Agenda item

Continental Food & Wine, 24 Craven Road, W2

17/10969/LIPV (“The Premises”)

1.

Sale by Retail of Alcohol (Off)

Amendments to application advised at hearing:

Mr Hopkins, representing the Applicant, advised the Sub-Committee that the proposed terminal hour for off sales was being amended to midnight from Sunday to Thursday.  The same terminal hour of 01:00 was sought on Fridays and Saturdays as was originally applied for.

Decision (including reasons if different from those set out in report):

The Sub-Committee heard from Mr Hopkins, representing the Applicant.  He stated that Mr Thuraisingam had owned Continental Food and Wine for ten years and had held a personal licence for five years.  Mr Hopkins informed those present that the Applicant lived in the local area of the Premises and he was keen to have a good relationship with his neighbours.

Mr Hopkins advised that there were amendments to the application proposed by the Applicant.  The terminal hour for off-sales and the closing time for the Premises sought Sunday to Thursday was now midnight.  The same terminal hour of 01:00 was sought on Fridays and Saturdays as was originally applied for. 

Mr Hopkins said that the Applicant had offered a number of conditions which were appropriate for the premises, including CCTV (which was installed already) and a Challenge 25 policy. These were part of the original application.   The Applicant was also offering three additional conditions which would come into effect after the terminal hour on the existing premises licence.  These were that after 23:00 there would no sale of beer, lager or cider above 5.5% ABV (they would be placed in a separate cabinet which would be locked at 23:00), there would no miniatures of less than 20cl sold after 23:00 and there would be no single cans or bottles of beer, lager or cider sold after 23:00. 

Mr Hopkins explained that the customers sought by the Premises in respect of the application would be guests staying in the hotels in the area.  These customers arrived in Paddington from the West End and other parts of the country and rather than paying at the hotel bar, they visited the local supermarkets to purchase alcohol.  The Applicant was seeking to capture that trade, particularly at the weekend.  Mr Hopkins added that it was expected that the customers would consume the alcohol in their hotel rooms.

Mr Hopkins made the additional points that the Applicant would not sell alcohol to street drinkers and that he was aware of the problems in the area (he also owned a café/restaurant over the road), there were no issues in terms of the management of the Premises and he had never knowingly sold alcohol to someone who was drunk. 

Mr Hopkins expressed the view that as a result of the conditions proposed and the reduced hours Sunday to Thursday, the application would not lead to additional problems regarding street drinkers in the area.

PC Russell, prior to making her representation on behalf of the Police at the hearing, asked the Applicant how he would enforce the conditions offered such as there would be no single cans or bottles of beer, lager or cider sold after 23:00.  Would additional staff or a SIA registered security person be employed?  Mr Hopkins replied that there would be a minimum of two trained staff on duty in the shop after 23:00 daily.  There would be a personal licence holder present.  High strength alcohol would be locked in a separate cabinet after 23:00.  Mr Hopkins indicated that the Applicant would also potentially consider, in the event that the Sub-Committee deemed it appropriate, to have an additional lobby style door inside the shop in operation after 23:00 which would act similarly to a petrol station where customers are served through a hatch.

PC Russell, addressing the Sub-Committee, stated that the Police did seek a SIA registered security person at the Premises in the event the Sub-Committee was minded to grant the application.  The Police were requesting that the Sub-Committee did not grant the application.  She stated that whilst Continental Food & Wine was well run and there were low crime statistics relating to the Premises, the later terminal hours would nevertheless create issues for policing of the area.  The availability of alcohol until late into the night would potentially add to anti-social behaviour including drinking in the street in a sensitive area.  Whilst Continental Food & Wine was in a controlled drinking zone, it would place an additional strain on Police resources.  It was submitted that the Premises had the potential to become a destination venue as word would spread that it would be open until later than other premises in the area.  The Police objected to late hours for all off licence premises in the locality.

PC Russell advised that the Police also had concerns that customers and also staff working late into the night could become victims of crime.  If the application was granted it could potentially set a precedent for other licensed premises in the area, including supermarkets seeking later hours.  She added that Continental Food & Wine is located in a residential area and any noise from patrons could exacerbate anti-social behaviour.

The Sub-Committee heard from Mr Koduah on behalf of Environmental Health.  He referred initially to the changes to the conditions the Applicant had applied for.  He proposed alternatives to a number of the conditions which the Applicant had applied to delete or add to the premises licence.  Most of these alternatives were the Council’s Model Conditions.  Mr Koduah suggested that separate delivery and waste collection collections were attached to the premises licence, He proposed that no deliveries to the premises or collections place between 23.00 and 08.00 on the following day.  He had no objection to deliveries of fish, bread, vegetables and meat taking place earlier as proposed by the Applicant.  Mr Koduah was content for the restrictions in the seasonal variations relating to Christmas Day and Good Friday to be removed in line with other licensed premises.

Mr Koduah clarified that Environmental Health was opposed to the aspect of the application for the extension of the terminal hour.  He shared the same concerns as the Police.  The objections were not specifically due to the management of the Premises.  He made the point that the Applicant may have been seeking custom from hotel guests but that most hotels had specific arrangements after 23:00 for their guests, such as The Royal Eagle in Craven Road.

The Sub-Committee was also addressed by Mr Brown, representing SEBRA and Mr Zamit, Chairman of SEBRA.  Mr Brown stated that SEBRA agreed with the position of the Police and Environmental Health in terms of the objections to the extension in the terminal hours.  SEBRA’s specific concerns in their representation related to street drinking and anti-social behaviour.  Mr Brown referred to the application being beyond Core Hours.  He made the point that the conditions which had been proposed by the Applicant were those that SEBRA would expect to be proposed for an application within Core Hours.

Mr Brown said that he and Mr Zamit were not aware of any off licence premises in the area operating beyond Core Hours.  He believed this was significant.  Firstly, there was the potential for later terminal hours to act as a precedent and for similar premises to inevitably seek later hours as well.  Mr Brown expressed the view that there was no specific merit to the application which meant that it should be granted at this location.  There was a concern that Continental Food & Wine would act as a honeypot and draw people to the area, including hotel guests.  It was felt that this would be the case as it would be the only off licence premises operating until midnight Sunday to Thursday and 01:00 on Fridays and Saturdays.  It would lead to potential noise on the street therefore giving rise to a breach of the public nuisance licensing objective.

Mr Brown commented that SEBRA did not have issues with the management of the Premises.  However, it was their strong belief that management could not control what happened in the street away from the Premises.  It was the case that SEBRA was asking for the Sub-Committee to refuse the application.  It was stated that they had not been able to reach an agreement with the Applicant regarding the application. 

Mr Brown did advise the Sub-Committee that SEBRA had no objections to the restrictions in the seasonal variations relating to Christmas Day and Good Friday being removed.  Mr Brown did however, requestthat there were no deliveries or collections between 20:00 and 07:00 rather than 06:30 which had been proposed by the Applicant. 

Mr Zamit wished to provide some additional comments as to why the hours proposed were inappropriate at this location.  He explained that there were constant issues in Praed Street (which leads on to Craven Street) and other local streets including Queensway with street drinking and rough sleepers.  He was not aware of anywhere in the City of Westminster and certainly not in the wider locality where there were later hours permitted for off sales than Core Hours.  He believed that if the application was granted it would set a precedent and encourage off licences to apply for later hours. 

Mr Zamit did not object to the removal of the seasonal variations relating to Christmas Day and Good Friday if this was consistent with other premises licences.  Mr Zamit was content for this to be granted if it meant that the conditions the Applicant had proposed to add to the premises licence were attached, including the conditions the Applicant had offered at the hearing.  He did suggest that he would, have sought further conditions to promote the licensing objectives in the event the application was for a new premises licence.  He was of the view that there should be a condition attached to the licence that there would be no high strength alcohol sold as it was an issue in the area.

The Applicant was asked by the Sub-Committee how customers would be able to access food at Continental Food & Wine if the store was to be operated similarly to a hatch at a petrol station.  Mr Hopkins replied that the Premises would not be as busy later in the evening and staff would have time to obtain the items requested by customers.  The Sub-Committee was advised that there would be a minimum of two staff on duty.

The Sub-Committee, having carefully considered the application on its merits and in relation to the promotion of the licensing objectives, refused the aspect of the application to extend the proposed hours until midnight Sunday to Thursday and 01:00 on Friday and Saturday.  This was on the basis that the Police, whilst not having concerns about the management of the Premises, had strongly objected to the application, including that the availability of alcohol until late into the night would potentially add to anti-social behaviour, including drinking in the street, at a sensitive location.  The Police had expressed concerns that the Premises would become a destination venue leading to a strain on Police resources.  It was the Sub-Committee’s considered view that this would impact adversely on a residential area based on the evidence from the Responsible Authorities.  The Sub-Committee noted that the Police’s concerns were very much shared by Environmental Health and SEBRA.

The Sub-Committee was minded to grant the removal of the condition as applied for by the Applicant which restricted the hours of operation during the day on Christmas Day and Good Friday.  It was felt that it was appropriate that the Applicant should be able to operate in accordance with the standard hours on these days.  The Sub-Committee noted that no parties objected to the removal of this condition.  The Sub-Committee asked the Applicant whether as part of this process he was still willing to accept the additional conditions he had suggested being placed on the licence which would have the benefit of updating the licence to reflect the intention of all parties as well as  promote the licensing objectives.  These included the model CCTV conditions, a Challenge 25 policy being adopted and restrictions on delivery and collection times.  Mr Hopkins had advised during the hearing that CCTV had been installed by the Applicant already.  The Sub-Committee did not believe it was appropriate to impose these conditions because a significant aspect of the application had been refused. 

Mr Hopkins responded on behalf of the Applicant that he was content for proposed conditions (numbered 8 to 23 in the report) to be attached to the licence.  He was agreeable to SEBRA’s proposed amendment to Condition 21 requested by Mr Brown so that there would be no deliveries received or rubbish removed between 20:00 and 07:00.  The Sub-Committee thanked the Applicant for agreeing that these conditions would be imposed on the licence in these circumstances.

2.

Hours premises are open to the public

Amendments to application advised at hearing:

Mr Hopkins, representing the Applicant, advised the Sub-Committee that the proposed closing time for the premises was being amended to midnight from Sunday to Thursday.  The same closing time of 01:00 was sought on Fridays and Saturdays as was originally applied for.

Decision (including reasons if different from those set out in report):

The Sub-Committee refused this aspect of the application (see reasons for the decision in Section 1).

3.

Seasonal variations / Non-standard timings:

Removal of Seasonal variations / Non-standard timings:

Alcohol shall not be sold or supplied except during permitted hours.

In this condition, permitted hours means:

(a) On weekdays, other than Christmas Day, 08:00 to 23:00

(b) On Sundays, other than Christmas Day, 10:00 to 22:30

(c) On Christmas Day, 12:00 to 15:00 and 19:00 to 22:30

(d) On Good Friday, 08:00 to 22:30

Amendments to application advised at hearing:

None.

Decision (including reasons if different from those set out in report):

The Sub-Committee granted this aspect of the application (see reasons for the decision in Section 1).

4.

Conditions being varied, added or removed

Amendments to application advised at hearing:

None.

Decision (including reasons if different from those set out in report):

The Sub-Committee granted the removal of Condition 6 above and the addition of Conditions 8 to 23 (see reasons for decision in Section 1).  Condition 21 was amended to ‘No deliveries will be received or rubbish removed between 20:00 and 07:00.

Condition 7 remained on the premises licence.