Agenda item

The licensing officer presented their report.

Members had questions for the licensing officer.

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

The licensing circulated additional papers at the meeting.

The police representative objecting to the application addressed the sub-committee and members had questions for the  police representative.

All parties were given five minutes for summing up.

The meeting went into closed session at 12.15 pm.

The meeting resumed at 1.00 pm.

RESOLVED:

That the application submitted by Cafe 16 Limited for a variation of the premises licence issued under the Licensing Act 2003 in respect of el Patacon 16 Tower Bridge Road, London SE1 4TR be granted as follows:

Conditions

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 condition as agreed by the sub-committee:

That condition 290 be amended as follows: “That SIA registered door supervisors, at least one of whom shall be a female shall be employed at all times after 22:00 hours that the premises are in use under this licence on Fridays, Saturdays and Sundays.”

Reasons

This was a meeting to consider the application made by Café 16 Limited to vary the premises licence granted under the Licensing Act 2003 in respect of the premises known as El Patacon, 16 Tower Bridge Road,  London SE1 4TR.

The applicant’s representative further stated that the premises operates as a responsible licensed premises and that they maintain good relations with their neighbours in particular the residents above the premises.

The applicant’s representative informed the sub-committee that the extended hours applied for would have little impact on the residential premises directly opposite and above.  This was substantiated by the fact that the sub-committee did not receive any representations from the residents during the consultation process. 

The applicant informed the sub-committee that they would be satisfied with reduced hours to those sought, with the terminal hour of 00:00.

The Metropolitan Police Service representative addressed the sub-committee. They expressed concern with the current variation application and potential impact on local residents.  The police informed the sub-committee that they would be satisfied with a reduced terminal hour of 23:00 hours.  The police stated they were not aware of any complaints received about the operation of the premises.

In reaching this decision the sub-committee had regard to all the relevant considerations and the four licensing objectives and considered that this decision was appropriate and proportionate in order to address the licensing objectives.

Appeal rights

The applicant may appeal against any decision to modify the conditions of the licence; and

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

a)  That variation ought not to have been made; or

b)  That, when varying the licence, the licensing authority ought not to have modified 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 Magistrates’ Court 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.