problems as Mr. Spiegel says there are mechanisms for safeguarding it is
ultimately a matter for the committee as to how it deals with it but that's the advice
I'd have to give chair.
Thank you just to say of course I agree with that and of course it has been considered
by the police because the police have proposed conditions dealing with online delivery services
so it's not as if it's been forgotten about it has been considered and none of the responsible
authorities have flagged it in representation so I agree with Mr. Malek. Thank you.
My concern is what Ms. Canchar said, currently you've got empty premises which will be coming online with lots and lots of residents.
I wonder whether the police would have noticed that because you're going to get an area that is increasingly densely populated.
and frankly do they want delivery blokes sitting in their doorway waiting to deliver?
And the first people they'll complain to is the applicant.
I'm not entirely convinced.
Are there any further questions?
So I'm going to tick on what I've just raised.
Thank you Ben.
I understand it's out,
the question, some of the questions we're asking is outside of the framework hours.
But would there be a delivery or pickup point in those units if there are takeaway cells?
Because as you can imagine, you wouldn't want MOPAs going where patrons are walking as well.
And do you have an ID link policy?
Thank you, Councillor.
In terms of the ID policy, firstly we don't know if the 12 individual units will want
to provide delivery, particularly for the small cafes, for the art and exhibition space,
they will. If they do, then we would expect, the applicant would expect that to be well
managed and if it's not being well managed, then the applicant is going to start receiving
complaints from local residents and the responsible authorities and the applicant is very much
interested to make sure that there aren't complaints because of course they're the ones
selling the 475 new homes. There are mechanisms in the licencing regime if these third party
the applicant would support that and they would support any procedures whether it's
an idling policy or whether it's having dedicated pick up points for the riders through geo
fencing or other matters. But I think that, I actually understand it's been recognised
as a concern but we are in a slightly tricky territory here because until now it's not
been flagged and it's not part of any objection. But I hope and it can be minutied that you
have an applicant here that's very much interested in making sure that it's not a concern, it's
not one landlord that's going to let out to a commercial property with no other interest
in the area and leave. There's very much vested interest here to make sure that local residents
are not disturbed whether they're existing local residents or new residents moving in.
I think we've reached the conclusion
I'll invite them each of the supporters to sum up for a minute and it were to object us to sum up for a minute
Thank you
We go around that way
Just you mean in terms of what I've what I've heard
Yes, there's nothing to it
I think maybe I'll just add one thing, chair, thank you for the opportunity again, that I did mention earlier, maybe through some nervousness, but I moved to Fish Island with my wife and two teenage children two years ago, probably because we knew the area quite well.
We lived just north of Victoria Park for 15 years, and on Wells Street for a couple of years, and so we got to know the area really well.
We were excited to move to HackneyWick and we loved the dynamism, the economy, the artists.
So this series of applications can just simply, from my limited perspective, help to maintain that dynamism, to continue it, to prevent a stall.
and to create an ease for these new businesses to move in and of course operate within plenty of legal frameworks to keep things under control I'd like to thank.
So I'm excited to be here. This is my first experiencing this kind of thing so I really appreciate it. Thank you very much.
I think obviously it's gone in terms of the public realm of the application.
Obviously there is an element that obviously the offer of 999 as a capacity, however it's
still 999 people.
I think in terms of a licence, not knowing what the event could be, I think with residential
to obviously in close proximity in an open space.
We don't know where the stages will be.
We don't know what the dynamics, the crowd profile,
which are key in certain aspects of events.
I think we still remain our objection to that.
And obviously the applicant could have made an application,
can make an application for those particular events
that they want when they know what's going to happen.
and we can obviously assess it in a better way rather than having an open licence with
none of that information and obviously an element of restrictions on the conditions
you can put on that licence. So Chair, we still object to that application. Thank you.
I agree with what Kathia said, concerns about the numbers, whether there's going to be any
speakers, and obviously the residents, there are going to be residents in close proximity,
the fact that obviously they're not, there's no residents at the moment is quite difficult,
but controlling the numbers and noise levels and everything.
I mean, I assume that the applicant will be providing
that in a noise management plan before an event.
But how they say five events, I mean, we don't,
they could have six or seven and we wouldn't actually know unless we get this noise management
plan.
I just think that I have a lot of issues with outside areas, noise nuisance.
I've had venues across the water that have caused a big problem to residents so my objection
still stands.
Thank you.
Thank you, Chair, very briefly. Specifically in relation to the public realm licence, APM,
no alcohol, a new capacity condition, a three month notification period with an associated
right to veto and an event management plan condition which sets out exhaustively the
requirements expected of that, including a noise management plan. And just to reiterate,
these events are about the community, they're for the community and they're certainly not
about disturbing the community. And the self -policing element you have, specifically in relation
to the public ground licence but also applicable to the 12 individual unit licence applications,
is you have this proactive, considerate and thoughtful landlord that is proposing these
uniform licences to you. They're selling 475 homes. They're very much invested in
the bigger picture. It's not in their interest to have 12 badly run premises
with lots of delivery riders nor lots of concerts or events that are likely to
disturb residents. Chair, thank you very much to you and your colleagues for
listening. We appreciate everyone's time.
Thank you very much and thank you for your contributions today. The subcommittee
We will now deliberate in a private session and you will be notified within five working
days and all sides will be notified on our decision.
The decision will tell you whether the whatever decision we make was a unanimous decision
or by vote and whether we have listened to them, we will be placing were we mindful of
granting anything additional conditions, including anything you may have offered up in the process
of the meeting.
Is that okay? Understood? Thanks very much.
We now conclude this meeting and adjourn to the private session.