204. Adam Street Club: Westminster Council; minutes of meeting

8/14/2019 204. Adam Street Club: Westminster Council; minutes of meeting

1/21

CITY OF WESTMINSTER

LICENSING SUB-COMMITTEE NO.3

THURSDAY 16 AUGUST 2001

MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS

At a meeting of the Licensing Sub-Committee held in the Council Chamber,Council House, Marylebone Road NW1 on Thursday 16 August at 9.30am.

PRESENT: Councillors Frances BloisKevin GardnerBarbara Grahame

1. MEMBERSHIP

1.1 There were no changes in membership.

2. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

2.1 There were no declarations of interest

3. CAFE FRED, 15A, ARGYLL STREET, W1

3.1 The Sub-Committee considered the report of theDirector of Planning and Transportation introducedby Ms. Sarah Day of the Licensing Business Unit.This concerned an application submitted by Mr.Paul Young for the renewal of the night caflicence for the year commencing 1 November2000 in respect of Caf Fred, 15a, Argyll Street,W1. The licence operates on each of the daysfrom Sunday to Saturday with permitted hoursfrom midnight to 5am the day following. The

application had originally been presented to ameeting on 25 April 2001 to be determined by wayof written representation but the Sub-Committeereferred this to an oral hearing.

3.2 The Planning Officer has reported that while no formal A3planning permission had been granted for the site, it appearedthat there had been a long history of use as a restaurant/caf,which was not subject to planning controls. The council would,therefore, have no planning powers to prevent the late nightoperation of the premises. The premises benefitted from a

Justices On-Licence with a Supper hours Certificate but thisrelated to the seated restaurant at 15 Argyll Street rather than


2/21

the take away area at 15a Argyll Street. The premises weresituated within the Central Activities Zone and the Soho StressArea.

3.3 No adverse comments have been received from the

Metropolitan Police Service, the London Fire and EmergencyPlanning Authority, the Licensing Inspectorate or theEnvironmental Health Officer. On 21 March, 2001, theLicensing Inspectorate had issued an unsatisfactory DuringPerformance inspection report citing the failure to display thelicence, a partially blocked escape route, lighting on the escaperoute not working, a fire extinguisher not fixed to the wall andthree seals missing from it. On 25 April 2001, a re-visit wascarried out and, as all issues arising from the previous visit hadbeen addressed, a satisfactory During Performance Inspectionreport was issued.

3.4 No adverse comments had been received from the WardCouncillors and an application received from the Soho Societyhad been withdrawn. The District Surveyor confirmed that hehad no objection to the renewal of the licence andrecommended that the following special condition be included inany licence that might be issued:

- The number of persons accommodated shallnot exceed three (staff only)

3.5 The application was presented by Mr. Toby Hole of Field,Fisher Waterhouse. He stated that there had been somedisagreement over what part of the building was the restaurantand what part was the night caf. He stated that the irregularitiesreported by the Licensing Inspectorate had occurred at therestaurant rather than the Night caf and, therefore, wereirrelevant to these proceedings. He conceded that the failure todisplay the licence occurred in the night caf but the othersoccurred in the restaurant. The premises had been in

possession of a night caf licence since 1997 during which timethere had been no breaches of the conditions and the licencehad been renewed each year.

3.6 Mr. Wehbe managed the premises and had been in post for 4years. He was present at the premises on 6 days a week and hehad a letter of authorisation from the owner. He was not presenton 21 March 2001 when the premises were visited by theLicensing Inspectorate. However, when he had been madeaware of what had happened, he took immediate remedialaction. The licence had not been on display because it had

fallen off the wall and had been placed on a table. It has nowbeen put into a new frame and has been placed on the wall in a


3/21

prominent position in accordance with the advice of theLicensing Inspector. Mr. Wehbe stated that he inspects thepremises every day to ensure that all conditions of his licenceare complied with. He had been inexperienced with fireextinguishers when the first inspection had been made but he

had now familiarised himself with the necessary requirements.In response to questions from Councillors, Mr. Wehbe statedthat entrance was gained to the premises from the street.

3.7 The confusion over which premises were which arose again. Mr.Hole stated that the restaurant had a liquor licence and thisreferred to number 15a. If the Night caf licence were to beissued to number 15a then the owners would have to go back tocourt to get the liquor licence changed. Mr. Hole referred to anordnance survey map which showed number 15 to be the nightcaf and number 15a to be the restaurant but officers stated that

this was at variance with the plans held by the LicensingBusiness Unit. Further discussion continued over this point butMr. Hole maintained that the breaches revealed during the visitby the Licensing Inspectors on 21 March 2001 referred to therestaurant rather than to the night caf and were thereforeirrelevant.

At 09.52 hours, the Sub-Committee withdrew and re-convened at 10.11 hoursto announce the decision.

This is an application by Mr Paul Young for renewal of the Night Cafe Licencein respect of premises known as Caf Fred, 15A Argyll Street, London W1.

The Sub-Committee has carefully considered the representations made byand on behalf of the applicant and notes that the objection by the SohoSociety was withdrawn on 8 July 2001. There are no other objections to thisapplication.

The Sub-Committee has had regard to the policy guidelines approved by thePlanning and Transportation Committee on 28 March 2000 as amended bythe Planning and Licensing Committee on 20 June 2000. It notes that the

premises are situated in the Central Activities Zone and within the West EndStress Area, designated by the Council as an area where residential amenityis under severe pressure. The surrounding area is described by the DistrictSurveyor as one consisting of mixed commercial and residential usage. Thereis no policy presumption against this renewal application, even though thepremises are licensed to operate well beyond 1am.

This application was submitted for consideration by the Sub-Committeebecause of concerns expressed about an inspection of the premises on 21March 2001. At that time, a licensing inspector noted that no licence wasdisplayed, escape routes were partially blocked, lights in the escape route

were not working, fire extinguishers were not fixed to the wall and three sealswere missing on the fire extinguishers.


4/21

A further inspection of the premises on 25 April 2001 revealed that all mattershad been rectified. However, it also seems that most of the contraventionsreported actually occurred in the neighbouring part of the Caf which is notactually licensed as a night caf. However, those premises are in the same

ownership.

There is always an overriding need to protect residential amenity. The Sub-Committee notes the contraventions reported on 21 March 2001 but alsonotes that the licensing inspector has not actually recommended refusal of thelicence. Moreover, his observations relate to matters which, though importantin terms of public safety, do not have a direct impact in terms of nuisance thatmay be caused to residents in the vicinity of the premises.

The Sub-Committee also notes that no concerns or objections have beenlodged by the Metropolitan Police or the London Fire and Emergency

Planning Authority and that no adverse observations have been made by theEnvironmental Health Officer. No objections or submissions have been lodgedby the ward Councillors.

The Sub-Committee is concerned about the contraventions on 21 March2001. Although they were rectified, and although they related to the restaurantoperation, they should not have been allowed to occur in the first place. MrYoung does have ultimate responsibility for the running of his premises and itmust be fully understood that measures must be in place at all times to ensurethat licensed premises are properly run in accordance with all the conditionsand regulations. On this occasion, however the Sub-Committee is not mindedto refuse renewal. Consequently,

THE DECISION IS:

That the application by Mr Paul Young for renewal of the Night Cafe licence inrespect of the take-away premises known as Caf Fred, (thought to be 15A),Argyll Street, W1 be granted until 31 October 2001 subject to the standardconditions and the following special conditions.

I. The premises may be kept open for the purpose of this licence from

midnight until 5am on each of the days Sunday to Saturday.

The number of persons accommodated at any one time shall notexceed 3 (staff only)

It will be open to anyone to lodge objection to any application made forrenewal of the licence by 31 October 2001 or the date four weeks after therenewal application is advertised, whichever is the later.


5/21

4. 9, ADAM STREET, LONDON WC2

4.1 The Sub-Committee considered the report of the Director ofPlanning and Transportation introduced by Ms. Claire Hayes ofthe Licensing Business Unit concerning an application by Mr.James Minter for a new annual public entertainment licence tobe issued in respect of the premises known 9 Adam Street,London WC2. The applicant also seeks an extension of hoursfrom 11pm on the days Monday to Saturday to 3am on the dayfollowing and from 11pm on Sunday to 1am on the day followingin respect of the basement and 3 levels.

4.2 The planning officer has reported that the authorised use of the

basement is as a private members club and there are norestrictions on the hours of opening. The premises benefit froma provisional Justices On-Licence and are located within theCentral Activities Zone but not within a stress area. The areawas not deemed to be predominantly residential in nature andthere was no policy presumption against the granting of thisapplication.

4.3 No adverse comments have been received from theMetropolitan Police Authority, the London Fire and EmergencyPlanning Authority or the Cleansing department. The LicensingInspectorate has advised that there has been no reason for itsofficers to enter the premises as they are used as a privatemembers club so no comments have been offered in respect ofthe application. The Environmental Health Department reportedthat extensive works were being carried out on the premises andthat a visit would be made immediately prior to the hearing toassess how this was progressing. As the application was for thebasement and sub-basement levels, no noise breakout wasenvisaged, although this would depend on the musicamplification system to be used. A report on an environmental

noise survey undertaken on 27 July 2001 concluded that anyadditional activity after 1am in Adam Street might have animpact on the noise environment and subsequently the residentsin the area.

4.4 Adverse comments have been made by both Ward Councillorsand objections have been received from 34 objectors. TheDistrict Surveyor has advised that he has no objections to thegrant of a provisional licence but has requested that thefollowing special condition be attached to any licence that mightbe granted:


6/21

- The number of persons accommodated at thepremises, shall not exceed:-

- Second basement: - Gallery 67- Bar 190- Dining Room 76

-Private Room 12

- Third basement - Rehearsal Room 120

4.5 Ms. Hayes called Ms. Gabrielle Halcrow, Technical Noise Officerfrom the Councils Environmental Health Department, whoconfirmed that she had carried out the noise survey referred toin paragraph 4.3 above. There had been background noise fromplant and air-conditioning units in both Adam Street and John

Adam Street. Ambient noise levels were affected by peopleparking cars and by pedestrians heading towards The Strand.These tended to reduce considerably after midnight and therewas a substantial drop after 1am. The survey concluded that thesound of car horns, the slamming of car doors and loud voiceswould be likely to cause more disturbance to residents here thanconstant plant noise or background noise from The Strand.

4.6 In response to questions from Mr. Stephen Walsh representingthe objectors, Ms Halcrow stated that she was present in thearea up to 2am and had witnessed a drop in pedestriannumbers after 1am. She also confirmed the written findings thatloud voices of people in the street would be expected to causedisturbance to residents in this area.

4.7 Ms. Hayes then introduced Mr. Ian Watson, EnvironmentalHealth Enforcement Officer, who had prepared a report dated 16August 2001 concerning a meeting he had had with theapplicant on 14 August 2001. The report appeared in the orderpapers circulated by the Licensing Business Unit immediatelyprior to the hearing. The meeting had been arranged to discuss

the progress of the works being carried out and related issues.He had also met Ms. Christine Bond from the Royal Society ofArts and discussed her objections to the application. Mr. Watsonhad written his report that morning, immediately prior to thecommencement of the hearing. He had concluded inter alia thatthe provision of toilets would support an accommodation figureof 350 people. He had made certain other observationsconcerning party walls, ventilation, kitchen safety, means ofescape in case of fire and the possibility of noise breakout. Hehad recommended the installation of a noise limiter to the soundsystem. No report had been sought from an acoustic expert but

Mr. Watson had spoken to a noise technician concerning noisetransmission through walls. This could be investigated if the


7/21

Sub-Committee so requested but it had not been done so far.Councillors asked questions concerning the provision of toiletsand were informed that these existed on 2 of the levels. It wasalso noted that the District Surveyor had recommended a totalaccommodation figure of 465 while the Environmental Health

Department was seeking a lower figure of 350.

4.8 In response to questions from Mr. Andrew Muir representing theapplicants, Ms Hayes confirmed that over 40 objections hadbeen received to the application but 9 of these had beenwithdrawn following a conciliation meeting. 2 objectors did notrespond to the councils letter asking whether they wished toproceed with their objection and the letters had been left in thebundle to be considered at this hearing. Mr. Muir stated that oneof these letters was from Mr. Horan of the Journal of Bone andJoint Surgery and he understood that Mr. Horan was happy to

withdraw his objection. Ms. Hayes also confirmed that therewas a low level of residential occupancy in the area. In responseto questions from Mr. Walsh, Ms. Hayes confirmed once morethe number of objections received and those that subsequentlywithdrew after the conciliation meeting. She confirmed that LittleAdelphi was situated within a 100 metre radius of the applicantpremises. At Mr. Muirs request, the letter from Mr. Horam wasread out and Mr. Muir suggested that the wording indicated thatit was not necessarily an objection and should not be treated assyuch.

4.9 Mr. Muir then introduced the application. The freehold had beenpurchased by the Minter family 7 years ago. Included in theproperty was The Green Room, a private club for theatricaland ancillary staff, which had been operating since 1954. TheGreen Room operated a licensed bar until 1am from Monday toWednesday, until 3am from Thursday to Saturday and until 1amon Sunday. The Green Room had a self-imposed capacity of150 and while it had been full on some occasions, it had neverreached its full capacity. Mr. Muir noted that some of the peoplewho were now objecting to the current application had once

been members. However, no complaint had ever been madeabout noise and nuisance caused by members arriving at orleaving the Green Room. The Green Room had no controls overthe operation of their liquor licence other than those, which wereself-imposed. The imposition of the statutory controls under thelicence would guarantee that the premises were well-operated.

4.10 Under club rules, members leaving the premises will be directedonly towards The Strand. Door staff would ensure that thisparticular rule was adhered to by members and their guests andany breaches of club rules would result in expulsion. Notices to

this effect would also be displayed prominently throughout theclub premises. The number of vehicles generated by people


8/21

visiting and leaving the club would be reduced significantly bythe agreement entered into with BCCP for the provision ofprivate hire vehicles, which would be required to enter and exitAdam Street via The Strand. The proprietors were well awarethat car parking was a problem in the area and members would

be requested not to bring their cars. Every member would beprovided with his/her own personal swipe card to gain access.This would include the members photograph, thereby ensuringthat there would be no exchange of membership cards.

4.11 Mr. Muir then introduced Mr. Richard Johnston, the GeneralManager, who was a very experienced international operator atthe very highest level of the licensed trade. Mr. Minter was theprincipal project co-ordinator. Mr. Johnston stated that the upperpart of the building consisted of serviced offices, owned andoperated by the same company. In the licensed area, the

second level consisted of a bar and top flight restaurant, whilethe 3rd level was available for dancing. Mr. Johnston believedthat many of the objections arose from the use of the worddisco in some of the preliminary paperwork but this was notwhat had been intended. Mr. Minter wrote to all the people whohad objected to the application and invited them to apresentation at the premises on 28 February. Of the 15 whoattended, several indicated their intention to withdraw their initialcomplaints. Mr. Johnston did not believe that the premiseswould lead to a loss of amenity. He felt that his clientele wouldbe more likely to visit the Savoy rather than a night club.

4.12. Mr. Johnston drew attention to a conciliation letter written by Mr.Minter dated 7 March (Annex J, page 86 of the agenda) in whichhe offered to accept conditions to ensure the main fearsexpressed by the objectors were taken into account. He thenreferred to the facilities at the premises as set out at Annex N onpage 113. There was no mention of a night club or a disco. Hestated that the premises would cater for professional peoplewhos current working hours were not 9-5 and who might want to

drink, dance and have a meal after they have finished work. Mr.Johnston then referred to the menu on page 115, which was notconsidered to be cheap. Membership of the club was not cheapeither so there was no chance of an unruly or rowdy clientele.Mr. Minter had taken the examination for the National LicenseesEntertainment Certificate and had attained the highest passmark ever recorded. Ms. Bristow and Mr. Johnston had alsoobtained this certificate. The Ward Councillors had also beeninvited to the conciliation meeting on 28 February but neitherhad chosen to attend. Mr. Johnston suggested that the Sub-Committee might like to grant the licence for a period of less

than a year in order to assess how the premises were beingoperated.


9/21

4.13 Mr. Muir then introduced Mr. James Minter, Managing Director of thecompany. Mr. Minter stated that he had done everythingpossible to keep the residents in the picture and he had everyavailable measure to alleviate their concerns. He felt that the

use of the word disco had given the wrong impression and hehoped that his premises would enhance the lives of theresidents rather than ruin it. He had tried to arrange a meetingwith Councillor Hyams but had been unable to do so. The GreenRoom had caused no problems for the residents or the Police.There would be a Committee of 30 people who would determinethe makeup of the club. There would be a membership fee of250 to the first 250 people to join and then this would rise to450 per annum. Mr. Minter had been in the Royal Navy up to 3years ago. The building above the club premises had beenrefurbished to provide a quality serviced offices for well-to-do

clientele. Originally, Mr. Minter wanted the Green Room to stayas it was but it was being charged a very low rent and the onlyway to ensure that these premises brought in more money wasfor him to take over the management himself. Many of thosewho rented the serviced offices were freelance workers whofrequently worked until 2am. They paid a great deal of money forthe use of these offices and the company would be ill-advised toupset their tenants by opening a noisy club in the basement. Mr.Minter was convinced that the presence of the club would nothave a detrimental effect on the amenity of local residents. ThePolice had confirmed that they had no record of any troubleemanating from the Green Room. Mr. Minter could understandwhy the residents had been upset but he was confident that theirmisgivings were unfounded. He referred to letters received fromMr. Horram and Mr. Fletcher withdrawing their objections. Hehad employed experts when setting up every aspect of AdamStreet from the architect to the restaurant consultant. Mr. Minterbelieved he was offering a quality product.

4.14 In response to questions from Mr. Walsh, Mr. Minter stated that

the restaurant and bar area would be open in the daytime andevening and the dance area would operate during the evening.Music would be middle of the road, ie Abba or other 70s dancemusic. There would be no Garage or any form of ravemusic.Mr. Minter referred to the letter he wrote on 20 February 2001which appeared at Annex I pages 82-84 on the agenda. Here,he had described the club as a quiet bolt hole during the dayand at night members and their guests will have a bar andrestaurant for their exclusive use. He referred to page 84,paragraph 2 where it explained why he was applying for thelicence. This was a legal technicality in order to keep the club

operating on the same basis as it had for the preceding 50years. The Green Room was a registered charity, which enabled


10/21

it to stay open until 3am. In order for the present club to dolikewise, a music and dancing licence was required. Mr. Minteragreed that his club was a commercial entity and would be runfor profit. He conceded that anyone could apply for membershipbut emphasised that they might not be accepted. The Green

Room sought to be an actors club at which all sorts of peopleconcerned with the theatre could relax after a performance.Mr.Walsh noted that there had been no mention of dancing inthe clubs prospectus. He also noted that the Green Room hadan annual membership fee of 23, while the new establishmentwas a profit-making proprietory club. Mr. Minter explained thathe needed a public entertainment licence in order tosuccessfully obtain a special hours certificate. Mr. Walsh statedthat he did not believe this was the real reason for theapplication. He noted that 12,000 was earmarked to be spenton a music system and DJ and Mr. Minter agreed that the

provision of music would be a significant element of the newestablishment and that this would be provided in what used tobe the rehearsal room until 3am. He maintained that there wouldbe no disturbance whatever caused to local residents. Therehearsal room was three floors below ground level and by thetime patrons had climbed up to the ground floor, Mr. Minterconsidered that they would have calmed down. There wouldthen be a taxi service available to take them home. Mr. Walshremained unconvinced and believed that people leaving thepremises would be loud and unruly. Mr. Minter stated thatpeople leaving these premises had not caused any disturbanceto the Little Adelphi residents for the last 50 years and he did notsee why they should start now. Again, Mr. Walsh was notconvinced by Mr. Minters statement, citing the inevitability ofnoise because of additional capacity, the difficulty in enforcing astandard departure route away from the Little Adelphi. Theexchange continued and Mr. Minter was unable to accept acondition that would prohibit entry after 11pm as people tendedto arrive between midnight and 2am.

4.15 Mr. Muir re-examined and, in response to his questions, Mr.

Minter stated that the front entrance to the premises was 25yards from The Strand. Also, his sister lived above the premisesand did not oppose dancing taking place there. When the plansfor refurbishment were first drawn up in July 2000 they includeda clearly identified dancing area. At this point, Mr. Walsh statedthat he had not inferred that there had been any deviousnessinvolved with the application, he only wished to establish that thepremises would be music and dancing premises rather thandancing premises. Mr. John Langlois, an objector queried howthose leaving the premises would get home at that hour. He wasinformed that a taxi service would be provided by the firm

mentioned earlier.


11/21

4.16 In response to a question from Councillors as to how he thoughthis club would enhance the lives of residents as he had claimedearlier, Mr. Minter indicated that The Strand had once been avery grand place but now there were very few nice places.Covent Garden had become a tourist enclave and ,as such, was

devoid of anywhere decent to go. At 9 Adam Street, Mr Minterwanted to create a high quality establishment offering music,dancing and a high-class restaurant. Mr. Minter denied that theclientele would consist mainly of young people stating that hisoldest member so far was 62 years old. Mr. Walsh thenexpressed concern by the possible use of the premises byother people. The residents feared that the premises could behired out commercially to independent promoters who wouldadmit non-club members, undesirables and drug dealers. Mr.Minter assured the objectors that this would never happen. Mr.Minter drew attention to paragraph 10, page 128 of the agenda

which set out the circumstances in which members could bookthe gallery, the private Dining Room and The Rehearsal Roomfor private events. However, Mr. Walsh was more interested inthe second part of that passage which stated The managementwill occasionally hire the entire club to house a function or eventduring which time no member shall have access to the club.

4.17 Mr. Minter stated that the whole of the club would not be let andany private letting would only occur during the day on Saturdaysand Sundays. It would be possible for individual club membersto book a room during the evening but a licensee would alwaysbe present at the event and a prior list of guests would berequired. The club would be closed before 5pm during the dayon Saturdays and Sundays. It was anticipated that this wouldnot occur more than twice a month. In response to furtherquestions from Mr. Walsh, Mr. Minter confirmed that clubmembers could hire rooms for private functions until 3am on anynight of the week. Mr. Minter was reluctant to accept anundertaking restricting admission to members and guests ashe did not see why it was necessary. The premises were aprivate members club anyway but he particularly wanted to

admit members guests. The requirement for a music anddancing licence was a legal technicality, although Mr. Minterconceded that private parties might need the use of a music anddancing licence. The residents were concerned that the club,once licensed, might change its complexion from a privatemembers club to one which admits the general public and letsits accommodation to outside promoters.

4.18 Mr. Muir introduced Mr. Derek Landen, who served as secretaryof the Green Room from September 1998 until it closed in July2001. The club had a self-imposed capacity of 150 people. It

was open from Monday through to Saturday and was closed,again by choice, on Sunday unless there was a special event.


12/21

The Grren Room was primarily an actors club with 75% of itsmembership coming from the theatrical profession. The bar wasvery well utilised, especially later in the week. people wouldcome in after shows to wind down. The club was open until 3amon Fridays and Saturdays but members tended to leave at

different times. There was no mass exodus at closing time. Hedid not know how many members, if any, arrived and left by car.Many left on foot, took night buses or booked mini-cabs. Inthose days, mini-cabs did not honk their horns. The driverspressed the buzzer at the front door to announce their presence.

4.19 Mr. Landen had never received any complaints about any part ofthe operation of the premises, even though members tended toleave in various directions rather than head towards The Strandas was now proposed. He regarded the present proposal to bedifferent from that of the Green Room. On Thursdays, Fridays

and Saturdays there could be upwards of 100 people in the club,occasionally reaching the 150 limit. There was no music exceptfor special occasions and even then, it had to be sanctioned bythe general Committee and the Secretary. On average, therewas music every 6 to 8 weeks or so. By 3am on Fridays andSaturdays, there were never more than 40 people. Attention wasdrawn to a complaint made by the RSA concerning the mis-useof an adjoining stair well. Some members used to sit out there,smoke, drink and converse noisily causing disturbance late atnight. Mr. Landen confirmed that this had taken place and theclub management had put a stop to it by speaking to themembers responsible and by erecting notices throughout thepremises asking for the practice to cease. The Green Room hada mature clientele with ages ranging from 50 to 92. Level 2 wasthe most used part of the club with a small bar, a dining roomand a snooker room. Club registration was granted in 1957

4.20 In response to questions from Councillors, Mr. Landen statedthat generally, people just sat in the bar and socialised.Occasionally there would be functions such as book launches orfilm wrap parties. Music would be permitted on those

occasions and would be played in the dining room area. Thethird level was never used.

4.21 Mr. Muir then introduced Mr. David Chambers, former head ofEntertainment Licensing at the Greater London Council and theCity of Westminster and now representing the applicant as aLicensing Consultant. Mr. Chambers had been asked by Mr.Minter to examine the practicabilities of the application. Hisprime concern was to protect the amenity of the residents and toprevent noise pollution. He had been impressed with Mr. Mintersdeclared intention not to upset the residents. He knew the area

well from his experience with the City of Westminster and hewas well aware of the Councils policy guidelines. He had met


13/21

with council officers and established that there had been nonoise breakout. He had then met with representatives of theMetropolitan Police Service who had informed him that thereappeared to be a good system in place and that there was neverany queue. Mr. Chambers believed that the club was in a good

location in that any noise would by-pass Little Adelphi, as soundbreakout tended to travel in a straight line. Mr. Chambersconfirmed that it was he who had advised Mr. Minter to directpeople leaving towards The Strand to avoid passing LittleAdelphi and to include this provision in the rules of the club,making any breach the subject of a penalty.

4.22 The operation had not changed since this instruction had beengiven. The premises would not attract the unwanted attention ofunlicensed mini-cabs by engaging the services of a dedicatedtaxi firm. They would be prohibited from sounding their horns

and would enter Adam Street from The Strand. It wasemphasised that after the underground closed, people leavingthe club would have no other reason to turn into John AdamStreet. Finally, Mr. Chambers stated that he expected people toleave the premises gradually over a period rather that en masseat closing time. This would cause less problems.

4.23 In response to questions from Mr. Walsh about the BritishEntertainment Licensing Institute course, Mr. Chambersconfirmed that he had been involved with this. The examinationconsisted of 50 questions with a pass mark of 65%. It wasextremely rare to have a candidate achieve a 100% pass mark.Most people who passed tended to scrape through. Mr.Chambers considered that this application for a publicentertainment licence was not a new departure for the area.Although the area was quiet after 1am, the premises hadpreviously been operated as a club. His main concern was thatpeople leaving the establishment did not disturb the residents ofLittle Adelphi. He was confident that these residents would notbe disturbed unless a full-blooded fight erupted and , in view ofthe nature of the clientele, this was extremely unlikely. If there

had been problems, Mr. Chambers would expect people tocontact either the Police or the noise team and, since there hadbeen no complaints, mr. Chambers concluded that there hadbeen no noise. Mr. Walsh contested this conclusion stating thatpeople did not always complain and just because there hadbeen no complaints did not mean there had been no noise.There was a further exchange between Mr. Chambers and Mr.Walsh during which they failed to reach an agreement on noisefrom people leaving the establishment disturbing the residents ofLittle Adelphi and taxis leaving the area having picked uppassengers. Mr. Walsh also cast doubt on the ability of the club

to prevent people from leaving the premises via John AdamStreet rather than The Strand. He maintained that it would not


14/21

be possible to physically stop them. Mr. Chambers agreed that,if the premises were open to the public, then this might be thecase. But this was a private members club and thecircumstances were completely different.

4.24 Mr. Walsh then referred to the Councils policy regarding the

central Activities Zone. Mr. Muir objected that this was not aquestion for Mr. Chambers to answer but he chose to respondanyway. The Councils policy concerning stress areas had beendeveloped over a long period of time. Many policy options hadbeen explored before the Council had reached the presentstage, where the Central Activities Zone was the preferredlocation for this sort of establishment. There was no policypresumption against the granting of this application. At thisstage, Mr. Muir produced a photograph of the premises whichdemonstrated its location in relation to John Adam Street.

RESOLVED:

That, as the Sub-Committee had been sitting for over three anda quarter hours, it was agreed to continue sitting until thebusiness on the agenda had been concluded.

At 13.02 hours, the Sub-Committee withdrew for lunch and reconvened at13.49 hours to resume the hearing.

4.25 Mr. Johnston, General Manager was re-called to clarify theposition regarding the monitoring of the behaviour of membersand their guests, especially upon leaving the premises afterclosure. He stated that duty managers would see customers offthe premises at reception level and , while they were sayinggoodnight, they would remind members to leave quietly and toleave in the direction of The Strand. The contracted taxi firm-PCCP would exit Adam Street via The Strand rather than tomake a circuit of Robert Street. They would not go beyond 9Adam Street and would do a U Turn to go back the way theycame. Taxis in that area tended to do that anyway and Mr.

Johnston saw no difficulty in incorporating a condition to thiseffect into the contract. Mr. Johnston confirmed that if thepremises were to be hired out either in part or in its entirety,then this would only be to a member.

4.26 In response to Mr. Walsh, Mr. Johnston confirmed that anymember could hire the premises for their own private functionand invite whoever they chose. The function area could be hiredby a member any time of the week but any problems would bethe members liability. The management would go to greatlengths to that a member understood the implications of his or

her booking. One or more of the management team would bepresent to reinforce the conditions and club rules. In response to


15/21

questions from Councillors, who expressed doubt as to whetherclub rules could be enforced upon the public highway, Mr.Johnston stated that it was in the interests of members tobehave in a manner that was consistent with the good name ofthe club. Mr. Muir noted that Boodles had the same modus

operandi, as did several of the clubs in St. James. Mr. Johnstonconfirmed that there was a corporate membership of 400 perannum. For this, corporate members could arrange their ownfunctions, as could any other member. Mr. Johnston envisagedcorporate members hiring parts of the premises to arrangebreakfasts, lunches and presentations in the bar area, whichhad a high quality dcor. However, the bar/restaurant areawould not be hired out if this impinged upon the enjoyment ofother members.

4.27. The Chairman expressed the fear that, once the public

entertainment licence was granted, the management could thenopen the premises to the general public and disregard themembership aspect completely. Mr. Johnston assured her thatthe proprietors had no intention of using the establishment forpublic entertainment although they did need a publicentertainment licence. Mr. Panto suggested that an undertakingcould be given by the clubs owners that they would only admitmembers and their guests.

4.28. Mr. Walsh then called Mr. Bill Aldridge of the Little AdelphiResidents Association to give evidence on behalf of theobjectors. Mr. Aldridge had lived in Little Adelphi for the past 5years and he stated that this was a high class residential area,which lay within the Adelphi Conservation Area. It had been builtby the Adam brothers and the Royal Society of Arts was one ofits original occupants. He estimated that there were currently194 residences within the Adelphi conservation area. Therewere single yellow lines in John Adam Street as well asresidents parking bays. These tended to be used by theatrepatrons during the evening when parking restrictions expired.Mr. Aldridge confirmed that John Adam Street was frequently

used as a route to Charing Cross Station. This could beapproached either by way of The Strand or Villiers Street. Up to11pm, this area tended to be very busy because of throughtraffic but between midnight and 1am there was occasionalnoise but not a great deal. He was occasionally aware of streetnoise at the rear of Little Adelphi. He took an interest in suchthings since he liked to be in a position to inform the Police inthe event of crime or urination in the streets. He was consciousof noise in the area and he had been woken up every few weeksor so by isolated incidents. He was not aware that there hadbeen any specific problems arising from the existence of the

Green Room, although he did have concerns about the size andnature of the proposed operation. He only once had concerns


16/21

over the operation of the Green Room when a fire door was leftopen during a party.

4.29. He did not feel that he would be disturbed by pedestriansleaving the premises and walking up Adam Street towards The

Strand but his flat was at the rear of the building. It was possiblethat those living at the front on John Adam Street might bedisturbed by this. Mr. Aldridge believed that any vehicles beingmoved from John Adam Street after 3am might well cause adisturbance to those resident at the front of Little Adelphi. Mr.Aldridge did not feel that taxis making U-turns in Adam Streetand exiting towards The Strand was a realistic option. After6.30pm, parking restrictions were relaxed so that there wasparking on both sides of Adam Street and John Adam Street.This would leave insufficient room for taxi drivers to make a U-turn making it necessary for them to either go around the block

or to use the tunnels under York Buildings and exit at theembankment.

4.30. Mr. Aldridge had met with the residents after the conciliationmeeting. This took place at the Residents Association AGM on12 March at which there had been a report of the conciliationmeeting while residents gave details of their concerns. It wasagreed by all of the 32 people present that all reasonable stepsshould be taken to ensure that the amenity around Little Adelphishould be protected as it was 100% residential.

4.31. In response to questions from Mr. Muir, Mr. Aldridge confirmedthat he believed the arrangement whereby club members wouldbe steered towards The Strand was impracticable. Furthermore,he did not think it would be very fair on Mr. Minter to grant thelicence for a trial period since he was convinced that the trialwould be unsuccessful and he would have to close down again.There were occasional events at the RSA but these rarely wenton after midnight.

4.32. Mr. Walsh then introduced Mr. William Miller who had been a

resident of the Little Adelphi for 5 years. He had objected to theapplication and had attended the conciliation meeting on 20February. Mr. Minter had given assurances that there would beno noise and urination in the streets caused by members of hisclub. He was also told that disco was not a fair representationof the entertainment to be provided to members. However, Mr.Miller was alarmed to learn that Mr. Minter was planning tospend 12,000 on sound equipment, especially so when he hadbeen informed earlier that dancing would not be a large part ofthe operation. He lived at the rear of the Little Adelphi and hehad been aware of vehicle noise and urination in the gardens.

He had also been disturbed on occasion by events at the RSAas well as by isolated disturbances at 2 and 3 in the morning. It


17/21

had been difficult to pin down exactly where these people hadcome from. Mr. Miller believed that the new establishment wouldencourage more people to come into the area, which would, inturn, be detrimental to the environment. He noted that theGreen Room had an annual membership of 23 while 9 Adam

Street would be charging 450. In view of the size of the newmembership fee, Mr. Miller felt that members would be inclinedto visit the premises often to get their moneys worth. Mr Muirreminded Mr. Miller of the fact that dancing was only a small partof the operation, that people would not necessarily be eating inthe restaurant at 3am every night, that the activities of peopleleaving could be controlled and that the dcor and environmentof the club were of a very high quality but Mr. Miller did notwaiver from his evidence.

4.33 In response to questions from Councillors, Mr. Miller stated that there

were no problems when the Green Room closed at 3ambecause the numbers involved were much smaller. Theatmosphere in the Green Room was different, too. For a startthere was no music and people are less noisy when they havenot been drinking and they are less hyped up when they havenot been dancing.

4.34. Mr. Walsh then introduced Mr. Graham Guthrie who had residedon the 5th floor in the front of the Little Adelphi since May 1999.He had been unable to attend the conciliation meeting and haddecided to pursue his objection. He did not doubt Mr. Mintersintention to run a high class establishment and to control hismembers when they left but he had doubts that this could beenforced. Mr. Guthrie slept with his windows open and notedthat the area was noisy between 11.00pm and 11.30pm whenthe pubs closed. The air conditioning units on various buildingswere also noisy. Because of the nature of the surroundingbuildings, noise tended to reverberate around the Adelphi andLittle Adelphi. He had been woken up by taxi noise as well asthe air conditioning systems in delivery vans. However wellintentioned, Mr. Guthrie did not believe that Mr. Minter would be

able to prevent taxi noise neither did he believe that Mr. Minterwould be able to insist that his members used the dedicated taxiservice. He was sure that some people would call their owntaxis. Black cabs tend to hover around and they are noisy. Hehad never been woken up or disturbed in any way by peopleleaving the Green Room.

4.35 Mr. Walsh introduced Ms. Christine Bond representing the RSAwhich owned 5 inter-connecting properties along John AdamStreet. The applicants had the right of access across RSAproperty. Because of the location of the RSA buildings, Ms.

Bond had been consulted by the applicant over various issuesincluding Rights of way, contractors and planning. The problems


18/21

with the stair well, which linked the Adam Street building with theRSA premises in John Adam Street, had been an ongoingsource of aggravation with the Green Room when it had beenmanaged by Mr. Landens predecessor. Members used to openthe fire door and sit on the steps, blocking the stairway, leaving

litter and making noise, which disturbed the RSA occupants. MsBond also recalled difficulties during a new member eveningwhen people kept opening the fire door in spite of frequentrequests from the RSA that it be kept shut. The RSA had apublic entertainment licence and a supper hours certificate. Ingeneral events concluded at 11pm although weddingssometimes went on until after that time. Ms. Bond did not doubtMr. Minters integrity but she believed that he would experiencedifficulty in controlling the activities of his members after theyhad left his premises. By way of contrast, she cited thearrangements that the RSA made with its corporate customers

where there were formal contracts concerning the behaviour.Large PLCs comprised 80/90% of the RSAs corporatecustomers while a smaller percentage of business involvedweddings where the clientele was younger. Ms. Bonds objectionto the application involved health and safety issues, refusecollection, the use of the fire escape and concerns over the useof the stair well. If the Councils conditions were complied with, itwas possible that the premises could be operated without undueproblems but she doubted whether Mr. Minter could controlpeople leaving.

4.36 In response to questions from councillors, Ms. Bond stated thatif there was a behaviour problem with people who had made aprivate booking at the RSA, the ultimate sanction would be toclose the event down. The RSA had a good relationship withlocal residents. She believed that an establishment with a largeclientele, open to 3am would be problematic. People would gothere merely to drink for longer.

4.37 Mr. John Langlois then spoke on behalf of his objection. He wasa Guernsey resident and not always present at his flat in Little

Adelphi, which he bought three years ago, originally for his son.He bore no animosity towards Mr. Minter and did not attend theconciliation meeting. He was concerned that the new premiseswould exacerbate an already unpleasant situation in John AdamStreet involving late night revellers, people vomiting andurinating in the streets as well as noise caused by ventilationsystems. His flat was immediately below that of Mr. Guthrie andwas frequently disturbed by noise from people in the street.There had been disturbances in the past arising from events atthe RSA and if this application were to be granted, the premiseswould draw more people into this quiet enclave, which was

becoming increasingly residential.


19/21

4.38 Mr. Walsh then made his closing statement. He believed thatwhat was on offer here was a good restaurant, music anddancing, all the ingredients for a good night out. The residentscould not be blamed for concluding, therefore, that customerswould leave noisily, in a boisterous and vocal manner. The

management had been trying to convince everyone that thiswould be an expanded Green Room but this operation wouldbe completely different. The Green Room had been a genuinemembers club, there had been no regular public functions i.e.one per month and they never had or needed a publicentertainment licence. This establishment would be double thesize and capacity.

4.39 The management were reluctant to accept a conditionpreventing any further admission after 11pm. The objectorswould be disturbed by noise made by people leaving the

establishment late at night and the proposed arrangements forensuring that both taxis and pedestrians left the premises in thedirection of The Strand were unenforceable. Mr. Walsh alsoexpressed concern over arrangements for the premises to bebooked for private events by members. He did not see howmembers could be accountable if rules were not obeyed by hisguests. There was no basis for control to prevent potentialdisturbance and this potential was significant.

4.40 Mr.Muir then made a closing statement on behalf of theapplicant. He referred to the evidence given by Mr. Landenconcerning the Green Room. This had not been controlledduring the entire period it had been open and, during that period,the people who left the club late at night caused no disturbanceto local residents neither did the taxis in which they had left. TheGreen Room operated the same terminal hour as the new cluband served actors and associated professions. None of thestatutory bodies had objected to the application. The owner, Mr.Minter, had spent 10 years in the Royal Navy. The dance areawas situated in the third basement level and it had already beenproved that noise escape from here was most unlikely. The

premises were within the Central Activities Zone but not in astress area so there was no policy presumption against grantingthe licence. Also, officers had stated quite clearly that the areawas not predominantly residential.

At 15.57 hours, the Sub-Committee withdrew and re-convened at 17.22 hoursto announce the decision.

This is an application by Mr James Minter for a new annual publicentertainment licence in respect of premises known as 9 Adam Street,

London WC2. Mr Minter is also seeking an extension of hours from 11pm onthe days Sunday to Wednesday to 1am on the day following and from 11pm


20/21

on Thursday, Friday and Saturday to 3am on the day following. The premisesoccupy the ground floor and three basement levels of a four-storey building inthe middle of a terrace.

The Sub-Committee has had regard to the policy guidelines approved by the

Planning and Transportation Committee on 28 March 2000 as amended bythe Planning and Licensing Committee on 20 June 2000 and notes that thepremises are situated in the Central Activities Zone. The premises are notsituated in a recognised stress area. The surrounding area is described by theDistrict Surveyor as one of mainly commercial properties with someresidential use. Consequently, there is no policy presumption against thisapplication in respect of that policy provision.

However, Council policy also recognises that some areas of the CentralActivities Zone are still very quiet at night. It is also policy that these areasshould be protected. Indeed, policy suggests that in areas where there is little

late night activity there is a presumption against granting new licences and, inparticular, licences with a terminal hour beyond 1am.

Whilst it is correct to say that the immediate vicinity of the premises is notentirely residential, the Sub-Committee does note that there is a verysignificant residential community close by in the Adelphi Conservation Area. Alarge number of those residents have objected to this application on the basisthat the applicant will not be able to control his customers when they leave thepremises in the early hours of the morning.

The Sub-Committee has carefully considered the representations made byand on behalf of Mr Minter. He is a Director of Adam House Limited, thecompany that owns the freehold to the premises. He explained that hisintention was to create a smart, private members' club. There was no intentionof operating a loud and noisy disco. He wants to attract small businesses andfreelance professionals. He made it quite clear that his application was a legaltechnicality so as to enable him to keep operating the club as it had beenoperating for the past 50 years. It seems that he has not sought registration ofhis club with the magistrates' pursuant to the Licensing Act 1964 because,unlike the Green Room Club which used to occupy the premises, his club wasgoing to be a profit making enterprise.

This application has been considered on its merits and on the understandingthat only members of the club and their authorised guests will, in fact, actuallybe able to use the premises for entertainment purposes.

There have been a significant number of objections to this application.Concern has been expressed about the possible noise that might be createdwhen up to 350 people leave the premises at 3am. There have been concernsabout the use of illegal minicabs, parking congestion, car doors slamming,street urination and the creation of large amounts of refuse.The fact that 9 Adam Street is actually going to be operated as a profit making

concern is one factor that greatly concerns the Sub-Committee. This will be avery different operation to the Green Room precisely because there is a


21/21

pressure to attract more members so as to increase profit margins. Mr Mintersuggests that the Green Room never caused any problems. Some objectorspoint out that this was because the Green Room did not attract a very largeclientele. Mr Minter will want to attract a large clientele and the Sub-Committee has real doubt as to whether he will be able to adequately control

the behaviour of his customers when they leave the premises.

The area around the Adelphi may not be primarily residential but there is nodoubt that the nature of the area is changing significantly. The residentsdescribe the area as a "tranquil haven", a "uniquely quiet part of centralLondon" and as a "quiet conservation area". There are no other premises inthe immediate area with a late night licence.

It was noted that this application was not subject to adverse comment orobservations from the London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority, theMetropolitan Police, the Environmental Health Officer or the Cleansing

Division. None of the objectors appeared to have any concern about theinternal management of the premises themselves, particularly during the day.Indeed, the Sub-Committee has no reason to believe that the premisesthemselves will be otherwise than well run and is confident that the applicantwill take his responsibilities seriously. However, the Sub-Committee is mostconcerned to ensure that local residents are not subjected to any disturbanceas a result of the use of the premises for public entertainment purposes. Inthis case, the Sub-Committee has concluded that, on balance, the policy infavour of protecting quiet areas must prevail.

Consequently, THE DECISION IS:

That the application made by Mr James Minter for a new public music anddancing licence in respect of the premises known as 9 Adam Street, LondonWC2 be refused.

5. TERMINATION OF MEETING

5.1 The Meeting ended at 17.29 hours

Signed.Date

Documents

204. Adam Street Club: Westminster Council; minutes of meeting