Memorandum by the Greater London Authority
(GLA) (EVN 09)
1. SCOPE OF
EVIDENCE
1.1 On 10 February 2003 the ODPM Select
Committee received evidence from Alex Bax on the Mayor of London's
concerns over the challenges and opportunities presented by the
evening economy in London. This evidence informed preparation
of the Mayor's London Plan and remains his basic policy position.
Since then the Government's policy position has evolved and the
Greater London Authority (GLA) has carried out further relevant
work. This submission is ordered to address the Committee's recommendations
to Government and Government's subsequent response.
2. SUMMARY OF
EVIDENCE
2.1 On behalf of the Mayor the GLA welcomes
this opportunity to provide follow up evidence on this sensitive
issue. He recognises that while the impact of the evening economy
is essentially local, it raises strategic issues. In a heavily
populated area like London some night-time activity locations
are of wider than local significance and cumulatively the evening
economy is of strategic economic importance as well as meeting
the needs of a strategically significant part of the population.
Managing it requires strategic (eg transport, police and economic
development) as well as local action.
2.2 While wishing to avoid a plethora of
plans, there is a real need for a integrated policy to co-ordinate
the activities of a wide range of agencies. Implementation of
policy should be supported by best practice guidance and pilot
studies. A delicate balance has to be struck between policies
to foster clustering or dispersal. On balance, and as a general
principle, the Mayor favours carefully managed clustering as having
the widest benefits for the community as a whole, taking into
account strategic as well as local concerns. Government must be
responsive to the cost implications of any policy approach, especially
in locations serving wider than local needs.
2.3 Undue weight should not be attached
to the contribution that planning can make to this process—it
deals only with new development while most of the problems arise
from existing premises. Licensing, noise, environmental, policing,
education and transport policy and implementation are much more
important in addressing these. The Mayor supports the "polluter
pays" principle, recognising that sellers of alcohol and
anti social individuals must both contribute to the external costs
generated by the evening economy. He is particularly concerned
by binge drinking and alcohol related anti social behaviour and
is supporting a range of activities to address this, including
widening the range of non-alcohol related activities that take
place in the evening.
3. A MANAGEMENT
STRATEGY
Recommendations 1 and 2: Action Plans abd Strategies
3.1 Like government, the Mayor is reluctant
to introduce a new tier of plans. However, he recognises that
the evening economy raises issues of wider than local importance
and that London-wide policy requires refinement if these are to
be addressed effectively. Working with local stakeholders he is
therefore preparing Sub Regional Development Frameworks.
3.2 These have particular value in addressing
evening economy related issues at the Sub Regional level because
they are not tied to traditional land use planning matters. Sitting
beneath the statutory London Plan, they can address the spatial
aspects of issues such as public order, licensing, street cleaning,
noise, transport, economic development, tourism and culture (all
associated with the evening economy) as well as co-ordinate relevant
local strategies and plans eg Community Strategies, Local Transport
Plans. Together with local evidence gathering studies, they can
inform Local Development Frameworks and licensing policies. A
joint study by Camden Council[4]
and the GLA identified a range of problems and potential solutions
in the context of a broad assessment of the scale and nature of
Camden Town's evening economy. This kind of study forms a sound
base from which to monitor policy or management interventions.
4. DISSEMINATION
OF BEST
PRACTICE
Recommendation 3: Pilot Studies
4.1 The Mayor recognises the value of best
practice guidance in addressing this complex issue. However, he
is also alive to the dangers of a "one size fits all"
approach. He intends to prepare Best Practice Guidance on London-wide
policy principles, backed by more geographically specific guidance
in Sub Regional Development Frameworks as well as best practice
from case studies. The GLA has contributed to such studies in
Camden[5]
and Ealing[6]
as well as undertaking its own research[7].
5. PLANNING LEGISLATION
Recommendation 4: Clustering and Dispersal
5.1 While the Mayor agrees with the Committee
on the need to create a wider customer base for evening economy
activities, his London Plan reflects national guidance (PPS 6)
to support clustering of these activities in leisure quarters
or "Entertainment Management Zones". With sensitive
management, and a diversification of evening economy activities,
these can complement broader mixed use policy, recognising that
the balance of uses varies across different parts of London, including
the Central Activities Zone in Central London. As a general strategic
principle, clustering rather than dispersal of evening economy
activities, provides greater benefits in terms of consumer choice,
minimising overall impact, impact management and town centre regeneration.
5.2 The Mayor recognises that over-concentration
of evening economy activities in some areas can cause adverse
cumulative impact. Management measures should therefore seek to
maximise the benefits of clusters of evening economy activities
while preventing unacceptable cumulative impact (see also Recommendation
31). The Mayor recognises that different approaches to clustering
and management of evening economy activities will be appropriate
in different centres.
Recommendation 5: Cumulative Impact
5.3 The Mayor recognises that the planning
system can have only a limited influence on cumulative impact
because it is essentially concerned with new development and redevelopment
rather than the use of existing premises, which are the greater
part of evening economy. However, forthcoming changes to the Use
Classes Order will provide a greater degree of control over change
than in the past. Licensing and planning powers must be co-ordinated
to achieve common aims and objectives. A combination of premises'
operating plans, and conditions on licenses and planning permissions
provide an opportunity to reduce cumulative impact.
5.4 In a densely developed and populated
area like London it is essential that local licensing policies
take into account broader strategic concerns and the specialised
role of particular areas that provide services for a wider area.
This bears especially on the designation of saturation areas which
can form part of the wider management of evening economy activities,
but should be evidence-based. A blanket approach to identifying
saturation areas (eg identifying whole town centres or whole neighbourhoods)
could conflict with the aims of PPS6. Blanket policies refusing
new applications in "stress areas" would not be compliant
with the London Plan. The Mayor stresses the importance of applying
such policies in a flexible manner.
Recommendation 6: "Super-pubs"
5.5 The Mayor is especially concerned with
environments that encourage "binge" drinking. While
this can be a product of the scale of the establishment and thus
potentially susceptible to planning policy where new venues are
proposed, it is more commonly associated with management practices
eg discounted prices or seating arrangements—more controllable
through licensing measures.
Recommendation 7: Use Classes Order Review
5.6 Changes to the Use Classes Order will
be implemented in April. While this change expands the ability
of the planning system to influence evening economy related issues,
it does not per se tackle issues associated with large scale drinking
establishments.
5.7 An integrated strategy to address local
evening economy issues should be considered in Local Development
Frameworks. It is essential that, as well as addressing local
concerns, such strategies give appropriate weight to the strategic
role played by relevant night time economy locations and are evidence
rather than assertion based. This is especially important in a
large conurbation like London where such locations can provide
a wider than local service. The strategic context for these local
strategies should be set out in Regional Spatial Strategies or,
in the case of London, the Spatial Development Strategy (the London
Plan), and associated Supplementary Planning Guidance and development
frameworks.
Recommendation 8: Internal arrangements
5.8 The existing stock of premises and uncontrolled
changes to them, including consolidation of premises, is a much
more significant source of nuisance than the relatively small
increment to stock generated by new development.
Recommendation 9: Environmental responsibility
5.9 Local authorities have powers to require
property owners/occupiers to clear their area of litter and keep
it clear. The Mayor is promoting the establishment of BIDs which
could do this on a more co-ordinated and wider scale over a "leisure
quarter". However, Government should be mindful of the resource
implications of implementing its Code of Practice on Litter and
Refuse. In parts of London which are strategically important "leisure
quarters" this places a particular burden on individual authorities.
Such a strategic burden should be recognised in resource allocations
to these authorities.
Recommendation 10: Noise
5.10 Government's response to the recommendation
appears reasonable. Available legislation is adequate to control
noise break-out from premises, with the major proviso that enforcing
authorities, many of which are already overstretched, need to
be adequately resourced. The new licensing regime will be expensive
to set up and run (eg there are expected to be more individual
premises-specific measures that will need to be agreed and then
enforced), and extended opening hours will require extensions
in the hours when enforcing staff are available.
5.11 The more intractable problem is noise
on the street from people leaving premises. Powers will be available
to enforcement officers when this reaches "anti-social behaviour"
threshold, but lower levels of people noise can still disturb
local residents. If a healthy evening economy and town centre
housing growth are to be achieved, the planning and licensing
systems will need to be used to avoid "cheek by jowl"
mixing of entertainment premises and family homes.
Recommendation 11: BIDs
5.12 As noted in previous evidence the Mayor
is strongly supportive of the principle of BIDs and has already
established pilots for these. It is intended that, with LDA support,
this programme should be rolled out and in the future include
strategically important "leisure quarters" eg parts
of the West End and possibly parts of the South Bank Strategic
Cultural Area. The contribution of evening economy premises to
the BID levy could be considered in relation to the needs and
impacts of the business.
Recommendation 12: Safe night transport; Recommendation
13: Late night bus resources; Recommendation 14: Late night licensed
drivers
5.13 See Transport for London submission.
6. DEALING WITH
ANTI-SOCIAL
BEHAVIOUR
Recommendation 16: Crime and Disorder Reduction
Partnerships
6.1 The Mayor believes that as a general
principle, existing partnerships (for example CDRPs, BID partnerships,
or existing town centre management partnerships) should take on
the task of co-ordinating the management of the night time economy
rather than creating new ones.
6.2 The London Anti Social Behaviour (ASB)
Strategy is being produced collectively by the Mayor, GOL, MPA,
MPS, TFL, LFEPA, British Transport Police and others. It will
provide a vehicle to monitor and assess how enforcement and prevention
activity to reduce ASB are working.
Recommendation 17: Enforcement of anti-social
behaviour fines
6.3 The Mayor welcomes the Government's
commitment to ensuring ASB fine payment is effectively enforced.
Recommendation 18: Night time activities' contribution
to policing costs
6.4 The Mayor welcomes Government's recognition
of the polluter pays principle in their proposals for Alcohol
Disorder Zones but is not convinced that the Zones as proposed
form the best mechanism. The Mayor would seek an approach which
allows for costs of additional policing to be recovered before
rather than after problems of anti-social drinking are prevalent.
Such measures should be applied with particular regard to the
type, scale and impact of the premises, and the mechanisms for
doing so need to be considered.
7. BINGE DRINKING
CULTURE
Recommendation 19: Night time activity health
costs
7.1 It is noted that government does not
consider that extending licensing hours will "necessarily
impact significantly on alcohol related disease" but will
monitor the outcome of licensing reform.
Recommendation 20: Government anti-alcohol abuse
campaign
7.2 Working with a range of stakeholders,
the Mayor has produced a non-statutory policy document aiming
to reduce the harm from alcohol and drug use in London. Its key
proposals are:
— involving local communities;
— strengthening the links between action
on alcohol and drugs with employment and housing and regeneration;
and
— improving the quality and effectiveness
of drug and alcohol interventions so they meet the needs of London's
diverse communities.
8. LICENSING
ACT 2003
Recommendation 21: Methodology for upper capacity
assessment
8.1 Like the Government, the Mayor does
not consider that the capacity of licensed premises in a town
centre is necessarily indicative of the number of people using
a centre, and therefore identifying an upper capacity for a centre
is not a practical measure to assess cumulative impact. However
he does support the licensing reform in seeking to prevent an
over-concentration of people in an area when closing times coincide.
The impact of changes to licensed hours should therefore be monitored
and kept under review to assess whether and how capacity limits
could help to manage the evening economy. Monitoring should assess
the impacts from early evening to late night.
8.2 Interpretation of the two concepts of
"cumulative impact" and "saturation" on which
these policies must be based is likely to evolve. Management or
remedial measures can increase capacity. For example, if the concerns
in a neighbourhood are that too many people mill about after the
pubs have shut because of inadequate transport provision, then
provision of additional transport capacity would permit some growth
in licensed premises.
8.3 The concepts of "cumulative impact"
and "saturation" imply that there is a threshold of
numbers of premises or numbers of revellers above which an area
becomes "saturated". It will always be difficult to
argue that one additional premise takes an area over this arbitrary
threshold. The two studies supported by the Mayor[8]
suggest that no single crude figure for measuring saturation point
can be identified, but a broad collation of evidence provides
a good baseline to enable assessment of future impacts.
8.4 The Licensing Act is in part about controlling
the recognised problems that night-time and particularly alcohol
related leisure activities can generate. Special saturation polices
should be used sensitively, and blanket restrictions on all new
licenses should be avoided unless the cumulative impact on a neighbourhood
can be shown to be excessive.
8.5 The Licensing Guidance rightly says
that "need" is a matter for the market and the planning
system. GLA research has identified an increasing demand for leisure
services, and the London Plan seeks to support them in specific
locations where appropriate, and to manage their impacts.
Recommendation 22: License objections—burden
of evidentiary proof
8.6 The Government response says that licensing
authorities' role in objections is to balance and reconcile differences.
In doing so an authority should give due weight to the strategic
and wider-than-local role of clusters of evening economy activities.
In such areas it should also recognise that town centres are the
most appropriate location for clusters of evening economy uses.
Suitable management of the evening economy in such clusters should
be based on evidence regarding a range of factors, including the
attitudes of residents in the local and wider area.
Recommendation 23: "Happy hours" to
be a licensing consideration
8.7 Management of "happy hours"
should form part of an integrated approach to managing the evening
economy. Subject to monitoring and review the Mayor supports voluntary
Codes of Practice.
Recommendation 24: Transport operators licensing
evidence
8.8 See Transport for London submission.
9. THE LICENSED
TRADE
Recommendation 25: Role of private operators;
Recommendation 26: Industry codes of conduct; Recommendation 27:
Recycling glass bottles
9.1 The measures identified by the Committee
and the Government are supported and their inclusion in Best Practice
Guidance would encourage their use.
Recommendation 28: Operator partners a licence
condition
9.2 Government's response for a voluntary
partnership is supported, although the take-up and outcomes of
the voluntary approach should be monitored.
10. MANAGING
THE EVENING
AND LATE
NIGHT ECONOMIES
Recommendation 29: Broadening appeal of evening
activities
10.1 The Committee's comments and government
response recognise the importance of diversifying the evening
economy. Alterations to the Use Classes Order and licensed hours
will promote greater diversification. Creating a critical mass
of alternative activities open into the evening could be assisted
by joint promotions which could be encouraged by town centre management
initiatives as part of an integrated approach to managing evening
economy activities.
Recommendation 30: Pro-active management
10.2 Licensing and planning are core tools
to manage the evening economy. The Mayor is concerned that licensing
policies should be in accordance with the development plan for
the area, which in London includes the London Plan. This will
provide a consistent approach to the evening economy with more
local and appropriate management tools in different centres.
Recommendation 31: Study and plan to limit excess
provision
10.3 In a densely developed and populated
area like London it is essential that local licensing policies
take into account broader strategic concerns and the specialised
role of particular areas that provide services for a wider area
and for tourism.
10.4 Local methods to ensure that there
is not excessive provision, such as controlling the proportions
of frontages in A3 (as existing) or non-A1 use, can ensure that
town centres remain varied and vibrant throughout the daytime
and evening.
10.5 Saturation areas should not be used
simply to limit what is considered excess provision, but should
be imposed only where cumulative impact issues arise. A blanket
policy to refuse new applications regardless of the actual type
of activity in "stress areas" would not be compliant
with the London Plan and could simply push evening economy activities
to areas bordering the designated saturation zone.
Recommendation 32: Inspection at appropriate time
10.6 The Mayor supports the principle underlying
the Committee's recommendation but draws attention to the resource
implications of appropriate-context inspections.
Recommendation 33: mobile urinals
10.7 Mobile urinals can help but there are
capital and revenue costs associated with their deployment.
Recommendation 34: LB levy on late night operators
10.8 The Mayor supports the polluter pays
principle. In some locations BIDS may be a way to fund services
required.
4 Mayor of London, LB Camden A Managed Approach to
the Night Time Economy in Camden Town: Research Study. GLA, 2004,
(see also LB Camden. Consultation Paper. Draft Supplementary Planning
Guidance for Central London. Food, Drink and Entertainment, Specialist
and Retail Uses. LB Camden, 2004). Back
5
Mayor of London, LB Camden A Managed Approach to the Night Time
Economy in Camden Town: Research Study. GLA, 2004 see also LB
Camden. Consultation Paper. Draft Supplementary Planning Guidance
for Central London. Food, Drink and Entertainment, Specialist
and Retail Uses. LB Camden, 2004. Back
6
LB Ealing Managing the Evening/Night-time Economy. The Cumulative
Impact of Pubs, Clubs and Restaurants. Case Study: Ealing Town
Centre. Planning Policy Research Report LB Ealing, 2004. Back
7
Mayor of London, London Development Agency, Transport for London.
Spending Time: London's Leisure Economy. GLA, 2003. Back
8
LB Ealing Managing the Evening/Night-time Economy. The Cumulative
Impact of Pubs, Clubs and Restaurants. Case Study: Ealing Town
Centre. Planning Policy Research Report LB Ealing, 2004; and Mayor
of London, LB Camden A Managed Approach to the Night Time Economy
in Camden Town: Research Study. GLA, 2004. Back
| 
