To receive any apologies for absence.

None.

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 Chief Executive.

None.

To note the rules of procedure which are attached for information.

Noted.

Mr Cruse advised that the variation applied to extending the hours the premises were open for and the sale of alcohol to 03:00 hours on all days. Objections had been submitted by residents and Appendix 6 detailed conditions put forward by the Police following a meeting with the applicant.

The applicant advised that it was understood the resident objections related to rubbish in the alleyway beside the shop and which led past their front doors to the yard and parking area behind. The applicant advised that they were happy to install a bin within the alley and also outside the shop. An additional member of staff would also be employed from 11pm onwards to move people on if necessary.

The additional hours were to assist the business and were in line with other premises within the locality. As the premises was situated on a red route, business tended to be slow during the morning and evening rush hours.

Mrs Benjamin addressed the Committee in respect of her objections and on behalf of Mrs Maloney who was unable to be present. Both lived above the premises and were most directly affected by the application. Objection related to the misuse of the alley by those purchasing alcohol who loitered within the alley and used it as both a rubbish bin and urinal.

The applicant confirmed for Members that there was CCTV within the shop and that the Police had confirmed that it could also cover the alley. The alley was cleaned by them on a daily basis though this was not their responsibility. There had been no problems at the shop in the years they had managed and they wished to resolve the concerns raised.

Mrs Benjamin stated that she had seen people buying cans of drink from this shop and go down the alley; the car park at the rear was frequently covered in broken glass. The Chair ascertained that there were other premises close by that were also licensed for off-sales. Mrs Benjamin stated that she had not spoken directly to the applicant though she had remarked on it. Mr Dayal parked his car at the rear of the premises and must have noticed what goes on.

The applicant confirmed that there was a bin outside the shop and CCTV coverage though neither was located to address use of the alley. He was happy to locate bins and signage that would hopefully assist.

It was clarified that the only entrance to the rear yard, which was a parking and bin refuse area for the shops and residents, was from Mile End Road.

There being no further questions, the Chair advised that the Sub Committee would now, at 3.45pm, adjourn to consider the evidence presented. The Sub Committee reconvened at 3.55pm and the Chair reported that Members had resolved:

That the application to vary the Premises Licence for Davi Dayal Newsagents, 184 Mile End Road, London E1 4LJ, be GRANTED subject to amendment and the following conditions:   

Hours open to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.1

The clerk advised that this item had been withdrawn as the date had proved unsuitable for the majority of those involved in the application.

Mr Frayssinet stated that he had lived above the premises and had occupied the flat before the premises opened. Since opening, he had suffered noise nuisance from the premises due to the volume and type of music which, despite conversations with the owners and Environmental Health had continued.

Despite some attempts to remedy the situation, as there is no insulation between the licensed premises and the flat, music noise and vibration could be felt throughout the whole surface area of the flat and conversations within the premises could be heard. Mr Frayssinet stated that he had no wish to see the premises close only that work should be undertaken to remedy the problems.

Paul Johnson, Environmental Health, reported that he had dealt with the original licence application and had liaised with the applicant. An acoustic test had been carried out and believed to be acceptable but it had since been found that tests had only been carried out in one flat and not in the rooms that would have been considered most suitable. This explained why complaints had arisen immediately the premises opened. Informal talks and discussion had been held with all parties

Mr Johnson further reported that EH had visited Mr Frayssinet flat and the noise on voices alone constituted a serious noise nuisance. On this basis, EH officers believed it reasonable to recommend that until the acoustic problems could be resolved, the hours the premises should operate should be reduced until 11pm. Once the noise and acoustic problems had been resolved to the satisfaction of EH and a noise limiter installed, the premises could operate the hours previously granted.

Mr Veres and Mr Ahsan, two of the three licence holders, were present. They confirmed that the original acoustic test had been carried out in the other flat and they had no reason to believe that there would be any difference between the properties. A DJ was now only present on Friday and Saturday and some insulation work had been undertaken. Further tests and a report on the nuisance in Mr Frayssinet’s flat would be undertaken as problems seemed to be to this property alone. There was a wish to address the problem.

Mr Ahsan reported that he and Mr Veres had been unaware of the correspondence between EH and Mr Stewart (the other licence holder), until the agenda for this meeting had been received. On the basis of that information, another acoustic report had been done but the work could not start before 26 August at the earliest. Mr Ahsan advised that the landlord may assist with the problems being encountered.

Mr Frayssinet stated that he understood the situation but nothing had been done despite this being the situation for the last six months.

The Chair enquired what the applicants felt they could offer to alleviate the current situation. Mr Veres advised that they wanted to ensure that the work was carried out and could reduce the volume of the music.

There being no further questions, the Chair  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.3