Agenda and minutes

To agree the procedure rules for remote meetings.

RESOLVED –

THAT the guidance on remote meetings be noted.

There were no apologies.

There were no declarations of interest.

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, this meeting is being recorded and broadcast live by the Council to the Internet and can be viewed on our website for six months after the meeting. After that time, recordings are archived and can be made available upon request.

If you address the meeting, you are deemed to consent 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 were no notifications of urgent business.

To approve the minutes of the meeting held on 6^th July 2023.

RESOLVED –

THAT the minutes of the meeting held on 6^th July 2023 be approved and signed as a correct record.

Report of the Executive Director, Supporting Communities.

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

Consideration was given to a report of the Executive Director, Supporting Communities detailing an application for a new premises licence under Section 17 of the Licensing Act 2003.

The Licensing Officer introduced the report and highlighted that it was an application for late night refreshment and not for alcohol. Conditions had been agreed with the Police, which were included at Appendix 4 of the agenda, and the Police had withdrawn their representation.

The Panel noted the written representations made by Interested Parties in relation to this application, and also listened to a verbal submission from Maria Cristina Regalado Peynetti who spoke further to her written submission.

The key points in Ms Regalado Peynetti’s submission were:

·       She wanted to ensure that customers would not be arriving at the premises.

·       She was of the view that delivery drivers congregating outside on motorbikes would cause public nuisance due to noise and would block the entrance to residential buildings in the vicinity.

·       Noise late at night would particularly disturb families with children and pets.

Members asked questions of Ms Regalado Peynetti to ascertain the layout of the area.

The Applicant, Pietromasso Lisi, addressed the Panel and the key points in his submission were:

·       The premises would not be open to the public. All orders would be collected by delivery drivers and delivered to customers.

·       Orders would be ready for the drivers to collect promptly, and thus there would be no need for drivers to loiter outside.

·       Drivers would park on Buckley Road and so not be obstructing the entrance to residential properties on Espalier Gardens.

·       Most delivery drivers had electric bikes and would not be generating much engine noise.

·       There would not be a significant number of drivers waiting outside at the same time, as the business had averaged one order every 35 minutes.

·       The firm operating the premises was an experienced operator, which had about 40 similar kitchens throughout the country.

Members queried whether the business would be viable with one order every 35 minutes and Mr Lisi said that the orders tended to be high value.

Mr Lisi was asked about his approach to drivers who were behaving inconsiderately. He acknowledged that he did not have direct control over the drivers, who worked via apps such as Deliveroo, but said he would not want to work with drivers who were ‘repeat offenders’ in terms of bad behaviour. He wanted to keep his neighbours happy as they themselves were potential customers.

Following the questioning of Mr Lisi, concluding remarks were made by both Parties and the Panel commenced deliberation in public.

Panel Decision and Reasons

Members commented that they had been reassured by what had been said during the hearing, and that they were minded to grant the application subject to suitable conditions.

Members noted that there were some duplicate conditions in the two lists of conditions at Appendix 4. The Chair commented that the Police conditions were more comprehensive but that Condition 2 in the ‘Officer’s summary of conditions  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

Report of the Executive Director, Supporting Communities.

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

Consideration was given to a report of the Executive Director, Supporting Communities detailing an application for a new premises licence under Section 17 of the Licensing Act 2003.

The Licensing Officer introduced the report and added that conditions had been agreed between the Police, an Interested Party (the Charlotte Street Association) and the Applicant.  These agreed conditions were at Appendix 4 of the report.

Members noted the one remaining objection from an Interested Party. 

The Applicant, Itamar Srulovich, spoke to his application and emphasised that it was a family-run business and that there had been no anti-social behaviour in premises that he had operated. He said that the business had a good track record of operation in Westminster.

Members noted that Paragraph 3.5 of the report said that the premises did not include the Council’s women’s safety principles. They asked Mr Srulovich why this was.

Mr Srulovich said that he ran the business together with his wife and they were committed to ensuring a safe environment for their female patrons and staff. However, he was of the view that some of these principles, such as “Ask Angela” were not practical to apply in a restaurant setting as compared to a bar. He said that this had been discussed in their meeting with the Charlotte Street Association and the Association had taken on board his comments given the nature of the business.

Following closing remarks from Mr Srulovich, the Panel commenced deliberation in public.

Panel Decision and Reasons

Members were of the view that all licenced premises should have regard to the women’s safety principles, although they noted that the way they might apply would be different in a restaurant from a bar.

A Member proposed that the proposed condition (k) in the Charlotte Street Association submission at Appendix 3 was a condition that be added to the licence to require that Licence Holders and staff were trained and supportive in relation to issues around women’s safety. This was agreed by the Panel.

The Panel decided to grant the licence subject to the conditions at Appendix 4 and to the additional condition regarding women’s safety.

RESOLVED –

THAT a licence be granted for:

a)    Supply of Alcohol (For consumption on the premises)

10:30 – 22:30 Monday to Saturday

b)    Opening hours

08:00 – 22:30 Monday to Saturday

  THAT the following conditions be added to the licence:

Applicant’s Proposed Conditions

1.     protecting people from alcohol relates crimes and antisocial behaviour by refusing to provide alcohol to intoxicated patrons on thepremises.

2.     effective and responsible management of premises and trainingand supervision of staff. -installation ofCCTV

3.     alcohol will be kept behind thebar

4.     premises will be mend by minimum 3 member of staff at alltimes

5.     all front of house staff will be trained and briefed regarding sales of alcohol best practices by theDSP

6.     premises will have CCTV, shown in the floorplan

7.     suitable risk assessments will be put together -regular testing (and certification) of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

There was no other business.

Should the Panel wish to go into closed session, it will take the following resolution:

THAT the press and public be excluded from the proceedings of the Licensing Panel on 14 September 2023 during consideration of the respective item on the agenda on the grounds that it is likely, in view of the nature of the business to be transacted, that were members of the public to be present, there would be disclosure of exempt information as defined in Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972 (as amended) and that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information.

Specifically -

Publicity in respect of item x would be likely to lead to the disclosure of information in respect of which a claim to legal professional privilege could be maintained in legal proceedings by virtue of Category 5 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972 (as amended).