Agenda and minutes

To agree the procedure rules for remote meetings.

RESOLVED -

THAT the guidance on remote meetings be agreed.

An apology for absence was received from Councillor Olszewski. The Panel was quorate with two Members present.

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 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.”

Webcasting

The Chair announced that the meeting was being broadcast live to the internet and would be capable of repeated viewing and copies of the recording could be made available to those that requested them. Those participating in the meeting were deemed to be consenting to being filmed.

There was no urgent business.

Report of the Executive Director Supporting Communities

This is an application to review a premises licence under section 51 of the Licensing Act 2003.

Consideration was given to a report of the Executive Director Supporting Communities detailing an application to review a premises licence under Section 51 of the Licensing Act 2003.

Peter Agbley, Licensing Officer, summarised the report and explained that the application to review the licence had been lodged by a local resident because they did not believe that the four licensing objectives, the prevention of public nuisance, the prevention of crime and disorder, public safety, and the protection of children from harm, were being upheld. Representations in support of the review were received from the Police, Licensing Authority and Environmental Health Responsible Authorities.

The Licencing Officer reported that no representations had been submitted by interested parties, however 32 residents of Cranfield House were signatories to the application for review.

Anne Cosentino (Cranfield House RTM), on behalf of Mike Eden, accompanied by Barbara Sansei (Cranfield House resident), outlined the application for review and presented the Panel with video footage. The following key points were made:

• The premises had been responsible for ongoing disturbances and there was an apparent disregard of the law and licencing objectives by the Licence Holder.
• Patrons of the premises were often witnessed being noisy, rowdy, and loitering in the street.
• There were several restaurants situated in the local area, none of which generated disturbance to local residents and most closed at roughly 00:00hrs.
• The restaurant appeared to host frequent club style events, which the applicants for review believed were in breach of the premises licence. As such, the applicants for review did not believe that the premises was operating as a restaurant as stated.
• The club events generated excessive noise and antisocial behaviour into the early hours of the morning. Use of illegal substances and the sale of drugs had been witnessed taking place outside the venue by residents and video footage that evidenced this had been submitted.
• It appeared that no attempt had been made by the Licence Holder to control patrons in the area immediately outside the venue. 
• Residents should be able to live in a peace and not be subject to continued noise nuisance.
• Numerous complaints had been lodged by residents to several of the Responsible Authorities.

Due to the reasons stated, the applicant for review sought revocation of the premises licence. 

Responding to questions Anne Cosentino advised: 

·       Since the application for review was submitted, there had been less activity at the premises and, therefore, there had been fewer issues and no recent complaints had been made. The reduced activity could have been a result of the previous complaints and the submission of the application for review prompting the premises to scale back operations.

·       However, in the lead up to the festive period, which was usually very busy, there were concerns that operations could pick up again and give rise to further disturbance.

·       The conditions proposed by the Licencing Authority and Environmental Health Responsible Authorities had been reviewed by the applicant for review, but there was concern that these would not alleviate the issues  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

There was none.