Decisions

The Cabinet Lead Member for Housing will be asked to approve a two year extension of for Housing Services Responsive Repairs Contract

 

Licensing Act 2003

Notice of Decision

 

 

PREMISES

Med Shish

151 South Street

Romford

RM1 1PL

 

 

APPLICANT

Mr Muttalib Batkitar

 

 

1.     Details of Application

 

Current premises licence hours:

 

Late night refreshment
Day	Start	Finish
Monday	23:00	02:00
Tuesday	23:00	02:00
Wednesday	23:00	02:00
Thursday	23:00	02:00
Friday	23:00	02:00
Saturday	23:00	02:00
Sunday	23:00	02:00

 

 

      Variation applied for:

 

Late night refreshment hours extension
Day	Start	Finish
Friday	23:00	04:00
Saturday	23:00	04:00

 

 

 

 

The applicant acted in accordance with regulations 25 and 26 of The Licensing Act 2003 (Premises licences and club premises certificates) Regulations 2005 relating to the advertising of the application. The required public notice was installed in the 26 October 2018 edition of the Romford Recorder.

 

2.     Details of Representations

 

There were 0 representations against the application from interested persons.

 

There were 2 representations against the application from responsible authorities, namely The Licensing Authority and the Metropolitan Police

 

 

Details of representations

 

Valid representations may only address the following licensing objectives:

 

• The prevention of crime and disorder
• The prevention of public nuisance
• The protection of children from harm
• Public safety

 

The representation from the Licensing Authority related to all four of the licensing objectives.

 

The premises were situated within the Romford Town Centre Cumulative Impact Zone.

 

In summary the application had declined to provide any rebuttal further to cumulative impact whilst the proposed conditions appeared ill equipped to successfully address the promotion of all four licensing objectives.

 

The Licensing Authority’s representative advised that he had twice tried to contact the applicant’s agent but had received no response. The authority’s representative also advised that there were concerns with the quality of the application as there appeared to be a number of erroneous statements contained within the application.

 

The representative from the Metropolitan Police advised that the police wished to object under the Crime & Disorder and Public Nuisance objectives.

 

The venue was situated in the middle of a busy transport hub only a short distance from numerous licensed venues. The clientele that would be attending the venue in the early hours of the morning would be people that were heavily intoxicated and unpredictable. In the past the venue had been the cause of large scale disorder and anti-social behaviour. Due to the size of the venue it could become over crowded very quickly and with only one or two door supervisors it would not be policed in a safe manner and the fear was that this would lead to confrontation inside and outside the venue.

 

The police strongly believed that the any extension in premises’ hours would have a direct result in an increase of Anti-Social Behaviour and violent crime at the location and in the nearby area.

 

The Police at this time did not have confidence that the venue will run efficiently in accordance with the requested licence conditions.

3.     Applicant’s response.

 

Prior to the hearing the applicant’s representative had submitted a statement concerning Cumulative Impact.

 

A copy of which is appended to this decision notice.

 

In summary the statement dealt with CCTV, incident logs, crime prevention notices and Challenge 25.

 

The applicant’s agent also confirmed that an additional SIA trained door supervisor would be on duty during the extended hours.

 

Notices would also be displayed reminding patrons to leave the premises quietly to minimise disturbances.

 

The agent also advised that his applicant was member of the Safe & Sound initiative that was in place in Romford town centre.

 

Members were advised that other similar premises were open to similar times and that extending the hours of the premises would enable swifter dispersal of patrons from the town centre.

 

4.     Determination of Application

 

Consequent upon the hearing held on 29 November 2018, the Sub-Committee’s decision regarding the application for a variation of a premises licence for Med Shish was as set out below, for the reasons stated:

 

The Sub-Committee was obliged to determine the application with a view to promoting the licensing objectives.

 

In making its decision, the Sub-Committee also had regard to the Guidance issued under Section 182 of the Licensing Act 2003 and Havering’s Licensing Policy. In particular, the Sub-Committee took into account policies 1, 5, 8 and 9 of the Statement of Licensing Policy.

 

In addition the Sub-Committee took account of its obligations under section 117 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998, and Articles 1 and 8 of the First Protocol of the Human Rights Act 1998.

 

 

5.     Decision

 

The Sub-Committee must promote the licensing objectives and must have regard to the Revised Guidance issued under s.182 of the Licensing Act 2003 and the Council’s own Statement of Licensing Policy.

The Sub-Committee noted that the premises were in a Cumulative Impact Zone and that the presumption against the variation of the premises licence therefore applied.

The Sub-Committee noted that the premises already enjoyed licensed hours which exceeded the Council’s standard times and that, by virtue of licensing policy 7, when dealing with variation applications more favourable consideration was generally given to applications within those times.

The Sub-Committee was reminded of and noted paragraph 9.12 of the revised statutory guidance which stated:

The police should be the licensing authority’s main source of advice on matters relating to the promotion of the crime and disorder licensing objective, but may also be able to make relevant representations with regard to the other licensing objectives if they had evidence to support such representations. The licensing authority should accept all reasonable and proportionate representations made by the police unless the authority had evidence that to do so would not be appropriate for the promotion of the licensing objectives.

The Sub-Committee considered the representations made by the responsible authorities and shared their concerns about extending the hours at a premises located in a crime and anti-social behaviour hotspot.

The Sub-Committee considered the submissions made by Mr Sutherland on the applicant’s behalf and the package of conditions offered by the applicant, including those submitted at short notice by the applicant’s representative.

However, on balance the Sub-Committee accepted the evidence of the responsible authorities that if the extension was granted it would likely add to the cumulative impact and adversely affect the licensing objective of the prevention of crime and disorder.

The police were already very stretched in the area and the Sub-Committee did not accept the applicant’s argument that allowing more licensed premises to remain open until 4.00 a.m. would lead to swifter dispersal of crowds and, consequently, fewer problems.

On the contrary, the Sub-Committee found that the extension sought was more likely to lead to greater numbers of drunken people congregating in the area and an increased likelihood of crime, violence and anti-social behaviour.

The Sub-Committee did not find that the applicant had sufficiently demonstrated why the operation of the premises involved would not add to the cumulative impact and not impact adversely on the promotion of the licensing objectives, as required by licensing policy 2.

The Sub-Committee therefore decided to reject the application pursuant to section 35(4)(b) of the Licensing Act 2003.

 

 

 

Appeal

 

Any party to the decision may appeal to the Magistrates Court within 21 days of notification of the decision. On appeal, the Magistrates Court may make an order for costs as it sees fit.

 

 

 

 

Richard Cursons

Clerk to the Licensing Sub-Committee

 

 

 

 

 

PREMISES

Upminster Taproom

1b Sunnyside Gardens

Upminster

RM14 3DT

 

APPLICANT

Mr Robert Knowles

 

Details of Application

 

Variation applied for:

 

Late Night Refreshment & Supply of alcohol
Day	Start	Finish
Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday	11:00	00:00
Saturday	11:00	00:00
Sunday

 

Non-standard timings:

 

Day	Start	Finish
Christmas Eve	11:00	00:30
Boxing Day	11:00	00:30
New Years Eve	11:00	00:30
Easter Thursday	11:00	00:30
Good Friday	11:00	00:30
Easter Monday	11:00	00:30
Bank Holiday Sundays	11:00	00:30
All Saints Day	11:00	00:30
St Georges Day	11:00	00:30
St Patricks Day	11:00	00:30

 

The applicant acted in accordance with regulations 25 and 26 of The Licensing Act 2003 (Premises licences and club premises certificates) Regulations 2005 relating to the advertising of the application.  The required public notice wasinstalled in the 16 November 2018 edition of the Romford Recorder.

 

1.  Details of Representations

 

There were 0 representations against the application from interested persons.

 

There was 1 representation against the application from a responsible authority, namely Havering’s Planning Authority.

The representation from the planning authority related to the prevention of

public nuisance objective.

 

There was no representative from the planning department present at the

hearing.

 

An assessment by the planning services had previously been undertaken under a planning application.  Upon review of all material considerations in terms of the use of the property, it was deemed necessary and expedient to restrict the use of the property to prevent a public nuisance.  The use had subsequently been conditioned so that ‘the use hereby permitted shall not be open to customers outside the following times: 11:00 - 23:00’.  The Planning Team had not received any application to vary this condition. 

 

The licence application proposed a use that exceeded the restrictions that had been placed on the use by the planning department; and the use proposed did not have lawful planning status and the application therefore did not accord with Licensing Policy 6.

 

4.  Applicants Response

 

Mrs Knowles presented the application on behalf of Mr Knowles.  Mrs Knowles advised that the application had been amended to reduce the hours for selling alcohol to a more moderate level as detailed in the report of the Licensing Officer.  Mrs Knowles explained that the premises had been operating since January 2016 as a licensed premises and provided a community hub for local customers. 

 

Mrs Knowles further explained that due to unforeseeable circumstances, an application to remove a planning condition had been delayed and that it was the intention of the applicant to submit a planning application in the near future.  The applicant confirmed that they were aware that an application would need to be approved to remove the planning restrictions that had been placed on the use by the planning department, in order for the premises to operate under any amended extended hours in accordance with Licensing Policy 6.

 

Decision

 

The Licensing Sub-Committee was satisfied by the representations of Mrs Knowles and the steps offered within the operating schedule that granting of the variation to the existing license would not affect the licensing objectives in a negative way and, in particular the objective of the prevention of public nuisance.

 

The Licensing Sub-Committee formed this view because:

 

1. There had only been no representations against the application from interested persons. The Licensing Sub-Committee considered that this was indicative of a lack of public nuisance associated with the premises as members were aware that there had been significant local opposition to the granting of the original licence. It would be expected that further representations would have been received if there was a problem with public nuisance related to the premises.

 

2. Since the granting of the original licences there had been no complaints about public nuisance.

 

3. The Licensing Sub-Committee had been impressed by Mrs Knowles presentation, along with the application and considered this to be a well run premises.

 

4. There was only 1 representation against the application from a responsible authority, namely Havering’s Planning Authority. This did not set out any evidence to support its representation it had concerns that the extension of licensing times would not promote the objective of the prevention of public nuisance.

 

5. Mrs Knowles had confirmed that she understood that the new licenced hours could not be put into effect until their planning application had been granted which they intended to do before they could operate their extended hours.

The Director of Adult Social Care and Health will be asked to approve the award of contract. 

 

More information regarding Shared Lives is available here:

 

https://sharedlivesplus.org.uk/

 

The Director will be asked to give Authority to award the contract.

 

Cabinet:

 

·       Reviewed the performance set out in Appendix 1 and the corrective action that is being taken.

·       Noted the content of the Demand Pressures Dashboard attached as Appendix 2

Cabinet will be asked to approve a virements for funding and give authority to award the contract for building works.

 

Cabinet:

 

• Agreed to vire funding of £1.2m from the DfE Basic Need Capital Grant - Phase 4 School Expansions contingency budget to the Royal Liberty expansion.  
• Agreed to release funding to the ESFA (Education and Skills Funding Agency) to proceed with expansion build works.
• Agreed to review the feasibility process to ensure more accurate forecasting of costs.

 

 

 

Cabinet will be asked to agree the Parking Strategy and the Highways Resurfacing Policy.

 

Cabinet:

 

 

·       Agreed the Parking Strategy at Appendix A of the report;

 

·       Agreed the Highways Resurfacing Policy at Appendix B of the report;

 

·       Delegated to the Director of Neighbourhoods in consultation with the Lead Member for Environment authority to take all necessary steps to enable and complete the strategy documents including minor revisions to the Parking Strategy and the Highways Resurfacing Policy and the future introduction of the service Parking Operation Plan.