There were no declarations of interest

There were no declarations of interest.

After discussion between the applicant and the Legal Officer, it was agreed that the additional evidence in ‘supplementary agenda, further information’ received on 30^th May,  would be excluded as it related to another premises (the Pod Bar). 

Mr Graham Hopkins, for the applicant, gave a statement clarifying the application.  This stated that the business would have a good pricing structure, be family orientated, a ‘high end’, high standard chip shop.  There would be no alcohol on display.  Meals would be for eating in or take away.  The restaurant would be small, 36 covers.  There would be no provision for selling drink only and customers would not ‘hang around’.  The drinks available to those eating in the restaurant would be limited to beer and wine, no spirits, as food was the priority.

CCTV would be installed giving head and shoulders views, footage would be kept for 31 days and staff would be trained in its use.  There would always be at least two staff on duty.  The premises would have Challenge 21 for proof of age, there would be a litter patrol, notices would be prominently displayed about not loitering or drinking outside.  After 8pm only five smokers would be allowed outside.

Mr Hopkins stated that the Metropolitan Police were satisfied with the controls and measures in place, and confirmed that litter would not be a problem.

Mr Hopkins had contacted all objectors and only one person had replied who did not want any discussion.

Mr Hopkins quoted the Thwaites case and stated that the new business would not add to problems in the area due to the measures taken.

Mr Hopkins also indicated that the Designated Premises Manager would change from Mr Graham to Mr Sotiriou and that papers would be completed to effect this on granting of the licence.

Questions from members were about the need to open so late and how any rowdy behaviour would be checked.

Mr Hopkins replied that customers want to eat late now, that members of staff would ensure good conduct by customers was maintained. 

Two members of Wimbledon East Hillside Residents’ Association spoke of their concerns around the number of businesses in the locality that are for eating and drinking, and how there had been a large increase over 28 years.  They requested earlier closing times of 10pm weekdays and 11pm weekends to avoid noise nuisance for local residents.   An unsubstantiated claim was made that the local bus does not stop as passengers dislike getting off outside the nearby noisy bar.  The residents’ association was opposing all extensions to licensed activities in the area as it was felt the number of licensed premises was out of balance.  The Legal Officer pointed out that the Licensing Act 2003 states that each application has to be considered on its own merit and that the panel needed to work out whether it should overturn the presumption that this application will be refused (due to the Cumulative Impact Zone) only if the premises will not add  ...  view the full agenda text for item 2.

Cousins Fish Shop Applicant:

Mr Graham Hopkins

Mr Sotiriou

Objectors
Representatives of Wimbledon East Hillside Residents’ Association (WEHRA)

The parties were satisfied with the accuracy of the papers issued.

After discussion between the applicant and the Legal Officer, it was agreed that the additional evidence in ‘supplementary agenda, further information’ received on 30^th May, would be excluded as it related to another premises (the Pod Bar). 

Mr Graham Hopkins, for the applicant, gave a statement clarifying the application.  This stated that the business would have a good pricing structure, be family orientated, and would be a ‘high end’ chip shop.  There would be no alcohol on display.  Meals would be for eating in or take away.  The restaurant would be small, 36 covers.  There would be no provision for selling drink only and customers would not ‘hang around’.  The drinks available to those eating in the restaurant would be limited to beer and wine (there would be no spirits), as food was the priority.

Mr Graham Hopkins went through the conditions offered. He confirmed that:

CCTV would be installed giving head and shoulder views, footage would be kept for 31 days and staff would be trained in its use.  There would always be at least two staff on duty.  The premises would have Challenge 21 for proof of age. There would be a litter patrol. Notices would be prominently displayed regarding not loitering or drinking outside.  After 8pm only five smokers would be allowed outside.

Mr Hopkins stated that the Metropolitan Police were satisfied with the controls and measures in place, and confirmed that litter would not be a problem, subject to acceptance of his conditions.

Mr Hopkins had contacted all objectors and only one person had replied who did not want to enter into a discussion with him.

Mr Hopkins referred to the Thwaites case in terms of the evidence provided by residents.  He stated that the new business would not add to problems in the area due to the measures taken.

Mr Hopkins also indicated that an application would be submitted for a Change of  Designated Premises Supervisor from Mr Graham to Mr Sotiriou and papers would be completed to effect this when and if the licence is granted.

The members asked questions about the need to open so late and how any rowdy behaviour would be curtailed. Mr Hopkins replied that customers want to eat late now after Theatre shows finish, and that members of staff would ensure good conduct by customers was maintained. 

Two members of Wimbledon East Hillside Residents’ Association spoke of their concerns around the number of businesses in the locality providing food and drink, and how there had been a large increase over 28 years.  They requested earlier closing times of 10pm weekdays and 11pm weekends to avoid noise nuisance for local residents.   An unsubstantiated claim was made that the local bus does not stop at the bus stop adjacent to the premises as the bus company had concerns about the behaviour  ...  view the full minutes text for item 2.

Wimbledon Rugby Club Applicant

Mr Ian Dawson, Mr David Kenny

Objectors

Representatives of Residents’ Association of West Wimbledon (RAWW)

Mr Ian Dawson, Tournament Director, introduced the application which was to be:

• An all ticket event
• A family fun event
• A Charity fundraising event

A similar event had been held last year and a demographic breakdown carried out showed that the visitors had been 50% male,  50% female and that 65% attendees had been in the over 35 age bracket, 70% lived locally (within 15 miles of venue). 

There had been no complaints under the licensing objectives from the event. 

This year local residents had received a leaflet about the event, and free tickets were offered to those in the immediate vicinity, 50 of which had already been claimed.  There had been no objections in principle. 

The management team were very experienced and included an environmental noise consultant to monitor public nuisance/noise issues and ex-traffic police to monitor parking issues.

This year the event would be even better managed. The site would be totally secure with designated entry and exit points staffed by SIA security personnel.  There would be provision for access by emergency services.  The music would be sited at the furthest point from residences as possible and everyone would leave the site by midnight.

All parking would be away from the immediate vicinity, and Colliers Wood Football Club ground would be used for parking.  There is a path drivers can take to walk from the parking area to the venue. 

Mr Dawson was 100% confident the event would be a success, and the only difference this year from last year would be the addition of the Friday evening event, which would be held under the same conditions as the Saturday event.

Mr Dawson understood the concerns of residents but was confident this year would be as good if not better.

Questions were asked about the Designated Premises Supervisor, what the ‘xxx’ stood for on page 85, attendance/ticket sales and litter clearance. Mr Dawson replied that David Kenny was the Designated Premises Supervisor and would be on site throughout, that ‘xxx’ should have read ‘150’, and that approximately 95% tickets would be sold in advance and that ticket holders would have wrist bands to indicate they were ticket holders.  The suppliers had been contractually bound by a condition that they were to remove all their own refuse from the site.

The residents said they would be happy with a repeat of last year’s arrangements with the conditions given by Environmental Health. However, they said they would like the sound to be monitored every 60 minutes, rather than every 90 minutes, as some sets on stage lasted only 45 minutes to 1 hour, and could thereby evade the monitoring process.

The residents expressed some concerns about traffic management, particularly in view of the Friday evening event increasing rush hour traffic issues, and of visitors not being able to find their way back to bus stops after the event.  The residents were  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3.