Agenda item

Agenda item

Application for a New Premises Licence - Mean Eyed Cat Bar, Basement and Ground floor, 60 Oldham Street, Manchester, M4 1LE

Now contains additional information submitted by the applicant.


The Hearing Panel considered a report from the Director of Planning, Building Control and Licensing.  The Hearing Panel also considered the written papers of the parties and the oral representations of the parties who attended as well as the relevant legislation.


The applicant’s agent addressed the Hearing Panel, noting that this was a business started in 2004 offering ‘escapism’ bars. The applicant operated a total of 7 venues, 6 in Leeds and one in Liverpool. The applicant’s agent that there had been no issues at any of those venues. The applicant would run the venue until it became well established, at which point an experienced manager would take over. The company have their own training academy for staff which is a 6-week programme. The applicant intended to employ 28 staff, a mix of part and full-time.


The premises would be a ground floor and basement bar, with a small external space. The premises already held a licence, that would be surrendered upon the granting of this. The applicant’s agent noted that this application was for a 2-hour extension on the current licence.


The applicant’s agent stated that there were no remaining Responsible Authority objections, with conditions agreed between the applicant and the responsible authorities. The applicant’s agent believed this showed a confidence in the applicant to uphold the Licensing objectives. It was noted that 62 conditions had been proposed as part of the Operating Schedule, far exceeding the number of conditions on similar licences in the area. The applicant had also commissioned a noise report to ensure the venue would not cause a noise nuisance for residents.


The applicant’s agent then addressed the concerns raised by residents. Noise was a main concern of the remaining resident objections, but the applicant’s agent felt there was no evidence to support this. The applicant had commissioned a noise report that showed no issues. Concerns were also raised regarding littering and anti-social behaviour, but the applicant’s agent believed there was also no evidence to support this. Residents had raised issues regarding another premises in the area, but the agent stated this had nothing to do with this application.


The applicant’s agent summed up by stating the applicant had proposed extensive policies and procedures for the venue. They noted that the applicant was an experienced operator, with no issues at the other venues they operate. They reiterated that there were no Responsible Authority objections remaining. The applicant’s agent stated the premises would provide employment and attract people to the city. They also stated that the requested operating hours were in line with other venues in the area.


In their deliberations, the panel noted that agreement had been reached with GMP and LOOH, the responsible authorities who had previously objected. They noted the applicant’s proven track record and their experience as an operator. The panel also noted the content of the acoustic report which demonstrated compliance with the relevant planning condition. The panel were satisfied that the applicant would uphold the Licensing objectives.




To grant the licence, subject to the conditions agreed with GMP and LOOH.


Supporting documents: