Agenda item

The licensing officer stated there had been one representation from a resident who said she was representing a Tenants and Residents’ Association (TRA). The resident provided minutes from a TRA meeting which confirmed this. She was accompanied by the TRA secretary.

The licensing officer stated that two lists of timings had been received. The correct ones were as follows:

To extend the provision of on and off sales of alcohol from 11:00 until 22:00 Monday to Friday and from 09:00 until 22:00 on Saturday and from 11:00 to 17:00 on Sunday;

To extend the opening hours from 09:00 until 22:00 on Monday to Saturday and from 10:00 until 17:00 on Sundays.

The resident explained her objection letter raised concerns about the effects on residents of cooking smells and noise issues. She had complained to staff at the premises. The TRA secretary stated that by removing Annex 2, Condition 1 and replacing it with “Consumption of alcohol on the premises shall be limited to the ground floor café area and limited to a maximum of 16 persons”, the licensee was seeking to replace the cultural activity of wine tastings, with drinking. The secretary also stated that the premises was in a Cumulative Impact Zone and raised concerns about the public health impacts that would arise from increased hours. He outlined Islington and London statistics in relation to alcohol consumption and raised concern about how expanding the hours would increase the harmful effect of alcohol consumption. He suggested that there should be no licensing past 9pm.

The resident proposed that if the licence variation was granted, no supply of alcohol should be made when the Designated Premises Supervisor (DPS) was not present or where the DPS did not hold a personal licence.

The resident raised concern about bottles being put out between midnight and 2am. The licensing officer suggested that this could be from other premises which closed much later than the Quality Chophouse.

In response to a question from a member about the residents objections when the written and verbal objections focused on different points, the licensing officer reminded the committee that they should use the representation in front of them and not any new information presented to them.

The applicant explained that the Quality Chophouse business was 150 years old. There was a commitment to meeting the licensing objectives e.g. Challenge 25 was implemented, log books were kept and there was a large pool of colleagues with personal licences. The application related to the butchers/wine shop/café and not the restaurant. The applicant stated that the application had been put in following customers saying they would like the premises to serve wine in the evenings with snacks. It would not be an all night bar, alcohol would only be served with food and would not be served after 10pm. There would be 10-15 covers. Wine would cost between £4 and £10 and it was anticipated that most guests would have one or two glasses of wine each.

The applicant stated he was upset to hear about behaviour of customers in the objection but it was possible this related to other premises rather than the Quality Chophouse, particularly as some of the issues e.g. taking bottles out, seemed to be at times when the premises was closed. He considered that the level of intoxication described would not relate to the café/shop.

The applicant stated that he had tried to arrange a meeting with the resident. He added that the extractor at the restaurant was upgraded last year to the highest specification but he was happy to look at it again if there was a noise issue. He advised that the residents above the premises had not objected to the application.

The resident stated that a complaint about noise and smells had been made to the restaurant. The applicant stated that he was unaware of a formal complaint having been made. Wine tastings were currently held until 9pm and there were no problems with customers leaving the premises. If the licence was granted, high quality drinks would be served, customers would usually just have one or two glasses and therefore inebriation would not be a problem.

RESOLVED

1)    That the application for a premises licence variation in respect of Quality Chop House, 88-90 Farringdon Road, London, EC1R 3EA be granted to permit -

a)    The provision of on and off sales of alcohol from 11am until 10pm Monday to Friday and from 9am until 10pm on Saturday and from 11am until 5pm on Sunday. 

b)    The premises to be open to the public from 9am until 10pm on Monday to Saturday and from 10am until 5pm on Sundays

2)     Annex 2, Condition 1 as detailed on page 52 of the agenda be replaced with the following

-       Consumption of alcohol on the premises shall be limited to the ground floor café area and limited to a maximum of 16 persons.

3)    Conditions as outlined in Appendix 5 as detailed on pages 56 and 57 of the agenda shall be applied to the licence with the amendment to Condition 17 to read – “On sales of alcohol shall be served ancillary to food”.

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 fell within the Clerkenwell cumulative impact area.  Licensing policy 3 created a rebuttable presumption that applications for the grant or variation of premises licences which were likely to add to the existing cumulative impact would normally be refused following the receipt of representations, unless the applicant could demonstrate in the operation schedule that there would be no negative cumulative impact on one or more of the licensing objectives.

Under Licensing Policy 3, specifically in relation to the Clerkenwell Cumulative Impact Area, possible exceptions were set out at Paragraph 24 for applications with comprehensive operating schedules that demonstrate that there would be no negative cumulative impact on the licensing objectives; where the premises encourage people to stay in the area after work, premises were not alcohol led, proposed hours of operation consistent with framework hours and arrangements to prevent vertical drinking.

The Licensing Sub-Committee noted that the applicant acknowledged that the interested parties had raised serious matters. The applicant had taken steps to try to meet with the interested parties and had sent a letter to them via the licensing team. The Licensing Sub-Committee noted the applicant’s submissions that his proposal to serve only up to 10pm and all alcohol to be served with food would address the interested parties’ concerns.

The Licensing Sub-Committee concluded that the applicant would ensure the high standards of management set out under Licensing Policy 8 would be maintained and the proposal was within the framework hours set out under Licensing Policy 6. The Licensing Sub-Committee noted that the premises was small in nature with no more than 10-15 patrons at any one time.

The Licensing Sub-Committee was satisfied that the applicant had rebutted the presumption in Licensing Policy 3 and was satisfied that there would be no negative cumulative impact on one or more of the licensing objectives.

The Licensing Sub-Committee amended Condition 17 to allow for off sales from the premises without being accompanied by the purchase of food.