Agenda item

To receive and consider the attached report of the Chief Officer (Elections and Regulatory) regarding an application for the grant of a premises licence made by Brigante Ltd., for Caffe Brigante, Venture House, 17 Hunslet Road, Hunslet, Leeds, LS10 1QN.

The report of the Chief Officer Elections and Regulatory requested Members consideration of an application for the grant of a premises licence made by Brigante Ltd., for Caffe Brigante, Venture House, 17 Hunslet Road, Hunslet, Leeds, LS10 1QN

Present at the meeting were:

• Ahmad Alrababa – Applicant / Proposed Designated Premises Supervisor (DPS)

The Legal Officer set out the procedure for the hearing.

The Licensing Officer presented the application providing the following details:

• The application was for the premises to operate as a café/bar, proposing the Sale by Retail of Alcohol (for consumption on the premises) Monday to Sunday 7am to 11pm.
• A redacted copy of the application form was available at appendix A, from page 11 of the report.
• Agreements had been reached with responsible authorities, West Yorkshire Police (WYP) and the Environmental Protection Team (EPT), with details of the proposed conditions available at appendix C and appendix D.
• There were three objections from other persons, primarily focused on public nuisance concerns, which remained outstanding matters for consideration by Members. 
• The options available to Members were outlined as: grant the application as requested, grant the application whilst imposing additional conditions and/or altering in any way the proposed operating schedule, refuse to specify the said person as the DPS or reject the whole or part of the application.

The applicant addressed the Sub-Committee providing the following information:

• The objections were perceived to be based on a misunderstanding as to what the application and business operations were proposing. Assurance that the premises was not altering the café business model was provided for residents in the upstairs flats, the landlord and property management company.
• Discussions that there may be a future intent to sell some alcohol at the premises had occurred during initial conversations when considering renting the property from the landlord.
• Before enacting any licensable activities, agreement with all interested parties was sought in order to provide clarity of business operations, maintain good communication and create a cooperative, harmonious way forward. 

In response to questions from Members the following points were noted:

• The process for resolving the objection to the application by the landlord, that was detailed on page 43 of the agenda pack, was queried. It was outlined that further conversations were needed with all objecting parties, but a recent meeting with the landlord and property management company had concluded with a potential way forward and some agreements.
• Upon signing the contract with the landlord, the applicant had noted the future intention to possess a sale by retail of alcohol licence in order to be able to offer products such as Irish coffees and tiramisus to customers. During these early conversations, it had been outlined to the applicant that the property management company were likely to object, however, it was thought they had misinterpreted the business model, believing cocktails, wine and beer would be the main products for sale.
• As the proposed licensed hours for the application were from 7am daily it was confirmed that these hours had been applied for as they were considered standard licensing hours and correlated with opening hours. The applicant also ran a premises in Bradford which was licensed from 9am to 11pm.
• Engagement with local residents and the residents living in the above flats had been done via sending emails detailing the proposals and providing clarity on social media posts. There was a misunderstood perception as to what the business model was, and although, there was some local support for the application, the applicant sought to work through any issues and concerns with residents and the property management company. Members noted that any supporting information for the application should have been provided beforehand to supplement the evidence base.

In summary, the applicant outlined the following points to the Sub-Committee:

• The recent meeting with the landlord and property management company had reached somewhat of an agreement in light of an explanation of the business model to address misunderstandings. The applicant noted he had a good relationship with the landlord.
• The licensable activities applied for were not considered onerous and sale of alcohol was not the main direction of the business.
• The applicant did not want to cause issues for local residents and thought a good local reputation to be more important than the licence.
• Although the licensed hours applied for were up to 11pm, it was not anticipated for any alcohol to be sold at late hours.

RESOLVED – To grant the premises licence as applied for.