Agenda and minutes

Venue: Room 8, Lambeth Town Hall, Brixton Hill, SW2 1RW. View directions

Contact: Gary O'Key, Tel: 020 7926 2183 Email: gokey@lambeth.gov.uk 

Items
No. Item

1.

Election of Chair

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:

    Councillor Martin Tiedemann declared a pecuniary interest in relation to item 3b on the agenda (Knowles of Norwood). Councillor Matthew Bennett would replace Councillor Tiedemann for the duration of that item.

3.

Licensing Applications for the Grant / Review of a Premises Licence pdf icon PDF 74 KB

3a

Just In Case, 34 Clapham Road, London SW9 0JQ (Oval ward) pdf icon PDF 60 KB

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    Presentation by the Licensing Officer

     

    The Sub-Committee was informed that this was an application for a variation to the current premises licence. The Sub-Committee’s attention was drawn to chapters 8, 9 and 10 of the Statutory Guidance, and to Sections 5, 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11 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 5.8 of the report on page 4.

     

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

     

    • The application originally sought regulated entertainment Thursday to Saturday until 1am and to extend the sale of alcohol on these days also to 1am. However, the applicant had since amended the application to cease all licensable activities at midnight on Fridays and Saturdays and withdraw entirely the part of the application relating to Thursdays
    • Nine representations had been received opposing the application
    • A series of conditions had been agreed between the Noise Team and the applicant. These had been circulated

     

    A map and photographs of the premises were circulated.

     

    Presentation by the Applicant

     

    Mr Justino Monteiro, applicant, and his associate Mr Jose Manuel Rocha, informed the Sub-Committee that:

     

    • The venue was a café and restaurant and they had been there for four years
    • The total area of the premises was approximately 155 square metres
    • They wished to extend the hours to increase income and cater for customers who currently went elsewhere when Just in Case closed but had listened to residents’ concerns and therefore amended their application as outlined

     

    In response to questions from Members, Mr Monteiro and Mr Rocha confirmed:

     

    • They currently stopped serving alcohol at 10pm in the week as opposed to the terminal hour in their existing licence of 11pm. This was because the venue was quiet in the week. The cleaning was done between 10pm and 11pm. There was trade on Friday and Saturday night however
    • They planned to host events, exhibitions and workshops relating to Portuguese and Brazilian culture if the application was granted
    • On Fridays and Saturdays there would be half an hour of drinking up time and they would close at 00:30
    • Their planning permission limited trading hours to 11pm but planning matters could not be taken into account in relation to licensing decisions
    • They had only had one temporary event notice in the last 12 months
    • The venue capacity was around 30-35 seated on the ground floor and around 20-25 seated in the basement. The ground floor was principally a restaurant while the basement would hold events. Most of the music played in the basement would be acoustic
    • In relation to the reference in the representations to use of the outside area, it was stated that this occurred years ago and this area had not been in use since 2011
    • Regarding the assertion by two of the objectors that loud music was played at around 8am on 15 December 2013, Mr Monteiro stated that he was not there at the time and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3a

3b

Knowles Of Norwood, 294-296 Norwood Road, London SE27 9AF (Knights Hill ward) pdf icon PDF 61 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 8, 9 and 10 of the Statutory Guidance, and to Sections 5, 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11 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 5.9 of the report on page 4.

     

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

     

    • This was a new application seeking recorded music and supply of alcohol on the premises from midday to midnight Sunday to Wednesday, and 1am Thursday to Saturday, and late night refreshment to 00:30 Sunday to Wednesday and 01:00 Thursday to Saturday
    • The application also sought a terminal hour of 2am on certain public holidays
    • Six representations had been received against the application, including from Planning, the Noise Team and Lancaster Avenue Residents’ Association (LARA)
    • Planning could not be considered when making decisions regarding Licensing; however, the planning information was included as it was mentioned in residents’ representations
    • 28 representations had been received in support of the premises but these were received out of time and were therefore not valid. They had however been re-submitted as additional information in support of the application and circulated to the Sub-Committee members

     

    A map and photographs of the premises were circulated.

     

    Presentation by the Applicant

     

    Mr Max Alderman, representing Antic London, informed the Sub-Committee that:

     

    • He had made an identical application five years ago for the original Knowles of Norwood site, which was granted; however, it was then discovered the building would have been too expensive to convert. They were in the process of purchasing the freehold of this site from the Co-op
    • The aim was to provide a great local pub, for which there was a lot of support locally
    • Antic ran 32 pubs including six in Lambeth
    • The premises were located on a relatively busy street
    • He was aware of the history of the nightclub which had operated on the other side of the road and understood why some residents may therefore have concerns
    • He agreed to almost all of the Noise conditions
    • He accepted that the planning consent did not tally with the licence application; however, the hours sought were in line with all of their other pubs. He planned to apply for an extension in the planning hours were the licence to be granted as per the application

     

    In response to questions from Members, Mr Alderman confirmed:

     

    • He disagreed that closing at 1.30am did not fit with the idea of a local pub nowadays. The fundamentals of a good pub were to provide good beer, excellent service and ambience
    • Though the planning details stated that there were two separate areas, one of which would be a pub and the other a restaurant, these would in fact all be part of the same premises
    • Regarding the application for recorded music, this was just to create  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3b

3c

S & G Food & News,11 Leigham Hall Parade, Streatham High Road London SW16 1DR (Streatham Wells ward) pdf icon PDF 59 KB

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    Presentation by the Licensing Officer

     

    The Sub-Committee was informed that this was an application for a variation to the current premises licence. The Sub-Committee’s attention was drawn to chapters 8, 9, 10 and 13 of the Statutory Guidance, and to Sections 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 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 5.8 of the report on page 4.

     

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

     

    • This was an application to vary the licence to provide off sales of alcohol 24 hours a day
    • The current proprietor, Mr Shamoon Chaudhary, became the licence holder on 18 November 2013. The application to vary the licence was made on 12 November 2013 by the previous licence holder, Mr Nisar Ahmed

     

    A map and photographs of the premises were circulated.

     

    Presentation by the Applicant

     

    Mr Shamoon Chaudhary, premises licence holder, informed the Sub-Committee that:

     

    • He had read the representations and would go through the points raised in turn
    • It was submitted that there were already sufficient 24/7 off licences and that the area was saturated; however, there was only one 24/7 shop in the near vicinity and this was on the opposite side of Streatham High Road, which was very difficult to cross. The next nearest ones were around half a mile away on either side
    • He denied ever selling alcohol to drunk people. He stated that his staff were trained, he upheld the licensing objectives and was in full compliance with the Licensing Act 2003
    • There had been very few incidents in the shop and he had only called the police twice – once in relation to a person who had a grievance with the previous owner, and once when an underage customer stole some cigarettes and, in fleeing, punched Mr Chaudhary’s friend. It was notable that there was no representation from the police
    • The premises was a mini market and sold many items other than alcohol. Alcohol accounted for around 30% of revenue
    • He was concerned he may lose customers if the licence was not extended and believed this was a matter of survival for the business. If he had to close, redundancies would result which would affect five families
    • In relation to litter, the bins were at the back of the premises and were fully secured. CCTV covered this area. He also had a waste management contract. A copy of this was passed to the Sub-Committee
    • There had only been one representation from a local resident
    • He had a petition in support of his application which had been signed by 69 people in the shop; however, as this had not been submitted in advance it was ruled inadmissible
    • In relation to the Trading Standards representation, both of the underage purchases related to the time that Mr Ahmed was in charge. There had not been any failed test purchases since 2010 and several had been passed  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3c