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.

There were no declarattherions of interest.

The rules of procedure were noted.

To confirm as a correct record the minutes of the Licensing Sub-Committee held on 19^th & 26^th July and 10^th August 2022.

The minutes of the meetings held on 19^th and 26^th July and 10^th August 2022 were agreed and approved as a correct record. 

At the request of the Chair, Ms Kathy Driver, Licensing Officer, introduced the report which detailed the application for a variation of the premises licence for Liberty Lounge, 1A Bell Lane, London E1 7LA. It was noted that objections had been received on behalf of residents and Environmental Health.

At the request of the Chair, Mr Robert Botkai, Legal Representative on behalf of the Applicant explained that there had been positive dialogue between the Applicant, the Environmental Health Officer and Mr Randall Thiel representing the SPIRE Residents Association and had agreed on conditions.

Mr Botkai briefly stated that the application was seeking an additional one hour on the Thursday Friday and Saturday for the sale of alcohol. The Premises would therefore close at 01:00 hours on Thursday and 02:00 hours on Fridays and Saturdays. The police were content with the application. In addition, they had engaged with Randall Thiel of SPIRE and Ms. Cadzow of the Environmental Health service. Both were content with a condition he had proposed to be added, the effect of which would be that on transfer of the premises licence from Mr. Kerr the hours would revert back to the pre-variation hours.  He said that the additional 30 minutes drinking up time initially applied for had now been withdrawn so no further alteration to the terminal hour would be made. It was also noted that they had met with the Police who had also agreed with the hours and conditions being offered hence there was no representation made by the Police.

Mr Botkai also explained that having met with Nicola Cadzow, Environmental Health Officer and Randall Thiel, they had now changed their position for objection. He stated that he was very conscious that that the premises was in the cumulative impact area where they needed to rebut the presumption of additional impact. He explained that the premises was a very small specialist cocktail bar with a maximum capacity of 65 people and had almost exclusively pre booked attendance at the premises. It had enough seating capacity with limited spacing for vertical drinking. It was noted that due to the nature of the premises, it was almost invisible to the outside world; passers-by could walk past and simply not know that the premises was there. They were underneath a discount suit shop, which is why it was called Discount Suit Company.

In order to demonstrate exceptional circumstances, the applicant had instructed an independent private investigator whose report concluded that there was nothing to be seen outside late at night when customers were leaving it was seen to be very quiet departures causing no nuisance.

Mr Botkai then explained that they had reached an agreement by way of condition that would apply if the licence is transferred out of Mr Kerr’s name or his companies name then the terminal hour will revert to the original hours of the current premises licence. Therefore, if the licence is transferred to another owner they would be taking it subject to the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.1

At the request of the Chair, Ms Kathy Driver, Licensing Officer, introduced the report which detailed the application for a variation of the premises licence for The Breakhouse Café, Unit 17 Bloc River Bank, 455 Wick Lane, London E3 2TB. It was noted that objections had been received on behalf of two residents and a local ward Councillor with nine others supporting the premises. It was noted that no objectors were present at the meeting and therefore Members of the Licensing Sub Committee would note and consider the written representations contained in the agenda pack.

At the request of the Chair, Mr Craig Baylis, Legal Representative on behalf of the Applicant explained that it was a small café situated in an industrial estate, with no residential properties in close vicinity. It had a capacity of 25 and noted that the business had suffered financial hardship during the pandemic. He then went on to state the variations applied for;

1.    To permit off sales for delivery or off-site catering

2.    Amend condition 8 in Annex 3 to permit the external area to be used until 23:00 hours

3.    To replace condition 3 in Annex 3 with the following condition “Substantial food shall be available throughout the premises at all times.”

4.    To permit supply of alcohol on the premises from 09:00 hours subject to the following condition “The supply of alcohol between 09:00 hours and midday shall only be ancillary to a meal.

5.    ” To add films as a licensable activity between 12:00 hours and 23:00 hours everyday.

Mr. Baylis also dealt briefly with the objections. He expressed disappointment that Cllr. Blake had not attended the premises despite being invited as, had she done so, she would have seen her fears were groundless. JB Riney expressed concerns but the Premises had operated without incident since April 2021 and If there had been road safety issues, the police would no doubt have objected to the application. Mr. Dover lived some distance from the Premises and much of what he said were fears and speculations and groundless with no evidence to suggest any public nuisance are associated with the premises.

In response to questions the following was noted;

-       That the applicant had previous experience of managing late night venues.

-       That the premises had been trading for the past two years.

-       That it was a food-led premises and serving alcohol during the earlier hours applied for allowed more flexibility to cater for breakfasts and brunches.

-       That there had been no complaints reported.

-       The variation to remove the condition that alcohol be ancillary to food was to give more flexibility to patrons.

-       Off-sales for delivery were sought because the Premises did deliver food to nearby businesses.

-       That the premises was in an area where there were warehouses and music studios and other late night venues, with the area being in constant use.

-       That there had been occasions where the Applicant had provided CCTV footage from  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.2

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.

Nil items.