Agenda and minutes

Councillor Thomas was elected as Chair for the meeting.

There were no apologies for absence.

Members are asked to declare any interests they may have in the business to be discussed.

Members were asked to declare any interests they might have in the business to be discussed.  No such declarations were received.

Report attached. A copy of the associated documentation is attached for Members only. Further copies are available on the Council’s website at www.cabinet.leicester.gov.uk or by phoning Democratic Support on 0116 4546356.

The Director, Local Services and Enforcement, submitted a report that required Members to determine an objection notice relating to a temporary event notice (TEN) submitted by Mr Vincent Suster for Shree Damania Machhi Mahajan (Community Hall), 103-105 Frisby Road, Leicester.

Members noted that an objection notice had been received in respect of the Temporary Event Notice, which necessitated that the Temporary Event Notice had to be considered by Members.

Mr Vincent Suster, (the applicant) Mrs Irena Suster and Natalia Manmiko, representing the applicant, were present at the meeting.   Also present was the Head of Regulatory Services and the Solicitor to the Sub-Committee.  Two members of the Council’s Noise Team were also present.

The Chair outlined the procedures to be followed at the meeting to consider the Temporary Event Notice.

Mike Broster, Head of Regulatory Services, presented the report. It was noted that an objection had been received from the Noise Team on the grounds of the prevention of public nuisance.  It was also noted that the building did not have a Premises Licence and therefore no conditions could be added to the Temporary Event Notice.  The Sub-Committee could only issue a counter notice under Section 105(2) of the Licensing Act 2003 if this was considered appropriate to promote the licensing objectives (this would prevent the event from taking place) or the Sub Committee could dismiss the objection notice and the allow the event to take place without any conditions. 

Chloe Roper and Terrence Olaf from Council’s Noise Team outlined the reasons for the objection and answered questions from Members, the Solicitor to the Sub-Committee and the applicant’s representative.  It was noted that the construction of the building made it completely unsuitable for any event involving amplified music with large numbers of people attending as it would result in having a significant public nuisance impact upon the surrounding area.  It was for this reason that the Noise Team could not envisage a compromise being reached to allow the event to proceed.  It was also noted that the planning consent for the building prohibited the use of the building after 11.30pm. 

Following a question from the applicant’s representative it was further noted that a Temporary Event Notice could not take precedence over any restrictions placed on the building through conditions on the planning consent.    

Mr Suster’s representative was then given the opportunity to respond to the points and concerns that were raised by Noise Team and answered questions from Members.

All parties were then given the opportunity to sum up their positions and make any final comments.

Prior to Members considering the application, the Solicitor to the Sub-Committee advised Members of the options available to them in making a decision.  Members were also advised of the relevant policy and statutory guidance that needed to be taken into account when making their decision.

In reaching their decision, Members felt they should deliberate in private on the basis that this was in the public interest, and as such outweighed the public interest  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

The Chair declared the meeting closed at 10.45am.