Issue - meetings

To consider an application for a new premises licence.

Presentation by the Licensing Officer

Ms Daliah Barrett, Licensing Team Leader, informed the Sub-Committee that:

·         The applicant was seeking the timings shown on page 1.1 of the Licensing Officer’s report.

·         The hours open to the public would be from Sunday to Wednesday 08:00 to 00:30, Thursday 08:00 to 01:00 and Friday to Saturday 08:00 to 01:30, with sale of alcohol terminating half an hour before the terminal hour. 

·         The application could be found on appendix 1 in the agenda papers.

·         Representations had been submitted by various residents. A letter of support and a petition had been submitted by the applicant.

·         A dispersal policy had been submitted along with some CCTV footage.

·         The premises had operated as a public house for many years and had been operated by various businesses in the past in the last five years

·         An existing licence was in place and was part of the agenda papers.

·         The external front was surrounded by residential properties and no time had been offered for the use of the rear shisha area which was also an external area.

·         There was an attempt to get planning permission for a shisha area when it was under a different operator. It had been refused, but complications regarding planning legislation meant the area could be used by the applicant in any case. However, the area was still not a compliant shisha area in terms of the Health Act.

Presentation by the applicant

Mr Robert Sutherland, representing the applicant and Ms Bianca Mali, the applicant, informed the Sub-Committee that:

·         In relation to the external area, there was a condition on the current licence which referred to a terminal hour for the use of the front area of the premises. This was an external terrace area on the current licence said that it would cease to be used at 21:00 Monday to Sunday. This was intended to continue.

·         In relation to the shisha area, they were not looking to address the Sub-Committee regarding the matter.

·         In relation to the application, there had been an agreed set of conditions found towards the end of the agenda papers bundle. One of these had been amended which stated that the rear external area could be used until closing time, but the roof was to be closed at 22:30, after which no shisha was to be offered unless it was electronic shisha with no tobacco content. This condition was agreed apart from the hours at which the roof was closed. The applicant would like the terminal hour to be 00:00 or, preferably, until closing time. 

·         The applicant had been in the hospitality industry for around 10 years managing and operating licensed premises.

·         The applicant grew up in her family's business where she gained experience in being a responsible operator dealing with alcohol and being compliant with the law. She had also completed her level two award for her personal licence. She also had run a premises in London with her husband - a coffee shop – although not alcohol related,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6

To consider an application for a new premises licence.

Upon opening the meeting, Ms Daliah Barrett, the Licensing Team Leader, stated that some additional late papers had been received from the applicant.

In response to questions, Mr Bryan Barnes, resident, informed the Sub-Committee that:

·      He objected to additional documents being circulated as the hearing of the application had already been subject to delay.

In response to questions, Mr Shiekh Subrattee, resident, informed the Sub-Committee that:

·      He objected to additional documents being circulated as the applicant already had time to submit documents and the applicant should not be given an advantage.

In response to questions, Mr Robert Sutherland, the applicant’s representative, informed the Sub-Committee that:

·      As a matter of law, the documents were not late under the procedure of the Licencing Act and the regulations, but he accepted that they may not have been in accordance with the Council's timetable in relation to the Licencing Act.

·      Whilst he would say the documents and the video should be considered, the documents from the acoustic consultants were following on from a series of emails with the Noise and Nuisance team. A number of questions were raised by the head of the department causing a delay. That resulted in an additional document from the acoustic consultants which had to address particular questions. In addition, there was a dispersal plan that indicated how the premises would operate in relation to dispersal should the licence be granted. There was also a further update to the noise management plan. A copy of the noise management plan was contained within the original report. There were some minor changes to it. In respect of the video evidence, it would not be a surprise to the Sub-Committee that the basis of the complaints was not accepted by the by the applicant and the evidence of the CCTV was to demonstrate that the number of people inside of the premises was very small. On one occasion, it was only two and on another occasion, it was maybe four or five. Generally, the number of patrons inside of the venue at the times the complaints were made were very small. The final document was in relation to a statement from the DPS who was able to give direct evidence herself. It would assist if the Sub-Committee could see it, but the evidence could be provided orally. If the Sub-Committee was minded to adjourn the hearing to another date, then he would invite the Sub-Committee to continue with the hearing without the additional information.

At 7:29pm, the Sub-Committee decided to adjourn to deliberate. The Sub-Committee reconvened at 7:39pm.

RESOLVED:

The Sub-Committee returned to the meeting and the Chair stated that the Sub-Committee had deliberated on the matter of the documents that were submitted late and considered that the Licencing Act allowed Councils to set their own policies in relation to licencing and the documents were not submitted in accordance with Haringey Council's procedural rules. The Sub-Committee wished to have the time to consider the documents so it could make a decision  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6

To consider an application for a new premises licence.

The Licensing Team Leader informed that she had received communication on Friday from the applicant’s representative requesting the matter to be postponed. He had stated that his client had to leave the UK for a short period of time.

The application would be rescheduled to be heard on 3 February 2024.