The licensing officer reported that a letter from the applicant, in response to resident concerns, had been circulated. This would be interleaved with the agenda papers.
This application had been made as the applicant wanted a new licence with less licensable activities. They had not applied for a music licence or dancing but only for the sale of alcohol. Many representations had been submitted for their previous application but they had only received two objections from interested parties for this application. No vertical drinking would be permitted. All other issues had been resolved. Most customers lived on the local estate. The premises was managed professionally, they had been visited by officers on a couple of occasions. This was a large venue which could operate a one-way system and customers could remain inside when waiting for a taxi.
In response to questions, it was noted that there were two door supervisors, staff were fully trained and retrained every six months. They did not offer drink promotions. Alcohol sold was not cheap but their food cost was set at a reasonable level. There were three levels of supervision. Orders were taken by a waiter, there was a floor manager and then the main manager who would manage customers. There was space for 30/40 people to remain inside whilst waiting for their taxi and this would prevent outside noise nuisance. There was no loud music and notices were posted inside warning customers about making too much noise. Rubbish had been an issue for one week and the applicant explained that he had 12 bins per week but the general public attending the park during lockdown had begun using these bins during the good weather. The manager then locked their bins but this created rubbish on the green. He therefore increased bin capacity to 18 a week, at a cost of £700, and left them open for the general public to use. There had not been an issue since this. It was noted that the premises was large enough to hold 180 people seated but to allow social distancing there was only capacity for 100 people. The Sub-Committee noted that a planning consultant was present should the Sub-Committee have any planning queries. The applicant stated that he was working with planning officers. This had not been easy to complete all works due to the three month lockdown but they wished to comply with the planning issues as soon as possible.
1) That the application for a new premises licence, in respect of Tetto’s Italian Kitchen, 313 Highbury New Park, N5, be granted to allow:-
a) the supply of late night refreshment on Friday and Saturday from 11pm to midnight.
b) the supply of alcohol on the premises on Sunday to Thursday from 10am to 11pm and on Friday and Saturday from 10am to midnight.
c) the premises to be open to the public on Sunday to Thursday from 10am to 11.30pm and on Friday and Saturday from 10am to half past midnight.
2) Conditions detailed on pages 187 to 190 of the agenda shall be applied to the licence.
REASONS FOR DECISION
This meeting was held under regulations made under the Coronavirus Act 2020 and it was facilitated by Zoom.
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.
Two local resident objections had been received and a comment from the planning team had been received about enforcement issues. No residents attended. No other responsible authorities had raised objections.
The Sub-Committee noted that the hours sought were within the hours specified in licensing policy 6.
The Sub-Committee heard evidence from the applicant that this was a family restaurant with many customers from the estate. The Sub-Committee had read the representations of the residents concerning issues of public nuisance with queues and rubbish being dumped over the summer lockdown period. The applicant explained that this was unprecedented and due to extraordinary circumstances. With the help of the local authority he had resolved these problems. The rubbish being dumped was not entirely due to his restaurant but because of members of the public going to the park and using his bins. He had increased bin collections to 18 each week. Inside his restaurant he was able to maintain social distancing because the premises were so large and he detailed the procedure for approving alcohol sales and avoiding serving intoxicated customers or allowing them in through the door.
The Sub-Committee was satisfied that the applicant was able to maintain good standards of management at the premises and accepted what he said about the unusual situation during the summer.
The Sub-Committee concluded that the granting of the licence with the conditions proposed 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 operating schedule demonstrated high standards of management and that the proposed use, with the conditions put forward, 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.
Note of the Sub-Committee
The Sub-Committee understood that there were planning issues outstanding that needed to be resolved separately through the planning process which the Licensing Sub-Committee had not taken into account when making their decision.