Agenda and minutes

(Agenda Item 1)

               Apologies were received from Councillor E Prescott who was substituted by Councillor Haley

The Chair will consider the admission of any late items of urgent business.  (Late items will be considered under the agenda item where they appear.  New items will be dealt with at item 9 below).

(Agenda Item 2)

               Item 7 on the Agenda (Lomnava) was withdrawn from the Agenda because the applicant withdrew his application for a new premises license.

Item 8 on the Agenda (Bingol) was withdrawn from the Agenda because it was mistakenly thought to be in Cllr. Haley’s ward and will be heard at a later date.

A member with a personal interest in a matter who attends a meeting of the Authority at which the matter is considered must disclose to that meeting the existence and nature of that interest at the commencement of that consideration, or when the interest becomes apparent.

A members with a personal interest in a matter also has a prejudicial interest in that matter if the interest is one which a member of the public with knowledge of the relevant facts would reasonably regard as so significant that it is likely to prejudice the member’s judgement of the public interest.

(Agenda Item 3)

            No declarations of interest were received.

To approve the minutes of the previous meetings of the Licensing Sub-Committee C held on 8 December 2005 (attached).

(Agenda Item 4)

               RESOLVED

That the Committee approves the minutes of the meetings of Licensing Sub-Committee C of 8 December 2005.

To consider an application for a NEW Premises Licence.

(Agenda Item 5).

               The Licensing Officer, Daliah Barrett presented the Report for the New Premises License to the Committee highlighting the current position in terms of the operation of the premises. Ms Barrett reported that the premises had been the centre of enforcement action. The applicant had kept the premises open constantly on a 24 hour basis. The matter was taken to court and costs were awarded to the Council in the amount of £3000 for operating without a license. Ms Barrett finally reported that the premises had continued to operate on a 24 hour basis. Ms Barrett also highlighted to the Committee that the current application was not for the sale of alcohol because the applicant did not possess a personal license. Once this was received, the applicant could then apply for a license for the sale of alcohol. Ms Barrett continued that there had been a number of representations against the application. The Enforcement Services had submitted comments to the application. The Noise Team commented on the application and advised that the premise was served with a noise abatement notice for noise emanating from the extractor fan.  The Heavy Enforcement Team had witnessed the premises open and trading in the early hours of the morning and the matter had been referred to legal. Ms Barrett highlighted that the Fire Officer had objected to the application, but that this had been withdrawn. The Planning Officer had objected the application on the grounds that the premises were not permitted to be operated between 07:00 or after midnight on Monday to Saturday and not at all on Sundays or Bank Holidays under the terms of its planning consent. Finally, Ms Barrett highlighted that there had been 3 letters of objection to the applicant for interested parties.

               The Chair invited questions to the Licensing Officer. The applicant, Mr Nizamettin Kovaycin, asked Ms Barrett why the Enforcement Services claimed the premises were opened for 24 hours. Ms Barrett replied by given evidence of an occasion when the premises was found to be open at 05:00. Councillor Haley asked Ms Barrett when the premises were last visited by Enforcement Services. The reply was that Heavy Enforcement had visited in January 2006, and the Noise Team had visited in December 2005. The Chair asked why the Fire Officer had withdrawn his representation. Ms Barrett replied that the fire equipment within the premises had been up-dated, but that she was not sure if CCTV cameras had been installed. Mr Sygrave, representing the Ladder Community Safety Partnership (LCSP), objector, asked Ms Barrett to clarify the hours applied for. Ms Barrett confirmed that although the application form itself stated 03:00 on Friday and Saturday nights, the applicant had amended the hours to Monday to Sunday 08:00 to 02:00.

               The Chair invited the objectors to address the Committee. Mr Sharman, an objector resident of Green Lanes, read out the content of the letter of representation re-emphasising that the premises was open on a 24 hour basis and that  ...  view the full minutes text for item 29.

To consider an application for a NEW Premises Licence.

(Agenda Item 6).

The Licensing Officer, Daliah Barrett presented the Report for the New Premises License to the Committee highlighting the current position in terms of the operation of the premises. The premises had been the centre of enforcement action. The previous owner of the premises had pleaded guilty to operating without a license and was fined £2500 and that the premises had been found to be open without a license past 23:00 since this fine. Ms Barrett informed the Committee that the representation against the application by the Fire Officer had been withdrawn since the measures required by the Fire Authorities had been implemented. Ms Barrett also notified the Committee of concerns raised by the Planning Officer. There was one letter of objection from an interested party.

              The Chair invited questions to the Licensing Officer. Mr Sygrave, representing the Ladder Community Safety Partnership (LCSP), objector, asked Ms Barrett to clarify when the premises had been found to be open beyond 23:00. Ms Barrett replied by listing dates and times of the offending occasions on 20 November 2005 (02:15) and 22^nd January 2006 (02:15).

              The Chair invited the objector to address the Committee. Mr Sygrave, objector on behalf of the LCSP raised his concerns over the operating schedule that had been submitted as part of the application stating that it did not tackle directly the four objectives of the licensing laws and this raised concerns to him because of the levels of crime and anti-social disorder in the area around the premises. Mr Sygrave asked the applicant to compromise in his application by bringing the closing hours applied for to 12midnight on weekends, and 02:00 on weekends. The Legal Adviser, Maria Bilbao, asked Mr Sygrave if there was any evidence of crime and anti-social behaviour being attributable to the premises. Mr Sygrave replied that there was no evidence.

              The Chair invited the applicant, Mr Orhan Kati, to address the Committee. Mr Kati stated that he was new to the business (since 21^st October 2005). He informed the Committee that there had been no criminal activity related to his premises and that he supported efforts to prevent it. Mr Kati rejected Mr Sygrave’s request for shorter opening hours on the grounds that he had not received any complaints from local residents or other residents’ groups. Mr Kati continued by highlighting that a public house was situated next to his premises which operated longer hours. He claimed that there was more likely to be nuisance emanating from this establishment.  He also stated that there was no evidence that parking had been a problem attributable to the premises. At the request of the Chair, Mr Kati gave reasons for the two occasions the premises were found to be open beyond its licensed hours. On 20 November 2005, this was four weeks after Mr Kati had taken over the running of the premises , and there had been a mis-communication in respect of the what hours the license permitted the premises  ...  view the full minutes text for item 30.

To consider an application for a NEW Premises Licence.

Withdrawn

To consider an application for a Late Night Premises Licence.

Withdrawn

To consider any new items admitted under item 2 above.

(Agenda Item 7).

              None