Agenda item

1.    Cleos Thompson (“the Applicant”) applied for the grant of a new Premises Licence for Jerk Haven, 18 Bromley Road, Catford, London, SE6 2UN (“the Premises”).

2.    Theapplication wasfor thegrant ofa premiseslicence to allowfor: theretail saleof alcohol on and off the Premises Mondays to Thursdays from: 11:00 hours – 02:30, Friday and Saturday11:00 –04:30 hoursand Sunday11:00 hours– 00:30hours. Theapplicant also applied forlate night refreshmentto be permitted Monday – Thursday from 23:00 hours – 02:00hours, Fridayand Saturdayfrom 23:00hours –04:00 hoursand Sundayfrom 23:00 hoursto 00:00hours. Theapplication alsorequested seasonal variationsto thepermitted hours for the retail sale of alcohol and the provision of late-night refreshment any day precedinga bankholiday until02:00 hoursand onJamaican IndependenceDay, 6August, until 02:00 hours.

3.    The Applicant offered several conditions as part of their application.The Licensing Authority, as a Responsible Authority, and the Police made representations to the application and because of discussion with the Applicant the representations were withdrawn following agreement to the following amendments to the application:

Additional Conditions:

1.            Nowaste orrecyclable materials,including bottles,shall bemoved, removedfrom or placed in outside areas between (23.00) hours and (08.00) hours on the following day.

2.            During the hours of operation of the premises, the licence holder shall ensure sufficient measures are in place to remove and prevent litter or waste arising or accumulating from customers in the area immediately outside the premises, and thatthis areashall beswept andor washed,and litterand sweepingscollected and stored in accordance with the approved refuse storage arrangements by close of business.

3.            Thepremises licenceholder shallensure thatany patronsdrinking and/orsmoking in the rear garden and the outside seating area to the front of the premises do so in an orderly manner so as not to cause a public nuisance or obstruction of the public highway.

4.            Frontoutside seatingarea toclose by22:00 andany seatingremoved

5.             Reargarden notto beused bypatrons

6.             The supply of alcohol at the premises shall only be to a person seated taking atable meal there and for consumption by a person as ancillary to their meal

7.             Thesupply ofalcohol shallbe bywaiter/waitress serviceonly.

8.             All sale of alcohol for consumption off the premises shall be in sealed containers only and shall not be consumed on the premises.

9.             Smokingarea solelyat thefront ofthe venueand limitedto 4people ata timeafter 22:00

Amended Hours

The hourspermitted forall licensableactivities amendedas follows: Monday to Thursday until 00:30 hours

Frida andSaturday until02:00 hours Sunday until 00:00 hours

4.    The application also received representations from 16 residents on the grounds that the Application failed to promote the licensing objectives to prevent public nuisance, prevent crime and disorder, protection of children from harm and public safety.

5.    The Licensing Committee held a hearing on 29 August 2024 to consider the Application. An agentspoke on behalf ofthe Applicant. The Committee also heard from 2of the local residents who had made written representations.

6.      Inmaking itsdecision theCommittee hasconsidered allthe paperscontained inthe report pack together with the oral submissions and evidence presented by the Applicant and Residentsat thehearing. Thecommittee hasalso consideredthe Council’sown Statement of Licensing Policy and the Home Office’s Statutory Guidance.

7.            The Committee’s decision is to grant the application subject to the additional conditions agreed with the Licensing Authority and Police and the amended hours permitted for all licensing activities.     Its reasonsfor granting the new premises licence are as follows:

a.    The Committee noted that the Applicant had agreed the conditions with the Licensing Authority and Police and agreed to reduce the hours permitted for all licensing activities.The Committee has determined that the additional conditions and the reduction in hoursagreed by the Application support the promotion of the licensing objectives.

b.    The Committee took very careful consideration of the concerns raised by the residents, both those who attended to give their representations in person and thosewho hadmade writtenrepresentations. However,the Committeedetermined that the conditions offered in the application, those agreed with the Licensing Authorityand Policeand thereduction inhours addressedthe concernsraised by residents.If local residents have any concerns going forwards the Committee would remind them to make, contact with the Licensing Authority.

3.1         The Vice - Chair welcomed all parties to the Licensing Committee. She introduced those present and outlined the procedure to be followed for the meeting. She then invited the Safer Communities Services Senior Officer to introduce the application.

            Introduction

3.2     The Safer Communities Officer Senior Officer said this hearing was being held to determine a premises licence application made by Cleo Thompson for Jerk Haven, 118 Bromley Road. The applicant had agreed conditions which were outlined in the agenda. The application was received and processed on 25 June 2024

3.3      The application was not originally advertised in accordance with regulations, so the consultation period was extended to ensure compliance.

3.4      During the consultation period, sixteen relevant representations were received by the licensing authority from members of the public. The licensing authority and the Police submitted an objection, but these were withdrawn due to the applicant agreeing conditions and amendments to the hours applied for. Representations were not received from any other relevant authorities.

3.5      Representations were received within the consultation period and were not considered frivolous or vexatious.

3.6      The Safer Communities Senior Officer then outlined the options open to members when making their decision.

Applicant  

3.7      Mr Thompson acknowledged that there had been some objections, but the shop next door to his restaurant was an off licence. There was also a Turkish restaurant 100 yards up the road which had an alcohol licence. There was no drug dealing or bad behaviour in the area. The Police were stationed in the area, and sometimes they were patrons of his restaurant.

3.8      Music had not been played at the premises and an event had not been held for 3 years. There had been a customer appreciation day where food was free.

3.9      In the Summer, jerk chicken is cooked outside. If this was causing a problem for residents, the chicken could be cooked inside. Mr Thompson did not think that the smoke from cooking the chicken caused any problems because the restaurant was situated on a busy main road where there were a lot of cars and noise.

3.10    Mr Thompson believed that he was the pillar of society, supporting youths in the area and his Caribbean restaurant was rated as the best in London; there had never been any incidences on the premises. He abides by all the rules and regulations. The premises would be managed as a restaurant not a club. 

3.11    Councillor Onikosi asked whether chicken was cooked outside the premises on a regular basis. Mr Thompson said that outside cooking took place about twice a week. Most of the time cooking would be inside the premises but would be held outside if the weather was good.

3.12    Councillor Harding asked the applicant how he would manage people loitering and drinking outside the premises and ensure that residents were not disturbed.  Mr Thompson said that if the premises licence was granted, management would ensure that patrons adhered to all the rules and regulations.

3.13     Councillor Onikosi asked if customers had been seen congregating on the pavement outside other establishments in the area. Mr Thompson had not seen any loitering near any local shops. It was a very safe area because the Police were so close and passed by the shops all day.

            Representations

3.14    The first resident to make a representation said that objectors’ main concern was the extension of hours. The other establishments in the area did not open after midnight. The premises was in a residential area with flats above and next door. There were three local streets and these residents’ lives were also affected by the activities at the premises; they worked in professions where they needed to sleep at a relatively early hour so that they could go to work early. Families with young children also needed to be able to sleep early.

3.15    There were also concerns because there was no parking in front of the property so patrons would be forced to park in local residential streets. Residents would suffer from the noise as people played music and sat in cars eating their takeaways until 2am. Delivery cars and bikes would also cause noise nuisance.

3.16    The resident said that in the Summer, cooking at the premises was held outside almost every day. Even if the weather was poor, a canopy was erected over the cooking area. Local buses and many cars were electric, were ulez compliant and did not cause fumes. Burning wood and coal caused different particles that were much worse for public health than electric vehicles.

3.17    If Jerk Chicken was the only shop selling alcohol in the area until 2am, this would encourage people to loiter causing a nuisance for local residents.

3.18    In response to a question from Councillor Onikosi, objector one confirmed that she had witnessed the cooking of the chicken outside the premises, and she had also witnessed people buying food from Jerk Haven and then sitting in cars in nearby residential roads to eat the food.

3.19    Objector two said that officers from the Police station at the end of his road did not patrol local streets. This station was a Highway and TSG station. They did not attend local issues and if there were any problems at Jerk Haven, Community Officers rather than Police officers would attend.

            Conclusion

3.20    Mr Thompson said that Police had been into his restaurant to apprehend people on scooters who had been riding on the pavement. They confiscated their scooters and issued them with tickets. Police would come into the restaurant if required.

3.21    When chicken was cooked outside, coal would be used.  They did not use wood. Smoke was created when the oil hit the jerk pan which then dissipated into the air. Chicken was not cooked in large amounts, approximately 48 pieces of chicken would be cooked in one day. He did not believe that the smoke would affect local residents but it was not a licensing issue.

3.22    Mr Thompson said that only background music would be played, so local residents would not be kept awake late into the evening.. Patrons would not be coming to the premises after 10pm, food would be delivered after this time.

3.23    Objector two said that Mr Thompson was currently running a takeaway shop which closed around 10pm only background music was played. If the licence was granted, he believed that there would be problems with noise nuisance. Patrons would arrive with radios playing in their cars, there could be more traffic and could affect local residents. Music would be played until 11pm and human noise until 2am throughout the week and 4am at the weekend. This was a quiet residential area, where residents needed a good sleep to ensure that they could work the next day.

3.24    The Vice-Chair said that a decision notice would be sent out within 5 working days. She thanked all parties for their attendance, and they left the meeting.