Agenda and minutes

Councillor Angelo Weekes 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 Councillors Asima Shaikh and Joseph Croft.

Councillor Ilkay Cinko-Oner substituted for Councillor Asima Shaikh and Councillor Clare Jeapes substituted for Councillor Joseph Croft.

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 was as set out in the agenda.

RESOLVED:

That the minutes of the meeting held on 14 March 2024 be confirmed as an accurate record of proceedings and the Chair be authorised to sign them.

The licensing officer reported that a number of documents had been circulated from the applicant which advised of amendments to licensing times and outlining the nature of the application.

In response to a question from the Sub-Committee, the licensing officer reported that there had been no complaints received from the temporary event notices held, although there had been one complaint made about a fashion show event on another evening.

The Friends of Clerkenwell Green stated that a number of applications had been heard relating to this premises over the years and there was no change in this application beyond the commercial advantage of Knotel. There had not been complaints as the current conditions were adequate and had been well debated previously. Longer hours were not needed and there should be no reason for this change. A second resident stated that the premises and the neighbourhood was well managed. This was a residential area and nuisance would be increased with the extension of hours.

In response to questions to the resident, it was noted that a previous Sub-Committee was persuaded to balance the needs of residents and the commercial operation and it was considered that there was no reason it should change. Conditions had been set as appropriate. There was residential housing alongside the building and concerns were raised that a new licence would move with the new operators. The pavement licence had not yet been used by the premises.

The applicant’s representative stated that the amended hours were submitted following the representations made. The hours were amended and matched the licence from the previous licence holders. The terminal hour had been reduced for the indoor restaurant and the pavement licence to 4pm and 8pm respectively. This application with 47 proposed conditions was not in nightclub territory and if conditions were breached the licence would be reviewed or prosecuted. The conditions allowed an operation as a members’ club with a maximum of 150 guests. The licence could not be transferred. Alcohol must be supplied with food and not alcohol led. The supply of alcohol to the restaurant and the pavement area must be with a table meal.  A licence should be granted on an evidence base. This company was well respected. There was no history of complaints except for one. This was a unique premises in this area of London. There were no representations from the responsible authorities, who, under the Home Office guidance were experts in their fields. The applicant had asked the Friends of Clerkenwell Green to visit the premises. The application added the restaurant which they would like members of the public to use and to appreciate the pedestrianisation of Clerkenwell Green. The application had been made for commercial reasons; this was an expensive building to maintain and it was also hoped that the public would enjoy the building.

In response to questions, it was noted that this was a corporate work club and was mixed use for co working and for client meetings. Costings for membership  ...  view the full minutes text for item 91.

The licensing officer reported that the applicant had sent in additional material but this had been received too late to be circulated. However, the applicant’s representative was permitted to address the Sub-Committee on the matters raised in the submission.

The Licensing Authority stated that there had been a lack of detail in the operating schedule. This was a busy area and could attract people who congregated in the area and delivery drivers who would be noisy and needed to be controlled. It had been detailed that the premises had been open on the 24 December and the 5 March, 9 March and the 16 March 2024 in contravention of the Licensing Act 2003. Anti-social behaviour officers had observed food being served from the window on the 5 and the 16 March. Licensing officers visited on the 22 March and noted that the premises was advertised as being open until 4am. The applicant had been written to and informed that was a breach of the licence and hot food could not be provided after 11pm without a licence. They had stated that this was due to Ramadan but there had been other occasions over the past few months that they had been open. In view of these breaches and the poor application, which did not indicate how they would be operating the premises, the licensing officer recommended refusal.

In response to questions, it was noted that they had not been witnessed open since they had written to by the Licensing Authority.  The premises had never had a late-night refreshment licence and the Licensing Authority stated that the first complaint had been made in December 2023.

The local resident stated that he appreciated that the area was changing.  He had evidence that the premises had been operating out of hours since June 2023. He had been woken in the night by the noise and had recently called the restaurant to complain but had no response. He did have double glazing but was unable to open his windows in the summer. He had been given inaccurate responses by the applicant. He had not received a letter from the applicant in response to his representation and he had no faith in this applicant.

In response to questions the local resident stated that he had first been disturbed in June 2023. He had been disturbed by noise from cars, with music blaring and all windows open, noise from motorcycles and from large groups of people talking.

The applicant stated that this was a restaurant and he would need permission for a take away. The premises was previously an Italian takeaway and drivers also congregated outside from Dominos next door. This licence was an important part of their business viability plan.  Dominos had a licence until 4am. The Noise team and the police had not objected to the application and conditions had been agreed with them. The primary use was for a restaurant but the take-away service was also required for the viability of the business.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 92.