Venue: Council Chamber, Civic Centre, Silver Street, Enfield, EN1 3XA. View directions
Contact: Jane Creer 020 8379 4093 Email: email@example.com
WELCOME AND APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
Councillor Aramaz as Chair welcomed all those present and explained the order of the meeting.
DECLARATION OF INTERESTS
Members are asked to declare any disclosable pecuniary, other pecuniary or non pecuniary interests relating to items on the agenda.
There were no declarations of interest in respect of any agenda items.
Application for a New Premises Licence – Mad Husky Events Limited (51st State Festival)
RECEIVED the application made by Mad Husky Events Limited for the premises situated at Trent Park, Cockfosters Road, Cockfosters, EN4 0PS for a New Premises Licence.
1. The introductory statement of Ellie Green, Principal Licensing Officer, including:
a. The application was made by Mad Husky Events Limited for a new premises licence, in Trent Park.
b. The application was for an annual event, but limited to two consecutive weekend days per year, with a maximum capacity at any one time of 17,500 people.
c. This year the event would take place on one day only: Saturday 3 August 2019.
d. Mad Husky Events Limited had applied for and been granted a one off premises licence for the previous two years. The 51st State Festival had been held since 2014 in Trent Park.
e. There had been no formal action by responsible authorities following any of the previous events.
f. The application was for licensable activities between 11:00am and 10:30pm, including regulated entertainment, and sale of alcohol from 11:00am to 9:45pm on Saturday, with times on Sunday to be one hour less.
g. Trent Park had a full premises licence. The Council’s Parks Department were the licence holder.
h. Trent Park was hosting additional festivals this summer. More details were set out on page 3 of the agenda pack.
i. This application had received 17 representations by other persons in objection: these were local people, resident groups, parks groups and ward councillors, referred to as IP1 to IP17, and set out in Annex 5 of the report.
j. This application had also received five supporting representations from residents and local businesses, referred to as SUP01 to SUP05, and set out in Annex 6 of the report.
k. The representations in objection were based on all four licensing objectives.
l. The applicant had responded, as set out in Annex 3 and provided information on the noise management plan in Annex 4 of the report.
m. The Licensing Authority originally made representation, seeking modifications to conditions. The applicant agreed the conditions and subsequently the representation had been withdrawn.
n. The Metropolitan Police had not made any representation.
o. The applicant had been in consultation with Enfield’s Safety Advisory Group (SAG). Esther Hughes, chair of SAG was in attendance at the hearing today.
p. Since the report was published, further amended lists of conditions were produced and the final agreed list was set out in Annex 9.
q. At this hearing it would be for the Licensing Sub-Committee to determine whether the application was supported the four licensing objectives.
r. Representatives of the applicant present included Lizamarie O’Sullivan, Director of Mad Husky Events Limited, Saba Naqshbandi, Counsel, and representatives from PA Company, Sabre Security, and Vanguardia.
s. IP3, IP11 and IP12 were present. A note had been received from IP4 who wished to apologise for their absence, and had an objection to the whole of licensing in Enfield. This matter was being dealt with outside the hearing.
2. The statement of ... view the full minutes text for item 58.
Application for a Variation of a Premises Licence.
RECEIVED the application made by Mr Kyriacos Pitsielis for the premises situated at The Penridge Suite, 470 Bowes Road, London, N11 1NL for a Variation of Premises Licence LN/200501167.
1. The introduction by Ellie Green, Principal Licensing Officer, including:
a. The application was for variation of a premises licence for The Penridge Suite, 470 Bowes Road, N11.
b. The venue was at the end of a commercial parade, on a busy road, with residential properties above the shopping parade and surrounding.
c. The venue had been operating since before 2005.
d. The application sought an extension of licensable hours, as set out in the table on page 80 of the agenda pack, with a latest hour of 01:30am. The table showed the amended times following the applicant’s agreement to Licensing Authority proposals. The extension was essentially 1.5 hours on Friday and Saturday and 1 hour on Sunday. The opening hours and recorded music would be reduced via the variation.
e. The Monday to Thursday supply of alcohol hours was confirmed as correctly stated at 11:00 – 22:30. This allowed 30 minutes’ drinking up time.
f. Ten representations had been received, against the application, from local residents, and were set out in Annex 4. Representations were based on prevention of crime and disorder, and public nuisance, and objected to the application in its entirety.
g. The Licensing Authority had made representation originally. The reduced times and activities proposed were agreed and therefore the Licensing Authority representation was withdrawn.
h. There were no representations from other responsible authorities.
i. Agreed conditions were set out in Annex 5.
j. Apologies had been received from the applicant who had to travel abroad at short notice on a family matter, but was represented by the Premises Manager and a Licensing Consultant. Councillor Christine Hamilton was also in attendance as a witness in support of the applicant.
k. The ward councillor or other persons were not able to attend the hearing, but full consideration must be given to the written representations.
2. The statement of Desmond Michael, Licensing Consultant, on behalf of the applicant, including:
a. The Penridge Suite was not a nightclub or a disco. It was purely a function suite and catered primarily for family-type events, such as birthdays and christening parties. The clientele was very much family oriented and were not likely to cause nuisance or noise.
b. Planning restrictions had been dealt with prior to the Licensing application. The Planning Inspectorate had granted a permission on appeal. A Licensing application had then been made for similar hours, and taking regard of the responsible authorities’ representations.
c. Further to officers’ clarification of amended times agreed, it was confirmed that the hearing should proceed on the basis of the most up to date hours sought by the application as set out in the table on page 80 of the agenda pack. If a further extension to hours was required, another variation application would be made.
d. The Penridge Suite had operated responsibly since 2003. ... view the full minutes text for item 59.
To receive and agree the minutes of the meetings held on:
• Wednesday 17 April 2019;
• Wednesday 24 April 2019;
• Wednesday 8 May 2019; and
• Wednesday 15 May 2019
RECEIVED the minutes of the meetings held on Wednesdays 17 April, 24 April, 8 May and 15 May 2019.
AGREED the minutes of the meetings held on Wednesdays 17 April, 24 April, 8 May and 15 May 2019 as a correct record.