Issue - meetings

To consider a report of the Corporate Director for Place Management & Regeneration.

The purpose of the report is to outline the process by which the Council seeks to align where it is possible to do, planning conditions which restrict the operation of licensed premises in the borough to those hours permitted under the licensing regime.

The report is tabled following a request by the Chair of Planning and Highways Regulation Committee which sought clarification with regards to process as well as a response in respect of enforcement undertaken by the Council as well as that undertaken by Greater Manchester Police.

The Committee is recommended to note the report.

Officer contact: Emma Curle on 0161 474 3542 or email: emma.curle@stockport.gov.uk

A representative of the Corporate Director for Place Management & Regeneration submitted a report (copies of which had been circulated) detailing the process by which the Council seeks to align, where it was possible to do so, planning conditions which restrict the operation of licensed premises in the borough to those hours permitted under the licensing regime.

The following comments were made/ issues raised:-

·         Confusion had arisen in the past where applications had been lodged with the Council simultaneously for planning consent and a premises licence and where the approval for the terminal hour for the operation of the premises did not correlate.

·         The Police licensing officer when attending premises will generally ask to examine the premises licence, which much lawfully always be on display, to ensure that the premises were complying with the conditions of their licence.  However, they would not ask to view the planning consent which means the premises could be operating beyond the hours approved by the planning authority.

·         It was suggested that where applications for planning consent and a premises licence were lodged simultaneously, then the planning application should be determined prior the licensing application.  In response, it was stated that licensing was a permissive regime and operated to strict statutory deadlines which may complicate such an approach.

·         It was commented that the onus should be on the owner or operator of the premises to comply with both licensing and planning conditions.

·         It was often difficult to sufficiently evidence that a new premises would conflict with the any of the four licensing objectives to be able to effectively control the hours of operation of new premises under the licensing regime.

·         Compliance with planning conditions was not as proactively enforced as compliance with a premises licence.

RESOVLED – That the Corporate Director for Place Management & Regeneration be recommended to investigate the feasibility of improving the alignment of the determination of planning applications and premises licence applications.