(a)

considered the report from the Director for Community Services;

(b)

heard from the applicant and his witnesses that –

(i)

the objection by the police was linked to disorder in Choo Choo’s nightclub which was yet to be finalised and was still going through the courts.  Until the appeal was heard in January 2012 how could the link be proven and used against them. The objection from the police would be unfair if the case was won in January;

(ii)

The Venue had been operating for the past six weeks and there had been no incidents,  police concerns raised or requests from the police for CCTV footage;

(iii)

Mr Miller had taken a seven year lease from the landlord and although he was currently the sole director of London Nightlife Limited there were other potential Directors who may join the company;

(iv)

although the company in which Mr Miller was sole director was the premises licence holder, Mr Miller had no input into the running of the premise;

(v)

there was a new clientele and a strict dress code which kept criminals out and there were regular customers;

(vi)

they were linked to other premises via a radio system and operate the PARC scheme;

(vii)

in The Venue there were an extra four door staff and nine CCTV cameras and they would be installing sixteen CCTV cameras which would link to the internet with the password given to the police;

(c)

heard from the representative of Devon and Cornwall Constabulary that –

(i)

the proposed premises licence holder was a limited company with a sole company director. This company director was Gary Miller;

(ii)

this person, Gary Miller was the sole company director of Crown Pub Property Solutions Limited which was the premise licence holder for Choo Choo’s, 71 Union Street, Plymouth when a determination was made by the licensing committee on 12 July 2011 following a review of the premise licence;

(iii)

it was the opinion of the Devon & Cornwall Constabulary that in light of this determination this application would undermine the crime prevention objective;

(iv)

there was a history of management involving Mr Williams, Mr Miller and Mr Robinson.  The management team was not good enough to run one premise with a 100 capacity and were now running a second 500 capacity venue;

(v)

although no incidents could be linked to the premise, in the past six weeks there were two incidents that took place outside the premise;

(vi)

the capacity for The Venue was 500 whilst Choo Choo’s was 100;

(vii)

during the committee on 12 July 2011 a time line was presented to the committee detailing a number of incidents linked to Choo Choo’s.