Agenda and minutes

Licensing Sub-Committee - Thursday 13 January 2022 7.00 pm

Contact: Julia Skinner, Democratic Services,  020 7926 0147, Email: jskinner@lambeth.gov.uk

Items
No. Item

1.

Election of Chair

    Minutes:

    MOVED by Councillor Irfan Mohammed, SECONDED by Councillor Tim Windle

     

    RESOLVED: That Councillor Fred Cowell be elected Chair for the meeting.

     

2.

Declaration of Pecuniary Interests

Under Standing Order 4.4, where any councillor has a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest (as defined in the Members’ Code of Conduct (para. 4)) in any matter to be considered at a meeting of the Council, a committee, sub-committee or joint committee, they must withdraw from the meeting room during the whole of the consideration of that matter and must not participate in any vote on that matter unless a dispensation has been obtained from the Monitoring Officer.

 

 

Minutes:

There were none.

 

3.

Licensing Applications for the Grant / Review of a Premises Licence pdf icon PDF 352 KB

Strategic Director of Residents Services

Contact: Bina Patel, Licensing Manager, 0207 926 4103

Email: bpatel@lambeth.gov.uk

3a

El Rancho De LALO 1 Buckner Road London SW2 5BY (Brixton Hill Ward) pdf icon PDF 323 KB

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    Presentation by the Licensing Officer

    The Sub-Committee was informed that this was an application for a new premises licence. The Sub-Committee’s attention was drawn to chapters 2, 3, 8, 9, 10 and 16 of the Statutory Guidance, and to Sections 1, 3, 4, 8 and 17 of the Statement of Licensing Policy, as the ones particularly relevant to this application. The options available to the Sub-Committee were set out in paragraph 6 of the report on pages 10 and 11.

    In response to questions from Members, Mr Ola Owojori, Licensing Officer, confirmed:

    ·         This is an application for a premises licence, seeking authorisation for the Sale of Alcohol (consumption on and off the premises), Monday to Sunday from 10:00 to 23:00.

    ·         The opening hours for the premises were proposed as Monday to Sunday, 08:00 to 23:30.

    ·         Eight representations had been received against the application from local residents, based on the licensing objectives of prevention of public nuisance and protection of children from harm.

    ·         Mr Manuel Rocha was present as the agent representing the applicant and Mr Carlos Yepes, the applicant, was also present. 

    ·         Copies of the representations were provided to the applicant and attached as Annex B.

     

    Presentation by the Applicant,

    Mr Manuel Rocha, representing the applicant, Mr Carlos Yepes, informed the Sub-Committee that:

    ·         As a restaurant, El Rancho De LALO required the Sale of Alcohol to assist the business and the applicant employed approximately 14 staff members who depended on the business for income.

    ·         The applicant operated a similar premises in Brixton Market, which had had no issues with upholding the licensing objectives.

    ·         Local customers supported the business’ licensing obligations, and an outstanding service was evident in positive reviews.

    ·         The management had considered and understood the objectors’ concerns and had issued a written response. The applicant was satisfied with the proposed conditions to address these concerns.

    In response to questions from Members, Mr Manuel Rocha and Mr Carlos Yepes confirmed:

    ·         Vertical drinking was not permitted on the premises.

    ·         The new license sought to cover both delivery and takeaway for the Sale of Alcohol, as well as ordering alcohol to drink seated in the premises.

    ·         The intention was not to promote the sale of alcohol and conditions for food requirements covered off license sales as well.

    ·         There was an incident of noise nuisance on 6 November 2021 that had taken place during the day and the music or any complaints had also been regarding daytime music.

    ·         The applicant agreed to amend a condition set in conjunction with the Council’s noise technical requirements.

    ·         The area was prone to antisocial behaviour, but the staff members would not serve intoxicated clients.

    ·         As the premises was in proximity to residential homes, security training will be provided to staff, to assess the state of patrons and ensure no alcohol would leave the premises.

    ·         The applicant agreed to an additional condition that would not permit open containers outside the restaurant, which included smokers outside during dining.

    ·         Maximum capacity of the restaurant was approximately 50 people, so a  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3a

3b

Sainsbury's 18-22 Greyhound Lane London SW16 5SD (Streatham South Ward) pdf icon PDF 320 KB

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    The Sub-Committee was informed that this was an application for a new premises licence. The Sub-Committee’s attention was drawn to chapters 2, 3, 8, 9 and 10 of the Statutory Guidance, and to Sections 1, 3, 4 and 8 of the Statement of Licensing Policy, as the ones particularly relevant to this application. The options available to the Sub-Committee were set out in paragraph 6 of the report on page 52.

     

    In response to questions from Members, the Licensing Officer confirmed:

    ·         This is an application for a Premises Licence to allow for the sale of alcohol on Monday to Sunday from 08:00 to 23:00.

    ·         The applicant was seeking authorisation for the sale of alcohol for consumption off the premises, during the following times: Monday - Sunday 08:00 - 23:00.

    ·         The opening hours for the premises are proposed as Monday to Sunday from 00:00 to 23:59.

    ·         There was a representation received against the application from one local resident and it is based on the licensing objective of prevention of public nuisance.

     

    Presentation by the Applicant

    Solicitor to the applicant, Mr Robert Botkai and Licensing Manager, Joanne Surguy, informed the Sub-Committee that:

    ·         The applicant had offered additional conditions in agreement with the Licensing Authority, which included the reduction of hours sought for the sale of alcohol.

    ·         The applicant was not applying for a 24 hour license and could be more appropriately called a ‘7/11’.

    ·         This particular corner on Greyhound Lane was in need of redevelopment and applying for the sale of alcohol on Monday to Sunday from 08:00 to 23:00 was shorter than other premises typical of the area.

    ·         The applicant and their representative had communicated with the Licensing Authority and had agreed with the imposed conditions, as specified on page 69 of the agenda pack. The first nine conditions had been put forward with the application and conditions 10 to 13 had been agreed with the Licensing Authority.

    ·         There were approximately 20 to 25 people employed at the store, who would provide training.

    In response to questions from Members, the applicant confirmed:

    ·         In order to mitigate the issue of street drinking, the staff training provided was high profile and equipped staff with the skills to prevent this activity from happening.

    ·         There was an intensive ‘Think 25’ programme, which had been written by a Police Officer from Richmond who was knowledgeable in this area.

    ·         Staff could not start working on the floor until the Think 25 training was complete and this was refreshed every six months.

    ·         The internal system meant that the management team could ensure this was adhered to and most retailers followed a similar process.

    ·         Staff were observed when working on the till and Think 25 workshops were held around the country, where colleagues would sit and discuss how to update the process and an external company come in to assess whether staff are compliant in the Think 25 process.

    ·         Conditions 10 to 13 were specific to this Sainsbury’s store and if this meant specific products would be prohibited  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3b

3c

The Cambria, 40 Kemerton Road London SE5 9AR (Herne Hill Ward) pdf icon PDF 503 KB

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    Presentation by the Licensing Officer

    The Sub-Committee was informed that this was an application to vary the premises licence. The Sub-Committee’s attention was drawn to chapters 2, 3, 8, 9, 10 and 16 of the Statutory Guidance, and to Sections 1, 3, 4, 8 and 17 of the Statement of Licensing Policy, as the ones particularly relevant to this application. The options available to the Sub-Committee were set out in paragraph 6 of the report on page 75.

     

    In response to questions from Members, Mr Ola Owojori the Licensing Officer confirmed:

    ·         This was an application to vary the existing licence.

    ·         The applicant was seeking authorisation to alter the layout of the premises.

    ·         The applicant was seeking to extend the opening hours to 08:00, Monday to Sunday.

    ·         The applicant was seeking the hours permitted for the sale of late night refreshment.

    ·         The applicant was seeking to remove condition 4, attached in Annex 2 attached to the licence and amend conditions 1 and 2 in Annex 3, in relation to the noise limiter and closing windows during any function.

    ·         There were 32 representations received against the application from residents, based on the licensing objective of the prevention of public nuisance and two previous representations had been withdrawn.

    ·         The opening hours for licensable activity in the existing licensing were 10:00 to 00:30, Monday to Saturday and 12:00 to 00:30 on Sunday.

    ·         The application had been advertised at the premises, displayed notice in the Newspaper as well as on the Licensing Authority’s website. 

     

    Presentation by the Applicant

    Solicitor to the applicant, Ms Karen Cochrane, informed the Sub-Committee that:

    ·         The applicant was not applying to change licensable hours, but opening hours to an earlier hour of 08:00 for non-licensable activities.

    ·         It was apparent there has been misinformation of a 03:00 license and many objectors quoted this hour.

    ·         The applicant did not wish to remove the condition about installing a sound limiter but to reword to fit the purpose as the function room was a secondary dining room. 

    ·         The Deregulation Act stated that music had to be discontinued by 23:00, but the operator was not planning loud music on the premises.

    At this point in proceedings, Legal Advisor, Ms Selina Wiafe clarified that the Deregulation Act meant that live or recorded music were only permitted between 08:00 and 23:00, which meant the noise limiter would only apply after 23:00.

     

    Mr Mark Draper, the operator, Ms Karen Cochrane and Mr Colin Coogan confirmed that:

    ·         Incidents occurred under the prior owner and the applicant took control of the pub in 2018 and had removed the previous operator in 2019 who was unprofessional.

    ·         Operators understood the sensitivities of the neighbourhood, and this meant only background music was to be played and no foreground, or live music and could manage the concerns of residents through direct communication.

    ·         Previous complaints related to Punch Partnerships PCL and the new operator; Heineken UK was professional.

    ·         Mr Draper was leaseholder to the site and had owned, operated and refurbished premises across London and in  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3c