Agenda item
Dixy Chicken, 5a Wilbraham Road, Manchester, M14 6JS
The report of the Director of Planning, Building Control and Licensing is enclosed.
Minutes:
Consideration was given to a report of the Director of Planning, Building Control and Licensing regarding an application for a New Premises Licence.
The Hearing Panel considered the written papers, oral representations of all parties as well as the relevant legislation.
The Hearing Panel took note that the application was for a premises situated within the Cumulative Impact Policy (CIP) zone. The effect on applications/premises within the CIP zone is such that any applicant must demonstrate that their operations will not add further disturbance in the area and, further to this, should also demonstrate that the premises will add something of benefit to the area.
The applicant addressed the Hearing Panel and stated that they were aware that they are situated within the CIP zone and accepted that the hours applied for (04:30 closing time) would not be in line with the policy and, as such, wished to reduce these hours to 01:30 closing on a Sunday, 02:00 Monday to Wednesday and 03:00 Thursday to Saturday. The applicant felt that these hours did not constitute a breach of the policy. The applicant gave mention of measures to be put in place regarding litter, signage and the refusal to serve intoxicated patrons yet, when asked to provide details of these measures, the applicant did not appear to have any firm measures in place.
The Hearing Panel then heard representations from responsible authorities and local residents who told of constant issues with litter (including litter from this premises), noise and anti-social behaviour from drunken patrons of this type of late night takeaway.
In their deliberations the Hearing Panel felt that there was already a problem with late night takeaway venues in the CIP zone and felt that the problem would be exacerbated if this premises were allowed to trade until a later hour. The Hearing Panel could also not find any firm measures put in place by the applicant that may allay their concerns around the problems already experienced by local residents and therefore felt it necessary to refuse the application in line with the aims of the policy.
Decision
To refuse the application on the grounds of the prevention of public nuisance.
Supporting documents:
- Report front, item 92. PDF 421 KB
- Appendix - location plan and photo - PUBLISH, item 92. PDF 1 MB
- Restricted enclosure View the reasons why document 92./3 is restricted
- Appendix - application - PUBLISH, item 92. PDF 484 KB
- Restricted enclosure View the reasons why document 92./5 is restricted
- Restricted enclosure View the reasons why document 92./6 is restricted
- Appendix - objections - PUBLISH, item 92. PDF 517 KB
- Appendix 4 - schedule of conditions - PUBLISH, item 92. PDF 23 KB
- Restricted enclosure View the reasons why document 92./9 is restricted