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: The start of the meeting was delayed slightly to allow the objector to attend but no contact had been received so the Chair decided to proceed in the absence of the objector.
At the request of the Chair, Mr Mohshin Ali, Licensing Officer, introduced the report which detailed the application for a new premises licence for Ozone Coffee Roastery, 8 Pritchard’s Road, London E2 9AP. It was noted that an objection had been received by a local resident.
At the request of the Chair, Mr Robert Sutherland, Legal Representative on behalf of the Applicant, explained that they wanted to make the following changes to the application: a reduction in the hours for the sale of alcohol to 23:00 hours from Monday to Saturday, the removal of regulated entertainment and late night refreshments and an amendment of the Challenge 21 policy to a Challenge 25 policy.
Mr Sutherland explained that the Applicant had made a substantial investment of £1.75 million in the premises. The premises included a roasting facility, the Applicant’s European Headquarters and a restaurant. It was noted that the first floor of the building would be used as the Head Office and a Training Facility.
Mr Sutherland noted that the Applicant had another licensed premises based in Islington. The premises has had no complaints or licence reviews despite residents living directly above the premises. It was noted that the new premises was a 100 cover restaurant, that customers would be seated and there would be waiter/waitress service. A condition limiting the number of smokers to 8 had been agreed with Environmental Health. It was also agreed that the designated area for smokers would be on Emma Street, which would be covered by CCTV cameras. Mr Sutherland noted that Emma Street was primarily a commercial area.
Mr Sutherland concluded by highlighting Mr Gurr’s experience to date. In response to a question from the Sub-Committee, the Applicant confirmed that it would accept an additional condition that no drinks would be allowed outside the premises.
The Chair was advised that the objector had just contacted Democratic Services to inform that she was running late and was on her way to the meeting. The Chair adjourned the meeting at 3.00pm and reconvened at 3.10pm to allow the objector to attend.
Mr Sutherland briefly summarised his earlier submission and the amendments to the original application for the benefit of the objector.
Members then heard from Ms Michele Scarr, local resident, who explained that she lived 10 meters away from the premises. She stated that she was in the middle of a developing area with a number of new licensed premises in close proximity. She believed this was turning a once quiet area into a busy and noisy area.
Ms Scarr raised concerns about the smoking area not being managed and questioned how the number of smokers outside the premises would be controlled. She suggested that there should be a designated person or security staff supervising the outdoor area.
In response to questions from Members, ... view the full minutes text for item 3.1 |
|
Additional documents: Minutes: It was noted that the objector was not present at the meeting, It was confirmed that the objectors had not contacted Democratic Services or the Licensing Authority so therefore the Chair decided to proceed in their absence.
At the request of the Chair, Mr Mohshin Ali, Licensing Officer, introduced the report which detailed the application for a new premises licence for Spice Hut, 221 East India Dock Road, London E14 0ED. It was noted that objections had been received by two local residents.
At the request of the Chair, Ms Rahana Begum, Applicant, explained that the application was for late night refreshments only and was made due to customer demand. She explained that it was a small business and the extended hours, if granted, would help cover costs and overheads.
It was noted that there would be no regulated entertainment at the premises and there would be notices displayed around the premises asking customers to leave quietly and respect the needs of local residents. Ms Begum explained that they could keep doors shut to prevent noise escape from the premises. She confirmed that there would be CCTV cameras in operation at all times and CCTV footage would be retained for 31 days.
It was noted that the objectors were not present at the meeting. Therefore, Members noted and considered their written objections contained in the agenda pack.
In response to questions, the following was noted:
- East India Dock Road is a busy high street and any noise from the premises is unlikely to be louder than the noise from the passing traffic on the main road. - Staff were trained to deal with conflict and disorder. - There were 36 covers at the premises. - They mostly sold takeaway meals. - The CCTV cameras were in operation 24 hours, with two cameras positioned outside the premises.
Members adjourned the meeting at 3.55pm for deliberations and reconvened at 4.10pm.
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:
Consideration
Each application must be considered on its own merits. The Chair confirmed that the Sub-Committee had carefully considered all of the evidence before them including the written objections contained in the agenda pack and the oral representations from the Applicant present at the meeting.
The Sub-Committee was satisfied that the licensing objectives would be promoted and that the conditions on the licence would effectively mitigate the risk of noise nuisance and crime and disorder. The Sub-Committee was also satisfied that the conditions imposed would help alleviate any concerns arising from the local resident objectors.
Therefore Members made a decision and the decision was unanimous. Members granted the application with ... 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: There were no applications that required extensions to decision deadlines.
|