Venue: Council Chamber - Town Hall. View directions
Contact: Taiwo Adeoye - 01708 433079 Email: taiwo.adeoye@havering.gov.uk
No. | Item | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Application for a new premises licence made by Aldi Stores Limited, 45 Market Place, Romford RM1 3AB, under section 17 of the Licensing Act 2003.
Decision: Licensing Act 2003 Notice of Decision
PREMISES Aldi Stores 45 Market Place, Romford, RM1 3AB
DETAILS OF APPLICATION
This application for a new premises licence is made under section 17 of the Licensing Act 2003 (“the Act”).
APPLICANT Aldi Stores Ltd Holly Lane Atherstone Warwickshire CV9 2SQ
This application is for a new premises licence. However, Aldi previously held a premises licence for the venue until 2010; when it was surrendered.
Seasonal variations
None.
Non-standard timings
None.
3. Promotion of the Licensing Objectives
The applicant acted in accordance with premises licence regulations 25 and 26 relating to the advertising of the application. The required newspaper advertisement was installed in the 13 December 2013 edition of the Romford Recorder.
4. Details of Representations
Valid representations may only address the four licensing objectives.
· The prevention of crime and disorder · Public safety · The prevention of public nuisance · The protection of children from harm
There was one representation against this application from an interested party. Councillor Frederick Thompson made representation against this application under the prevention of public nuisance and protection of children from harm licensing objectives and at the hearing reiterated his view. He informed the Sub Committee that he was not totally against the application but had concern that the premises was in close proximity to areas that would provide an opportunity for what is referred to as pre-loading by drinking high strength drinks prior to visiting a pub or club. He added having worked within the NHS he had first-hand experience of seeing drunken people being brought into Accident & Emergency unit. Councillor Thompson was also of the opinion that strength of beer ought to be capped at 5% alcohol volume, and that half and quarter size bottles of spirits should not be sold.
Responsible Authorities
Chief Officer of Metropolitan Police (“the Police”): None Planning Control & Enforcement: None Licensing Authority: None
Public Protection: None
London Fire & Emergency Planning Authority (“LFEPA”): None
Health & Safety Enforcing Authority: None.
Public Health: None
Children & Families Service: None
The Magistrates Court: None
Applicant’s response.
The representative for the applicant, Ms Gilligan, informed the Sub-Committee that Aldi know the area very well being that they previously occupied the same location and handed back their licence when they moved out. It was added that following discussion with the Police, it was agreed to include two further conditions. The Sub-Committee was informed that there was no evidence to suggest Aldi facilitated preloading, and that the responsible authorities had no previous concerns with Aldi. Furthermore, much of the alcohol sold by Aldi was its own label, so it would be easy to identify if it became a problem. The Sub-Committee was also informed of Aldi’s proud record of no licensing convictions right across the country.
Ms Gilligan submitted that the objections raised were not evidence based, that the suggested conditions, and ... view the full decision text for item 1. Minutes: Licensing Act 2003 Notice of Decision
PREMISES Aldi Stores 45 Market Place, Romford, RM1 3AB
DETAILS OF APPLICATION
This application for a new premises licence is made under section 17 of the Licensing Act 2003 (“the Act”).
APPLICANT Aldi Stores Ltd Holly Lane Atherstone Warwickshire CV9 2SQ
This application is for a new premises licence. However, Aldi previously held a premises licence for the venue until 2010; when it was surrendered.
Seasonal variations
None.
Non-standard timings
None.
3. Promotion of the Licensing Objectives
The applicant acted in accordance with premises licence regulations 25 and 26 relating to the advertising of the application. The required newspaper advertisement was installed in the 13 December 2013 edition of the Romford Recorder.
4. Details of Representations
Valid representations may only address the four licensing objectives.
· The prevention of crime and disorder · Public safety · The prevention of public nuisance · The protection of children from harm
There was one representation against this application from an interested party. Councillor Frederick Thompson made representation against this application under the prevention of public nuisance and protection of children from harm licensing objectives and at the hearing reiterated his view. He informed the Sub Committee that he was not totally against the application but had concern that the premises was in close proximity to areas that would provide an opportunity for what is referred to as pre-loading by drinking high strength drinks prior to visiting a pub or club. He added having worked within the NHS he had first-hand experience of seeing drunken people being brought into Accident & Emergency unit. Councillor Thompson was also of the opinion that strength of beer ought to be capped at 5% alcohol volume, and that half and quarter size bottles of spirits should not be sold.
Responsible Authorities
Chief Officer of Metropolitan Police (“the Police”): None Planning Control & Enforcement: None
Licensing Authority: None
Public Protection: None
London Fire & Emergency Planning Authority (“LFEPA”): None
Health & Safety Enforcing Authority: None.
Public Health: None
Children & Families Service: None
The Magistrates Court: None
Applicant’s response.
The representative for the applicant, Ms Gilligan, informed the Sub-Committee that Aldi know the area very well being that they previously occupied the same location and handed back their licence when they moved out. It was added that following discussion with the Police, it was agreed to include two further conditions. The Sub-Committee was informed that there was no evidence to suggest Aldi facilitated preloading, and that the responsible authorities had no previous concerns with Aldi. Furthermore, much of the alcohol sold by Aldi was its own label, so it would be easy to identify if it became a problem. The Sub-Committee was also informed of Aldi’s proud record of no licensing convictions right across the country.
Ms Gilligan submitted that the objections raised were not evidence based, that the suggested conditions, and ... view the full minutes text for item 1. |