Agenda item

 Application for the grant of a Premises Licence.

The Sub-Committee comprised Councillor Tony Wade (Chairman), Councillor      Peter Robinson and Councillor David Kerr.

The Legal Adviser was Mrs. Sarah Taylor, Head of Legal Services.

The Democratic Support Officer was Jon Stark of Administration Services.

An application had been made by Arshid Mahmood, Tahir Mahmood and Javed Iqbal for a premises licence under Section 17 of the Licensing Act 2003 in respect of MT Belly, 6 Clarence Street, Lancaster.  The hearing was held in the light of relevant representations received from a number of interested parties

The applicants, Arshid Mahmood and Tahir Mahmood were in attendance, with Ms Shanaz Patel who had written in support of the application.

A number of interested parties who had made representations were in attendance.  These were Alison Parker, Jane Simpson and Diana Cuming.   The interested parties were represented by Councillor Blakely.

The Chairman explained the procedure to those present, and stated that the hearing would be a discussion led by the licensing authority.  It was agreed that any questions would be put through the Chairman.

The Legal Adviser reminded the Sub-Committee that this was an application for takeaway food premises, which, prior to the 24th November 2005 had not required to be licensed.  However, under the Licensing Act 2003, such premises now required a licence in order to supply hot food after 11.00 p.m.  This application was for the premises to open until midnight Sunday to Thursday, and until 01.00 hours on Friday and Saturday nights.

The interested parties then presented their representations.  Councillor Blakely, Ms Parker, Ms Cuming and Dr. Simpson addressed the Sub-Committee, and also called Christopher Kirkbride, Kathleen Wilson and Georgina Marchment, who gave  evidence of nuisance and disturbance caused by customers of the premises.

Mr. Tahir Mahmood then presented the applicants’ case, and Mr. Arshid Mahmood and Ms Shanaz Patel spoke in support of the application.

After summing up by the interested parties and the applicants, the Sub-Committee withdrew to make its decision, and sought advice from its legal adviser as to the appropriate phraseology of the decision.

DECISION

The Sub-Committee has given careful consideration to all the documentation presented to it, and to the oral representations made at the hearing.

The Sub-Committee has noted that this is an application for a premises licence for the provision of late night refreshment only. This has only become a licensable activity under the Licensing Act 2003, and prior to the Second Appointed Day, the 24th November 2005, no licence was required.  The Sub-Committee has noted that the premises have previously opened until midnight during the week and until 01.00 hours at week-ends without the need for a licence.

The Sub-Committee has considered the application in the light of the licensing objectives, and in particular the licensing objective to prevent public nuisance.

The Sub-Committee has noted the concerns of the interested parties in particular in respect of noise and disturbance from customers congregating outside the premises late at night, waiting to be served, and also eating food purchased at the premises, and also in respect of noise from customers’ vehicles and, to a lesser extent, the vehicle delivering food from the premises.  Although the Sub-Committee considers that a number of the complaints relate to and are influenced by times when the premises were under different management, the Sub-Committee is satisfied from the evidence that such disturbances are caused directly by these premises, and that they have arisen under the current management.  In forming this view the Sub-Committee has noted the evidence of the residents that there has been no disturbance on Monday nights when the premises have been closed, or, more recently, since the 24th November 2005, after 23.00 hours when the premises have again been closed. 

For the avoidance of doubt, the Sub-Committee has taken the view that there is no firm evidence that other incidents of anti social behaviour referred to, such as vandalism to vehicles, has been caused by customers of these premises.  

In reaching a decision, the Sub-Committee has taken into account that the premises are situated in a residential area, with a narrow street. The Sub-Committee sympathises with the complaints of the residents about noise and disturbance outside their houses late at night, especially when the following day is a week day and they need to get up early for school or work. 

In order to regulate the operation of the premises so as to control noise nuisance and other disturbance and disorder, the Sub-Committee has resolved to impose conditions on the licence as follows:

1.      That all doors and windows in the premises shall be kept closed.

2.      That notices shall be displayed in the premises reminding customers that they are in a residential area, and requesting them to leave the area quickly and quietly.

3.      That the licence holder shall discuss with the Police Crime Prevention Officer within four weeks of the issue of the licence, the possibility of installing CCTV at the premises, and shall comply with any recommendations of the Officer.

However, even with these conditions, given the location of the premises, the Sub-Committee considers that in order to prevent unreasonable public nuisance to the neighbouring residents, it is necessary to limit the opening hours of the premises.  The Sub-Committee has decided, therefore, to grant the licence until 23.30 hours Sunday to Thursday, and until midnight on Friday and Saturday nights.

Accordingly, the licence is granted for these hours, and with the conditions referred to above.

In accordance with Section 181 and Schedule 5 of the Licensing Act 2003, the parties have a right of appeal to the Magistrates against this decision.

Signed………………………………………………………… Dated………………………..

            Councillor Tony Wade  (Chairman)