LICENSING AND APPEALS SUB-COMMITTEE
Minutes of a meeting of the Licensing and Appeals Sub-Committee held on 15
June 2011 in the Council Chamber, Council Offices, Holt Road, Cromer at
10.00am.
1
Sub-Committee
Mr R C Price (Chairman)
Mrs A Claussen-Reynolds
Mrs A Green
Officers in Attendance:
The Legal Advisor, the Environmental Health Manager,
the Licensing Officer and the Democratic Services Team
Leader
Also in Attendance:
Mr Wayling, Mr Baggot, Mrs Wade, Mr Goldsmith, Mr
Smith, members of the public (for item 5)
Mr Ward (for item 6)
APOLOGIES
None received.
2
ITEMS OF URGENT BUSINESS
None
3
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
None.
4
APPLICATION FOR NEW PREMISES LICENCE – ERPINGHAM ARMS, EAGLE
LANE, ERPINGHAM NR11 7QA (formerly the Spread Eagle Public House)
The Applicant, Mr Wayling was present. He was supported by Mr Baggot
Objectors present included Mrs Wade and Mr Goldsmith. Mr Nelson had sent his
apologies but had nominated Mr Goldsmith as his proxy. Mr N Smith represented
Erpingham Parish Council and was also attending as local District Council Member
for Erpingham.
The Chairman introduced the Panel and Officers. The Legal Advisor explained the
procedure. She explained that, at a later stage, the Panel would withdraw to make
their decision. She would accompany them to provide legal advice and to assist them
to formulate their decision but would not take part in the making of the decision.
The application was outlined by the Licensing Manager
The Erpingham Arms (formerly the Spread Eagle) was an established public house
on a central site adjacent to residential properties in a rural village. The premises
historically benefitted from a Justices Off Licence which had been converted in 2005
to a Premises Licence following a contested application. The Licence officially
lapsed in August 2009 when the then Premises Licence Holder was declared
insolvent and no application had been made to transfer the Premises Licence. The
premises had remained vacant since then.
Licensing Sub-Committee
1
15 June 2011
A new application for a Premises Licence had been made on 18 April 2011 and had
been deemed valid. The application sought the following permissions:
•
Trading hours Mon to Sunday 0700 to 01.00hrs
•
Sale of alcohol for consumption on and off the premises Mon to Sunday 11.00 to
01.00hrs
•
Showing of films Mon to Sunday 1100 to 23.00hrs
•
Live music Mon to Sunday 1100 to 01.00hrs
•
Recorded music Mon to Sunday 0900 to 01.00hrs
•
Facilities for dancing Mon to Sunday 1800 to 01.00hrs
•
Provision of late night refreshment Mon to Sunday 2300 to 05.00hrs
During the consultation period no objections had been raised by the Responsible
Authorities. Three representations had been received from local residents and one
from the Parish Council.
Since the close of the consultation 17 other comments had been received. The
correspondents had been informed that as the statutory consultation period for the
application closed on 17 May 2011 the comments could not be accepted as valid
representations. If the Panel was minded, and with the agreement of the Applicant,
the comments could be considered. The comments didn’t raise any new concerns.
The Legal Advisor informed the Panel of a precedent, the case of Belfast City
Council and Miss Behavin’ Ltd, which demonstrated that Licensing Authorities had
the discretion to consider late submissions but were not under a duty to do so. The
late submissions to NNDC had come in via email and could be from interested
parties. The local Member was present at the meeting to represent the concerns of
the community. However the Chairman considered that, to display fairness, the late
submissions should be considered when the Panel retired to deliberate the
application. The Applicant agreed that he was willing for the late submissions to be
considered.
The key points raised by correspondents had been the requested hours of trading
and the potential for crime and disorder and nuisance from noise and light. In
particular, a request for the provision of late night refreshment from 23.00 to 05.00
hours had caused ambiguity. The request had been made because the Applicant
intended to have residential guests and might require to serve hot food when the
premises were not open to the public. If it was causing concern the Applicant might
consider requesting that all permissions should end at 01.00 hours.
Questions of the Licensing Manager
The Licensing Manager explained that under licensing law permission for late night
refreshments was required if hot food was offered for sale. This was not necessary
after 05.00 hours.
The Applicant’s Case
The Applicant presented his case. He stated that he and his family lived at the
premises. He wished to run the establishment as a traditional family pub providing
food and real ales, but offering the facilities to hold functions, such as family
gatherings and weddings. He did not intend to have a pool table, fruit machines or
satellite television. The premises had planning permission for Bed and Breakfast
Licensing Sub-Committee
15 June 2011
2
accommodation which he intended to complete. It was for this reason that he had
requested permission to offer late night refreshments. He was willing to withdraw this
request from the application if necessary.
Questions to the Applicant
The Applicant was asked how he would ensure that customers left at a reasonable
time if he was serving food till 05.00 hours. The Applicant replied that late night
refreshments would be served to residents only.
The Applicant was asked what type of event he would put on and if he had any
bookings. He replied that the events he hoped to attract were weddings and family
gatherings. He had no bookings yet. If a marquee was requested for a wedding he
would provide it.
Mr N Smith said that although the Parish Council had objected on the grounds of the
hours that the Applicant had applied for they supported the reopening of the pub.
Mrs A Green asked if the people who had provided late submissions had been able
to read the application. It was explained to her that the application was in the public
domain. Some concerns were expressed about the publication of the application to
which the Licensing Manager explained the process. Members of the community
were encouraged to attend Parish Council meetings so that they would be informed
of applications concerning their village.
Concerns were expressed regarding the potential for late night noise, anti-social
behaviour and nuisance from light.
The Legal Advisor asked the Applicant if he intended to keep the premises open until
01.00 hours every day. He replied that on a day-to-day basis he would be closing
between 11.00 and 11.30 pm. The late hours were only for special events.
In response to questions from the Legal Advisor and the Chairman, the Applicant
said he would address the potential for noise nuisance by displaying notices asking
customers to behave responsibly when they left the premises. His business would be
run in such a way that it wouldn’t attract the type of clientele who would behave
irresponsibly. He was due to meet with the Crime Prevention Officer to discuss
measures for dealing with difficult customers. He intended to plant round the
boundary of the premises. This would reduce the risk of noise or light nuisance.
In response to a question from Mrs A Claussen-Reynolds the Applicant said that he
planned to open 3 letting rooms immediately and 3 more in eighteen months time. All
rooms would be doubles.
Closing Statements
Mr Smith commended the Applicant for reopening the pub which would be a facility
for the village. However, he would prefer the opening hours not to be so late.
The Applicant hoped that the residents who had expressed concerns had been
reassured.
The Committee adjourned at 10.50 to consider their decision and returned at 11.35.
The Chairman said that, in the interest of fairness, and with the agreement of the
Applicant, the Panel had considered the late submissions when making their
decision. It was important that the village had a good pub which was operated well.
The Applicant had a young family and expected to be closed by 11.30 most nights
Licensing Sub-Committee
15 June 2011
3
but it was important that the licence allowed flexibility for his business. The Panel
welcomed the Applicant’s offer to withdraw the request for the late night refreshment
licence. The rest of the application was granted as requested but with conditions
attached.
RESOLVED
To grant the premises licence as applied for in the application signed and dated
13/4/11, save that Box L be removed (Late Night Refreshment), with conditions
attached, namely:
1. The Licencee/Designated Premises Supervisor shall ensure that no nuisance
is caused by noise emanating from the premises or by vibration transmitted
through the structure of the premises.
2. Prominent, clear notices shall be displayed at all exits/ in the beer garden
requesting customers to respect the needs of local residents and leave the
premises and the area quietly.
3. The Designated Premises Supervisor or a nominated representative shall
receive and respond to complaints throughout the duration of all noisy events
and will have full control at all times over the sound amplification.
4. The specification and orientation of all external speakers shall be agreed with
the Licensing Authority/Responsible Authority
5. The external garden/patio area must not by used by customers after 23.30
hours Sunday to Thursday inclusive
5
EXCLUSION OF PRESS AND PUBLIC
Members decided that they wished to go into Private session to hear fully from the
Applicants and consider matters in confidence.
RESOLVED
That under S100 A (4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public and press be
excluded from the meeting for Agenda Item No 4 on the grounds that it involved the
likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraph 1 of Part 1 of
Schedule 12 (a) of the Act.
6
WK110013612:APPLICATION FOR A LICENCE TO DRIVE HACKNEY CARRIAGE
OR PRIVATE HIRE VEHICLES IN NORTH NORFOLK
The Applicant was present.
The Chairman introduced the Panel and Officers and the Legal Advisor outlined the
procedure for the Hearing and the test that the Panel would apply - that is to satisfy
themselves that the Applicant was a Fit and Proper Person to hold a taxi driver’s
licence. She explained that, at a later stage, the Panel would withdraw to make their
decision. She would accompany them to provide legal advice and to assist them to
formulate their reasons but would not take part in the making of the decision.
The Licensing Manager presented the report which related to correspondence
received from Norfolk Constabulary detailing an offence (in charge of a vehicle with
excess alcohol) committed in February 2011 which was subsequently not reported to
North Norfolk District Council, in writing, in accordance with the conditions set out in
the Taxi Handbook. On 20 May 2011 the Licensing Manager, using delegated
powers, suspended the Applicant’s licence until the matter could be heard.
Licensing Sub-Committee
15 June 2011
4
There were no questions at this stage, so the Applicant put forward his case.
He had been a taxi driver since 2004, running a small business. On the night in
question he realised he was over the legal limit, had tried unsuccessfully to get a taxi,
and had remained in his stationary vehicle, with the engine running for warmth. He
was not on duty as a taxi driver that night. He was unable to walk home because his
clothing was too light for the weather.
In response to questions from the Chairman the Applicant confirmed that he had
received 3 points on his licence for speeding in 2005. This was now spent. He had
been parked off road on the night of his more recent conviction because there was
no room on the pub car park. He was in the plated vehicle which he used as a taxi.
The Applicant told the Legal Advisor that he had pleaded guilty. The Court had
instructed him to inform Norfolk County Council for whom he did taxi work, but he
had omitted to inform NNDC. He apologised for this.
The Chairman informed the Applicant that the Panel took a dim view of noncompliance with the Taxi Handbook. Furthermore the Applicant had traded as a taxi
driver during a period when his insurance might not have been valid.
The Panel retired at 12.15 pm to consider their decision and returned at 12.27 pm.
The Chairman asked the Applicant if he had notified the Council at the time of his
2005 offence. The Applicant said that he had not.
The Chairman said that a working group would be set up by the Licensing and
Appeals Committee to revise the Taxi Handbook. The revised Handbook would
contain specific conditions which must be adhered to. The Panel was mindful that the
Applicant, on the night of the offence, had not driven even a short distance, had no
fares and had pleaded guilty, even though he had failed to notify NNDC.
RESOLVED
that the Applicant’s suspension should continue until 23.59 hours on 20 June 2011.
7
WK/1100004802 – APPLICATION FOR A LICENCE TO DRIVE
HACKNEY CARRIAGE OR PRIVATE HIRE VEHICLES IN NORTH NORFOLK
The Applicant was unable to provide the documents required for the Hearing.
RESOLVED
to adjourn the application to 13 July 2011.
The meeting concluded at 13.00pm.
___________________
Chairman
Licensing Sub-Committee
5
15 June 2011