Minutes:
The Applicant’s representative presented the case on behalf of the applicant. He explained that the Applicant was the leaseholder of 4 London Road and he outlined her circumstances. She had worked with her husband since 2012 at the premises, which was previously a butchers and a deli. An application for offsite sales of alcohol had been granted in 2015 for the premises. The business had since been relocated to 20 London Road. The Applicant also ran a deli in Thetford which permitted off site sale of alcohol. The Applicant was the Designated Premises Supervisor and Licence Holder.
The Applicant’s representative explained that the premises at 4 London Road was currently undergoing a refit as a café and referred to the plan of the premises which was attached to the Licensing Manager’s report.
He informed those present that London Road was a mix of residential and commercial properties. The Applicant would like to provide a small café with a takeaway service. She would like to offer customers the opportunity to purchase alcohol to consume with their meal or to takeaway. She did not intend to act as an off licence.
The Applicant’s representative highlighted that no application had been made for regulated entertainment and it was intended to provide background music only so that patrons could still hold a conversation.
The Applicant intended to open the premises from 10am to 11pm, but she could choose to close earlier depending on customer requirements.
The Applicant’s representative drew attention to the conditions put forward by the Community Safety and Neighbourhood Nuisance Team which had been accepted by the Applicant. He informed those present that representatives from the Community Safety and Neighbourhood Nuisance Team had met at the premises.
The Applicant’s representative informed those present that one of the conditions put forward by the Community Safety and Neighbourhood Nuisance Team would be the adoption of a Noise Management Plan. A copy of the plan was circulated to all parties present at the hearing. The Applicant’s representative stated that the plan went wider than what was required in the conditions.
The Licensing Manager reminded those present that the Noise Management Plan would require agreement from the Community Safety and Neighbourhood Nuisance Team.
The Applicant’s representative referred to the representations made by other persons. He felt that they painted a bleak picture of a problem premises, but felt that these problems related to the previous occupiers of the premises who had often traded for longer hours than permitted. He stated that there had been no reported problems since the current occupier had taken over the premises.
The Applicant’s representative explained that the Applicant still had three years remaining on her lease so wanted to utilise the shop. She felt that it would be of benefit to the community.
The Applicant’s representative referred to crime figures from November 2015 and stated that there were three incidents of anti-social behaviour and public disorder within 400 yards of the premises. He did not consider this to be a huge problem. He reminded those present of the representations received from the Community Safety and Neighbourhood Nuisance Team and the conditions. He referred to the representation put forward by Mrs Knights in that the operating hours should be reduced. He explained that the Applicant would not trade beyond 11.00pm. He referred to the representations from other persons regarding highways issues as there was no parking outside of the premises. He explained that this was a matter for the Police, who had not made any representations on the application.
The Applicant’s representative reminded those present that the Applicant had three shops which employed eight full time equivalent staff. She already had a premises licence and a track record of compliance. He reminded those present that the Applicant could still run 4 London Road as a café without a premises licence and customers could bring their own alcohol, however, she wished to control and be responsible for what was consumed on her premises.
The Chairman thanked the Applicant’s representative and invited questions from all parties.
The Licensing Manager reminded the Applicant’s representative that he would be required to submit a copy of the Noise Management Plan to the Community Safety and Neighbourhood Nuisance Team for approval.
The Licensing Manager asked if the Applicant had engaged with local residents to alleviate their concerns. The Applicant’s representative explained that she had not because they did not get on with her and were likely to object to the application anyway.
In response to a question from the Licensing Manager regarding staff training, the Applicant’s representative explained that 4 London Road would employ one full time Manager and two full time assistants. The Applicant would be the Licence Holder and the Designated Premises Supervisor. The Applicant would train the staff as required.
The Licensing Manager informed those present that he had visited 20 London Road and asked the member of staff on duty about staff training and personal licences and explained that the member of staff did not know about personal licences. The Licensing Manager sought reassurance that staff would be trained appropriately. The Applicant’s representative assured the Sub-Committee that all members of staff had been trained and the Applicant had the relevant paperwork as evidence. It could have been a case of the member of staff not understanding the question.
The Licensing Manager referred to the Planning Permission which would be required to alter the premises. He reminded those present that Licensing and Planning were separate regimes. The Applicant’s representative stated that a Planning Application would be submitted soon, the Applicant was just awaiting a signature from the owner of the property.
The Licensing Manager referred to one of the conditions from the Community Safety and Neighbourhood Nuisance Team, which would be attached to the application. He asked how the Applicant would ensure that there was no smoking in the outdoor area beyond 10.30pm. The Applicant’s representative stated that the Applicant would be firm and say no to people wishing to use the outdoor area to smoke after the permitted time. He stated that the Applicant felt that she could deal with customers appropriately.
The Chairman referred to the plan of the premises which showed only one toilet which was for staff use only and no disabled facilities. The Applicant’s representative reminded those present that premises could operate without a toilet if the café provided seating for less than ten people. The toilet facilities would be relocated as part of the planning application and disabled access would be provided.
Mrs Knights stated that she wished to defend her reputation and had been neighbourly towards the Applicant. She referred to page 27 of the agenda which stated that the premises had been a butchers for the past three years with a premises licence. She clarified that a premises licence had only been granted in 2015, she felt that this was misleading. The Applicant’s representative acknowledged that he should have made it clearer on the application.
Mrs Knights asked for clarification on how much seating would be provided in the café. The Applicants representative explained that the regulations only allowed ten seats in the absence of a customer toilet. The application stated 25-30 but this was before the toilet requirements were known. He stated that 25-30 seats was highly unlikely given the size of the premises, but additional customers collecting takeaway orders could add to the amount of people in the premises at any one time.
Mrs Knights asked for clarification on what level of music would be provided. The Applicant’s representative explained that background music would be provided, so that customers could still hold a conversation.
Mrs Knights referred to the operating times applied for and felt that there should be a distinction on a Sunday and requested that the Sunday closing time be brought forward to 8.00pm. She stated that she was unsatisfied with the noisy smoking aspect which had an effect on neighbouring properties. She stated that the applicant would be unable to control 25-30 people and sought assurance that the applicant would ensure that there was no smoking outside the premises beyond 10.30pm. She also asked if the Community Safety and Neighbourhood Nuisance Team had an obligation to consult local residents. The Licensing manager clarified that they did not.
The Applicant’s representative explained that use of the outside area would be controlled and a Manager would be on duty at all times. The Applicant also lived locally so could attend the premises if required.
Mrs Knights asked if the Applicant had any experience in running a café. The Applicant’s representative explained that this was a new venture and she had no previous experience in running a café, but did have experience running a business and she would instruct and manage staff appropriately.
Mrs Knights asked if the outside area would be covered by CCTV. The Applicant’s representative agreed to ensure the outside area would be covered by CCTV if required.