Agenda and draft minutes

Paddington Bowling & Sports Club, Castellain Road, W9

16/10999/LICV

1.

Supply of alcohol to members or guests (On & Off)

Amendments to application advised at hearing:

The Applicant submitted additional information prior to the hearing.  This included an amendment to the proposed terminal hours for on and off sales Monday to Thursday.  The hours proposed were as follows:

Monday to Thursday 11:00 to 23:00

Friday to Saturday 11:00 to 00:00

Sunday 12:00 to 22:30

Decision (including reasons if different from those set out in report):

As included in the additional information submitted by the Applicant and in Ms Lawrance’s presentation of the item, the Applicant had offered additional conditions to those included in the report.  These included that ‘the use of external areas by members and guests shall cease at 23:00 Monday to Saturday and 22:30 on Sundays save for use by smokers’.

In order to assist those present, Mr Panto set out the differences between a variation of a club premises certificate and a variation of a premises licence.  In respect of the club premises certificate, the licensable activities or qualifying club activities are restricted to the membership, guests and associated membership (an example of the associated membership in this case was Hampstead & Westminster Hockey Club).  It was not generally an authorisation that enabled the public to attend the premises.  The organisation had to be a non-profit organisation.  There were fewer restrictions than for a premises licence, including the fact that late night refreshment did not need to be applied for.  There was not a requirement for a Designated Premises Supervisor or a personal licence holder.

The Sub-Committee heard from Mr Bradley, representing the Applicant.  He stated that the premises had been operating at the site for over a century.  There had been relatively few issues raised in relation to the premises over recent years.  He appreciated that a number of residents had raised concerns  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3.

The Seashell Restaurant, Ground Floor, 49-51 Lisson Grove, NW1

16/11829/LIPV

1.

To extend the licensable area to include the private pavement in Lisson Grove

Amendments to application advised at hearing:

None.

Decision (including reasons if different from those set out in report):

The Sub-Committee heard from Mr Herridge.  He stated that the premises building at 49-51 Lisson Grove is licensed for the sale of alcohol as is the Applicant’s private pavement at Shroton Street.  He was now seeking to sell alcohol to customers sitting at the three to four chairs per table at four tables on the private forecourt in Lisson Grove.  Mr Herridge clarified in response to the residents’ written representations that there were no proposed changes to the hours of operation.  He was not aware of any concerns regarding the operation of the outside area in Shroton Street.  He did not believe that issues would arise as a result of extending the licensable area to include the private pavement in Lisson Grove.  If there were likely to be any problems he was keen to address these.  There would continue to be rubbish collections on a regular basis.

The Sub-Committee was addressed by Ms Kasman, a local resident who lives in the building immediately next to the restaurant.  She commented that the takeaway service has a very limited seating capacity.  Customers congregated outside and as there were only four tables they used the pavement area in front of where she lived, 53-55 Lisson Grove, to consume food.  The customers in front of 53-55 Lisson Grove talked loudly or shouted. They also made a loud noise from banging into the railings in front of the property, often with their bikes.  Smokers threw their cigarettes into the basement of the building   Ms Kasman informed the Sub-Committee that she has a small child whose bedtime is the peak time for the Seashell takeaway service and she was scared by the various noises.  All of the bedrooms in the family flat faced towards Lisson Grove.   She did not believe that there would be any complaints regarding the operation of the outside area in Shroton Street as there was no noise inside or outside in this particular area.

Ms Kasman stated that she did not have any issues with the cleanliness of the takeaway service or the way in which the outside area was cleaned.  Any issues were due to the behaviour of some of the customers outside and their response to the limited seating capacity.  She was concerned that if the Applicant was permitted to sell alcohol to customers who would consume it on the private pavement in Lisson Grove, there would be a similar scenario to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

130 Edgware Road, W2

16/08273/LIPN

1.

Late Night Refreshment (Indoors)

Monday to Sunday 23:00 to 03:00

Amendments to application advised at hearing:

Al-Hairi stated that the Applicant was seeking a terminal hour of 01:00 for late night refreshment (indoors).

Decision (including reasons if different from those set out in report):

As set out in the report and in Ms Lawrance’s presentation of the item, there is an existing licence for the premises which permitted on and off sales, late night refreshment and performance of dance and live music to Core Hours.  A new application had been submitted on behalf of the Applicant, Mr Shadi Al Said Ahmad requesting late night refreshment to 03:00 Monday to Sunday with the opening hours applied for being until 23:00.

The Sub-Committee requested clarification on what proposed hours the Applicant was seeking.  Mr Al-Hairi, representing the Applicant, stated that the Applicant was seeking a terminal hour of 01:00 for late night refreshment (indoors).  He accepted that there had been an error on the application form and the Applicant was now seeking a closing time to the public of 01:00.  He confirmed that the Applicant did not want to sell alcohol at the premises.

The Sub-Committee expressed concerns that there had been a consultation on the basis of the hours applied for.  It was possible that the lack of representations from residents or businesses had resulted from the incorrect opening hours set out on the application form.  It was also the case that the Sub-Committee did not tend to grant hours, including the hours premises are open to the public, in excess of those applied for.

Ms Lawrance advised that the existing premises licence had not been surrendered and no application for transfer had been submitted.  Mr Panto informed the Sub-Committee that the Director of the existing licence holder company was Mr Sherwani.  Mr Al-Hairi provided the information that his client Mr Shadi Al Said Ahmad had been a sous chef when the premises had operated under the existing premises licence.  He was now a manager and wanted to be a licence holder at the premises.  The existing premises licence holder had moved to the north of Iraq.

The Sub-Committee explored possible legal options with Mr Panto.  Mr Panto confirmed in relation to a possible transfer of the existing premises licence that such an application could be submitted but this could only proceed if the current licence holder gives consent.  Mr Panto added that if the Sub-Committee was minded to grant the application, it was not possible to demand the surrender of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

Muse Soho, 23 Frith Street, W1

16/13402/LITENP

The Premises User had submitted a Temporary Event Notice (‘TEN’) for sale by retail of alcohol (on sales), supply of alcohol, provision of regulated entertainment and provision of late night refreshment from 20:00 on 20 December 2016 to 04:00 on 21 December 2016.  The Police and Environmental Health had objected.  The Police’s concerns had been addressed as a result of an agreement with the Premises User that the conditions on the premises licence 15/03256/LIPCHT would apply for the period of the Temporary Event Notice.

The Premises User, Mr Rai and the Police were not in attendance at the hearing.  Ms Curtis advised the Sub-Committee that she had maintained her objection to the TEN.  Condition 14 on the current premises licence stated that ‘the number of persons accommodated at the premises shall be 60 persons excluding staff’.  However, the Premises User was applying for a capacity of 110 persons including staff.  She informed the Sub-Committee that there had been examples of the Premises User requesting increased capacities for TENs including for the Pride event in June 2016 and these had not been objected to.  However, 110 persons including staff had not been requested before.  Ms Curtis considered she could not remove her objection without the Premises User reducing the proposed capacity or supplying a Fire Risk assessment demonstrating that 110 persons can be safely accommodated and able to access and egress the premises.  She added that two late TENs had been received from the Premises User and there had not been sufficient time to propose modifications.  Counter notices had therefore been issued in response to the late TENs.

The Legal Adviser to the Sub-Committee, Mr Panto, also pointed out that the “agreement” reached between the Police and the Premises User had no legal effect as such a modification of the TEN could only be achieved by agreement between all the parties, including Environmental Health. However, he pointed out that the Licensing Sub-Committee could itself attach the conditions to the TEN if it considered it appropriate to do so and that could be a means of securing a reduction in capacity as the lesser capacity on the licence would have to override the larger capacity indicated on the TEN itself. 

Ms Curtis stated that she had attempted on a number of occasions to contact Mr Rai but he had not responded to any of her communications following his agreement of the Police’s terms.  Ms Curtis was asked by the Sub-Committee whether if all the conditions on the premises licence 15/03256/LIPCHT were attached to the premises licence, including that ‘the number of persons accommodated at the premises shall be 60 persons excluding staff’’ this would address her concerns.  She replied that it  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.