|Date: Friday 17th June 2016 Time: 10.00 a.m. Place: Council Chamber, Civic Centre, Ebbw Vale|
|Present||And||With||Report to||Report of|
|COUNCILLOR MRS. D. ROWBERRY (CHAIR)|
Councillors W. J. Williams, M.B.E., J.P., B. Willis
LICENSING ACT 2003 - NEW PREMISES LICENCE - THE POTTERS, CEMETERY ROAD, ABERBEEG, ABERTILLERY
Appendix 1 (87K/bytes)
Appendix 2 (125K/bytes)
The Chair welcomed everyone to the meeting, and introductions were made.
At the invitation of the Chair the Team Leader Licensing presented the report which outlined an application for a New Premises Licence in respect of The Potters, Cemetery Road, Aberbeeg, Abertillery in accordance with the Licensing Act 2003.
The Officer confirmed that in accordance with the Licensing Act 2003 consultation was carried out with Gwent Police, South Wales Fire and Rescue Service, Blaenau Gwent County Borough Council Trading Standards, Licensing Enforcement, Planning, Environmental Health, Social Services Department and Aneurin Bevan Health Board. Notice of the application was also placed in the Gwent Gazette, and at the premises to enable 'other persons', i.e. local residents and businesses to make representations.
The Officer reported that representations were received from Blaenau Gwent County Borough Council Environmental Health Department, however, following discussions the applicant had agreed to amend the application to include conditions, as outlined in section 2.5 of the report, and as a result Environmental Health have withdrawn their representations.
Representations were also received from two 'Other Persons', and copies of these were attached to the report at Appendix 2.
In determining the application, the Officer highlighted the options available to the Committee, namely:-
- To grant the application.
The Chair then invited the objectors to the application to address the Committee.
Mr. & Mrs. Lloyd said they had lived at their property adjacent to The Potters for 25 years, and whilst the premises had not been used as a licensed premises for the past 4 years, when it was they experienced problems with customers leaving the premises late at night.
They had experienced damage to their property and theft, which they had reported to the Police. There was very limited parking spaces at the premises which had resulted in cars parking illegally on the bend outside the property, and also instances where cars had been parked outside their premises blocking their entrance/exit.
Mrs. Lloyd said previously when The Potters was in operation they were regularly disturbed after 11.00 p.m. by rowdy behaviour from customers leaving the premises, particularly on weekends. She reported that their 13 year old son had been diagnosed with autism, and he also suffered with OCD and anxiety, and was very sensitive to noise and changes to his routine etc. Mrs. Lloyd expressed concern that this disturbance would start again and the detrimental effect that this would have on their son.
The Chair then invited the applicants to address the Committee.
The applicants said The Potters had been a public house for many years, and pointed out that the objectors had chosen to live in the property next door to The Potters when it was in operation as a public house.
In relation to the issue of car parking, they felt that there was an adequate number of spaces provided and the Police had not raised any issues. In terms of noise emanating from the premises, the applicants confirmed that they had agreed to a number of conditions that would restrict their business and sales, but they had agreed to the conditions in order to prevent noise emanating from the premises. They concluded that they intended to provide for 3 or 4 full time jobs and hopefully run a successful local business.
The objector asked the applicant what they would do to restrict noise from people leaving the premises.
The applicant explained that one of the conditions agreed to with the Environmental Health Department was the erection of signs requesting customers, and staff to respect the needs of local residents and to leave the premises and area in a quiet manner. The applicant confirmed that they would this expect and encourage their customers to adhere to this.
A Member referred to the live entertainment that was intended to be held at the premises, and asked how many they expected to cater for and whether there would be door security on these occasions.
The applicant said the maximum number of people was approximately 50-60, and confirmed that Mr. Rickard intended to undertake a door security course for particular events in the future. She said the safety of customers and staff was their priority, and also to ensure that no upset was caused to neighbouring residents and the community.
The applicants said The Potters had always been a public house visited by older people in the community, and it was hoped that this would continue. They would have a zero tolerance on bad behaviour, as they wanted to protect their investment in the renovated premises. They assured that they would do everything they could to prevent disruption to neighbouring properties.
In response to a question raised by the Chair regarding the provision of door security, the Team Leader Licensing said there was nothing in the application referring to door security, nor had it been raised by the Police. Any door security would have to be Security Industry Approved, and any event would have to be risk assessed to determine whether door security was necessary. If there was sufficient grounds for door security the Committee could impose a condition requiring this, however, no issues had been raised during the consultation process to warrant sufficient grounds for the requirement of door security.
The applicants, objectors and Officers then left the meeting while Members considered the application.
Following consideration of the application, the applicants, objectors and Officers were invited to re-join the meeting, and the Solicitor reported the decision of the Committee, as follows:-
RESOLVED that the application be accepted.