Agenda item

To consider a report of the Head of Elections, Licensing and Registration setting out an application to vary a premises licence for Whites Deli at Otley Road Ls6

(report attached)

  Prior to consideration of this application, representations were made by the applicant’s legal representative for the submission of further documentation.  Copies of this had been sent to the Council - albeit after the timescale for the submission of information – and copies had also been provided to the two objectors who were in attendance

  Mr Cook, one of the objectors, referred to a document entitled ‘ Headingley Renaissance’, which he would reference in his representations, although this had not been included in the papers before the Sub-Committee

  Members considered how to proceed and decided, on this occasion, to accept both sets of documents, with the hearing being adjourned for a short period to enable the Sub-Committee to have sight of this additional information

  When reconvened, the Chair asked that due to the late submission of papers, when making their representations to the Sub-Committee, both parties should reference any particular points they felt the Sub-Committee should have specific regard to when considering the application

  The Licensing Sub-Committee considered an application to vary a premises licence made by Whites Deli Ltd for Whites Deli, 9 Otley Road Headlingley which was situated in an area covered by a cumulative impact policy

  Present at the hearing were:

  Mr Arnott – applicant’s legal representative

  Ms White – applicant

  Mr Cook – local resident

  Mr Unsworth – local resident

  The application had been brought to Members for consideration as the proposals had attracted representations.  It was noted that the representation submitted by the EPT had been withdrawn following agreements to measures which had been incorporated into a revised operating schedule

  Mr Arnott presented the case on behalf of the applicant and referred to the popularity of the premises within the Headlingley community; that the premises was a well-run, food-led café/bar which was seeking a modest extension to its opening hours.  Since the premises opened over a year ago there had been no problems or incidents; that the occasions when the premises had opened later with a Temporary Event Notice, no issues had occurred and that this demonstrated the premises could open later without adding to the cumulative impact of the licensed premises in this area

  In terms of the complaints received by local residents, none of these referred specifically to Whites Deli

  The Licensing Sub-Committee then heard from Mr Cook who outlined the reasons behind the Headingley Renaissance document which provided a vision to guide the future development of Central Headingley and the overwhelming level of support by local residents to resist further licensed premises

  Concerns were raised that the premises did not operate as a Deli but as a café to a broad clientele through the day.  However, by night the premises operated as a bar with music, with very few people eating.  Mr Cook accepted that the premises added to the facilities in the area but was of the view that there was no good reason to allow the application to extend the hours of operation.  Further canvassing of local residents about the application indicated whilst there was some support for the application, objections were raised

  The Licensing Sub-Committee then heard from Mr Unsworth who commented that many of the letters of support in the additional information submitted by the applicant’s legal representative were not from local people and that the premises was encouraging people into the area from further afield

  By way of response, the applicant explained that market research had indicated that a deli was required in the area.  However, it became clear that there was a greater demand locally for a café/bar use, so the extent of deli goods available was reduced and was now limited to less perishable items

  The Licensing Sub-Committee carefully considered the verbal representations from Mr Arnott, Ms White, Mr Cook and Mr Unsworth and the written representations submitted in respect of this application, including the additional information provided by both parties

  Members noted that the premises were situated in an area covered by a cumulative impact policy.  However, it was considered to be a well-run, food-led operation with 36 covers and that the existing conditions on the licence would prevent it becoming a vertical drinking establishment

  RESOLVED -  That the application be granted