The council has rejected an application for a 3am late-night refreshment licence submitted by a burger bar business for its premises in West Street, Brighton.
Smacks Hamburger wanted the licence to sell food and drink – but not alcohol – from 11pm to 3am daily but Sussex Police and Brighton and Hove City Council licensing officials objected.
As a result, a council licensing panel, made up of three councillors, held a hearing at the start of last week.
They considered the application by Bino Hospitality, a London company run by Shamsun Shamin, 33, as well as representations detailing high crime levels in the West Street area.
The council also has tougher rules around licences in the busy central area of Brighton and Hove, even for venues that don’t sell alcohol.
At the licensing panel hearing on Monday 14 July, Sussex Police licensing officer Claire Abdelkader said that, in West Street and within half a mile of the premises, 9,195 incidents were recorded over the past year including 4,540 crimes.
Richard Haddad, a chartered environmental health officer, spoke for Bino Hospitality, saying that Really Happy Chicken had a late-night licence, allowing it to trade from 11pm until midnight.
Mr Haddad said that the company had extensive experience working in similar zones in London boroughs.
Smacks submitted draft licence conditions, proposing dining in only after 11pm, no takeaways other than deliveries and for door staff to be deployed from 9pm.
But the panel of three councillors – Julie Cattell, Ollie Sykes and Alison Thomson – were unpersuaded.
The council’s decision letter said that the panel did not feel that the company’s representative (Mr Haddad) understood the challenges of the area.
The letter said: “There was inconsistency in the presentation and messaging and the panel and the responsible authorities were left unclear about the approaches to management, door control and security, and deliveries.
“Furthermore, the panel does not consider that the applicant has shown any exceptional circumstances to enable departure from the cumulative impact policy.
“Overall, the panel shares the police and licensing concerns that granting the application is likely to add to problems of cumulative impact and undermine the licensing objectives.”
Smacks has 21 days to appeal against the council’s decision.
Well, it sounds like the owner did try to make a reasonable case here, and personally, I think a food and non-alcoholic drink establishment is less likely to cause antisocial behaviours.