The licensing officer reported that noise and police representations had been withdrawn as conditions had been agreed. A letter had been received from the applicant stating that this licence replaced a previously held licence. The letter would be interleaved with the agenda papers.
A local resident reported that Upper Street was already saturated and was concerned regarding off sales. There would be noise following the closure of the premises after 12:30 at night. There was too great a concentration of licensed premises in the Angel area and the saturation policy should be applied. She was very frustrated about the number of licenses being granted and stated that this would be another one that would add to the cumulative impact.
The licensing officer reported that this would be a licence for on sales only and the resident stated that this would be an improvement.
The applicant’s representative reported that the premises were acquired in 2003 for A3 use. The applicant undertook his responsibility towards training. In 2009, planning permission was granted for 3 residential units above and during construction work the premises caught fire. The freeholder was ordered by the court to put them the applicant back in the premises. He understood the saturation policy. He advised that if there had not been a fire they would still be operating under the original licence and so would not have an additional impact. This licence was for a restaurant which served alcohol only with a meal. There was no bar area. They had not any issues or complaints prior to the fire and hoped to join the local pubwatch. Training would be available for all staff. Opening times and conditions had been agreed and the applicant wanted to run the premises as it had been run previously. The opening hours had been amended. The applicant was a responsible operator and it was hoped that he would be given the opportunity to run the premises.
a) That a new premises licence in respect of The Fig Tree, 35 Upper Street, N1 0PN be granted:-
i) To permit the sale by retail of alcohol, on supplies only, Sundays to Thursdays from 11:00 until 23:00 and Fridays and Saturdays from 11:00 until midnight.
ii) To allow late night refreshment, Fridays and Saturdays from 23:00 until midnight.
iii) The premises to be open to the public, Sundays to Thursdays from 09:00 until 23:30 and Fridays and Saturdays from 09:00 until half past midnight.
b) Conditions as outlined in appendix 3 as detailed on page 183 of the agendashall 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 Policy 2. The premises fall under the Angel and Upper Street cumulative impact area. Licensing policy 2 creates a rebuttable presumption that applications for new premises licences that are likely to add to the existing cumulative impact will normally be refused, unless an applicant can demonstrate why the operation of the premises involved will not add to the cumulative impact or otherwise impact adversely on the promotion of the licensing objectives.
The Sub-Committee noted that there were now no off sales which was a main concern of the residents, two of whom had withdrawn. They noted that the applicant had previous experience of running a similar business in the same location lawfully and had demonstrated a track record of compliance with legal requirements. In his presentation he demonstrated a comprehensive knowledge of best practice and had agreed conditions with the noise team and police. The application was for a restaurant operating within core hours set out in licensing policy 8.
The Sub-Committee considered that the grant of the premises licence could potentially add to the existing cumulative impact. However, the applicant demonstrated in his operating schedule with the agreed conditions that there would be no negative cumulative impact on any of the licensing objectives.
The Sub-Committee considered that it was appropriate, proportionate and in the public interest to grant the licence.