The report of the Head of Planning, Building Control and Licensing is attached.

The Designated Premises Supervisor together with a colleague attended the hearing on behalf of the Applicant whilst LOOH and GMP were also in attendance to oppose the Application.

At the outset of the hearing the Applicant indicated that he wished to amend his application and seek only an extension of hours for Sun – Thursday to the terminal hour of 3am.

The Applicant explained that he wished to open for longer to cater for comedy shows, business events, Christmas parties and promotions.

GMP explained to the Committee that they had fundamental concerns as to the running of the premises and questioned the ability of the Premises to uphold the licensing objectives.

The Committee was advised that the area of Deansgate locks had become a problematic area for policing and that nearly 80 incidents of violence had occurred in the last 12 months alone. This was supported by an incident log produced by GMP which showed a number of incidents occurring outside the premises.

On one particular occasion on the 9^th February 2019 a visit was made to the premises and it was evident from the signing in book that not all door supervisors had signed in, as required, under the terms of their licence. In addition, one of the door supervisors did not have an SIA badge and as a consequence should not have been working.

LOOH referred the committee to MCC’s Licensing Policy and explained that in their view it was evident from the visits they had carried out that the Premises was failing to adhere to the Policy and indeed the Licensing objectives .

Whilst most of the conditions were being met the Committee was advised that there were problems with properly implementing a Dispersal and Smoking policy, door supervision and effective management at the premises.

LOOH were also concerned about the amount of littering especially from discarded cigarette butts and stated that this situation had been observed on numerous occasions when visits had been carried out. This was despite the premises being warned on more than one occasion about the need to uphold the Public Nuisance licensing objective .

The Committee also noted objections submitted from a neighbouring business and from a resident.

The Committee was not satisfied that the Applicant would be capable of upholding the licensing objectives.

It felt that whilst the Premises had always appeared willing to work with the Responsible Authorities there were areas of its business practice that needed to be more robust in addressing concerns.

The Committee noted that the Premises had inadvertently breached conditions on its licence without fully appreciating the consequences of such breaches.

On numerous occasions Public Nuisance had been observed by LOOH and it was apparent that the premises had not heeded advice given to address this issue.

It also noted the concerns expressed in representations made by a neighbouring hotel and resident.

Furthermore, it was apparent that there had been incidents outside the premises that had been highlighted by GMP and this had been exacerbated by the fact that the Premises was not keeping accurate records about door supervision and ensuring that such supervisors were displaying SIA accredited badges. 

The Committee was also not satisfied that the Designated Premises Supervisor or an appropriate member of staff was capable of providing or arranging for suitable training to be given to staff. 

In reaching its decision the Committee took into account s182 guidance, licensing objectives and its own licensing policy.

Decision

To refuse to grant the variation application.