Agenda item

Applicant: Mr Kambiz Shayegan Zadeh, represented by David Holley (Licensing Agent)

Interested Party: the Circus Residents Association, represented by Henry Brown

Witnesses for the Interested Party: Mrs Rothwell and Mr Plumstead

The Environmental and Licensing Manager introduced the application, which was for a new premises licence authorising the sale of alcohol, with food orders only, for consumption off the premises between the hours of 11.00 and 23.00 Monday to Sunday. Representations had been received from Interested Parties relating to the licensing objectives of the prevention of crime and disorder, the prevention of public nuisance and the protection of children from harm.

Mr Holley stated the case for the applicant. He said that the applicant, who had owned and operated a takeaway in Julian Road for six months, wished to offer his customers the option of buying wine or beer to consume with the food they purchased from him. He did not wish the premises to become an off-licence. Food was served at the shop or could be ordered for delivery to customers’ homes. There were no other premises selling hot food in Julian Road, though there were other premises in the road selling alcohol up to 23.00. He said that the applicant had taken time to discuss the application with him before submitting it. As a result, he had decided not to store alcohol in the ground floor shop; customers would be able to consult a wine and beer list from which they could make their selection. He had also decided that it was best at present not to open beyond 23.00. Following an incident where a pile of rubbish left outside a shop in the road had been set on fire, the applicant had decided that no rubbish would be left outside the premises, but would be removed every day. Mr Holley noted that there had been no representations from residents living in Julian Road or neighbouring roads. He drew attention to the fact that the premises were on the very edge of the cumulative impact area, and referred to paragraph 16.11 of the Council’s Statement of Licensing Policy, which states that applications will be decided in accordance with the individual circumstances of the case.

In response to questions from Members, Mr Holley and Mr Zadeh stated:

• there would be a minimum charge of £10 for food purchased at the premises

• the drinks sold would be wine and beer, but not cider or canned beer

• the strength of the beer sold would be 3.5-4%

• if people wanted cheap beer, they would be more likely to go to another outlet

In response to questions from Mr Brown, Mr Holley and Mr Zadeh stated:

• wine and beer would be sold in bottles

• it was expected that the sale of drink would account for 10% of the  turnover of the premises

• the applicant had not sought support from local residents for the application

Mr Brown stated the case for the Circus Residents’ Association. He introduced his witnesses, Sally Rothwell and John Plumstead, local residents who shopped regularly in Julian Road. Mr Brown said that Julian Road was a small shopping area, situated in a mixed residential inhabited by both the young and the elderly. There was a primary school nearby. A good deal of motor traffic used Julian Road as an alternative route. He noted that an Interested Party had said in his representation that Julian Road could be intimidating at night because of noise and disturbance from people gathering there. Mr Brown said that residents were concerned that more people would be attracted to the premises if they could buy alcohol there, and that there would be an increase in noise nuisance, litter and broken bottles. He referred to the information he had circulated to the parties before the meeting, which gave figures provided by the Police about crime and disorder in the area. This revealed that 23% of crime incidents around Julian Road were crimes against the person and that 57% of anti-social behaviour occurred between 18:00 and 02:00 and that there was a higher-level of anti-social behaviour between 18:00 and 00:00 on Friday to Sunday. There was already crime and disorder in the area, and residents feared that another outlet selling alcohol would make this worse. He suggested that customers who had bought food and drink from the premises would be likely to sit down nearby to consume them, which could lead to increased litter. Glass bottles which had they left behind might be broken by other people and become a hazard to children and dogs. He called his first witness, Sally Rothwell. She said that went to Julian Road two or three times a day. She often felt intimidated by people hanging around in the road for no obvious purpose and avoided going there at night. There was always a great deal of paper litter and broken glass in the road. Mr Brown then called Mr Plumstead, who said that he also went to Julian Road two or three times a day. With the consent of the applicant and by leave of the Chair, Mr Plumstead submitted a photograph showing a group of people sitting on the pavement by a building in Julian Road. Ms Rothwell said that this would not have been seen five years ago. Mr Brown said that he hoped that the Sub-Committee would reject the application. If Members felt unable to do this, he asked them to consider attaching the following conditions to the licence:

1. No special offers to be permitted.

2. Sales of alcohol to be with deliveries only.

3. Drink not to be supplied in glass bottles.

Mr Holley asked Mr Brown whether there was any evidence linking anti-social behaviour in Julian Road to the consumption of alcohol. Mr Brown replied that this might be inferred from the fact that most anti-social behaviour occurred between 18:00 and 00:00 and was worse at weekends.

The parties were invited to sum up.

Mr Brown said that the premises appeared to have few customers at present, but residents were concerned that if an alcohol licence were granted, many more people would be attracted to them. There was a fear that the premises might try to attract customers by selling cheap drink and that there would be an increase in anti-social behaviour in the area. He urged the Sub-Committee to reject the application, or if they felt unable to do so, to impose the conditions he had suggested.

Mr Holley submitted that the representations contained a lot of opinion, but very little hard evidence. The Co-operative Store in Julian Road, which sold alcohol, had been there a long time and there was little to suggest that it had contributed to anti-social behaviour. The Council’s Statement of Licensing Policy said that the impact of different kinds of premises would be different and that decisions should reflect the individual circumstances of each application. The premises were only just within the cumulative impact area. A good deal of thought had been given to the application before it was submitted and appropriate conditions had been included in the operating schedule.

Following an adjournment, the Sub-Committee RESOLVED to grant the licence, subject to the mandatory conditions, to conditions consistent with the operating schedule, and to the following conditions imposed by the Sub-Committee:

·  There shall be no irresponsible drinks promotions

·  Alcohol shall only be sold with food

·  Alcohol shall only be provided with a minimum food order of £10

·  Beer shall not be sold in glass bottles

Authority was delegated to the Licensing Officer to issue the licence accordingly.

REASONS

Members have determined an application for a Premises Licence at Solo Burger, Rivers Street Place, Bath. In doing so they have reminded themselves of the Licensing Act 2003, Statutory Guidance, the Council’s Statement of Licensing Policy, which includes the cumulative impact policy, and the Human Rights Act 1998. 

Members are aware that the proper approach under the Licensing Act 2003 is to be reluctant to regulate in the absence of real evidence. Further, they must only do what is necessary and proportionate to promote the licensing objectives based on the evidence presented to them.

Members listened carefully to the applicant, took account of the representations from the Police, the Interested Parties and also took account of the representations made by the licence holder. Members were careful to balance the competing interests of the parties. 

The applicant stated that the business had been operating successfully as a take-a-way food outlet for the last 6 months but in response to demand for deliveries of wine with food he wanted to be able to offer the off sale of alcohol. He suggested that the sale of alcohol with food raised only minor risks to the licensing objectives and that conditions would be able to deal with these. So far as the protection of children from harm was concerned a number of conditions relating to deliveries and the age of recipients were suggested.

Members noted that there were no representations from the Police regarding crime and disorder or from Children Services on the protection of children from harm. However, Members heard representations from interested parties who stated that Rivers Street is a densely populated area and anything that encouraged people to hang around with alcohol in glass bottles would lead to an increase in crime and disorder, public nuisance, litter and broken glass as residents already felt intimidated by people hanging around on Julian Road.

Members do not consider that these premises will add significantly to cumulative impact and grant the licence as applied for with conditions consistent with the operating schedule and as suggested by the applicant this morning. Members also add the following conditions as necessary and proportionate to promote the licensing objectives.

·  There shall be no irresponsible drinks promotions

·  Alcohol shall only be sold with food

·  Alcohol shall only be provided with a minimum food order of £10

·  Beer shall not be sold in glass bottles

Delegated authority to the licensing officer to issue the licence.