Agenda item

The licensing officer presented their report.  Members had questions for the licensing officer.

The applicant addressed the sub-committee.  Members had questions for the applicant.

The ward councillor addressed the sub-committee.  Members had questions for the ward councillor.

Both parties were given five minutes for summing up.

The chair advised that as it was late that the parties would be notified of the decision in writing.

The meeting went into closed session at 5.20pm for the members to make their decision.

RESOLVED:

That the application by Saban Erturk for a premises licence to be granted under the Licensing Act 2003 in respect of the premises known as Istanbul Express, 234 Southwark Park Road, London SE16 3RW is granted as follows:

The operation of the premises under the licence shall be subject to relevant mandatory conditions, conditions derived from the operation schedule highlighted in Section M of the application form and the following conditions:

1.  That alcohol will not exposed for sale within five metres of the premises entrance.

2.  That no alcoholic beers, ciders or similar beverages with an alcohol by volume (ABV) of 6% or more shall be made available for sale at the premises.

3.  That the premises shall operate a Challenge 25 age verification scheme.

4.  That there will be a record of refusals which shall be made available to relevant authorities on request.

5.  That a CCTV system shall be installed and maintained.  The CCTV footage shall be stored for a minimum of 31 days and shall be made available to the relevant authorities on request.

6.  That all staff shall be trained to operate the CCTV in the store.

7.  That all staff authorising the sale of alcohol will hold a personal licence.

8.  That the premises will maintain training records of all staff will be made available to relevant authorities upon request.

Reasons

This was an application submitted by Saban Erturk for a premises licence to be granted under the Licensing Act 2003 in respect ofIstanbul Express, 234 Southwark Park Road, London SE16 3RW. 

The licensing sub-committee heard evidence from the applicant who informed the sub-committee who stated that the premises would be  run as a grocery store and would not retail high strength alcoholic beverages.  The applicant advised the sub-committee that he had conciliated with the public health authority, in accordance with condition 2 (above).

The licensing sub-committee heard from other persons, namely a local ward councillor who gave evidence on behalf of the Manor tenants and residents association, in addition to the Blue Bermondsey Business BID who informed the sub-committee that whilst both groups supported and welcomed the applicant had his business to the area, they did not support the application for a premises licence to community safety issues and a saturation of licensed premises along the high street.  The granting of a licence would undermine the licensing sub-committee’s previous decision to revoke 2 licences for the same reasons.

Whilst the licensing sub-committee was sympathetic with the concerns raised by the local ward councillor and the Manor tenants and residents association, in addition to the Blue Bermondsey BID, neither the police nor Southwark’s anti-social behaviour unite (SASBU) had raised any concerns.  The area did not fall within a cumulative impact zone and as such, Southwark Park Road was not deemed to be considered saturated.  The sub-committee recalls the revocation of the licence to the 2-premises on the Southwark Park Road, but are also aware that this was due to breaches in trading standards legislation, rather than wider community safety issues. 

The licensing sub-committee see no justified reasons to not grant the licence.  However, the sub-committee remind the ward councillor and other local groups including the residents that if there are concerns with the operation of this premises, there is the option to review the premises licence.  In the meantime, if there are wider saturation and community safety issues in the area, the sub-committee would recommend the ward councillor to approach the licensing unit to have these addressed.

In reaching this decision the sub-committee had regard to all the relevant considerations and the four licensing objectives.

The licensing sub-committee considered that it was appropriate and proportionate to attach these conditions in order to address the licensing objectives.

Appeal rights

The applicant may appeal against any decision:

a)  To impose conditions on the licence

b)  To exclude a licensable activity or refuse to specify a person as premises supervisor.

Any person who made relevant representations in relation to the application who desire to contend that:

a)  That the  licence ought not to be been granted; or

b)  That on granting the licence, the licensing authority ought  to have imposed different or additional conditions  the conditions of the licence, or ought to have modified them in a different way

may appeal against the decision.

Any appeal must be made to the magistrate court for the area in which the premises are situated. Any appeal must be commenced by notice of appeal given by the appellant to the justices’ clerk for the Magistrates’ Court within the period of 21 days beginning with the day on which the appellant was notified by the licensing authority of the decision appealed against.