Agenda and minutes

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

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Khan.

Councillor Ward substituted for Councillor Khan.

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 Aysegul stated that she was the ward councillor for Highbury East.

The order of business was as the agenda.

RESOLVED

That the minutes of the meeting held on the 19 July 2016 be confirmed as a correct record and the Chair be authorised to sign them.

The Sub-Committee noted that this item had been withdrawn.

The licensing officer reported that conditions 6 and 7 should be merged to read as one condition and conditions 3 and 4 could be deleted as they had been repeated in condition 10.  An additional condition regarding the display of notices should be included as a proposed condition as indicated in the operating schedule.

The interested party stated that since the shop had been closed the streets were very quiet.  There had been no more problems with youths in the area.  He considered that cars would be outside late at night and people would cause trouble.  He stated that he would prefer the licence not to be granted but if it was the licence be restricted from 8am to 8pm rather than the 16 hours requested.

In response to questions he stated that when the shop was open previously there had been trouble from youths hanging around outside the shop.  Since the shop had closed the area had been very quiet.  He stated that, although he would rather that the licence was not granted, he considered 7am was very early when there were schools nearby.

The applicant’s representative reported that this shop had been licensed for many years and planning permission had been granted for the replacement building with two shops beneath.  The shop was not currently open.  The hours requested were within police and this would be a local shop catering for people in the locality.  The hours proposed in the morning would enable customers on the way to work to purchase alcohol and they could also buy alcohol in the evening.  11pm was a time recognised as appropriate and the representative asked that the licence be granted for this time.  There was no evidence of nuisance, crime and disorder.  Police had agreed a CCTV condition.  The licensee had held a licence in Copenhagen Street with no difficulties.  If the licence was granted the designated premises supervisor would be at the shop most of the time. There were generally two people employed in the premises.  They would operate Challenge 25, they would have CCTV inside and outside which would assist if there were problems.  There had been a petition of support with 70 signatures.  The licensing objectives would be promoted if the licence was granted with proposed conditions. 

In response to questions it was reported that the licensing consultants offered training.  The shutters were electric which it was considered may be quieter than previously.  The area of floor space used for storing alcohol was indicated to members of the Sub-Committee.  Local people had visited and supported the shop. The applicant’s representative stated that there may be some flexibility regarding the early morning taking into account resident concerns.  This was a local community store and was not a nightclub or bar.  The proposed hour of 7am would be useful for customers who wished to purchase alcohol on the way to work.  The representative did not know of any issues in the area regarding street drinkers.  Street drinkers often looked for  ...  view the full minutes text for item 136.

The licensing officer reported that conditions 13 and 26 had been duplicated.

The licensing authority stated that the premises were not in a cumulative impact area.  The authority would not wish the premises to be used as a bar. Customers would be eating food with alcohol.  They had no objection to the hours as these had been the same hours as previous licence.  There would be no eating or drinking outside the premises.  They held no complaints regarding noise nuisance.  The take away hours were until 5am although these had not been used fully previously due to noise restrictions. 

The applicant’s representative stated that this was a restaurant serving Turkish cuisine that had seating available for 50 people.  There had been a previous licence but this had not been transferred when the company had been dissolved in June 2016.  The licensee was currently still paying staff for covering the night shift but closing at 11pm.  The applicant was not asking for more hours than the previous licence holder and 30 conditions were proposed for the licence, 15 of which had been agreed by the noise team.  It was stated that the four interested parties were referring to the previous owner in their representations.  Full refurbishment of the premises had been carried out including new soundproofing.  A planning application was to be submitted although it was noted that planning and licensing were separate regimes. There were 12 staff employed by the premises but 7 staff would lose their jobs if the licence was not granted.

In response to questions it was noted that staff would ensure that alcohol was not taken off the premises.  It was noted that the applicant had spoken to the interested parties and they all thought that this application had been submitted by the previous owner.

RESOLVED

1)       That the application for a new premises licence, in respect of Yeni Adana, 25-27 Green Lanes, N16 9BS, be granted to allow:-

a)     The supply of alcohol, for consumption on the premises from Sunday to Thursdays from 11am until 1am hours and Friday and Saturday from 11 am until 2 am Friday and Saturday.

b)     The provision of late night refreshment, Mondays to Sundays from 11pm until 5am.

c)     The premises to be open from 8am until 5am Monday to Sunday.

2)       That the conditions outlined in appendix 4 and detailed on pages 142 and 143 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 noted four local residents had made representations which were included in the report.  A representation had been submitted by the Licensing Authority.

The Sub-Committee noted that the premises were not in a cumulative impact area.  The Sub-Committee also noted that there had been a previous licence at  ...  view the full minutes text for item 137.