Agenda, decisions and draft minutes
Venue: Council Chamber - Town Hall, Mulberry Place, 5 Clove Crescent, London, E14 2BG. View directions
Contact: Antoinette Duhaney, Democratic Services Tel: 020 7364 4120, E-mail: antoinette.duhaney@towerhamlets.gov.uk
No. | Item |
---|---|
DECLARATIONS OF DISCLOSABLE PECUNIARY INTEREST PDF 68 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: No declarations of disclosable pecuniary interests were declared. |
|
To note the rules of procedure which are attached for information. Additional documents: Minutes: The Rules of Procedure were noted by the Sub Committee. |
|
ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION |
|
Additional documents: Minutes: At the request of the Chair, Kathy Driver introduced the report which detailed the application for a Premises Licence for Vicolo Romano at 420 Roman Road, London, E3 5LX. It was noted that the applicant wanted to withdraw the application for the provision of regulated entertainment licence having considered the concerns raised by local residents.
At the request of the Chair, Ms Tuba Korkmaz, the applicant’s representative informed the Sub Committee that the applicant had reconsidered his application given the concerns raised by the local residents and was willing to withdraw his application for the provision of a regulated entertainment licence and confirmed that any music played would be at background level only. Ms Korkmaz informed the Sub Committee that the premises were hoping to improve trade in the area and enhance the area with the business. It is only a small area and there were no concerns from the local residents who are happy with the business and with the premises. It is a 15 seater premises and is funded by the Roman Road Trust and is an area with existing businesses and the local residents have been happy with no recent complaints relating to the premises. Members also heard from Semih Lekesiz, the Restaurant Manager who also informed the Sub Committee that he was and experienced manager who would uphold the licensing objectives and contribute to ensuring that the conditions of the licence are enforced. He also stated that the restaurant is adding to the improvement of the area and the alcohol licence is necessary for the survival of the business.
In response to questions from Members it was noted, that:
· customers would only be able to purchase alcohol with a meal and would not be allowed to solely use the premises to purchase alcohol. · The sale of alcohol was an extra option for customers who would like an alcoholic drink with their meal. · The Premises Manager had taken appropriate action to address the complaints with the assistance of the Environmental Inspectors.
Members adjourned the meeting at 6.57pm to consider the decision and reconvened at 7.15pm
The Licensing Objectives
In considering the application, Members were required to consider the same in accordance with the Licensing Act 2003 (as amended), the Licensing Objectives, the Home Office Guidance and the Council’s Statement of Licensing Policy and in particular to have regard to the promotion of the four licencing objectives:
1. The Prevention of Crime and Disorder; 2. Public Safety; 3. Prevention of Public Nuisance; and 4. The Protection of Children from Harm
Consideration
Each application must be considered on its own merit. The Sub Committee has carefully considered all of the evidence before them and considered written and verbal representation on behalf of the applicant and the objectors with particular regard to the licensing objections of prevention of public nuisance and the prevention of crime and disorder.
In addition Members took note of the Home Office guidance which states that “where there are objections to an application to ... view the full minutes text for item 3.1 |
|
Additional documents: Minutes: At the request of the Chair, Kathy Driver introduced the report which detailed the application for a New Premises Licence for Tasnim Superstore, 49 Old Ford Road, London, E2 9PJ.
At the Request of the Chair, Omar Beg, the applicant’s representative informed the Sub Committee that the business is a small local shop on an “estate” selling convenience goods for the past 8 months and is a growing business. The applicant would like to expand their business to sell alcohol due to the economic climate as without expansion the applicant may have to close down the business. The applicant will comply with the appropriate requirements including CCTV and “Challenge 21” and will ensure that staff are trained appropriately and that the alcohol is locked and secure at all times. The applicant will also take a sensitive approach when selling alcohol and based upon previous complaints relating to previous premises owners, will take the necessary measures to ensure the Licensing Objectives are met.
In response to questions from Members it was noted, that:
· A large group of younger individuals came into the shop. The shop owner asked the group to come into the shop in sections. When they refused she advised them that the shop had working CCTV and should they cause any trouble they would be reported to the police. The shop owner then asked the group to leave. · The owner believes that a firm approach from the outset will go some way to prevent the historical problems of ASB re-occurring. · The applicant’s representative believed that the conditions set out within the operating schedule would hopefully alleviate some of the concerns of the residents.
Members adjourned the meeting at 7.27pm to consider the decision and reconvened at 7.45pm.
The Licensing Objectives
In considering the application, Members were required to consider the same in accordance with the Licensing Act 2003 (as amended), the Licensing Objectives, the Home Office Guidance and the Council’s Statement of Licensing Policy and in particular to have regard to the promotion of the four licencing objectives:
1. The Prevention of Crime and Disorder; 2. Public Safety; 3. Prevention of Public Nuisance; and 4. The Protection of Children from Harm
Consideration
Each application must be considered on its own merits. The Sub Committee has carefully considered all of the evidence before them and considered written and verbal representation on behalf of the applicant and the objectors with particular regard to the licensing objectives of prevention of public nuisance and the prevention of crime and disorder.
In addition Members took note of the Home Office Guidance which states that “where there are objections to an application to extend the hours during which licensable activities are to be carried on and the licensing authority determines that this would undermine the licensing objectives, it may reject the application or grant it with appropriate conditions and/or different hours from those requested”.
Members took into account the representation made by a local resident and the two petitions signed by local residents. Members also ... view the full minutes text for item 3.2 |
|
Additional documents: Minutes: The Principal Licensing Officer, Kathy Driver together with the applicant’s representative, Mr Dadds and the applicant, Mr Uzun and all the responsible authorities present requested a 5 minute adjournment to discuss the objections and to provide a way forward.
The meeting adjourned at 7.55pm and resumed at 8.04pm
At the request of the Chair, Kathy Driver introduced the report which detailed the application for a Premises Licence for Efes Express, 79 Brick Lane, London, E1 6QL. It was noted that following the adjournment the parties had reached an agreement and that the Responsible Authorities and the Local Residents had withdrawn their objections, although there was one point which the Licensing Authority wanted clarification by the applicant regarding the proposed draft condition surrounding CCTV requests.
Both the local residents and the Responsible Authorities confirmed this.
At the request of the Chair, Mr Dadds, the applicant’s representative informed the Sub Committee that the applicant had substantial experience of owning and managing businesses and is well known by the local residents. He confirmed that the applicant was happy to review its application and amend it accordingly to satisfy the objectors. He informed the Sub Committee that the application was for food and not alcohol and that the premises had been refurbished to a very high standard. Mr Dadds also submitted that the Cumulative Impact Zone was a policy that had not been reviewed since its introduction and that there had also been a reduction in ASB and crime since the policy was introduced. He also stated that when the policy was adopted the premises was already licensed so to approve this application would be not adding to the number of licensed premises in the area and as such the premises would not be contributing to the crime and disorder in the area neither would it be undermining the Licensing Objectives as it is operating a “takeaway” and would only be selling food. He further stated that the premises is an asset and would improve the environment. Mr Dadds stated that in order to rebut the presumption within the CIZ policy the applicant would be required to provide evidence that granting the licence would not have a negative impact in the locality. Mr Dadds referred the Committee to 2.1 of the Home Officer Guidance which says that the Licensing Authority should look to the Police as the main source of advice on crime and disorder. In this application the Police had agreed conditions with the applicant and have now withdrawn their objections. In addition to this the applicant has the relevant experience and coupled with the agreed conditions this would be sufficient evidence to rebut the presumption created by the CIZ policy.
In response to questions from Members it was noted, that:
· In relation to the CCTV, the applicant would prefer the appropriate wording which had been confirmed by the Information Commissioner Officer and that it may also assist ill-trained officers when requesting CCTV and that the legislation would still need to be complied ... view the full minutes text for item 3.3 |