Issue - meetings
Application by Wayout Dreams Community Project Limited for a variation of the premises licence for '71-73 High Street' (London, NW10 4NS) pursuant to the provisions of the Licensing Act 2003
Meeting: 27/02/2014 - Alcohol and Entertainment Licensing Sub-Committee (B) (Item 4)
Additional documents:
- Wayout Dreams - Application, item 4 PDF 297 KB
- Wayout Dreams - Rep1, item 4 PDF 56 KB
- Wayout Dreams - Reps2, item 4 PDF 187 KB
- Wayout Dreams - Rep3, item 4 PDF 64 KB
- Wayout Dreams - Plan, item 4 PDF 1 MB
- Wayout Dreams - Old_Licence, item 4 PDF 886 KB
Decision:
That the application by Wayout Dreams Community Project Limited for a variation of the premises licence for 71-73 high street NW10 4NS be approved subject to the following conditions being added to the licence:
1) Notices advertising the number of a local licensed taxi service shall be displayed in a prominent position in the premises.
2) Facilities within the premises shall be made available for customers to await taxis.
The Alcohol and Entertainment Licensing Sub-Committee (B) felt that there was no evidence in the written representations submitted to suggest that the application would undermine the licensing objectives (prevention of crime and disorder, prevent of public nuisance, ensuring public safety and protection of children from harm) and accordingly the application was agreed.
Minutes:
The Senior Regulatory Services Manager informed the sub committee that an application by Wayout Dreams Community Project Limited for a variation of the premises licence for '71-73 High Street' (London, NW10 4NS) had been received with objections presented by local residents. The Legal Advisor clarified that the process to be followed was a fair and democratic process.
The applicant was invited to speak and made the following points:
· The application was to extend the hours to sell alcohol
· The premises was a self funded community centre and all profits went back into the centre
· The premises had previously had their licence reduce and subsequently the premises had changed the nature of its business and customer base
· The majority of current customers were members living in the vicinity or guests of members
· The community centre offered a gym, dance classes, catered for events such as weddings or christenings as well as fundraising
· There had been over 30 events in the past 3.5 years which had all been successful following working closely with the local police
· There had not been any issues with immediate neighbours regarding the events held
· It would not be cost effective to hold events regularly and would be to enable occasions such as weddings to be celebrated a little longer and for the community centre to be sustainable in the current financial climate
· Events that served alcohol had tight alcohol controls and SIA door staff were always present and to the required standard
During questions of the applicant the following points were clarified:
· The applicant currently received funding but due to the ending of many government grants wished to become self funded and sustainable for the future
· Members attended many daytime activities at the centre and the applicants knew most using the centre
· There was a residential property adjacent to the premises although there had never been any complaints received and had complied with advice from the noise pollution team for TENS
· There had previously been incidents of antisocial behaviour in the past which had been resolved in changes to use of the premises and clientele
· They had learnt their lesson from the previous reduction in licensing hours and had changed the business to a successful community venue with a new management team
Councillor Hector was invited to speak and raised the following concerns:
· She had received a number of complaints and concerns from local residents
· Residents were concerned that if granted, the premises would revert back to its old ways
· Residents had highlighted issues of dispersal at the end of the night with many persons waiting for public transport or loitering until the tube recommenced
· Cars often played loud music outside and rubbish would be left by patrons leaving the premises after purchasing food
· There was concern over children being exposed to alcohol and crime and disorder should the premises hold christenings and birthday parties
During questions of Councillor Hector, the following points were clarified:
· Many of the residents concerns were based on past events and it ... view the full minutes text for item 4
Meeting: 07/01/2014 - Alcohol and Entertainment Licensing Sub-Committee (A) (Item 5)
Additional documents:
- Wayout Dreams - Application, item 5 PDF 297 KB
- Wayout Dreams - Rep1, item 5 PDF 56 KB
- Wayout Dreams - Reps2, item 5 PDF 187 KB
- Wayout Dreams - Rep3, item 5 PDF 64 KB
- Wayout Dreams - Plan, item 5 PDF 1 MB
- Wayout Dreams - Old_Licence, item 5 PDF 886 KB
Decision:
That the application by Wayout Dreams Community Project Limited for a variation of the premises licence for ’71-73 High Street’ (London, NW10 4NS) pursuant to the provisions of the Licensing Act 2003 be adjourned.
The Alcohol and Entertainment Licensing Sub-Committee (A) felt that in the absence of the applicant, the application should be adjourned having exercised its discretion under paragraph 20 of the Licensing Act 2003 (Hearings) Regulations 2005 to allow the applicant to respond to the concerns raised in the written representations. However, the sub-committee also stated that the applicant should be advised that should they fail to attend a future hearing for whatever reason, then the application may be considered in their absence.
Minutes:
RESOLVED:
that the application by Wayout Dreams Community Project Limited for a variation of the premises licence for ’71-73 High Street’ (London, NW10 4NS) pursuant to the provisions of the Licensing Act 2003 be adjourned.
The Alcohol and Entertainment Licensing Sub-Committee (A) felt that in the absence of the applicant, the application should be adjourned having exercised its discretion under paragraph 20 of the Licensing Act 2003 (Hearings) Regulations 2005 to allow the applicant to respond to the concerns raised in the written representations. However, the sub-committee also stated that the applicant should be advised that should they fail to attend a future hearing for whatever reason, then the application may be considered in their absence.