Appendix D
REP A
From: REDACTED
Sent: Sunday, December 10, 2023 10:51 PM
To: EHL Licensing EHL.Licensing@brighton-hove.gov.uk
Subject: Licence - 1445/3/2023/04770/LAPREV
EG CON ENDS 02.01.2024 VALID PCD AND PPN (A)
Licence – 1445/3/2023/04770/LAPREV
126 Church Road Hove
We wish to lodge our strong opposition to this licence being issued on the following basis.
The applicant’s REDACTED. REDACTED. This area of Hove is predominantly a residential area. We are seeing a gradual increase in the number of cafes and restaurants opening where retail outlets were formerly located, however, it is not an area for ‘night life’. There is no precedent for two level reataurant in this stretch of Church Road, and we do not need one. We live in a ‘special stress area’ and already suffer from late night revellers leaving licenced premises and going home noisily. It is not unusual to hear singing at 11pm at weekends. This is bad enough. It would not be acceptable for this behaviour to occur later in the evening.
Point 3.2.2 of the Statement of Licencing Policy states “New and varied applications for premises and club premises certificates within the SSA will not be subject to the presumption of refusal, but operators will be expected to pay special attention when drawing up their operating schedules and to make positive proposals to ensure that their operation will not add to the problems faced in these areas.” The applicant has not made any effort to address these points.
We are unsure if the applicant still wants to remove ‘condition 5 of annex 2 from his licence (details unclear). If he does we would like to express our concern, as this states
‘The premises will become a member of the BCRP, or similar scheme approved by the Licensing Authority that operates with radios and uses the Nightsafe & Yellow Card Scheme or similar reporting scheme’
Sadly, our this reflects our experience of the applicant. We have found him a difficult neighbour. He has been unwilling to work with us or other residents, and only ever wants to do the bare minimum of what is expected of him.
The applicant’s lack of positive
proposal regarding the SSA and his avoidance of participation in the
BCRP or similar scheme sadly reflect our experience of his lack of concern for
neighbours and crime prevention.
We are also somewhat surpised that he feels the need to expand, as the premises is rarely, if ever full. However Since Persia opened, we have had repeated instances of people using our front garden to take drugs or drink. They have moved on when asked, but late-night revelry will only compound this problem. A bike REDACTED knocked over by non-residents REDACTED. There is no reason for any visitor to the building to walk past or knock over the bike. The only reason is when people try and reach the rear of the building. The style of Persia is that of a pseudo nightclub, including a DJ deck which we can hear in our property.
The applicant recently withdrew application Licence – 1445/3/2022/02877/LAPREV. We were interested to note the concerns of Sussex Police regarding REDACTED in Persia’s REDACTED, and the increased levels of crime in the period since this venue’s reopening.
In addition to public nuisance points listed above, REDACTED. Noise from REDACTED. His current planning permission prohibits this (although he has a history of ignoring planning permission!), and the first floor of Persia also does not have planning permission for commercial use, and an extension refused planning permission. In the event that a licence is granted, and given the licensees’ history of ignoring planning permission, we would like it explicitly stated that the upstairs extension is not licenced for any hours of operation.
The applicant has recently built an extension to the rear of the first floor on 126 Church road, despite having been refused planning permision. It is unclear whether this area is included in the proposed licence on current information online, but REDACTED, with the attached poetential for noise and disturbance.
The suitability of the applicant to hold an alcohol license is very questionable. He has a long and ignominious history of ignoring regulations, including planning, noise breaches, and licence regulations.
His activities have included.
· July 2015 Manger of Barcode (128 Church Road) installed noisy extraction flue, which breached noise regulations and caused neighbours a year of high stress, until he eventually removed it under pressure from BHCC and local councillers.
· June 2016 Manager of Barcode, sold alchohol to REDACTED, whilst not holding alcohol licenced
· October 2017, Emad Abudolkhani specifically named to have no involvement of running Barcode on licence Licence – 1445/3/2017/03526/LAPREV, due to previous activities.
· August 2021 Banned as company director for tax abuse https://www.gov.uk/government/news/hove-restaurateur-banned-for-tax-abuse
· 2022 Two previous licence applications reveal traces of drugs on premises, after police inspection.
· 2023 Builds extension to rear of 126 Church Road (Persia), despite refusal of planning permission
We strongly feel that he is not a suitable person to even hold a licence, let alone an extended premises. The previous license panel for this premise stated,
‘It does not have confidence in the applicant and his ability to manage the existing premises, let alone premises with an increased capacity and longer operating hours.’
We do not see any reason why this has changed.
REDACTED
REP B - Document is restricted