Agenda item

The Chair of the Sub-Committee opened by asking the licensing officer for any additional information that had become available since the publication of the agenda. In response, the Licensing Officer informed the Sub-Committee that there had been no further updates.

When asked by the Sub-Committee to outline their case, the applicant described their business as a hair salon. The reason for the application was that they would like to sell wine. Guests are offered a glass of wine as part of the hairdressing appointment, but this application covers the sale of that bottle to the customer if they would like to take it with them. There are a maximum of two guests in the premises at any one time, which allows greater regulation of the space, behaviour, alcohol consumption and loitering outside the premises. The applicant stated they did not wish to convert to a wine shop or any form of alcohol-led establishment. The off sale of alcohol was just an option, not the primary focus of business.

When asked by the Sub-Committee whether they wanted to expand the offer to events or have more than two guests within the shop at any one time, the applicant responded that they did not.

RESOLVED

1)       That the application for a new premises licence, in respect of Teto Studio, 6 Shillingford Street, London, N1 2DP, be granted to allow:-

a)     To allow the sale by retail of alcohol, on & off supplies, Mondays to Sundays from 09:00 until 21:00

2)       That conditions outlined in appendix 3 and detailed on page 223 to 224 of the agenda be applied to the licence, with the additional condition as follows: the premises licence for the sale of alcohol is dependent on the operation of the premises as a hair salon.

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 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. Licensing Policy 3.31-46, states that the area continues to feature as an alcohol-related crime hotspot. However, Licensing Policy 3.48 provides an exception for premises submitting comprehensive operating schedules which are small premises with a capacity of no more than fifty persons, or premises which are not alcohol-led with appropriate hours.

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.

One local resident objection had been received, but the resident did not attend.  There had been no representations made by the responsible authorities and conditions had been agreed with the Police and the Noise team.

The Sub-Committee heard evidence that this was primarily a hairdressing salon. Each guest took one hour to complete a treatment and there are only two guests on the premises at any given time. Guests could be offered a glass of wine with their treatment. If they liked the wine, they could buy a bottle and take it away with them. There would be no drinking outside and alcohol would be provided to seated guests at a table or bench.

The Sub-Committee concluded that there would be no negative impact on any of the licensing objectives. However, it was concerned to include a condition that the premises licence would be dependent on the use of the premises as a hair salon, in order to avoid any future problems.

The Sub-Committee was satisfied that granting the premises licence was proportionate and appropriate to the promotion of the licensing objectives