Agenda item

The licensing officer introduced the applicant. She stated that a letter from the applicant to the interested parties had been circulated outlining the proposals and the conditions proposed.  One resident responded in objection. No residents were in attendance.

The applicant stated that Badiani had come to London five years ago and operated eight venues across London. He recognised that he was in a cumulative impact area and stated that the premises predominantly sold gelato, the hours would be framework hours and there would be less than 50 patrons. They would sometimes offer a special gelato with a glass of prosecco. They have agreed to a number of conditions including that the primary activity of the premises would be for the sale of gelato.  They would promote the licensing objectives and would take into account the special measures that were in place.

In response to questions it was noted that the sale of alcohol was ancillary to food and this was a proposed condition. They would sometimes provide a special gelato e.g tomato or truffle and would serve these with a glass of prosecco or wine but this was ancillary to the core business. They may provide an Irish coffee but this did not appeal to children.  Their hours were from midday.  They had two tables and four chairs outside which were brought in at closing.

In summary, he wished to reassure members that he did not want to add to the cumulative impact and the offer was primarily gelato with coffees, wine and prosecco. Alcohol was not the core business.

RESOLVED

1)      That the application for a new premises licence, in respect of Badiani, 14 Camden Passage, N1 8ED be granted to allow:-

a)    The sale of alcohol, on and off the premises from 12:00 until 11pm Monday to Sunday.

b)    The premises to be open to the public from 8am to 11pm Monday to Sunday.

2)      That conditions detailed on pages 42 to 44 of the agenda be applied to the licence.

REASONS FOR DECISION

This meeting 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.

The Sub-Committee took into consideration Licensing Policies 2 & 3.  The premises fall within the Angel and Upper Street 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 operating schedule that there will be no negative cumulative impact on one or more of the licensing objectives.

The Sub-Committee took into consideration Licensing Policy 4.  The Council has adopted a special policy relating to cumulative impact in relation to shops and other premises selling alcohol for consumption off the premises.  Licensing policy 4 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 or subject to certain limitations, following the receipt of representations, unless the applicant can demonstrate in the operating schedule that there will be no negative cumulative impact on one or more of the licensing objectives.

Seven local resident objections had been received. Conditions were agreed with the police and noise team.

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

The Sub-Committee heard evidence that the company had come to London five years ago and operated eight sites in the city. Alcohol was sold but was ancillary to the main purpose of the business which was the sale of gelato. The applicant was aware that the premises was in a cumulative impact area but believed that the exceptions set out in the policy applied as the premises would have below 50 guests and would be operating within framework hours.

The applicant confirmed that alcohol would always be ancillary to gelato sales and anyone wishing to purchase alcohol would have to buy food. The type of alcohol on offer would not be attractive to children and was not the core of the business model. The applicant stated that the business wished to offer special gelato such as truffle or tomato flavoured and that part of the offer would normally include a glass of prosecco. The primary offer would be gelato, coffee or crepe.

The Sub-Committee concluded that with the conditions accepted by the applicant, the granting of a licence would not add to the cumulative impact and would promote the licensing objectives. The committee noted that a condition had been agreed that the primary nature of the business would be as a gelateria, that there would be no vertical drinking and that alcohol would be ancillary to food.

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 operating schedule demonstrated high standards of management and 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.