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
Media
No. | Item |
---|---|
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST PDF 214 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.
|
|
To note the rules of procedure which are attached for information. Additional documents: Minutes: The rules of procedure were noted.
|
|
MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING(S) PDF 243 KB To confirm as a correct record the minutes of the Licensing Sub-Committee held on 9th November 2021.
Additional documents: Minutes: The minutes of the meeting held on 9th November 2021 were agreed and approved as a correct record.
|
|
ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION Additional documents: |
|
Additional documents:
Minutes: At the request of the Chair, Ms Corrine Holland, Licensing Officer, introduced the report which detailed the application for a new premises licence for Classic Football Shirts, 17 Commercial Street, London E1 6NE. It was noted that objections had been received from Officers representing the Licensing Authority and Environmental Health.
At the request of the Chair, Mr Andy Newman, Licensing Agent on behalf of the applicant explained that they were aware the premises were in the Brick Lane Cumulative Impact Zone (CIZ). However, they believed that the nature of the premises together with the modest hours applied for would not negatively impact the area.
He referred the Sub-Committee to the supporting documents in the supplemental agenda, which included photos of the layout of the premises and the café area inside the premises. It was noted that the premises previously used to be a licensed restaurant but the company had gone into liquidation and therefore the existing licence lapsed. It was further noted that the applicant had experience of operating in the area and in fact operated a concession store within the Truman Brewery.
Mr Newman highlighted the fact that Temporary Event Notices (TENs) had been given, which had attracted no complaints from residents or local businesses. He explained that the café would be ancillary to the store and the model of the business was for people to have a quick drink and cookie or cake whist shopping, very similar to cafes in department stores. It was also noted that no objections had been made by the police and that conditions suggested by them had been accepted by the applicant.
He suggested that there was no evidence from Environmental Health to indicate that the premises would give rise to public nuisance. He said there were excellent transport links and there would be no need for people to congregate outside the premises. He said customers would spend quite a long time in the store browsing due to the uniqueness of the store.
It was noted that the seating capacity at the café was for 48 patrons, having a lesser impact than the previous restaurant at the premises. This fells within the Council’s Licensing Policy, being a small premises thatis not alcohol-led. Together with the robust set of conditions it would not negatively impact on the area. He welcomed the conditions put forward by the responsible authorities and expressed some challenge to making alcohol ancillary to a table meals as the business model was to sell cakes and cookies and possibly introducing sandwiches in the future. He said that the applicant was willing to join appropriate associations to become part of the community and was welcome to suggestions. He said that after the TENs it could be said that the business sales runs a 60/40 split with 40% of the sales from the café and 60% from the store merchandise itself.
Mr Newman concluded that the applicant had a proven track record of being a responsible operator and was willing to adopt the ... view the full minutes text for item 4.1 |
|
Application for a New Premise Licence for Katsute, 147 Brick Lane, London, E1 6SB PDF 362 KB Additional documents:
Minutes: At the request of the Chair, Ms Corrine Holland, Licensing Officer, introduced the report which detailed the application for a new premises licence for Katsute, 147 Brick Lane, London E1 6SB. It was noted that objections had been made by the Licensing Authority.
At the request of the Chair, Mr Niall McCann, Legal Representative on behalf of the Applicant, stated that they wished to formally reduce the hours for sale of alcohol so as to start from 11:00 hours. He then gave a brief history of the Applicant, his businesses and his experiences to date and highlighted that there have not been any complaints from residents or responsible authorities at his other licensed premises.
It was noted that the applicant was personally seeing to the works at the premises and had put a lot of time and effort in trying to create a distinctly Japanese atmosphere, which could be seen in the photographs in the supporting documents. It was noted that the premises would have on offer authentic Japanese tea, homemade cakes and other snacks and, if granted, Japanese alcoholic products for consumption on and off the premises. He explained that a typical customer would come in, they would have a glass of Japanese whisky or sake and if they liked it then they would a buy bottle to take it away as present or for special occasions. McCann said that they found the customers who frequented the premises tended to be Japanese nationals or friends of Japanese nationals and where they do consume alcohol, it was in very limited amounts. They believed it to be important to be able to offer the facility whereby people can taste the alcohol for taking it away because it was a new product and is set at a premium price compared to mainstream alcoholic products. It was noted that there were no representations from any residents or the Police or Environmental Health.
Mr McCann then addressed the concerns of the premises being in the CIZ. He believed that the premises would not negatively impact on the area because of the nature of the operation and with the conditions, both offered and agreed with the responsible authorities. It was noted that alcohol consumption could lead to crime and disorder in an area where demand is stimulated due to increased availability with new people coming to the area and encouraged to drink large quantities of alcohol quickly which was not the business model for this premises. The premises had a capacity of 46, however in reality there was only 36 covers at the moment. It was noted that the premises had currently been open for a few weeks now as a cafe without alcohol and there had been no issues. It was also noted that an average bottle of whiskey or sake would cost between £50-£70 and therefore not attractive to street drinkers.
As for potential public nuisance, the applicant did not anticipate receiving noise complaints and this could be supported by the ... view the full minutes text for item 4.2 |
|
Additional documents: Minutes: This application was resolved prior to the meeting.
|
|
Additional documents: Minutes: This application was resolved prior to the meeting.
|
|
Additional documents: Minutes: At the request of the Chair, Ms Corrine Holland, Licensing Officer, introduced the report which detailed the application for a Temporary Event Notice (TEN) for The Atrium, 124-126 Cheshire Street, London E2 6AG. It was noted that an application for a counter notice had been made by PC Mark Perry representing the Metropolitan Police.
At the request of the Chair, PC Mark Perry explained that the application had given no indication of what the event actually was, which made it difficult to assess the risk and see if the necessary measures were in place to uphold the licencing objectives and prevent crime and disorder. He said that it was only when searching for the contact details that he saw that the email address was for a boxing company and then after speaking to the applicant it became clear that this was an application for a white-collar boxing event. Those were amateur boxing events where people who are members of boxing clubs turn up and engage in boxing matches against other clubs. He said that boxing events are generally high risk in terms of prevention of crime and disorder because of the nature of the event itself and the high levels of testosterone, and it has the capacity and the possibility to lead to crime and disorder.
He said that organisers for such events were usually very good at providing risk assessments, so they knew where the boxers were coming from, whether there had been any trouble at previous events,, whether adequate security plans were in place with sufficient security staff, and how to deal with instances of disorder. However, this part of the application form was left blank. PC Perry expressed his concern over this as it was incredibly risky and incredibly scary because they either hadn’t thought about it or they had chosen not to share it with the police. This made it difficult to trust them. It was also noted that since the objection there had been no contact from the applicant to supply risk assessments or security plans. PC Perry said to allow the event to go ahead would in his opinion lead to crime and disorder, even though alcohol was not being supplied.
Mr Wolid Ali, Applicant, began by giving a brief history of his experiences to date and his knowledge of the area. He said he had been a boxing coach for 25 years working with local youth in the area. He said one of his young trainee’s had completed the application and unfortunately missed out the section where it asks to describe the event. He said that PC Perry did contact him over the telephone and had been quite hostile and did not provide any help or guidance. He said that he had organised similar events and had not been required to produce in depth policies and risk assessments and there was nothing in the form asking for such information. He said he had explained the error on the form made by one ... view the full minutes text for item 4.5 |
|
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.
|