To consider an application for the variation of a premises licence in respect of ‘Mamma Jamma’s, 15A West Street, Hereford, HR4 0BX’.

The Regulatory Sub-Committee was convened in order to determine an application for a variation to the premises licence in respect of Mamma Jammas, 15A West Street, Hereford, HR4 0BX. The application was submitted in accordance with Section 51 of the Licensing Act 2003.

The Chairman introduced the Members and Officers and asked any interested parties to introduce themselves. He advised them of the hearing procedures and asked if any party required an extension to the 10 minute time limit for public speaking, no extensions were requested.

The Licensing Officer presented the report. He advised Members that although a copy of the applicant’s advertisement had been sent to the licensing authority it did not contain the correct information. The applicant advised that the advertisement on file was for an earlier application, he presented the sub-committee with the correct advert. The Licensing Officer noted that the advertisement did not contain reference to non-standard timings but accepted that all other details were correct.

The Licensing Officer also advised that the applicants had agreed to all of the conditions recommended by the Environmental Health department. He also advised Members that the applicant had agreed to all conditions recommended by West Mercia Police excluding the condition requiring a last entry time of midnight.

The applicant advised Members that he was happy to retain the sound limiting device and had only requested its removal as the amplification system the used could not reach the levels required to activate the sound limiter.

In accordance with the Licensing Act 2003 (Hearings) Regulations 2005, Mr Mooney, representing West Mercia Police, addressed the Sub-Committee. He advised Members that there had previously been incidents of low level noise disturbance from the premises but that the agreed conditions would address any such issues. He added that the last entry time of midnight had been requested to restrict any potential for antisocial behaviour and noise disturbance in the area.

In response to a question from the Legal Practice Manager, Mr Mooney advised that last entry conditions were not common for city centre premises but were used where licensed premises were located in residential areas.

In response to a question from the applicant, Mr Mooney confirmed that there had been minor incidents at the premises but no significant issues of crime and disorder.

In accordance with the Licensing Act 2003 (Hearings) Regulations 2005, Mr Jones, the applicant, addressed the sub-committee. He commented on a number of issues, including:

• The Thwaites case stated that representations against an application should be based on ‘real evidence’ and not ‘fear and speculation’, for this reason he felt that the representation from the Town Clerk should not be accepted.
• The premises had a strict door policy and did not admit entry to patrons under the influence of drink and drugs.
• The internal sound proof door stopped the premises being a noise pollutant to local residents.
• There was only one halogen light located at the entry to the premises.
• There was no bass subwoofer in the premises.
• The nearby Green Dragon Hotel had not submitted a representation.
• The 8 letters of objection were all very similar.
• If all of the letters were submitted by the same person they could not be deemed as public nuisance, as defined in the Hope and Glory stated case.
• Two of the local residents who had submitted representations against the application had been in the premises recently and denied writing letters of objection.
• Mamma Jammas opened in July 2010 and there had been no record of noise disturbance.
• Staff check West Street and Aubrey Street to ensure there was no litter from the premises.
• The Council’s Environmental Health team were happy with the soundproofing at the premises.
• To restrict entry after midnight would be of detriment to the premises, currently permitted entry until 0200.
• The majority of patrons enter the premises after midnight.

In response to a question, the applicant confirmed that he had spoken to the manager of the Green Dragon Hotel who had stated that the hotel had not received any complaints regarding noise disturbance from Mamma Jammas.

The Legal practice Manager raised concerns regarding the applicant’s comments regarding the possibility of fraudulent representations. He added that it was acceptable for one person to write a representation for a number of residents subject to it being signed by the residents themselves. He had some concerns regarding the inconsistency of some of the signatures and requested that the meeting be adjourned for further investigation of the matter to be undertaken.

The meeting was adjourned until 12:00 noon in order for discussions to take place with the local residents who had made representations in order to confirm that they were valid.

The meeting was reconvened at 12:10 pm, at this stage Mr Lawley, Miss Crick, and Mr and Mrs Holt, who had all submitted representations in objection to the application were present at the hearing.

The Legal Practice Manager advised Mr Lawley that there had been a question raised regarding the validity of his representation. Mr Lawley confirmed that the signature on the representation was his signature and that he had submitted the representation.

In response to a further question regarding the representations, Mrs Holt confirmed that she had written the representations for some of her tenants and that these representations had been signed by the tenants themselves. She added that a number of her tenants were foreign and could not express their views in writing, therefore she had checked with the licensing department to confirm if it would be permitted for her to write the representations and had been advised that it was acceptable.

In accordance with the Licensing Act 2003 (Hearings) Regulations 2005, Mr Holt, speaking on behalf of an interested party who had submitted a representation, addressed the sub-committee. He commented on a number of issues, including:

• Two windows had been broken in the early hours of the morning recently, it was accepted that this may not have been linked to Mamma Jammas.
• There were noise disturbances from the premises.
• Currently have to bleach and clean the steps to the flats as a result of vomit and urine.

The Sub-Committee retired to make their decision, the Legal Practice Manager and the Democratic Services Officer also retired to assist them with procedural matters.

The Legal Practice Manager read out the decision, the applicant was advised that the formal decision would be sent to the address listed on the application form.

RESOLVED

That the application for a variation to the premises licence in respect of Mamma Jammas be approved subject to the amended hours and the conditions detailed in the attached decision notice.