This meeting will centre around an application submitted by Islington Council to review the licence of The Sekforde public house on 34 Sekforde Street. The application follows on from complaints made by local residents about noise and anti-social behaviour and evidence of recurring licence condition breaches witnessed by the council. This review application and the related documents detail a long history of complaints about The Sekforde.

The Sekforde Arms

The Licensing Sub Committee A will determine an application to review the licence of The Sekforde Arms public house on 34 Sekforde Street.
The application has been made by the Licensing Authority of Islington Council in response to resident complaints about noise and anti-social behaviour coming from the pub. The report pack also details recurring breaches of the pub's licence conditions witnessed by Licensing Officers from the council. The grounds for review relate to the licensing objective of the Prevention of Public Nuisance. In the report pack, the Licensing Authority says:

This review is being made under the Licensing Objective: the Prevention of Public Nuisance.

The Sekforde opened as a public house in 1829 and remained open as a pub until the current owner, David Lonsdale, closed it for re-development in 2015. The pub re-opened just before Easter 2018. The property is located on the corner of Sekforde Street and Woodbridge Street and is structurally attached to residential neighbours on Sekforde Street. The premises is situated over three floors, the basement, ground floor and first floor.

The current Premises Licence was granted on 24 November 2005 after The Sekforde's Justices' On Licence was converted. Mr David Lonsdale has held the Premises Licence for The Sekforde since 9 November 2015. The Designated Premises Supervisor, Mr Harry Smith, has held that position since 5 April 2019. The report pack includes a Brief Licensing History of the premises, and says that:

The Responsible Authority for noise submitted a review application in 2018 following an investigation of complaints from residents about noise from amplified music and from customers outside the premises. The Licensing Committee determined the application and attached additional conditions to the licence. The Committees’ decision was appealed and following a hearing in the Magistrates Court imposed the conditions that are attached to the current licence.

Following the review, local residents continued to report complaints to the Council. These complaints generally detail being disturbed by noise and antisocial behavior from customers outside the premises. These complaints regularly detail the blocking of the pavement/s and alleged breaches of licence conditions. These complaints are more frequent during the warmer spring and summer months.

The report pack also says that:

In March 2024 a Minor Variation application was submitted to amend the licence conditions.

Representations were received from a Responsible Authority and Other Persons. These representations detailed sufficient information indicating that the changes proposed in the Minor Variation could undermine the promotion of the licensing objectives.

In accordance with Licensing Act 20023, section 41B the Minor Variation was refused and the Premises Licence Holder was invited to apply for a full variation so that the changes to the licence conditions could be determined before a Licensing Sub-Committee. At the time of writing this report such an application has not been sought.

A number of incidents that occurred in 2024 are cited in the report pack as examples of breaches of the current licence conditions, including these incidents that were witnessed by Licensing Officer Carol Jones:

• On Friday 9 August 2024, a Licensing Officer witnessed customers drinking while standing on Sekforde Street, customers entering and leaving through the Sekforde Street door, and all of the windows on the first floor open.
• On Thursday 31 October 2024, a Licensing Officer witnessed the side door on Sekforde Street being used after 21:00, a window open on the Sekforde Street elevation and another open on the Woodbridge Street elevation, and a number of customers standing on Woodbridge Street, some in the road.

The licensing authority has suggested a number of changes to the current licence conditions for The Sekforde, including the addition of the following new conditions to its licence:

• Condition 17 requires the installation, operation and maintenance of a CCTV system that meets a detailed list of specifications.
• Condition 18 requires all staff who are involved in the sale of alcohol to be regularly trained on the Licensing Act 2003¹, and for records of this training to be made available on request to the police and Licensing Authority.
• Condition 19 requires the licensee to develop, agree with the Licensing Authority, and periodically review a Noise Management and Dispersal Policy.

The report pack for this meeting contains copies of the current licence, and representations from the Metropolitan Police and the Council's Noise Service, as well as representations from the current licence holder, Mr David Lonsdale and the current Designated Premises Supervisor, Mr Harry Smith. The Metropolitan Police have said they support the addition of conditions 17 and 18 to the licence. The Noise Service has said:

The Sekforde PH has several existing conditions including those relating to drinking outside in Sekforde Street and Woodbridge Street to provide protection against noise nuisances from customers and any removal of these conditions would not promote the prevention of public nuisance objective.

The Noise Service's representation also says:

The EPPP team confirms that even with these conditions in place, a high number of complaints have been received in relation to The Sekforde PH. None of the complaints appear to have been substantiated as a statutory nuisance but several correspond to breaches of the licensing conditions.

Mr Lonsdale's representation details the history of the pub, saying:

Sekforde street was developed between 1827 and about 1840. It consists mainly of fine late Georgian architecture. The Sekforde Arms, as it then was called, was completed in August 1829... It was the very first building on Sekforde street to be completed. The Sekforde has always been a pub.

Mr Lonsdale also outlines his own long association with the pub, saying that he purchased the freehold in 2004:

I obtained planning and listed building [consent] from Islington Council to develop the site and to restore the pub. I retained one of the most celebrated architects in London Chris Dyson. The council was on this project extremely collaborative and helpful. Between June 2015 and December 2017, the building work took place. I am pleased to say the pub obtained several awards for the quality of the work including two RIBA awards for architectural excellence and sustainability. It is now an exceptionally beautiful building.

Mr Lonsdale goes on to complain about the previous licence review, saying:

This led to a licence review in 2019 which resulted in Islington Council imposing what I thought were harsh and unreasonable conditions. There is a right of appeal to the magistrate’s court which I exercised. There was eventually a hearing which lasted three days. The council adduced evidence from the neighbours who had complained about the pub. It called no evidence from the police or anyone who supported the pub which was by far the majority. Some of my neighbours gave evidence for me.

Mr Lonsdale also complains about the conditions relating to the closure of windows and doors at 8pm, saying:

The Sekforde for its entire 200 year history has relied upon natural ventilation and cooling through open windows and doors. There is no possibility of introducing air conditioning units into the Sekforde which is [a] grade 2 listed building. I have taken advice from several experts as to whether the pub could be adequately cooled without using natural ventilation.

Mr Lonsdale's representation includes a letter from the architect, Chris Dyson, who says:

Any work which alters the character of a listed building requires consent. It is a criminal offence to do work without such consent. Islington takes its obligation to protect its historic buildings very seriously

He also says that:

An adequate system for a busy crowded pub would be large and would require listed building consent and such consent would not, in my opinion, be granted by Islington council. In my opinion, this pub should be allowed to operate as it was designed to operate in 1829. Windows and doors must be kept open to allow natural cooling and ventilation in the summer months until at least 10pm. This is not merely a matter of comfort. It is an essential matter of health and safety.

Mr Lonsdale goes on to complain that:

Almost as soon as I re-opened the Sekforde in 2018 the complaints about noise started to flood in from a small number of neighbours.

He also complains that:

Given there are over 200 pubs in Islington a reasonable person would infer that to be the only pub subject to any review must be because the Sekforde is a uniquely badly run pub which flouts the law and does not care about its neighbours. This is of course false. If the pub were badly run or flouting the law, then we would not receive so much support from the great majority of residents. These have included families who live in very close proximity to the pub.

Mr Lonsdale complains that Islington Council Licensing Officers:

...do not appear to us to take any account of the views of the great majority.

He also says that:

They have completely captured the support of all the licensing officers who do not appear to us to take any account of the views of the great majority.

He concludes by saying:

However, if the licensing officers really want the Sekforde to close then they should just make an application for the revoking of our licence rather than pretending it is just about imposing additional conditions when they know full well the proposed conditions would force the pub out of business anyway.

Mr Harry Smith's representation includes a Noise Management Plan for The Sekforde, and outlines a number of actions that The Sekforde has taken to reduce noise nuisance, including no longer allowing customers to gather in large groups on Sekforde Street, no longer playing music above background levels, not using microphones, and employing a dedicated door supervisor on Thursday and Friday evenings. Mr Smith says that:

Customers when leaving the pub historically would have been able to leave outside Sekforde street, they would have waiting for taxis or saying their good byes right outside houses, now customers leave via the Woodbridge Street Side.

He says that:

Objectively you have to say the local residents on this street have never had it so good.

He also says that he believes:

...the reports from Islington council back it up.

Mr Smith complains that:

There is no longer music above background levels, neither are we allowed to use microphones. This is a far cry from the historical Sekforde pub that had a music hall upstairs. But even recently, management before David took over hosted live music on the ground floor of the pub. 10 years ago customers spread onto the other side of the road to catch the early evening sun, to the point where they used to have tables and chairs across the road.

Mr Smith goes on to complain about the condition that requires the closure of windows and doors at 8pm, saying:

8pm is when we are at our peak capacity on every night of the week apart from Sunday. Even when it is cold outside, when the pub is full of people it can get extremely hot. Sometimes we need to open more than one window to allow sufficient air to circulate and cool the pub.

He complains that:

We cannot get air conditioning because it is [a] listed building. We had customers faint. We had a customer have a heart attack because the inside temperature was above 35 degrees with the windows open. With the windows closed in the peak of summer they would go above 40 degrees. It creates an unsafe environment for both our staff and customers.

He also complains about the condition that requires the closure of the Sekforde Street door at 9pm, saying:

How do you close a door without a lock? Well, the answer Islington licensing have proposed is to install an alarm that goes off every time the door opens and closes. This is to prevent noise nuisance. If I wasn’t about the lose my livelihood I would find the irony funny. What is even more infuriating about this rule is that it won’t stop people from using the door because it won’t be locked. We already have signs up asking customers not to use the door after 9pm, but they pay no notice. All this rule would do would be to create additional noise nuisance.

He concludes by saying that:

Please, please look at the facts, think through the conditions, and consider very carefully whether you want to be the person who shuts this pub down for good.

Sunnyside Community Center

Councillors will be asked to consider an application for planning permission submitted by Sunnyside Community Association to convert and extend the Sunnyside Community Center on Sunnyside Road. The application seeks permission to demolish the existing single-storey building, and construct a part single, part two-storey building in its place. The new building would contain a main hall, a smaller hall, a kitchen, two offices and two accessible toilets on the ground floor, and a meeting room on the first floor. The report pack includes a planning statement from the applicant's agent which says that:

The current building has become outdated and no longer meets the needs of the local community. The proposal is to erect a new, modern community centre that will provide a range of facilities for the local community.

The existing community centre was constructed in the 1960s. The report pack notes that the site is within the Stroud Green Conservation Area², and that the proposed development would be:

...likely to have a significant impact on the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. The report pack includes the responses of a number of consultees, including objections from the Stroud Green Conservation Area Advisory Committee, and the Islington Society. The Stroud Green Conservation Area Advisory Committee have objected to the proposal, saying that it would be overly dominant and intrusive. The Islington Society have also objected, saying that:

The proposed development would harm the character and appearance of the Stroud Green Conservation Area.

The report pack also includes a number of letters of objection from local residents, including one from 7 Sunnyside Road who complains that the new building would be unacceptably large and would overshadow my property. The resident of 9 Sunnyside Road has objected on the grounds that:

The loss of the existing building would be a significant loss to the local community.

The resident of 11 Sunnyside Road has objected, saying that the proposed new building would be out of keeping with the character of the area. The report pack notes that the proposal is contrary to Policy DM15 of the Islington Local Plan³, which seeks to protect the character and appearance of conservation areas, however, the planning officer has recommended that planning permission be granted, subject to a number of conditions, concluding that the proposal would provide significant public benefits that outweigh the harm to the conservation area. The planning officer has recommended conditions restricting the hours during which construction work can take place in order to protect residents from noise. They have also recommended conditions relating to the materials that should be used to construct the building to protect the character of the Conservation Area.

5-15 Cromer Street

The committee will be asked to consider an application for planning permission submitted by Mr Terence Matthews to redevelop the site at 5-15 Cromer Street. The application seeks permission to demolish the existing two-storey building, which is currently in use as a shop and offices, and construct a four-storey building in its place. The new building would contain a shop on the ground floor, and nine flats on the upper floors. The report pack contains a planning statement from the applicant's agent which says that the proposed development would provide much-needed housing in the borough. The report pack notes that the site is located within the King's Cross Opportunity Area⁴, and that the proposal is consistent with Policy SP11 of the Islington Local Plan, which seeks to encourage the development of new homes in the borough. The report pack says that:

The proposed development would make a positive contribution to the character and appearance of the King's Cross Opportunity Area.

The report pack includes the responses of a number of consultees, including comments from the Greater London Authority, who support the proposal, saying that it would provide a significant number of new homes in a sustainable location. The report pack also includes a letter of objection from the resident of 17 Cromer Street, who complains that the proposed development would be too high and would overshadow my property. The report pack also includes letters of support for the proposal from the residents of 19 Cromer Street and 21 Cromer Street. The planning officer has recommended that planning permission be granted, subject to a number of conditions, saying that:

The proposal would provide a significant number of new homes in a sustainable location, and would make a positive contribution to the character and appearance of the King's Cross Opportunity Area.

The report pack includes a number of suggested conditions relating to the size, scale, and layout of the development to protect the character of the area. It also includes suggested conditions relating to the provision of affordable housing⁵ as part of the development in line with the council's policies.

70-72 Essex Road

Councillors will be asked to consider an application for planning permission submitted by Mr Stephen Fry for a change of use for 70-72 Essex Road. The application seeks permission to change the use of the ground floor of the building from Use Class E(a)⁶ to Use Class Sui Generis⁷ in order to permit the use of the ground floor as a restaurant. The report pack notes that the site is located within the Barnsbury Conservation Area⁸, and that the proposed development would be:

...likely to have an impact on the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. The report pack includes the responses of a number of consultees, including an objection from the Barnsbury Conservation Area Advisory Committee, who have concerns about the impact of the proposal on the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. The report pack also includes a letter of support from the resident of 74 Essex Road, who says that:

The proposal would provide a much-needed new restaurant in the area.

The planning officer has recommended that planning permission be granted, subject to a number of conditions, concluding that the proposal would:

...make a positive contribution to the vitality and viability of the local area.

The planning officer's report contains a number of suggested conditions relating to the opening hours of the proposed restaurant to protect local residents from noise nuisance. It also suggests conditions relating to the installation and maintenance of an extraction system to ensure that cooking odours from the restaurant do not cause problems for residents.

145 Blackstock Road

Councillors will be asked to consider an application for planning permission submitted by Ms Lorraine Kelly for alterations to 145 Blackstock Road. The application seeks permission to construct a single-storey rear extension. The report pack contains a planning statement from the applicant's agent which says that:

The proposed development would provide much needed additional living space for the applicant's family.

The report pack notes that the site is located within the Highbury New Park Conservation Area⁹, and that the proposed development would be:

...likely to have a minor impact on the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. The report pack includes the responses of a number of consultees, including an objection from the resident of 143 Blackstock Road who complains that the proposed development would overshadow my garden. The planning officer has recommended that planning permission be granted, subject to a number of conditions, concluding that the proposal would:

...not have a significant impact on the character and appearance of the Conservation Area.

The report pack includes a number of suggested conditions relating to the materials to be used to construct the extension, and limiting the height of the extension to protect the amenity of neighbouring residents.