Agenda item

The licensing officer advised that the licensing authority, police and noise team had withdrawn their objections as the amended conditions circulated had been agreed. She confirmed that an event had been held under a TENs on 4th, 5th and 6th September and although noise complaints were emailed after the event, they were not made to the noise team at the time of the event so were unsubstantiated.

The Chair of the Florin Court Freehold Association stated that he was speaking on behalf of 74 individuals. He raised concern about noise especially as the flats were in a listed building and did not have double glazing. He raised concern about security, stated that holding events would establish a precedent and referred to a deed that had been in place since 1990. He was liaising with Charterhouse on this and requested the consideration of this item be deferred until an agreement on the deed had been reached. He anticipated this would be in the next couple of months. The deed provided for the use of the square and gardens by the residents of Florin Court. At the time the deed was made, it was not anticipated that the Charterhouse would be open to the public. People took on leases knowing the deed was in place and there were certain expectations. In response to a question from a member, the Chair of the Florin Court Freehold Association suggested that the association should know what the events would be so they could approve them in advance.

In response to a question, the applicant stated that if the licence was granted there would be a maximum of 10 events per year. This would equate to ten days in total.

A resident raised concern that Charterhouse Square was in a cumulative impact area and suggested that the Charterhouse was a large charity with considerable resources. They had made a business choice to remove parking from the square which would result in lost revenue.

A resident stated that there were not many green spaces in Bunhill, raised concern that events were being proposed on a burial site and events could be held in the Charterhouse building. Concern was raised about a tent being used for events.

The applicant advised that a significant amount of money had been spent improving the square and this had involved removing parking and lost revenue of £110,000. There was not much green space in Bunhill and the Charterhouse wanted to open the square up to the public following the Charterhouse museum opening. There had been support from the Golden Lane Estate. Meetings had been held with local residents every six months and these meetings to discuss concerns would continue to be held.

The applicant expressed the view that the rights of Florin Court under the deed did not make the application unacceptable. The events would enable the Brothers to meet local people.

The applicant advised that some of the Brothers’ bedrooms looked out onto the square and the building did not have double glazing. Efforts would be made to ensure events would not be noisy. There would be no amplification. At the recent event, the traffic meant it was difficult to hear the actors.

In response to a question from a member, the licensing officer reported that the police were happy with the proposed security arrangements. The location of the events would be difficult to monitor with CCTV so instead bodycams would be used.

The applicant advised that although they only wanted events 10 days a year, due to a misunderstanding, they had initially put in an application to be able to hold an unlimited amount of events throughout the year. Due to the objections received, this application had been withdrawn and the new application was for 10 events a year.

The applicant advised that it was not possible to hold all events in the Charterhouse building as it was the home of the Brothers. The charity did not have considerable resources and conservation costs were significant. They also had to pay a large sum to Charterhouse School.

In response to a question from a member, the applicant outlined the type of events that had taken place in the last 18 months. These included a summer fair, a small bonfire party, Handlebars (a performance by actors), a private lunchtime event, a team building sports day, an early evening event with champagne and a harpist and a summer solstice event with jazz singing until 8pm.

Last year the nearby Sutton Arms pub had asked to do a weekly pop up event but due to bad weather this did not often take place. This year, the Charthouse would not be enabling the pop up event.

In response to members’ questions the applicant advised that they had put in this application rather than apply for a TENs each time due to the cost and also because they wanted to schedule a programme of events. An event operational plan had been produced as the applicant was keen for the events to run well. The applicant had received no complaints from residents after the recent event and residents had been given contact details if there was a problem. At events there would be people picking up litter.

In summary, the residents stated that they wanted the gardens to be left as they were and for the space within the Charterhouse building to be used for events.

In summary, the applicant stated that she wanted a wider group of residents to enjoy the square. It was not possible to use the inside space for events as this was the Brothers’ home. A dialogue with residents would be continued.

RESOLVED:

That the application for a new premises licence in respect of Greenspace, Charterhouse Square, London, EC1M 6AN be granted

1)         To allow the sale by retail of on sales of alcohol, provisions of live and recorded music, the provisions of plays and the provisions of films on the site from 11:00 until 22:00 Monday to Saturday.

2)         Opening hours to be:-  11:00 until 22:00 Monday to Saturday.

3)         A maximum of 10 events to take place in one calendar year totalling no more than 10 days.

Conditions detailed on the circulated sheet of amended conditions shall be applied to the licence.

REASONS FOR DECISION

The Sub-Committee listened to all the evidence and submissions and read all the material. The Sub-Committee reached the decision having given consideration to the Licensing Act 2003, as amended, and its regulations, the national guidance and the Council’s Licensing Policy.

The Sub-Committee took into consideration Licensing Policies 2 & 3.  The premises fall within the Bunhill cumulative impact area.  Licensing policy 3 creates a rebuttable presumption that applications for the grant or variation of premises licences which are likely to add to the existing cumulative impact will normally be refused following the receipt of representations, unless the applicant can demonstrate in the operation schedule that there will be no negative cumulative impact on one or more of the licensing objectives.

The Sub-Committee noted that the applicant had agreed conditions put forward by the police, the noise team and the licensing authority and that those representations were therefore withdrawn.

The Sub-Committee fully considered the agenda papers and noted the written objections outlined at pages 31-82.

The Sub-Committee heard evidence from local residents that they were concerned with noise, security and whether a precedent would be established. Residents stated that due to the enclosed nature of the square, sound echoed and properties had no double glazing so residents would still hear any noise. Residents stated that at previous events the Charterhouse’s security operations were incapable of operating outside and that residents did not believe the applicant to be fit and proper to organise events. The Chairman of Florin Court plc stated that a deed was in place since 1990 and that certain rights under this deed would not be possible if the application was granted. Residents were concerned as to the number of licensed premises in the area and that this application if granted would spoil the tranquillity and dignity of the square. The Sub-Committee heard evidence that ordinary people wanted grass and trees. The Sub-Committee noted the concerns of residents that they wanted to know what events were going to be held and they did not want any surprises.  The Sub-Committee noted that complaints had been made by residents in relation to the most recent event held in the square, although the Sub-Committee also heard evidence from the Licensing Officer that these complaints were not made contemporaneously and so were not substantiated by any officers.

The Sub-Committee heard evidence from the Chief Executive of the Charterhouse Charity. The Sub-Committee noted that it was the desire of the Charterhouse to open up a green space to the wider community in an area where there was minimal public green space. The Sub-Committee heard evidence that the Charterhouse had meetings every 6 months with local residents and had provided contact email addresses to residents before an event held under a TEN. The Sub-Committee noted that the Charterhouse was only seeking the licence for 10 events per annum and would not be amplifying sound in the square. The Chief Executive confirmed that an event would be 1 day so the Charterhouse was seeking a total of 10 days per annum. The Sub-Committee noted that events would likely be in the summer months apart from one event on Bonfire night. The Sub-Committee heard evidence that Florin Court contributed to the upkeep of the surrounding roads not the square and that the Charterhouse was of the view that the deed did not prohibit the events sought.

The Sub-Committee was of the view that with the conditions agreed, the licence would not add to the cumulative impact and would promote the licensing objectives. The Sub-Committee noted that the Charterhouse was seeking to open a grassy space to more residents and locals. The hours of operation, with the licence being sought for only 10 days a year with a terminal hour of 10pm were well within the authority’s framework hours. The applicant had agreed strict conditions in relation to the control of noise including conditions in relation to waste, deliveries and also a condition in relation to lighting. The Sub-Committee noted that a condition had also been agreed which required the Charterhouse to consult with police and the licensing authority at least 14 days before each event. The Sub-Committee was satisfied that the operating hours in combination with these conditions would minimise noise and still allow residents to use and enjoy the square. The Sub-Committee noted that conditions had been agreed in relation to supervisors at the event and the Sub-Committee was satisfied that these conditions would ensure sufficient security operations at the events. The Sub-Committee further noted that a condition had been agreed that if any third party was organising one of the permitted events in the square, a contract would be in place between the organiser and the Charterhouse.

The Sub-Committee concluded that the grant of the licence with the agreed conditions would not add to the cumulative impact and would promote the licensing objectives. The Sub-Committee considered Licensing Policies 2 and 3 in relation to cumulative impact, 6 in relation to operating hours, 7 and 8 in relation to high standards of management and 10 in relation to cultural spaces.