Interactive webcast player

Licensing Sub-Committee
Thursday, 9th July 2026 at 6:00pm

 
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
  1. Webcast Finished

1 Apologies

of the licencing subcommittee which is being held as a hybrid meeting.
This meeting is being webcast so please do bear with us if there are any technical issues.
My name is Councillor Mitten.
I'm chairing this meeting and I'll now invite the other attendees to introduce themselves
in following orders.
So if we go Councillors, officers, applicants and then representations.
Thanks.
Councillor Bodding.
Good evening.
I am Councillor Matthew Tiller.
And the officers.
Guy Bishop, legal advisor to the licencing subcommittee.
Julie Hopkins, licencing officer.
Michael Flowers, democratic services officer.
Stephanie Burke, democratic services officer.
If we go to applicants.
Gary Grant, I'm the barrister for the applicant.
Elizabeth Speed, Group General Counsel for the applicant.
Sean Hooper, Regional Operations Director for the applicant.
Mark Thompson, Risk and Compliance Director for the applicant.
And now representations.
This bridge member of the public.
Fantastic.
So are there any apologies for absence or declarations of interest?
Oh, sorry, a few more online.
Did he? Yeah, sorry.
Hi there, Miss Wojcik. Are you able to just introduce yourself? I believe you're for the first application for the Adult Gaming Centre.
Yes, sorry, good afternoon. Good evening. My name is Anna. I have been living in Putney for the past nine years.
Oh, sorry, you will have a chance to introduce yourself fully as part of your representation.
So I just wanted to confirm your name and attendance for the meeting.
Thank you.
Oh, yes, of course.
My name is Anna Wojcik.
Thanks.
So Agenda Items 1 and 2, are there any apologies for absence or declarations of interest for
any items on the agenda?
No?
Fantastic.

2 Declarations of Interests

APPLICATIONS TO BE CONSIDERED UNDER THE LICENSING ACT 2003

So, moving on, we'll first consider the application for a new adult gaming centre licence in respect

3 Admiral, 160-162 Putney High Street, London, SW15 1RS (Paper No. 26-153)

for premises known as Admiral 160 to 162 Putney High Street, London, SW15 1RS.
This application is being considered under the Gambling Act 2005 and its delegation,
and I now invite the licencing officer to introduce the application.
Thank you, Councillor. This is an application for a new premises licence under the Gambling Act 2005,
submitted by Luxury Leisure Trading as Admiral for an adult gaming centre known as an AGC at 160 to 162 Putney High Street, London, SW 15 1RS.
I should point out that there is a small error on the committee report that states that the
applicant is a luxury leisure trading as Tellarius Limited, so apologies for that.
The application was advertised as required under the legislation with a slight notice
of the premises and a newspaper advert.
This resulted in the receipt of 58 representations from other persons.
These are the only matters for consideration tonight.
The Gambling Act 2005 has a different set of licencing objectives to that of the Licencing Act 2003.
These are A. preventing gambling from being a source of crime and disorder, being associated with crime and disorder, or being used to support crime.
B. ensuring that gambling is conducted in a fair and open way.
And C. protecting children and other vulnerable persons from being harmed or exploited by gambling.
There is also an aim to permit principle set out in section 153 of the Gambling Act 2005.
This is in exercise and then functions. The licencing authority shall aim to permit the
use of premises for gambling insofar as the authority thinks that that use would be a
in accordance with any relevant code of practise issued by the Gambling Commission, b in accordance
with any relevant guidance issued by the Gambling Commission.
C reasonably consistent with the licencing objectives and in accordance with Wamsworth's
own statement of policy and principles.
Section 23 of the Committee Report provides mandatory conditions that are attached to
every gambling premises licence.
Section 24 of the Committee report shows mandatory conditions which are attached to an AGC licence.
Section 25 of the report states that there are currently no prescribed default conditions for an adult gaming centre premises licence.
Councillors, I've laid out the brief facts of the application, but I'll be happy to answer any questions you may have. Thank you.
Does the subcommittee have any questions for the licencing officer?
In that case, just to remind everybody that both the applicant and representations, you'll
have a chance to address this subcommittee.
There'll be equal time for both.
And the subcommittee will have opportunities
to ask for clarifications of those speakers.
So I'll now take this moment to invite the applicant
to address the subcommittee.
You'll have 20 minutes to speak,
after which questions may be asked.
Councillors, thank you.
This application is a matter of considerable public interest, as you would be aware from
the number of representations, both at the planning stage as well as the licencing stage.
And for that reason, I'm going to show the residents the respect they deserve by addressing
all of their points and pointing out where we address those points in the context of
the gambling law and your policy on gambling premises.
What we are aiming to do is to put a high street premises that is boarded up and has
the pleasure it will bring to many of the customers who enjoy using adult gaming centres.
But we will only do so by applying the market leading most robust operating procedures of
any company who runs AGCs in the country, that's Luxury Leisure, who trade as Admiral. They are also
the most experienced operators of AGCs.
They operate some 300 around the UK.
180 of those are 24 hour, seven day a week operations.
It is an extraordinary statistic
that not a single one of their licences
have ever been reviewed because it was even suggested
that having operated and opened,
and they caused any undermining of the licencing objectives.
There is every reason to believe that if you were minded to grant this application, the
same would be true here, despite the concerns of a number of residents which you will have
read about.
AGCs are descended from the penny arcades of the old seaside towns in Victorian and
Georgian England.
And they then entered the town centres as amusement arcades and since the 2005 Gambling
Act became known as adult gaming centres.
But they are there for amusement.
They are relatively low stakes between 10 pence and 2 pounds for relatively low rewards
that range from 5 pounds to 500 pounds.
The overwhelming number of people who use our premises around the country are not problem gamblers.
They are people in the same way as people who use pubs and bars and restaurants, generally are not problem drinkers.
There are of course some who have issues with gambling and we take more steps to avoid and to help those people
and to avoid them gambling than any other operator
in the country.
And that set out an enormous detail within the paperwork
I know you would have seen.
I can point out this, that when it comes to,
well, what shall we do with this premises,
I think one resident suggested, I'd rather leave it empty.
That's not a neutral decision.
Twice, including last night, squatters have attempted
to break into this premises to take it over.
So that is the effective alternative.
Either we put this into good commercial use
or it will end up becoming a squat when they do successfully break in.
There is better ways to deal with this premises.
Our customers come to us.
We are low stakes, alcohol free, adult only entertainment venues,
which the evidence that we've produced suggests has a low impact on the community
despite undoubted concerns of those communities.
Our customers, the average age is between 45 and 50.
There's a male -female split of around 60 to 40.
The majority of our customers are regulars.
Why 24 hours? It's because a lot of our customers are shift workers.
They're taxi drivers, they're emergency workers, they're hospitality workers who,
to relax after a night shift, will often come and spend half an hour or an hour in one of
our venues.
Unlike licences for bingo premises or betting offices, where there is a curfew as a standard,
In the case of AGCs, the default position set by Parliament is in fact 24 hours operation,
seven days a week, and that can only be curtailed if you find there is good, clear evidence
that renders that necessary.
We say in this case there is no such evidence that would lead you to reduce what is the
default 24 -hour position.
Wandsworth's own gambling policy for your legal advisor's note at 3 .5 states that this
authority recognises the importance of gambling as a legitimate part of the leisure industry.
Now you have received some 58 written representations from residents.
A number of those are a template that have been duplicated.
About two -thirds of them refer to matters which legally is not permissible for you to take into account.
They are broadly what I would characterise as an anti -gambling stance.
In other words, we don't think it's desirable to have another gambling premises in Putney High Street.
And I will address that.
We acknowledge those genuine concerns and there are three things I wish to address today.
Firstly, the legal framework. There is a presumption in favour of grant.
Two, the evidence, including expert independent evidence, that addresses every properly raised concern by the residents.
And thirdly, why we say that the available, reliable and specific evidence, in other words,
not general evidence about problems elsewhere, but the specific evidence about this premises,
as opposed to speculative fears or generalised concerns, supports the grant of this licence
as applied for 24 hours a day, seven days a week, with only the mandatory conditions
and no additional.
Now, the legal framework,
I set this out to assist in great detail
in my written submissions,
which is in the supplementary pack,
and I understand you've had the opportunity
to consider those.
So I'm not going to go into the law.
You're blessed with an extremely experienced legal advisor
who will advise you on the law in any event.
But I don't believe that anything I've written in there
isn't the least bit controversial.
The authority under the Gambling Act shall aim to permit.
It is an effect very unlike Licencing Act matters.
There is a presumption to grant unless there is clear specific evidence
that to do so would be incompatible with the licencing objectives.
And your own Wandsworth policy states at paragraph 15 .3
that the starting point is the grant.
The burden in gambling cases falls on the objectors, in this case the residential objectors,
for them to show with evidence, not speculative fears, that the grant, even with the measures we propose,
that as I say go beyond that which any other operator offer, would be inconsistent with the licencing objectives.
And we say, with all due respect to all of those representations, that when you look for the evidence,
those representations do not get close to the high bar of suggesting that the statutory presumption to grant should be overturned.
The three licencing objectives you are aware of, prevent gambling being a source of crime or disorder,
or being associated with crime or disorder.
The second is ensuring gambling is fair and open.
That is generally a matter for the gambling commission, not for local authorities.
And thirdly, perhaps something that's raised in more representations than any other,
protecting children and vulnerable persons from being harmed or exploited by gambling.
And I highlight and underline those words by gambling.
I make the simple point, not a single child or vulnerable person will be gambling in our premises.
Children are not allowed in, we have a challenge 25.
We have an extraordinary success rate of over 95 % during test purchases,
of making sure that youngsters do not get access to the machines.
And I can indicate this, we are unique, and in the very rare cases
where a member of staff does not challenge a young person who walks in,
and in this case it would be 18, 19 -year -olds who are old enough,
if they are not challenged, that member of staff is automatically dismissed.
That is how seriously we take it.
What we cannot take into account is a great deal of the material relied on by the residents.
You cannot take into account moral objections,
the undesirability of gambling premises, demand,
the number of nearby premises, planning or amenity matters,
fears of nuisance or antisocial behaviour,
insofar as it doesn't amount to crime and disorder,
which is a high bar.
Disorder is the sort of thing where you need to call the police to sort it out.
Economic impact may not be taken into account, the character of the high street, or speculative fears or concerns,
which we say the resident representations is primarily based on.
And your policy makes those points simply for your legal advisor's note at 13 .4 and 15 .4.
Your own agenda report expressly and correctly, it's at page 7, paragraph 21, says as follows.
That the subcommittee may not modify the conditions, reject the whole or part of the application,
merely because they consider it desirable to do so.
The absent voices in this case are all of the responsible authorities.
Licencing, as you know, being an experienced panel, works on relying on the expertise of those who specialise in preventing crime and disorder,
in preventing harm to children
and preventing nuisance and so on.
In this case, and it is stark,
that having been consulted expressly about this application,
the Metropolitan Police do not object
on crime or disorder grounds.
The Gambling Commission do not object to the grant.
Wandsworth's own Safeguarding Children Partnership
do not object to the grant of this application.
The Safeguarding Adult Service,
although not a formal representation,
they have the same right as anyone else to make a rep,
they are not objecting
on behalf of vulnerable adults in the area.
Your Public Health Team, your Planning Team,
your Environmental Health Team, the London Fire Brigade,
none of them object to the grant of this application
in full 24 -hour 7.
The resident concerns which you will listen to and you will have regard to must, we say,
be tested against the absence of objections by all of the expert bodies charged with protecting
the licencing objectives under the Act.
Planning permission. You will be told and you will be told correctly that planning and
licencing our separate regimes.
That does not, however, mean they exist
in their own vacuums and silos,
and one must completely ignore the other.
That is not the law, and indeed it never has been.
We have included in our bundle a case called Forster
from the Court of Appeal.
Mr. Bishop, I know, will already be aware of it.
But it simply says this, that in making,
when licencing makes a decision,
It must have regard to a decision taken in a similar context by your colleagues in planning.
It doesn't mean it's determinative, but it does mean you need to have regard to it.
Within my written submissions, I cite the paragraph where the Court of Appeals say that.
And that, if you take a step back, must make sense.
when you have the council acting as a planning authority,
looking at pretty much the same evidence you're looking at.
In fact, the planning looked at a lot more evidence.
There were over 500 objections, not 50, right?
And they make decisions where they specifically look at residential amenity,
which would include things like nuisance.
And they specifically looked at crime and disorder
and came to a conclusion that planning for the change of use
from a pub bar to an adult gaming centre could be granted, that if you on the same evidence
made a completely different decision, it does somewhat undermine the coherence of the decision -making
powers.
And the reason it is important, and this was a decision made fairly recently in December
Can I please ask you to turn in the supplementary pack to page 219 because your planning colleagues
made some findings which we would invite you to have regard to when weighing up your decision
in licencing.
So at 219, this is the London Power of Wandsworth's permission for development.
It allowed the change of use from Pub Bar.
And then that decision was based on your planning officer's report of September 2024.
And that begins at page 225 of that bundle.
And I'm going to point out the positive evidence that both the police and
environmental health and community safety teams of the council gave at planning.
because I wouldn't want it to be thought that the mere absence of an objection by the responsible authorities meant they were simply neutral.
At the top of page 227, the officer's report records as follows from the Metropolitan Police, and this directly addresses the concerns of residents.
A search of other similar venues in the borough indicates no incidents of crime reported.
The majority of crime and antisocial behaviour reports for Putney High Street relate to the
existing nightclub.
It's recommended that a management security plan is provided for the council's approval,
and that would be a condition of planning.
And then, if you move on to amenity, which would overlap with nuisance concerns, although that's not an objective,
at page 230, you'll see at paragraph 3, 3 .3,
By reason of the subject site located within the Putney Town Centre,
a certain level of noise generated by foot full and public interaction is expected.
The existing residential use located above the ground floor as well as to the year.
The proposed opening hours 24 -7 mirror those of other existing adult gaming centres in the area.
And inquiries with the police and the council's community safety unit
have failed to return a history of issues of antisocial behaviour
or crime associated with this use or with similar establishments
elsewhere in the borough.
And it goes on and on about amenity and concludes the same thing.
That despite in that case 500 letters of concern from residents,
that actually the facts show that it does not add to antisocial behaviour,
nuisance, crime, disorder.
That is the fact as opposed to the speculative concerns which are before you in this application.
The applicant, you would have read a lot in our paperwork as to who we are.
It suffices to say that we were the first UK land -based operator to receive what is
known as the G4 accreditation by a global body of gambling regulators. That is the industry
gold standard. You cannot get a higher degree of compliance and regulatory control than
Admiral or luxury leather has. We are extremely experienced and knowledgeable about working
in Wandsworth. We in fact operated from Putney High Street between 1990 and 2004. I won't
embarrass him but one of the colleagues on the table is old enough to have been working
for luxury leisure when that happened. So we know Putney High Street. We currently operate
in St. John's Hill in Clapham Junction, as well as in Tooting. They are 24 -7 operations.
There has been zero incidents related to the licencing objectives. There has never been
a review application of those licences. In other words, we know what we're doing. We
know how to operate these venues without in any way undermining the licencing objectives.
You've seen evidence from Mark Thompson and Sean Hooper that really talk about the enormous lengths we go to.
It is no accident we have never been reviewed.
We haven't left it to our own directors to simply say how good they are and how unimpactful their premises will be.
We have instructed two independent experts with vast experience in gambling regulation
to carry out repeated observations of the other ABCs within Wandsworth,
both Admirals as well as Merkor and indeed the other betting shops around Putney High Street.
And that's Joanne Craig, whose report is in our papers,
some 33 years experience.
She has worked for the Gambling Commission
and is now a consultant.
She concludes that with all of the policies we are offering,
we either meet or in most cases exceed the standards set out
in one's worth gambling policy at Appendix C
for what a well -run AGC should do.
Laveche Associates similarly carried out vast observations
through the night at various premises within Wandsworth and they also conclude
that all of the concerns of residents are simply not borne out by the evidence
on the ground. Addressing if I may the residential objections. So I was gonna
say that's that's been 20 minutes. It has. May I just summarise them briefly? I'll
Well, nothing I'm going to say is not already in my written submissions.
We deal with the residential objections.
We deal with why we say either they're not relevant to the objectives or on the cases
where they are relevant, how our procedures meet those concerns.
Could I simply deal with the clustering point?
your policy at 3 .8 mentions clustering and mentions that you wish the authority will work with the Gambling Commission Trade and Partners
to control the inappropriate clustering of gambling licence premises.
How is that done? It is not done by refusing or restricting applications.
By reference to your paragraph 3 .8 of your policy,
it's done by expecting high standards
and scrutinising each application.
And that's set out in the bullet points
where you deal with clustering.
And we deal with each and every one of those points
within our evidence.
Okay, thank you.
And I'll turn to subcommittee
if you have any questions for the applicant.
Please go ahead.
Councillor Tiller.
Thank you.
Yes, I was glad to hear about the policy on not admitting children,
but I have some questions about vulnerable persons.
You rely heavily on the multi -operator self -exclusion scheme.
What evidence do you have that problem gamblers
actually self -exclude before suffering substantial financial harm?
Also your safeguarding model depends heavily on staff intervention.
How many customer interactions for potential gambling harm occur annually across your estate?
And how many resulting customers being excluded or referred for support?
And finally, how do staff distinguish between an enthusiastic customer and one who is gambling
beyond their means?
I will ask my witnesses to address that.
Yes, I'll certainly try.
Just with regards to some of the statistics you've included in your questionnaire, Councillor,
In the first part of this year, so in Quotas 1 and 2, nationally we've conducted 170 ,000
customer interactions. That's across 300 venues, circa, so that gives you the flavour, I think,
of the number of customer interactions we conduct. I don't have the sort of conversion
to self exclusion, numbers to hand. However, I can say that we self exclude about 150 to
160 people per week. Now that number may seem high, but in relation to our overall clients
Ellen Fall, it's not. And I would argue that and present it very much as being a positive
action or a demonstration of our proactivity around how we take our customer interactions
and then make appropriate kind of safeguarding decisions around self exclusion we see is
very much the end of the customer journey. We don't want customers to self exclude. We
and I think this addresses another part of your question,
forgive me if I've dealt with them slightly out of order.
Our staff receive more training, I would suggest,
than anybody else working in the gambling sector,
and they are trained not only to identify
potential triggers or signs of harm,
but then what to do with it,
and we give them a very prescriptive journey
with which they should address customers.
So distinguishing between somebody getting
a little bit excited and somebody getting angry,
obviously the observations of their senses,
their eyes and ears, would be their starting point.
However, but it's followed up with conversation
and question and sort of a dynamic decision -making model
on the basis of their observations.
Councillor, forgive me, is there any part
of your questions I didn't address there?
There was quite a lot to it, forgive me.
Yeah, sorry, I appreciate there were
several questions at once.
Yeah, perhaps you could say a bit more
about how the staff intervene
when they see a problem gambler.
So if you are unfamiliar with AGC's, I could just point out our key difference, the key
difference between ourselves and other types of land -based gambling establishments is that
our staff are present on the floor of the venue, so they don't sit behind a counter
like in a licenced betting office for example.
So we position our reception refreshment station just inside the entrance to our venues and
it allows the staff a real sense of control right from the very point of access for a
customer.
They can assess age, they can assess other vulnerabilities like things like intoxication.
Now, we're not prohibited from allowing people in who have had a drink, for example, but
we've made that decision as a policy.
So our staff are trained to refuse entry to people that appear to be intoxicated because
we consider them to be vulnerable.
The staff, once they identify something they think may be a sign of harm, it's all about
the conversational piece, it's about the questions, it's about how they follow up with it.
Now, we offer a range of gambling management tools
that would allow a customer perhaps,
who was exhibiting signs of harm,
to manage their gambling more effectively.
And we would suggest and encourage that they follow those
so they might come in for shorter periods of time,
come in less often, play with a smaller stake.
And hopefully those kind of management options
prevent them from getting to the stage
where they feel like they need to self -exclude.
Thank you very much.
Just on the, just a clarification on the point of
vulnerable people and just acknowledging the location
of the drug and alcohol medical facilities
that are nearby, in reference to something
that you mentioned that there were no vulnerable people
that have used your facilities,
and apologies if I've got that incorrect,
how can you tell on some vulnerabilities?
Because if people have an addictive personality,
it's not something that you can see
unless it's manifesting in addiction to alcohol or drugs.
So just be good to get a clarification on that.
Primarily it comes back to the training of the staff
and what we train them to identify and the way in which we do that I don't know if as
part of the submission our trading materials were included but they're significant if I
was to print it for example it's not print but if we were to print our online Admiral
Academy you know we would be sitting with a considerable number of pages in front of
us the focus is very much on the behaviours that they need to identify somebody as potentially
vulnerable. It's very difficult and even the gambling commission don't try to
qualify what a vulnerable person is so we train our staff to be very open
minded about it and consider bits of information they are told by their
customers. So for example something that might seem relatively insignificant like
somebody suffered a breakup or somebody's maybe lost their job or
something more serious they've suffered a bereavement that can make someone
vulnerable in the same way that something more debilitating like an addiction can.
I get your point, Councillor, in the sense that I think what you're trying to establish
is how do you know a homeless person is homeless when they don't appear to be? And we train
our staff not to take anyone for sort of granted or not at face value. So really the difference
between ourselves and other types of gambling is our staff are quite nosy, they're quite
engaged with our customers, and that arms them with lots of information that hopefully
helps them conduct an effective assessment.
Thank you.
Just to clarify, I never meant to give the impression we would never have a vulnerable
person in our premises. The impression I was trying to give was that if there is one and
we take extraordinary steps to find out, we will intervene. We won't just let them gamble.
Thanks.
I won't fire off all the questions all at once, I'll take it in sections.
Can you just explain to me what your shop front is like?
What is in the windows?
What the glass is like?
What the door is like to the entrance?
So what you put in the shop windows as well?
Just I can get a sense for that.
Okay, we like to think we have an active shop front, we like to fit in with the retail environment
and perhaps quite different to maybe what you've seen with Merka on Putney High Street,
you can actually see inside our venues.
So we have glass, but we usually have digital screens with a kind of shelving system that allows a glimpse in.
But we're quite proud of the way...
Slattered.
Slattered, yes, thank you. I couldn't think of another call.
Shelving. Slattered screens.
And if you went to Tooting where we operate or Clapham, you could see exactly what our shop front looks like.
but the main difference to say Merkur is we're a bit more open,
we want people to be able to see in and out to an extent.
Yeah, I've seen that one.
So when the doors open, and would like in weather like this,
the doors be wide open, can you see in or are the doors closed all the time?
Not directly because we operate a two door entrance.
So we have a lobby whereby the external doors onto the pavement would normally be open while we're trading.
You walk into that lobby, which is usually an enclosed lobby area, with automatic doors that then allow you in to the gaming area.
And if I could add, in terms of visibility in, the police really like having partial visibility in?
And then can I further ask, on your advertising, do you use celebrities for advertising? What
sort of colours are you using? Do you have flashing lights on your digital displays?
First of all, celebrities, I can't think of any recently. Many years ago we would have
the likes of Barbara Windsor and people like that would come and do visits, but we haven't
on that for many years. Sorry, Lisa?
I was just going to add that the Advertising Standards Authority and the Gambling Commission
are very clear about the advertising can't appeal to children and that type of thing.
Just on that point, and I know you've mentioned it in the submission, our external advertising
is not directed at people under the age of 18.
Could you just clarify what that means?
Yeah, I think the sort of primary control on that
is the fact that our marketing director
as a PML holder, personal management licence holder,
like I am, it's one of the specified management offices
that's within the LCCP.
And we have a process of all marketing
being signed off by him first and foremost.
Now anything that's even vaguely contentious,
and I'll tell you we're really quite risk averse
when it comes to this,
we'll go to the ESA and ask there,
is it, I forget what they call the,
the sort of got a helpline cap line,
and we just run everything past them
to get their approval prior to anything being released.
And in terms of getting that assurance
from a level above that shot,
what's the mechanism that you have to ensure that that is maintained once it's
installed? As in what's the control to make sure, yeah so it's primarily
through our very heavy and deep regional management structure so obviously
Sean I'm going to speak on his behalf but he's the regional director down here
in the south but below him he has working for him two regional managers
who have a number of area managers, sorry, three regional managers, who have a number
of area managers working for them, and then venue managers obviously have the relevant
training and guidance around the process before any kind of marketing.
But the main control is that the majority of it is centrally controlled?
Just say we don't really do locally developed or devised initiatives.
it's all through our central system which then gives us the control.
Can I just ask on your marketing, do you market on TikTok at all that attracts a younger audience
or are you just quite middle of the road? We're not on TikTok to my knowledge,
sometimes mainly for really for our family entertainment centre businesses which are family
orientated businesses, we may have something on social media.
So would this advertising be generic? You know, it's not going to be specific for this one site,
if you did, you know, if you do a marketing campaign for this one site, or would it be a generic regional?
We would have a launch campaign for Putney. You know, we obviously want people to know that we'd
be opening in the location. But after that, it becomes generic.
So just on the point of younger people and children, obviously there's the location of
the primary schools within 368 yards and 289 yards.
Mentioned that there's a congregation of young people at the bus stop between, what time
Is it three till half four?
And it's mitigated by the shift patterns.
Can you just clarify in terms of the shift pattern,
say in the morning when people might be going to school
and walking past there or congregating there,
what are the shift patterns to mitigate that?
Is it there are people there 24 seven
or only at certain times of the day?
We have people on the floor all the time, so we'd have a minimum of two staff working in the arcade.
There always has to be one person on the arcade floor monitoring the entry point.
In terms of shift patterns, for 24 -hour venues we generally run three 8 -hour shifts.
They tend to hand over at 8am, 2pm and 10pm.
So, in terms of monitoring those times when there are more young people or schoolchildren
outside, then they're not usually shift -hand over times.
Thank you.
You did mention in your submission that you have good relationships with the SNT.
Is that in other areas and have you started building up relationships with the S &T officers in this area?
Yeah, it refers my background. I don't know if you picked it up from is in policing
So I was a set of sergeant down in the Met and so the security aspect of my responsibilities is something
I take very seriously now. I have reached out to the local police here and
Had no response to this point
but everywhere else we have really close working relationships. We join the local, any local bid initiatives where they are.
Local crime initiatives often, as I'm sure you appreciate, often are within the framework of the bid, like business crime reduction partnerships,
vet watch schemes and the like. Now we've joined everything, in all of our venues, we've joined whatever is available nearby.
I have a team of regional security managers who are tasked with maintaining local police
relationships and although I've had no response from them to this point, I will do if we're
successful.
And in your submission you say that you will engage and obviously it's helpful if they
do reply to you, but can you just clarify what you mean by engaging because that could
range from just sending an email, attending meetings,
engaging more tangibly with them.
Yeah, initially at this kind of stage or before this stage,
I want to understand their views on what us opening
might do to a community or an area,
what local crime and antisocial behaviour and stuff's like.
Once we establish a relationship, I'll be really honest,
it's mostly me given my mobile number,
The number of people that have my personal mobile number is significant.
Or my right hand man, my security manager, again, X met 30 years.
We have lots of existing relationships.
And it can be as simple as we exchange numbers.
as I receive calls all the time from the police.
Whilst I was looking at the questions,
the one question I have is,
and it comes through your application quite consistently,
is all the training that you do for staff.
It'd be interesting to, is it mandatory training
that everybody needs to complete,
and then what is the mechanism to ensure
that it is actually completed
and the refreshes are completed each time?
So all of our training is provided first and foremost
through what we call our Admiral Academy.
It's a digital eLearning platform,
and included in that are two significant core modules
relating to our responsibilities under the LCCP,
for example.
because it's digital completions monitored staff aren't for example if a staff member joins us in
their first few weeks they can't ever be alone until they've completed all their relevant
training and got the relevant time on the shop floor lots of the training is reinforced with
individual refresh modules which appear sort of every half year for them we
insert or embed in our training video shots specifically to make a particular
point of say this is a good customer interaction this is a not so good one
for example or this might be a good way to initiate a conversation about problem
gambling. We don't rely on just our own internal training you know we don't
our own homework as it were, we engage with outside agencies specifically, not so much
any more, they're not charities anymore, but with gambling charities who provide us with
kind of enhanced training on particular topics like customer interaction for example, and
we pay significantly for that so that our staff get training from kind of different
directions. Could I just also add that it's an important KPI for us in
operations as well so our area managers are, it's a KPI for them to make sure
that all training is completed. We have a balanced scorecard with all
different KPIs and that is one of them so that all training is up to date and
completed. And just just final final question probably for me is you touched
on that if somebody enters the premises that's below the age of 18 and a member of staff
doesn't challenge it, then it's down to, they are dismissed. Do you have a sense of, across
the board, how many have been dismissed from that and whether it's targeted to certain
regions?
I would have to just slightly correct that. We don't instantly dismiss people. We have
to go through investigation and disciplinary process, otherwise we'd be in tribunals on
a regular basis, but unless there is significant mitigation, and mitigation is not, I thought,
they were over 25, we don't accept that.
All of the people that serve legal use are 18 or 19, so they are actually legally allowed
to gamble, but because we operate Think25, that's the level they have to go to.
I would estimate that when we do fail, and we don't, thankfully, we don't fail too many,
as you've already heard, we have a very high success rate, 95 percent.
I think probably 80 percent of those cases result in dismissal of at least one member
of staff.
Okay, thank you.
I'd just like to ask about the outside of the building.
Do you have CCTV looking in on your entrance?
And do staff clear up, do regular patrols at all,
just to double cheque that everything's all safe outside?
Because if you're losing one of two staff out of the shop floor,
that's leaving one staff member in to be quite vulnerable.
With regards to CCTV, yes, we have external CCTV at all of our venues.
We're really quite accustomed now to assisting local police with the provision of CCTV footage.
We've invested quite heavily in it over the last few years and we have a CCTV control
room back at head office so if local police identify something they want CCTV of that
happened outside of the premises, they can literally send us a link for their forensic
submission framework, whatever they're using, and we can have it to them within minutes
all being well.
In terms of the sort of operational, I guess more a question for Sean, but if staff yes
will have regard to the exterior of premises, it's kind of something in a, again I'm not
referencing his age, but some of our more senior directors still have that kind of old -fashioned
venue needs to be presented particularly well.
staff will be responsible for making sure it's clean and presentable.
And I take your point. I'm sure it's only a short time when I take your point about leaving it.
With litter, it's commonly sort of take away.
McDonald's, for example, leads to litter. We don't serve any takeaway food.
There are some refreshments people can buy for eating inside, but it doesn't tend to be a major issue.
If I may, a general question about
to your company policy. Is there any type of location that you would not consider suitable
for opening an adult gaming centre?
That's a good question. I'm just trying to think if there are. I'm sure there would be.
We look at opportunities all the time across the country,
and we have various tools that we use to try and help us identify
whether we think that's going to be commercially successful or not,
but of course, at the same time, we're also, you know, have to be...
For instance, I can't think of one where we have an AGC next door to a school,
for instance, we may do but I can't think of one, but we view everything on an individual basis.
I think the point is that the decisions are made commercially, so we want to be where there's a
demand and it's commercially viable. I think you will have all seen in our submission we use a tool
to identify places where the vulnerable might congregate is the phrase that the gambling
commission used in order to construct our local risk assessments. That's the kind of
primary tool. I'm not aware we've ever conducted a risk assessment and not opened a venue on
the basis of that if that answers your question.
Final question from me.
Is there any loud music coming from the venue?
Thank you.
No, there isn't.
We usually put as well, there'll be soundproofing,
because there is some noise from the machines, it's generally low level,
and we do play background music, but again, at a very low level,
it's just to try and give the place a little bit of atmosphere,
but we don't get complaints from neighbours for noise.
Just ask the subcommittee if you've got any more questions.
No?
Okay.
In that case, thank you very, very much for that.
Now invite the representatives to speak.
You have 20 minutes to speak, after which questions may be asked.
If I hand over to Fleur Anderson MP who will speak first.
Thank you.
Thank you very much, Chair.
So how many of us residents are there who will be speaking?
Just so I know how to divide the time.
I can have a -
We have three in total, including yourself.
Three, great.
Well, I will not be taking any more of my time
than I should.
I'm leaving plenty of time for others to speak.
Thank you very much, committee.
Thank you for considering this.
And I'm glad we have a committee to look
at the needs of the community and really balancing
the commercial needs of Admiral with what
people in Putney need.
And I really would like to, I haven't ever spoken.
I've been an MP for 6 and 1 -2 years.
This is the first licencing committee
I've come to, which I think underlines
the absolute strength of feeling of people in Putney and I just want to
ensure that the committee absolutely knows the strength of local feeling
against this application demonstrated by the fact that 624 people objected to the
proposal and the committee has received 58 objections but I think you could
easily get 58 more objections if you just went out any time onto Putney High
Street or the surrounding streets and we do feel in Putney that this is
inappropriate clustering that there is a limit to be reached on the amount of premises used for
gambling on Partney High Street. It's not a question of it's this or squatters. I just think
that's a really wrong dismissal of what the current situation is. It used to be a bar, the bar closed
down after Covid. It could be a bar, could be even four number of things on Partney High Street in the
and I think that to dismiss residents actual fears and actual concerns is just
speculative is also incorrect. My concern is that this is the wrong location to
licence for gambling and I hope that the committee will agree. This premises is
directly opposite Putney station as you know one of the busiest gateways into
our community. The applicant's own risk assessment acknowledges the high footfall
from the station, the presence of school children using the train station and
and changing from bus stops to the train,
and the proximity of local primary and secondary schools.
It recognises that vulnerable people,
a high number of vulnerable people,
including those experiencing mental health disabilities,
addiction, bereavement, financial stress,
or other life crises will be going past here.
And the question is obviously,
we're not whether gambling is legal, it absolutely is.
And we have other gambling establishments
on Putney High Street.
They have not received the level and number
that this one has because I think we think there is a limit.
The question is whether this location is reasonably consistent
with another gambling institution.
Someone with a gambling problem doesn't relax every time they walk past a gambling venue.
They walk past it dozens, maybe hundreds of times.
The concern is that when that difficult day comes,
the bereavement, financial pressure, the mental health crisis,
that the constant accessibility and visibility is right there waiting.
That's why location matters.
Gambling venue opposite a major station, Putney Station,
is not simply serving customers who seek it out.
It's repeatedly placed in front of the vulnerable people,
whether they seek it out or not.
As has been mentioned already,
it's on a route used daily by a high number of pupils
using local primary schools, but secondary schools.
There's Art Putney Academy, Ashcroft Technology Academy,
Putney High School, and on the other side of the river,
the oratory full of boys, I could go on.
Hundreds of young people pass through the station
and the surrounding area and change between modes of transport
at exactly where the premises being under consideration is.
We should consider the cumulative effect of concentration
and this inappropriate clustering that Wandsworth Council has in it as a criteria.
There would be three gambling premises clustered together
in the immediate area.
And I know each application must be considered
on its own merits, but common sense
tells us that increasing the concentration of gambling
opportunities increases the risk.
Recent applicants' arguments that this
makes it a more safe area, I really
don't stack up with putney residents at all.
As I've said, the strength of local feeling
is that 624 people have signed a petition
objecting to this proposal. This significant level of public concern
reflects the view of many local residents that the location is
inappropriate. Several objections did raise concerns about safety and I know
that the police have not said they don't like this but they said that they are
content with this either and Putney residents do feel that there are
safety, crime and antisocial objections to this. They note that similar gambling
in other areas, this is what they've got to compare it to,
have been subject to complaints relating to nuisance disorder
and impact on vulnerable individuals in particular.
One constituent in the objections
questioned whether the addition of another 24 -hour
gambling venue in such close proximity to Muckley Station
could further increase these issues,
particularly the late night hours
when levels of oversight and footfall are lower.
The instances of crime and vulnerable people,
especially students as well.
So lots of students from
Rowhampton University,
there aren't many pubs,
there are no clubs in Rowhampton.
So a lot of students
come to Putney High Street.
And there's such a high level of
vulnerability that it's acknowledged
that Putney Angels is needed.
So there's a Putney Angels team
that operate on Friday nights
and would do more if they had more volunteers
because they pick up
a huge number of vulnerable young people
who use Putney High Street, become intoxicated,
get into trouble in various ways,
and the Putney Angels are there.
And they're there because there is a known risk,
vulnerable people on Putney High Street.
It's a particular place where lots of younger people
come to from all over London.
It's a known late -night venue.
And we love that in Putney,
but it does add to the additional concerns
about this venue being positioned all night
in this place. A female resident said that a 24 -hour gambling venue opposite
Putney station would make her feel less safe when travelling through the area at
night. I don't see those concerns reflected in any of the applicant's
papers. These comments are representative of wider concerns by local residents,
many of whom believe that such a prominent gateway site should contribute
positively to the social and economic life of the town centre rather than
introducing a use which carries a recognised risk of gambling -related harm.
Partly already has gambling provision.
The issue before you is whether adding another venue in this highly visible,
highly accessible location is consistent with
the licencing objective of protecting vulnerable people from harm.
I respectfully submit that it is not.
I would ask that you reject this application,
and if you don't, that you consider restrictions in hours,
you consider a reduced length of the application,
licence application that you provide,
or a temporary application.
There are changes in law, very, very imminent,
that will be coming in very soon.
On the cumulative concerns that we have here
and on clustering, those will be much more strong
in the new laws coming.
So a temporary consideration of an application
would enable a full assessment of the antisocial risk
to be done and full assessment of the cumulative concerns.
So I would ask you to reject this application.
Thank you very much.
I was listening to the statistics given by the applicants
and I'm interested in the protection offered
to vulnerable people.
I am quite satisfied that it's a clean, safe premises and I'm quite satisfied that it's
good gambling, clean gambling, but I am very worried about the vulnerable people.
You said I think that 170 ,000 challenges were made per year in your 300 establishments.
On the back of a fag packet here, I think that's 600 each, which is about 10 a week.
That is a challenge and a half every day. Is my fag packet wrong?
Interactions.
Interactions.
So if you make your representation then there will be...
I would like you to be challenging more than one and a half customers a day in each of your shops.
You said that 150 to 160 people were excluded in a week from 300 venues.
That is less than a half a person from each venue.
I have been a chaplain in Wandsworth Prison. I know how many men in Wandsworth Prison are vulnerable
and who end up standing on the front of the railway station or at the bus stops with nowhere to go.
Those rates of challenge and those rates of interaction are not high.
You talk about having two members of staff on duty at any one time.
But if you have two members of staff, one of them has to have a lunch break or
a coffee break, and I have to go to the loo.
You're working right the way through the nights.
There will be periods when you only have one member of staff on.
I am worried about the amount of vulnerable people who will be using your premises.
In your literature you show the gamcare leaflets that you hand out. Actually it's a statistic
that's a shame on us all but about 15 % of the British population can barely read and cannot
read or barely read. So your leaflets are no use to anybody that speaks a foreign
language and they are no use to 15 % of the population. Can I ask you also why
there isn't complete visibility into your shops as there might be in Boots or
Gregg's? Is it because people are ashamed of being in a betting office or a
or might be recognised or seen in need of help.
It seems strange to me that you're slatting rather than just giving complete visibility.
I am very worried about the vulnerable people that gamble in your shops.
There's a recent paper being produced by Durham about the amount of domestic violence
caused by gambling. And there are more vulnerable people we are in Wandsworth than we think
we're talking about. We think we're talking about the people that attend your shop. But
those people have families. They have wives, they have girlfriends, they have children.
And I don't know what you're doing to protect those vulnerable people.
And I think I've run out of steam. Thank you.
Thank you. If I hand over to, I believe it's Hannah online for your opportunity to speak.
Just checking you're still there, Hannah.
Yes, sorry. Yes, I'm here. Thank you. So can I start? Yes, absolutely. Yes. So good evening,
Chair and members of the committee. Thank you very much for giving me the opportunity to speak. My
name is Anna Wojcik and I live locally and I'm the mother of two young children who might enter
to interfere, hopefully not when I'm speaking. So I will just be very quick. My family uses
parking high street every day and we visit the library, walk through the high street
regularly and like many local families, this is the centre of our community. I'm here to
support my written representation and respectfully ask you to refuse this application. I have
listened carefully to the applicants presentation this evening. I don't doubt that they are
an experienced and responsible operator. I also acknowledge that they have described
comprehensive safeguards, including staff training, Challenge 25, CCTV, customer interaction
and self exclusion procedures. I also recognise that none of the responsible authorities have
However, my concern is not about whether this operator would comply with the law or manage the premises responsibly.
My concern is whether this particular location is appropriate for another adult gaming centre.
As a local residence, we bring first -hand knowledge of how this community lives and uses the High Street every day.
Parliament gives residents the right to make representations because that local knowledge is an important part of your decision -making.
Padme High Street is not simply a commercial street, it's a busy community high street
used every day by families, children, commuters and vulnerable residents. It's close to Padme
Library, schools and nurseries and is a place where people access essential community services.
If this application is granted there will be three gambling premises within a very short stretch of
the high street. I appreciate that the existence of other gambling premises is not by itself
a reason to refuse an application. However, there must come a point where adding another
gambling premises in such close proximity is no longer consistent with the licencing
objective of protecting children and verbal people from harm. The applicant has explained
in detail how staff identify and support vulnerable customers once they enter the premises. And
I welcome those safeguards. However, the licencing objective is to protect vulnerable people
from being harmed or exploited by gambling. My concern is that creating another gambling
premises in this location increases opportunities to gamble before any member of staff has the
opportunity to intervene. Not every vulnerable person is visibly vulnerable and not everyone
who is beginning to experience gambling harm has reached the point of asking for help or
self -excluding. I appreciate that much has been said today about evidence. As a local residence,
I cannot present statistical studies. What I can provide is my experience of living in this
community every day and my genuine concern about the direction of our high street.
I respectfully ask the committee not to dismiss the lived experience and genuine concerns of local residents simply because they cannot be expressed as statistics.
Your role is to exercise your judgement on whether granting this licence is reasonably consistent with the licencing objectives.
I'm not opposed to gambling as a lawful activity and I'm not questioning the professionalism of this operator.
I am simply asking you to consider whether approving another adult gaming centre in this
particular location is consistent with the objective of protecting children and variable
people from harm.
And as a local resident and a parent, I don't believe that it is.
For those reasons, I respectfully ask you to refuse this application.
Thank you.
Thank you very much.
I do want to give representatives the maximum time, which is the same as the applicant has had,
and there are another three minutes if anybody would like to utilise that three minutes.
Does it say anything else?
No?
Okay, in that case, I'll move to subcommittee to have questions for those making representations.
I did have one question of clarification for Claire Anderson.
Just, you referenced the petition.
We haven't seen it submitted as part of the papers,
so we just wanted to cheque whether it had been submitted at all to us.
I don't know if it's been submitted.
I don't know the status of the petition, actually.
there was a very, very high level of objections to the original planning commission.
Yep. So just to clarify, it was the one that went to planning, not a separate petition?
Yes, it was that one.
Okay, thank you. Did the subcommittee have any questions for representatives?
No?
One more thing. In the supplementary papers that we got sent by email, there was a G4
certificate of – it had expired. Has it been renewed?
Yes.
The one that was circulated had expired.
Oh, apologies. I haven't seen that in the submission, but our accreditation was renewed
just in March this year.
Okay, if there are no questions, I will invite both parties to have closing remarks. You'll
have two minutes to address the subcommittee. I will go to representatives for closing remarks.
I hope you heard loud and clear the strength of the residents concerns and I think Anna
put it very well and you could speak you could go down to Putney and speak to so many people
and that's what you're here. I've had public meetings, I've had it raised with me, I cannot
tell you how concerning this is for local people and how much looking at ways in which you can
reject this because of the cumulative clustering issues that Wandsworth has laid out that is
an issue for it and the impact on vulnerable people because of the place where it is restricting
the hours or providing a temporary application length would be very, very welcome by the
committee.
Thank you. There is another minute just to give the other representatives opportunity
to speak. I felt that the statistics given showed that the care of the
vulnerable was not as careful as I believe care of the vulnerable
should be and that if you're looking at an interaction of 10 a week with
customers and you're looking at half a person excluded from a venue in a
week that really isn't real care of the vulnerable and the serious gambler.
That's taking out your problem gamblers, really, your surface problems.
And Anna, about 30 seconds left if you did want to add anything.
No?
Okay.
In that case, I will pass over to the applicant.
The primary focus of the oral submissions of the residents and their representatives
today has really been on the third objective, protecting children and other vulnerable persons
from being harmed or exploited.
Could I re -emphasise the four words of that objective?
It's protecting children and other vulnerable persons from being harmed or exploited by
gambling.
In other words, by actually gambling rather than there being a premises where you can
gamble. In the case of children, they are not permitted to enter. Full stop. In the
case of vulnerable persons, of course gambling does attract some vulnerable
people, the same way some pubs can attract some alcoholics. You do not refuse
the licence of every pub, and indeed there is a pub next to us, the railway,
because there are some alcoholics who will drink too much. Instead, what you
rightly expect is that every safeguard that is proper is taken. In this case we do that
and more, in fact we do more than your Appendix C guidance to AGCs. We also abide by the Gambling
Commission's LCCP which is their Code of Conduct and Policies. It is an extraordinarily lengthy
in detailed document and a big chunk of that is precisely to make sure that our standards,
our training, our operation is sufficiently good to intervene when necessary to spot vulnerable
people. To intervene you've had 177 ,000 exchanges and to try and stop them. So that's the bar.
People come out of Putney Station, yes, they face the railway pub, which is next door to our premises.
You don't refuse a licence for a pub.
You expect proper safeguards and that's exactly what we provide.
So that's the primary point.
A lot of else that we've heard that I haven't addressed specifically, but without meaning any disrespect, it's an anti -gambling stance.
It's the stance that says we don't like gambling premises here.
Frankly, if someone is a vulnerable person, the fact that there is one or two AGCs in
a particular high street is not going to make the difference as to whether that person gambles
their money away or not.
I'm not going to speak about the level of control of the other AGC.
That's your two minutes now.
Thank you.
Thank you. That now concludes the first application on the agenda for the meeting.
Just to remind everyone the decision reasons and any legal guidance given during the subcommittee's discussion
has informed the decision will be confirmed in writing, together with information about any rights of appeal within five working days.
Thank you.
I would say for those still in attendance, if you want to use this as an opportunity
to get a drink, it is quite warm in here.
and
.
.
.
.
.
.

4 Athletic Stadium, Wimbledon Park, Wimbledon Park Road, London, SW19 7HX (Paper No. 26-154)

.
.
.
So now we've got Agenda Item 5, where we will consider the application for new premises
licence in respect of the premises known as Athletic Stadium Wimbledon Park, Wimbledon
Park Road, London, SW 19 7HX.
This application is being considered under the Licencing Act 2003 and its delegation,
and I now invite the licencing officer to introduce the application.
And there we go.
Thank you, Councillor.
Grass Paddle Limited have applied for a new premises licence at the athletic stadium, Wimbledon Park,
Wimbledon Park Road, London SW 19 7HX, for the sale of alcohol for consumption on and off the premises
and the provision of regulated entertainment, being plays, films, indoor sports and events, live and recorded music.
Appendix B of the report provides the full timings for the activities being applied for,
however please note there is a small typo for the hours for Wednesday, which incorrectly
gives it as midnight ending for consumption of alcohol. This should read 2100 hours.
The application was advertised as required under the legislation with site notices of
premises and with a newspaper advert. This resulted in the receipt of five representations
from other persons, objecting and one in support. These representations are the only matter
for consideration tonight.
Appendix A of the report lays out the condition arising from the applicant's operating schedule,
including those agreed with the Metropolitan Police, which will become conditions of the
licence if it is granted. Appendix B to the report lays out the proposed hours of the
licence with the exception of the Wednesday, which is 2100 hours.
Councillors, the options that are open to you tonight when deciding this new application
include granting the application as requested or modifying the conditions of the licence,
alter or omit conditions or add new or reject the whole or part of the application.
Councillors, I've laid out the brief facts of the application and I'll be happy to answer
any questions you may have.
Does the subcommittee have any questions for licencing officer?
Okay, in that case, just to talk through the format, so there'll be speaking time of five
minutes for both the applicant and the representatives.
Applicant will go first and then there'll be opportunity for the subcommittee to ask questions
and then we'll move over to representatives.
They'll have five minutes to speak.
Subcommittee will have opportunity to ask questions.
There will be two minutes at the end
for both applicants and representatives for closing remarks.
So I'll take this opportunity to pass over to the applicant
to address the subcommittee.
You'll have five minutes.
Thank you.
Thank you very much and good evening everyone.
So I'm here, my name's Nick Newton.
I'm here with my wife Lisa Newton. We run Grassroots Paddle, which is, we are the operators
of the Wimbledon Athletics Track. That's not just Paddle, that's Paddle and Athletics and
Sports Days, and Community Boxing and various other sports. So we are a community sports
facility. We are a local family. We're focused on improving a tired and under -invested council
facility and bringing it up to a level of being a first class, friendly, professional,
well operated asset to the park and local community.
We care very deeply about the power of good in sport, the relationships we made with Hercules
Athletics Club, the coaches, management staff, all our paddle members and players, all the
people who attend our free boxers size and fitness classes are very valued members of
our local community and this application is a response to their requests.
I'd like to just make three short points. Firstly, this is a sports facility not a
drinking venue. The licence is for the whole of the athletic stadium and sports
hub which serves established athletics clubs and their members, schools, paddle
players and the wider community. Alcohol is entirely ancillary to that sporting
use, a drink after a game or a match as at any tennis, cricket or athletics club is reasonable
in our opinion and a response to our athletes and players and the wider community.
Secondly, we have listened to the feedback and the five representations and we have narrowed
the application accordingly and would actually like to hand out a one -page
document in a moment to support that. We've continued talking to
residents and are therefore proposing to reduce our hours so that we
close at nine o 'clock in line with the park. On weekdays alcohol won't be served
until 12 noon, so there's no conflict with schools or PE periods.
And our limited number of later events will now have a firm finish of 10 .30, with the
site clear by 11 o 'clock.
The original report had no end time at all.
And we've also cut the number of events from 24 to 20 a year, with no more of those – with
more than half being on weekends and we were also committing to managing patrons off the
site in an orderly way at the end of any event, which is something we actually do anyway.
Our paddle finishes at nine o 'clock, actually the gates of the park are locked to 8 .50 and
we're well adept at taking the last group of paddle players out of the park in an orderly
fashion.
Thirdly, we'd just like to note that the responsible authorities are satisfied and the sporting
community supports us.
We've brought an email from Hercules Athletics Club supporting the licence application and
the 20 events that I mentioned include nearly half of those are in relation to Hercules'
is scheduled athletics events throughout the calendar year.
So we've got the email with us.
We understand and respect the residents who've written in,
and we've tried to meet their concerns directly
on hours, on noise, on children, and on practical questions
around the site.
We believe our application, with the conditions
we're offering today promotes all four licencing objectives and would ask the committee to
grant it. We're very happy to answer any questions. Thank you.
Fantastic. Thank you. Unfortunately, you're not able to hand out additional – unfortunately
not – no, they did need to be submitted in advance of the committee. Thank you very
much. I'll pass over to the subcommittee for questions now.
Councillor Tiller, did you want to go first?
Thank you, Chair. Let me see where I should start.
Can you demonstrate that toilet provision is adequate for the maximum number of customers likely to attend when alcohol is being sold?
Yes, in the document we've prepared, but we won't hand out, there are one, two, three
female public toilets and two washbasins.
There's three female cubicles, there's a male cubicle and two urinals.
That's in day -to -day use for the general public and paddle players.
In terms of the clubhouse, there are two wheelchair accessible toilets in the clubhouse.
That's the male toilet and the female toilet.
They are in use for club athletes and club athletes' parents.
And then we have dedicated changing rooms and shower blocks for school use.
We have a female shower block that has four cubicles and four showers.
It also has a wheelchair accessible cubicle and a wheelchair accessible shower.
In addition to this, we have a mail changing room and shower block.
The mail changing room has two cubicles and three urinals.
It also has a wheelchair accessible cubicle and a wheelchair accessible shower.
In addition to this, there are eight number showers as well.
Q Hello. Can you just give me some clarification on the pre -planned events that you discussed?
Are they happening inside or outside? Is there a venue for them? And is that for members
and their guests only, or can outsiders come in and book the venue as such, say for a birthday
party or something like that?
I would say the majority of the 20 that we've outlined are already pre -planned and scheduled.
The next forthcoming event is on the 22nd of July, which is the Dave Clark Mile with Hercules Athletics Club.
There are eight athletes trying to go under, break the four minute mile barrier.
We've organised a barbecue, the council are coming down, the councillors are coming down.
We will have the paddle courts in operation just before the event and at the end of the
last race.
It is a ticketed event and the athletes have signed up in advance.
But in answer to your question, yes, members of the public can attend.
And this event will likely go past the nine o 'clock curfew.
The last race is at close to nine.
And by the time the athletes have finished and everything is packed up, it will be closer to ten that everyone is off site.
So I just wanted to sort of flag that as a why this, why we would need 20 events in the
calendar.
Can I just, following on from that, if you're saying that you brought the hours down to
nine o 'clock for the licence.
On a day -to -day basis.
On a day -to -day basis.
Would you be applying for a special events licence for, say, if somebody wanted to have
a birthday party that went on later?
No, that's not in our projected 20 events. So actually a private party is not something
that we would consider. And actually in the calendar, let's say 10 are athletics based
and the remaining 10 would have to be a sporting event of some description, be it we had the
game for the World Cup at some point, you know, something of that nature rather than
a private party.
And then just following on from that, will there be music and dancing at the events or,
you know, will there be loud music that might impact on neighbouring properties?
I don't want to say absolutely not, but within, we're very, very aware of the local surroundings
and the lake and how the noise travels.
And actually when we started to operate the site in August last year, one of the first
events that we had was a South African sports day.
and the limit was just pushed to loud music up to 1020, I think, 1030.
And we recognised immediately that that was too much.
And so if there was music, it would be very well controlled
and a reasonable limit would be put on it.
And actually in terms of the planning,
we have a 50 decibel restriction around the perimeter anyway.
Just to kind of clarify what our revised conditions
and the revised proposal is, we originally
applied for a licence until 11.
On the back of all the residents, or 10,
we now want to keep our opening hours in line
with the parks opening hours and in line with our operating
hours, which are till 9, 9 o 'clock every single day.
And then for a small number of events up to 20 a year,
we're asking that we can give local residents advance warning
and that we can actually open until 10 .30 with everybody
cleared out by 11.
So it's kind of a significant reduction
in the number of hours that we want to be open for to be
able to sell alcohol.
So obviously, it does apply to 10 ,000 customers?
Yeah.
Obviously what you've also said tonight and in previous papers is that you're
going till nine o 'clock every day. You can't go outside what you've applied for
so far so you can't go after ten in terms of those private events that you
propose because you haven't given notice that you're going to do that so you
can't change and increase the hours from what you've applied for. You can go lower
that's fine. That's in relation, let's talk about this in relation to the private hire
or sporting events condition. If you're going on later than 9 o 'clock, it could only be
possibly 10 o 'clock. But I'm not saying that's what the committee might or might not grant,
but you can't go beyond that unless you had a temporary event notices.
Sorry, I think that's accepted, fair and accepted.
But the question I think I'm following on Councillor Botting's point is the committee's
not clear what these events, when you call them pre -planned community or private high
or sporting events are. So you need to explain that to them, to the
committee so they understand what those mean and if you're going to go on until ten o 'clock
for those twenty events, what it is that is envisaged in each one. For example, you've
given one example, this Dave Clark mile thing, fine. What the committee will want to know
is whether the private hire is to third parties completely unrelated to the club who they
might be and what they're going to do in it.
OK, so if you could explain that,
that might be the best way of dealing with it.
Nothing's unrelated to the club.
So, OK, so we should.
There's no intention to rent the, for a private hire
and rent the entire premises out to anybody else that's
not related to the club or the sport that's
contained within it.
So at least 10 of those events every year
are to do with Hercules and the athletics club.
So they have 400 metres that we've already done several of them this year haven't we?
So about 10 of them are Hercules related and the remainder would be things to do with other sporting events
For example the Paddle World Cup or a paddle tournament or something that's related to the premises and the sports contained within the premises
Whether that's athletics, paddle, gym
Etc the facilities that we have there
Some sort
Yes. And in that case you would want to be able to sell alcohol to those people watching?
Correct. Okay. What about, so there'll be no private hire to third parties at all?
No. Are you okay for a condition to say that? Yes.
I mean that doesn't mean you couldn't theoretically do a temporary notice for that, but that's outside this licence.
That's fine, yeah.
For the 5 ,000 metres, we had, no that was the 3 ,000 metres.
3 ,000 metres was, yeah, 280 athletes and probably the same again in spectators.
And what sort of measures will you put in place for the safety of those spectators and
people who are attending the events and how they exit the premises?
So we're very well staffed.
In fact, we're overstaffed at all times and we pride ourselves on a good level of customer
service.
We have agreed crossing points that we've debated in detail in terms of the track with
of Sports England, England Athletics,
so the circulation routes around the space
and the crossing points into the paddle facility.
We have largely closed the Southfields gate
so that we've found that actually operating
a two -gate venue is much more complicated
than we need it to be.
And we now operate 90 % of the time
from just the lakeside gate, which is the agreed entrance, which we've refurbished,
and has a, and leads to the agreed crossing point on the track, and it also leads to the
hospitality area or the licenced area where any alcohol would be served.
So I don't know if I'm answering this particularly well, but we've spent a lot of time analysing
people, movement, and have actually responded to that in practise and are constantly sort
of tuning it to become a better and better site.
But with or without alcohol, those points still exist.
Still stand, yeah.
We have to manage them with or without our premises licence.
And then can I just ask, is the alcohol served in plastic glasses because you're going outside
and everything?
Yes.
So all the time though?
Yes.
For inside as well?
Yes.
Okay, thank you.
And people aren't allowed to take the alcohol into any other area of the facilities other
than the hospitality area, onto the track or the paddle courts for example.
So just a quick question, just on the distribution of people if they're leaving the event and
appreciating the park shots at 9.
So you've got the, from my left, you've got Wimbledon Park Road coming down the side and
then you've got, sorry to say it this way, but the Southfields grid to the north east.
Just so I can get my mind around it, can you just clarify how people would be moving?
would they predominantly all be going down to Wimbledon Park roadside or would it be
distributed?
The majority go to the Revelstoke roadside because that's a 24 hour turnstile egress
out of the park and everyone is instructed to leave their cars outside of the park for
the last paddle sessions and we also have an electric scooter and we whizz around the
making sure that everyone, so not everyone goes to Revelstoke Road, some
people do want to go to Wimbledon Park gate. Before they leave though, we make sure they're very aware before they arrive and when they leave that the gate has been closed at nine o 'clock and if they need to get out of that exit they need to be chaperoned by one of our members of staff.
So if the last handful of people can't go out of Revelstoke Road for whatever reason,
we will escort them out of Wimbledon Park Road, ourselves, up to the gate, unlock the
gate, just the pedestrian gate, and let them out.
And then just in terms of late night drinking, say, in terms of security and that, just clarify
position on I know the CCTV but in terms of for example if you're talking about
Putney High Street there'll be banks is on premises and things like that can you
just clarify what plan is there? Yes we have we have CCTV in operation currently
over the whole site and in particular over the cafe bar area we have a very
good relationship with Wimbledon Park constabulary who are all avid paddle
players and who have actually been in marked DNA marked all of the property
within within the site we have a hotline to them out of hours and we also have a
hotline up to the Eltech tennis security at the top the top of the hill
Yes, if I could ask a bit more about the alcohol aspect of it, because that was essential to quite a few objections that I saw.
I mean, I take your point about sports people quite often drinking after a sports event,
but this is unusual in that it's in the middle of a public park
and there will be people of all ages, including children,
going past all the time.
So that does concern us,
and is the alcohol strictly a necessary part of this?
Can I just make one quick point, which is Cook's Kitchen, the cafe by the tennis courts,
does have an alcohol licence, and actually that alcohol licence is now a 24 -hour alcohol
licence over the Wimbledon period.
It has nothing to do with sport.
Well it sits close to the tennis courts.
And just to answer your point, is it strictly necessary?
What we don't want to see is heavy drinking, absolutely not.
What we do want to see is community and socialising.
And what we've noticed is a lot of parents are actually coming in with children,
young professionals who've moved to the area.
They're keen to play paddle or do athletics as a way of meeting people.
And actually to share a drink after a game or to host the veteran athletes after their
sprint session is just a really nice add -on for community sport, social community sport
operation.
So just on that point, it leads into my next question.
So I'm looking at, I think it's, yes, under your submissions, it's just access to under -16s.
All children under the age of 16 shall be accompanied by and remain under the supervision
of a responsible adult at all times.
It would just be great for you to clarify how that's enforced from your position.
Sorry, in terms of – sorry, could you repeat the question?
Yeah, so ensuring that anyone who's under the age of 16 – I suppose it also applies
to those who are 17 or under 18 as well.
How can you ensure that they are being accompanied
by an adult at all times,
just in the context of, you know,
sale of alcohol and all of that?
It'd just be good to get a sense from you.
I think we know everyone on the site
and we've had to learn,
we've had to get to know everyone.
So we know all the coaches,
We know all the management team of Hercules. We know all the parents and they're more than customers, they're friends.
We talk to them regularly. We're just very acutely aware at all times who is on the site.
We don't let people come in as an extension of the park for a wander.
That is not acceptable to us.
And, you know, wandering onto an infield where javelin is being thrown around is just not
acceptable.
So we have to be very disciplined in terms of the management of people.
So yes, 16, 17, 18 -year -olds are present on site, but we know who they are, where they
are, where they should be, who their coaches are, who they should be reporting to.
And they're registered as well.
And we have their details, yeah.
And would you say, so I suppose that's your knowledge of them on a personal level, would
you say that that's reflected for anybody else working on site there and staff as well?
Because it's a family business, so it's our kids, it's your sisters.
Well, it's not just that. I guess it's with the Hercules.
Obviously there's hundreds of children using that track on a daily basis,
but the coaches have registers.
They have to have membership to Hercules to even be able to go there.
If they're doing a trial and they're new to athletics,
they're coming with their parents and they're still being marked in on their daily registers.
So we know who's in what group at any particular point in time,
and their parents have checked them in and then come back.
if they do leave the premises, they're with their coach, they're being supervised at all time and they're being collected and deregistered and leaving with their parents under supervised conditions.
Okay, thank you. Willy, I have a question for officers just in terms of have we had any noise complaints that you're aware of from this site over say the last two years or so?
Okay.
So, no formal ones.
Okay.
Thank you.
So.
No, no, just is it important if anyone has gone through the formal complaints process
about noise?
So, just to confirm that there hasn't.
Okay.
Thank you.
Anything else from subcommittee?
Okay, in that case, thank you.
I'll now pass over to the representations to speak.
We've got one online and also over here as well.
You'll have five minutes in total, so whether you wanted to split it 50 -50,
for that but happy for you to go first.
Thank you very much, Chair.
I'll take about, if you could give me a shout
about two and a half minutes
because I don't know exactly who it is that's there.
Okay, thank you.
I'm Fran Steer, I'm a local resident.
I objected to this because the primary purpose
of the area where the licence is
is for sports and athletics as well as paddle
and it is Grassroots Paddle, not Hercules Club, that have put this application in.
It's also understood that Paddle have got temporary licence, whereas this licence would be for full time.
The main concerns I had related to the fact that the sports area is used by schools, local Wandsworth schools, as part of their PE facilities.
The application wants to have an alcohol licence.
The application said 11 o 'clock.
I now understand it's 12 o 'clock,
but even so there is still the potential
for school related PE activities to take place
during that period of time.
And I am particularly concerned about
there are no barriers whatsoever between
where Paddle and the cafe place is
and the sports track. And it is well known that sale of alcohol can lead to a congregation of people and unsocial activity,
and you have young adolescents running around in their PE kit.
Furthermore, we've just heard that the whole area is subject to CCTV.
That in itself is a bit of a concern, because I think parents have to give permission for their, for pupils to be filmed,
and we've just heard it covers the whole site, which I didn't realise was the case, but I've
seen the application. Furthermore, I did meet with the applicant on about the 28th of July.
The applicant made clear they did not want such a broad application at all. Profuse apologies
were given. They wanted to restrict it. They certainly did not want to run events. That
wasn't the purpose. They were a paddle club that wanted to reach out to the community.
That is not what we've had here. I note the reduction in hours from nine o 'clock, sorry,
11 o 'clock close to nine o 'clock, and ten o 'clock for events, etc. But that still is
a significant period of time. In terms of the sale of alcohol, I calculate over 70 percent
thank you, over 70 % of the time that Paddle Club will be open is for the sale of alcohol.
I don't consider that to be an ancillary service, nor do I consider entertainment. When the
applicant made clear to me it would only be for music, not other things, is appropriate.
I'll come back to other matters later. Thank you very much, Chair.
Thank you. And I believe Mr Steiner online, I'll give you the opportunity to speak for
two and a half minutes. Over to you. You're just on mute.
Are you in our hearing? Yes.
Yes. Okay. Got to be very quick. I'm the chair of the Friends of Wombent Park, which
is covering the 61 -hectare park with the three owners as a background. The public park, which
is where this is, is 15 hectares of land and 9 hectares of land. The area under consideration
has become a premise within the public park.
The concern is that the extended hours shouldn't be allowed in the uptime, closing in 2100 hours.
We are fully supportive, obviously, of the athletics.
It's not the only sport in Wimbledon Park.
We've got the Wimbledon Club with cricket and so forth, national, international.
That does create a lot of problems.
So we're looking for a closure time at 2100 hours.
We have a history of bad behaviour of residents and the particular concern is the exit into
the cul -de -sac which is for a road.
Road. If it was to be grouped in, that should be changed to Wimbledon Park Road and if it
connects to that road. We have a lot of problems with events. Obviously these events are going
to be inside what we call the Wimbledon Park Arena. We have to say we have a lot of problems
coming out of the arena with the sports stage and that sort of thing. And noise, it's
something that we now register on our website particularly. What we'll do now is to focus
a lot more on the arena with events, because I can come out my front door and hear it and
and travel through the country with the net.
When we're in past,
there's probably a pool of problems.
Sorry, Mr. Steinert.
Sorry, Mr. Steinert, that is your two and a half minutes.
I'm happy to just give you a little bit longer,
which I then give the applicant some extra time
on their side if you did want to finish.
No, I think I've rushed it through.
Okay. Hopefully covered it all.
Brilliant, thank you very much.
I'll turn to the subcommittee to ask any questions of the representations.
Councillor Tiller?
Could you say more about the types of agisatial behaviour you've experienced from Remorton
Park?
Well, we've actually got the Wimbledon fortnight at the moment, and of course we're actually
dealing with problems with toilet behaviour, antisocial behaviour, and that sort of thing.
So we're in fact without take on that.
But those are some apparent issues.
In the past, the barbecues, the barbecues, people were left in the park after 9 o 'clock.
Then they left climbing over the gates, Revelstoke Road, making a lot of noise.
Paratus was climbed over.
This is the reason we've been interested in events
or coming from the Wimbledon Park Road entrance.
Of course, there's one house sort of next door to it.
It's clear of residence.
Revelstoke Road should be checked earlier.
Yes.
Sorry, if I may just add.
residents within the gardens area, which is Wimbledon Park Road and Southdene Gardens,
have actually had to invest in a decibel counter very recently in order to monitor the noise from
the park. I am surprised that this council has not received any complaints. I can only assume
that most of the complaints have gone to Mercer because for one instance the energy and
well -being event which took place just three weeks ago prompted a large number of complaints.
And as I say, I can only assume it's gone. The fact that we've had to invest in a decibel
counter would give you an indication of the concern. Furthermore, 24 events, which I'm
now told is likely to be 20 preplanned events, is still virtually one every fortnight, which
combined with Fulham football and other things becomes quite a noise in and around the park.
Thank you.
All I can say is we haven't received any complaints and the noise team are one of the
consortees and they didn't raise an objection or mention that so I'm sorry about that.
And also I'd just like to kind of point out we...
This is just for representation.
You'll have two minutes at the end
to give any final remarks.
I just want to clarify that all of those events
have got nothing to do with our premises,
they're all park related.
So you'll have your two minutes at the end
to make your final comments.
Councillor Botting, did you have any further questions?
Okay, in that case, there are no questions from myself.
In that case, I'm happy to thank you for the representations.
Happy to move on to closing remarks.
So go to representations.
You'll have two minutes.
I don't know whether you want to take one minute each.
Totally up to you.
And then hand over to the applicant for their two -minute closing remarks.
Thank you.
Thank you, Chair.
In principle, I object to this application.
I would be more than happy to consider an application which had Monday to Friday sale
of alcohol from say 4 o 'clock when schools had finished till 9 o 'clock.
And during Saturday and Sundays it could be, as far as I'm concerned, from 11 o 'clock till
9 o 'clock in line with the opening hours because then children are not at school.
They're not having an education PE lessons.
Sale of alcohol then become to underage children, then becomes or being around alcohol then
becomes a parent problem, not us.
In terms of entertainment, I would prefer the applicant
to stick with what they indicated they would consider,
which was purely sporting events,
not music and other events.
The application as set out is far too broad.
If it restricted just to sporting events
within the times you've stated,
that would go some way to meeting the concerns.
In terms of the toilets, I'm sorry,
but I viewed the toilets,
and the applicant herself indicated to me, we think Merton is using Paddle Club in order to improve its facilities.
And there is some real concern over the state of those toilets and the potential, given events,
that public are able to go in at the same time as school pupils. Thank you, Chair.
And then over to Mr Steiner. You've got one minute.
Yes, I'll very quickly say that we're talking about the public park. The Wimbledon Park
Arena is part of the public park and not something separate. And that is something that we will
be arguing very strongly when we come to look at the local plan set out at Merton. And I
seems to be becoming. Thank you, Mr Steiner. Now that's the two minutes for representatives
over to the applicant for your two minutes of closing remarks. Yeah, so just to summarise,
I think what I want to say is we are a sporting facility. We're not intending to host private
events. We're not intending to be noisy. We're not expecting drunken
disorderly behaviour. We're completely fine with reducing our hours down to
match those that we've we've already suggested and proposed to nine o 'clock
in line with our operating hours and 10 o 'clock for up to 20 events a year.
We're completely fine with that. We are in the process of refurbishing the
toilets ourselves because we are aware that they do need some work. They are
usable, they're clean, they're functional. Are they nice? They're not. We are working
on that over time and that's the purpose of some of the investment that we're making in
those facilities and not Merton. However, that doesn't mean to say it's not going to
be an activity that happens. There are going to be, just like every tennis and every cricket
and every athletics club throughout the country that have alcohol licences, we do want our
members and our and our people and our athletes who are enjoying the premises
and doing sporting events to be able to enjoy an alcoholic drink should they
wish to. Will it be supervised? Will it be controlled? Will we make sure that
everybody's chaperoned out and they behave responsibly? That's exactly our
intention. It's not like you see in some of these other events in the park where
there's thousands of people all sitting around on park benches drinking their
own alcohol out of cans and I understand that that does cause noise.
That is not what we're intending to do here.
We want it to be controlled, we want it to be restricted and we want to make sure everybody
and the community enjoys our premises.
Thank you.
That now concludes this part of the meeting.
The decision reasons and any legal guidance given during the subcommittee's discussion
that has informed the decision will be confirmed in writing together with information about
any rights of appeal within five working days.
Members of the Licencing Subcommittee, Democratic Services Officers and Legal Advisor will now
join the Separate Confidential meeting room to make the decision.
And thank you for attending.