Agenda and minutes

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

None.

None.

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.

None.

The Sub-Committee noted that Items B2 and B3 had been withdrawn from the agenda.

The order of business would be B1, B4 and B5.

RESOLVED

That the minutes of the meeting held on the 9 February 2016 be confirmed as an accurate record of proceedings and the Chair be authorised to sign them.

The Sub-Committee noted the additional information from the applicant circulated separately.  This would be interleaved with the agenda papers.

The local authority stated that their representation was maintained. The premises were in a cumulative impact area and further measures had not been provided.  The supporting information supplied was welcomed.  These were an historical problem premises but the new operators had operated since July 2015 with a number of temporary event notices and had received no complaints from residents, the noise team and the police. Hours in the licensing policy for bars were currently up until midnight and the applicant would need to explain the operation for the premises after midnight.

Councillor Gary Poole reported that he had serious concerns regarding the nature of the venue and its sensitive location.  The premises would impact on the night-time economy which raised particular concerns past midnight.  The hours did not reflect the framework hours in the licensing policy.  Residents were transient in nature and a young mum had left as this area as it was untenable for families.  The policy was designed to protect residents and it was vital that the policy be upheld.  He stated that there was no rebuttable presumption for this application, it was an alcohol led venue, larger than the exceptions in the policy and did not fit within the licensing policy.

The applicant’s representatives stated that the previous occupiers of the premises did not have anything to do with the current applicant and previous problems should not be held against this operator.  Police had not objected to the application and had been supportive. The applicant managed six other late night premises, closing between 1.30 am and 3.00am, most of which had residents as near neighbours and had comprehensive management procedures.  Regarding the representations, one was from a neighbour who did not live immediately above the premises and two were from residents who did not live close by.  The police who had previously submitted a review and the noise team, who had supported the review, had not submitted a representation.  The applicant had a positive relationship with the neighbour directly above the premises who had reported no issues since July 2015. Refurbishment, including installation of sound insulation, had been carried out on the premises.  The applicant had demonstrated over the last nine month period that the premises were well run by a responsible operator.  The local authority had no issues with the temporary event notices.  The applicant had tried to contact an interested party on several occasions with no success. The temporary event notices (TENs) had all been granted with no objections.  Seven were granted until 2am and 16 granted until 3am. These had provided good evidence that the premises would not add to the cumulative impact.  An interested party had stated that hours were being breached but late hours would have been during the operation of TENs. During the TENs, CCTV had been provided at the rear of the premises and the applicant had been fully co-operative.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 118.

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

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

The applicant reported that this was a premises in a warehouse development.  He had a restaurant near the Islington/Hackney borders which he had been operating for two years and would like to repeat this business at these premises.  He had met with residents.  They had concerns about problems arising on match days and takeaways. He stated that patrons would need to reserve tables.  Wine was sold with food.  No spirits or alcopops were sold.  He wanted to bring Michelin star food to Holloway. 

In response to questions it was noted that this restaurant would focus on sustainable seafood from Devon.  Beer would only be a small percentage of sales and sold in 2/3^rd pint measures.  Reservations would need to be made for tables and on matchdays alcohol would not be served 90 minutes before or after the game. He was not catering for a match crowd.  No bottled beers or take away would be sold.  The van that currently occupied that area would be moving further away.

In summary, the applicant stated that this was a food led premises, they would close at 11pm and they had received no complaints about their other restaurant.

RESOLVED

That the application for a new premises licence in respect of the Ground Floor, 15 Benwell Road, N7 7BL be granted to allow the sale of consumption of alcohol, on and off the premises on Monday to Friday 12:00 to 23:00 and from 10:00 to 23:00 on Saturday and Sunday with the conditions as detailed on pages 154 and 155 of the agenda.

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 that conditions had been agreed with the licensing authority and that there were no objections from responsible authorities. 

The Sub-Committee noted that the applicant had experience of running a restaurant on the Islington/Hackney borders.  The restaurant was to focus on sustainable seafood.  Wine would be served ancillary to food.  Beer would be approximately 2 per cent of alcohol sales and would be served in schooners which measures 2/3rds of a pint.  Beer would not be on display.    Tables were available by reservation only and bookings would not be taken by persons entering from the street.

The Sub-committee noted the conditions proposed regarding the restrictions on alcohol on matchdays.  The restaurant was not catering for football fans.

The applicant had met with the residents who had objected and had explained that the style of the restaurant was not what they had anticipated and the restaurant was not connected with the trailer outside which sold hotdogs. The Sub-Committee noted that the residents had not attended the meeting.

The Sub-Committee noted that the hours sought were within the hours specified in licensing policy 8.

The Sub-Committee considered that the granting of the licence with the conditions was  ...  view the full minutes text for item 121.

The Sub-Committee noted that an application for late night refreshment on Fridays and Saturdays until midnight had also been made.

The applicant stated that she had been operating the premises for eighteen months until 9pm during the week and 10 pm at the weekends.  The area was generally quiet.  There had been an objection from a local resident who had mainly generic concerns.  Food was served alongside drinks. They were operating with A1 planning consent so there was a restriction on cooking.

RESOLVED

1)   That the application for a premises licence variation for Nanna’s, 274b St Pauls Road, N1 2LJ be granted to allow:-

a)     The sale of alcohol for consumption on and off the premises Sunday to Thursday, 08:00 to 23:00, 08:00 to midnight on Friday, 09:00 to midnight on Saturday and from 09:00 to 23:00 hours on Sunday.

b)     Late night refreshment from 23:00 to midnight on Fridays and Saturdays.

2)   Conditions as detailed on page 181 shall 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 account licensing policy 8 and noted that the application for variation was within core hours. 

The premises sold food alongside alcohol and operated as a café catering for tea, coffee, beer and wine drinkers.  The applicants’ response to the resident dealt with the objections raised and the resident did not attend the Sub-Committee meeting. 

There had been no representations made by the responsible authorities.

The Sub-Committee considered that the granting of the variation would not have a negative impact on the licensing objectives.