Agenda item

Councillor Gary Poole was in the chair for consideration of the following two items.

The Licensing Officer reported that the roof area had been removed from the premises licence application and that the Noise and Planning Teams had consequently withdrawn their representations.

A resident said that there were no licensed premises opening onto Featherstone Street and that it should be kept that way.  The premises were serviced offices, though he recognised that they had alcohol at events in the building. Given that the premises were situated in a licence free zone in a Cumulative Impact Area, with no other licensed premises in the street, it should stay that way and he could see no reason for them to have a licence. If, however, the application was granted, he hoped that an amendment to condition 16 could be considered to clarify that alcoholic drinks should not be taken away from the common area in the members’ lounge on the ground floor. Another resident said that, if the licence was granted, she would agree   with the proposed conditions which would help to ensure less noise nuisance from the back of the premises and that driveways were not blocked by delivery vans. Another resident said that the application was more like one for a private club and it should therefore be for members only.  The proposed hours were excessive and would have an adverse impact on the local school and on her flat in particular.  There would be problems with noise, odour control and safety. The proposed opening hours were excessive. She added that the hours on the original premises licence were 08:00 to 22:00 hours on Monday to Friday, 08:00 to 12:00 noon on Saturdays and closure on Sundays and bank holidays. Regarding the proposed conditions, there should be no use of vehicle bays, or the rear yard, other than for logistics. There should be no smoking in those areas either.  ASB and drug dealing was taking place on the private curtilage of the premises and there should therefore be more CCTV.

A member of the Committee asked residents whether there had been any outreach by the applicant.  One of the residents said that they had been contacted by the applicant only three to four days ago and had met with the applicant on the previous day.

The applicant stated that the premises would be a female founders club, aiming to support women to build companies. The licence was needed for seven days, to support a wide range of women, some of whom had work commitments and/or mothers taking children to and from school. The applicant agreed with the proposed change to condition 16 but pointed out that the back of the driveway was owned by the landlord and not within their control.  She was aware of the congestion caused by deliveries to the premises, but building work would be coming to an end in the forthcoming month and vehicles would then be able to turn left into Mallow Street. There was good security of the premises and they had been instructed to move drug dealers away from the premises. The applicant did not propose to run a bar at any hour on the premises, merely when there was a networking event taking place. These events would be occasional and ancillary to the business.  There had been no issues since February. Approximately 100 businesses were being supported, generating 300 extra jobs.  Their aim was to foster business relations.

A member of the Committee asked for clarification on the applicant’s business model, with the aim being the establishment of a female founders club, which would be for members only.  He queried whether access to the bar would be for members only, whether members could invite guests and whether external parties could rent space in the building. He asked whether the applicants were surprised at the number (21) of resident representations to the licence application.  The applicant said that members could host an event at the premises but would have to provide a guest list, which could be checked off as guests arrived.  She added that she was not surprised about  the number of representations, though many were about the roof.  She understood residents’ concerns and would be happy to show them around the premises and explain the business plan.

A member of the Sub-Committee noted that the applicant had only very recently contacted local residents about their proposals and pointed out that this should have happened much sooner. The applicant stated that a letter had been sent to residents on the previous Monday. In response to a question from another member of the Sub-Committee about the possible vulnerability of women using the premises, with anti-social behaviour in the vicinity, the applicant said that women were using the premises already and there was no issue. She added that the 300 extra jobs generated from business supported at these premises were across London and not just in Islington.  In response to a further  question about possible nuisance caused by taxis arriving at the premises to transport patrons, the applicant pointed out that not everyone would be leaving at once and patrons would be advised of the best pick up points.

One of the residents said that the was surprised to learn of the focus on women’s events at the premises, since this had not been specified in the application or on the applicant’s website. He would prefer not to see extended hours and could not see a necessity for networking events to go on later than 22:00 hours.

In response to a question about the necessity for licensed hours from Monday to Sunday, the applicant acknowledged that they could manage Monday to Friday and, in response to residents’ concerns about the late licensing hours being sought, conceded a revision of midday to 22:00 hours for the supply of alcohol at the premises.  Outside bookings were limited to persons known by the applicants.

RESOLVED:

That the application for a new premises licence in respect of Runway East, Ground Floor, 19-23 Featherstone Street, London, EC1Y 8SL, be granted:

1)         To supply alcohol for consumption on the premises from 12 noon until 10pm, Monday to Friday. 

2)         Opening hours to be:-  8am to midnight, Monday to Sunday.  

Conditions detailed on pages 257 and 258 of the agenda shall be applied to the licence, subject to the following amendments:

Condition 2 – add “and the licensee will not accept any outside bookings, external to the membership”

Condition 16 – amend to read “Alcoholic and other drinks purchased from the premises shall not be taken away from the licensed area of the ground floor”

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 within the Bunhillcumulative 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 noted the representations from residents, in particular their concern that the premises would operate seven days a week and that there would be an opportunity for the public to purchase alcohol from the premises.

The Sub-Committee noted the amended conditions that the applicant was willing to accept in relation to the hours of operation, that licensable activity would only take place on Monday to Friday, that drinks purchased would not be taken outside the licensed area and that there would be no outside bookings.

The Sub-Committee decided that in view of the concessions made at the hearing, there would be no adverse cumulative impact on the licensing objectives and that the licence would be granted, subject to the agreed conditions.