Agenda and minutes

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

There were no apologies for absence.

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.

There were no declarations of interest.

The order of business would be as the agenda.

RESOLVED:

That the minutes of the meeting held on 6 February 2024 be confirmed as an accurate record of proceedings and the Chair be authorised to sign them.

RESOLVED that Item B1 be held in private session as it contained exempt information as specified in paragraph 1 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972, namely information relating to any individual.

The licensing officer reported that there were no additional papers.

The police stated that the licensee was an Islington licence holder. There were two relevant convictions under s132 to consider and sought revocation of the licence.

The licensee apologised for the offences. He thought that he had notified the Licensing Authority about the most recent offence. He asked that the Sub-Committee consider the suspension of his licence rather than a revocation.

In response to questions, he stated that the loss of his driving licence had already affected his work as he worked late. He did not know whether or not he would lose his job if he no longer held a personal licence. He had a wife and two children to support. He outlined the circumstances around his offences and stated that if he lost his licence it would make a large difference to him financially.

RESOLVED

That the personal licence be revoked.

REASONS FOR DECISION

The Sub-Committee considered all the evidence and the Home Office guidance.

The Sub-Committee considered a proposal from the Metropolitan Police on behalf of West Mercia police to revoke a personal licence following the licence holders’ conviction for a relevant offence.

The Sub-Committee heard evidence from the Police that the licence holder was convicted of driving with excess alcohol and the licence holder had failed to notify the Licensing authority of the conviction.

The Sub-Committee heard evidence from the licence holder that he accepted that he had done something wrong, he thought that he had notified the Licensing Authority of the conviction and that he would appreciate a suspension rather than revocation. The licence holder stated that at the time of the 2016 offence he was not a dps and his mind was elsewhere as his wife was due to have their first child. At the time of the second offence in 2023, his uncle had just passed away and he could not get back to Australia, he had gone for a drink with friends and had one beer too many. The loss of his driving licence had already affected his work and he did not know if there would be a different position available for him in the company if he lost his personal licence.

The Sub-Committee noted that the licence holder had pleaded guilty and was now ‘holding his hands up’ and acknowledging his mistakes. However, the seriousness of the offence and the fact that it was not properly reported to the Licensing Authority, led the Sub-Committee to conclude that the licence should be revoked in line with the recommendation of the Police, rather than suspending the licence for a period. The Sub-Committee considered it was proportionate and necessary to revoke the personal licence in order to uphold the licensing objectives.

The licensing officer advised that an additional letter from the applicant, which had been sent to the representatives, had been circulated.

The local resident stated that there had been a history of licensing applications for the Nags Head market.  The upper floor of the market had a number of licensed premises and now this was an application for the ground floor. There were too many licensed premises outlets and residents did not want any more. The granting of this licence would add to the cumulative impact and increase problems with crime and disorder. The upper floor was heavily conditioned and he was concerned that another licence would turn the market into a bigger drinking venue. The market was not well run and the applicant would not be able to control all the entrances and exits.

In response to questions, the resident stated he had seen no improvement in the market and licences granted to the upper floors had not worked. He considered that the heavy conditions had stifled business to the upper floors. He stated that the pub on the corner had always been there and McDonalds had a 24 hour licence. Delivery bikes and uber drivers congregated. He considered that the applicant would not be able to overcome cumulative impact. He considered that there was now more litter from food outlets on the upstairs level and it attracted Deliveroo and Ubers. Vehicles had to pull up in Hertslet Road as Seven Sisters Road was a red route. He was concerned that the market operator would make multiple applications on the ground floor further increasing the licences in the market.

The applicant stated that he was applying for this licence independently of the market operator.  He had run pubs for ten years and had spent 15 years in hospitality. He had been in the market for 18 months and the market had not been invested in over recent years. He was running a small kitchen with enough room for 6 seats in the front. Alcohol was ancillary to food and customers would not be served alcohol without food. He would remove the chairs when busy and would not serve alcohol during this time. They would be removing the deliveries so that the quality of food could be controlled. The market was strict with its closing times. Traders found it hard to be a successful business. He was a pub manager and had a personal licence. Alcohol could only be sold by a personal licence holder.  It would be a better space if traders were experienced and could control the flow of alcohol.  There would be no patrons standing and drinking alcohol. Security was available if needed on the upper floors. He had CCTV and the market also held CCTV. Any music played would not be amplified.

In response to questions, he stated that he would be selling mainly bottled Mexican beers and lagers. He would be happy limiting spirits and food to be with beer. He would be moving people  ...  view the full minutes text for item 89.

The licensing officer reported that details were as detailed in the papers. There had been one objection from a local ward councillor.

The applicant stated that she had taken over the post office. There had been poor customer service previously and she had spent the first year looking at the dynamics of the business and considering a wider range. She wanted a one stop shop for customers. The post office had told her to maximise her space. To limit the cumulative impact she had installed CCTV, would ensure staff were trained, she held a personal licence and her niece was working towards obtaining one. Deliveries would be early as the road was on a red route. She did not intend the premises to be open until 10pm. Staff would be trained not to sell to drunk customers.  There was only one fridge for alcohol. She stated that the premises would not be a nuisance to the community.

In response to questions, she stated she would not be selling alcohol on match days. She felt that the retail part of the business would keep it sustainable. The post office was a needed service in this area. One of her staff was obtaining an SIA licence. The premises would have two staff at all times. She had CCTV and she hoped that the business would grow and that the community could still have a much needed local post office.

RESOLVED

1)      That the application for a new premises licence, in respect of Wemimz at the Post Office, 116-120 Seven Sisters Road, N7 6AE be granted to allow:-

a)   The sale of alcohol off the premises, Mondays to Fridays from 10am to 10pm and on Saturdays from 8am to 10pm and on Sundays from 10am to 8pm;

b)   The premises opening hours to be Mondays to Saturdays from 8am to 10pm and on Sundays from 8am to 8pm.

2)      That conditions detailed on pages 93 to 95 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 Holloway and Finsbury Park 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.

The Sub-Committee took into consideration Licensing Policy 4.  The Council has adopted a special policy relating to cumulative impact in relation to shops and other premises selling alcohol for consumption off the premises.  Licensing policy 4 creates a rebuttable presumption that applications for  ...  view the full minutes text for item 90.

The licensing officer reported that conditions had been agreed with the Responsible Authorities and hours had also been amended.  The applicant engaged with residents and as a result one representation had been withdrawn leaving one representation remaining.

The applicant advised that he had a small dining space and he had invested in double glazing and sound proofing. Staff would monitor the outside area and wanted minimum disruption to neighbours. He had reduced the hours applied for with a limit to late nights at the weekends only.  There would be no delivery services. Alcohol would be served alongside a full dining service and customers would be encouraged to remain seated. Customers would include families rather than people solely focussed on drinking.

In response to questions, he advised that neighbours could be supplied with his number in case of issues.  Alcohol was ancillary to food. CCTV had been installed both inside and outside.

RESOLVED

1)      That the application for a new premises licence, in respect of Donnamu, 27 Baron Street, N1 9ET, be granted to allow:-

a)    The sale of retail of alcohol, on supplies only, Sundays to Wednesdays from 12 noon until 11.30pm and Thursdays to Saturdays from 12 noon to 1am;

b)    The provision of late night refreshment Sundays to Wednesdays from 11pm until 11.30pm and on Thursdays to Saturdays from 11pm until 1am;

c)     The premises to be open to the public Sundays to Wednesdays from 12 noon until midnight and Thursdays to Saturdays from 12 noon until 1.30am.

2)      That conditions outlined in appendix 3 and detailed on pages 128 to 130 of the agenda be applied to the licence with the following addition:-

·       A telephone number be supplied to neighbours in case of disturbance.

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 Kings Cross 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.

Amended hours had been agreed with the Licensing Authority. Conditions had been agreed with the police, noise and trading standards. Three local resident objections had been received but two had withdrawn.  The Sub-Committee noted the content of the objection from the local resident.

The Sub-Committee heard evidence from the applicant that the premises were a small dining space. He had invested in double glazing for sound proofing and staff would be monitoring the outside area. He was committed to having regular meetings and feedback sessions with residents. There would be  ...  view the full minutes text for item 91.