You are here: Agenda and minutes

Agenda and minutes

Venue: Committee Room 4, Town Hall, Upper Street, N1 2UD

Contact: Jackie Tunstall  020 7527 3068

Items
No. Item

99.

Introductions and procedure

Minutes:

Councillor Diner welcomed everyone to the meeting, asked members and officers to introduce themselves and outlined the procedures for the meeting.

100.

Apologies for absence

Minutes:

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Spall and Khan.

101.

Declarations of substitute members

Minutes:

Councillor Raphael Andrews substituted for Councillor Marian Spall and Councillor Paul Smith substituted for Councillor Robert Khan.

102.

Declarations of interest

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.

 

Minutes:

None.

103.

Order of Business

Minutes:

The order of business was as the agenda.  Item B4, Mamma Mia, Holloway Road had been adjourned to a future meeting.

104.

Minutes of Previous Meeting pdf icon PDF 161 KB

Minutes:

RESOLVED

That the minutes of the meeting held on the 12 January 2016 be confirmed as a correct record of proceedings and the Chair be authorised to sign them.

105.

McDonalds, 23 Highgate Hill, N19 5LP - New premises licence pdf icon PDF 4 MB

Minutes:

The licensing officer reported that the police had withdrawn their objections following the agreement of the conditions at pages 36 and 37 of the agenda.

 

The licensing officer had reported that she had seen the DVD enclosed with the application.  She considered that the cumulative impact only applied to the sale of alcohol in this area and not late night refreshment but would prefer the core hours in the licensing policy to be maintained.  She had concerns about where their customer base would be from in the early hours of the morning. She welcomed the agreement of the condition regarding SIA operators.

 

In response to questions it was noted that there were other McDonalds with SIA operators in Kings Cross and Chapel Market.  This had been as a result of anti social behaviour and where further conditions had been added to the licence following discussions between the authority and the applicant.  It was noted that core hours were up to 1am.  There were four licensed premises in the area that closed between midnight and 3am.  The Kings Cross and Chapel Market premises were open 24 hours although there would be more late night licensed premises in those areas.  Following the staffing by SIA operators, things had improved in those premises.

 

The applicant’s representative welcomed that the licensing authority had agreed that the cumulative impact policy did not apply in this instance as licensing police 3 referred to the management of alcohol, particularly in relation to off sales.  This premises did not impact negatively.  There were a number of fast food premises in the area that were open until 4 or 4.30 am.  These were detailed at page 83 of the agenda. McDonalds offered seating which the other premises didn’t and also provided a safe warm environment.  McDonalds would be the safer place where customers could sober up if necessary.  The franchisee was experienced and already managed a 24 hour premises.  The audio visual monitoring station was detailed and it was considered that 70% to 80% of anti-social behaviour had been reduced with its use.  The premises would be of a benefit to the local community who would be the principle users.  There had been no resident objections and the representation from the Better Archway Forum detailed an increase in alcohol hours which had not been applied for.  The representation from Councillor Burgess did not refer to the licensing objectives. There was a nightclub opposite the premises which closed at 4am.  McDonalds would not be looking for this custom and would be closing before dispersal from the nightclub. The police had withdrawn their objection and the representative asked that the Sub-Committee consider the Home Office guidance that stated that the police were the main source of advice relating to the promotion of the crime and disorder objective. During the operation of temporary event notices over ten weekends there had been no incidents.

 

In response to questions it was noted that the temporary event notices ran from 5am to 3am. Customers were  ...  view the full minutes text for item 105.

106.

Unico Italian Cafe, 156A Seven Sisters Road, N7 7PS - New premises licence pdf icon PDF 1014 KB

Minutes:

The Sub-Committee moved into private session under paragraph 1, of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972 to consider this item.

 

RESOLVED

That the application for a new premises licence in respect of Unico Italian Café, 156a Seven Sisters Road, N7 7PS 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 into consideration Licensing Policy 2.  The premises fall under the Finsbury Park cumulative impact area.  Licensing policy 2 creates a rebuttable presumption that applications for new premises licences that are likely to add to the existing cumulative impact will normally be refused, unless an applicant can demonstrate why the operation of the premises involved will not add to the cumulative impact or otherwise impact adversely on the promotion of the licensing objectives. The Sub-Committee also considered licensing policies 9 and 10 regarding high standards of management.

 

The Sub-Committee heard evidence from the police that the current applicant was linked to the previous licensee and that it was his belief that the previous licensee would still be involved in the running of the premises which he considered would return to its previous state.  The Sub-Committee noted the applicant’s concerns that the police did not provide any extra information prior to the hearing.

 

The Sub-Committee noted the police concerns that the applicant had never run a restaurant before and could not demonstrate any licensing experience.

 

The Sub-Committee heard evidence from the applicant that the premises would be a family restaurant and that alcohol would only be served with a full table meal with no vertical drinking.  The applicant stated that while he knew the previous licensee they were not best friends and he did not know him well. The applicant’s representative clarified that the maximum capacity was 50 persons and submitted that with the hours sought in a family run restaurant there would be no negative impact from noise and disturbance.

 

The Sub-Committee noted that, upon being asked about his understanding of the area, the applicant stated that there were no issues although his representative then discussed conditions to tackle street drinking.

 

The Sub-Committee was concerned that the granting of the new licence would undermine the licensing objectives.

 

In accordance with licensing policy 2, the Sub-Committee was satisfied that the grant of the application would undermine the licensing objectives.  The Sub-Committee was of the view that the applicant had not demonstrated sufficient understanding of the cumulative impact policy and the area in which the premises were located. Although it was noted that the applicant was seeking hours within the core hours of licensing policy 8, and although the premises would have capacity for only 50 persons, the Sub-Committee was concerned that the applicant had no experience of operating licensed premises.  These premises were in an area recognised to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 106.

107.

B and D Supermarket, 156 Seven Sisters Road, N7 7PL, - Review of premises licence pdf icon PDF 1 MB

Minutes:

The licensing officer reported that additional papers had been circulated from Trading Standards.  These would be interleaved with the agenda papers.

 

The trading standards officer reported that there had been a large seizure of illicit goods in 2014.  Written advice had previously been sent to the licensee and if this advice had been followed, the licensee would have recognised that the alcohol was illicit. The licence could have been reviewed at this time but it was agreed that additional conditions be added to the licence.  Following a tip off, the premises were visited in November 2015 and illegal tobacco was found and Romanian beer. The licensee stated that some of the beer had been purchased from a caller to the shop, as was the case when goods were seized in 2014. The licensee was unwilling to take steps to prevent this from happening. There were no concerns regarding underage sales.  He considered the licensee to be dishonest and not suitable to be a licensee in Islington.

 

In response to questions it was noted that at the first visit in 2014, 39.4 litres of spirits, 65 bottles of cheap Italian wine and ½ kilo of shisha tobacco were seized. If advice had been followed, this would have been recognised as being illicit. Training was attended in November 2014 and the decision was taken not to review the licence.  A variation to the licence was made in summer 2015 and then there was a further seizure in November 2015.

 

The police stated that he fully supported the review of the licence.  Management standards were not as required.  Recent training had taken place.  He did not consider that additional conditions would help. 

 

In response to questions the police stated that following the first seizure and the training advice he would not expect illegal tobacco to be on the premises. There could be a misunderstanding on the first instance but not following the training and high input given by trading standards following the first seizure. The licensee claimed that the tobacco was for personal use. At interview he had stated that he had hidden them under the counter as he did not want his staff to smoke or sell them. There were 18 packets of cigarettes found.  This was considered to be a legitimate amount if buying from duty free but not for personal use.

 

The licensee’s representative stated that there was no issue wit the facts.  Cigarettes had been found which were for personal use and these should not have been stored in the shop. There was a reason for a lack of confidence in the designated premises supervisor.  The licensee realised the serious mistake he had made and in order to protect the livelihoods of four staff he had decided to sell the business.  He had found a potential buyer to buy the leasehold and the business. The sale was anticipated to go though in another two months.  One employee was a licence holder and would work under the new designated premises  ...  view the full minutes text for item 107.

108.

Mamma Mia, 12 Hornsey Road, N7 7BP - New premises licence pdf icon PDF 509 KB

Minutes:

The Sub-Committee noted that this item had been adjourned to a future meeting at the request of the applicant.