Agenda and minutes

RESOLVED that Councillor Jim Porter be elected Chair for the meeting.

The Chair introduced the Members of the Sub-Committee and officers in attendance and asked the applicants and Police representatives to introduce themselves. He then explained that following the presentation of the officer’s report, the applicants would have an opportunity to present their case followed by the Police. There would be an opportunity for questions following each of the above stages before each party had an opportunity to sum up with the applicants being last to speak. Members of the Sub-Committee would then withdraw to consider their decision.

In addition to the Members of the Sub-Committee and Council officers in attendance the following were present:

Jeremy Bark                          Representing Tesco

Greg Bartley                          Tesco

Chris Howell                         Tesco

Sharon Cockling                  Tesco

Professor Roy Light            Representing Gloucestershire Police

Andy Cook                            Gloucestershire Police

Craig Guthrie                                    Gloucestershire Police

Elizabeth Lovell                   Gloucestershire Police

To receive from Members, declarations as to personal and/or prejudicial interests and the nature of those interests in relation to any agenda item. Please see Notes 1 and 2 overleaf.

There were no declarations of interest.

Report by the Group Manager, Environmental Health and Regulatory Services

The Sub-Committee and all parties considered a report outlining an application made under Section 17 of the Licensing Act, 2003 in respect of new premises for 254 Painswick Road, Gloucester. The report was presented by Carl Knights who circulated additional appendices submitted by the Police. The Chair outlined the options available to the Sub-Committee under the Licensing Act.

In a response to question from the applicant’s representative, it was confirmed that the officer was able to circulate copies of the premises licence for the property opposite at 191 Painswick Road.

On the invitation of the chair, the applicant’s representative presented the case in support of their application. The representation included the following issues:

·                     The conditions agreed between the two parties as attached at appendix I. It was outlined that the main point of difference was bullet point six and the requirement to employ security officers at the premises.

·                     An overview of the layout of the proposed express store and the number of stores across Gloucestershire. The overview also outlined the nature of the business undertaken by the express brand of stores.

·                     An outline of the measures taken by Tesco to promote responsible drinking. This included the Challenge 25 scheme, mystery shopper schemes and the role taken by Tesco to work with bodies to promote responsible drinking.

·                     A summary of the training provided to Tesco employees on the sale of alcohol, a summary of the employee procedures on the sale of alcohol, and the steps taken to assess the levels of risk at each store.

·                     An outline of the costs of employing two full time security officers which was estimated to be in the region of up to £200,000.

·                     A detailed presentation on the statistics provided by the police disputing their relevance and suggesting that the levels of incidents associated with alcohol was significantly lower than those indicated by the information provided by the Police.

The Chair invited the Police’s representative to ask questions of the applicant. In a response to a question regarding the risk analysis carried out by Tesco, it was advised that the proposed store had been assessed as slightly below the level of critical.

Members of the Sub-Committee were then invited to ask questions of the applicant’s representative as summarised below:

·                     It was advised that if employees sold alcohol to those under 18 they would be subject to Tesco’s employee disciplinary policy.

·                     It was confirmed that the layout of the store meant that there was only one entrance and one exit and that CCTV was installed.

·                     It was confirmed that no complaints had been received at the site opposite the proposed store.

On the invitation of the chair, the Tesco’s representative presented the case in support of their application. The representation included the following issues:

·                     An overview of the position of the Police on the proposed store and an outline of the risk assessment completed by the Police. The overview also outlined the number of incidents associated with Tesco across Gloucestershire. 

·                     An outline of the Police’s concerns  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.