Agenda and minutes

To agree the procedure rules for remote meetings.

RESOLVED –

THAT the guidance be agreed.

Apologies had been received by Councillor Jenny Headlam-Wells; Councillor Shah Miah was sitting as a substitute Panel Member.

There were no declarations.

Broadcast of the meeting

The Chair to announce the following: “In addition to the rights by law that the public and press have to record this meeting, I would like to remind everyone that this meeting is being recorded and broadcast live by the Council to the Internet and can be viewed on our website for at least six months after the meeting. After that time, webcasts are archived and can be made available on upon request.

If you have asked to address the meeting, you are deemed to be consenting to being filmed and to the use of those images and sound recordings for webcasting and/or training purposes. If you are addressing the Committee your contribution will be recorded and broadcast.”

Broadcast of the Meeting

The Chair made the following announcement: “In addition to the rights by law that the public and press have to record this meeting, I would like to remind everyone that this meeting is being broadcast live by the Council to the Internet and can be viewed on our website for six months after the meeting. After that time, webcasts are archived and can be made available upon request.

If you have asked to address the meeting, you are deemed to be consenting to having your contributions recorded and broadcast, including video when switched on, and to the use of those sound recordings and images for webcasting and/or training purposes.”

There was no urgent business.

To approve the minutes of the meeting held on 29 September 2022 and 16 February 2023.

RESOLVED –

THAT the minutes of the meetings held on 29 September 2022 and 16 February 2023 be approved.

Report of the Executive Director Supporting Communities

This is an application to vary a premises licence under section 34 of the Licensing Act 2003.

Consideration was given to a report of the Executive Director Supporting Communities detailing an application to vary a premises licence under section 34 of the Licensing Act 2003.

Dennis Viechweg, Licensing Officer, summarised the officer report.

PC Dominic Hallam, Metropolitan Police responsible authority summarised their representation opposing the application.

Sarah Williams, Licensing Authority responsible authority summarised their representation opposing the application.

In response to questions, the responsible authorities stated that no additional conditions had been offered by the Applicant to mitigate any potential negative impacts of operating during the later hours and that the Applicant had not responded to any of the concerns raised in the representations.

It was clarified by the responsible authorities that given the objective of the application to vary the licence was for the benefit of a prospective future owner of the premises, the responsible authorities were not able to assess the suitability of the future prospective premises licence holder as part of the process.

 Miho Kaneyasu, the Applicant, summarised the reasons for the application. It was confirmed that the current operation Japanese restaurant and the prospective future operation a late night chicken-led venue, were different business ventures. The application had been made at the request of the prospective new owners who wished to operate until later hours. As the variation was not intended for the Japanese restaurant they did not respond to the representations but had sent them to the new owners for them to respond but they did not.

Decision and Reasons

In their deliberations, Members stated that there was a presumption to refuse the application because the premises was in the Camden Town cumulative impact area. Having heard from the Applicant, it was clear there were no exceptional reasons that encouraged Members to be minded to grant the application, therefore Members would uphold the presumption and refuse the application.  Further Members stated that the hours applied for late night refreshments between 23:00 – 04:00 Monday to Sunday, would increase the likelihood of the occurrence of crime and disorder and public nuisance in the area and noted that the Applicant had not offered any additional conditions to promote the licence objectives or address the concerns raised by the responsible authorities. Members were also concerned that it appeared that the application was being made on behalf of someone else who intended to take over the business in the future who was not known to the Police, and it was not possible to determine whether they were responsible operators.

Members stated that the any future licence holder of the premises would be able to submit a further application at a later date once they had taken over the business.

RESOLVED –

THAT the application to vary the premises license be refused in its entirety in order the promote the licensing objectives.

Report of the Executive Director Supporting Communities

This is an application for a new premises licence under section 17 of the Licensing Act 2003.

This application was resolved ahead of the hearing and therefore was not considered by the Panel.

There was no urgent business.