Agenda and draft minutes

Councillor Graham welcomed everyone to the meeting and officers and members introduced themselves.  The procedure for the conduct of the meeting was outlined.

There were no apologies for absence..

There were no declarations of substitute members.

If you have a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest* in an item of business:

§  if it is not yet on the council’s register, you must declare both the existence and details of it at the start of the meeting or when it becomes apparent;

§  you may choose to declare a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest that is already in the register in the interests of openness and transparency. 

In both the above cases, you must leave the room without participating in discussion of the item.

If you have a personal interest in an item of business and you intend to speak or vote on the item you must declare both the existence and details of it at the start of the meeting or when it becomes apparent but you may participate in the discussion and vote on the item.

*(a)Employment, etc - Any employment, office, trade, profession or vocation carried on for profit or gain.

(b) Sponsorship - Any payment or other financial benefit in respect of your expenses in carrying out duties as a member, or of your election; including from a trade union.

(c) Contracts - Any current contract for goods, services or works, between you or your partner (or a body in which one of you has a beneficial interest) and the council.

(d) Land - Any beneficial interest in land which is within the council’s area.

(e) Licences- Any licence to occupy land in the council’s area for a month or longer.

(f) Corporate tenancies - Any tenancy between the council and a body in which you or your partner have a beneficial interest.

 (g) Securities - Any beneficial interest in securities of a body which has a place of business or land in the council’s area, if the total nominal value of the securities exceeds £25,000 or one hundredth of the total issued share capital of that body or of any one class of its issued share capital. 

This applies to all members present at the meeting.

There were no declarations of interest.

The order of business would be as per the agenda.

RESOLVED

That the minutes of the meeting held on the 20^th April 2023 be confirmed as a correct record and the Chair be authorised to sign them.

The Licensing Officer reported one update to the Sub Committee, that one representation had been withdrawn.

The Licensing Officer also informed the Sub Committee that this was a new application which if granted would supersede the existing licence, and that officers were working to get the existing licence surrendered.

The Licensing Authority, in their verbal representation to the Sub Committee, made note that the existing licence had longer, overall, operating hours than that requested in the new application put forward before the Sub Committee. If granted of which the overall operating hours would be reduced, although weekend hours would still be two hours over policy.

The Licensing Authority also put forward concerns regarding noise, and suggested a condition that all deliveries to the premises should be by non-motor vehicles such as e-Bikes and scooters.

The Police, in their verbal representation to the Sub Committee, made note that the premises initially came to their attention due to an incident under the previous operators. The current operators engaged well with the Police, to which the Police encouraged them to obtain either the current licence by way of a transfer, or a new premises licence entirely. The Police highlighted that the current operators (the applicant) had accepted their recommendations and generally made a good impression, but their objection was primarily regarding the failure of the applicant to obtain the old licence from the previous operator, and that if the licence was granted, would constitute another premises in the area that would be operating outside of framework area. The Police did, however, make clear to the Sub Committee that they were pleased the new licence applied for, will have enforceable conditions on it.

The applicant, in their verbal representation to the Sub Committee, highlighted that they had been at the premises for a number of years with no issues regarding customers and/or delivery drivers since the business started, and that when there was, they engaged with the Police immediately. The applicant stressed that the business was their living, and that they take pride in customer service and the quality of their products, and always trying to improve their service.

There were no interested parties, residential or business, in attendance at the hearing to raise verbal objections to the Sub Committee.

In summing up, the Licensing Authority highlighted that should the new licence be granted there would be fewer operating hours during the week than currently permitted, and through the conditions on the new licence, the local authority would have greater powers to enforce.

In summing up, the Police highlighted that then they visited the applicant, they discussed the proposed conditions, and was assured by the applicant that it could be abided by. The Police also went on to state that the premises was quite small, and thus the number of patrons on the premises at any given time, would also be small in number.

In summing up, the applicant stressed to the Sub Committee that they already try to alleviate crowding concerns at their  ...  view the full minutes text for item 52.

The Licensing Officer informed the Sub Committee that the correct opening hours were as per the front page of the report in the agenda, rather than the hours listed in the application form; the discrepancy was due to the hours being changed after the applicant had discussed with the Police.

In their verbal representation to the Sub Committee, the interested party stressed that the area in and around the Triangle Estate had suffered from a lot of alcohol-related anti-social behaviour, and that the number of establishments in the area, had contributed to high instances of noise, public urination and vomiting.  The interested party cited the number of other representations that had been made regarding this application as evidence of local concern regarding anti-social behaviour. The interested party also outlined that they felt another alcohol-licensed premises in the vicinity would worsen the problem of anti-social behaviour, and that permitting the use of the outdoor space late on Fridays and Saturdays would result in increased smoke and noise. The interested party also stated that there was the possibility of noise emanating from inside the premises itself, that the increase in trading hours were significant and that there appeared to be a lack of kitchen facilities on-site.

In response to the Interested Party’s representation, the Licensing Officer informed the Sub Committee that the interested party had made several points that were not in their formal submission, therefore neither the applicant or the Sub Committee would have had an opportunity to consider or verify this. 

In their verbal representation to the Sub Committee, the applicant stated that they had unfortunately been unable to meet objectors in person. The applicant also went to state that they were not aiming to create a pub, but a welcoming atmosphere that was quieter than neighbouring establishments, in which they could offer such things as wine and coffee tasting. The applicant stated that their clientele is primarily from nearby universities, and that while they have not encountered any issues yet, they were aware of issues in surrounding areas. Don’t think there will be an issue. There are lots of off licences and pub, target is not creating a pub. The applicant stated that they share the same concerns as residents regarding public urination and highlighted that they permit the public use of their toilets free of charge to help with the problem. The applicant also made note that they didn’t believe that there would be noise from their premises, and that they were trying to be part of the local area, and not a hindrance to it.

In response to questions from the Sub Committee, the applicant informed the meeting that they operate as a coffee shop, with an outside area that had very limited seating. The applicant stated that each day they have approximately 40-45 customers, but rarely any higher, and the profile of their customers were not revellers or disruptive, but quieter and well-mannered.

In response to questions from the Sub Committee, the applicant clarified that the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 53.

The Licensing Officer reported one update to the Sub Committee that since the publication of the report, the Planning Officer had confirmed that the premises did have the correct planning permission.

In their verbal representation to the Sub Committee, the first interested party raised concerns regarding the length of the operating hours, specifically the closing times on Friday and Saturday nights; that the premises was within a cumulative impact area; and that the restaurant had very high ceilings and that it currently hd ineffective sound proofing, which the interested party said would result in noise reverberating and affect residents above. The interested party also stated that the premises had always closed at 11pm because of noise issues and cited the closing times of other restaurants in the vicinity to support their representation.

In their verbal representation to the Sub Committee, the second interested party raised concerns regarding noise, and stated that there had been noise issues with previous occupants of the premises, despite each previous tenant giving similar assurances. The interested party stated that the noise came from within property, outdoor seating, and extractor fans, but that their main objection was the proposed later opening hours.

In their verbal representation to the Sub Committee, the third interested party raised concerns regarding noise late at night, the later licensable hours of operation and that the granting of the application would set a precedent for other establishments in the area.

The Sub Committee informed the interested parties that conditions 9 and 10 address the issue of noise from the premises and that in the event of either condition being breached, the licensee would have to take action.

In their verbal representation to the Sub Committee, the legal representative of the applicant outlined that they were grateful for the Sub Committee reading the material in advance, that their client had experience in operating restaurants, and was committed to the local community and the building, which had been occupied by squatters. The Legal Representative went on to state that they hadn’t received responses to their letters to the interested parties, but that the door remained open to feedback, and that they were grateful at the indication that the objections were not to the application in principle, but the hours of operation. The Legal Representative continued, stating that the premises’ use matched licensing policy and promoted the licensing objectives, and the desire for additional customers was to make the business viable. It was also stated to the Sub Committee that the purpose of requesting after hours was about ensuring controlled departures from second seatings, which they hoped would be less likely to disturb residents; and that there was an existing licensing footprint at the site for late night hours of operation.

In their verbal representation to the Sub Committee, the applicant stated that they had a good relationship with all neighbours. The applicant went on to state that squatters had caused damage and nuisance to the property which had to be addressed, and that they  ...  view the full minutes text for item 54.