Agenda item

The Licensing Officer was asked to report any additional updates, which there were not. There were also verbal representations from interested parties or responsible authorities.

In their verbal representation to the Sub Committee, the applicant highlighted that they were a very small restaurant applying for the sale of alcohol between 11am and 10.30pm. The applicants stated that they operated another restaurant in the London Borough of Haringey, of whom had granted them a similar licence.

The applicants also highlighted that they had responded to objections accordingly and also managed to obtain signatures of support from neighbours in close proximity of the premises.  The applicants clarified that there would be no vertical drinking from the premises as it was an extremely small space and would be sit down service only. The applicants also clarified that despite the name ‘Brunch’ featuring in the title, the business did not want to restrict itself to just brunch hours, as it had to remain competitive. The applicant stated that they were not anticipating selling vast list of alcohol and spirits, that the environment would be ambient with no live music, and the business’s presence in the area would boost safety through footfall and CCTV on the door.

In terms of why the licence was needed up to 11pm, the applicant stated that this was to manage demand. Addressing an objection received about potential waste, the applicant stated that as an existing coffee shop at the premises, they already have waste management procedures in place, but this can be altered if required.

The Sub Committee asked the applicant what the alcohol offer would be, to which the applicant responded that it would be mostly wines or cocktails as there physically was not the space to store beer and the business was primarily focused on food. 

The Sub Committee asked the applicant how they would manage large groups of customers congregating outside the premises, to which the applicant responded that they had a private outdoor space that had not been included on the plan, which would help with mitigate against patrons impeding residents’ access to neighbouring properties.

The Sub Committee asked the applicant how they would mitigate sound outside, to which the applicant advised that they would have signs reminding patrons to not be too loud and that there would also be a booking system. The applicant stated that they had also engaged with the community and had the support of residents.

In summing up the applicants stated that they were trying to do something different to survive as a business and also adapting to the community.

RESOLVED

1)       That the application for a new premises licence, in respect of Brunch on the Green, Units 1-3, 34 Islington Green, London, N1 8EU, be granted to allow:-

a)     To allow the sale by retail of alcohol, on supplies only, Mondays to Sundays from 11:00 until 23:00

b)     To allow the premises to be open to the public, Mondays to Sundays from 07:00 until 23:00

2)       That conditions outlined in Appendix 3 and detailed on pages 115 to 117 of the agenda 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 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 noted that there were no representations from relevant authorities and conditions had been agreed with the Police and Noise Team.  Two local residents and one local councillor had made a written representation, but none were present at the hearing. 

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

The Sub-Committee heard evidence from the applicant that the premises was a small coffee shop and intended to offer alcohol with meals such as wine with cheese boards. There would be no off sales and no vertical drinking within the premises.  The hours sought were modest and provisions already in place for non-disruptive deliveries to the premises. 

The Sub-Committee concluded that this case fell within the exceptions to the cumulative impact policy in that it was within framework hours, not alcohol led, and had conditions in place to prevent vertical drinking.  The applicant had demonstrated that there would be no cumulative impact on any of the licensing objectives and had rebutted the presumption against granting the licence.

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