Agenda and minutes

Councillor Diarmaid Ward welcomed everyone to the meeting. Members of the Committee and officers introduced themselves.  The procedure for the conduct of the meeting was outlined.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Gary Poole.

Councillor Satnam Gill substituted for Councillor Gary Poole.

If you have a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest* in an item of business:

§  if it is not yet on the council’s register, you must declare both the existence and details of it at the start of the meeting or when it becomes apparent;

§  you may choose to declare a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest that is already in the register in the interests of openness and transparency. 

In both the above cases, you must leave the room without participating in discussion of the item.

If you have a personal interest in an item of business and you intend to speak or vote on the item you must declare both the existence and details of it at the start of the meeting or when it becomes apparent but you may participate in the discussion and vote on the item.

*(a)     Employment, etc - Any employment, office, trade, profession or vocation carried on for profit or gain.

(b) Sponsorship - Any payment or other financial benefit in respect of your expenses in carrying out duties as a member, or of your election; including from a trade union.

(c) Contracts - Any current contract for goods, services or works, between you or your partner (or a body in which one of you has a beneficial interest) and the council.

(d) Land - Any beneficial interest in land which is within the council’s area.

(e) Licences- Any licence to occupy land in the council’s area for a month or longer.

(f) Corporate tenancies - Any tenancy between the council and a body in which you or your partner have a beneficial interest.

 (g) Securities - Any beneficial interest in securities of a body which has a place of business or land in the council’s area, if the total nominal value of the securities exceeds £25,000 or one hundredth of the total issued share capital of that body or of any one class of its issued share capital. 

This applies to all members present at the meeting.

There were no declarations of interest.

The order of business would be as the agenda.

RESOLVED

That the minutes of the meeting held on the 7 February 2017 be confirmed as a correct record and the Chair be authorised to sign them.

The licensing officer reported that five resident objections had been received and letters of support had been circulated by the applicant. It was suggested that police conditions 1 and 2, as detailed on page 30, be amended to restrict the numbers to 14 customers and to ensure that alcohol would be ancillary to food. He stated there were no planning issues.

In response to a question the applicant stated that it was intended to do wine tasting once a month but if it was successful it may be increased to once a week.

A local resident reported that he welcomed the small shop and the choice it brought to the area but was concerned with the alcohol licence.  Saturation levels were close to being reached or had already been reached in that area. Concerns were raised about the clarity of the application, the amount of food that would be sold with alcohol and the number of events that would be held. There were no limitations of the amount of alcohol on display and it was considered that alcohol should remain in locked cupboards and out of reach.  Concerns were also raised about the licence if the premises were sold.  A second resident was concerned that the area was in a saturation zone and considered that this did not mean much if another licence was granted.  It was requested that should the licence be granted it should only apply to these applicants only so it would not be passed on.  Residents had to suffer the residue of licensed premises including empty bottles and glasses and stated that this was yet another outlet in a saturation zone which should be properly addressed.

The legal officer advised that this was an application for a premises licence and not a personal licence and therefore could not be restricted to the applicant.

The Sub-Committee asked the resident if they considered the same issues related to this premises, as it was a small specialist premises rather than a bar.  The resident stated that they were not able to tell what the licence would lead to.

The applicant reported that they were a French delicatessen who had found small producers of French products which they would to sell. They would like to offer cheese and wine tastings.  Wine would be a complementary element to the food. The applicant’s supporter stated that Camden Passage had changed over the past seven years and instead of antique shops there were other shops.  He considered that this shop in the Passage would benefit the area.  They would not be selling lager.

In summary the applicant stated that he had a personal licence.

RESOLVED

1)       That the application for a new premises licence, in respect of Le Coq Epicier, 1 Camden Passage, N1 8EA, be granted to allow:-

a)       The sale of alcohol, on and off the premises from 10am until 8pm Monday to Friday, from 9am to 9pm on Saturday and from 10am until 7pm on Sunday.

b)       The premises  ...  view the full minutes text for item 161.

The police informed the Sub-Committee that, as the premises was on the border of two Boroughs it was difficult to obtain crime statistics and he considered that the situation was worse than the statistics suggested.  He would not want a grant of the licence until 3am but would suggest midnight during the week or 1am on Fridays and Saturdays.  He reported that in the past six months there were 76 violent offences in the ward. At least 50 of these were related to alcohol. The target clientele for these premises would be people who had been drinking.

The noise team were concerned about the toilet facilities. It was noted that there was a toilet shown on a plan provided but this appeared to be in a separate building and was not considered suitable or sufficient for customers.

The licensing authority stated that they agreed with the police and that they would ask for reduced hours.  The applicant had not fully engaged with the authority and as the night tube ran through Finsbury Park, customers were likely to be those drinking in the centre of London. They raised concerns regarding the position of the toilet marked on the plan as customers would need to go through a food preservation area to use it. 

The applicant’s representative stated that the premises was a kebab van with a seated area in front. The seated area would be removed after 11pm.  There would be take away food only after 11pm and the applicant would not want to provide a toilet area in this case but if it was considered necessary the applicant would provide a public urinal. They did not agree that there be a reduction in hours as suggested by the police and the licensing authority. The core hours were outlined in the licensing policy however the Licensing Act wanted flexible hours for responsible businesses to ensure a positive aspect for late night venues.  The premises would provide jobs.  Licensing hearings often considered the negative aspects of licensing.  The dispersal of customers could be managed by staff who would encourage customers to leave the area. Notices would be displayed asked customers to leave the area quietly and CCTV would be in place and could be provided on request.  The applicant’s representative asked that they be given a licence on Friday and Saturday until 3am.

In response to questions, the applicant’s representative reported that toilet facilities were not expected in a small shop.  This was a kebab van.  Staff would be managing any queue.  They would not be serving alcohol and would be serving late night refreshment only.  The police were not specific about problems from these premises.  If the licence was not granted they would be selling cold food to show that these premises could be run properly.  Crime and disorder was caused by alcohol and late night refreshment premises should not be penalised.  The applicant did not wish to add alcohol to the licence.  If they served cold food they would provide  ...  view the full minutes text for item 162.

The licensing officer reported that the applicant had withdrawn this item verbally but confirmation in writing had not been received. 

The applicant was not present at the meeting and the Sub-Committee agreed to hear the application in their absence.

The police and the licensing authority had nothing further to add to their representations.

RESOLVED

That the application for a new premises licence, in respect of Star Food and Wine, 138-140 Balls Pond Road, N1 4AD, be refused.

REASONS FOR DECISION

The Sub-Committee listened to all the evidence and submissions and read all the material. The Sub-Committee reached the decision having given consideration to the Licensing Act 2003, as amended, and its regulations, the national guidance and the Council’s Licensing Policy.

The Sub-Committee took representations made by the Licensing Officer, that the Licensing Authority had been informed that the application was going to be withdrawn.

No written confirmation had been received by the Licensing Authority.

There was no appearance on the part of the applicant.

The Sub-Committee considered the written representations made. No further oral submissions were made by the Responsible Authorities.

The application was refused.