Agenda, decisions and minutes

Councillor Kennedy was elected as the Chair.

There were apologies for absence from Councillor Patrick and Councillor Moule. However Councillor Plouviez agreed to susbstitute.

There were no declaration of interest.

The Minutes of the previous meeting were not agreed by members as no one at that meeting was present at the meeting to agree them.

Members noted the Licensing Sub Committee Hearing Procedure.

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;

That the application be refused.

Reasons for the decision

The Licensing Sub-committee, after careful consideration believed that on balance two licensing objectives would be undermined, the public nuisance and protection of children from harm objectives, if alcohol was sold from the premises.

The Sub-committee heard evidence from residents that they heard noise from patrons of the premises which is directly opposite their homes under temporary event notices.  This included the conversations of a small number of people outside the premises even with the double-glazed windows and doors in the homes closed.

The residents further explained that their gardens were only two to three car widths distance from the premises and that children using these gardens would be exposed to patrons enjoying themselves in a licensed premises which may well include exposure to strong language and sexual expletives.

Such exposure would be increased when the bi-fold doors at the premises were open as that would expose children not only to patrons’ conversations outside the premises, but also inside.

One toilet that patrons of the premises could use was also directly opposite residents’ home, which was likely to add to the noise emanating from the premises especially were queues formed for the use of the toilet.

Residents also highlighted that the lack of toilet facilities in the premises was also likely to encourage people to urinate in the road in front of the premises or in their homes as patrons would not be disturbed if they did so as the road was quiet and out of sight from any main road.

The Licensing Sub-committee heard from the applicant that patrons attending the premises would do so to appreciate the beers before purchasing those beers that they particularly enjoyed and so would not generate noise that would disturb residents.

The applicant explained that the bi-fold doors were to be closed at 7 pm in the evening, which was a condition proposed to be included on the premises licence, and the number of patrons permitted in the premises was to be reduced to 35.

The applicant also explained that there were two outside toilets that patrons could use and that the premises would continue to be managed as they had under the temporary event notices as this had not resulted in nuisance that the applicant was aware of.

The Licensing Sub-committee were particularly concerned that activities at the premises would be taking place so close to the outside amenity space of families with young children and so considered carefully the measures proposed to ensure that the nuisance identified by residents would not occur.  However, it was felt that a premises located so close to residents homes and gardens was likely to  ...  view the full decision text for item 6.

The Principal Licensing Officer introduced the Application explaining that Maregade Brew Co Ltd made an application for a premises licence under the Licensing Act 2003: To authorise the supply alcohol for consumption on and off the premises. The premises was not currently licensed for any activity. A previous application, which sought sale of alcohol daily until 23.00, was refused by Licensing Sub-Committee on 14 December 2017.

Members were advised that Temporary Event Notices have been given for the premises throughout March and April starting at 12.00 and finishing at 20.00.

Four representations were received from and on behalf of local residents opposing the application (Appendices C1- C4) and 4 in support (appendices C5 – C8): Representation received were on the grounds of The Prevention of Crime and Disorder, Public Safety, Prevention of Public Nuisance, The Protection of Children from Harm.

The Health Authority Representation had been withdrawn following acceptance of a proposed condition.

The Planning Authority submitted an Informative highlighting that Planning reference 2012/3532 granted the demolition of existing infills to railway Arches 213 -222 and construction of new front and rear arch infills with block work walls, roller shutters and integral doors. No approval has been for the operation of a micro-brewery and tap room (sui generis) at Railway Arch 214, Ponsford Street. Licensing approval does not grant planning approval. However subject to the specific operation of the tap room, it may be ancillary to the main use of the premises as a brewery. If this were to be the case then planning permission would not be required for the use. If the proposed tap room use is to be ancillary to the main use as a brewery, then the applicant is advised to seek a certificate of lawfulness for formal confirmation that this is the case.

No other responsible authorities remained their objections.

The Committee invited the applicant to introduce the application. The Solicitor stated that the brewery’s profits were going to be 75% off sales and 25% on site sales, it was echoed that the planning provisions would be acceptable and ancillary without a change of use, however it was reminded that this was advisory only. Members were reminded that there had been no representations from any other authorities, the applicant felt that this demonstrated that the premises would fully promote the licensing objectives.

Members were informed that there would be a dispersal policy and a maximum of 5 smoker outside at any one time, smokers would also be kept close to the premises door. The Maximum capacity of the premises would be 45 people at any one time and individuals would not be permitted to take drink out the premises. The Committee was informed that it is policy that drinks must be left inside the premises and that the only motive to go outside would be to smoke, it was felt that this would prevent disturbances.

It was stated that Staff would also be responsible to monitor customers outside to ensure that there is no loitering.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

The application was withdrawn.

Application approved under delegated authority. Item withdrawn.