Apologies were received from Councillor Miller.

Apologies for lateness were received from Councillor Bouchier.

Members are asked to declare any interests in matters for consideration at the meeting.

There were no declarations of interest.

To approve the minutes of the meeting held on 1 April 2008 attached.

The Minutes of the meeting held on 1 April 2008 be received and approved and the Chair be authorised to sign them, subject to the following amendment:

Page 2, point 4 (iv) be amended to read:  “Playing of music, live or pre-recorded, externally to the street trading area is prohibited.”

There were no representations from members of the public.

This report seeks Members views on whether or not there is a need for further consultation to enable them to make the decision early next year on whether to allow another season, or more, of alfresco dining in Church Street, Twickenham.

Report of the Head of Licensing attached.

The Committee decided;

a)         That additional consultation was not needed to enable the Committee to determine the alfresco dining application for Church Street, Twickenham for the 2009 season.

b)         That a letter be sent to local residents advising that the alfresco dining application would go before the Regulatory Committee in 2009, and that the aforementioned letter indicate that such a alfresco dining licence could be granted for a period of more than 1 year (though no more than 3 years.)  The format and content of the letter be agreed by Council officers and the Chair of the Regulatory Committee.

[The Head of Licensing informed the Committee that the level of complaints received from local residents and traders over alfresco dining in Church Street in 2008 had been minimal.  The Head of Licensing added that the Council’s Transport Planning department had indicated that the bollards by the Barmy Arms Public House would not be removed for the duration of the alfresco season for safety reasons.

The Committee discussed consultation undertaken with residents and traders in previous years, with some Members expressing concern that consultation would be likely to garner similar responses as those previously received, and that costs would make such consultation prohibitive. 

A contrary point of view posited by Committee Members was that the Council was obliged to seek a mandate from the local community on this application, particularly in light of the fact that such a street trading licence could be granted for more than one year.  In not informing the community, the Council potentially laid itself open for criticism in failing to inform and engage local residents and traders.]

This report considers again non statutory advertising of licence applications, the legal issues and if adopted the geographical area to be informed.

The report of the Head of Licensing is attached.

The Committee decided;

a)         To adopt non statutory advertising.

b)         That a radius of 25m from the applicants’ premises be chosen to form the area for businesses and residents to be notified of the application.

c)         That non statutory advertising be adopted by April 2009, subject to the securing of resources necessary for the Council to undertake such advertising.

[The Head of Licensing tabled additional information for Committee Members relating to the potential scope of non statutory advertising that could be undertaken, and the various radii from the license applicant’s property within which notification could be proposed.

The Committee noted that concerns had been raised previously over notification and consultation undertaken of licensing applications.  Some Members of the Committee opined that the consultation undertaken currently was in line with statutory obligations, and that it was unreasonable in terms of cost and officer workload to expect that further consultation be undertaken, particularly in view of the fact that the Council currently received relatively few complaints over advertising of licensing applications.  A contrary view was put forward by other Members of the Committee that what was proposed was moreover notification of residents, as opposed to consultation, and that it was important for the Council to ensure that the local community were informed of potential changes within the area that could have a material effect on their wellbeing.

The Head of Licensing and the Legal Advisor informed the Committee that there was a risk of a greater number of Sub-Committee hearings and thus Licensing Appeals arising from non-statutory advertising. 

Discussions ensued about the current notification undertaken, with some Members unhappy about the sufficiency of measures such as blue notices on applicants’ premises, and information available via the internet.  Discussions also took place on the potential for legal challenge if further non statutory advertising were to take place.  Officers responded that there was no case history on this point, and emphasised the importance of letters sent to residents and businesses being purely objective, and within a reasonable distance of the applicants’ premises, which would not equate to defining vicinity under the Licensing Act.

The Committee concluded that the current advertising undertaken could be bolstered, with a radius of 25m from applicants’ premises chosen to form the area to be informed of any application.  Queries were raised on this matter as to from which point on a premises such a radius would be measured, with Officers responding that dedicated computer software was available in assisting with these measurements.

The Committee noted concern that, in agreeing to additional non statutory advertising, there was a danger of increasing costs and Officer workloads to an unsustainable point.  The Committee therefore agreed that their Decision would come into effect, subject to increased resources being allocated to the Licensing Department.]

This report seeks to remind and update members about the Review process under the Licensing Act 2003 which has not yet been required in this borough yet remains a very potent tool for ‘interested parties’ and ‘responsible authorities’ in certain circumstances.

The report of the Head of Licensing is attached.

The Committee noted the report.

[The Committee noted that no Review Hearing had yet taken place within the Borough, with Committee Members observing that this was a testament to the Borough’s Licensing Sub-Committee being responsive to representations.

The Committee asked that the Review Hearings process be further communicated to members of the public.]

This report seeks to update members about two important decision making processes within the Licensing Act 2003 which have not yet been required in this borough. It updates members on a decision taken regarding technology for the electronic processing of licence applications. It considers again non statutory advertising of licence applications, the legal issues and if adopted the geographical area to be informed. An update and reminder of recent and important case law relevant to the committee’s functions and in the light of a decision to be taken early next year in respect of alfresco dining in Church Street, Twickenham, whether the committee seeks a new consultation and if so what questions it wants asked. 

The report of the Head of Licensing is attached.

The Committee noted the report.

[The Head of Licensing amended the description of agenda item 8 on the agenda frontsheet to read as follows:

“This report seeks to introduce to Members the Expedited Review process, emphasising the very tight timescale for decisions and possible duration of those decisions.”

The Head of Licensing informed the Committee that other London Boroughs had held Expedited Reviews, as set out in the Licensing Act 2003, and that it was useful for Committee Members to be notified of the requirements, expectations and responsibilities on Members of such Reviews.]

This report seeks to update members on a decision taken regarding technology for the electronic processing of licence applications.

Report of the Head of Licensing attached.

The Committee noted the report.

[The Head of Licensing informed the Committee that Officers had evaluated a software package that would enable licence applications to be made electronically, which would then be available to view online.  Following this evaluation, the Council had decided not to pursue this scheme.  The Head of Licensing added that the experience of those Local Authorities who had subsequently chosen to take up the package had proven to be a mixed one. 

An EU directive was due to come into force in late 2009 which would oblige all Authorities to ensure that all licensing application processes would be available online.]

This report seeks to update and remind members of recent and important case law relevant to the committee’s functions. 

The report of the Head of Licensing is attached.

The Committee noted the report.

[Discussions were held over recent case law relating to the Licensing Act 2003, and the implications that that case law might prove to have on Council policy, and Committee procedures.]