Meeting documents

There were no apologies for absence.

There were no declarations of interest.

The Chairman introduced the parties and explained the procedure to be followed. The Hearing Regulations 2005 stated that the Authority must allow parties an equal period of time in which to present their evidence. It was agreed that the maximum time for each presentation be ten minutes.

The Licensing Enforcement Officer presented the report and highlighted background information, representations received and referred to the Special Policy in Ashby.

There were no questions for the Licensing Enforcement Officer.

The applicant's representative then presented the application as detailed within the report. She made reference to the Ashby Special presumption but added that there was a low risk attached to the premises and stressed that the Policy was rebuttal for businesses with little impact. The applicant's representative stated that the applicants were brothers with over 50 years experience of the trade between them, as they had managed restaurants, cafes and take-aways. She stated that the applicants would like to offer a condition with regards to keeping the street free from litter and the installation of a bin outside the premises. It was stated that the applicants had already met with the local police constables and the Licensing Enforcement Officer with regards to how anti-social behaviour could be avoided. The applicants also stated that they would tailor the menu so that after 11.00pm, the food offered would only be food that could be turned around quickly to avoid many customers building up within the premises and outside. It was stated that the applicants had taken all of the objections into account and offered to amend the application so that the terminal hour be 1.00am instead of 2.30pm.

A Member asked the applicants how they were planning on stopping problems from occurring within the premises as stated in the agenda papers. The applicant stated that he had many years experience and could asses each customer as they walked in on how they were likely to behave. Because of this, the applicant explained that he could act appropriately to ensure problems did not occur.

Mr N Smith - objector, referred Members to page two of the report which stated that security cameras would be installed. He asked the applicant if he was aware that security cameras were already installed around Ashby and that they did not stop problems occurring, and how this premises cameras would be any different. The applicant's representative responded that the cameras would be installed to the satisfaction of the Leicestershire Constabulary.

Mr N Smith asked how the applicant was intending to link the security alarm to the Police station when this was not possible. The applicant's representative apologised if this was not possible, it was not intended to mislead the Members in anyway, the applicants believed at the time the application was submitted that this was possible.

Mr N Smith asked how the applicants would limit the amount of people in the premises at one time, as it would be difficult due to the large groups of people that were around Ashby. The applicant's representative stated that the door to the premises could be closed if over crowded and no more customers permitted inside. She stated once again that the application was completed in good faith and was not intended to mislead.

Mr N Smith asked the applicants how they were intending to deal with litter as other premises had litter bins outside but people did not use them. The applicant's representative stated that the applicants would clean outside the premises each night as offered as a condition in the application.

Sergeant S Moore then presented his representation on behalf of the Leicestershire Constabulary as detailed within the report. He stated that the objection was originally submitted as Police Constable Arjoo had his concerns. Police Constable Arjoo has been impressed by the professionalism of the applicants and was pleased that the terminal hour has been amended. In light of this, Sergeant S Moore withdrew the Leicestershire Consubulary's representation.

In response to a number of questions from Members, Sergeant S Moore stated the following:

- with regards to linking premises alarms with police stations, it was a service that was provided many years ago but as the demand increased in was impossible to control. This was now a commercial service. Sergeant S Moore suggested that the applicant look into using a panic alarm system or to use the Ashby Pub Watch Radio. The applicant stated he would be willing to do that.

- It was confirmed that there was currently problems in Ashby with anti social behaviour within takeaways.

- It would be acceptable to close at 1.00am as there would be the police man power available to patrol the area.

In response to a question from a Member regarding the proposed seasonal opening hours, the applicant's representative and the applicant had a brief discussion, and stated that the seasonal element of the application was withdrawn.

Mr C Tandy - an objector, presented his representation as detailed within the report.

Mr N Smith - an objector, presented his representation as detailed within the report.

Sergeant S Moore declined the opportunity to make a closing speech.

All other parties gave a brief closing speech outlining issues previously raised.

At 7.50pm the Sub Committee adjourned to consider its decision and re-convened at 8.45pm.

The Legal Advisor read out the Members decision, findings of fact and the reasons for the decision.