Transcript

It's Nicky here. Okay. Licensing authority is Nick Sutcliffe. And I'd like to ask the applicants and the objectors, one at a time, if we can introduce themselves, please. Hello there. My name is Sam Edwards. I work for 55 Hospitality, who's the applicant of 55 Farthingstone Limited. Thank you for having me. Thank you. And are there any objectors online? Hello. Good morning. Leo Skinner and Sarah Skinner. We're residents of Farthingstone. Thank you. I'll go next then. Good morning. Kevin McLeod here, also a resident of Farthingstone. Thank you. Is there anyone else online? I'm online. I wasn't able to unmute myself earlier. My name is Thompson Mayloin, and I'm the solicitor representing the applicant this morning. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Is that everybody? Okay. Have all parties received a copy of the agenda for today's hearing? Yes, thank you. Are there any preliminary issues anyone wishes to raise? None from the applicant, sir. Hello. Yes, it's just really if we're able to have a recap of any last minute movements in the applicant's position. That will come out in due course, sir. Thank you. Okay. This hearing is in respect of an application for a premise license. I'd like to invite the licensing officer to introduce the report, please. Thank you, Councillor Cartwright. Good morning, everybody. It's a fairly long report, and I would normally just give an overview of it, but I appreciate that not everybody may be overly familiar with it, so I'm going to read it right through. So here we go. So the purpose of this report is to consider a licensing act application for a new premises license in respect of the Farthingstone Golf and Leisure Centre on the Everton Road in Farthingstone. The recommendation is that the new application be determined in accordance with the provisions of the licensing act and the licensing act hearing regulations. So this is an application for a hotel with license facilities that were received on the 4th of April 2025 from 55 Farthingstone Limited. These will be the proposed premises license holders. The proposed designated premises supervisor is Sam Edwards, and a copy of the application is at Appendix A, and a copy of the plan showing the extent of the premises is at Appendix B. The application is for the following licenceable activities. Late night refreshments and performance of dance indoors and outdoors from 11pm to 1am, seven days a week, plus from the end of permitted hours on New Year's Eve to the start of permitted hours on New Year's Day. For the supply of alcohol for consumption on and off the premises, performances of a play, exhibition of a film, performance of live music, playing of recorded music and entertainment are for similar descriptions to all of the above, 24 hours per day for hotel residents and their guests. This is 8am to 1am for non-residents and guests, plus from the end of permitted hours on New Year's Eve to the start of permitted hours on New Year's Day. The opening hours of the premises will be 24 hours a day, seven days a week. As of the 13th of May 2025, a subsequent condition has been offered by the applicant for outdoor entertainment to seize by 11pm and indoor entertainment taking place in the main building and courtyard to seize by 1am, seven days per week. A further plan will be provided to confirm their proposed plans. All statutory responsible authorities will serve the notice of the application. 61 representations were received, six are in support of the application. One has been submitted by the Environmental Improvement Team and 54 have been submitted by other interested parties, including the Chair of Farthingstone Parish Council, which is not a responsible authority for the purposes of the Act. Copies of these can be found at Appendix C. What follows is a summary of the representations not in support. These will focus around the licensing objectives. Around prevention of crime or disorder, it is alleged there will be potential for increased footfall associated with entertainment events to result in antisocial behaviour, including littering, public drunkenness and vandalism. Such occurrences would mar the peaceful atmosphere of the area and place strain on limited police and community resources. Also, the potential for extended hours for alcohol sales and entertainment activities to encourage disorderly behaviour, loitering and shouting from intoxicated individuals, creating further disturbance and potential littering, public drunkenness and vandalism. Around public safety, there is a potential for traffic, including cars and motorbikes leaving the venue in the middle of the night to cause noise and hazard, which may impact the area and concern that speed limits will not be kept to. Potential for narrow roads to become unsafe, with the added use of them for traffic leaving the site. It is currently safe for walkers and dog walkers specifically to use the roads without pavements, but the fear is this will not be the case in the future. Potential for a late night licence to encourage additional villagers, therefore compounding the problems. Around public nuisance, potential noise pollution causing disruption in the early hours of the morning, especially when there is traffic movement away from the site. Potential for sleep to be disrupted if noise is heard from music being played into the early hours, between Sunday and Thursday evenings as the finish time is classed as unsociable hours. Potential for long entertainment and sale of alcohol to lead to more traffic leaving the venue in the middle of the night, which will lead to more traffic through what is currently a safe and quiet village, along narrow lanes known as unsociable hours causing noise and unacceptable hazard, which may impact the area and cause even more disturbance and nuisance to villagers. Potential for extra lighting that will be visible at night or during the winter months to cause nuisance. Potential for the extended hours for alcohol sales and entertainment to encourage disorderly behaviour and shouted for intoxicating individuals, further disturbance and potential littering, drunkenness and vandalism. Potential for profound or unacceptable impacts on villages if the loud music proposes magnified if amplified music is allowed outside the permanent building to the hotel itself or in the grounds in the marquees. There are concerns regarding the ability of the premises to safely accommodate large gatherings in a rural setting, inadequate parking facilities, potential overcrowding and limited provisions for emergency access could pose risks to public safety and obstruct local infrastructure. Potential for noise nuisance to be caused in the summer months if the doors and windows are left open at times when music is being played. Protection of children from harm. There are concerns that the rural setting attracts families and younger residents who may inadvertently be exposed to inappropriate language behaviour or environments due to the entertainment events. Measures to protect children and preserve the family friendly nature of the area appear to be insufficiently addressed in the application. Some comments in relation to support of the application which can be found at Appendix D. The new venture will offer employment to the area both directly and indirectly via the supply chain if the licence is required for the venture to be viable and do not wish it to fail. It should be noted that the hotel hub will be over one kilometre away from the village centre and would have created a natural valley surrounded by trees. I see no problem with granting this new premises licence due to the fact that there has been a similar licence on the premises. I don't think it will cause problems to the local area as it is far enough away from the village of Farthingstone. I have no objection to the proposed changes which are not of material change to the existing licence. Enforcement of planning conditions attached to the application will protect the intended use of this space. I have no objection to the licence and fully support the application. I feel the conditions of the licence are appropriate and are not dissimilar to the previously held licence when operating as a golf club and hotel or what is required for a hospitality venue, not dissimilar to the local hotels and aware that planning conditions already condition against noise. As one of the closest neighbours of the above development, we write to express that we have no concerns or objections with regards to the application. I feel the conditions of the licence are appropriate for the hotel. Previously the site was operating as a golf club, we had a similar licence and we had no issues. So far, 55 Hospitality have personally consulted us every step of the way and we all harshly support the application. Obviously no concerns around crime or disorder, public safety, public nuisance, people are aware that in the original planning conditions these were set out conditions against noise. Excessive noise would be counterintuitive to the purpose of the development which is to provide a tranquil escape so will effectively be self-policing. Any noise created will impact guests paying for a retreat experience. Granting of the licence will support the viability of the development, in my opinion a failed business and possible resale would pose far greater risk to residents than occasional possible noise occurring around 1km away from the village centre. Any noise created will be on an occasional basis and will affect the residents of the hotel long before the village dweller, therefore the impact on farthestown will be negligible. Protection of children from harm, nothing. So this is a bit of background, the previous premises licence was surrendered when the old hotel and golf complex closed in 2017. These premises are not going to be the same type of venue, obviously the premises are whilst they will have a hotel and golf complex, the existing buildings are going to be demolished and new ones built. The aim is to have a wellbeing centre and provide a fitness and spa facilities for guests, the aim is a tranquil setting for people to get away from the hustle and bustle of daily life and them to seek solace. In order for a licence to be granted and a business to utilise the premises, they must hold both the premises licence and separate planning permission. If they only hold one and not the other, they may not utilise the premises. Also if the authorisation for example on the licence is different to the planning permission, then they could potentially in breach of one or the other provisions. It's for the applicant to ensure that they have the correct permissions before utilising the premises and each process must be followed through independently of one another. Also, each application is dealt with on its own merits and you cannot suggest just because the previous licence had certain conditions or hours for licenceable conditions that this one should have them or just because the licenses in the village are limited that this one should be too. The members of the subcommittee are statutorily obliged to determine this application with a view to promoting the four licensing objectives. The applicant is applying for all kinds of licence activities that you would expect for a new hotel, whether in an urban or rural setting, for example 24 hour opening for bona fide residents and guests, alcohol sales, regular entertainment, late night refreshment, performance of plays, exhibition of films, all between 8 and 1am the following morning. Councillors will need to consider if the grant of a premises licence is appropriate and proportionate in order to promote the four licensing objectives. The options are as follows. Councillors have the option to approve the premises licence as the application was made, approve the application with added appropriate conditions or refuse the application. The subcommittee is requested to determine the application in light of the above matters and any others it considers material. On to the legal implications. Where relevant reputations are made by a responsible authority or by the person about the likely effect of the grant of the application on the promotion of the four licensing objectives, a hearing must be held to consider them unless members of the subcommittee, the applicant and each person or responsible authority that has submitted a representation agree that a hearing is unnecessary and all representations are withdrawn. Having regard to the relevant representations, the subcommittee must take such reasonable and proportional steps as it considers appropriate, if any, for the promotion of the four licensing objectives. These steps were set out of paragraph 5.2 above. Appropriate weight must be given to the steps that are appropriate to promote the licensing objectives, the representations, the statutory guidance and the statement of licensing policy. However, the playing of live music and recorded music on the premises would not need to be authorised as a separate licence activity by the premises, provided that it takes place between 8am and 11pm. The premises are open for the purpose of being used for the supply of alcohol for consumption on the premises and if the music is amplified it takes place in the presence of an audience of no greater than 499 persons. A decision must be made by the subcommittee within the period of five working days beginning the day in which the hearing was held. Once a decision has been made, a written notice containing the full reasons for that decision must be supplied forthwith to the applicant and any other person or responsible authority that has submitted a relevant representation. Any premises licence application must be considered on its own merits and factors which form the basis of the decision must be limited to consideration of the licensing objectives and nothing outside of those parameters. Licensing authorities are expected to come to the information based on an assessment of the evidence of both the risks and the benefits either for or against granting a licence. Any conditions attached to the licence must be tailored to the individual style and characteristic of the premises and events concerned. This is essential to avoid the imposition of disproportionate and overly burdensome conditions on the premises where there is no need for such conditions. Standardised conditions should be avoided and may be unlawful where they cannot be shown to be necessary for the promotion of the licensing objectives in any individual case. Section 182 guidance states that, as a matter of practice, licensing authorities should seek to focus the hearing on the steps considered appropriate to promote the particular licensing objective or objectives that have given rise to the specific representation and avoid straying into undisputed areas. A responsible authority or other person may choose to rely on their written representation. They may not add further representations to those disclosed to the applicant prior to the hearing but they may expand on their existing representation and should be allowed sufficient time to do so within reasonable and practicable limits. Any personal responsible authority that submitted a relevant representation may appeal to a magistrate's court if they are grieved at the decision of the subcommittee. Any such appeal must be submitted in writing to the court within 21 days commencing with the day on which the person received a copy of the written notice of the decision. Councillors will have to decide whether to issue the application taking into account the full licensing objectives, with the prevention of common disorder, prevention of public nuisance, upholding public safety and the protection of children from harm. And that concludes my report, Chairman. Thank you. Thank you very much, Mr Sutcliffe. Okay, we're now going to hear representations from each of the parties. All parties will have an opportunity to make their presentations during the hearing. At the end of each presentation, there will be an opportunity to ask questions of the speaker. Please keep any questions to what you've just heard from the speaker. Okay, I'm going to invite the objectors to make representations first, and I'm going to do it in the order that we were introduced. So that's Leo and Sarah Skinner. Would you like to make your objections, please? Thank you. I should say that my wife, Sarah, is a parish councillor and is representing the council today. The first thing I just really wanted to make clear was that we welcome the application and in principle support, obviously, the proposal for the hotel to be developed and to open as a trading hotel with the facilities that are likely to be afforded. Our only concern is obviously ensuring that the public nuisance element of any potential activities is given consideration. And certainly in my written submission, I did actually suggest some conditions the licensing committee might like to consider, which are common conditions used and have been applied in other facilities and hotels of a similar nature in the south and west Northamptonshire area. And it seems to me that there's a slight disconnect between the aims of the current operators to obviously to focus on wellness and tranquility and then putting in an application, obviously, which allows the widest possible licensing position to be permitted. So there's a sort of difference of approach, it seems, and whilst I fully accept that the licensing is acting for the applicants, I would have thought it best to start with the most open position possible. But of course, in doing so, it has attracted some degree of consternation amongst the local residents that the public nuisance element is being given proper consideration. So I think that that is our principal concern, and I think that we welcome the proposal to bring the terminal hour down to 11pm. I'm not quite clear as to whether that's for all regulated activities that the license will authorize or just specific ones. So if that could be clarified, that would be really helpful. The other thing that I also question is some of the start times of some regulated activities and allowing for the fact that this is going to be a hotel. But some of these regulated activities are both indoor and outdoor, and I think they do need to be treated differently because of the noise implications. And so I would certainly suggest that the terminal hour for outside activities is actually 10am, not 11am, sorry, pm, I beg your pardon. And because of the likelihood of noise being heard from within the village. So that's broadly our position. I'm very happy to answer any questions. Thank you very much to Sarah or Leo on anything they've said. I've got no questions on this Chair. The only thing I'd like some, I'll probably speak later about it, about the guidance regarding activity up till 10 o'clock. That Mr Skinner mentioned, whether that is some of the condition or whether it's normally allowed up to 11 o'clock. But I think that's just more confirmation from James, possibly, but I've got no other questions. Thank you. Okay, if there are no further questions for Mr and Mrs Skinner, we'll move on to Mr Kevin MacLeod, please. You were next. Yeah, thank you for that. I'm not going to labour the point. I think I would echo everything that was just said previously. My main concern is the carte blanche license application, which seems to started in the broadest possible terms rather than being specific to the needs of the business. So in general, actually, I'm supportive of the business. It just needs to be a reasonably appropriate license that's granted. The noise in particular, I don't think is an acceptable position from most of the farthing residents, certainly not myself with small children in the house. So I wouldn't say any more than that. I think the other thing actually, just thinking about it, is the potential for the traffic impact during the night if there are going to be events which the license suggests that there may be. So I think it's just about being reasonable. Thank you, Mr MacLeod. Does anyone have any questions on this? Not from me, thanks. I'd like to ask Mr MacLeod, and indeed probably Mr Skinner, but I'm sure Mr MacLeod can deal with it anyway. You've lived in the village a reasonably long time. Yeah, so I think we're 12 or 13 years now, I think. So you've experienced how it was when the golf club was there. Do you anticipate this being different in that regard? Because the golf club used to hold evening events too. Yes, that's right. But I would say, looking at the business plans from 55, I think the business will be a success. And the numbers that went through the golf course just I don't think will be in the same league. Very small numbers. I think Sam's business is likely to attract much more and a much more consistent number across the year. So I think you need to take that into consideration as well. So you are concerned about the potential for increased activity? Yes, yes. Thank you for that. I'd agree with that, for the record. Thank you. Okay, if there are no further questions. No further objectors online? Okay, please. Yeah, all I was gonna say is, obviously everyone's, Leo and Kevin have already said things, but the noise travels across the valley and up incredibly well. So I probably live the closest I overlook it. When people were playing golf, I could hear them talking from my house, like they're in my garden. So, you know, I'm obviously gonna have an issue with noise anyway, but I'm gonna have an issue with music. The whole reason we've moved here was because it's silent at night. It's just completely still. It's amazing. And, well, that's gonna change. So, yeah, that's all I would say, really, is that any noise gone, as Leo said, maybe 10 o'clock, something like that, is not why we live here and would make a massive, massive difference. The difference between 20 people playing golf from nine o'clock in the morning till four o'clock in the afternoon to 300 people living there, sort of in and out all day, is very, very different. Obviously, the golf course didn't work, but that's not the same thing. Okay, thank you, Mr Bayliss. Does anyone have any questions? Sorry, Chairman, can I just come in there, just because I feel we'll go off on a tangent. And James, Leo will probably support me on this. And just so the residents are clear, I don't actually have to apply for live music between 8am and 11pm. They're legally entitled to have that under the Live Music Act. So we couldn't really condition the license to have live music until 10pm because they don't have to apply for it. They are actually legally entitled to that without applying. Anybody can have that anywhere without having a license. They can have live music between 8am and 11pm, as outlined in the report. So they don't have to reduce that to 10pm. That's up to them to volunteer that, but they're not legally obliged to and we can't make them do that. We could only do that should the premises be granted and then be reviewed. And there are noise issues post 10pm that would require the license pulling in. But as it stands, there are no complaints around the license because it's not being granted. So therefore, we can't pull it in from 11pm unless that is self volunteered by the applicant. Okay, so what I was really guessing at was the golf course, the golf club really finished at four o'clock, five o'clock, and that was gone. That was the end of it. Until the next day, where this is going to be very, very different. People outside, people walking back drunk, you know, all that sort of thing. So that's my issue. Yeah, I appreciate that, Mr. Bayliss. Yeah. Thank you very much. Does anyone else have any more questions for Mr. Bayliss? Okay, thank you very much, the objectors. Okay, we're going to hear now the applicant to make a presentation. Would you rather this solicit a spokesperson? Yes, that's the intention. I hope you can all hear me okay. Thank you very much and thanks to the residents for taking the time to attend. I do know that people are busy so to take time out to attend. It's always grateful to hear their comments and regardless of what the decision is today, we take on board the concerns very, very much so and we look forward to working with them in the future. So, as we've heard, it's an application for a new premises license for Farlingstone Hotel that you know is off the Everton Road. Sam Edwards, who's with me today, is one of the directors of 55 Hospitality who are the applicants. It's part of his vision to create this hotel and he will be able to answer any specific questions that you may have in relation to day-to-day management of the hotel itself and that perhaps needs more meat on the bone to what I'm going to say now. The site, as proposed, will be a five-star luxury hotel based primarily on, as we've heard, on the idea of wellness and spa treatments and outdoor activities including swimming in towers, etc., etc. It was and remains a 100-acre site. It had operated as a golf club which sadly didn't work financially and failed, hence why we are here. The new proposal consists of, as you'll see from the plans, some 61 individual villas which are spotted around the estate and that will have some 77 beds. So the hotel itself as envisaged is not particularly large. We would suggest it's quite modest and the internal capacities in the hotel, to give some background, the restaurant, we anticipate 90 covers, the main bar, only 18 covers, so really quite tiny, a drawing room of 18 covers, a café of 12 covers and a bakery. You'll see from the list there, it's not and never was intended to be and won't be an alcohol-led type hotel. This is, to go back to my introduction, this is all about wellness and going back to the country and enjoying the peace and tranquility that the area has to offer. The application was submitted back in April and this was following the grant of a planning permission, a substantial one that was granted back in June of 23, so some two years ago. I appreciate that great care needs to be taken not to confuse the planning and licensing systems, but I think there are a couple of matters that I'd like to bring to the committee's attention that I hope would assist you and also confirm that a good deal of the concerns raised by those making representations are already addressed by the planning permission. As you will be aware, as is emphasized within your own licensing policy, the two regimes shouldn't duplicate each other. The application itself seeks license activities from 8 in the morning until 1am with 24 hours for residents staying at the hotel. We don't think these hours are unreasonable and were very carefully considered taking into account both the location and the residents in the village and, of course, those that will be staying at the hotel itself. It will be, as you'd expect, in our commercial interest that those staying at the hotel are not disturbed and they will be within metres of any activities that would be taking place. There are a number of conditions that we've offered that we suggest assist the applicant application and go towards addressing the licensing objectives and the concerns raised. In particular, we'd have a direct telephone number, which can be circulated to those in the village. We have a complete CCTV system covering the estate. We have conditions relating to noise that it doesn't emanate, causing a nuisance. Importantly, any activities must be ancillary to the buildings being used as a hotel and all staff will need to be trained properly in relation to their duties and responsibilities under the Licensing Act. To go back briefly, if I may, just to the planning point and the issues I was going to just mention, there are some very stringent conditions in relation to noise. In particular, there has to be a planned noise assessment. In lighting, there has to be a crime prevention perspective and planning assessment, which needs to be passed by the planning authority and by the chief of police. The delivery service management plan must also need to be submitted and approved under planning. And finally, the division itself also reiterates the fact that the space can only be used, and it's important, only be used as a hotel and no other purpose. Now, there has been an ongoing and open dialogue with the community and local stakeholders. And regardless of your decision today, I would like to say on behalf of the applicant that that dialogue will continue and we would welcome a constructive dialogue. And the dialogue has, by and large, been very constructive with local residents throughout the process. As I said, Mr. Edwards will be able to furnish you with the ins and outs of those meetings, if need be. After the application was submitted, we did have a meeting on site with your officers from the Licensing Service and Environmental Health Officer on the 13th of May. And they will be able to give evidence and report to you where the premises are in relation to the village, which is nearly a mile away, and the driveway itself is over 700 metres. So it is a distance, and while we accept that noise can travel, further to that meeting, clarification was sought by your officers and which was given. And to reiterate that clarification today would be that no regulated entertainment would take place outside after 11 o'clock. As you've heard from your officers, before 11 o'clock, it's not licensable in any event. The only exception to that would be within the courtyard, within the main hotel hub itself. Any other entertainment would take place indoors and that would stop at one o'clock. But it is important to note that all of the buildings are acoustically sealed and that in itself also forms part of the planning commission. And everything will need to be signed off by acoustic engineers and also by the Noise Management Team and indeed Environmental Health and Trading Standards from the local authority before any use was forthcoming. In relation to your statement of licensing policy, I look at the Daventry District Council policy. I would draw the committee's attention to certain paragraphs, namely 2.13. It reminds us that in determining a licensing application, the overriding principle adopted by the licensing authority will be that each application shall be determined on its own merits. At 2.14, it goes on to say, in considering the hours, the views of the police and other agencies will be important in this consideration. I think it is important to note that there hasn't been a representation from police. And as I understand it, I stand corrected if I'm wrong, that the Environmental Health Officer, that their concerns have been addressed with a clarification on the outdoor regular entertainment. At 2.15, it also says that the licensing hours will not inhibit the development of a thriving and safe nighttime economy, which is important for investment and employment locally and beneficial to tourism. On this, the applicant ticks all of those boxes. The investment that we're talking about is over £100 million, which will go into the local economy. And the employment opportunities are substantial, which I will expand upon later. Finally, within the policy, at 7.3, it states that the Council expects other responsible authorities to intervene if they have concerns with an application and specifically single out the police and crime or disorder. As I said, there has been no representation from the police. The hours that we've applied for has been raised as a concern by some residents, in particular the 24-hour licensing for those staying at the hotel. Such hours have been accepted, and previously these were accepted by statutes. Those residing anywhere would have the same right as someone residing in their home. And as I would respectfully suggest, one would expect a hotel, and this will be the case, they will have minibars. The hotel will have 24-hour room service, and none of this is doable without the usual hotel-style permissions. Whilst, of course, and I accept that each case must be taken on its own merits, it is also fair to say that you'd be hard pushed to find hotels around the country that aren't afforded this particular dispensation. And it's also fair to say that other hotels within the local authority area are allowed to operate 24 hours for residents and guests. Addressing the other specific concerns raised by residents, namely littering, vandalism and noise pollution and fouling, these are not accepted by the applicant. And no evidence has been produced to give any weight whatsoever to, in particular, littering, vandalism and fouling. I would add to the committee just to note as well that once operational, it is our intention that delivery, any deliveries to the hotel would arrive from the north of Everton Road, i.e. not through the village. And we've already committed to this as a company within our transport and travel plan documents, which have already been approved by the local authority and conditioned already on the planning permission. There are, of course, as you've heard, a number of letters of support, and some of those residents do, in fact, live, as they've said themselves, very close to the development. Finally, if I may finish just on a few facts that I think are important for the community to take into consideration, and that I think assists the applicant and hopefully will assist you to make your decision with the comfort that they can be assured that not only is it good for the community, but also with the conditions already offered and the clarification on the hours that the licensing objectives have been addressed. So, in turn, the project itself, the construction, will create over 250 jobs. Once the hotel is up and running, we're looking at employing over 100 staff. By way of comparison, the golf club employed 12 people. As I've said, there's an investment of £100 million in the local economy. There's a rejuvenation of the site itself, something that we would suggest that everyone could be proud of, including a huge investment in showing the regeneration of the countryside itself, and that is restored to what it was back in the 1960s. There's a huge investment by the hotel in terms of apprenticeships, and we're working in partnership with local schools and colleges and the local university, also with the West Northamptonshire Economic Growth and Regeneration team, and Milton College and other local contractors. And finally, the principal contractors, McLaren, Midlands and North, they are looking to take on students from the Northampton College during the construction as part of the apprenticeship programme for bricklaying, stonemasonry, plumbing, electrical works, and the construction itself would go on until the first quarter of 2027. So there are fantastic opportunities for the local community, both economic, but also, as I suggested, in terms of the licensing objectives, crime disorder, public nuisance, public safety, and protecting children. My submissions are that those objectives have been adequately addressed, and we would recommend that the application is granted by yourselves on the terms now sought. So unless you have any questions of me or Mr Edwards, that is our application. Thank you very much for your time. Thank you indeed. Does anyone have any questions for Mr O'Brien? Could I just ask a quick question, please? Yes. Thank you. You made reference to conditions that have been offered to be put on the license. I can't see any attached to the actual application. Do you know where I can find a copy of those? Or is this just related to the 11pm finish? No, so within the report, there is attached to the... I think it's that appendix. Bear with me, sorry. Is it Appendix A? Yeah, Appendix A, part of that you have the summary and contained within that there are post additions which are numbered 1 to 14. Right. I don't think I have a copy. Could you tell us what page that is? My printout doesn't have page numbers, I'm afraid. I don't know about the office I can assist with. No, I'm afraid the copy of the report I have doesn't seem to have those. Yes, I can't see any list of conditions. It would be useful to see that. Yeah, I don't think that on Appendix A has got more of a change. It's a new application in light of that. And it just stipulates the change of hours. If it assists, I'm happy to... I can send this document again to the officer and he can circulate. But I'm also happy to go through the conditions that were in the original application itself. Now, there's only 14 of them. It will take five minutes. But I can also forward the document as well. So at least you have a flavour for what was offered on the original application as well as it being circulated. Would you like me to say that or should I just... No, I mean, the subcommittee members will need that and I'm not sure why it wasn't included as in the application papers. I will send over... Is it best to send to Mr Bostock? I can do, yes. Yeah, I will. I'll send that document to Ed Bostock now. I'm just going to ask Mr Sutcliffe a question. Nick, did the copy of the application that's in the papers, is that all of it or were some of the pages missing? It seems to start at page 13. That might be the pages for the report. I think that's pages for the report. Do you know whether there were any conditions offered in the application originally or what is produced at Appendix A? That's a good question, James, because I've picked this up very late due to the original officer's absence. I'm not sure, to be honest. I assume there would have been. I'm sure Thomas will confirm that. I can't imagine that an application was submitted without conditions. Yeah, no, I can. I'm happy to confirm that and I have the document here, which I'm going to send over to make sure it's the right one. Right, that's been sent now to you, Ed. Could I ask what you're sending? Is that replication of the original application conditions volunteered or is it amended to reflect representations made? It's the original application that was submitted. So it doesn't reflect any of the... Well, the change to that is in relation to the outdoor regulated entertainment, but that, of course, is contained within the report now as well. Right, so the only amendment to those is around the hours for outdoor regulated entertainment that's already been gone through. Yes, well, it's contained within your report, which was mentioned by your officer that that was clarified following the meeting with your officers on site on the 13th. Yeah, that's fine. I just want to be certain. And just to double check, has the email now come through with the document? The email has come through, thank you. I'm forwarding it on to the members and to James now. Thank you. Sorry, I beg your pardon. I've sent the wrong document to you, Ed. It's for another 50. Sorry, bear with me. Let me send the correct one. Right, we're just awaiting the arrival of this document, and then Mr. Bostock will send it out to everyone when we have that, and then we'll have a quick couple of minutes to have a look at that. Yeah, sorry about this. That's okay. Just take your time and we'll get there. I was wondering if I could ask a question of the applicants in relation to their operational intent. What you can do is you can ask the speaker some questions about what he said. Great. But once he's found the document that he needs to send us, it will take a while. Yeah, there's different versions of it. I just want to make sure it says the right version. Right, okay, we have it. Right, okay, there we are. That hasn't been sent. Hopefully you will receive that now. Okay, as soon as Mr. Bostock gets that, he will reattach it and send it to all the relevant parties. I've received your email, Thomas, I forwarded it on to the members. Thank you so much. Just to confirm that I've read those conditions. Thank you. It might be beneficial for the people who are in attendance who haven't received a copy of that, which effectively was the operating schedule to the application. It might be helpful to just set out what those are, those conditions. Would you like me to go through them now? Please, yes. And sorry, do the residents have a copy of the document? I'm trying to locate whether they were actually in the papers, because obviously what was submitted with the application and what has made its way to the papers are two different things. I'm trying to, I'm trying to find it. Did you copy the objectives in with that list? I didn't, Councillor Mayne. I can't send it to them or should we not send it to them? As far as we're concerned, we're happy for the, for everyone online to have a copy of it. Is there a reason why we can't send it? I can forward it out to all of the representatives. Thanks very much. I'm going to send it out to everybody. Could I suggest it might be useful just to put it on the page in front of us so we can all see it? Can you do that? Can you show your screen? I'll find that out. I'll give it a go. Apologies. Is there a share screen thing that you can put up like on Teams? I'm sharing my screen. Can everybody see that? Yes, thank you. Would you like me to go through them or? It might be helpful, yes. Well, thank you very much and I'm not sure what happened there, but anyway. These were the conditions that were submitted with the original application. As you'll see, it's numbered one to 14. The important part that has changed is in the top section of the document at page one, where the title says summary of grant of premises, license, and underneath it says proposed hours. And underneath that, you'll see sale of alcohol, then regulated entertainment, et cetera. At the bottom of that, so we have regulated entertainment, it says films, plays, music, dance, and anything similar. And we say indoor and outdoor. The word and outdoor would be deleted. So those that regulated entertainment would only place indoors, with the exception of entertainment within the courtyard, as detailed on the plan that was sent to the local authority, which is the main hub of the hotel where the main reception rooms are. And to be clear, that courtyard has been designed in a way acoustically so as to contain noise. And there's an overhang of the roof itself into the courtyard by some distance. So it is designed to allow entertainment, but for that noise to be contained. Hence why on discussion with the officers, we wanted that particular area to be excluded in terms of the outdoor element. So that's the actual only real change. So it means then that no other entertainment takes place on the 100 acres after 11 o'clock. Whether in fact it takes place up until 11 o'clock is a moot point because, as you've heard, it's not something that we're considering today. And it's something that is permissible in law anyway. Whether it would happen, it's probably unlikely. But it would be wrong to have a condition, as per the guidance, have a condition that would exclude us. In terms of the conditions themselves and running through them quickly, a lot of them are fairly standard for hotels. Number one, substantial food and non-alcoholic beverages, including drinking water, shall be available in all parts of the premises where alcohol is sold or supplied for consumption on the premises. Two, and I referred to this earlier, a direct telephone number for the duty manager at the premises shall be publicly available at all times if the premises is open. The telephone number is to be made available to residents and businesses in the vicinity. Three, also referred to this, the premises shall install and maintain a comprehensive CCTV system as part of the minimum requirements of the police. As I've said, it's also conditional planning. The CCTV system shall continually record whilst the premises are open for life-support activities and during all times when patrons remain on the premises. All recordings shall be stored for a minimum period of 31 days. Four, no noise generated on the premises or by its associated plant or equipment shall emanate from the premises nor vibration be transmitted through the structure of the premises, which gives rise to a nuisance. This is also covered in planning and readings need to be taken from the nearest and closest sensitive area, sensitive residential dwelling. Five, a Challenge 21 Proof of Age scheme shall be operational at the premises where only acceptable forms of ID are recognised photographic identification cards. Six, the means of escape provided for the premises shall be maintained unobstructed, free of trip hazards, be immediately available and clearly identified in accordance with the plans provided. Seven, importantly that we've mentioned before, light selectivities authorised under this licence shall remain ancillary to the main use of the premises as a hotel. Eight, an instant log shall be kept at the premises and made available on request to an authorised officer of the council or the police. Nine, all front of house staff at the premises shall receive training in the Licensing Act 2003. Ten, all emergency exits, exit doors shall be available at all material times without the use of a key code, card or similar means. Eleven, all emergency doors shall be maintained effectively, self-closing and not be held open, other than by an approved device. Twelve, the approved arrangements at the premises, including means of escape, provisions, emergency warning equipment, the electrical installation and mechanical equipments, shall at all material times be maintained in good condition and full working order. Thirteen, the means of escape provided for the premises shall be maintained unobstructed, free of trip hazards, be immediately available and clearly identified in accordance with the plans provided. Fourteen, finally, all fabrics, curtains, drapes and similar features, including materials used in finishing and furnishing, shall either be non-combustible or durably inherently flame retard fabric. Any fabrics used in escape routes other than foyers, entertainment areas or function rooms shall be non-combustible. And so those are the fourteen conditions that were originally offered with the application itself. I hasten to add that I see that there's duplication on that list in so far as condition six and condition thirteen are one and the same, so I would suggest that one of those is deleted for clarity sake. So thank you. Thank you. Does anyone have any questions for Mr Molyneux? Yes, I do, chair, if I may. Of course. Thank you very much for going through the trouble reading through the condition actually, which are now, I can't remember the number, but it's the condition relating to no noise emanating from the premises. In terms of premises, what is meant by that? Is it the bricks and mortar on site or is it the perimeter line of the boundary of the hundred acres? It's the boundary of the hundred acres. Right, okay. And would you agree with me that the license you're applying for is sufficiently wide enough to operate a wedding business? As it is now, yes. Yeah, because obviously the sensitivity around the outdoor areas, which I know from what you've said you have made some concessions in relation to, is obviously the outside areas because of the travel of in particular noise pollution. So if the venue became, I know it's not the intention at the moment and that's understood, but we all live in the real world that things don't stay the same. But if the site became a regular wedding venue, then certainly the noise pollution would become more of an issue. And whilst we're not concerned with the immediate operators of your client, we certainly would be if a change in modus operandi was ever put in place because of commercial pressures. So, you know, we're entitled to look at this application on the basis upon what it allows, and it allows a wedding business to take place outdoors and indoors for the hours that you have indicated. So that is the chief reason why there may be a concern over outdoor noise and why we would invite you to reconsider voluntarily a 10pm terminal on outside areas. Without being cherished, I think the difficulty is that the guidance from the Home Secretary is quite clear actually that conditions shouldn't be added to new licenses in relation to entertainment up until 11 o'clock. So whilst I can say, and perhaps Mr Edwards could join us, I think it's very unlikely that you'd ever have entertainment past 10 o'clock. But I think from a legal point of view, I wouldn't be happy with having a condition on a new license that is specifically excluded by legislation on statute. Thank you. I would say every application is obviously considered on its own merits. And in this case, because of the sensitivity of a particularly low threshold of background noise in the rural area, that the noise issue is much more sensitive than the average hotel in an urban area. Or indeed a more built up area in outside towns. And it is common to see restrictions to 10pm for outside areas in wedding venue hotels or hotels that could be wedding venues. So whilst I fully accept it's a voluntary request, I am suggesting that you consider that nonetheless the sensitivities of this particular location are demanded. Could I just say something, please? Yes, yes. We, we've been speaking with members of the parish council, and the landlord of the local pub. And it's of my understanding that The Cloisters, which is sat bang in the centre of Farthingstone Village with a large outside area, has a license to play music until 11pm. So we're, we're sort of matching that. And I know that you've got an ABBA tribute there soon, in the centre of the village, whereby a band is playing up until potentially a licenseable activity until 11pm. So we're sort of just sort of matching that and we're a kilometre away from the village. Thank you. Okay, thank you. I was going to... Just a second, please. I was going to say, Mr. Edwards, did you want to make a statement or anything? Or were you happy to let your solicitor speak? I just want to say that we're the owner, operator and developer of the site. We're sort of not developing and then running away. I've been around for three years, and I know some of the faces here on the screen. And we're very, very proud of what we're building. Very proud to be and extremely excited to be the first five star hotel in Northamptonshire. And as you've heard the investment that we're making is substantial. We're keen to be a solid part of the community, as we have been for the last three years, and many years to come. We bought the golf course as a going concern. We ran the golf course between the May and December 2021, 2022. And, you know, we did hold evening functions, and there was evening functions held throughout the 50 years that the golf course was a golf course. There is 16 bedrooms, that equated to 32 beds. There was a lot of people there. The planning application shows the amount of vehicle movements that will be expected in our operational phase of being a hotel are less than the golf course when it was a very successful golf course years ago. I fully appreciate everyone's concerns. I think there's just a lack of quite kind of trust on us, you know, we need to operate and show you that we are going to be very considerate to the village and our internal guests. We also need to afford ourselves the flexibility as a new business to be able to take bookings and to be able to, you know, make the money and make the site work. But you have my word that we're going to be considerate neighbours, and we want to work with you to make sure the site is a success for everyone and we don't disturb people by noise. Can I respond to Mr Edwards? Mr Skinner's asked a question. You had a question. Could I respond to Mr Edwards? Yes, please. Thank you very much. Mr Edwards, I very much appreciate your clarity on your intentions, and I don't in any way suggest that you're not trusted. But one has to live in the real world, and we're dealing with a development which is going to, at its peak trading moment, will more than double the population of Farthingstone. And obviously, the attendant noise that may be generated is a real concern because of the attendant activity. Obviously, it's very different to what was traded before, which was very, very small business, to be frank, and not particularly operated at full capacity anyway. So I don't think we can make comparisons of the two. So I do think that if you decided, for commercial reasons, to run a more intense wedding venue, which would be a very nice one too, and a lot of hotels have gone down that route because it is a good money spinner. But obviously, the increased heightened concern over noise becomes a reality. I know it's not intended now, but this premises license, once granted, will benefit any successor title, any buyers, and any change made as operandi. It's wide enough your solicitor has confirmed to allow wedding business. So that's why I'm asking you to consider voluntarily outdoor restrictions to 10pm. Sorry, Sam, I'd just like to come in on a point of clarity because the objectors may not be aware of how premises licenses operate. So just try to put your minds at rest or allay some fears that once a license is granted, it doesn't mean to say that's it. If Sam goes against his word and has no reason to suspect that he will, or if the business is sold and taken on by new operators who are not as accommodating as Sam and his colleagues who are currently running the business, then you can review the license. So if it is noisy, if there's pollution, if it is not operating as you wish it to operate, you can call the licensing to review and it will go back before a licensing subcommittee and then they can take action and they could reduce licensing times. They could take away licenseable activities. They could suspend the license. They could revoke the license. So it's not like the old days under the old licensing act where before magistrates and once a pub got a license, it was a nightmare to ever get rid of it. This is far more user friendly in the fact that US residents have a whole load more rights. And even in Sam's case, if two months down the line you think he's gone back on his word, he's told us all this. He said, we'll be okay till 11 and it's riotous and there's noise and it's a nightmare every weekend. You can call a licensing to review. It would be, I think it wouldn't be very wise of Sam to run the business like that because he knows he risks reputational damage and would potentially lose it in the license. So it's in his interest to make the business work and cooperate with Farthingstone residents. But just to put your minds at rest, when the license is granted, you still have the power to call it into review if it is not being run in the way you want it to be run. So it doesn't end today a point of grant or whenever the license is granted, you should still have that power. Anyone of you as an individual, doesn't have to be a group of you, doesn't have to be a responsible authority, can be one of you. If you are adversely affected and you wish to call that license into review, you have the opportunity to do that, just so you're aware that the option exists. Thank you, Mr Sutcliffe. This subcommittee is purely to decide on whether to grant the license for this venue or not. These are the considerations that can be addressed at a later date, as Mr Sutcliffe has said. Perhaps it might be an idea moving forward when these things come up that somebody perhaps tells people this in advance. So it's not a shock. And you find out at a meeting that has other responsibilities to deal with. That's for the future, as we say. If anybody has any questions for Mr Edwards on what he said? I'd just like to ask, has there any consideration been taken to any signage for any of the patrons leaving the property with respect to keeping noise down and leaving, things like that? I was happy to answer that. We had considered that, and obviously you've seen these notices in public houses in particular and in some restaurants where the premises are next to, immediately reside, residents. We don't have any objection or principle, but we would question whether they actually serve any real purpose. Because when people are leaving, they're leaving via reception. There is a great deal of control as to when the guests leave. When they would be leaving, they would ordinarily be leaving in a vehicle. So where would the notice be? Would the notice be in the reception area, which probably doesn't really serve any purpose? And certainly, having notices on the driveway wouldn't serve any purpose either because people are going to be driving past them. So it was really just one of practicality and what we would seek to do is really to have, for example, if guests were leaving late at night, that our staff would be trained and would be able to remind people to, A, if they could, not drive through the village and take the other route, as we've suggested with the deliveries, for example. And also just to be reminded that there is a village a mile away and that people have the right to a good night's sleep and they don't want to be disturbed. So drive carefully or if you're going out for a late night walk, be sensible. But we don't think that the latter is very likely. And we think that the former, it would probably be very minimal. Thanks. No further questions. Thank you. Okay, if no one has any more questions on that, then all parties are going to have an opportunity. Sorry. Yes. Yes, I've got a question for the Solicitor and Mr. Edwards. The plan extends to the whole site, so therefore the licence would extend to the old site. Somebody interrupt me if I'm going down the wrong road. Now I see and read that you're having, is it 61 villas on the site? Yes, 61 individual villas and you've also acknowledged that they would have minibars. How do you foresee dealing with the potential for public nuisance from those 61 villas when they go off and perhaps hold their own parties and events? Well, I mean, Mr. Edwards can address you on this, but from a very practical point of view. So we do have our own security, which obviously will be on site. In terms of people staying at the hotel, we certainly don't envisage people taking a miniature bottle of brandy or vodka, for example. We've got a limited party. In terms of room service, that's obviously very controlled. So when room service happens, it wouldn't be open to somebody just to order willy-nilly copious amounts of whatever it was. There will be checks and balances in place in exactly the same way that you would expect in any hotel, that room service isn't going to deliver some extraordinary amount of alcohol to somebody's room. In terms of a minibar, there is a very limited amount of alcohol that would be available. And also the rooms themselves are for either occupancy of either one or two people. There are some family villas, but the ordinary villa, which has two people, and the way they're designed, they have their own private areas. So we don't think that the reality is that people would be trying to get the alcohol and going off for a party somewhere. But if that were to happen, and I don't think it would happen, but if it were, our security would be there to deal with any potential issues. As Sam has said, we do have a duty towards the guests staying at the hotel. We can't allow people to be wandering around in the middle of the night drinking. That is not what this hotel is about at all. So there are checks and balances, not only with security, but also, as you've heard, within the conditions themselves. We've heard a condition about all staff, all front of house staff, being trained in relation to their duties and responsibilities under the Licensing Act. A number of them will hold personal licenses. And of course, there's a duty of responsibility of licensees to ensure that such behavior doesn't take place on any license premises. I don't know whether, Sam, you want to add anything to that? Stephen, just like if anyone was being misbehaved at the bar, if anyone's being misbehaving in their bedroom or around their villa, they would sort of be told as well. Like Thomas said, it's a limited kind of minibar, as you expect, a bottle of wine, if you're lucky, kind of thing. There's no outside feature lighting on the site, other than very low-level wayfinding lighting along the paths. And that's all to do with the wonderful ecology that we have on site and is conditioned for kind of very, very dark skies. So there wouldn't really be anywhere for anyone to go and have their little rave in the woods, which, as Thomas said, wouldn't be happening. We both acknowledge the risk that they could bring their own alcohol on site. We have a 24-hour security and a team of night porters and night managers to ensure that people are behaving themselves. And also, we're just not expecting that of the kind of clientele that we're expecting at a lovely five-star resort that's here for relaxation and wellness. It's 61 villas, but that sort of only equates to 77 beds. And that's if we're absolutely fully booked and no hotel really runs at 100% occupancy, our business plan is 80% occupancy. But yeah, you have my word. We'll be making sure that everyone's behaving themselves. Well, thank you for recognising the risk. And as you say, we have your word. The other point, and again, it is about public nuisance and the concerns that have been expressed about parking in the village and access to the site. I do know from experience, it's a very narrow lane up to the site, very long and narrow lane. Are you expanding on that? Are you relaying that? Slightly outside of this situation, but just to give you a quick update, we're looking to lay a hard surface road at 4.88 metres, which is a significantly wider road than what was there previously or within our ownership. And we're pleased to be able to offer that as a wider, better road. And you're right, that road is a little bit hairy and is a horrible old road right now. It gets dug up as of Wednesday and all of our new utilities get put in. So excited to be able to deliver a far better access road. Thank you. Thank you. I'm sorry, just going to add to that, the significant parking within the hotel as well. And so that was all factored in on the planning application. So there's more than, they're actually overcatered in terms of parking for all residents and guests and for staff. So it shouldn't be an issue that people would need to park in the village. And of course, as we've all recognised, it's some distance away. So it probably wouldn't be in their interest in the event. OK, thank you very much. Are there any further questions? OK, I'm going to give all parties an opportunity, I should say, to sum up. You don't have to repeat your presentation in full, just the salient points, please, if I could ask that. So Licensing Officer Mr Sutcliffe, would you care to sum up your presentation, please? Yeah, thanks, Mr Chairman. Yeah, like I said, I've got no intention of going through the report, but just to stress that today is to take this application on its own merits, looking at the conditions that have been offered the presentation by the applicant and their representative, take into account everything that's been mentioned by people making representations and then make your decision based on what the licensing act allows. So you can either grant the license as applied for with the amendments that have been suggested. You can either add your own conditions, you can remove a license of activities or you can refuse the application. So those are the options that are open to you today. Thank you, Chair. Thank you. Do you feel you've had sufficient opportunity to say everything you wish? Yes, thank you. Thank you. Applicants, would you like to go first? I'm more than happy to go first and I won't take up too much of your time. Firstly, we'd like to thank the committee for taking the time to listen to the application. And also, as I have said previously, to thank the residents who have taken their time to address and to talk their concerns. It's always best in these situations to talk through things and hopefully reach some sort of agreement. And as I said in my opening, our door is very much open and we welcome an ongoing dialogue with any concerns whatsoever that any local resident may have. Our door is always open and Sam has been actively engaged with lots and lots of different groups and people and residents from the early days of planning. As you've heard from the officers, it's an application for a new hotel that needs to be taken in relation to the licensing objectives. We've heard crime disorder. There's no representation from the police. That, we would suggest, should be foremost in your mind. In terms of public nuisance, we have dealt with, well, I think it was the main concern of the environmental health officer about the outdoor regulated entertainment, which has been, in effect, withdrawn with the exception of the courtyard, which I don't think is causing undue concern. Public safety. Likewise, this is dealt with by building regulations. It is essentially, are the premises safe for people to be in? And not only have you heard the list of conditions to deal with fire safety and other aspects of safety, but the buildings themselves obviously will need to be signed off by your officers and you'd be content that that objective will be fully addressed and hereto. And finally, in relation to children, we haven't heard directly that they might be harmed in any way. But just to remind the committee that, of course, that, sometimes misunderstood, that particular objective is and relates to, are a premises suitable for children to be in? And it is primarily focused on, for example, premises that are alcohol-led, premises that have some sort of sexual entertainment, or premises that have gambling. Obviously, none of those would come into play for these premises. And of course, it is the intention of the Licensing Act to try to encourage licensed premises to be family-friendly. And you'll see from the plans that obviously we have family villas and the premises themselves have facilities that reach out to children. So that is enough, I think, from me, but I just thank you and the committee for your time again. Thank you. Thank you very much, Mr. Redwoods. Would you like to add anything? Nothing else for me. I assure you that we're going to be exemplar operators, as our team have about 100 years experience in operating high-end assets. And we have a proven track record. I'm really, really looking forward to continuing the relationship with The Village. And I'm always here to answer any questions, as The Village all have my phone number and email address and have done for many, many months. So look forward to speaking to you soon. Thank you for the opportunity to speak today. Thank you. Do you feel you've had sufficient opportunity to say everything you wish to the subcommittee? Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you, sir. I'll take the offer the same to the objectors and again, we'll go in the same order. Mr. and Mrs. Skinner, would you care to sum up? Thank you, Chair. Big thank you to Mr. Edwards and to Solicitor for making some points clear. Unfortunately, I'm not so minded that the issue of noise pollution is adequately protected by the conditions proposed at the moment. And I would ask these licensing committees to consider those others that have employed in terms of conditions that have been suggested in representations, which are prevalent in other premises in rural locations, most notably Crockwell Farm, for example, not far away. And that is my chief concern, because this application does allow wedding business use effectively. I know it's not the immediate intention of the applicants to trade it that way. But I take on board the advice that it is available for residents to object and seek a review subsequently. But the residents will want the confidence to know that the premises license doesn't have to be challenged. Every time there's a change in ownership or modus operandi, it's a very heavy burden on the residents to have to do that. And I think that there is an opportunity now to extend to the residents an acknowledgement of genuine concern for noise in what is a very peaceful rural environment. They're therefore much more likely to feel noise pollution fairly eagerly, especially for residents who live nearer than myself. Certainly those along the Madewell Road are only 400 metres away from the main building. So I think that noise pollution is still of concern. Thank you. Do you feel you've had. Yes, I do. I think. And there was Mr Kevin McLeod. Would you like to sum up, sir? I'm getting a glitch on my. He'll find his left chair. His left, I see. He had to go, yes. Thank you. Mr Bayliss. Yeah, thanks for all of that information. I just don't really think that the residents will be treated better than people paying like a thousand pounds a night if if if that's what they're roughly on five star hotel. So I think that the you know, the residents of the actual site will be given priority. But also with the joy made, it's only used once or twice a year, so I don't think you can really use that as comparable for hours and usage and things like that. Otherwise, yeah, that's me. I said if you have had a sufficient opportunity to say everything you want to do to the subcommittee. Yeah. Thank you. Everybody covered subcommittee is going to retire to make our decision now. The decision of the subcommittee will be communicated to all parties in writing within five working days of this hearing. Details of how to make an appeal against the decision of the subcommittee will also be included.