Agenda item

6.1  The sub-committee heard from the Principal Licensing Officer, Counsel for the applicant and the Licensing Authority. During the course of submissions and a discussion of the application, the sub-committee noted the following:

·  Since the publication of the officer report, the applicant had proposed a further four conditions to address the concerns related to public nuisance.

·  Counsel for the  applicant stated that the applicant was seeking to extend the hours on Sunday for the sale of alcohol from 10:00 to 01:00 hours and late night refreshment from 23:00 to 01:30 hours during the months of September to March, the premises was a restaurant and bar exclusively showing sports events, the sale of alcohol would be ancillary to the live screening of events, there would be no entry from 23.00 hours, an additional four conditions had been submitted during this period to address the  concerns related to crime and disorder, and no objections from received from the local residents living in the special policy area and Responsible Authorities except the Licensing Authority.

·  The Licensing Authority’s representative stated that the premises was located within the Shoreditch Special Policy Area (SPA), the proposed activity would further exacerbate the negative cumulative impact identified in the area as a result of the large concentration of licensed premises, and sought further clarification of the nature of the televised sporting events.

·  Counsel for the applicant clarified that the bar would be broadcasting exclusively NFL American Football live sporting events and college football.

·  Counsel for the applicant responded that the premises were located within a quiet corner of Shoreditch, they expected 30 to 50 patrons at the events, which was 50% of the total seated capacity inside the premises, the ambience would be relaxed with games estimated to last 2 to 3 hours, alcohol would be sold ancillary to food, people would have to book their place via  a booking system and the exact numbers expected at an event would be known,  there would be a minimum of two SIA door supervisors to ensure the area was well managed and dispersal was staggered to minimise any negative impact on the area,  no more than five smokers would be allowed at any one time and no drinks outside, the clientele would include local residents, Amazon was above the premises but closed on Sundays, there would be minimal impact from dispersal as the exit doors led directly into the City of London and there were not many residents living this area

·  A risk assessment would be undertaken for each event to determine if more than two SIA door supervisors were required.

·  The applicant reassured the sub-committee that there would be no vertical drinking at the premises and that alcohol would be served ancillary to food by waiter service or ordered online.  A full kitchen would be open until closing hours and patrons could order food such as wings, nacho, burgers.

·  The applicant and the Licensing Authority’s representative agreed to late night refreshment ceasing at 01.00 hours in line with the hours for the supply of alcohol.

RESOLVED:

The decision

The Licensing Sub-Committee in considering this decision from the information presented to it within the report and at the hearing today has determined that having regard to the promotion of all the licensing objectives:

·  The prevention of crime and disorder;

·  Public safety;

·  Prevention of public nuisance;

·  The protection of children from harm;

the application to vary a premises licence has been refused in accordance with Licensing Policies LP1, LP2, LP6 and LP11 within the Council’s Statement of Licensing Policy.

Reasons for the decision

The Licensing Sub-Committee, having heard from the Licensing Authority and the Other Persons believed that granting this application is likely to result in the licensing objectives being undermined and will have an impact on the area. 

The Sub-committee took into consideration that there were objections raised by Other Persons (two local Ward Councillors Lea Bridge and Kings Park on behalf of the local residents) on the grounds of the four licensing objectives. The Sub-committee took into consideration objections raised by the Licensing Authority on the grounds of public nuisance.

The Sub-committee took into consideration the concerns of the Licensing Authority that additional hours in this area could have a negative impact on nearby residential properties therefore undermining the prevention of public nuisance.

The Sub-committee took into account that there had been complaints from local residents due to the level of noise coming from the premises which affected their sleep. The Sub-committee took into consideration the alleged breaches of the conditions of the premises licence by having customers seated outside until late at night.

The Sub-committee took into consideration representations made by the Ward Councillors on behalf of the local residents that it is not appropriate to allow outdoor seating until 23:00 at a bar in a residential area such as Chatsworth Road and the surrounding streets, especially on weekday nights and Sunday evenings.

The Sub-committee noted that the noise disturbance from the premises during the Summer months in 2022 following its opening was significant and repeated despite residents complaining. The Sub-committee heard that the indoor section of the bar is small and so the business is strongly incentivised to exceed its outdoor seating restriction.

The Sub-committee carefully considered the representations made by the Premises Licence holder, the Licensing Authority and Other Persons (Ward Councillors). The Sub-committee was not convinced by the Premises Licence holder’s proposed variation of the premises licence which was contrary to the Council’s Licensing Policy LP6.

The Sub-committee felt that there were not strong mitigating factors or evidence to support why the Premises Licence holder should be granted the variation to the premises licence because it will have an impact on the residential area that was in close proximity to the premises. The Sub-committee also took into consideration the Premises Licence holder’s track record.

The Sub-committee felt that the nature of the area is changing to increased daytime business as trade increases. The Sub-committee encourages more daytime use

in keeping with the area.

The Sub-committee also felt that by not granting this variation application it would prevent anti-social behaviour which would contribute to increasing public nuisance in the area.

The Sub-committee took into consideration when refusing this application that each case is considered on its merits. The Sub-committee believed that the licensing objectives could not be promoted by granting this variation application, and as such believed it was appropriate to refuse the application in its entirety.