Agenda item

The licensing officer presented their report and informed the meeting that all parties had conciliated, except for the residents. Members had no questions for the licensing officer.

The applicant addressed the sub-committee. Members had questions for the applicant.

The representative of the police addressed the meeting explaining that their concerns had been addressed via the conciliation process. Members had no questions for the police representative.

The representative of the council’s environmental protection team addressed the meeting explaining that their concerns had been addressed via the conciliation process. Members had no questions for the environmental protection officer.

The licensing officer representing the council as a responsible authority addressed the sub-committee explaining that their concerns had been addressed via the conciliation process.  Members had no questions for the licensing officer.

Three residents from Druid Street objecting to the application addressed the sub-committee, and submitted a video to support their claims of excessive general noise levels in the street on weekends.  Members had questions for the local residents.

All parties were given an opportunity for summing up.

The meeting went into closed session at 10.50 am.

The meeting resumed at 11.10am. The chair did not read out the decision of the sub-committee, as none of the parties were present any longer.

RESOLVED:

Conditions

The operation of the premises under the licence shall be subject to relevant mandatory conditions, conditions derived from the operation schedule highlighted in Section M of the application form, the conditions conciliated with the responsible authorities and the following additional conditions:

1.  That the accommodation limit of the premises (excluding staff) shall not exceed 50 people.

Reasons

The reasons for the decision are as follows:

The licensing sub-committee heard from the applicant who stated that L’Emporio had a different model of operation from the other licensed premises on Druid Street.  The premises was very much food-led and would bring Italian food culture to the area with cheese tasting, curing and wine tasting events. They had also withdrawn all regulated entertainment from the application. All responsible authorities had conciliated and it was felt that the conditions agreed with them also addressed the concerns the local resident had.

The licensing sub-committee noted that the applicant conciliated with the responsible authorities:  Metropolitan Police, licensing and environmental protection team. 

The licensing sub-committee noted the representation submitted by the ward councillors.

The licensing sub-committee heard from other persons who stated that they lived very close to the premises and the other existing licensed premises. The area was already densely populated with licensed premises and there were already well-known and long-running issues concerning, noise nuisance, anti-social behaviour littering and urinating. A further licensed premises in the area would only add to problems. The other person accepted that they had not had any reason to complain about the L’Emporio when they had temporary events.

The licensing sub-committee are extremely sympathetic to the concerns of the local residents in that there had been a noticeable increase of licensed premises in Druid Street. This would naturally have an impact on residents in the area. However, L’Emporio was a food-led business, the sale of alcohol would not be primary. The business had been running for four years during which time, the residents had no reason to complain and for this reason, the premises license is granted.

This licensing sub-committee are concerned about the number of licensed premises opening in the Druid Street area and the cumulative impact that it is having on residents.  It is therefore recommended that a site visit to the area is made by the full Licensing Committee with the view that there is discussion on imposing a saturation zone in this area.  The residents also raised concerns that their complaints were not being followed up with any enforcement.  This licensing sub-committee recommend that Druid Street is carefully monitored and appropriate enforcement action taken by all responsible authorities for the next six months and their findings reported to the licensing committee.

In reaching this decision the sub-committee had regard to all the relevant considerations and the four licensing objectives and considered that this decision was appropriate and proportionate.

Appeal rights

The applicant may appeal against any decision:

a)  To impose conditions on the licence

b)  To exclude a licensable activity or refuse to specify a person as premises supervisor.

Any person who made relevant representations in relation to the application who desire to contend that:

a)  The  licence ought not to be been granted; or

b)  That on granting the licence, the licensing authority ought to have imposed different or additional conditions to the licence, or ought to have modified them in a different way

may appeal against the decision.

Any appeal must be made to the Magistrates’ Court for the area in which the premises are situated. Any appeal must be commenced by notice of appeal given by the appellant to the justices’ clerk for the Magistrates’ Court within the period of 21 days beginning with the day on which the appellant was notified by the licensing authority of the decision appealed against.