Agenda and minutes

Councillor Angelo Weekes welcomed everyone to the meeting and officers and members introduced themselves.  The procedure for the conduct of the meeting was outlined.

None received.

There were no declarations of substitute members.

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.

Councillor Angelo Weekes declared that he was a ward councillor for Mildmay ward and had been advised at a resident meeting that there had been an application for Item B1, The Dreamery which was to be heard a future Licensing Sub meeting. Councillor Weekes had advised residents to contact other ward councillors with any comments about the application.

The order of business would be as the agenda.

RESOLVED:

That the minutes of the meeting held on 11 April 2024 be confirmed as an accurate record of proceedings and the Chair be authorised to sign them.

The Licensing officer reported that submissions had been circulated from the applicant. A meeting had been held with residents in March to outline the application. In an amendment to the report the Sub-Committee was advised that late night refreshment had also been applied for from 11pm to midnight on Fridays and Saturdays.

A local resident stated that he was in favour of the application.  It was on the site of an old car wash which was not very attractive and the applicant had been willing to invest in an old building. It would be necessary to offer protections against unruly behaviour and smells from the cooking.  He expected it would bring people to the area and make it safer. He considered that the area would be improved with the staff and activity in it.

In response to questions, the resident stated that exit and entrance should be at the front of the building and not the rear. He was concerned about the smells from cooking. There was an open area at the rear that was not part of the licence application and which they did not own. The resident stated that the hours were fine as long as patrons were directed out the front.  If there was a beer garden that would be a different matter.

The applicants’ representative stated that many people turned up to the resident meeting and they were not present at the Sub-Committee this evening. He stated that the applicant had a lease which operated as a car wash. This was Class E in planning terms, which extended to restaurant use. The premises was situated outside a Cumulative Impact Area and was on a main road. There was no application for regulated entertainment and conditions were extensive. There was one letter of support from a resident and 12 opposed, although many had attended the resident meeting on the 27 March. The applicant was not proposing a delivery hub but hoped to provide a small amount of food and drink at home. Conditions 14 – 19 on page 60 and 61 of the agenda would control delivery activities. The hours were within framework hours. There would be less vehicle traffic than the previous car wash. There was no regulated entertainment and money had been spent on sound proofing. The external area was covered. There would be a dispersal policy and a supervisory presence for antisocial behaviour and litter picking. Cooking would be with a covered smoking device with a tall chimney which emitted very little smell.  The responsible authorities had not objected. This would be a positive addition to the community and would promote the licensing objectives.

The space allowed for a maximum of 120 covers but it was considered that there was likely to be around 60-80 covers. The premises would only be open initially from Wednesday to Sunday but trade was hoped to be extended in the future if successful. The kitchen would close at around 10.30pm. There would be no tables and chairs outside.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 107.

The licensing officer reported that there were no further updates.  In response to a letter sent by the applicant to the interested parties, two objectors wanted to continue with their objection and the licensing officer had not heard from the third.

The applicant stated that he had revised the application to framework hours following the receipt of representations.

In response to questions, he stated that his vision was to offer prohibition era style cocktails. He wanted a low key, friendly warm place which served good quality drinks. He had met with a number of people and businesses and was in contact with them to help reduce crime. He had removed a bench from outside so there would be no loitering when smokers were outside.  He had been a bar manager and store manager for over 30 years. The premises were small and held around 35 people. Two staff would be on duty on Tuesdays to Saturdays and on Sundays it would be closed. If the business was successful, he would look at employing more staff. There were conditions proposed from the police and the noise team.

In summary the applicant stated he would have a phone number available for residents. He was happy with the hours until midnight.

RESOLVED

1)      That the application for a new premises licence, in respect of The Mad Hatter, 44 Old Street, EC1V 9AE, be granted to allow:-

a)    The supply of alcohol, for consumption on and off the premises from 12:00 until 23:00 hours Sunday to Thursday and from 11:00 until midnight Friday and Saturday;

b)    Late night refreshment from 11pm to midnight on Fridays and Saturdays.

c)     The premises to be open to the public from 11 am until 11 pm Sunday to Thursday and from 11am until midnight Friday and Saturday.

2)      That conditions outlined in appendix 3 and detailed on pages 102-104 of the agenda be applied to the licence.

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 Policies 2 & 3.  The premises fall within the Bunhill cumulative impact area.  Licensing policy 3 creates a rebuttable presumption that applications for the grant or variation of premises licences which are likely to add to the existing cumulative impact will normally be refused following the receipt of representations, unless the applicant can demonstrate in the operating schedule that there will be no negative cumulative impact on one or more of the licensing objectives.

Three local resident objections had been received.  Conditions were agreed with the noise team and the police. There had been no other representations made by the responsible authorities.

The Sub-Committee noted the written representations from the local residents.

The Sub-Committee noted that the hours sought were within the hours specified in licensing policy 6.

The Sub-Committee heard evidence that  ...  view the full minutes text for item 108.