Agenda and draft minutes

There were no apologies for absence.

There were no declarations of interest.

It was confirmed that all items of business were marked Part I and would be considered in public.

None.

Introduction

Jhini Mukherjee, Licensing Officer, introduced the application for a new premises licence at Grant View, Unit 1, 10 Stonefield Way, Ruislip, HA4 0JS. The Sub-Committee was given an overview of the application received and was informed that one representation had been received from an interested party during the consultation period. Members heard that, since submitting the application, the applicant had agreed to additional conditions at the request of the Metropolitan Police Service and the local authority. The Sub-Committee were invited to determine the application.

In response to questions from the Panel, it was confirmed that the premises were sited at a considerable distance from residential housing. No representations had been received from the responsible authorities - the Anti-Social Behaviour Team, the Metropolitan Police or the local authority.

The Applicant

Mr Graham Hopkins, the applicant’s representative, presented the application to the Sub-Committee noting that the premises, set over two storeys, would be used as a community venue for Tamil events such as weddings etc. The maximum capacity would be 150 people excluding staff. It was confirmed that the location had been specially selected as it was not in a residential area and would therefore not present a disturbance to those residing in the vicinity. Adequate parking provision was included in the lease agreement.

The proposal was for the premises to open between 09:00 and midnight seven days a week with the sale of alcohol until 23:00 hours – this would allow time for guests to say their goodbyes and leave gradually and quietly in an orderly fashion. A traffic marshal would be in attendance from 22:00 hours to ensure guests left quietly and adhered to the one-way system.

It was confirmed that CCTV cameras, appropriate signage, a dispersal policy and a noise limiter would be in use at the premises. Doors and windows would remain closed while events were taking place. The applicant was new to the business, but the proposed DPS was very experienced in the field.

It was noted that no representations had been received from the responsible authorities or from local residents. Only one objection had been received from a local Ward Councillor who had raised concerns regarding parking, possible misuse of the one-way system and the potential for public disturbance.  Responses to allay these concerns were set out in the agenda pack.

The Sub-Committee was advised that the licensing objectives would be promoted at the premises at all times.

In response to questions from the Sub-Committee, it was confirmed that the applicant, Mr Rasalingam, had previously worked as a builder. In terms of capacity, the venue could seat a maximum of 136 people but could accommodate 150 as it was set out over two floors. Only one wedding would be held on any given day and the applicant was willing to accept a condition in relation to this. Numbers would be checked by means of a click counter operated by the applicant or by SIA staff – the applicant was willing to accept  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.