Agenda and minutes

To appoint a Chairman for the purposes of this meeting.

RESOLVED:  That Councillor Thaya Idaikkadar be appointed Chairman for this Licensing Panel Hearing.

To receive declarations of personal or prejudicial interests, arising from business to be transacted at this meeting, from:

(a)               all Members of the Panel;

(b)               all other Members present in any part of the chamber.

RESOLVED:  To note that there were no declarations of interests made.

[Note:  Licensing Panel minutes are:-

(1)               approved following each meeting by the Members serving on that particular occasion and signed as a correct record by the Chairman for that meeting;

(2)               not submitted to the next panel meeting for approval.

Reasons: The Licensing Panel is constituted from a pooled membership. Consequently, a subsequent Panel meeting is likely to comprise a different Chairman and Members who took no part in the previous meeting’s proceedings. The process referred to at (1) above provides appropriate approval scrutiny].

(See Note at conclusion of these minutes).

To receive any questions, petitions or deputations (if any), under the provisions of Committee Procedure Rules 17, 15 and 16 (Part 4B) of the Constitution respectively.

[Note: These items are qualified by the requirements of the licensing legislation and will not be applicable to applications on the current agenda.]

RESOLVED:  To note that no public questions were put, or petitions or deputations received at this meeting under the provisions of Committee Procedure Rules 19, 16 and 17 (Part 4B of the Constitution) respectively.

Procedure to be followed at an oral hearing.

The Chairman asked the Panel Members, officer/s, Responsible Authority/ies and other attendees at the meeting to introduce themselves and then outlined the procedure for the conduct of an oral hearing, which was set out in the agenda.

Report of the Divisional Director Environmental Services.

The Panel received a report of the Chief Environmental Health Officer which sought determination of an application for a Temporary Event Notice (TEN).

In attendance was the applicant, Ms June Burrell and her business partner Mr Newton Green and Sergeant Crump of the Metropolitan Police who was objecting to the application.  

The Chief Environmental Health Officer reported that the application was an objection notice to a TEN for licensable activities, namely the sale of alcohol and provision of regulated entertainment at Dooey’s Bar on the 2 June 2012 from 23:00 – 09:00 the following morning. 

The objector to the application, Sergeant Crump, advised the Panel that the Metropolitan Police objections were on the grounds of crime and disorder.  He requested that the Panel reject the application based on the issues outlined below:

·                    at the time of submission here were no event details concerning how the event would be managed;

·                    police concerns related to a potential increase in crime and disorder activities resulting from the proposed extended period of alcohol consumption;

·                    the police were not clear that the licence holder for the premises had agreed to the holding of the event.

Sergeant Crump responded to questions raised by the applicant’s representative and the Panel as follows:

·                    the police were concerned that the requested additional event would result in an overstretching of resources on what was anticipated to be a busy jubilee weekend;

·                    although the police recognised that a risk assessment was in place and that 5 security personnel were proposed there remained concern that the extended period proposed for the event would result in a significant period of alcohol consumption, with no food, provided at the event, which could result in crime and disorder breaches;

·                    a conversation held with the owner of the venue indicated that he had expressed concerns at the event being held at his premises, although he had not submitted these in writing.

The applicant provided reasons for her application, which included:

·                    she felt a strong risk assessment had been undertaken and the police had been issued with the details of all security personnel and disc jockeys anticipated to be used at the event.  Her aim in holding similar events elsewhere was always to work in conjunction with the police to ensure a safe and secure event;

·                    she had conversed with the owner and he had given verbal assurance that he was satisfied with the event being held on his premises;

·                    she had organised and held a variety of similar events in Brent and Ealing and indeed had strong reference from the police in Ealing;

·                    she was happy to provide additional security personnel if this was regarded as appropriate by the Panel.

In response to questions raised by the objector and the Panel, the applicant stated that:

·                    previous events operated for a variety of different timings dependent on what was appropriate for each.  These had included 24-hour events also;

·                    she had approximately 6-7 years of experience of holding such events in Brent and Ealing;

·                    many of the patrons  ...  view the full minutes text for item 120.

Report of the Divisional Director Environmental Services.

[PLEASE NOTE THAT THIS ITEM WILL NOT BE HEARD BEFORE 6.30PM.]

In attendance:

RESOLVED:  That taking into account the:

·                    Licensing Act 2003;

·                    Guidance under Section 182 of the Licensing Act;

·                    the Licensing Objectives;

·                    Harrow Council’s Licensing Policy;

·                    the Human Rights Act 1998;

·                    the principles of natural justice;

·                    and representations made in writing and at the hearing;

the Panel had decided to grant the licence subject to the following additional conditions:

(1)               Amplified Sound Equipment shall be governed by a sound limiter device set at a level approved by the Licensing Authority;

(2)               Doors and Windows shall be kept shut during times when amplified sound and other music is used;

(3)               The Premises Supervisor (or representative) shall monitor the volume of music emanating from the premises and adjust the volume to ensure that any amplified sound or other music from the licensed premises does not cause a public nuisance.  The Premises Supervisor (or representative) can ensure that music from the premises does not cause a public nuisance by ensuring that the music is inaudible at the boundary of neighbouring properties.

REASONS:  The Panel considered that the decision promoted the licensing objectives for the prevention of public nuisance.