Agenda, decisions and minutes
Venue: Online 'Virtual' Meeting - https://towerhamlets.public-i.tv/core/portal/home. View directions
Contact: Simmi Yesmin, Senior Democratic Services Officer Tel: 020 7364 4120, E-mail: simmi.yesmin@towerhamlets.gov.uk
Media
No. | Item |
---|---|
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST PDF 215 KB Members are reminded to consider the categories of interest, identified in the Code of Conduct for Members to determine: whether they have an interest in any agenda item and any action they should take. For further details, see the attached note from the Monitoring Officer.
Members are also reminded to declare the nature of the interest at the earliest opportunity and the agenda item it relates to. Please note that ultimately it is the Members’ responsibility to identify any interests and also update their register of interest form as required by the Code.
If in doubt as to the nature of an interest, you are advised to seek advice prior the meeting by contacting the Monitoring Officer or Democratic Services. Additional documents: Minutes: There were no declarations of interest 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: |
|
Additional documents: Minutes: At the request of the Chair, Ms Corinne Holland, Licensing Officer, introduced the report which detailed the application for a new premises licence for Da Nonna, Unit 2, New Crane Place, London, E1W 3TS. It was noted that objections had been received on behalf of local residents.
The Applicant, Ms Alexa Mora, asked for her friend, Mr Alessandro Ferrari, to speak on her behalf. Mr Ferrari explained that that the Applicant lived and worked in the local area and was excited to bring Italian soul food to local residents. He explained that the premises was not a pub, bar or club, but a restaurant for customers to enjoy food and drink. He explained that alcohol would only be sold ancillary to a meal and customers would not be allowed to take open vessels of alcohol outside the premises. The premises would provide free drinking water, train staff, have notices displayed in the premises and monitor customers to ensure they do not block the entrance to residential buildings.
Members also heard from Mr Mark Gower, landlord of the premises, who confirmed that he owned the building. He explained that the premises had been operating as an Italian restaurant for the past 10 years but the license lapsed when the previous operators had left and therefore a new application had to be made. He said that here were 150 apartments in the local area who will use this facility. He said that the premises next door was a licensed premises which had now been sold and turned into gym, and therefore no licence in place. He said some of the objectors were not local residents; they were buy to let landlords and individuals who no longer live there. He expressed his support for the premises.
Members then heard from Mr Ben Pommer, Ms Caitlin Spence, Mr Ed Lawrence, Ms Deborah Holmes and Mr Tim Warren, objectors, who expressed the following concerns in relation to the premises:
1. The hours applied for were excessive, especially in a residential area. 2. There had been noise emanating from the premises since the Applicant had taken over the premises. 3. Two residents had moved as direct consequence of the noise emanating from the premises. 4. Efforts to engage with the Applicant had been unsuccessful. 5. It was a quiet residential area with few late night premises. 6. There was no sound insulation preventing noise emanating to the upper part of the building. 7. Objectors were concerned about noise emanating from the building when the glass front was opened up. 8. Customers and staff had been seen smoking and blocking building entrances. 9. Building works had been carried out during unsociable hours. 10.There had been no problems with the previous operators.
11.Residents were unable to keep windows open during the summer months due to noise and impact on sleep and family life. 12.Residents felt intimidated by customers who block the building entrance.
In response to questions from Members, the following ... view the full minutes text for item 3.1 |
|
Additional documents: Minutes: At the request of the Chair, Ms Corinne Holland, Licensing Officer, introduced the report which detailed the application for a new premises licence for Quick Commerce Limited, 28 Redchurch Street, London, E2 7DP. It was noted that objections had been received on behalf of officers representing the Licensing Authority and Environmental Health.
Mr Robert Botkai, Legal Representative on behalf of the Applicant, explained the new and interesting business concept. He explained that the premises was a dark store operating as an App based company, selling mini supermarket goods, with no external signage and no customer access. He explained the business concept, where an order is made via the app and then delivered to a residential or business address, and not to any open space. He explained that the riders (delivery drivers) would be employed directly by the company, offering them employee incentives, and highlighted that this aspect was important as it was not like other companies. Mr Botkai explained that riders had a waiting room with toilet facilities, coffee machines and sofas. The riders will be using company e-bikes to deliver goods; these bikes were silent and therefore no idling or noise was caused by the bikes.
The Applicant, Mr Joseph Falter, gave a brief history of his qualifications and experiences in operating a business with e-delivery as a large scale operation. He said the ‘ZAP’ app would ensure all riders are entitled to sick pay, pension and paid above the London living wage.
It was noted that the Applicant had consulted with the Police who did not object to the application and there were no objections from residents. Mr Botkai addressed the impact on the Cumulative Impact Zone (CIZ) policy. He submitted that the grant of a licence would in fact reduce the impact. With no customer accessing the store, customers would be staying at home and in turn not contributing to cumulative impact in the area. It was noted that the business had been operating 24 hours since March 2021 using Temporary Event Notices. There had been no complaints and the business had very good practices in place. It was noted that the company could in fact deliver goods 24 hours without a licence but a licence was being sought to include the sale of alcohol. In conclusion, Mr Botkai stated that the premises would not add to the CIZ and would be reducing the impact of customers frequenting the area as people would stay at home and stay safe.
Members then heard from Ms Kathy Driver, Licensing Officer, who explained that the area was saturated and any application in the CIZ is to be refused unless the Applicant can demonstrate that their premises would not negatively impact the area. She raised concerns on the potential noise from riders entering and exiting the premises during the noise sensitive hours as the business will be utilising the outside area 24 hours a day which would further impact residents.
Ms Driver asked that there be clarity on deliveries ... 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.
Additional documents: Minutes: Nil items.
|