Agenda, decisions and minutes
Venue: The Council Chamber, Town Hall, Mulberry Place, 5 Clove Crescent, London, E14 2BG
Contact: Simmi Yesmin, Senior Democratic Services Officer Tel: 020 7364 4120, E-mail: simmi.yesmin@towerhamlets.gov.uk
No. | Item | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
DECLARATIONS OF DISCLOSABLE PECUNIARY INTEREST PDF 117 KB To note any declarations of interest made by Members, including those restricting Members from voting on the questions detailed in Section 106 of the Local Government Finance Act, 1992. See attached note from the Monitoring Officer.
Minutes: There were no declarations of interests made.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
To note the rules of procedure which are attached for information. Additional documents: Minutes: The rules of procedure were noted.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Additional documents: Minutes: At the request of the Chair, Mr Mohshin Ali, Licensing Officer, introduced the report which detailed the application for a new premises licence for Unity Diner, 60 Wentworth Street, London E1 7AL. It was noted that objections had been received by Officers on behalf of the Licensing Authority and Environmental Health.
At the request of the Chair, Mr Winston Brown, Legal Representative on behalf of the Applicant explained that the premises licence was being sought for a vegan restaurant/diner and cocktail bar. He explained that it was mainly a booking only restaurant, and when entering, customers would be seated by a host, there was a seated waiting area and it was a very controlled environment. The clientele they attracted were calm and measured. He explained that hours had been amended subject to the comments from the Licensing Officer.
He explained that the Licensing Officer visited the premises on 29 November 2019, and found the premises selling and displaying alcohol without a licence. He explained that the applicant believed that having made an application for a premises licence meant they could sell alcohol and therefore accepted that there had been a breach. Mr Brown highlighted the fact that there had been seven temporary event notices so far, and all carried out successfully with no complaints or concerns. He said that if Members had concerns about the Designated Premises Supervisor (DPS) named on the application then the Applicant would be happy to change the DPS as the Applicant accepts that there was a breach.
Mr Brown stated that Environmental Health had come to an agreement, as the Applicant was happy to accept the conditions proposed and believed to have met their concerns.
He also said that the licensing conditions proposed met the concerns regarding the Cumulative Impact Zone (CIZ) and that the clientele which the premises would attract would not be the type to cause problems. It was further noted that six members of staff had Level 2 training for the relevant field and all staff were trained to use and download images from the CCTV system. Mr Brown concluded that the Applicants took the licensing objectives seriously.
Members then heard from Ms Lavine Miller-Johnson, Licensing Officer. She referred to her representation on pages 62-62 of the agenda pack and explained that during her visit to the premises, alcohol was on display for sale during the consultation period, and therefore she was not confident that the Applicant would uphold the licensing objectives. She further explained that the premises was in the CIZ and that the application and the oral representation made at the meeting did not justify a premises licence being issued in the CIZ given the presumption against grant of a licence for premises in the CIZ.
Members also heard from Ms Nicola Cadzow, Environmental Health Officer. She explained that she had initially agreed to conditions, but upon visiting the premises, concerns had been raised. She stated that the Applicant had a lack of understanding of the Licensing Act and the ... view the full minutes text for item 3.1 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Application for a New Premise Licence for S & T Wines, 210a Brick Lane, London, E1 6SA PDF 271 KB Additional documents: Minutes: At the request of the Chair, Ms Lavine Miller-Johnson, Licensing Officer, introduced the report which detailed the application for a new premises licence for S&T Wines, 210a Brick Lane, London E1 6SA. It was noted that objections had been received by Officers on behalf of the Licensing Authority and Environmental Health and a local resident.
It was noted that the premises was for a wine tasting and art exhibitions space serving wine and food, it was noted that conditions had been agreed with the Police.
At the request of the Chair, the Applicant, Mr Tony Garwood explained that the premises licence was for a basement area, a small area with a capacity of 15 people for wine tasting. He said he was an experienced personal licence holder and was the Chairman for the Otley PubWatch scheme.
He explained that notices would be displayed around the premises asking customers to leave quietly, there would be no regulated entertainment, they would operate the Challenge 25 policy, and there would be no smoking or drinking allowed outside the premises.
Mr Garwood sought to argue that the local resident’s premises were in fact bed and breakfast accommodation, on the basis of something he had looked up on the internet via his mobile ‘phone; but the Sub-Committee disallowed this and disregarded this because this was being introduced late by the Applicant, and the local resident in question was not present even to be asked if they agreed to the late introduction of that material.
Members then heard from Mr Mohshin Ali, Licensing Officer. He referred to his statement on pages 133-137 and explained that his representation was based on the licensing objectives of the prevention of public nuisance and prevention of crime and disorder. He said there was no mention by the Applicant of the impact on the Cumulative Impact Zone in the application or during the Applicant’s oral representations at this meeting,nor there were there any details in the operating schedule in the application form specifying how the Applicant would promote the licensing objectives or not add to the cumulative impact in the Cumulative Impact Zone. He questioned if the Applicant was a limited company or a sole trader as it was not clear from the application. He pointed out that background music did not require a licence as it did not count as regulated entertainment, yet the application form sought permission for low background music at voice level, and so it was unclear what was applied for in respect of a non-licensable activity. In conclusion the Licensing Authority believed that there was not enough in the application on how they would promote the licensing objectives and how the premises would not add to the cumulative impact in the Cumulative Impact Zone.
Members also heard from Ms Nicola Cadzow, Environmental Health Officer. She explained that her representation was based on the licensing objective of the prevention of public nuisance. She further explained that there was nothing in the operating schedule which sufficiently ... view the full minutes text for item 3.2 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
EXTENSION OF DECISION DEADLINE: LICENSING ACT 2003 The Sub Committee may be requested to extend the decision deadline for applications to be considered at forthcoming meetings due to the volume of applications requiring a hearing. Where necessary, details will be provided at the meeting.
Minutes: Members agreed to extend the decision deadlines for the following applications;
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Additional documents: Minutes: This item was withdrawn prior to the meeting.
|