Issue - meetings

The Sub-Committee considered very carefully the application for a variation of the premises licence at Ava’s, 25 Oxford Street, Southampton, SO14 3DJ.  It has given due regard to the Licensing Act 2003, the Licensing Objectives, statutory guidance and the adopted statement of Licensing Policy.  The Human Rights Act 1998, the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 and the Equality Act 2010 were borne in mind whilst making the decision.

The Sub-Committee made its decision on the basis of all of the evidence submitted, both in writing and given orally at the Hearing.

The Sub-Committee noted that no responsible authority had made representations.

The application was for a variation toextend the licensable activities Live music, Recorded Music and Supply of Alcohol by one hour and Late Night Refreshment by half an hour. Additional conditions had been offered.

The Sub-Committee heard oral evidence and representations on behalf of the applicant Mr Bousson and from his representative Mr Semper. Ms Castleman and Mr Beaven objecting to the application did not attend but had provided written representations.

Whilst none of the Responsible Authorities had made representations, the police attended the Hearing and at the request of the applicant PC Hawley explained the police position confirming that conditions had been agreed with the applicant, to be added to the licence, should the variation be granted.

Considering all the above, the Sub-Committee has decided to grant the application, subject to the additional conditions set out in the variation application.

Reasons

Legislation provides for a presumption of the granting of a variation of a premises licence, subject to the determination of the application with a view to promoting the licensing objectives in the overall interests of the local community. It was noted that Oxford Street is within a Stress Area designated by Section 6 of the Statement of Licensing Policy, and therefore the onus is on the Applicant to prove that the granting of the application will not adversely impact any of the Licensing Objectives and will not increase the impact in the area.

The Sub-Committee noted the concerns of the residents, which included noise, anti-social behaviour and crime and disorder.

Whilst the Sub-Committee noted the concerns of the residents, it was satisfied that there had been no complaints regarding the operation of the business to either Licensing or the Responsible Authorities during the period of the business commencing operation and the application for a variation of the licence.

There was a direct contradiction between Mr Beaven stating he had made complaints direct to the premises which was denied by Mr Bousson.  In the absence of Mr Beaven the Sub-Committee preferred the evidence of Mr Bousson.

The Sub-Committee was concerned regarding the number of SIA door supervisors proposed and expects the applicant to be pro-active in their risk assessments for busy times. It was felt that a condition requiring 2 SIA door supervisors would be an over reaction but would expect the position to be monitored by the premises, the police and the Licensing Authority.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 46