Agenda and minutes

RESOLVED that Councillor L Bigham be appointed as Chair for the hearing.

There were no apologies.

There were no declarations of interest.

To consider an application to vary the Premises licence in respect of the first floor at Quids Inn, 117-118 Gosford Street, Coventry

Note: The applicant and their representative have been invited to attend the

  hearing.

  Persons who have made representations have been invited to attend.

The City Council’s Statement of Licensing Policy is available on the Council’s website. Alternatively, please contact us if you require a hard copy.

The Sub-Committee considered an application to vary the Premises Licence in respect of Quids Inn (First Floor), 117-118 Gosford Street, Coventry. The application requested an extension of the hours for all current licensable activities (sale/supply of alcohol, regulated entertainment and late-night refreshment) by two hours from 2.00am to 4.00am. The application also requested the addition of live music until 4.00am.

One representation had been received from an Other Person objecting to the application in the grounds that the extension of hours would undermine the licensing objective of the Prevention of Public Nuisance.

None of the Responsible Authorities had objected to the application.

The Licensing Officer presented a summary of the application and confirmed that all application formalities had been complied with.

The Applicant was invited to present his case. His Representative explained that both the upper and lower floor of the premises are run by the same business, however they have separate Premises Licences. The ground floor Premises Licence has a terminal hour of 4.00am, whereas the first floor Premises Licence has a terminal hour of 2.00am. The application proposed to bring the two Premises Licences in line with each other and was therefore not a substantial change. The applicant’s representative explained that it can be confusing for the customer when the first floor needs to close early but the ground floor can remain trading.

In response to the representation submitted by the resident, the Applicant’s Representative explained that Planning Permission had been granted in 1994 for the premises to be a nightclub. The resident moved in some 11 years later, in 2005, and subsequently made the decision to convert a storage area into a flat, in the knowledge that the premises next door was operating as a late night venue. He further purported that mediation had been offered to the resident during the application process, but that he had refused. In addition, the Applicant wished to commission a sound report to establish the noise levels through the party wall, but the resident had refused access to the engineer to allow this to take place.

In his representation, it was noted that the resident had made complaints about the noise on a number of occasions, however the Representative explained that this has never been through the right channels and despite being told that he should complain to Environmental Health, this has never been done. The Sub Committee noted that Environmental Health had not made any representations regarding the application.

Finally, the Representative stated that the Applicant was keen to work with the resident and had offered to contribute to the cost of insulation and/or double glazing to make his living arrangements as comfortable as possible.

In response to questions asked by the Sub Committee with regard to the numerous text messages sent by the resident to the premises complaining about the noise, the Designated Premises Supervisor (DPS) stated that she has tried to maintain a good relationship with the resident and made her number available so he could contact her  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

To consider any other items of business which the Chair decides to take as a matter of urgency because of the special circumstances involved.

There were no other items of business.