Agenda item

Committee to determine an application for a new premises licence report ENV943.

Decision

 

That the Premise Licence for KFC, 27 Harlaxton Road, Grantham, Lincolnshire NG31 7SA be granted as applied for, subject to the inclusion of two additional conditions as outlined within the supplementary papers.

 

The Vice-Chairman introduced those present and confirmed who would be speaking in respect of the application before the Committee.  Christopher Rees-Gay from Woods WHUR and Georgia Welsh, Area Manager KFC. 

 

Although a representation had been received in respect of the application before the Committee, it was noted that the representor was unable to attend the meeting.

 

The Licensing Officer presented report ENV943 which concerned a new Premises Licence in respect of KFC , 27 Harlaxton Road, Grantham, Lincolnshire.

 

In June 2026 an application was received by the Licensing Authority for a new Premises Licence.  The application was for the following activities and timings:

 

·       Late Night Refreshment Indoors and Outdoors Monday to Sunday 23:00 until 02:00

·       Opening hours Monday to Sunday 09:00 until 02:00

 

The premises already benefited from a Premises Licence which permitted Late Night Refreshment Indoors only, Thursday to Sunday from 23:00 to 00:00 with opening hours Sunday to Thursday 11:00 to 23:00 and Friday and Saturday 11:00 to 01:00.  This licence had been in place since July 2014 and it was stated that this would be surrendered if a new Premises Licence was granted.

 

Each application is determined on its own merits.  During the consultation period one resident submitted a representation relating to concerns regarding potential noise disturbance with the drive through speakers.  The agent for the applicant had offered a compromise, but this had been rejected by the local resident, so the representation still stood.

 

Licensing Officers have the delegated authority to decide whether a representation is relevant, vexatious, or frivolous however, Section 9 of the Revised Guidance issued under Section 182 of the Licensing Act 2003 states:

 

9.9 It is recommended that, in borderline cases, the benefit of the doubt about any aspect of a representation should be given to the person making that representation. The Subsequent hearing would then provide an opportunity for the person or body making the representation to amplify and clarify it.

It was felt that the representation appended at Appendix 2 did not fall within the delegated authority.

 

Where relevant representations are made, the authority must:

 

i.       Hold a hearing to consider them, unless the authority, the applicant and each person who has made such representation agree that a hearing is unnecessary, and

ii.      Having regard to the representations, take such steps mentioned below (if any) as it considers necessary for the promotion of the licensing objectives.

The steps are:

 

·       Grant the application subject to conditions that are consistent with the operating schedule modified to the extent that the Committee considered appropriate for the promotion of the licensing objectives and any mandatory conditions that must be included under the Licensing Act 2003.

·       Reject the whole or part of the application.

 

A location plan was appended to the report (Appendix 3) indicating the speaker location in relation to the street where the representation was received from.

 

When determining an application the licensing authority should give appropriate weight to;

 

-        The steps that are appropriate to promote the licensing objectives

-        The representation (including supporting information) presented by the parties

-        The guidance issued under section 182 of the Licensing Act 2003

-        South Kesteven District Councils Licensing Policy

 

Guidance issued under Section 182 of the Licensing Act 2003 stated at 9.37 that;

 

“As a matter of practice, Licensing Authorities should seek to focus the hearing on the steps considered appropriate to promote the particular licensing objective or objectives that have given rise to the specific representation and avoid straying into undisputed areas. A responsible authority or other person may choose to rely on their written representation.

         

They may not add further representations to those disclosed to the applicant prior to the hearing, but they may expand on their existing representation and should be allowed sufficient time to do so, within reasonable and practical time limits.”

 

A question was asked by a Member in relation to whether any other public noise nuisance had been received in relation to the premises to which the Licensing Officer confirmed nothing had been logged.  A further question was asked about the location of the representation received to which the Licensing Officer replied.

 

Mr Rees-Gay on behalf of the applicant then made their representation. A brief background was given in respect of the Adil Group which was a family firm established in 1969 and the brands covered by the Group.  Members attention was drawn to the supplementary papers that had been circulated which detailed the background to the Adil Group and also contained the conditions to be attached to the Premises Licence and the proposed further two conditions following the representation that had been received.  The two conditions were:

 

-        The drive thru order point will be set to ‘night mode’ at 22:00 daily (condition 6)

-        A telephone number for the manager at the premises shall be publicly available at all times the premises is open, being displayed in a front window of the premise. (condition 7)

 

Together with information relating to the ‘night mode’ for the order point speaker.

 

It was confirmed that there had been no complaints reported in respect of the premise and that neither the Police nor the Environmental Health Service had made any representation in respect of the premise.

 

Information was given in respect of the written training programmes and formal training programmes in place together with direct one to one training and e-learning.  The promotion of the licensing objectives was stated with the Area Manager having 13 years’ experience in the trade and the Store Manager having 10 years’ experience.  The extra hours requested would result in two more full-time positions and two part-time positions.

 

Details in respect of the CCTV and litter picking were also highlighted with the inclusion of the extra two conditions following the representation made, making the telephone number available for the Manager to be contacted at any time that the premise was open and the ‘night mode’ offered a 20% reduction in the noise level of the drive thru speaker.

 

A comment in respect of the telephone contact number was raised and it was suggested that a letter drop be undertaken in Buckminster Gardens advertising the contact number which was acknowledged by the applicants representative.

 

The Licensing Officer then gave her closing statement reminding the Committee to consider all representations made in respect of the new Premise Licence and having regard to all the relevant guidance and South Kesteven District Council’s Licensing Policy for the promotion of the four licensing objectives:

 

-        The Prevention of Crime and Disorder

-        Public Safety

-        The Prevention of Public Nuisance

-        The Protection of Children from Harm

 

Mr Rees-Gay then gave a brief closing statement on behalf of the applicants stating that none of the Adil Group premises licences had been reviewed or revoked and they had over 100 premises. Extensive training was put in place and they were happy to undertake a letter drop at Buckminster Gardens indicating the direct line to call in respect of any issues that arose in relation to the premise. There was no negative evidence in respect of the premise and no representations had been received from the Police or Environmental Health and he asked the Committee to grant the licence as requested with the addition of the two extra proposed conditions.

 

(11:50 the Licensing Officers and all those present for the application left the meeting)

 

Members discussed the application before them having regard to all representations made and all relevant guidance and policies.  It was noted that only the one representation had been received and unfortunately the party had not been able to attend the meeting.  No representations had been received from the Police or Environmental Health in relation to the premise.  Members noted the proposed additional conditions offered and it was proposed, seconded and agreed that the new premises licence be granted as applied for with the addition of the two conditions, on being put to the vote this was agreed.

 

(12:05 the Licensing Officers and all those present returned to the meeting)

 

The Legal Advisor read out the Committees decision.  The Committee had read all the paperwork before them and had heard from the Licensing Officer and Mr Rees-Gay and Georgia Welsh on behalf of the applicant. The resident who objected was unable to attend the hearing. 

 

Mr Rees-Gay provided a background of the business and its operation and the experience of the managers. Mr Rees-Gay referred to the representation relating to the noise levels of the drive through. A condition was offered to the objector regarding night mode being set at 22:00 hours daily. Mr Rees-Gay also confirmed when questioned that they would provide a letter drop to residents in Buckminster Gardens with a number to contact in the event of any problems. Mr Rees-Gay offered for inclusion on the licence the additional conditions as set out in their supplementary papers. 

 

The Committee noted that there are no objections from Environmental Health. 

 

The Committee were of the view that the conditions offered were appropriate and proportionate to the promotion of the licensing objectives and would address the concerns of the objector. They considered the additional conditions offered and decided to grant the licence subject to those conditions being included on the licence. 

 

There was a right of appeal to the Magistrates’ Court within 21 days of the licence decision being received.