Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Mrs. Bosworth, Parkin and Mrs. Wheat.

The Committee were advised that Councillor Mrs. Jalili would be replaced by Councillor Mrs. Gaffigan until the next annual meeting of the Council.

Members are asked to declare an interest in matters for consideration at the meeting.

No declarations were made.

(Enclosure)

The minutes of the meeting held on 25^th August 2006 were approved as a correct record of the decisions taken.

(a)               APPLICATION FOR THE VARIATION OF A PREMISES LICENCE FOR MILLSTONE INN, 1 ALL SAINTS STREET, STAMFORD

(The appendices to the report at agenda item 4a are attached for Committee Members only. If any other Members wish to see the supporting information, please contact the Service Manager, Environmental Protection)

Decision:-

That the application for the variation of a premises licence in respect of the Millstone Inn, 1 All Saints Street, Stamford, be agreed as applied for with the following conditions:-

1.                  That no person under the age of 18 years unless accompanied by a parent or guardian shall be permitted on the premises after 7:00pm in accordance with guidance from the Secretary of State and the Council’s licensing policy, to prevent such persons suffering moral, psychological or physical harm;

2.                  The joining of the Stamford Pubwatch scheme, in order to reduce instances of crime and disorder;

3.                  Subscribing to the “Challenge Under 21” proof of age policy in order to address issues in relation to under-age drinking (“No I.D. – No Service”);

4.                  No glasses or glass bottles are to be removed from the premises by patrons;

5.                  Where the premises are open beyond midnight, then a minimum number of two doorstaff for the first 100 customers and one door staff per 100 customers thereafter, registered with the SIA, shall be on duty from  9:00pm.

The Committee had before them report number ENV364 by the Service Manager, Environmental Protection in relation to an application to vary a premises licence in respect of the Millstone Inn, 1 All Saints Street, Stamford. A plan showing the location of the premises was attached at appendix 1, a full copy of the application at appendix 2 and a copy of the objection made by the police was attached at appendix 3. Representations were also received from one member of the public.

In introducing the report, the Environmental Health Practitioner stated that the application was for the variation of a premises licence to extend the hours for the sale of alcohol and allow children into the bar up to 9:00pm when accompanied by a parent/guardian. Representations had been received from Lincolnshire Police who objected to the application on two grounds: the Designated Premises Supervisor did not seem to supervise the premises and allegations over the sale of alcohol to people under the age of 18 years.

The applicant and the police had discussed the application and the police had agreed to withdraw their objection subject to conditions being added to the licence. A copy of the letter sent by Lincolnshire Police withdrawing their representation was circulated at the meeting. Written confirmation had been received from the Millstone stating that they were happy to adhere to the suggested conditions.

Inspector Rose from Lincolnshire Police confirmed that an agreement had been reached between the police and the applicant and stated that the police objection to the application for variation had been withdrawn subject to the licence meeting the following conditions: that the applicant should join the Stamford Pubwatch Scheme, subscribe to the government-led Challenge 21 proof of age policy, commit to not allow patrons to remove glasses or glass bottles from the premises and that, were the premises to be open beyond midnight, SIA registered door staff would be on duty from  ...  view the full minutes text for item 21.

The following item of business was considered as urgent because of the statutory deadlines that had to be met for hearings on applications for Temporary Event Notices (TENs) in respect of Chilli Masters, 2 Red Lion Street, Stamford..

Decision:-

That the application for Temporary Event Notices in respect of Chilli Masters, 2 Red Lion Street, Stamford, be refused.

Note to the police – that the premises be kept under review and any necessary action in respect of initiating a review of the licence be taken.

The Committee had before them an application for Temporary Event Notices in respect of Chilli Masters, 2 Red Lion Street, Stamford. A copy of the application was circulated to Members of the Committee together with the objection received from Lincolnshire Police. Lincolnshire Police objected to the application under the Crime and Disorder Licensing objective based on an incident at the premises where CCTV tapes had been requested by the police as evidence and a reluctance to call the police during a public disorder incident. The terms of Chilli Masters’ licence stipulated that CCTV tapes should be saved for 28 days and made available at the request of the police. The applicants had liaised with the police and proposed to reduce the dates applied for to 24^th December 2006 and 31^st December 2006 until 2:30am, an hour earlier than had been applied for. The police had not withdrawn their objection.

Inspector Rose of Lincolnshire Police explained that there had been two occasions on which the applicant had been asked to supply CCTV footage where the tapes had been erased or not recorded properly. The police were concerned that Chilli Masters were not honouring the terms of their original licence and did not think it appropriate that they be granted any extension. The policy within Stamford of closing food outlets before clubs had seen a decrease in general crime. Committee members asked questions about the incidences of crime and disorder that had occurred within the environment of the premises.

The Clerk to the Committee clarified whether the application should be considered as submitted or whether it was for 24^th December 2006 and 31^st December 2006 only. However, it was confirmed that the Committee had to determine the application as submitted.

In summing up, the Environmental Health Practitioner reminded the Committee that they had to accept or refuse the application in full. The officers and police representative left the meeting.

The Committee discussed the application. It was proposed, seconded and agreed that the application should be refused because, on the information available, the Committee was concerned that to grant the application as submitted would not satisfy the licensing objectives in terms of crime and disorder. The Committee also agreed that a note to the police should be added; given the failure of the applicant to comply with the conditions of their licence, the premises should be monitored.

The officers and police representative returned to the meeting and were advised of the decision as noted above. The police representative was asked if they would monitor the premises and take any necessary action in respect of requesting the review of the licence.

The meeting was closed at 10:54.