Content

RESOLVED:
 
The decision
 
The Licensing Sub-Committee, in considering
this decision from the information presented to them within the
report and at the hearing and having regard to the promotion of the
licensing objectives:
· 
The prevention of crime and disorder
· 
Public safety
· 
Prevention of public nuisance
· 
The protection of children from harm
 
The application for a premises licence has
been approved in accordance with the Council’s Statement of
Licensing and the proposed conditions set out in paragraph 8.1 of
the report.
 
· 
The hours of licensable activity
 
Films
 
Friday - Saturday   11:00 - 00:00
 
Live Music
 
Friday - Saturday   23:00 - 00:00
 
Recorded Music
 
Friday - Saturday   23:00 - 00:00
 
Supply of Alcohol
(On the Premises)
 
Monday - Thursday 11:00 - 23:00
Friday - Saturday  11:00 - 00:00
Sunday 
11:00 - 22:30
 
Supply of Alcohol
(Off the Premises)
 
Monday - Sunday   11:00 - 23:00
 
Late Night
Refreshment
 
Friday - Saturday   23:00 - 00:00
 
Opening hours
 
Monday - Thursday 07:30 - 23:30
Friday - Saturday  07:30 - 00:30
Sunday 
11:00 - 23:00
 
 
Reasons for the
decision
 
The application for a premises licence
(described as a “shadow” premises licence) has been
approved as members of the Licensing Sub-Committee were satisfied
that the licensing objectives would not be undermined. 
 
The Sub-Committee took into consideration that
there were no representations from the Responsible Authorities, and
there were 2 representations from Other Persons (1 local resident
and Ward Councillors on behalf of local residents).
 
The Sub-Committee took into consideration
representations made by the Applicant’s representative that
the shadow licence is to protect the freehold owner not the
licensee. The future licence is not relevant to this application.
The Sub-Committee noted that parking is not relevant to this
application. Any concerns about the premises should be taken up
with the landlord. The freeholder will not be using the licence and
it is held in reserve if needed should the premises licence held by
the tenant lapse or be revoked. The Applicant’s
representative contended that there is no evidence to support the
objections, and that the representation from B2 be dismissed
because there are no other complaints from local residents and
Responsible Authorities.
 
The Sub-Committee took into account
representations from both Ward Councillor Kennedy and Councillor
Webb that the hours should be no more than core hours which
protects the licensing objectives, particularly if the landlord
will not use the licence. Otherwise they have no objection to the
shadow licence.
 
The Sub-Committee took into consideration the
representation from a local resident that only core hours should be
granted and the revised site plan should be attached to the
premises licence. The local resident made representations that they
want the premises to operate responsibly. The Sub-Committee heard
the premises attract people who live far away, and the area could
suddenly have up to 40 cars causing a nuisance, and a disturbance
in the residential area late at night with no public transport
available for the customers.
 
The Sub-Committee noted that the premises had
four operators in the last five years. The Sub-Committee took into
consideration that the local resident made representations that
they had no issues with the current operator. The Sub-Committee
noted there was occasional disturbance relating to the temporary
events that have been held.
 
The Sub-Committee considered this application
on its merits. When making their decision the Sub-Committee took
into consideration that a shadow licence application made by the
freeholder is to protect their interest in the premises. The
Sub-Committee took into consideration that shadow licences are
lawful under legislation and it can be reviewed.
 
Having taken all of the above factors into
consideration the Sub-Committee was satisfied that by granting the
shadow premises licence the licensing objectives would not be
undermined.