Agenda and draft minutes
Venue: Room C1, 1st Floor, Town Hall, Mulberry Place, 5 Clove Crescent, London, E14 2BG
Contact: Simmi Yesmin, Democratic Services Tel: 020 7364 4120, E-mail: simmi.yesmin@towerhamlets.gov.uk
No. | Item |
---|---|
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE To receive any apologies for absence. Minutes: There were no apologies for absence.
|
|
DECLARATIONS OF DISCLOSABLE PECUNIARY INTEREST PDF 56 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 Disclosable Pecuniary Interest.
Councillor Motin Uz-Zaman stated that he was present in his capacity as a Ward Member for the application for a new Premises Licence for Nisa, 9 Burdett Road, London, E3 4TU.
|
|
To note the rules of procedure which are attached for information. Minutes: The Rules of Procedure were noted.
|
|
ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION |
|
Additional documents: Minutes: At the request of the Chair Mohshin Ali, Senior Licensing Officer, introduced the report which detailed the application for a review of the Premises Licence for Sweet Point, 2 Old Montague Street, London, E1 5NG. He added that the review had been triggered by the Tower Hamlets Trading Standards and Licensing Service and was supported by Tower Hamlets Planning Service, the Metropolitan Police and local residents.
The Chair indicated that he would allow speakers 10 minutes for and against the application for review.
The Evidence
At the request of the Chair, John McCrohan, Trading Standards and Licensing Manager, addressed the meeting with regard to his statement as contained in the previously circulated agenda pack, adding that the premises had a chequered history and had been subject to action by Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs on a number of occasions, when non-duty paid cigarettes and alcohol had been seized. Test purchases had also resulted in an underage sale of a tobacco product to an underage person. Sale of alcohol to an already intoxicated person had also been witnessed. The premises was also within the Cumulative Impact Policy Zone (saturation policy) and was in the vicinity of Hopetown Hostel which housed vulnerable persons with alcohol problems. Mr McCrohan commented that the Licensing Authority had no confidence that the premises were being managed in a way that supported the Licensing Objectives. He requested that the Premises Licence be revoked. If the Sub-Committee chose not to do so, there should be a period of suspension plus the addition of conditions as set out in his report.
PC Mark Perry of the Metropolitan Police stated that the premises was in a key position in the Brick Lane area, which had the second highest level of anti-social behaviour (ASB) and associated offences in the metropolitan area. The Hopetown Hostel liaison group had also expressed concerns that hostel users were being sold super strength lagers at cheap prices. Street drinkers were also able to obtain credit at the shop and this contributed to ASB. The Police also had no confidence that the premises was being managed appropriately and supported revocation of the licence, or the application of the conditions proposed by Mr McCrohan.
Ms Sandy Critchley indicated that she was speaking as a local resident and Chair of the Spitalfields Society and confirmed that the area was subject to high levels of ASB, which the Police were trying to reduce. She supported the review of the licence and felt that the efforts of the Police should be supported by revoking it. She agreed that the location of the premises comprised the main grounds for review, along with the sale of alcohol to vulnerable people from the hostel who were trying to get their lives back together. The premises had a very poor record for addressing the Licensing Objectives and had an adverse effect on ASB levels. She expressed the opinion that the licence should be revoked for these reasons.
Mr Miah, ... view the full minutes text for item 4.1 |
|
Additional documents: Minutes: At the request of the Chair, Mohshin Ali, Senior Licensing Officer, introduced the report which detailed the application for a new Premises Licence for Nisa Local, 9 Burdett Road, Mile End, London, E3 4TU. The application was for the sale of alcohol and the hours that had been applied for were:
Sale of Alcohol (on and Off sales) Ø Monday to Sunday from 08:30 hours to 23:00 hours
Hours premises are open to the public Ø Monday to Sunday from 07:00 hours to 23:00 hours
Mr Ali added that the application had previously been submitted to the Licensing Sub-Committee on 16 July 2013 with the address ’11 Burdett Road’, when it had been refused.
The Chair indicated that he would allow speakers 5 minutes for and against the application.
The Evidence
Robert Jordan, Agent for the applicant, indicated that his client had agreed to additional conditions as set out in the report previously circulated with the agenda pack. He commented that the only objection had been made on behalf of the Burdett Road Business Association but he had no information on any meeting of that Association which may have been held to formulate an objection. He had no information as to how many businesses comprised the Association and pointed out that no representations had been made by Responsible Authorities.
Mr Jordan added that his client had been given poor advice and had been poorly represented at the meeting when the application had been refused and on that occasion there had been confusion over the address of the premises by the previous agent. There was no evidence to suggest that his client would not uphold the Licensing Objectives and no evidence that any harm would result. The Objector had premises at 27 Burdett Road and claimed to represent all nearby businesses but no others had written in.
The shop manager, Khuram Iftikhar Sahi, would be obtaining relevant qualifications and would ensure that staff would receive appropriate training before alcohol was sold. The applicant was a member of the Nisa organisation and would follow their code of practice for alcohol sales. 14 CCTV cameras were installed in the premises and there was no evidence not to grant the application.
Didhar Hussain, speaking in objection to the application, stated that the application for 11 Burdett Road had been refused as it was located in a high crime area frequented by street drinkers and drug dealers. He had started working with the Police two years ago and crime levels had reduced massively but there were still concerns relating to the location and there was a bus stop less than 20m. away that was used by primary and secondary school students. He had seen some recent examples of anti-social behaviour and any sales of alcohol in the area would trigger the same effects as there had been two years ago.
Following questions from Members, Mr Jordan stated that: § A fresh application had been made, rather than an ... view the full minutes text for item 4.2 |
|
ANY OTHER BUSINESS THAT THE CHAIR CONSIDERS URGENT PDF 82 KB Additional documents: Minutes: Nil items.
|