Issue - meetings

To consider an application for a new Premises Licence

LCA64  MEDUSA RESTAURANT, 299 ARCHWAY ROAD, LONDON N6: (Agenda Item 7)

               The Licensing Manager presented this application and asked members to note the comments of the Planning Officer; ie. use of the basement as a nightclub had been refused in March 2002 on the grounds of excessive noise and loss of amenity.  Additional incidents of noise disturbance had been reported in addition to those set out in the Deputation above.  A noise abatement officer was present who confirmed that the abatement order was in breach and a prosecution was pending.

               Another objector spoke, having been advised by the Chair that comments must be factual; not based on hearsay or probability nor be frivolous or vexatious. 

One resident’s bedroom was adjacent to the premises and the degree of noise disturbance was so severe that the resident was forced to sleep in another room.  The noise was reportedly from stomping, clapping and voices as well as from loud music.  The resident felt that this was an entirely inappropriate use for a residential area.  Members were asked to note that Archway Road was a busy area with a higher than usual ambient noise level; therefore these incidents would be considerable.   She claimed that she was often unable to make phone contact with the restaurant to register these complaints.

The applicant supported their case by explaining to members that the Medusa had an exclusive clientele and the restaurant offered silver service to more mature, discerning clients.  They advised that the incidents reported above were often charitable events or functions held by reputable organisations.  They said that the basement area was furnished with tables and chairs for dining during entertainment.   The previous owner had spent some £40,000 on sound insulation and the applicant felt this was adequate.  However, they had made enquiries about an enhancement to this in order to achieve full insulation; which would cost in the region of £22,000 extra.  They advised members that functions were only on Saturday evenings.  The objector challenged this and said events had taken place on Fridays and weekday evenings (one Thursday evening had been the subject of a complaint to the noise team).

In answer to members questions, they said they felt that the abatement order had been confusing and jargonistic and they had not fully understood its implications.  They said they wanted to work with the local residents and the Council and needed the anticipated extra  income from the extension of hours in order to fund further enhancements to the sound insulation.  They claimed it was difficult to immediately respond to noise levels when live acts were playing.  However, the noise abatement officer confirmed that following one complaint the noise had been turned up again. 

RESOLVED:

That the application for extended hours for licensable activities be rejected in full:

·               Hours for consumption of alcohol to remain as under the existing justices licence plus 30 minutes drinking up time thereafter: ie. Mondays to Fridays 10.00 to 23.00, Saturdays 11.00 to 23.00 and Sundays and Good Fridays 12.00  ...  view the full minutes text for item 35