Content

Notification of decision
following a Licensing Sub-Committee hearing to determine an
application for the grant of a premises
licence under section 17 of the Licensing Act
2003
 
PREMISES:  
Unit 8, Brentford Lock, High Street, TW8 8AQ
(“the Premises”)
 
APPLICANT:  QC Newport Ltd (“the Applicant”)
 
TAKE NOTICE
THATON 7 May 2024 following a
hearing before the Licensing and General Purposes Sub-Committee
(the “Licensing Panel” or
“Panel”),
 
HOUNSLOW COUNCIL,
as the Licensing Authority for the Premises
RESOLVED that:
 
the application for the grant
of a premises licence for Unit 8, Brentford Lock, High Street, TW8
8AQ is GRANTED subject to the modifications
and conditions stated below.
 
REASONS:
 

1)        
The Panel convened to determine an application for
the grant of a premises licence for Unit 8, Brentford Lock, High
Street, TW8 8AQ made under the Licensing Act 2003. 
 

2)        
The Applicant applied for the following licensable
activities:
 
·      
Supply of alcohol on and off the
premises:

Monday to Sunday 11:00 to 23:00

 
·      
Hours premises are open to the
public:

Monday to Sunday 11:00 to 23:30
 
Whilst not expressly stated within the Application Form for the
Premises Licence, the Applicant had by way of a proposed condition
of the Licence (if granted), requested a seasonal variation for
both the supply of alcohol on and off the premises and Late Night Refreshment from the terminal hour for
those activities on New Year's Eve through to the commencement time
for those activities on New Year's Day.
 

3)        
A copy of the application was attached as Appendix A (pages
12 to 24) of the agenda pack.
 

4)        
The Premises are not currently licensed. A previous
licence at the Premises is understood to have lapsed.
 

5)        
The Premises are situated in an area of mixed
commercial and residential properties with the Premises being at
the bottom of a block of flats.
 

6)        
The hearing was held in-person with one of the Panel
members attending over Microsoft Teams. The Panel consisted of
three members. All members of the Licensing Panel were in
attendance throughout the hearing, and during deliberation which
took place separately in a closed session.
 

7)        
The Licensing Panel carefully considered all the
relevant information including:
 
·      
Written and Oral representations by all the
parties
·      
The Licensing Act 2003 and the steps appropriate to
promote the Licensing Objectives
·      
The guidance issued under section 182 of the
Licensing Act 2003 (“the Statutory
Guidance”)
·      
Hounslow Council’s Statement of Licensing
Policy (“the Council’s Policy”)
·      
The Human Rights Act 1998
 

8)        
The measures and conditions the
Applicant proposes to include with any licence that may be granted
are set out in the application in Appendix A and
also listed in
paragraphs 4, the Operating Schedule (pages 8) of the agenda
pack.  
 

9)        
As part of the consultation process the Authority
received an email from Metropolitan Police Service (“the
Police”) stating they had agreed conditions with the
Applicant that they ask to be included should the Licence be
granted. The email and agreed conditions are shown as Appendix
C (pages 63 – 65) of the agenda pack.
 

10)     
The Authority also received numerous representations
from residents objecting (“the Objectors”) to
the application due to concerns with a possible increase in public
nuisance, crime and disorder from anti-social behaviour and a
possible risk to public safety. In particular,
various representations refer to potential nuisance from
noise from the premises as well as concerns that the Premises is to
operate as a delivery business resulting in issues with traffic
management. The written representations are shown at pages 25-62)
of the agenda pack.
 

11)     
There were no representations from the Licensing
Enforcement opposing the application.
 

12)     
Subsequent appendices and further submissions to
existing representations were submitted prior to the hearing. This
included a letter from the agent for the Applicant addressing some
of the concerns raised around the operation of Premises and stating
that the main purpose of the Premises was to operate as a
restaurant, a copy of the letter is shown at Appendix
D of the agenda. Further submissions from Objectors were
received which included photos of the Premises and photos
illustrating delivery drivers on scooters on the
pavement.
 

13)     
A copy of the report and all representations
received were sent to the Applicant.
 

14)     
Two of the people involved in the running of the
business at the Premises including the proposed DPS were in attendance at the hearing and represented by
a Mr Christopher Montanez (“the Agent”) whilst
six of the Objectors also attended.
 

15)     
During the licensing panel hearing the facts giving
rise to the application for the grant of a premises licence were
set out by the licensing officer and were agreed by all the parties
in attendance. It was noted that the Applicant had originally
requested a seasonal variation to include Late Night Refreshment
and the supply of alcohol on and off the premises on New
Year’s Eve from 23:00 through to the commencement time for
those activities on New Year’s Day, however, this was
subsequently agreed to a reduced time of from 23:00 on New
Year’s Eve to 02:00 on New Year’s Day in agreement with
the Police. The Applicant acknowledged that this was an error and
that a one-off request to operate for longer time as originally
proposed would be more akin to a Temporary Event Notice Application
and so were happy to agree the Police’s suggested
recommendation in the reduced timing.
 
Submissions by the Applicant and
Objectors
 

16)     
The Agent stated that the Application sought the
ability to sell alcohol alongside food. The Applicant was not
seeking to operate Late Night Refreshments (save for the seasonal
variation for New Years Eve to New Year’s
day) and highlighted that the Applicant could sell hot food
until 23:00 without the need for a licence. The Agent added that
ancillary to the restaurant would be takeaways and deliveries as
was the case with many other restaurants but dismissed concerns
that the Premises was intending to operate as a ‘dark
kitchen’ whereby deliveries through ordering applications was
the main business. He stressed that the restaurant was the main
nature of operation and that the current licence applied for was in
line with the previous licence which was
in operation at the Premises, save for the addition of making
alcohol off sales (i.e. takeaway and deliveries) as well as on
sales. It was also highlighted that the previous licence appeared
to be lightly conditioned, whereas they had now suggested further
conditions and that other than the Police who they had subsequently
agreed conditions with, no other responsibly authority had raised
concerns or issues.
 

17)     
With reference to the updated Premises plan
provided, the Panel queried what the number of covers were for the
restaurant. The Agent confirmed that the currently layout of the
restaurant allowed for 50-60 chairs which included the bar area and
the private dining room (PDR) but not the proposed outdoor seating.
In response the Panel questioned why there had been such a
substantial drop in seating capacity given the previous restaurant
holding a licence allowed for around 200 covers as well as
questioning why there was such a large area allocated for storage.
The Agent explained that the Applicants were used to running
smaller restaurant operations and wanted to avoid having a big
restaurant which appeared to have numerous empty seats. In
addition, given the Applicant and their business partners operate
two other restaurants, they have allowed for a bigger storage area
to allow flexibility for the Premises to store additional chairs
and other catering supplies as may be necessary for the other
smaller Premises located in central and west London. The Agent also
confirmed that the kitchen may be used to prepare items of food for
the other restaurants, hence the bigger kitchen area, but insisted
that the main nature of the business remained to operate as a
restaurant.
 

18)     
Further queries around the plan were raised and
where the outdoor seating would be arranged. The Agent made reference to the second plan included within
the application which shows an area          
striped green and to be used as the outdoor seating area. This area
was said to be included within the Lease demise to the Applicant
and so could be used for outdoor seating. The Objectors were
concerned that the area where the seating was proposed could block
access to the entrance to resident’s building although the
Agent suggested there was sufficient space. The Agent added that
the outside seating is something the Applicant will be considering,
however the inside of the Premises and the Restaurant remains the
priority, if the outside seating doesn’t work then this would
be changed accordingly. The updated plan was also said to have been
chosen as the revised option because it took account for a better
flow of the restaurant.
 

19)     
A key concern raised by Objectors was around
potential noise nuisance from the Premises and the Panel therefore
asked what works and steps had been taken to mitigate any potential
noise complaints? Whilst the Agent could not confirm the exact
works which had taken place as these were being dealt with by the
Applicant’s project manager, the Applicant did confirm that
there were no structural changes taking place and in particular no
changes to the existing ceiling. The Agent also confirmed that as
per the updated plan, the main entrance and exit to the restaurant
to be used for customers as well as any takeaways or deliveries was
from the roadside so as to avoid
disturbance using the other entry / exit points which were closer
to the residents’ building entrance. Concerns were also
raised by an Objector relating to vibration, noise and damage
caused by the ventilation system from the restaurant. This was said
to have caused damage to the said Objector’s lighting. Whist
the Panel were sympathetic to the Objector, they emphasised that
they could only consider the Licensing aspects of the Application
which currently relate to supply of alcohol on and off the premises
and Late Night Refreshment under a
seasonal variation. It was also established that the Restaurant was
still undergoing renovations and had not yet begun operating and
that the issue of the damaged lighting and vibration (albeit said
to be continuous) were prior to the current Applicant’s
ownership of the Premises.
 

20)     
As per the Objectors’ representations, the
management of deliveries was an area of concern. Whilst the Agent
could not specify, given the need for fresh produce etc the Agent
suggested that the restaurant could receive deliveries once a day,
six days a week but reiterated that it could be more or less depending on circumstances. The
Objectors queried how deliveries would be made given the limited
parking availability which in any case always seemed to be full.
The Agent suggested that they would make use of the loading bays
and that parking was available, albeit limited. The Agent added
that there was no intention to make use of the entrance on the
other side of the restaurant where the resident’s building
entrance was for deliveries and that if the Panel felt it
necessary, they could add a condition to the Licence accordingly.
As for takeaway deliveries from the restaurant, other neighbouring
premises also make use of delivery services and so information
could be gleamed from them as well as the delivery companies to see
how they manage to operate and where their delivery drivers park
when collecting orders. In relation to noise from delivery
scooters, the Agent suggested that there are options with delivery
companies to make use of certain vehicles such as electric vehicles
only. This would then reduce any potential congestion and
noise.
 

21)     
The Objectors reiterated their concerns about this
being an industrial kitchen stating that there were many children
living in the locality at the moment
with the area being developed and the idea of an industrial kitchen
did not fit in with this. The Objectors added that the singing of
Happy Birthday could be heard from the Premises when it previously
operated and that even recently the drilling from the renovation
works could be heard. Furthermore, the Objectors relayed they were
already experiencing issues arising from one other neighbouring
premises often resulting in noise or anti-social behaviour and did
not want this to be a repeat of the same. Smells emanating from the
Premises were also suggested as a possible
issue.
 

22)     
Overall the Objectors believed that enough thought had
not been given as to how the restaurant intended to operate and
that they would like to have seen more to demonstrate a responsible
owner taking regard of the neighbours in relation to noise, smells,
and parking. They suggested that what had been demonstrated was not
enough to convince them and that the area did not need another
restaurant.
 

23)     
The Agent echoed his earlier comments about the
nature of the business being a restaurant and that the restaurant
was yet to operate and so any issues identified once in operation
could be raised with the Applicant to address. As the Applicant is
yet to operate, they are not yet able to tackle any potential
issues which may arise. In addition, the Agent confirmed that he
had made enquiries as to whether there were any prior issues at the
Premises from the previous Licence but was informed that there had
not been any.
 

24)     
The Panel noted no representation was put in by
Licensing Enforcement.
 
Statutory Guidance
 

25)     
The Panel considered the Statutory Guidance further
which states:
 

“2.1    Licensing authorities should
look to the police as the main source of advice on crime and
disorder. They should also seek to involve the local Community
Safety Partnership (CSP).”
 

26)     
Furthermore, the Statutory Guidance states the
following:
 
“Public Nuisance

2.21      The 2003 Act enables licensing
authorities and responsible authorities, through representations,
to consider what constitutes public nuisance and what is
appropriate to prevent it in terms of conditions attached to
specific premises licences and club premises certificates. It is
therefore important that in considering the promotion of this
licensing objective, licensing authorities and responsible
authorities focus on the effect of the licensable activities at the
specific premises on persons living and working (including those
carrying on business) in the area around the premises which may be
disproportionate and unreasonable. The issues will mainly concern
noise nuisance, light pollution, noxious smells and litter

 

2.22      Public nuisance is given a
statutory meaning in many pieces of legislation. It is however not
narrowly defined in the 2003 Act and retains its broad common law
meaning. It may include in appropriate circumstances the reduction
of the living and working amenity and environment of other persons
living and working in the area of the
licensed premises. Public nuisance may also arise as a result of the adverse effects of artificial
light, dust, odour and insects or where its effect is prejudicial
to health.

 

2.23      Conditions relating to noise
nuisance will usually concern steps appropriate to control the
levels of noise emanating from premises. This might be achieved by
a simple measure such as ensuring that doors and windows are kept
closed after a particular time, or persons are not permitted in
garden areas of the premises after a certain time. More
sophisticated measures like the installation of acoustic curtains
or rubber speaker mounts to mitigate sound escape from the premises
may be appropriate. However, conditions in relation to live or
recorded music may not be enforceable in circumstances where the
entertainment activity itself is not licensable (see chapter 16).
Any conditions appropriate to promote the prevention of public
nuisance should be tailored to the type, nature and characteristics
of the specific premises and its licensable activities. Licensing
authorities should avoid inappropriate or disproportionate measures
that could deter events that are valuable to the community, such as
live music. Noise limiters, for example, are expensive to purchase
and install and are likely to be a considerable burden for smaller
venues. 2.24 As with all conditions, those relating to noise
nuisance may not be appropriate in certain circumstances where
provisions in other legislation adequately protect those living
in the area of the premises. But as
stated earlier in this Guidance, the approach of licensing
authorities and responsible authorities should be one of prevention
and when their powers are engaged, licensing authorities should
be aware of the fact that other
legislation may not adequately cover concerns raised in relevant
representations and additional conditions may be appropriate
emanating from the premises may also be appropriate to address any
disturbance anticipated as customers enter and leave.

 

2.25      Where applications have given
rise to representations, any appropriate conditions should normally
focus on the most sensitive periods. For example, the most
sensitive period for people being disturbed by unreasonably loud
music is at night and into the early morning when residents in
adjacent properties may be attempting to go to sleep or are
sleeping. This is why there is still a need for a licence for
performances of live music between 11 pm and 8 am. In certain
circumstances, conditions relating to noise.”

 
 

The Council’s Statement of
Licensing Policy 2020-2025
 

27)     
The Council’s Policy states the
following:
 
“54. Each of the
four licensing objectives are of equal importance and therefore
each needs to be considered with equal weight.
 
55. The Council expects
applicants to risk assess their proposals and put forward measures
aimed at promoting the licensing objectives.
 
LP2 The
Four Licensing Objectives
 
1.
Prevention of Crime and Disorder
Whether the
proposal includes satisfactory measures to mitigate any risk of the
proposed operation making an unacceptable contribution to levels of
crime and disorder in the locality.
 
2. Public
Safety
Whether the
necessary and satisfactory risk assessments have been undertaken,
the management procedures put in place and the relevant
certification produced to demonstrate that the public will be kept
safe both within and in close proximity
to the premises.
 
3.
Prevention of Public Nuisance
Whether the
applicant has addressed the potential for nuisance arising from the
characteristics and style of the proposed activity and identified
the appropriate steps to reduce the risk of public nuisance
occurring.
 
4.
Protection of Children form Harm
Whether the
applicant has identified and addressed any risks with the aim of
protecting children from harm when on the premises or in close proximity to the
premises.”
 

28)     
The Panel noted that ultimately it is for a licence holder to
ensure they are operating in compliance with their licence and to
propose measures to promote the licensing objectives and tackle any
issues.
 

29)     
In relation to the core hours, the Council’s
Policy states that the hours for licensable activity will
generally be authorised subject to the Applicant demonstrating that
they understand the area where the premises are located and that
they will promote the four licensing objectives.  The core hours are:
 
· Monday
to Thursday 09:00 to 23:00
· Friday
and Saturday 09:00 to 00:00
· Sunday
10:00 to 22:30
 

30)     
Furthermore, the current policy goes on to state
that:
 
“Hours may be more restrictive dependent on the
character of the area and if the individual circumstances require
it. Later hours may be considered where the applicant has
identified any risk that may undermine the promotion of the
licensing objectives and has put in place robust measures to
mitigate those risks. It should be noted that this policy does not
apply to those who are making an application within a Cumulative
Impact Area (see section 3) unless they have been able to
demonstrate that the proposed activity or operation of the premises
will not add to the cumulative impact that is already being
experienced.”
 

31)     
Off Sales of Alcohol is also considered at as LP4 of
the Council’s Policy which sates:
“Hours for the supply of alcohol will generally be
restricted to between 09:00 and 23:00.”
 
The
Panel noted that Applicant was only seeking to remain operating for
a further 30 minutes beyond the core hours on a Sunday and
otherwise within the Off Sales of alcohol hours and did not
consider this to be of issue.
 

32)     
They also noted that in accordance with 2.1 of the
Statutory Guidance, ‘Licensing authorities should look to
the police as the main source of advice on crime and
disorder.’ In this case it appeared the Police had been
satisfied by the conditions agreed and therefore although some
representations raised concerns with a potential increase in
anti-social behaviour in relation to Crime and Disorder and a risk
to Public Safety, this appeared to have been satisfactory to the
Police. In addition, the Panel considered that as per the
Council’s Policy, the application was to be considered on its
own merits and that issues with other neighbouring premises did not
necessarily mean that there would be issues with this Premises,
particularly as were said to be no previous issues at the subject
Premises.
 

33)     
The Panel acknowledged that there were many concerns
raised by the Objectors of which were predominantly (if not all)
from local residents. Some of these
concerns related to issues which were outside the remit of the
Licensing Panel whilst some were weary of a new Premises given
concerns about the way previous Premises in the same location have
been run. It seemed to the Panel that the main licensing issue
appeared to be in relation to the prevention of public nuisance by
way of potential noise from the Premises, albeit some of these
concerns were simply to do with the restaurant operating and noise
from the fans. The Panel considered that ultimately, the Premises
could operate as a restaurant without the need for Licence during
non-licensing hours (outside of Late
Night Refreshment) and so allowing the sale of alcohol to
the Premises would not adversely add to this from
what had been presented.
 

34)     
Whilst alcohol may influence customers and result in
higher noise levels, the Panel noted that the restaurant seating
had been reduced substantially and so considered there would be
less customers and potentially less noise.
 

35)     
In further considering the Objectors
representations, the Panel acknowledged that takeaways and
deliveries were a part of normal restaurant business but were
concerned that the noise generated from this may cause disturbance
to the residents. The Panel therefore proposed to add a condition
to encourage delivery drivers to act responsibly when visiting the
restaurant. In addition, whilst noting the Applicant could make use
of external seating under their Lease, the Panel were concerned
that the noise from this may cause further disturbance to the
residents. Accordingly, in order to
reduce the risk of excessive noise that may occur if customers are
consuming alcohol outside, the Panel considered that the supply of
alcohol on the Premises should be restricted to the inside areas
only and for alcohol to not be sold or consumed in any proposed
outside seating area.
 

36)     
Some concerns were raised around litter and waste
within the proximity of the Premises. In accordance with the
Statutory guidance, “beyond the immediate area
surrounding the premises, these are matters for the personal
responsibility of individuals under the law.”
 

37)     
The Applicant had agreed conditions as set out
within the Agenda with the Police as well as proposing some its own
conditions. The Panel considered the proposed conditions and were
happy to incorporate these with some amendments.
 
Decision
 

38)     
Whilst the Objectors were concerned about the need
for another restaurant, the Panel reiterated that they were unable
to consider the commercial viability of the restaurant but rather
whether the licensable activities (in this case the sale of alcohol
and the Late Night Refreshment for the
seasonal variation) would breach the licensing
objectives.
 

39)     
Overall, the Panel was of the view that granting a
premises licence within the hours sought, with appropriate
conditions, would not be contrary to the licensing
objectives.   
 

40)     
With reference to the conditions proposed by the
Applicant in the application, the Panel directed that the
conditions 1 to 4 shall remain as drafted. Condition 5 proposed by
the Applicant should be amended to reflect the restriction to sales
of alcohol within the internal area of the Premises only and
accordingly condition 6 (relating to alcohol sales to the external
tables) was removed. Condition 10 relating to the New Year’s
Eve / New Year’s Day timing was also removed and the updated
timings are to be set out within the Licence itself whilst
conditions 7, 8 and 9 were retained as proposed by the
Applicant.
 

41)     
In relation to the proposed conditions by the
Police, the condition relating to Notices being placed around the
Premises requesting patrons to leave the premises in a quiet and
orderly manner was removed as this was a duplicated condition
suggested by the Applicant. In addition, the Panel resolved to
remove the condition relating to the seasonal variation for New
Year’s Eve / New Year’s Day as this is to be detailed
within the timings given in the licence itself. Furthermore, the
Panel removed the Police proposed condition relating to incident
logs and replaced it with a similar model condition in the
Council’s Policy. In amending this, the Panel also
incorporated a further sub-point to record any incidents of issues
with the delivery service which was mentioned in the Police’s
suggested wording of this condition. The Panel were aware this was
broadly similar but thought using the model condition would allow
for further clarity and ensure enforceability.
 

42)     
In addition to the above, the Panel felt it was
important to the add a further few conditions to better promote the
licensing objectives and to ensure that the Objectors points had
been considered and acted upon. Accordingly the Panel decided to add further
conditions, shown as condition numbers 16 to 22 below, to ensure a
more robust compliance with Licensing Conditions. As highlighted by
the Applicant’s Agent, the Panel felt it was important to
engage with local residents and
therefore a telephone number ought to be provided for the Applicant
to be contacted should there be any complaints as per condition 17.
The Panel was concerned that the Objectors complaints about the
potential for anti-social behaviour and nuisance in general that
may arise if customers take alcohol away with them and from
customers and/or deliver drivers congregating outside the Premises.
Therefore, the Panel decided to add conditions 18 and 19 to address
these public nuisance and crime and disorder issues. Conditions 20
and 21 were added to address the possible waste and litter issues.
Moreover, given the delivery operation was a key concern for the
Objectors, the Panel resolved to adding a condition to encourage
delivery drivers / riders to act responsibly so as not to
cause a nuisance to any residents or generally gather outside the
premises as fully detailed in condition
22.
 

43)     
The Panel considered adding a condition relating to
timing of deliveries to the Premises but thought this may end up
causing further disruption given the current loading bays already
provide for time restrictions. However, whilst not a condition, the
Panel would expect that the Applicant takes
into account the residents’ circumstances and that
deliveries are undertaken with minimal disruption to them and at
appropriate times. The Panel also expects, as suggested by the
Applicant to co-operate with neighbours, to tackle any issues which
may arise and ensure compliance with the licensing
objectives.
 

44)     
The Licensing Panel has therefore decided to GRANT the
application for a grant of the premises licence with
the following modifications:
 
·      
Supply of alcohol on and off the
premises:

Monday to Sunday 11:00 to 23:00

 

Seasonal variation: End of licensing hours on New
Year’s Eve to 02:00 on New Year’s Day
 
·      
Late night refreshment

Seasonal Variation:

23:00 New Year’s Eve to 02:00 New Year’s
Day
 
·      
Hours premises are open to the
public:

Monday to Sunday 10:00 to 23:30

 

Seasonal Variation:

23:30 New Year’s Eve to 02:30 New Year’s
Day
 
 
 
 
Additional Conditions:
 

1.   
The premises shall install and maintain a comprehensive CCTV system
as per the minimum requirements of the Hounslow Police Licensing
Team. All entry and exit points will be covered enabling frontal
identification of every person entering in any light condition. The
CCTV system shall continually record whilst the premises is open
for licensable activities and during all times when customers
remain on the premises. All recordings shall be stored for a
minimum period of 31 days with date and time stamping. Viewing of
recordings shall be made available immediately upon the request of
Police or authorised officer throughout the entire 31-day
period.
 

2.   
A staff member from the premises who is conversant with the
operation of the CCTV system shall be on the
premises at all times when the premises are open. This staff
member must be able to provide a Police or authorised council
officer copies of recent CCTV images or data with the absolute
minimum of delay when requested.
 

3.   
No noise generated on the premises, or by its associated plant or
equipment, shall emanate from the premises. Nor shall any vibration
be transmitted through the structure of the premises which gives
rise to a nuisance.
 

4.   
Notices shall be prominently displayed at all exits requesting
patrons to respect the needs of local
residents and businesses and leave the area quietly.
 

5.   
The supply of alcohol at the premises shall only be to a person
seated taking a table meal inside the Premises and for consumption
by such a person as ancillary to their meal and shall not be
supplied to a person using any outside area.
 

6.   
The supply of alcohol shall be by waiter or waitress service
only.
 

7.   
Sales of alcohol for consumption off the premises shall only be
supplied with, and ancillary to a take-away meal.
 

8.   
A Challenge 21 or Challenge 25 proof of age scheme shall be
operated at the premises where the only acceptable forms of
identification are recognised photographic identification cards,
such as a driving licence, passport or
proof of age card with the PASS (Proof of Age Standards Scheme)
Hologram.
 

9.   
Appropriate signage will be displayed, in a prominent position,
informing customers they are being recorded on CCTV.
 

10. An incident log
shall be kept at the premises and made available on request to an
authorised officer of the Hounslow Council or the Police. It must
be completed within 24 hours of the incident and will record the
following:
(a) all
crimes reported to the venue
(b) all
ejections of patrons
(c) any
complaints received concerning crime and disorder
(d) any
incidents of disorder
(e) all
seizures of drugs or offensive weapons
(f) any
faults in the CCTV system, searching equipment or scanning
equipment
(g) any
refusal of the sale of alcohol
(h) any
visit by a relevant authority or emergency service.

(i) any issues with the delivery
service

 

11. Clear and legible
notices must be prominently displayed at any area used for smoking
requesting customers to respect the needs of local residents and use the area quietly.
 

12. Persons wishing to
leave the curtilage of the premises will not be allowed to take any
drinks in open containers.
 

13. All staff
responsible for selling alcohol shall receive regular training in
the licensing act 2003. Written records of this training shall be
retained and made available to police and council officers with the
absolute minimum of delay when requested.
 

14. Drivers will not
deliver to anywhere other than at the residential or business
address given when the order was placed.
 

15. Deliveries will
also be refused if driver believes the alcohol is being purchased
on behalf of another person who is not 18.
 

16. A record shall be
kept detailing all refused sales of alcohol. The record should
include the date and time of the refused sale and the name of the
member of staff who refused the sale. The record shall be available for inspection at the premises by the police
or an authorised officer of Hounslow Council at all times
whilst the premises is open.
 

17. A direct telephone
number for the manager at the premises shall be
publicly available at all times the premises is open. This
telephone number is to be made available to residents and
businesses in the vicinity.
 

18. No Alcohol shall
be removed from the premises in open containers.

 

19. Customers and delivery drivers shall be discouraged from
congregating outside the premises.

 

20. All waste shall be
properly presented and placed out for collection at reasonable
times and to minimise disturbance to residents.

 

21. The
area immediately outside of the premises will be monitored,
swept and kept clean of any
rubbish.

 

22. The premises will
encourage all riders or drivers involved in deliveries to use their
vehicles in a responsible manner so as not to cause a nuisance to
any residents or generally gather outside the premises; (where
vehicles have engines) not to leave engines running when the
vehicles are parked; and not to obstruct the highway. Delivery
bikes, or any other vehicle used for the delivery of orders, shall
be stored or parked in a way that does
not cause a public nuisance to neighbouring residents or
businesses.
 

45)     
The Panel would like to remind the Applicant that a
breach of the licence times and conditions could result in a review
of the premises licence, and potential modification of the
conditions and even a revocation of the premises
licence.
 
Right to Appeal
 

46)     
Any party aggrieved with the
decision of the Licensing Sub-Committee on one or more grounds
set out in schedule 5 of Licensing Act 2003 may appeal to the
local Magistrate’s Court within 21 days of notification of
this decision.