Decision

RESOLVED:

The decision

The Licensing Sub-Committee in considering this decision from the information presented to it within the report and at the hearing 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; and

• The protection of children from harm,

and in particular the prevention of public nuisance, made the following determination:

1. Modify the conditions on the premises licence as follows: 

·  Members of staff shall manage the outside area and dispersal from the premises.

·  The Premises Licence Holder shall organise and publicise a meeting (online and/or in person by distributing flyers to homes in the area) for local residents to discuss the operation of the premises at least every 6 months.

·  The Premises Licence Holder shall maintain a dedicated telephone number and email address that must be available at all times and by distributing flyers to homes in the area. These contact details shall be included on any website of the premises and on display at the premises.

·  The premises shall keep and maintain a log to monitor noise from the nearest residential property to the premises.

Reasons for the decision

The Licensing Sub-Committee after considering the application from the Environmental Protection Service to review the premises licence on the grounds of the prevention of public nuisance, and after hearing from the Environmental Protection Service, Premises Licence Holder, and their legal representative the Sub-Committee decided to modify the premises licence.

The Sub-Committee took into consideration that there were complaints between March 2023 to March 2026.The Sub-Committee heard that the last complaint was almost 3 months ago.

The Sub-Committee took into consideration representations from the Premises Licence Holder and their legal representative that a significant amount of money had been spent to resolve the noise issues at the premises.

After hearing the evidence presented to them the Sub-Committee felt that revocation of the premises licence was not appropriate or proportionate in the circumstances.

The Sub-Committee took into consideration that the Premises Licence Holder had taken proportionate steps to address problems. In addition they carried out works including acoustic treatment at the premises. The Sub-Committee noted that there had been no change in the hours of the operation.

The  Sub-Committee took into consideration the evidence of the complainant. However, they could only attach a limited amount of weight to the representations made by the complainant who was unable to attend the hearing.

The Sub-Committee took into consideration that there were 5 written representations from local residents against this review application.

The Sub-Committee felt that the premises should hold regular residential meetings to deal with any issues at the premises.

The Sub-Committee felt there was not sufficient evidence to take action against the Premises Licence Holder. The Sub-Committee felt that the evidence had not demonstrated that there was an ongoing public nuisance. The Sub-Committee also took into consideration that no other Responsible Authorities had made representations.

Public Informative

The Premises Licence Holder is advised to engage with local residents, the Shoreditch Community Association and Responsible Authorities to reduce any noise issues.