The
recording of this meeting can be view by clicking here.
Following the item being heard the Licensing
Sub-Committee’s decision was:
The Licensing Sub-Committee
considered the Application for a Premises Licence at Units 53-57 Boxpark, 99 George Street, Croydon, CR0 1LD and
the representations received as contained in the report of the
Executive Director ‘Place’ and the additional
documentary evidence submitted by the Applicant prior to the
hearing and incorporated in the supplementary information published
as an addendum to the report.
The Sub-Committee noted that
the Applicant had, in discussions with the Police licensing
officer, amended their application to have the following condition
added to the licence, if the Sub-Committee were to grant the
application, namely:
“During events in Boxpark
which the Metropolitan Police deem as high risk, given one
month’s notice, the premises will operate as a bar only for
the duration of that event.”
The Sub-Committee also
considered the representations made by the Applicant and the
objectors during the hearing.
During the course of the
hearing, the applicant confirmed that they would like an additional
condition to their operating schedule which would be applied as a
condition to the license if the Sub-Committee were minded to grant
the application. This additional condition was as
follows:
“The doors opening to
George Street shall be kept closed at all times except in respect
of emergency access and emergency egress”
The Sub-Committee, having
reference to the licensing objectives under the Licensing Act 2003
and the Council Licensing Policy, RESOLVED to
GRANT the application as amended by the
Applicant with the addition of a
further condition imposed by the Sub-Committee which would
supersede conditions 6 and 7 proposed by the Applicant in Annex A
to Appendix A1 of the report. The Sub-Committee imposed this
further condition on the basis that the Sub-Committee were
satisfied that it was appropriate and proportionate and would
support the Licensing Objectives, in particular the promotion of
Protection of Children from Harm, to do so.
The reasons of the
Sub-Committee were as follows:
- The Sub-Committee was
mindful that axe throwing was not a licensable activity under the
Licensing Act 2003 (“the Act”) but that the licensable
activity they were tasked with considering was the sale of alcohol
by retail.
- The Sub-Committee
noted that the Police had not raised any objections to the proposed
application, whether from a crime and disorder perspective or in
relation to any of the other Licensing Objectives under the Act and
had been consulted by the applicants and in turn had visited the
venue to assess the risks associated with the application. As part
of this engagement, the police had suggested conditions be offered
reflecting similar conditions imposed on the Wembley venue of the
applicant’s premises as detailed in the report and in
addition, a condition had been agreed with the police as detailed
above.
- The Sub-committee
noted the concerns raised by Croydon Council’s Head of
Quality Assurance and Safeguarding in relation to the Protection of
Children from Harm licensing objective, including the concerns
about those under 18 being permitted on the premises and the
associated concerns about safeguarding and protecting children in
the context of the premises’ operations and sale of alcohol
within the Croydon context including concerns about youth knife
crime and violence when compared to other London
Boroughs.
- The Sub-Committee were also mindful of the
representations made by a ward councillor for the area in which the
proposed premises would operate, including in relation to the
protection of children from harm given the supply of alcohol and
the perceived adult nature of the activity of axe throwing. The
ward councillor also raised issues around ID checks for all patrons
at the venue (not just in relation to the sale of alcohol) but the
Sub-Committee considered that these were adequately addressed in
relation to the Licensing Objectives by the imposition of the
proposed condition detailed below.
- In relation to the
concerns raised by the objectors, the Sub-Committee noted that the
applicant had prepared a risk assessment of the undertakings at the
premises which was before members for their consideration and which
the sub-committee considered addressed many of the potential
concerns and risks they were mindful of, however they remained
concerned around the promotion of the
protection of children from harm in relation to the sale of alcohol
given the proposed activities and the proposed presence of children
on the premises even if that presence was subject to restrictions
as suggested by the Applicant.
- The Sub-Committee
noted that the applicant had indicated that it considered that the
activity of axe throwing was one which was suitable for those under
18 subject to the safety parameters they proposed for the premises
and around the activities, including in relation to the requirement
that all children would only be permitted onto the premises under
the supervision of a responsible adult and that no children under
18 would be permitted on the premises after 21h00. It was noted
however that Boxpark requires that all under 18’s have left
the Boxpark site by 20h00.
- The applicant noted
that axe skills and throwing were things taught to children as part
of “forest” skills and scouts and the applicant
considered it was appropriate for children in the context of this
application. The Sub-Committee were not swayed by that analogy
bearing in mind that they were considering a licensed premises in
the centre of an urban area which was proposing the recreational
throwing of axes whilst also proposing to sell alcohol to patrons
and to which it was proposed to admit children.
- The Sub-committee
noted that the applicant’s risk assessment had considered
that it would be appropriate for 1 adult to supervise up to 6
children on the premises, some which could be as young as 8 and be
entitled to throw axes subject to coaching and supervision. The
Sub-Committee also noted that the applicant had indicated that each
group would have their own coach for axe throwing and while only
two members of a group would be throwing axes at any one time the
average group size at their other venue was 8 and they expected
similar at Croydon. The Sub-Committee also noted that there would
be 1 “floating” coach, not assigned to a group, to
provide extra supervision.
- The Sub-committee
noted that the applicant had indicated that they didn’t get
many children in their other branch and didn’t anticipate
many in Croydon. Indeed the premises is anticipated by the
applicant to be most busy on weekends and evenings with pre-booked
groups.
- The Sub-Committee
considered whether or not it would be appropriate to impose a
condition on the applicant requiring an obscuring of the windows
through which activities within the premises, including the
axe-throwing, could be viewed. There was concern that the ability
for this activity to be viewed could lead to imitation by younger
more impressionable residents, such as those under 18, but also
that this ability would be seen to be glamourising or promoting the
use of weapons in a borough which already has a significant knife
crime and violence issue. The Applicant had indicated at the
hearing that they were not aware that imitation had been an issue
in other venues and did not consider, because of the stringent
safety requirements and coaching that they provided as part of the
axe-throwing, that it would be viewed as the use of a weapon rather
than a sport and skill, the latter being how they promoted the
activity. The applicant was also keen to ensure that those outside
the premises could view the controlled way in which they operated
the premises as it would act as a marketing mechanism for them to
promote the business and as a small business, they did not have
much in the way of marketing budget.
- The Sub-Committee
were mindful that, as provided for in the Statutory Guidance and in
the Council’s Licensing statement of Policy, protection of
children from harm includes the protection of children from moral,
psychological and physical harm. This includes not only protecting
children from the harms associated directly with alcohol
consumption but also wider harms. The Sub-Committee were also
mindful of the direction in the statutory guidance that significant
weight should be given to representations about child protection
matters.
- The Sub-committee
took into account the provisions within the Statutory Guidance at
paragraph 9.44 regarding the imposition of conditions and noted
that determination of whether an action or step is appropriate for
the promotion of the licensing objectives requires an assessment of
what action or step would be suitable to achieve that end. While
this does not therefore require a licensing authority to decide
that no lesser step will achieve the aim, the authority should aim
to consider the potential burden that the condition would impose on
the premises licence holder (such as the financial burden due to
restrictions) as well as the potential benefit in terms of the
promotion of the licensing objectives.
- Finally the
Sub-Committee was aware that licence conditions should not seek to
duplicate other statutory provisions although licensees should be
mindful of requirements and responsibilities placed on them by
other legislation, including for example the Health and Safety at
Work etc. Act 1974.
- In light of the above
matters, the Sub-Committee did not consider that it would be
appropriate to impose a condition regarding obscuring the windows
into the premises at this point in time but that the below
condition was more appropriate to deal with the protection of
children from harm objective. The Sub-Committee did however reach
the conclusion that it was appropriate and proportionate to provide
the following condition to address the protection of children from
harm licensing objective:
“No children under the age of 18 (eighteen) shall be
permitted on the premises”
This
condition is to replace the proposed conditions 6 & 7 in the
applicant’s operating schedule.
- The Sub-Committee
wished to thank all participants for the manner in which they
engaged with and supported the hearing in providing information to
allow the Sub-Committee’s consideration and wished the
applicant well in their safe and successful operation of their
business.