Venue: Committee Room (B6) - Lambeth Town Hall, Brixton, London, SW2 1RW. View directions
Contact: Nazyer Choudhury, Tel: 020 7926 0028 Email: email@example.com
Election of Chair
MOVED by Councillor Philip Normal, SECONDED by Councillor John Kazantzis.
That Councillor Fred Cowell be elected Chair for the meeting.
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.
None were declared.
Strategic Director, Neighbourhoods and Growth
Contact: Bina Patel, Licensing Manager, 020 7926 4103
Presentation by the Licensing Officer
The Sub-Committee was informed that this was an application for a new a premises licence. The Sub-Committee’s attention was drawn to chapters 2, 3, 8, 9 and 10 of the Statutory Guidance and Sections 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 15 and 16 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 6.2 of the report on page 11 of the agenda papers.
The Licensing Officer explained that the applicant did not appear to be present at the meeting, that the application had been previously adjourned at the applicant’s request and that the Licensing team had not received any contact from the applicant since 4 October 2018.
The Sub-Committee decided to go ahead with the proceedings as the applicant had been notified and had given no indication that they wished to attend the meeting and had been made aware that this meeting would take place this evening. Furthermore, the applicant was informed at the meeting on 4 October 2018 when they made the application to adjourn that the application would be heard at this meeting.
The Licensing Officer confirmed:
· This was a new application, seeking authorisation for live music and performance of dance from 17:00-22:00 Monday to Sunday.
· The applicant had also applied for the supply of alcohol 12:00 – 22:00 Monday to Thursday, 12:00 – 00:00 Friday and Saturday and 12:00- 21:00 on Sunday.
Presentation from interested parties
Mr Ola Owojori, Licensing Officer informed the Sub-Committee that:
· This application was for a restaurant with a bar facility and was located in a cumulative impact zone.
· The applicant had not specified how they would operate the premises to tackle the existing problems in the area.
· The application proposed that the premises would operate as a café and restaurant but could also operate as a bar and this would significantly impact the area.
· Noise nuisance would be caused by patrons drinking all day and it was therefore important to have adequate conditions in place. However, the applicant had not indicated if they agreed to the conditions or not.
· It was difficult to get hold of the applicant to reach an agreement.
· Pages 37-39 of the agenda papers outlined the proposed conditions including a condition which would allow the premises only to serve alcohol ancillary to a table meal.
· Page 33 of the agenda papers displayed a plan showing that patrons would have to go through the kitchen in order to access the toilet and that was not acceptable.
· An acceptable toilet facility for patrons was one of the conditions proposed by the Licensing team.
Mr Henry Umeh, Public Protection Officer, informed the Sub-Committee that:
· As the application was located in a cumulative impact zone, it was the duty of the Sub-Committee to presume that the application would be refused unless the applicant could demonstrate that the application would have no negative impact on the licensing objectives.
· The application could ... view the full minutes text for item 3a
Presentation by the Licensing Officer
The Sub-Committee was informed that this was an application for a new a premises licence. The Sub-Committee’s attention was drawn to chapters 2, 3, 8, 9 and 10 of the Statutory Guidance and Sections 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 16 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 6.2 of the report on page 58 of the agenda papers.
The Licensing Officer confirmed:
· This was an application for a new premises licence.
· The premises had been previously licensed until 2017, when the Sub-Committee revoked the licence (on 26 October 2017).
· Mr Dadds was representing the applicant.
· Representations had been received from a local councillor, Public Protection, the Licensing team, Police and residents.
· In attendance were residents including Ms Diana Linskey who had made a representation.
· Page 55 of the agenda papers outlined the background of the application.
· The application could be found on page 59 of the agenda papers.
The representative of the applicant, Mr David Dadds, enquired how Councillor Normal appeared to know one of the residents who had made an objection to the application (Ms Diane Linskey) as he had “acknowledged” and “waved” at her before the meeting. Councillor Normal explained that he was familiar with Ms Linskey as he previously was the Safer Neighbourhood Chair in Oval.
In response to a question asked by the Chair, the representative of the applicant, Mr Dadds, stated that the previous premises licence holder and the previous DPS were not connected to this application. He was being instructed by the applicant, who was the nephew of Mr and Mrs Mendes. Although there was a family connection between him and the previous premises licence holders, there was a separation between them and their nephew (unless the Sub-Committee felt that any family member represented a clear connection to the previous premises licence holder).
Presentation by the applicant
The representative of the applicant, Mr David Dadds, and the applicant Mr Elvio Lemos, informed the Sub-Committee that:
· The applicant was not proposing conditions whereby alcohol would be ancillary to food but this could be imposed if the Sub-Committee thought it appropriate.
· Given the hours the premises would operate, the applicant was content for the hours to be reduced to 22:00.
· There was no application for the playing of music.
· The conditions were set out on page 77 of the agenda papers.
· Mr Dadds was aware of the previous review application for the premises and had drafted conditions in response to some of the issues.
· There would be no use or access to the rear of the premises.
· Much of the data relied upon by objectors regarding the premises was historical in nature. One incident related to an incident in December 2014.
· Each application was meant to be judged on its own merit.
· The applicant and the other director of the company were persons of good character. One ... view the full minutes text for item 3b