Agenda and minutes

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

None.

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 Item B4 followed by Item B3.

RESOLVED:

That the minutes of the meeting held on 22 October 2019 be confirmed as an accurate record of proceedings and the Chair be authorised to sign them.

The Sub-Committee noted that this item had been withdrawn as all representations had been agreed.

The Sub-Committee noted that this item had been withdrawn as all representations had been agreed.

The licensing officer reported that conditions had been agreed with the responsible authorities.  A letter had been sent to the interested parties from the applicant.  No responses had been received and none of the interested parties were present at the meeting.

The applicant stated that the operation would be as detailed in his letter on pages 88-91 of the agenda. In response to a question it was noted that alcohol would only be served with food. 

RESOLVED

1)   That the application for a new premises licence, in respect of 172 Goswell Road, EC1V 7DT, be granted to allow on sales of alcohol from 12 noon until 11pm Monday to Saturday and from 12 noon until 10pm on Sunday.

2)   That conditions detailed on pages 92 and 94 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 operation 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 had been agreed with the police, noise team and trading standards and there were therefore no representations from the responsible authorities.

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

The Sub-Committee noted that this was a small Italian restaurant with 25 covers serving beers and wines to sitting customers.  There was no standing bar area and alcohol would only be served with food and would not be allowed outside the premises.

The Sub-Committee concluded that the granting of the licence with the agreed conditions would promote the licensing objectives. The Sub-Committee noted that the hours sought were within the hours specified in licensing policy 5 and 6.  The Sub-Committee was satisfied that the proposed use, with the extensive conditions agreed, meant that the premises would not add to the cumulative impact.

The Sub-Committee was satisfied that granting the premises licence was proportionate and appropriate to the promotion of the licensing objectives and in the public interest.

The licensing officer reported that there had been no representations from the responsible authorities. A response to the objector from the applicant and a plan of the premises had been circulated to the Sub-Committee.

The local resident stated that his objection had been made on the basis that the licensed premises should promote the licensing objectives and he was concerned about the public nuisance that was being caused. He stated that the street was primarily residential with 14 residential dwellings, some retail outlets and a school. The presumption had been rebutted in the previous application as it was to be operated in a specific way and conditions had been proposed to mitigate any impact. A previous Sub-Committee had imposed a condition stating that there would be no more than two despatches of alcohol a day and this had been continually breached.  The concerns raised at the time were still valid now. It was also stated that the applicant had been operating outside the permitted hours.  The breaches were longstanding and he would not have the confidence that the applicant would adhere to conditions in the future. He considered that the Management plan was impractical and the vans outside the garage driveway would be blocking the pavement. He considered that photos provided indicated how van drivers could block the road as the drive was adjacent to a parking area.  It would not be possible to enforce conditions such as turning off engines, or talking loudly on radios. Previous concerns remained valid and no reasons had been given for justifying the change. The licence had an adverse impact on residents.  He raised concerns that the licence would be extended even though the applicant had not complied with the licence conditions in the first instance. 

In response to questions, the interested party stated that on average there were 8/10 couriers per day and two vans. It was stated that there was a courier almost every hour of the day.  The applicant stated that the recent out of hour deliveries had been for journalists and did not mean this was a breach in condition.

The applicant stated that 20% of his business occurred in December with 3000 collections/deliveries this year.  The business was carried out from three locations, primarily on five days a week with approximately 9 collections per day on average.  Some collections/deliveries could be grouped together.  The applicant’s representative stated that the applicant did not agree with the charges made by the interested party.  A licence was granted in 2014 and it had been brought to the applicant’s attention in October 2019 that there had been breaches of conditions and the licence would need to be updated.  The application was to vary the hour until 7pm, to relocate the storage area and to vary conditions as detailed in the report. The primary objective of the application was to ensure that the licensing objectives would be promoted. The applicant did not accept the objection from the interested party and had requested a meeting  ...  view the full minutes text for item 92.