Agenda and minutes

Venue: Room 8, Lambeth Town Hall, Brixton Hill, SW2 1RW. View directions

Contact: Gary O'Key, Tel: 020 7926 2183 Email: gokey@lambeth.gov.uk 

Items
No. Item

1.

Election of Chair

2.

Declaration of Pecuniary Interests

    Under Standing Order 4.4, where any councillor has a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest (as defined in the Members’ Code of Conduct (para. 4)) in any matter to be considered at a meeting of the Council, a committee, sub-committee or joint committee, they must withdraw from the meeting room during the whole of the consideration of that matter and must not participate in any vote on that matter unless a dispensation has been obtained from the Monitoring Officer.

     

     

    Minutes:

    There were no declarations of pecuniary interest.

3.

Minutes pdf icon PDF 134 KB

4.

Licensing Applications for the Grant /Variation/SEV Licences pdf icon PDF 53 KB

4a

Max 2 62A Brixton Road, London, SW2 6BS (Oval ward) pdf icon PDF 16 KB

4b

Area, Arch 67-68 Albert Embankment, London SE1 7TP (Prince's ward) pdf icon PDF 16 KB

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    Presentation by the Licensing Manager

     

    The Sub-Committee was informed that this was an application for a new sex establishment licence. The Sub-Committee’s attention was drawn to the Home Office Guidance for Sexual Entertainment Venues, and to Sections 3 and 5, and Appendix 2, of the Lambeth Sex Establishment Policy, as the ones particularly relevant to this application. The options available to the Sub-Committee were to grant the application with the standard conditions, grant the application with amendments to the standard conditions, or to refuse the application.

     

    In response to questions from Members, the Licensing Manager confirmed:

     

    • The application sought to licence the establishment so that it might operate as a sexual entertainment venue (SEV) and sex cinema
    • A premises licence issued under the Licensing Act 2003 was also in place for this venue
    • Four representations had been received opposing the application
    • The supporting information submitted with the application made reference to several of the standard conditions
    • The mandatory grounds for refusal did not apply in this case

     

    A map and photographs of the premises were circulated.

     

    Presentation by the Applicant

     

    Prior to beginning the presentation, it was explained that the legal representative was acting for three applicants – Area, Fire (item 4c) and Covert (item 4d) – and that all three applications sought the same provisions. The same written submissions regarding the standard conditions also applied to all three venues, which operated in the same way, with sexual entertainment ancillary to the principal activities as outlined in the premises licences. Following advice from the legal advisor to the Sub-Committee, it was therefore decided to hear all three applications in one hearing.

     

    Jack Spiegler, legal representative for the applicant, alongside Philippe Giovanni, general manager of Area, Fire and Covert, Jamie Burns, the Designated Premises Supervisor (DPS) of Fire and Area, and Tom Fuller, DPS of Covert, informed the Sub-Committee that:

     

    • Area, Fire and Covert were all located in railway arches in Vauxhall and were popular venues with the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) community
    • All three venues were primarily nightclubs which had historically provided sex films and relevant entertainment (as defined in the Home Office guidance) with no problems under the Licensing Act 2003. These applications therefore sought to maintain the status quo under the new regulatory regime
    • The operators of the venues were all experienced
    • The main issues with the application were regarding the standard and discretionary conditions. These were drafted principally in relation to strip or lap dancing clubs; however, Area, Fire and Covert did not operate in this way and were instead nightclubs with occasional ancillary sexual entertainment – for example, choreographed nude dancing once every week or two. There were therefore concerns that a strict interpretation of the standard conditions would impinge on the venues’ operation as clubs when relevant entertainment was not being provided

     

    Given the oral submissions made to this point, the Sub-Committee decided to go through the conditions outlined as being potentially problematic in the applicants’ written submissions one by one, with  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4b

4c

Fire, Arch 39 - 44 Parry Street, London SW 8 1RT (Prince's ward) pdf icon PDF 16 KB

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    Presentation by the Licensing Manager

     

    The Sub-Committee was informed that this was an application for a new sex establishment licence. The Sub-Committee’s attention was drawn to the Home Office Guidance for Sexual Entertainment Venues, and to Sections 3 and 5, and Appendix 2, of the Lambeth Sex Establishment Policy, as the ones particularly relevant to this application. The options available to the Sub-Committee were to grant the application with the standard conditions, grant the application with amendments to the standard conditions, or to refuse the application.

     

    In response to questions from Members, the Licensing Manager confirmed:

     

    • The application sought to licence the establishment so that it might operate as a sexual entertainment venue (SEV) and sex cinema
    • A premises licence issued under the Licensing Act 2003 was also in place for this venue
    • Four representations had been received opposing the application
    • The supporting information submitted with the application made reference to several of the standard conditions
    • The mandatory grounds for refusal did not apply in this case

     

    A map and photographs of the premises were circulated.

     

    Presentation by the Applicant

     

    See minute for item 4b.

     

    Presentation by Interested Parties

     

    No interested parties were present; therefore the objections were considered on the basis of the written submissions.

     

    Adjournment and Decision

     

    At 11.40am, the Sub-Committee withdrew from the meeting together with the legal advisor and clerk to deliberate in private.

     

    The Sub-Committee had heard and considered representations from Mr Spiegler, Mr Giovanni, Mr Burns and Mr Fuller, as well as considering the written objections received.

     

    Legal advice was given to the Sub-Committee on the options open to them and the need for any decision to be proportionate. The Sub-Committee decided to grant the application with conditions for the following reasons:

     

    • This was an application for a sex establishment licence pursuant to Schedule 3 of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1982 as amended. The Licensing Sub-Committee took into account the submissions made by the applicant’s legal representative, both written and oral, as well as the representations made by residents. The representations addressed issues regarding noise, safety and suitability. The issue of noise is not covered by the jurisdiction of the 1982 Act and could be addressed pursuant to the Licensing Act 2003. The Licensing Sub-Committee considered the submissions by the applicant and considered that the other representations had been adequately addressed, having had regard to the guidance and policy

     

    RESOLVED: To grant the application with the following conditions:

     

    Conditions

     

    Standard Conditions for Sex Establishment Licence

     

    1. The licensee or some responsible person nominated by him in writing for the purpose of managing the sex establishment ('the manager') shall have personal responsibility for and be present on the premises at all times when the premises is open to the public.

     

    2. Where the licensee is a body corporate or an incorporated body, any change of director, company secretary or other person responsible for the management of the body shall be notified in writing to the Council within 14 days of such  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4c

4d

Covert, Arch 65, Goding Street, London, SE11 5AW (Prince's ward) pdf icon PDF 16 KB

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    Presentation by the Licensing Manager

     

    The Sub-Committee was informed that this was an application for a new sex establishment licence. The Sub-Committee’s attention was drawn to the Home Office Guidance for Sexual Entertainment Venues, and to Sections 3 and 5, and Appendix 2, of the Lambeth Sex Establishment Policy, as the ones particularly relevant to this application. The options available to the Sub-Committee were to grant the application with the standard conditions, grant the application with amendments to the standard conditions, or to refuse the application.

     

    In response to questions from Members, the Licensing Manager confirmed:

     

    • The application sought to licence the establishment so that it might operate as a sexual entertainment venue (SEV) and sex cinema
    • A premises licence issued under the Licensing Act 2003 was also in place for this venue
    • No representations had been received opposing the application
    • The supporting information submitted with the application made reference to several of the standard conditions
    • The mandatory grounds for refusal did not apply in this case

     

    A map and photographs of the premises were circulated.

     

    Presentation by the Applicant

     

    See minute for item 4b.

     

    Presentation by Interested Parties

     

    No representations were received in respect of this application.

     

    Adjournment and Decision

     

    At 11.40am, the Sub-Committee withdrew from the meeting together with the legal advisor and clerk to deliberate in private.

     

    The Sub-Committee had heard and considered representations from Mr Spiegler, Mr Giovanni, Mr Burns and Mr Fuller, as well as considering the written objections received.

     

    Legal advice was given to the Sub-Committee on the options open to them and the need for any decision to be proportionate. The Sub-Committee decided to grant the application with conditions for the following reasons:

     

    • This was an application for a sex establishment licence pursuant to Schedule 3 of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1982 as amended. The Licensing Sub-Committee took into account the submissions made by the applicant’s legal representative, both written and oral. The Licensing Sub-Committee considered the submissions by the applicant and decided to attach the conditions as amended, having had regard to the guidance and policy

     

    RESOLVED: To grant the application with the following conditions:

     

    Conditions

     

    Standard Conditions for Sex Establishment Licence

     

    1. The licensee or some responsible person nominated by him in writing for the purpose of managing the sex establishment ('the manager') shall have personal responsibility for and be present on the premises at all times when the premises is open to the public.

     

    2. Where the licensee is a body corporate or an incorporated body, any change of director, company secretary or other person responsible for the management of the body shall be notified in writing to the Council within 14 days of such change and such written details as the Council may require in respect of the change of personnel shall be furnished within 14 days of a request in writing from the Council.

     

    3. A copy of the licence and conditions attached to the licence shall at all times be displayed in a  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4d

4e

Bar Code, Arch 69, Goding Street, London, SE11 5AW (Prince's ward) pdf icon PDF 16 KB

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    Presentation by the Licensing Manager

     

    The Sub-Committee was informed that this was an application for a new sex establishment licence. The Sub-Committee’s attention was drawn to the Home Office Guidance for Sexual Entertainment Venues, and to Sections 3 and 5, and Appendix 2, of the Lambeth Sex Establishment Policy, as the ones particularly relevant to this application. The options available to the Sub-Committee were to grant the application with the standard conditions, grant the application with amendments to the standard conditions, or to refuse the application.

     

    In response to questions from Members, the Licensing Manager confirmed:

     

    • The application sought to licence the establishment so that it might operate as a sexual entertainment venue (SEV) and sex cinema
    • A premises licence issued under the Licensing Act 2003 was also in place for this venue
    • No representations had been received opposing the application
    • The supporting information submitted with the application made reference to several of the standard conditions
    • The mandatory grounds for refusal did not apply in this case

     

    A map and photographs of the premises were circulated.

     

    Presentation by the Applicant

     

    Prior to the applicant’s presentation, the Chair explained the discussions which had taken place earlier regarding the conditions (see minute for item 4b) and the decisions which were made in respect of items 4b, 4c and 4d, which were relevant to this application as the written submissions from Bar Code were identical.

     

    Troy Wear, proprietor of Bar Code, and his legal representative, informed the Sub-Committee that:

     

    • They were happy to agree to the amended conditions applied to Area, Fire and Covert and did not wish to make any further submissions
    • The witness statement at p137 of the agenda pack provided further background information on the venue

     

    Presentation by Interested Parties

     

    There were no representations in respect of this application.

     

    Adjournment and Decision

     

    At 2.20pm, the Sub-Committee withdrew from the meeting together with the legal advisor and clerk to deliberate in private.

     

    The Sub-Committee had heard and considered representations from Mr Wear and his representative.

     

    Legal advice was given to the Sub-Committee on the options open to them and the need for any decision to be proportionate. The Sub-Committee decided to grant the application with conditions for the following reasons:

     

    • This was an application for a sex establishment licence pursuant to Schedule 3 of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1982 as amended. The Licensing Sub-Committee took into account the submissions made by the applicant’s legal representative, both written and oral. The Licensing Sub-Committee considered the submissions by the applicant and decided to attach the conditions as amended, having had regard to the guidance and policy

     

    RESOLVED: To grant the application with the following conditions:

     

    Conditions

     

    Standard Conditions for Sex Establishment Licence

     

    1. The licensee or some responsible person nominated by him in writing for the purpose of managing the sex establishment ('the manager') shall have personal responsibility for and be present on the premises at all times when the premises is open to the public.

     

    2. Where the licensee  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4e

4f

The Hoist, London, Arches 47B And 47C South Lambeth Road, London, SW8 1RH (Oval ward) pdf icon PDF 16 KB

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    Presentation by the Licensing Manager

     

    The Sub-Committee was informed that this was an application for a new sex establishment licence. The Sub-Committee’s attention was drawn to the Home Office Guidance for Sexual Entertainment Venues, and to Sections 3 and 5, and Appendix 2, of the Lambeth Sex Establishment Policy, as the ones particularly relevant to this application. The options available to the Sub-Committee were to grant the application with the standard conditions, grant the application with amendments to the standard conditions, or to refuse the application.

     

    In response to questions from Members, the Licensing Manager confirmed:

     

    • The application sought to licence the establishment so that it might operate as a sexual entertainment venue (SEV), sex cinema and sex shop
    • A premises licence issued under the Licensing Act 2003 was also in place for this venue
    • No representations had been received opposing the application
    • The supporting information submitted with the application made reference to several of the standard conditions
    • The mandatory grounds for refusal did not apply in this case

     

    A map and photographs of the premises were circulated.

     

    Presentation by the Applicant

     

    Mr Guy Irwin, applicant, and his legal representative Mr Steve Burnett, informed the Sub-Committee that:

     

    • They had made written submissions which were included in the agenda pack regarding the application and had little to add to this
    • Mr Irwin was one of the longest standing licensees in the borough and had a good track record
    • The premises had been trading for 17 years and operated discreetly. They had not experienced problems with crime and disorder; neither had there been any breaches of the licence
    • They had not specifically addressed the Safer Lambeth Violence Against Women & Girls (VAWG) strategy; however, the venue catered principally for gay males and so it was not likely there would be a VAWG impact
    • They had met with the police and the local authority prior to submitting the application and agreed conditions which were attached to the application

     

    The Chair explained that the Sub-Committee had heard four applications for similar premises earlier and outlined the amended conditions which had been applied in the other cases, and the reasons behind them. Mr Irwin and Mr Burnett indicated that they were happy to agree to these conditions, and also the further proposed conditions as outlined on p173-4 of the agenda pack.

     

    Presentation by Interested Parties

     

    There were no representations from responsible authorities or interested parties.

     

    Adjournment and Decision

     

    At 2.35pm, the Sub-Committee withdrew from the meeting together with the legal advisor and clerk to deliberate in private.

     

    The Sub-Committee had heard and considered representations from Mr Irwin and Mr Burnett.

     

    Legal advice was given to the Sub-Committee on the options open to them and the need for any decision to be proportionate. The Sub-Committee decided to grant the application with conditions for the following reasons:

     

    • This was an application for a sex establishment licence pursuant to Schedule 3 of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1982 as amended. The Licensing Sub-Committee took into account the submissions  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4f

4g

Eagle, 349 Kennington Lane, London, SE11 5QY (Oval ward) pdf icon PDF 16 KB

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    Presentation by the Licensing Manager

     

    The Sub-Committee was informed that this was an application for a new sex establishment licence. The Sub-Committee’s attention was drawn to the Home Office Guidance for Sexual Entertainment Venues, and to Sections 3 and 5, and Appendix 2, of the Lambeth Sex Establishment Policy, as the ones particularly relevant to this application. The options available to the Sub-Committee were to grant the application with the standard conditions, grant the application with amendments to the standard conditions, or to refuse the application.

     

    In response to questions from Members, the Licensing Manager confirmed:

     

    • The application sought to licence the establishment so that it might operate as a sexual entertainment venue (SEV), sex cinema and sex shop
    • A premises licence issued under the Licensing Act 2003 was also in place for this venue
    • One representation had been received opposing the application, dealing with the nature of the area
    • The mandatory grounds for refusal did not apply in this case

     

    A map and photographs of the premises were circulated.

     

    Presentation by the Applicant

     

    Mark Oakley, applicant, alongside his associate, informed the Sub-Committee that:

     

    • He had put together a pack of information explaining the background to the application, including letters of support. It was acknowledged that this should have been submitted in advance of the hearing and there were concerns that the objector would not have seen it; however, following advice from the legal advisor, the Sub-Committee decided to accept the additional information
    • He was committed to the local community
    • The application sought permission for the venue to carry on operating as it had done for many years

     

    In response to questions from Members, the applicant confirmed:

     

    • There were two schools and two churches close to the venue; however, they had borne this in mind and taken steps to be discreet by painting the pub black to make it look anonymous, and never using obscene flyers. They had also instigated a litter pick-up in the vicinity
    • They had a strict code of conduct for performers and required all artists to preview their show before it was accepted
    • Performers were escorted to the performance area and back, and no audience involvement or participation was allowed

     

    The Chair explained that the Sub-Committee had heard a number of applications for similar premises earlier and outlined the amended conditions which had been applied in the other cases, and the reasons behind them. Mr Oakley indicated that he was happy to agree to these conditions.

     

    Presentation by Interested Parties

     

    The sole objector was not present; therefore the representation was considered on the basis of the written submission.

     

    Adjournment and Decision

     

    At 3.20pm, the Sub-Committee withdrew from the meeting together with the legal advisor and clerk to deliberate in private.

     

    The Sub-Committee had heard and considered representations from Mr Oakley and his associate, and had read and considered the objection received.

     

    Legal advice was given to the Sub-Committee on the options open to them and the need for any decision to be proportionate. The Sub-Committee decided  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4g

4h

Pleasuredrome Spa, Arch 124, Cornwall Road and Arch 125 Alaska Street, London, SE1 8XE (Bishop's ward) pdf icon PDF 15 KB