Agenda and minutes

Resolved:           That Councillor Gillies be elected as Chair of the meeting.

At this point in the meeting, Members are asked to declare:

·        any personal interests not included on the Register of Interests

·        any prejudicial interests or

·        any disclosable pecuniary interests

which they may have in respect of business on this agenda.

At this point of the meeting, Members were asked to declare any personal, prejudicial or pecuniary interests they may have in the business on the agenda. None were declared.

Members considered an application by Tapped York Ltd for a premises licence in respect of Pavement Vaults, Piccadilly, York.

In coming to their decision, members took into consideration all of the evidence and submissions that were presented to them and determined their relevance to the issues raised and the licensing objectives. The following were taken into account:

1.   The application form and documents submitted prior to the hearing.

2.   The Licensing Managers report and her comments made at the hearing. She advised that a representor had queried the accuracy of one of the legal notices placed in the local newspaper. The applicant confirmed that there had been errors on the notice but these had been rectified and the notice re-submitted correctly. He had proof of this on an email and agreed to show the Licensing Manager this before the end of the hearing.  The application was for a premises licence at Pavement Vaults (the former White Swan Hotel site) Piccadilly, York. The premises were located within the Cumulative Impact Zone. North Yorkshire Police had made representations as had a local business owner. Consultations had been carried out correctly. It was later confirmed by the Licensing Manager that she had seen evidence to show that the newspaper notice query detailed above had been resubmitted correctly.

3.   The applicants solicitors comments made at the hearing. He advised that following negotiations with North Yorkshire Police, both parties were now close to reaching an agreement on licence conditions, should the application be granted. The police had indicated that a condition requiring 60% of sales to be food would be acceptable to them but the applicant considered that there would be difficulties in trying to meet this condition. It was suggested that a condition to state that the business would be ‘predominantly food led’ would be more reasonable. He explained that this is because the premises attracted a high rental and in order to be viable a mixed use as a restaurant and bar was needed for the venture. The style of operation being proposed would not be a high density vertical drinking establishment, although the applicant would like to have the option of including a drinking area in the ground floor bar for up to 50 persons. He also described in detail the kind of beers and food that would be on offer and confirmed it would be a premium bar and restaurant concept, offering craft beers and an extensive menu. It was stated that it was the intention to attract discerning customers, not large groups of stags and hens, and that in his opinion, whilst it was within the CIZ, there was a big difference in character between Micklegate and Coppergate. The intention was to employ a sommelier and drinks would include sophisticated cocktails, but not cheap priced drinks offers. The premises would be available for dining all day, from breakfast, through lunch to evening dining. The bar area would be located on the ground floor with the restaurant downstairs. The Brewdog  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.