Agenda item

The panel is asked to consider and determine an application for a premises licence is respect of the above premises.

Discussion:

The Chairman asked those present to introduce themselves and explained the process that the hearing would follow as outlined in the agenda.

The Principal Licensing and Enforcement Officer stated that the application was to request a new premises licence for the supply of alcohol off the premises between 07:00 hours and 23:00 hours, Monday to Sunday, in respect of 288 Lonsdale Drive, Rainham, Kent ME8 9JU. The application had been correctly advertised in the local press and notices had been displayed at the premises for the required timescale.

The following documents were included in the agenda for the Panel’s consideration:

•          Appendix A - pages 11 to 32 - a copy of the application submitted.

•           Appendix B - page 33 – a location plan showing the approximate location of the application.

•          Appendix C – pages 35 to 81- copies of representations received from members of the public.

In accordance with section 9.14 of the Amended Guidance to the Licensing Act 2003 Licensing Officers had been in discussions with colleagues in the Planning Service and confirmed that the premises had no planning history.

The application had been referred to the Licensing Hearing Panel for consideration due to relevant representations that had been received.

The Principal Licensing and Enforcement Officer advised the Panel that some supporting documentation on staff training had been submitted by the applicant’s agent via email on 28 January 2018 for circulation to all parties.  As this had not been possible in advance of the hearing, Members agreed that it be distributed at the hearing.

The Chairman invited the applicant and her agent to speak in support of the application for a premises licence.  The applicant’s agent highlighted the applicant’s experience in operating stores, having operated similar premises in a residential area of Sittingbourne. Those premises had never been the subject of any complaints and the applicant had a good relationship with the local community. Also, the applicant had invested £35k in fully refurbishing the premises at 288 Lonsdale Drive, which were joining the Premier franchise, including new CCTV and alarm systems and an electronic till point. As a newsagents and convenience store, the addition of alcohol sales to the store’s offer, not restricted to 20:00 hours, was considered to be crucial to the viability of the premises.     

The applicant’s agent also highlighted the significance of the Responsible Authorities, in particular the Police, not submitting representations against the application.  She said that the representations received from local residents, based on a fear of what might happen, were understandable but were, in her opinion, without foundation; many small shops operated in residential areas without any problems. Case law, the Thwaites case, demonstrated that decisions must be evidence based. If any issues arose after a premises licence was granted, there was the ability to apply for a review of the licence.

In response to questions for the applicant and her agent from objectors to the application, the following points were made:

• Although the Thwaites case related to an application to vary the licence of a public house, the principles were fully transferable to other situations.
• The footfall of the premises after 20:00 hours was estimated to be around 100.
• There was no independent audit of the staff training; the training provided was fully accredited and was consistent with training provision across the county.  
• There were no Challenge 25 posters on display at the premises because a licence had not yet been granted. The premises had been operating by way of Temporary Event Notices (TENs).

Next, Members of the Panel questioned the applicant’s representative and the following points were made:

• There was a litter bin outside the premises that was emptied every other day.
• Customers do not sit outside the premises drinking.

The Chairman invited those who had objected to the application to set out their objections. An objector pointed out that the Council’s Statement of Licensing Policy referred to Saturation and Cumulative Impact. It was suggested that the saturation point had been reached in this highly residential area. Concern was expressed that the Police would not attend a disturbance unless it was a serious incident. There was a history of anti social behaviour outside the premises when it was a video hire shop.  A statement from Philip Kolvin QC was referred to and this suggested that it was appropriate for Licensing Sub-Committees to take into account the potential impact of a premises licence application. Also, reference was made to the dangers of alcohol and the finding of the Office of National Statistics that alcohol deaths are on the increase.  Whilst it was acknowledged that these premises were an asset to the community and the new owners had invested heavily in them, the proposal to sell alcohol was not welcomed.

Another objector pointed out that the premises were on a school route and therefore alcohol would be on display to children.  Also, youths tended to congregate where alcohol was available. A third objector cited an occasion when he had been sworn at by young people sitting on his wall.

The applicant’s assessment that there would be a footfall of 100 after 20:00 hours was questioned by the objectors; it was suggested that only less responsible people would purchase alcohol after this time. If alcohol was available after 20:00 hours, there was a danger that the premises would become a magnet for people and this could impact negatively on the local community.   

There being no questions for the objectors from the applicant’s agent or members of the Panel, the Chairman invited both parties to sum up. The applicant’s agent said that the concerns that had been raised by residents amounted to speculation about the possibility of something happening should a premises licence be granted. There was no evidence that the licensing objectives would not be met. In relation to the proximity of schools, the shop had policies in place to protect children from harm and the licensing authority would check that any conditions attached to the licence were being met. The applicant had made significant investment in the premises and she was committed to making the business a success.

Temporary Event Notices (TENs) had been in place between 07:00 hours and 23:00 hours for 42 days, including the Christmas and New Year period, and there had been no issues. This was clear evidence that the licensing objectives would not be undermined should the licence be granted. The applicant was seeking a chance to demonstrate that she was able to manage licenced premises effectively. 

One of the objectors took issue with the assertion that their objections were speculation, pointing out that in 2014 he had chaired a meeting to discuss residents concerns. 

An objector questioned the extent of the use of TENs as it was his recollection that the premises still closed at 8.00pm on those occasions. The Chairman sought clarification on this point and it was confirmed that the premises did not stay open late in the evening every day that the TENs were in place.  

The Chairman asked all parties to leave the room during the Panel’s deliberations.  They returned for the Chairman’s announcement of the Panel’s decision.

Decision:

a)        The Panel considered the written and oral evidence presented at the hearing and had regard to both Medway Council’s current Licensing Policy and the Statutory Guidance.

b)        The Panel determined that the application for a premises licence for 288 Lonsdale Drive, Rainham, Kent, ME8 9JU be granted but reduced the hours permitted for the supply of alcohol off the premises to 07:00 hours to 21:00 hours, Monday to Sunday. The Panel considered these hours to be appropriate for this highly residential area to ensure that the licensing objectives, in particular the Prevention of Public Nuisance, were being promoted.