Loading
Loading
Councils this month have been setting waste strategies, changing how people access household waste sites and looking at fly-tipping enforcement. The Welsh Government is consulting on new powers to tackle roadside rubbish.[5][8][7][14]
Written in November 2026 from council records since 20 September 2026, open consultations and official sources. Written automatically, then checked: every point names its sources and every figure appears in them. Follow the links to check anything before relying on it.
Councils collect household waste and recycling, run recycling centres, keep streets clean and deal with fly-tipping.
The Cabinet member for the environment leads. Changes to collections usually go to the Cabinet.
Report missed collections and fly-tipping to the council. Changes to collection services are often consulted on first.
| Council | Items | With a decision |
|---|---|---|
| Powys | 24 | 6 |
| Cardiff | 15 | 13 |
| Carmarthenshire | 15 | 7 |
| Newport | 14 | 5 |
| Neath Port Talbot | 11 | 7 |
| Gwynedd | 10 | 10 |
| Pembrokeshire | 9 | 8 |
| Swansea | 8 | 6 |
| Flintshire | 8 | 2 |
| Denbighshire | 7 | 7 |
| Wrexham | 7 | 7 |
| Blaenau Gwent | 6 | 6 |
| Conwy | 6 | 6 |
| Merthyr Tydfil | 4 | 3 |
| Vale of Glamorgan | 4 | 3 |
| Rhondda Cynon Taf | 4 | 4 |
| Monmouthshire | 3 | 1 |
| Caerphilly | 2 | 0 |
| Torfaen | 2 | 1 |
| Ceredigion | 1 | 1 |
| Bridgend | 1 | 0 |
AGREED unanimously to refuse the application for street trading consent. In making their decision, the Committee have had regard to the council street trading policy. The Committee have also had regard to the licensing objectives, in particular the prevention of public nuisance which can include nuisance from noise, light, smells, litter or fumes to households and businesses in the vicinity of the proposed street trading site. The Committee considered the representations from the applicants, which in summary were that this would be a temporary arrangement to establish a business in the hope they will be in a position to move to a permanent premises within 12 months. The applicants indicated that this would not be a large commercial cooking venture and was simply to establish a reputation and a base. They indicated that they had fitted the shack with three extractor fans with carbon filters to address odour concerns, they would empty waste daily and predominantly they were aiming for deliveries and food orders. They indicated that there would be toilet facilities available in the shop if required. In relation to parking the applicants suggested that the lane could be used, and there were other areas to park nearby. The Committee also considered the representations from the responsible authority and residents, which overlapped and can be summarised as concern regarding odours, road safety, waste disposal, litter and noise. The residents also highlighted potential problems for disabled residents who live nearby. The Committee were of the view, in considering the location of the site that it was likely that nuisance would be caused to nearby residents from odours, noise from customers and traffic and there would also be concerns around road safety given the restricted parking available and the likelihood of vehicles arriving and leaving to collect food and take deliveries. The Committee noted that the applicants were of the view that this would be a small operation with limited customers, but the Committee also took into account that if the consent was granted there was no restrictions that could be placed on them in terms of the number of customers or equipment being used, and if the venture was successful it would inevitably lead to increased footfall, traffic and noise and would, because of the location likely result in problems with parking. Unfortunately, the Committee felt there was insufficient detail as to how the business would operate on the ground and how they would address and mitigate the concerns around road safety, parking and nuisance. On balance, whilst the Committee commends the applicants for their ambition in wanting to start a new business venture, they were of the view that the location, taking into account the street trading policy and the need to promote the licensing objectives, was simply not suitable for street trading and therefore took the view that the application should be refused. The meeting closed at 13:01 pm.
RESOLVED that the application for a new premises application be granted subject to approved conditions. The decision of the Licensing and Gambling Sub Committee regarding the hearing held on 30th July 2024 in respect of an application for a new premises application is to approve the application for the sale of alcohol and provision of Late Night Refreshment as detailed within Paragraph 1.13 of the Officer report and the imposition of conditions set out in Appendix 10 of the Officer report. The Sub-Committee considered the representations from all parties in attendance at the hearing and those contained within the Sub Committee report. The Applicant made their representations for a new premises licence on the basis that Euro Garages Limited had been acquired by the Asda Group and that they manage over 1,000 licensed premises across the country. The Applicant put forward that there is a high standard of management when dealing with their licensed premises and despite the high number of premises under licence, Asda Group have never been subject to proceedings under the Licensing Act 2003. The Applicant also confirmed that this premises will not sell alcohol that is attractive to street drinkers – white ciders, single high percentage volume cans of lager and the like – and will adopt the challenge 25 system, prompts on the premises tills to highlight the sale of alcohol, spirits kept behind the counter and regular training for its staff. The Sub-Committee considered the representations from Responsible Authorities, including Gwent Police who did not object to the application and were satisfied with the suggested conditions found at Appendix 10 of the agenda pack. The Sub-Committee heard representations from Environmental Health who did not oppose the application subject to their recommendations in respect of the proposed licence, which had been agreed by the applicant. The Sub-Committee read written representations from the Licensing Authority in its role as a responsible Authority who referred to their representations contained within the agenda pack. The Licensing Authority Officer did not oppose the application subject to the proposed licence conditions at Appendix 10 of the report. The Sub-Committee considered the representations made on behalf of residents, who were represented in person by Mr K Ingram and Mrs L Lewis, along with written representations from over 100 local residents and the Local Ward Councillor, Cllr Morgan. Incidents of anti-social behaviour, violence and littering were raised as many of the concerns surrounding the premises being granted an alcohol licence, referring to problems that occurred during the previous owner’s tenure with a premises licence. The Sub-Committee queried with Gwent Police if there was any such incidents recorded. Gwent Police confirmed that they only had information for the past three years and there were no incidents recorded linked to anti-social behaviour with the premises post code area. The Sub-Committee did have significant concerns that the period of available information was limited to the last three years and queried why no information was available beyond that period. The Sub Committee gave weight to the applicant’s representatives comments in respect the Home Office Section 182 Guidance in particular paragraph 10.15 in relation to hours, paragraph 9.43 in relation to matters being evidenced based, paragraphs 9.12 and 2.1 in respect of the Responsible Authorities being recognised as being experts in their field and the Police being the main source of advice on crime and disorder. The Sub Committee did not feel that there was evidence to support refusal or a further restriction on the hours proposed. Having considered all the representations, the Sub-Committee have agreed to grant the premises licence, for the licensable activities and hours detailed in paragraph 1.13 of the agenda pack and the conditions set out at Appendix 10 of the same. The matters are set out in Annex 1 below. Any person aggrieved by this decision has 21 days from the date of written notification of the decision to appeal to the local Magistrates Court. ANNEX 1 Alcohol (off sales) Monday to Sunday, 06.00 – 23.00 Late Night Refreshment (Hot Drinks Only) Monday to Sunday, 23.00 – 05.00 1. An incident/refusals book/electronic record shall be kept at the premises, in which details of crime and/or disorder relating to the premises shall be recorded. This log shall contain the following details; i. Time, date and location of incident/refusals. ii. Nature of the Incident/refusal. iii. Names, addresses and contact details of persons involved. iv. Result of the incident/refusals. v. Action taken to prevent further such incidents. vi. Each entry signed/reviewed by the DPS or other responsible person employed at the premises and so authorised by the DPS; and the incident/refusals book/electronic record will be retained for a period of no less than 12 months and made available to the Police for inspection upon request 2. No customers will be permitted to enter the premises between the hours of 2200 and 0600. All sales during that period will take place through the night hatch. 3. The provision of late-night refreshment will be limited to hot drinks only. 4. The licence holder shall ensure that adequate measures are in place to remove litter or waste arising from customers and to prevent such litter from accumulating in the immediate vicinity of their premises. In particular, provision of sufficient receptacles for the depositing of waste materials such as food wrappings, drinks containers, smoking related litter etc, by customers. 5. Waste collection activities shall only take place between 08.00 and 22.00 hours 6. All external lighting levels shall be suitably controlled so as not to cause a nuisance. 7. Staff shall be trained in the premises licence holder’s procedures which include liquor licensing and all checkout operators shall have additional training in the sale of alcohol. 8. All spirits will be displayed behind the counter. 9. No miniature bottles of spirits of 20cl or below shall be sold from the premises. Please note this does not apply to prepackaged gift packs which may contain a spirit miniature. 10. A CCTV system will be installed and maintained at the premises. Cameras will cover internal areas and the external area immediately in front of the store. The system will be capable of continuously recording and copies of such recordings shall be kept for a period of not less than 31 days and handed to the Police or authorised person upon production of a compliant ‘Access Request’. 11. The premise licence holder seeks to comply with the requirements of the health and safety legislation. 12. The store will have a till prompt system for alcohol products. When prompted, staff will adopt a Challenge 25 proof of age scheme. Only recognised forms of photographic identification such as Passport, Photo Driving Licence, ‘Proof of Age’ card, Military ID or any other form of identification agreed with the police will be accepted as proof of age. If the appropriate proof of age is not produced there will be no sale. 13. Notices are to be prominently displayed advising customers of the Challenge 25 policy.
RESOLVED that. The decision of the Licensing and Gambling Sub Committee regarding the hearing held on 21st June 2024 in respect of an application for a new premises licence has been granted subject to the agreed recommendations by Gwent Police and other Responsible Authorities. The Sub-Committee considered the representations from all parties in attendance at the hearing. The Applicant made their representations for a new premises licence on the basis that the licence requirements could be properly managed and that they agreed to the proposed recommendations made by Gwent Police and other Responsible Authorities. The Applicant presented their case that Blackwood Golf Club is a long standing and valued part of the local community, and they have had a Club Premises Certificate in place for several years. The Applicant confirmed that they would not be fundamentally varying the way the club is run and there are no plans currently to do so in the near future. The Sub-Committee considered the representations from Responsible Authorities, including Gwent Police who did not object to the application, subject to the proposed additional licence requirements in order to fully promote the licencing objectives, which have been accepted by the Applicant. The Sub-Committee heard representations from Environmental Health Pollution Team who did not oppose the application subject to their recommendations in respect of the proposed licence. The Sub-Committee heard representations from the Licencing Authority in its role as a responsible authority who referred to their representations contained at page 45 of the agenda pack. The Licensing Authority did not oppose the application subject to conditions being attached to the proposed licence. The Sub-Committee considered the representations made on behalf of residents, represented by Councillor Nigel Dix and Mr Curtis-Jones who appeared remotely. Both parties were satisfied with the recommendations by the Responsible Authorities and the licensable hours contained at Paragraph 1.10 of the report. Having considered all the representations, the Sub-Committee have agreed to approve the licence application, subject to the Applicant implementing the proposed conditions by Licensing and the other Responsible Authorities. The Sub-Committee have agreed to grant the premises licence for the hours stated at Paragraph 1.10 of the Sub Committee report and subject to the conditions set out within Appendix 13 of the report, detailed in Annex 1 below. The Sub-Committee confirm that in respect of the seasonal licensable hours on New Years Eve, that the licence period for sale of alcohol is granted until 0030hrs. Any person aggrieved by this decision has 21 days from the date of written notification of the decision to appeal to the local Magistrates Court. _________________________________ Chair ANNEX 1 CCTV shall be in use at the premises. (i) Where a CCTV system is to be installed, extended or replaced, it shall be to an appropriate standard as agreed with the Licensing Authority in consultation with the Police. Where a CCTV system is to be installed, it shall be fully operational by the day the licence is granted. (ii) The CCTV equipment shall be maintained in good working order and continually record when licensable activity takes place. (iii) The premises licence holder shall ensure images from the CCTV are retained for a period of 31 days. This image retention period may be reviewed as appropriate by the Licensing Authority. (iv) The correct time and date will be generated onto both the recording and the real time image screen (v) If the CCTV equipment (including any mobile units in use at the premises) breaks down the Premises Licence Holder shall ensure the designated premises supervisor, or in his/her absence other responsible person, verbally informs the Licensing Authority and the Police as soon as is reasonably practicable. This information shall be contemporaneously recorded in the incident report register and shall include the time, date and means this was done and to whom the information was reported. Equipment failures shall be repaired or replaced as soon as is reasonably practicable and without undue delay. The Licensing Authority and the Police shall be informed when faults are rectified. (vi) The premise licence holder shall ensure that there are trained members of staff available during licensable hours to be able to reproduce and download CCTV images into a removable format at the request of any authorised officer of the Licensing Authority or a constable. (vii) The system shall also record clear images permitting the identification of individuals. (viii) CCTV cameras shall monitor all areas used by patrons including any outside area(s) (viiii) There shall be clear signage indicating that CCTV equipment is in use and recording at the premises during operating hours. The premises licence holder shall require the designated premises supervisor, or in his / her absence other responsible person, to keep an ‘incident / refusals’ logbook in a bound book in which full details of all incidents are recorded. This shall include details of any refused sales and shall give details of the persons involved, incident description, time and date, actions taken and final outcome of the situation. This shall be completed as soon as possible and, in any case, no later than the close of business on the day of the incident. The time and date when the report was completed, and by whom, is to form part of the entry. The logbook is to be kept on the premises at all times and shall be produced to an authorised officer of the Licensing Authority or a constable when required. All records shall be kept for a period of 12 months. All staff/members who serve alcohol to be trained in the prevention of underage sales to a level commensurate with their duties. All such training to be updated as necessary, for instances when legislation changes, and should include training on how to deal with difficult customers. The training should be clearly documented and signed and dated by both the trainer and the member of staff receiving it. The documentation shall be available for inspection on request by an authorised officer of the Licensing Authority or a constable. An approved proof of age scheme shall be adopted, implemented, and advertised within the premise such as ‘Challenge 25’ whereby an accepted form of photographic identification shall be requested before any alcohol is sold to any person who appears to be under 25 years of age. Acceptable proof of age shall include identification bearing the customers photograph, date of birth and integral holographic mark or security measure. Suitable means of identification would include PASS approved proof of age card, photo-card driving licence and passport. Publicity materials notifying customers of the operation of the Challenge 25 scheme shall be displayed at the premises, including a Challenge 25 sign of at least A5 size at the entrance to the premises and where practicable at each point of sale. All staff to be trained in the prevention of underage sales to a level commensurate with their duties. All such training to be updated as necessary, for instances when legislation changes, and should include training on how to deal with difficult customers. The training should be clearly documented and signed and dated by both the trainer and the member of staff receiving it. The documentation shall be available for inspection on request by an authorised officer of the Licensing Authority or a constable. All records shall be kept for a period of 12 months. Clear notices must be displayed at all points where customers leave the building instructing them to respect the needs of local residents and leave the premises and the area quietly. Children and young persons must be accompanied and supervised by a responsible adult at all times and must vacate the Bar area by 9pm unless of a televised sporting event or they are part of a pre-booked function event being held at the premises, in which case children and young persons must vacate the premises by 23:00. The use of the outside licensed area of the premises is not permitted after 22.00, other than for access solely for the use of the smoking area and after such time the smoking area capacity shall not exceed 5 persons. Adequate notices shall be displayed in appropriate locations to ensure that this information is brought to the attention of patrons. No alcohol shall be consumed or taken into any outdoor area post 22:00. The premises shall be cleared of customers within 30 minutes of the last supply of alcohol on any day. The volume of amplified/unamplified live and recorded regulated entertainment must be at a level so as not to cause a nuisance at the nearest residential property. The Premises License Holder, Designated Premises Supervisor or other competent person shall produce a noise management plan to adequately control noise from the premises. This is to include both internal and external areas and to be submitted and agreed in writing with the Pollution Control Team in Environmental Health. is not limited to: A list of mitigation measures implemented to reduce noise from the licensable premises, Regular monitoring at the boundary perimeter during periods of amplified/unamplified entertainment, to ensure noise is not at a level to cause a nuisance at residential receptors, Training of staff to undertake such observations and implement controls to reduce noise level, To implement corrective actions (such as volume reduction) to control noise during licensable hours, Maintaining a written record of such observations and actions taken, to be kept for review upon request by any responsible authorities. This document once agreed should be enforced and updated regularly to ensure the continued compliance with the premises license. The premises supervisor, manager or other competent person shall manage any outdoor area to ensure that customers do not behave in a noisy, rowdy, or offensive manner so that noise levels do not cause a disturbance at nearby noise sensitive receptors. Clear notices must be displayed at prominent points in all outdoor areas requesting that they respect the needs of local residents and behave in a quiet and orderly manner. Except for access and egress all doors and windows shall be kept closed during periods of entertainment associated with the Premises Licence. All windows and doors to be kept closed to reduce noise impact at neighbouring properties other than when the doors are being used for loading and unloading and for the use of entering and leaving the premises. NOTE This condition shall not prejudice the minimum ventilation levels for health and safety and access to emergency exits shall not be compromised. During times of amplified/unamplified live and recorded regulated entertainment is taking place, staff shall make regular patrols in the immediate vicinity to ensure noise nuisance does not occur at the nearest residential property. The applicant is not to remove waste and bottles into external storage areas between the hours of 21:00 and 08.00. All lighting for external areas of the premises must be aimed so the beam does not give rise to a statutory light nuisance.
RESOLVED that the application for a new premises licence be GRANTED, subject to the conditions as set out below: · Supply of Alcohol (Off Sales only) Monday to Sunday 7.00hrs to 23.00hrs subject to the conditions set out within Appendix 13 of the Licensing Report, attached hereto. In reaching this decision the Sub-Committee considered the promotion of the four licensing objectives, being the prevention of crime and disorder, public safety, the prevention of public nuisance and the protection of children from harm. The Sub-Committee had regard to the statutory guidance and the council’s licensing policy. The Sub-Committee gave weight to there being no objection made to the application from any Responsible Authority. During the consultation period the Applicant had engaged with the Responsible Authorities and had reached agreement as to the wording of the proposed conditions of licence (which is reflected in Appendix 13 of the Licensing Report. The Prevention of Crime & Disorder / the Prevention of Public Nuisance The Sub-Committee considered the written objection/representation of the local resident. The local resident objector did not attend the hearing to expand or amplify his objection to the application. In summary, the local resident objector objected on the basis that the promotion of the prevention of crime and disorder licensing objection, or alternatively the promotion of the prevention of public nuisance licensing objective, would be undermined by granting the licence. The resident objector’s concerns were that a further premise licensed to sell off-sales alcohol in the village “will bring anti-social behaviour and people/strangers hanging around drinking in parks and village”. The representation of the local resident was supported by the local business objector, who similarly objected to the Application based on an increase of anti-social behaviour and or nuisance within the park in the locality of the premises. The Sub-Committee noted that the business objector operates the local convenience store that is licensed for off-sales of alcohol until 10.30pm – but his store closes at 8.30pm. The business objector indicated that there was no need for a further licensed premises allowing off-sales of alcohol and will lead to an increased likelihood of crime and attract more undesirables to the premises and area. The Sub-Committee took into account that the premises subject to the Application had not been previously licenced. The Sub-Committee understood that the objectors could not provide evidence of ASB or public nuisance directly linked to the licensable activities of the premises given the premises has not been licenced. Notwithstanding this, neither objector provided evidence that this was a current problem involving the park in the locality of the premises (and in the locality of the business objectors own licenced premises). The objections appeared to be based more upon a fear of what may occur rather than exacerbating a current problem the community is experiencing. The business objector accepted that the above was not an issue for his own off-sales of alcohol but indicated his store closes at 8.30pm –and the later off-sales of alcohol up to 11pm was more likely to create disorder and or nuisance. Regarding the above objections, based on the asserted threat to the prevention of crime and disorder and prevention of public nuisance licensing objectives , the Sub-Committee took into account the representations of Gwent Police regarding existing anti-social behaviour (“ASB”) in the park within Abertysswg. Gwent Police fairly indicated that ASB was a common problem in such areas throughout the borough, but it did not have any evidence that connected any ASB within the park to the licensable activity involving the off-sale of alcohol from local licensed premises. The Sub-Committee gave regard to there being another licensed premises currently able to supply off sales alcohol (Post Office/General Store). The Sub-Committee did not reach the view that ASB fuelled by off sales alcohol from nearby licensed premises was an existing problem within the locality of the park adjacent to the premises to which the application relates. Whilst the Sub-Committee could not rule out that a further licensed premises would not alter the existing situation, in its judgement the Sub-Committee determined that such risk was sufficiently low (particularly when considered against the proposed conditions of licence, and the applicant’s prior experience as a designated premises supervisor) that the promotion of the crime and disorder, and the prevention of public nuisance, licensing objectives would be sufficiently protected. The Sub-Committee gave weight to the Applicant’s submission, which should such unlikely risk eventuate then the Licensing Act’s review mechanism could be triggered by concerned residents at any future point in time. On balance, the Sub-Committee were not persuaded that such future unrealised risk to the promotion of the prevention of crime and order, and the prevention of public nuisance, justifies the refusal of the application. In reaching its decision, the Sub-Committee disregarded the objections based on the perceived lack of “need” for a further licenced premises for off-sales of alcohol. It gave regard to paragraph 14.19 of the Statutory Guidance which makes clear that “need” is not a matter for a licensing authority in discharging both its licensing functions and policy. Further aspects regarding the Prevention of Public Nuisance In the Sub-Committee’s judgement, not much weight was given to the business objector’s objection based on the threat of noise/light nuisance (undermining the promotion of the prevention of public nuisance licensing objective). The Environmental Health officer did not oppose the application, and perhaps more significantly, no representations in this regard were received from neighbours in the immediate locality of the premises. The Sub-Committee took into account that the premises had been used as a fish and chip shop for many years, and it was not immediately apparent why a convenience store presents more risk of producing noise and light disturbance as opposed to the premises being used as a fish and chip shop trading into the night. Furthermore, the Sub-Committee had been provided with no evidence as to why the perceived increase light/noise disturbance risks would be on account of the licensable activity (off-sales of alcohol) as opposed to the general use of the premises as a convenience store. The Sub-Committee gave weight to the review mechanism within the Licensing Act, which serves as a protective tool to address issues should they arise. On balance, the Sub-Committee reached the view that the proposed licence conditions would adequately promote the licensing objective of preventing public nuisance. The Sub-Committee were not persuaded by the business objector that the licensable activity would increase the risk for public nuisance on account of an increase in littering in the local area. The Sub-Committee gave consideration to paragraph 2.26 of the Statutory Guidance, which reflects that a licensee will have a diminishing responsibility for people’s nuisance behaviour, such as littering, beyond the immediate area surrounding the premises. The Sub-Committee were of the view that it is a matter of personal responsibility for a customer of the store purchasing alcohol to appropriately dispose of the waste this creates. Accordingly, the Sub-Committee was not persuaded that such a risk justified the refusal of the application. The Sub-Committee gave little weight to the objections to public nuisance on the basis of the proposed CCTV system to be installed to the immediate curtilage of the premises. Such use of CCTV was not in and of itself unlawful and the Applicant would have to abide by any data processing obligations arising under the law. The promotion of Public Safety & the Protection of Children from Harm The Sub-Committee considered objections to the application of the basis that it would fail to promote the licensing objective of public safety. The Sub-Committee heard evidence from the Applicant that the premises is benefitting from a complete modern refit with standard safety features. The Responsible Authority responsible for Health and Safety did not raise any objections to the application (however the Sub-Committee took into account the shop fitout had not been completed). The objections received involved the proximity of the premises to a children’s playground, and children would be able to see alcohol in the premises and see people purchasing alcohol. The Sub-Committee, in its judgement, did not find that this would compromise a threat to public safety. The objection on the basis of public safety further asserted that there was a risk that children would witness people consuming alcohol in the park and possibly people who are intoxicated. The Sub-Committee took into account the Applicant’s personal experience in previously managing stores licensed for off-sales of alcohol in his capacity as a designated premises supervisor under the Licensing Act 2003. It would be an offence under such Act for the Applicant to sell alcohol to an intoxicated person and the Applicant would be acutely aware of the same. There Sub-Committee noted that there was no evidence before it that public drunkenness within the park area was a current issue – notwithstanding the PO/General Store being in close proximity to the park and also being licensed for off-sales of alcohol. On weighing the factors, the Sub-Committee were not persuaded that the risk in this instance would justify refusing the application. The business objector raised objections based on the licensable objective of protection of children from harm. The Sub-Committee gave weight to Children’s Services not opposing the application given the proposed conditions of licence had alleviated any of their concerns. The objections in this regard were a repetition of the risk of children seeing alcohol, seeing people purchase alcohol, people consume alcohol within the park. The Sub-Committee considered paragraph 9.12 of the Statutory Code of Guidance and gave weight to Children’s Services being experts in the field of child safety, who do not oppose the application. For reasons outlined above discussing CCTV and consumption of alcohol within park – the Sub-Committee were not persuaded that the Application should be refused on this basis. Objections outside of the licensing objectives The Sub-Committee were presented with several objections to the Application from the business objector that fell outside the scope of the 4 licensing objectives. The business objector’s objections were from the outset a mixture of the relevant and irrelevant objections. Factors such as the increase of commercial competition between similar businesses in a small community, the investment of capital by any party in their respective businesses, the jeopardy of post office services due to such increased commercial competition, tobacco sales – are all beyond the remit of the Sub-Committee and are simply not relevant to the determination of the Application under the Licensing Act 2003. For this reason, the Sub-Committee gave such arguments/submissions no regard in reaching its decision on the Application. Conditions of Premises Licence As the Sub-Committee had determined that there were not sufficient grounds to refuse the Application, it went on to consider the adequacy of proposed conditions of licence in promoting the licensing objectives. The Sub-Committee were satisfied that the proposed conditions within Appendix 13 were adequate to safeguard the promotion of the licensing objectives, as they covered the principal areas of risk and were sufficiently clear in terms of the obligations on the Applicant. Any person aggrieved by this decision has 21 days from the date of written notification of the decision to appeal to the local Magistrates Court.
RESOLVED that the application for a new premises licence be GRANTED, subject to the conditions as set out below: · Supply of Alcohol (On and Off Sales) · Monday to Sunday 10.00hrs to 22.30hrs subject to the conditions set out within Appendix 26 of the Licensing Report, attached hereto (save for the removal of the proposed condition number 6 regarding the use of toughened glassware). In reaching this decision the Sub-Committee considered the promotion of the four licensing objectives, being the prevention of crime and disorder, public safety, the prevention of public nuisance and the protection of children from harm. The Sub-Committee had regard to the statutory guidance and the council’s licensing policy. The Sub-Committee gave significant weight that no Responsible Authority opposed the application. In this respect, there appeared to be little, if any, opposition to the application based on public safety, or the protection of children from harm. The objection to the application, made by the relevant members of the public, appeared to principally relate to the promotion of prevention of crime and disorder, and the prevention of public nuisance, though the Sub-Committee accepted that there can be some limited cross-over between such objective and the remaining three licensing objectives. All members of the public who had made representations objecting to the grant of the new premises licence failed to appear at the hearing. The Sub-Committee accepted the evidence from the Senior Licensing Officer that each individual had been sent a notification of the hearing. One objector responded to indicate that they would not be attending the hearing. It was confirmed at the hearing that no responses had been received from any resident that they intended to attend the hearing. The Sub-Committee were equally satisfied that no contact had been received by the licensing team or Committee Services from either resident that explained their respective absences or any requests for the hearing to be adjourned. The Sub-Committee decided pursuant to regulation 20(2)(b) of The Licensing Act 2003 (Hearings) Regulations 2005 to hear the application in the absence of the two residents who had objected to the application. The Sub-Committee did not consider that it was in the public interest to adjourn the hearing to a further date. The Sub-Committee, in reaching its decision, gave regard to the written objections provided by each respective resident comprising pages 51 to 71 of the Licencing Report. The Sub-Committee gave significant weight to the Applicant’s previous experience in operating a licenced premises of the same nature within Newport and weight was given to the two responses from members of the public supporting the Applicant’s application. The Sub-Committee accepted that there was no evidence that the Applicant had failed to promote the four licensing objectives within her former licensed premises. The Sub-Committee drew confidence from the combination of the contents of the Applicant’s initial operating schedule, her positive conduct in interacting with Responsible Authorities during the consultation period, and the Applicant’s demeanour at the hearing, that the Applicant took her licensing responsibilities with due seriousness and consideration. The Sub-Committee were persuaded that it could have confidence in the Applicant maintaining appropriate conditions of a premises licence and ensuring the promotion of the four licencing objectives. This was not an application for which the only way to promote the licensing objectives would be to refuse the licence outright. The Sub-Committee noted that the council does not have a cumulative policy in terms of premises licencing. Given this, the Sub-Committee did not give any significant weight to relevant residents’ objections that were based on there being an “influx” of off-licence premises within the Caerphilly town centre. There may or may not be an influx of such premises – but this element alone would be an insufficient basis on which to refuse the application under the terms of the council’s own licensing policy. The resident objections principally relied on a link between off-sale alcohol and anti-social behaviour (a form of disorder) within the town centre. In assessing the weight to give this evidence the Sub-Committee considered paragraph 9.12 of the Home Office – Revised Guidance issued under section 182 of the Licensing Act 2003. Each responsible authority are experts in their field and the Sub-Committee gave significant weight to Gwent Police not opposing the application. The evidence provided at the hearing by the Applicant, which the Sub-Committee fully accepted, was that her business model was fundamentally different to a small shop selling off-licence alcohol. The Applicant set out in detail within her written submissions within the licensing report, and verbally at the meeting, that she intends to operate a bistro/restaurant business – with the focus principally being on food rather than alcohol. The Applicant explained, and the Sub-Committee fully accepted, that the off-sales permission was sought to enable the Applicant to sell boutique or unusual spirits or wines as part of gift hampers and the like from a small deli counter within the premises. This was an aspect of the intended business which differed from her previous restaurant in Newport. The Sub-Committee, in its judgement, reached the view that there was a very remote risk of individuals buying such alcohol from this premises to consume in public and behave inappropriately within the locality of the premises – which may be more of a risk with a small store, for instance, selling high strength lager in multi-can packs. The Sub-Committee afforded little weight to the resident objections. The residents were appearing to, colloquially put, “compare apples with pears.” Whilst the Sub-Committee reached this view, it was not seeking to denigrate the residents’ concerns about aspects of the Caerphilly town centre and off-sales of alcohol – which it accepted was acutely felt by most, if not all, of the resident objectors. However, in the context of the Applicant’s business, there was a very low risk that the granting of the premises licence would add to the concerns raised by the residents, due to it being a restaurant/bistro. In reaching the above view, it was a factor for the Sub-Committee that the written objections from residents were mostly less than one respective page – often comprising 2-3 sentences. The representations expressed broad complaints and the Sub-Committee noted paragraph 9.9 of the above s.182 guidance and its application in this matter. The opportunity for the objecting residents to attend the hearing to amplify and or clarify their objections had not been taken. The Sub-Committee took the view that there may be ASB within Caerphilly town centre – but the determination of the application did not solely rest on whether this was the case. The critical link between the licensed activity (off-sales of alcohol) and any ASB was not borne out in the written objections. The residents had not made themselves available to the hearing to be questioned as to why they had concluded that the ASB they are alleged to have witnessed was caused by off-sales of alcohol as opposed, for instance, from on-sales of alcohol at nearby licenced premises. Nor had the residents made themselves available to answer questions from the Sub-Committee. The Sub-Committee gave some weight within its decision to the location of the premises and its recent history of operating as a licensed premises with a former licence holder. The Licensing Authority confirmed that the premises had not been one causing any concern over recent years whilst licenced. The outdoor area to the front of the premises had been in place for several years. The area surrounding the premises is a mixture of commercial and residential premises. These factors combined with the lack of objection from Environmental Health in regard to noise nuisance issues, and appropriate licensing conditions having been in principle agreed to mitigate such risk – the Sub-Committee were confident that the promotion of the licensing objective to prevent public nuisance would be adequately protected should the licence be granted. In the Sub-Committee’s judgement, it was adequately satisfied that the licensing objectives, particularly in regard to the prevention of crime and disorder, and prevention of public nuisance, would be sufficiently promoted by the Applicant to justify the grant of the licence applied for. The Sub-Committee was equally satisfied that the licence conditions, as settled between the Responsible Authorities and the Applicant prior to the hearing, were all the current conditions necessary to promote the licencing objectives in this instance. The Sub-Committee acceded to the request to remove the condition regarding the use of toughened glassware within the premises on account of such use will not necessarily prevent sharp shards when broken. Any person aggrieved by this decision has 21 days from the date of written notification of the decision to appeal to the local Magistrates Court. Conditions of Licence 1. The premises licence holder shall require the designated premises supervisor, or in his / her absence other responsible person, to keep an ‘incident / refusals’ logbook in a bound book in which full details of all incidents are recorded. This shall include details of any refused sales and shall give details of the persons involved, incident description, time and date, actions taken and final outcome of the situation. This shall be completed as soon as possible and, in any case, no later than the close of business on the day of the incident. The time and date when the report was completed, and by whom, is to form part of the entry. The logbook is to be kept on the premises at all times and shall be produced to an authorised officer of the Licensing Authority or a constable when required. All records shall be kept for a period of 12 months. 2. All staff to be trained in the prevention of underage sales to a level commensurate with their duties. All such training to be updated as necessary, for instances when legislation changes, and should include training on how to deal with difficult customers. The training should be clearly documented and signed and dated by both the trainer and the member of staff receiving it. The documentation shall be available for inspection on request by an authorised officer of the Licensing Authority or a constable. The records shall be kept for a 12 month period. 3. An approved proof of age scheme shall be adopted, implemented, and advertised within the premise such as ‘Challenge 25’ whereby an accepted form of photographic identification shall be requested before any alcohol is sold to any person who appears to be under 25 years of age. Acceptable proof of age shall include identification bearing the customers photograph, date of birth and integral holographic mark or security measure. Suitable means of identification would include PASS approved proof of age card, photo-card driving licence and passport. 4. Publicity materials notifying customers of the operation of the Challenge 25 scheme shall be displayed at the premises, including a Challenge 25 sign of at least A5 size at the entrance to the premises and where practicable at each point of sale. 5. All staff with a responsibility for supplying or selling alcohol shall be vigilant in preventing adults buying alcohol on behalf of persons who are under 18 and will refuse such sales where they suspect that this may be about to occur, subject to the exemptions under Section 149 (5) of the Licensing Act 2003 which allows beer, cider or wine to be purchased for an individual aged 16 or 17, providing the beer, cider or wine is for consumption with a table meal and that a person aged 18 or over is accompanying the individual. 6. The contents of any bottled beverage shall be decanted into a plastic / PTE / glass before service to any customer that uses the outside area. No glass will be allowed outside. 7. The outside area will not be used after 22.00 hrs. 8. The outdoor area to the front of the premises must be closed and cleared of customers by 22.00hours. 9. There shall be no consumption of alcoholic beverages purchased from the premises in open containers outside at the front of the premises unless seated in dedicated area with table and chairs. 10. All off sales will be in sealed containers. 11. The premises supervisor, manager or other competent person shall manage any outdoor area to ensure that customers do not behave in a noisy, rowdy, or offensive manner. 12. The Outside area to be monitored periodically by staff through licensable times. 13. Should customers be outside the premises causing congestion, loitering and/or causing Anti-Social Behaviour they will be told move away from the vicinity of the premises by the premises supervisor, manager or other competent person 14. Amplified music shall not be played at a level that will cause unreasonable disturbance to the occupants of any properties in the vicinity. 15. Clear notices must be displayed at all points where customers leave the building instructing them to respect the needs of local residents and leave the premises and the area quietly. 16. Activities relating to the on-site disposal (including placing into external receptacles) and collection of refuse, bottles and recyclable materials shall only take place between 09:00 and 21:00 17. The licence holder shall ensure that adequate measures are in place to remove litter or waste arising from customers and to prevent such litter from accumulating in the immediate vicinity of their premises. In particular, where necessary the premises licence holder shall ensure that adequate measures are in place to provide customers with sufficient receptacles for the depositing of waste materials such as food wrappings, drinks and smoking related litter, etc. 18. All staff/members who serve alcohol to be trained in the prevention of underage sales to a level commensurate with their duties. 19. All such training to be updated as necessary, for instances when legislation changes, and should include training on how to deal with difficult customers. 20. The training should be clearly documented and signed and dated by both the trainer and member of staff receiving it. The document shall be available for inspection on request by an authorised officer of the Licensing Authority or a Constable. All records to be kept for a minimum of 12 months. 21. Children must be accompanied and supervised by a responsible adult at all times. 22. CCTV shall be in use at the premises. (i) Where a CCTV system is to be installed, extended, or replaced, it shall be to an appropriate standard as agreed with the Licensing Authority in consultation with the Police. Where a CCTV system is to be installed, it shall be fully operational by the grant of the licence. (ii) The CCTV equipment shall be maintained in good working order and continually record when licensable activity takes place and for a period of two hours afterwards; (iii)The premises licence holder shall ensure images from the CCTV are retained for a period of 30 days. This image retention period may be reviewed as appropriate by the Licensing Authority. (iv) The correct time and date will be generated onto both the recording and the real time image screen: (v) If the CCTV equipment (including any mobile units in use at the premises) breaks down the Premises Licence Holder shall ensure the designated premises supervisor, or in his/her absence other responsible person, verbally informs the Licensing Authority and the Police as soon as is reasonably practicable. This information shall be contemporaneously recorded in the incident report register and shall include the time, date and means this was done and to whom the information was reported: (vi) Equipment failures shall be repaired or replaced as soon as is reasonably practicable and without undue delay. The Licensing Authority and the Police shall be informed when faults are rectified; (vii) The premise licence holder shall ensure that there are trained members of staff available during licensable hours to be able to reproduce and download CCTV images into a removable format at the request of any authorised officer of the Licensing Authority or a constable; (viii) The system shall also record clear images permitting the identification of individuals. (ix) There shall be clear signage indicating that CCTV equipment is in use and recording at the premises 23. CCTV camera’s shall monitor all area’s used by premises patrons including any external area to monitor numbers and prevent crime and disorder. 24. The licence holder or DPS shall risk assess the need for SIA door supervisors to be present in the premises when key sporting events are taking place or when a function of any kind is taking place. 25. If door supervisors are present then the premises licence holder shall ensure that the following details for each door supervisor, are contemporaneously entered into a bound register kept for that purpose: (i) Full name; (ii) SIA Certificate number and or badge number, or registration number of any accreditation scheme recognised by the Licensing Authority (including expiry date of that registration or accreditation); (iii) The time they began their duty; (iv) The time they completed their duty. This register is to be kept at the premises at all times and shall be so maintained as to enable an authorised officer of the Licensing Authority or a constable to establish the particulars of all door stewards engaged at the premises during the period of not less than 31 days prior to the request and shall be open to inspection by authorised officers of the Licensing Authority or a constable upon request. _______________________ CHAIR
RESOLVED that the application for a new premises licence as set out in Section 1.3 of the Licensing Manager’s report be GRANTED, subject to the conditions agreed in line with recommendations by Gwent Police and the Licensing Authority as detailed in appendix 6 in the Officers report. Any person aggrieved by this decision has 21 days from the date of written notification of the decision to appeal to the local Magistrates Court. _______________________ CHAIR APPENDIX Conditions applicable to the grant of the licence as per Appendix 10 of the Licensing Manager’s report: 1. CCTV system is installed that is capable of continuously recording for a period of not less than 31 days meeting Home Office Guidelines and is maintained in good working order. Recordings will be made of all trading periods. The correct date and time will be generated onto both recording and real time image screen. The system is able to produce copies of recordings on site. The system is capable of facial image recognition of all persons both entering and exiting the store. At least one camera from the system covers the doorway and another covers the till area. Copies of recordings shall be provided on request to an office under the direction and control of the Police or an officer of the Licensing Authority. The DPS will ensure that there are trained members of staff available during licensable hours to be able to reproduce and download CCTV images into a removable format at the request of an authorised officer of the Licensing Authority or the Police. There is a clear signage indicating that CCTV equipment is in use and recording at the premises. The DPS will take such steps as necessary to ensure that the system is operated and maintained in accordance with these conditions. 2. High Strength spirits (20% abv or above) will only be displayed behind the till area. 3. Provision will be made for the disabled to ensure safe evacuation in the event of fire or other emergency and general access to the store. 4. All planning requirements will be met and procedures established to prevent noise nuisance from deliveries. 5. Measures will be in place to ensure the proper disposal of all waste. 6. The premises licence holder shall require the designated premises supervisor, or in his / her absence other responsible person, to keep an ‘incident / refusals’ logbook in a book in which full details of all incidents are recorded. This shall include details of any refused sales and shall give details of the persons involved, incident description, time and date, actions taken and final outcome of the situation. This shall be completed as soon as possible and, in any case, no later than the close of business on the day of the incident. The time and date when the report was completed, and by whom, is to form part of the entry. The logbook is to be kept on the premises at all times and shall be produced to an authorised officer of the Licensing Authority or a constable when required. All records shall be kept for a period of 12 months. 7. The store will operate a Challenge 25 Policy. Publicity materials notifying customers of the operation of the Challenge 25 scheme shall be displayed at the premises, including a Challenge 25 sign of at least A5 size at the entrance to the premises and where practicable at each point of sale. 8. Staff will receive training not less than every 6 months in respect of Challenge 25 and records will be kept of all training and refresher training. 9. Training will include the refusal of service to any person appearing under 25 unless they can produce an acceptable means of identification to show they are 18 or over. Acceptable means of identification will include passport, photo driving licence. or PASS accredited photo ID. 10. Should customers be directly outside the premises entrance causing congestion, loitering and/or causing Anti-Social Behaviour they will be told move away from the vicinity of the store by the premises supervisor, manager or other competent person.
RESOLVED that; The decision of the Licensing and Gambling Sub Committee from the hearing held on 9 August 2023 and 3 October 2023 in respect of an application for a Variation Premises Licence at Brew Monster is that the variation of the licence is granted subject to conditions. The Sub-Committee has varied the licensable activity trading for the supply of alcohol (on and off sales) to now include the following: · Bank Holidays 09.00 to 23.00 hours · New Years Eve 09.00 to 02.00 hours The Sub Committee has decided to vary licence condition 15 of the existing licence to the following: All alcoholic drinks will be consumed indoors within the licensed area, save between the hours of 11.00 to 21.00 on Saturdays and Sunday, where alcoholic drinks may be consumed in the outdoor courtyard area delineated in blue hatch upon the attached plan. In addition, further variations to the existing licensing conditions for the premises were made by the Sub-Committee. The amended schedule of license conditions are annexed hereto marked “A” (with amendments and additions being in underlined italics). The variations and reasons for the same are set out further below. The amended Premises Plan is annexed hereto marked “B”. The Sub Committee have listened very carefully to all representations made today and read very carefully all the written representations received. The Sub Committee have considered all four Licensing Objectives, the Licensing Act 2003, the revised Home Office Guidance, and Caerphilly Council’s Licensing Policy. The reasons for the Sub Committee’s decision are as follows. Extension of licensable hours In regard to the extend hours for the supply of alcohol (on and off sales) on a Bank Holiday and New Years Eve, the Sub Committee gave weight to the lack of objection in this regard from Gwent Police, Environmental Health, or the Licensing Officer (acting as the Responsible Authority). In regard to the resident objectors, only Mr Butler objected to this aspect of the variation application. Mr Butler indicated his objection to this aspect of the variation application via email of 18 July 2023 (page 65 of the Licensing Report). Within the email he simply confirms that he objects to both aspects of the variation application. He did not set out specifically why he objected to the extension of the licensable hours for Bank Holiday’s and New Years Eve. His representations made within his email of 15 July 2023 (page 63 of the Licensing Report) are primarily directed at the request to use the courtyard as a beer garden. Mr Bulter’s sets out objections on page 63 of the Licensing Report which arguably could be relevant to the extension of licensable hours request. The objection relates to the impediment of the public footpath on account of pop-up signage place by the Applicant whilst trading and the permanent presence of large commercial bins. The latter issue did not seem to be affected by the extension of the hours, as the bins appear to permanently reside where stated. Mr Butler indicated that the impediment on the footpath may affect families going to and from Twyn school site and passers-by. The Sub-Committee did not accept that this issue would affect persons connected to the Twyn school site as the hours sought to be extended were only applicable to days on which the school would be closed in any event by virtue of a public holiday. The Sub Committee were not persuaded by Mr Butler’s objections as to that aspect of the variation application warranted refusal. The Sub Committee were adequately satisfied that licensing objectives would be sufficiently promoted under the conditions of licence that would inevitably apply to the earlier opening hours. The Sub Committee gave significant weight to the extension of the hours being for an earlier start time, rather than extending the hours further into the night/very early morning. As such, this aspect of the variation application was granted and no amendments to the license conditions were required in this respect. “Brewery Yard” as limited beer garden It was abundantly clear to the Sub Committee that the licensing objective at greatest risk of being undermined by this aspect of the application was the prevention of public nuisance. This was principally due to the risk of patron noise within the beer garden, and the noise created by patrons walking to and from the beer garden. A further issue being the noise potentially created by the likely increase in the number of times the entry doors of the premises would be opened, allowing noise from within the premises to escape. A secondary aspect was the promotion of public safety possibly being undermined. Public safety In regards to public safety, the Sub Committee took into account the representations made from Gwent Police and the Environmental Health’s Health and Safety Officer, their respective recommended works and amendments/additions to the licencing conditions, and the Applicant’s readiness to accept such works and amendments/additions. For the Sub Committee, the amendments and additions sought, and agreed by the Applicant, adequately promoted the licensing objective of public safety and nothing further needed to be added by the Sub Committee. Regarding public safety, the Sub Committee has reservations as to the data protection issues arising from the requirement to operate CCTV on the section of public footpath from the premises entrance to the entrance of the Brewery Yard. This has significant potential to collect personal data of members of the public (by the capturing of their image) who are wholly unconnected to the Applicant’s business. How that personal data is collected, stored and used would give rise to complex issues for the Applicant to navigate. The Sub Committee noted that the Applicant had agreed to such additional condition within the premises licence and that this was likely to have been done so with the Applicant’s “eyes wide open”. The Sub Committee took the view that this was a matter for the Applicant to manage, possible with advice and guidance from the Information Commissioner’s Office as to appropriate signage and ancillary obligations the Applicant will have to those whose personal data is collected by it. Prevention of Public Nuisance The Sub-Committee took into account paragraph 2.21 of the current Revised Guidance issued under section 182 of the Licensing Act 2003 and paragraph 11.2 of the council’s policy and accepting the noise issues raised by the three nearby residents, and the representations from Environmental Health were directly relevant to the prevention of public nuisance licensing objective. The Sub Committee determined that the nuisance was sufficiently public – affecting a small number of local residents. Noise has previously arisen because of groups of patrons standing outside the immediate entrance to the premises, on the public footpath forming the immediate curtilage of the premises, to smoke. The noise of the patrons doing so, and the number of people within the groups, during the quieter hours of the evening/late evening – has disturbed local residents living directly across the road from the premises. The Applicant indicated that it had intended to provide a smoking shelter within the courtyard area, away from the public footpath, but patrons had not sought to use it due to the condition of the courtyard and it generally being uninviting. It was the Applicant’s submission that by using the courtyard in the way the variation intended would partly alleviate this problem by moving the smoking patrons to the courtyard. The Sub Committee gave some weight to the Applicant not being required to provide such shelter, but it does have a responsibility to manage patron noise within the immediate vicinity of the premises. Resident evidence, supported by Environmental Health, submitted that the Applicant had taken little or no, steps to attempt to mitigate this noise issue, though Environmental Health also stated that they did not witness prolonged noise from patrons. The Sub Committee did accept that the intended use of the courtyard, for the consumption of alcohol on weekends until 9pm would not completely alleviate the above noise issue. There remained the prospect that larger groups frequenting the premises after 9pm on a weekend would continue to smoke immediately outside the premises entrance and could make incidental noise that disturbs neighbouring residents. In the same respect, the Sub-Committee did not fully accept that the intended use of the courtyard would exacerbate this issue. The terminable hour for the courtyard being sought was 9pm – and largely the same risk of congregated patron smokers making noise after 9pm immediately outside the premises remained whether or not the application was granted. This issue was relevant to the degree of confidence that the Sub Committee could have in the Applicant managing this particular noise issue. Therefore the Sub Committee in exercising its judgement determined to vary the license condition numbered 13 to: · Prominent and clear notices displayed at points where clientele leave and enter the building, instructing them to leave the premises and area quietly, and if smoking outside to do so quietly. In weighing the risk to the promotion of prevention of public nuisance, Sub Committee, in exercising its judgement, took into account several factors. A lot of weight was given by the Sub Committee to the days and hours requested by the Applicant. The use was being self-limited to only weekends, and only until the terminable hour of 9pm. The Sub Committee reached the common-sense view that the courtyard, like many beer gardens, may not be an attractive area to consume alcohol during period of wet and cold weather that occurs beyond spring and summer. The Sub Committee reached the common-sense view that the courtyard was unlikely to be frequented by patrons 52 weekends of the year – and this was more likely during spring/summer. The risk to undermining this licensing objective was unlikely to persistently present itself on every weekend throughout the year. The terminable hour of 9pm was viewed by the Sub Committee as being reasonable. It appeared to fairly balance the needs of the Applicant and that of neighbouring residents – as the foot traffic between premises entry and courtyard would cease to continue at a time when residents would expect peace and quiet in the later hours of the evening. This went a substantial way to the promotion of this particular licensing objective. A further consideration in this respect was the increased frequency of the premises entry doors to open and close on weekends up until 9pm – as patrons enter/exit and re-enter/re-exit to obtain drinks to consume within the courtyard. This would allow more frequent spillage of noise from within the premises to neighbouring residents across the street. The Sub Committee gave weight to the risk largely being limited to weekend afternoons and evenings up to 9pm. The Sub Committee determined that managing this risk to the promotion of the licensing objective an additional condition of licence will be attended, based on term NP12 of the council’s model pool of conditions. The inclusion of such condition would enable an increased management of the risk of noise escaping should the entry door fail to be closed by patrons entering or exiting the premises for whatever reason. The additional condition is: · An automatic door closer shall be installed at the main entry door from the public footpath into the building to the satisfaction of the Licensing Authority by 1 March 2024. The Sub Committee reached the view that the above condition would largely alleviate the Applicant’s staff from having to monitor the sound trap remaining effective by the main entrance door being left open, particularly during busy periods of trade. The Sub Committee heard evidence from a neighbouring resident’s daughter, on behalf of her mother, as to the excessive noise her elderly mother had experienced during the 3 Temporary Event Notice (“TEN”) events held in the courtyard earlier in the year. She indicated that otherwise for the use of the courtyard her mother did not have any other noise issues with the Applicant’s use of the premises. There were 3 TEN events involving the courtyard run by the Applicant earlier in the year. The Sub Committee were advised that no service requests to the Environmental Health team eventuated from such events. The Sub Committee heard evidence and submissions, principally from the Applicant and the Environmental Health Officer regarding proposed noise mitigation measures the Applicant was seeking to install to the respective fence lines within the courtyard. This perhaps unexpectedly had not formed a part of the Applicant’s variation application until the day before the initial hearing. It was a design the Applicant had researched and designed via Mr White, its director. Mr White accepted he had not spoken with the manufacturer of the acoustic panelling he is proposing to use. The Sub Committee heard submissions from residents and the Environmental Health Officer about the effectiveness and suitability of such acoustic panelling to an uncovered, external area, that would be exposed to the elements. In considering the mitigation offered by the Applicant in terms of the works to the fence lines, the clarity of evidence was scant. This was noted clearly by the Environmental Health Officer, who explained that to reach a clear view on the potential effectiveness of the intending works an assessment from an acoustic consultant would be required. Mr Jennings cautioned that real world effectiveness was often significantly different to how the product may perform in controlled conditions. The Sub Committee accepted this point – and were not persuaded by Mr White’s indication that the works would prevent any noise escaping the courtyard and or reducing the noise by more than 70 decibels. Mr Jennings, very fairly, indicated that noise from the courtyard can be mitigated against and the measures proposed were likely to result in a reduction of patron noise escaping from the courtyard – but he could not guess at the level of reduction. In his experienced view, the uncertainty did not provide adequate reassurance for him to remove his objection to the application being granted. In judging this aspect of the application, the Sub Committee considered the same aspects detailed above, namely the limited hours and days in which the courtyard would be used and these likely to be limited to the warmer and drier weather. The Sub Committee recognised that the licensing regime was intended to be a permissive regime, subject to ensuring the promotion of the four licensing objectives. In this instance, the Sub Committee had sufficient confidence that the combination of the noise reduction works, as detailed in the information provided by the Applicant to it, and further conditions of license would adequately safeguard the promotion of the prevention of public nuisance. The Sub Committee accorded weight to the fact that should a public nuisance arise, despite the mitigation works and further conditions of license, the residents and relevant authorities could request a review of the license. The Applicant acts in the clear knowledge that the intended works and steps it intends to undertake would not eliminate the possibility of a future review should the licensing objectives not be promoted. Furthermore, the residents will have the ever-present potential protection of the local authority dealing with any alleged statutory nuisance arising via the Environmental Protection Act 1990. The Sub Committee considered the likelihood that the Applicant would be permitted to install the acoustic panelling to the fence line without infringing planning requirements/restrictions. The evidence on this issue was also scant and principally limited to information from the Applicant itself. Mr White confirmed that the single planning application had been made for the change of use for the courtyard and the intended noise reduction works to the fence line – but this application had not as yet been determined. The Sub Committee are not bound by planning decisions and the planning authority are not bound by licensing authority decisions – the two regulatory systems are separate, but often consider similar areas of issue. The Applicant appeared to be acutely aware that planning is required to use the courtyard in the manner intended, which he does not presently have, and the objecting residents are also acutely aware of this outstanding issue. If the Applicant uses the courtyard area, as permitted by his varied premises license without having all required planning consent – then it runs the very real risk of breaching planning regulations. The Applicant recognised this issue. On balance, the Sub Committee were sufficiently confident that should the courtyard be permitted by planning to use the area as sought then the acoustic works would be allowed. If not, then the Applicant may have to make a further variation application to the Licensing Authority to amend the relevant conditions imposed by the Sub Committee in this instance. The Sub Committee considered the evidence that the premises has no direct line of sight to the courtyard area. Objecting parties submitted that this would make the management of noise and behaviour in the courtyard area difficult to manage. The Sub Committee took account that the requested amendment to the licensing conditions made by Gwent Police for the requirement for CCTV to be used in the courtyard area was accepted by the Applicant. The Sub Committee held concerns as to the lack of noise monitoring the CCTV would provide but in its judgement believed that this issue could be managed by the further addition of conditions of license. These conditions, based upon the model pool of condition are: · The outdoor courtyard area shall only be open to patrons to consume alcohol on Saturday and Sundays from 11.00 until 21.00 hours. Adequate notices shall be displayed in appropriate locations to ensure that this information is brought to the attention of patrons. At 21.00 hours the outdoor courtyard is to be clear of patrons and all entry points to the courtyard be closed and secured to prevent access by patrons. · The premises licence holder shall take all reasonable steps to ensure that patrons using the outdoor courtyard area do so in a quiet and orderly fashion. · The manager, licence holder or other competent person shall carry out observations in, or in the vicinity of, the outdoor courtyard area, on at least hourly between 12pm and 9pm when the outdoor courtyard is being used by patrons in order to establish whether there is noise being made at a level likely to cause disturbance to the occupants of properties in the vicinity. If such observation reveals such level of noise to cause disturbance, then patrons causing such noise will be asked to reduce the volume of noise and or to leave the courtyard area. A record of such observations shall be kept in a book for that purpose, such book shall be completed immediately after the observation detailing the time, location and duration of the observation, the level of noise and any action taken to reduce such noise. Such book to be made available at all times upon request to an authorised officer of the Licensing Authority or a constable. The Sub Committee took into account the concerns expressed by the Environmental Health Officer and the Licensing Officer as to the ability of the Applicant to adequately manage the varied license. However, on balance, in the Sub Committee’s judgement was that this did not result in it having such low confidence in the applicant that it undermined the promotion of the licensing objectives that would justify an outright refusal of the application. Any person aggrieved by this decision has 21 days from the date of written notification of the decision to appeal to the local Magistrates Court. _______________________ CHAIR
RESOLVED that the application for a new premises licence as set out in the Licensing and Gambling Sub Committee Decision Notice be GRANTED subject to conditions annexed to such decision notice. In making their decision, the Sub Committee considered all four Licensing Objectives, the Licensing Act 2003, revised Home Office Guidance and Caerphilly Council’s Licensing Policy. The reasons for the Sub Committees’ decision are set out below. The decision of the Licensing and Gambling Sub Committee in regards to the hearing held on 26 September 2023 in respect of an application for a new premises licence at Sunset Lodge, Ty Cae Brith Farm, Troed y Rhiw Road, Mynyddislwyn, NP11 7BB is that the licence is granted permitting the following Licensable Actives: · Supply of Alcohol (on and off sales) In regard to “The Lodge” Sunday to Saturday 12.00 to 23.00 New Years Eve 12.00 to 1.00 In regard to “The Marquee” Between and including the last Saturday within May until and including the last Saturday of September of the same year, that is limited: (a) to only a total of 10 Saturday’s within such period; and (b) not on consecutive Saturday’s. Saturday 12.00 to 23.00 · Provision of Recorded Music (Indoors) In regard to “The Lodge” only New Years Eve until 00.30 · Late Night Refreshment New Years Eve 23.00 to 00.00 The Premises Licence will be subject to the Conditions of Licence as annexed to this decision notice and all applicable mandatory licence conditions. The Sub Committee have listened very carefully to all representations made today and read very carefully all the written representations received. The Sub-Committee had regard to the 33 A4-sized colour photographs and 2 A4 sized maps submitted at the hearing on behalf of some objecting residents – the admission of which was consented to by all parties. The Sub-Committee also had regard to the video footage submitted on behalf of some of the objecting residents. The Sub Committee have considered all four Licensing Objectives, the Licensing Act 2003, the revised Home Office Guidance, and Caerphilly Council’s Licensing Policy. The reasons for the Sub Committee’s decision are as follows. Fundamental Issues The Sub-Committee firstly determined a series of aspects of the application and challenges to it raised by various residents. The Sub-Committee was always aware that the part of the premises comprising “The Lodge” (premises plan on Page 1 of Appendix 1 of the report) is already a licensed premises pursuant to a delegated grant in 2021. The 2021 premises licence was granted under delegated powers to Mr Marcus Hobbs and Mrs Lisa Hobbs, rather than the current applicant (Sunset Lodge Weddings Limited). The Sub-Committee determined that there was no express limitation within the Licensing Act 2003 that prevents the same premises being subject to more than one premises licence at the same time. The Sub-Committee are unaware, and were not referred to, any case law that has interpreted the relevant provisions of the Licensing Act 2003 that would prevent the same. Various local residents objected to the application being treated by the licensing authority as an application for a new premises licence application rather than as a variation application. The residents submitted that it was open to the Sub-Committee to refuse the variation application and in turn revoke the 2021 premises licence for the part of the premises comprising “The Lodge”. The submission was reliant on the statutory guidance issued by the Home Office pursuant to section 182 of the Licensing Act 2003. The Sub-Committee were not persuaded by the residents’ submissions in the above respect for several reasons. The submissions did not deal with the difference in legal entity between the current holder of the 2021 premises licence and the legal entity, Sunset Lodge Weddings Limited, that had made the application currently being determined by the Sub-Committee. The Sub-Committee are of the view that section 34(1) of the Licensing Act 2003 is clear, in that only “the holder of a premises licence may apply to the relevant licensing authority for variation of the licence”. In this case, section 34(1) had not been engaged as the licence holder of the 2021 premises licence had not made the application currently before the Sub-Committee. The current application was entirely separate from the existing 2021 premises licence. Mr Marcus Hobbs and Mrs Lisa Hobbs have not sought to transfer the existing 2021 premises licence to Sunset Lodge Weddings Limited. The Sub-Committee concluded that even if it was wrong in this respect, section 36(6) was engaged in this instance and that a variation application cannot be made so as “to vary substantially the premises to which it relates”. This is reflected at paragraph 8.26 of the 2 most recent editions of the Revised Guidance issued under section 182 of the Licensing Act 2003. The Sub-Committee considered that the addition of “The Marquee” part of the premises, effectively increased the existing premises (“The Doghouse” aka “The Lodge”) by 270 m2. This was a substantial increase to the premises, supported further by the fact that it is not a physical extension of the existing “The Lodge” building but comprising a separate marque structure in a nearby field. The addition of “The Marquee” was also adding an additional tilled bar at which the sale of alcohol would take place within that part of the premises. The Sub-Committee were of the view that these aspects, if section 36(6) were to be engaged by section 35, via section 34(1) of the Licensing Act 2003, would amount to a substantial variation to the premises. An objecting resident had provided prior written representations that the existing 2021 premises licence was not/or should not be a premises licence, but rather a Club Premises Certificate. The Sub-Committee did not find that such submissions were relevant for two principal reasons. Firstly, such submission relates to the existing 2021 premises licence which is not held by the current applicant. Secondly, the Licensing Act 2003 makes separate provision for an application for a premises licence (Part 3 of the Act) or a Club Premises Certificate (Part 4 of the Act). The Mr and Mrs Hobbs in 2021 applied for a Premises Licence pursuant to Part 3 of the Licensing Act 2003, not a Club Premises Certificate. There is no provision within the Licensing Act 2003 for the Licensing Authority to unilaterally decide to treat an application made under Part 3 of the Act as one being made under Part 4 of the Act, or vice versa. A local resident raised an issue within their written submissions regarding the address the Applicant had placed within its required notices and advertisement pursuant to the relevant parts of the Licensing Act 2003 (Premises Licence and Club Premises Certificates) Regulation 2005. This principally rested on the inclusion within the address details “Troed y Rhiw Road”. The local resident indicated that there is no such road contained within the Unique Property Reference Number (“UPRN”) register of Caerphilly County Borough Council and that this had caused confusion to local residents that had adversely affected local residents’ ability to make objections to the application within the consultation period. This written representation was not significantly expanded upon during oral submissions. The Sub-Committee considered the details of Licensing Act 2003 (Premises Licence and Club Premises Certificates) Regulation 2005 in terms of the address. It specifically considered regulation 26(4)(b) which provides that the advertisement/notice must contain the postal address of the premises, if any, or if there is no postal address for the premises a description of those premises sufficient to enable the location and extent of the premises or club premises to be identified. The address on the advertisement/notice contained the farm name (Ty Cae Brith Farm), it contained a reference to Mynyddislwyn, and to the post code NP11 7BB. No reference is made to a local authorities UPRN register within such regulations. The combination of the farm name, Mynyddislwyn, and post code appears to comprise the postal address for the premises and in this respect the Sub-Committee did not find the submission persuasive. The Sub-Committee were not persuaded that the inclusion of “Troed y Rhiw Road” created the adverse effect alleged. Appendix 12 of the report clearly showed a significant number of local residents were aware of the new premises application and had provided representations opposing the grant. Further residents provided representations who were not included in the joint representation within Appendix 12. Troed y Rhiw Road emanates from an intersection with the B44521 Nine Mile Point Road within the nearby village of Wattsville. It forms the “murder mile” referred to in other representations made by residents. It appeared to be the main access road between the Mynyddislwyn church and the village of Wattsville. The Sub-Committee were of the view that the reference of Troed y Rhiw Road, in combination with the name of the farm and post code was very unlikely to cause any confusion to local residents. This aspect did not undermine the process for which the advertisement serves within the above regulations and Licensing Act 2003. The Sub-Committee determined that there was no persuasive evidence before it to place into doubt the Licensing Managers assertion that the Applicant had met all applicable requirements pursuant to the Licensing Act 2003 (Premises Licence and Club Premises Certificates) Regulation 2005. The Sub-Committee accepted that an A4 size notice was place in a prominent position in the appropriate place. Licensing Objectives The Sub-Committee considered the application and all of the evidence against the promotion of the four licensing objectives, namely: the prevention of crime and disorder, public safety, the prevention of public nuisance, and the protection of children from harm. It was of the view that the most pertinent of the four licensing objectives in this instance was public safety and the prevention of public nuisance. Crime and Disorder Gwent Police, the responsible authority with the greatest degree of awareness regarding the prevention of crime and disorder had not raised an objection to the application in light of proposed conditions of licence. Gwent Police indicated at the hearing that it did not believe that there was an existing issue with crime and disorder within Mynyddislwyn and had researched this prior to making its earlier written representation in regard to the application. The Sub-Committee heard evidence regarding a hen’s party that had been hosted within the Doghouse (being “The Lodge” part of the premises being applied for) that resulted in a group of women who were intoxicated walking down the highway from the venue making their way back to Pontllanfraith. They were alleged to have been loud and had knocked the door at an unsocial hour of at least one resident seeking directions. The Sub-Committee accepted that this incident appeared to be a form of lower-level disorder (anti-social behaviour). The directors of the Applicant accepted that in retrospect hosting the hen party was an error and a mistake they have not repeated. The Sub-Committee took into account that the incident complained of appeared to have been a one off. There was very little, if any, evidence that other events in, or patrons of, the Doghouse had resulted in similar behaviour notwithstanding the operation of the licensed premises since 2021. The Sub-Committee gave consideration to paragraph 2.1-2.5 of the Revised Guidance issued under section 182 of the Licensing Act 2003 (August 2023) (“Statutory Guidance”) and paragraphs 10.1-10.4 of the council’s licensing policy. The Sub-Committee took into account the proposed conditions of licence as set out within Appendix 27 of the report. Various conditions had been agreed by the Applicant that are addressed at avoiding crime and disorder arising from the licensable activities at the premises. The installation of CCTV and management of the same had been agreed with Gwent Police. Patron transport has received focused attention at proposed condition 21. Patron behaviour on the premises has been considered in the proposed conditions surrounding SIA door staff from 7pm, prescribed minimum bar staff, and obligations to risk assess the use of glass as opposed to polycarbonate receptacles. The Sub-Committee was guided by paragraph 2.26 of the Statutory Guidance, that states: “Beyond the immediate area surrounding the premises, these are matters for the personal responsibility of individuals under the law. An individual who engages in antisocial behaviour is accountable in their own right….”. The Sub-Committee were aware that this aspect of the guidance is principally aimed at the prevention of public nuisance but reached the view that the same rationale would apply to instances of low-level disorder. The Sub-Committee in this instance, had sufficient confidence that the prevention of crime and disorder would be promoted by the conditions of licence imposed within the annex to this decision notice. The Sub-Committee did not reach the view that the risk of failure to promote the licensing objective to prevent crime and disorder was sufficiently high to warrant refusing the application. The Protection of Children from Harm The Sub-committee noted that the only aspect relevant to this licensing objective within the Responsible Authorities representations was from Trading Standards regarding proxy sales of alcohol to minor within the premises. An agreed condition of licence regarding the same had been included within Appendix 27. Residents made submissions as to the safety of children from physical harm due to the premises (in particular “The Marquee” part of the premises) being in relatively close proximity to farm animals housed in neighbouring fields to Ty Cae Brith Farm. A representative on behalf of a neighbouring resident recounted an alleged incursion by a small group of children into their field housing Alpaca’s during an event hosted at Ty Cae Brith Farm. The children were placed at physical risk of harm due to the risk of being injured by the Alpacas due to the situation. Details of the alleged incident were scant, and no direct evidence of this incident was provided via written representations or in oral submissions at the hearing. No details were provided as to how the children had managed to gain access to the field (presumed to be by climbing the stock fence), whether this had occurred in the afternoon or evening hours. There was no evidence that the alleged incident had occurred repeatedly. The Sub-Committee noted that the Environmental Health – Health and Safety Officer had not flagged this issue as a concern within his written representations or orally at the hearing. The Sub-Committee considered the above in the context of the proposed licence conditions. During the evening hours for wedding receptions in “The Marquee” there would be as a minimum, two door staff and three bar staff. Persons within this group would be responsible for checking the external areas of the premises and also for monitoring noise in fields further away from the premises at regular intervals during the reception. This would reduce the risk of children wandering away from the immediate area of the premises (primarily “The Marquee”). Significantly, there would be a positive obligation under the conditions of licence for all children to be supervised by a responsible adult during the licensable activity and the designate premises supervisor and personal licence holder will be obliged to take steps to ensure that this condition is not breached. The Sub-Committee reached the view that the risk to the promotion of the protection of children from harm in this regard could be managed by the suggested conditions of licence The Sub-Committee did not reach the view that the risk of physical harm to children caused by their entry onto neighbouring farms was sufficiently high, or inherently unmanageable, as to warrant refusing the application. Public safety The application was opposed by many, if not all, local residents and local members (who spoke at the hearing) due to the risk to public safety due to the increase of traffic upon the narrow country lane(s) that patrons of the premises, particularly guests attending wedding receptions within “The Marquee”, would cause getting to and from the premises. Clear evidence was submitted and shown to the Sub-Committee as to the nature and condition of the public highway. The Applicant had provided a partial copy of traffic report compiled by Asbritransport – Transport Planning Consultants regarding the effect of the intended operation of the premises on local road conditions. The report appeared to be produced in respect of a planning application. The Sub-Committee found this report helpful but not determinative on this issue. The Sub-Committee took into account the resident’s criticisms of the report methodology (for instance only tracking traffic on the highway to the south of the Mynyddislwyn church – which was not reflective of potential interference with usual traffic patterns on the highway on the northern side of the church). The Sub-Committee noted that the report not extensively, if at all, deal with farm related traffic on the highway such as tractors and other machinery using the highway to gain access to various fields for various tasks throughout the farming calendar (this aspect also being highlighted by a local resident at the hearing in terms of hay production). The Sub-committee did not give significant weight to the evidence/submissions provided by objecting residents as to problems with articulated lorries within the lanes, particularly around the church horse-shoe dry walled blind bend. This was not intended with any disrespect to the local community for which the concern as to articulated lorries (and like vehicles) damaging walls, vehicles, and hedges was prescient and understandable. However, the Sub-Committee did not take the view that traffic to the premises in relation to the licensable activities thereon would be using such large articulated vehicles. The Sub-Committee did take the collision data within the Asbritransport into account, affording this some weight within its decision making. The Sub-Committee accepted that it was likely that the traffic level on the rural lane would increase, should the licence be granted, than the traffic level during the period the data is collected from (2017-2021). The data on pages 21-22 of Appendix 26 indicated that collisions over the last several years did not occur within the country lane itself, but principally occurred at the intersection of the lane with the larger volume highways. The collision sites noted for the relevant roundabout on the northern entrance of the lane are spread across all four points of the roundabout and do not clearly indicate a causal connection to the use of the lane itself. Whilst the Sub-Committee accepts the evidence provided by residents as to the accident involving an unoccupied and stationary vehicle with a reversing lorry in close proximity to the church, this seems to not have meet the definition of traffic collision adopted by Asbrtransport. Whilst driving conditions on the highway across Mynyddislwyn are challenging, there does not appear to be a current issue with vehicle collisions upon the lane. Whilst the Sub-Committee took account of the 60 mph speed limit applicable to the relevant highway (lane) it was difficult for it to accept that drivers, even those unfamiliar with the road, would seek to drive that road at such speed. A common-sense assumption is that the vast majority of drivers tend to drive to the conditions around them, trying to ensure that they remain safe. There was no obvious reason for the assumption to be made that guests, driving to a wedding reception at “The Marquee,”, would not behave in this usual manner. It was a common-sense assumption to make that local couples, with a connection to the area, would be the most likely to hire “The Marquee” for their wedding reception. As such, it would be common sense to expect that a number of guests attending would be familiar with the general area, if not with the specific road itself, and the prevalence of narrow country lanes into rural areas of the borough. Guests arriving from outside the borough may also be familiar with the prevalence of country lanes within the highway network and the tendency for these to arise when traveling across rural parts of the highway network. It was difficult for the Sub-Committee to get a sense of the volume of traffic that would be generated from an event held at “The Marquee” for 150 people. The Asbitransport report includes a breakdown of their assumptions as to the number of passengers per vehicle. A proportion of the objecting residents were critical of the Asbitransport assumptions in this regard. The Sub-Committee did accept that clusters of arriving traffic would occur within a relatively short time window to arrive in time for the commencement of the wedding reception and, later, but perhaps to a lesser degree, further guests arriving later to the evening party which normally follows the afternoon’s proceedings. However, the Sub-Committee gave significant weight to the applicant directors running similar sized events under recent Temporary Event Notices – of which there was no evidence that the promotion of public safety had been undermined due to traffic conditions on the rural lane arising from such events. Ultimately, the Sub-Committee had to take a view as to whether the concerns regarding highway safety due to traffic concerns upon a public highway was sufficiently connected to the remit of the Licensing Act 2003. It decided that it was not. The Sub-Committee reached the view that the proper determination of issues raised by the resident objectors and elected members in regard to their concerns as to the effect of the use of Ty Cae Brith Farm as a venue for events within “The Marquee” on the public highway rests with the local authority’s planning section. In reaching this view the Sub-Committee took account that this area of dispute would require a level of specialist knowledge and experience of traffic management and highway issues – which is generally beyond the scope and expertise of the Sub-Committee for licensing. The Sub-Committee gave weight to a local authority’s highway section/officer is not listed as a responsible authority pursuant to section 13(4) of the Licensing Act 2003. The Sub-Committee noted that the local planning authority is a responsible authority and in this instance it was made aware of the application but provided no representations in respect of the application. The Sub-Committee gave weight to the local planning authority being able to take in a far broader range of considerations in determining permission for the use of land – with the Sub-Committee being limited to the narrower considerations of the promotions of the four licensing objectives. The Sub-Committee had several written and oral submissions placed before it regarding the planning status for the use of the land and for the structures comprising the premises. Whilst the frustration of the residents was clearly evident, the licensing regime and planning regime are separate, and whilst often each touches on a number of similar issues the decision making in each is not the same. Paragraph 14.63 of the Statutory Guidance and paragraphs 17.6-17.12 of the council’s Statement of Licensing Policy reinforces the principal that planning committees are not bound by licensing committee decisions or vice versa. Representations were made on behalf of the objecting residents that in essence licensing should not grant a licence to a premises without planning approval – but the Sub-Committee were not persuaded by that submission. There is no provision in the Licensing Act 2003 that enables the Sub-Committee to refuse on such a basis, as a contested application can only be determined by the Sub-Committee exercising its judgement on the promotion of the four licensing objectives. The Sub-Committee considered the representations in regards to the increased risk of drink driving from the premises not promoting the licensing objective of public safety. In exercising its judgement, the Sub-Committee took into account the representations from Gwent Police did not identify this as a current issue or whether this was a likely eventuality. The Sub-Committee decided that the additional condition of licence at paragraph 21 of Appendix 27 would mitigate this risk. The Applicant is obliged to “turning the mind” of the organisers of the wedding reception/hires of “The Marquee” venue as to the organisation of transport at a very early point in the booking process. It is usual to expect that the Applicant would provide contact details for local taxi/private hire vehicles and these would inevitably be to hand should staff be asked for these from a guest. The Sub-Committee took a common sense view that a lot of groups attending such events organise a designated driver and guests have a tendency to share taxis when leaving the premises. The risk identified cannot be entirely removed by any licence holder, but in this instance the Sub-Committee were satisfied that the proposed licence conditions will adequately manage this ever-present risk to the promotion of the prevention of public safety. The Sub-Committee considered the maps provided of Ty Brith Farm and considered the distances from the public highway to the car park, and from the car park to both part of the Premises. It considered the representations of the Environmental Health – Health & Safety officer and his recommendation of license condition 16. However, given the rural location and the land comprising farm land the Sub-Committee determined that in order to promote the objective of public safety sufficiently the obligation in license condition 16 should extend and include the route from the entrance of Ty Brith Farm from the public highway, to the car park, and from the car park to “The Lodge” and “The Marquee” whilst licensable activities are taking place. Licence condition 16 was accordingly varied. Prevention of Public Nuisance The objecting residents and elected members submitted that the noise of the premises (which includes the noise emanating from both parts of the premises from music, general patron noise, traffic noise), the congestion of the rural lane by guests travelling to and from premises, and the effect on livestock – undermine the promotion of this licensing objective. In terms of the effect of the noise on livestock, the Sub-Committee considered whether this could fall within the wide definition of public nuisance. The Sub-Committee was mindful that what would amount to a private nuisance would not usually amount to a public nuisance – but gave regard to paragraphs 2.20-2.21 of the Statutory Guidance and the decision within Hope & Glory as to the threshold for public nuisance. The Sub-Committee reached the view that if a small number of local farmers were being caused nuisance as a result of the noise then this would equate to a public nuisance. The Sub-Committee considered the representations on the effect of noise on the livestock. It determined that should an adverse effect be experienced by the livestock – then this in and of itself would not be a public nuisance. The adverse effect would need to materially affect the reasonable comfort and convenience of life for the affected person (as opposed to livestock). The Sub-Committee, in this instance were not persuaded that the relevant objecting residents had shown this to be likely. There was very little detail provided on this aspect within the written representations and the oral submissions focused on the alleged increase of miscarriages within Alpaca breeding stock near the premises, which appeared to the panel to effect a single local resident. The Sub-Committee were not persuaded that the single farmer’s concerns in this specific regard (Alpaca miscarriage) amounted to a public nuisance. The Sub-Committee felt that this would be a possible private nuisance – and would be a further instance where the constraints of the licensing regime can be contrasted by the far wider relevant information that could be taken into account within the planning permission regime. This view was not reached without empathy to the Alpaca farmer, who inevitably devotes significant attention and care to his/her stock. In exercising its judgement as to the potential for traffic noise late at night and whether this would undermine the promotion of the licensing objective, the Sub-Committee took into account paragraph 2.26 of the Statutory Guidance and paragraph 11.7 of the council’s Statement of Licensing Policy. The Applicant would not be expected to control the noise of guests’ vehicles as they use the public highway (and the same would apply should they be on foot). The Sub-Committee was not overwhelmingly persuaded that the traffic noise would be a public nuisance as it is very difficult to determine whether the lawful use of the public highway by road users would be unreasonable to the extent that persons cannot be expected to put up with it. The fact that the country lane is part of the national highway network was a significant factor in the Sub-Committee’s view. The Sub-Committee accepted that should the public highway be used for purposes that it perhaps not intended, for instance vehicles parked inappropriately on a public highway, blocking traffic, to attend an illegal rave would be capable of causing a public nuisance. However, the Sub-Committee did not believe that this premises posed a similar risk. The Applicant is providing parking spaces within his land and no issue as to the highway being blocked by inappropriately parked cars on the highway was raised as a result for any activity under the 2021 current licence or Temporary Events Notice events. The Sub-Committee readily accepted that the potential for nuisance emanating from the premises posed a risk to the promotion of the prevention of public nuisance. The Sub-Committee took into account the rural setting of the premises and the low level of background noise. Representations from residents varied in the respect of the degree and effect of noise levels experienced to date by licensable activities within “The Lodge” part of the premises (under the 2021 premises licence) and under the Temporary Event Notice events. Some residents accepted that the noise would not usually carry as far as their homes but depending on the direction of wind – have previously been heard. Some residents described the noise as horrendous. The Sub-Committee gave weight to the representations of the Environmental Health Officer and her lack of objection to the application based on conditions agreed with the Applicant. Mr Waters information as to distances and elevation of neighbouring farms was helpful. In exercising its judgement, the Sub-Committee gave weight to the Environmental Health Officer undertaking a site visit at the Applicant’s farm and at the site of the premises prior to making her written representations. She had directly experienced the landscape surrounding the premises and would have been factored into her report and recommendations. The Sub-Committee found that the Applicant had been cooperative and to an extent, proactive, in trying to minimise noise issues. The Sub-Committee gave weight to the type of audio equipment purchased to be used within “The Marquee” that would lower the level of escaping noise. The contents of the noise management plan produced by the Applicant had currently been agreed by the Environmental Health Officer. The Applicant had sought the cooperation of neighbouring residents in trying to address the noise issue from recorded music within “The Marquee” and explained the master control over the audio volume level the bar staff are able to access. The Applicant had agreed to a series of licensing conditions in regard to minimising the risk of noise nuisance and explained steps it had taken to remove external speakers from the exterior parts of “The Lodge”. Some representations on behalf of objecting residents in relation to noise heard from Temporary Notice Events were equivocal. The Sub-Committee considered the series of text exchanges set out on pages 45, 46 and 50 of Appendix 13. It is likely only part of the exchange has been provided, but within the sections provided the Applicant is trying to establish if the noise is creating a disturbance. The resident or residents indicate that they can hear the music, or it can be heard if a window is opened. The hearing of the music does not determine whether or not, objectively the noise materially affects the reasonable comfort and convenience of the resident’s life, or if the level of noise is itself unreasonable. Neither text exchange shows the resident insisting to the Applicant that there was a nuisance being caused to him/her. The Sub-Committee gave significant weight that no service requests had been made to Environmental Health in regard to alleged noise nuisance since licensable activities commenced at the farm. The Sub-Committee were not persuaded that the reason for this was out of a fear of retribution from the Applicant directors and no evidence was provided that corroborated this assertion made on behalf of objecting residents. The Sub-Committee gave weight to the limited dates the Applicant was seeking to be able to use “The Marquee” and the controls it was willing to put in place to mitigate the risk of this licensing objective being undermined. It gave weight to that licensing regime enabling the licence to be reviewed should the promotion of the licensing objectives be alleged to be undermined in the future. This affords objecting residents, and responsible authorities, an avenue to ensure the promotion of the licensing objectives in the future. On balance, and subject to the amendments to the operating times and licence conditions explained further below – the Sub-Committee judged that the risk to the promotion of the prevention of public nuisance could be adequately managed if the premises application was granted. Ancillary Matters The Sub-Committee found the explanations provided by the Applicant directors as to their use of “The Lodge” part of the premises under the 2021 far from convincing. It shared the view of several residents and elected members that explanation of the use of this premises for family and friends whilst carrying out the licensable activity of the sale of alcohol to be highly unusual. It found the Applicant director’s position on this lacked clarity and did not appear candid It accepted however, that simply because a premises is licensed does not mean that a licensed activity can be its only use for such premises and there was no obligation on a premises licence holder to trade. Whilst not directly relevant to the application before it, the Sub-Committee was very concerned that the existing premises under the 2021 licence had not been subject to a Fire Risk Assessment pursuant to the obligations arising under the Fire Safety Order. There were several instances in the documentary evidence before the Sub-Committee where representations made by the Applicant were inconsistent. However, the above was only of limited relevance to the determination of the current application. There is no separate “fitness” test for whether the Applicant is fit to hold the premises licence. The general confidence a licensing committee can have in an applicant’s ability to promote the four licensing objectives is however a relevant assessment as part of the application process. The licensing objective may be undermined due to the applicant appearing incompetent or incapable of promoting the objectives. Given the above, the Sub-Committee did have reservations in regard to the Applicant that it felt warranted adjustment to the operating hours and licence conditions to adequately safeguard the promotion of the licensing objectives. During the consultation period it was evident that in relation to “The Marquee” it was intended for the wedding receptions to terminate at 23.30 (see page 8 of Appendix 7 under “Dispersal of Customers”). Notwithstanding the sale of alcohol for “The Marquee” was sought until 00.00. The Sub-Committee have reached the view that for “The Marquee” the supply of alcohol (on/off sales) will only be permitted to 23.00. This will allow guests to finish drinks and make their way to the taxi point or their cars to travel home. To further assist in the termination of the reception at 23.30 the Sub-Committee has refused permission for recorded music within “The Marquee” to continue after 23.00. On these two measures the Sub-Committee determined that these measures were needed to bring the licence “into line” with what the Applicant states his intention is and is required to manage the risk of noise nuisance emanating from “The Marquee” at a late hour. Given the above, the Sub-Committee sought to amend licence condition 11 by requiring outdoor areas of “The Marquee” to cease being used at 22.00. This would then be consistent with the Applicant’s Noise Management Plan (page 7 of Appendix 7). In the Sub-Committee’s judgement this was necessary to further ensure the adequate promotion of the prevention of public nuisance objective. The Sub-Committee was repeatedly told by the Applicant that the use of The Lodge was only for family and friends of its current directors, and it was not trading as a public house. The Sub-Committee accepted that there had been issues connected to the use of this part of the premises, which the Applicant appeared to accept and explain that the external speaker system had been removed earlier in the year. The Applicant, rightly, provided separate consideration to the noise risk from the Lodge within the Noise Management Plan at pages 9 and 10 of Appendix 7. The Applicant had further clarified that since making the application it had altered its original plan to conduct smaller wedding receptions and possibly wedding ceremonies within The Lodge. As outlined above, the Sub-Committee had some reservations in its confidence in the Applicant directors due to the unusual explanation of the use of the part of the premises under the existing 2021 licence and the inconsistent elements of its position across the consultation period on various aspects of the application. The Sub-Committee took account of the Applicant’s indication within the Noise Management Plan for The Lodge to close its external areas at 22.00 and it agreed that this would be appropriate and licence condition 10 at Appendix was varied accordingly. Given the intended use of “The Lodge” is to sell alcohol to family and friends the Sub-Committee reached the view that the hours for licensable activities were excessive. The Sub-Committee have determined to shorten the on/off alcohol sales to 23.00 – being consistent with “The Marquee” hours. This will reduce the risk of patron noise undermining the prevention of public nuisance objective within this particular area of the borough. To further prevent undermining the same objective, the Sub-Committee did not agree to allow recorded music, as a licensable activity, to take place within “The Lodge” beyond the statutory permitted time of 23.00. In line with this position, the Sub-Committee did not agree to grant permission to allow unamplified live music within “The Lodge” beyond the statutory limit of 23.00. In line with the above decisions, and to promote the prevention of public nuisance from very late-night patron noise, the Sub-Committee did not grant permission for Late Night Refreshments in “The Lodge” and the sale of any hot drinks and food within could not take place after 23.00. An exception was made for New Years Eve until 00.00. The Sub-Committee acknowledge that “The Marquee” use creates a higher risk for public nuisance than “The Lodge”. Whilst it was encouraged by the Applicant’s indication to only use this on Saturdays between May and September – the frequency of receptions varied across the Applicants various documents. The Sub-Committee considered the Applicant’s information on page 9 of Appendix 26 and were not persuaded that the period open for “The Marquee” use needed to be any earlier than the last Saturday in May. It was incredulous that the initial weeks of May were required to sell alcohol from “The Marquee” to those who erected it. The limitation of the period from the final Saturday in May until the final Saturday in September was, in the judgement of the Sub-Committee necessary to promote the prevention of public nuisance. It would limit the period in which any such risks would eventuate. Similarly, the Applicant was confused as to the number of receptions it would wish to hold in “The Marquee” during the May-September “season”. It varied from 5 to 16 depending on which documents was being read. The Sub-Committee accepted that the Applicant was “feeling its way” in a new business – but the Sub-Committee were of the firm view an actual numerical limit needed to be placed within the premises licence itself. The risk profile in terms of undermining the licensing objectives for “The Marquee” use each Saturday across May to the end of September was vastly different to a limitation of 10 Saturday receptions from the end of May until the end of September. It determined a maximum of 10 Saturday’s, not on consecutive Saturdays, was a proportionate measure to promote the prevention of public nuisance licensing objective. This would allow potential growth for the Applicant over the coming years should the venture succeed. It would allow periods of respite for the local community across the “season”. Another ancillary issue arising in the hearing was the allegation against the Applicant directors that they had breached the mandatory licence condition of their 2021 premises licence by carrying out an irresponsible drinks’ promotion. It was not the task of the Sub-Committee to make any finding as to whether Mr and Mrs Hobbs had breached the relevant mandatory licence condition of their 2021 premises licence. The purpose of the hearing was to determine the Applicant’s application. The Sub-Committee took the view that the allegation may have some bearing on the current application only in as much as going to the general confidence it has in the Applicant promoting the licensing objectives. The Applicant directors stated that patrons at the relevant event were seated at table of around 8 people. Drinks were resupplied only when all guests at the table had finished their current drink and no “stacking” of drinks was permitted. Around halfway through the 2-hour event a hog roast was served to the guests. It was claimed that the guests were largely known to each other and, it was alleged that all were family and friends of Mr and Mrs Hobbs. However, the Sub Committee were troubled by several aspects of this event, particularly regarding the type of advert placed on snap chat, and the suggestion that this was aimed only at family and friends. The Sub-Committee were aware that issues regarding irresponsible drink promotions would be determined on the facts of each instance, and that it would expect the Licensing Authority to monitor this type of promotion in the future, involving the premises. A submission was made on behalf of some residents that the use of tables in the “Bottomless Brunch” event made it somehow transgress the law. The Sub-Committee do not agree. The original incarnation of The Licensing Act 2003 (Mandatory Licensing Conditions) Order 2010 provided that provision of unlimited or unspecified quantities of alcohol for a fixed fee would not be a breach of such condition where this was made available to an individual in respect of alcohol for consumption at a table meal. In 2014 the Order was amended and the previous the wording included within article 1(2)(b) regarding alcohol for consumption at a table meal was removed. This does not mean the presence of a table meal determines whether a breach has occurred or not – but rather the assessment of all relevant surrounding circumstances need to be taken into consideration in determining whether the mandatory licence condition was breached by creating a significant risk of the four licensing objectives being breached or undermined. For the sake of completeness, there was mention throughout the hearing documentation and within several verbal representations about a maximum number of guests. It is noted that the Applicant has not yet had a fire risk assessment undertaken pursuant to the Fire Safety Order, which would indicate a maximum capacity number in line with the assessed fire risk. The Sub-Committee is mindful that article 43 of The Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 would render any condition of licence imposed by the Sub-Committee to have no effect. Any person aggrieved by this decision has 21 days from the date of written notification of the decision to appeal to the local Magistrates Court. Signed Cllr Cllr Clerk to the Committee Date ___2nd October 2023. ANNEX Conditions of Licence • CCTV shall be in use at the premises. (i) Where a CCTV system is to be installed, extended or replaced, it shall be to an appropriate standard as agreed with the Licensing Authority in consultation with the Police. Where a CCTV system is to be installed, it shall be fully operational by the day the licence is granted. (ii) The CCTV equipment shall be maintained in good working order and continually record when licensable activity takes place and for a period of two hours afterwards. (iii) The premises licence holder shall ensure images from the CCTV are retained for a period of 30 days. This image retention period may be reviewed as appropriate by the Licensing Authority. (iv) The correct time and date will be generated onto both the recording and the real time image screen. (v) If the CCTV equipment (including any mobile units in use at the premises) breaks down the Premises Licence Holder shall ensure the designated premises supervisor, or in his/her absence other responsible person, verbally informs the Licensing Authority and the Police as soon as is reasonably practicable. This information shall be contemporaneously recorded in the incident report register and shall include the time, date and means this was done and to whom the information was reported. Equipment failures shall be repaired or replaced as soon as is reasonably practicable and without undue delay. The Licensing Authority and the Police shall be informed when faults are rectified. (vi) The premise licence holder shall ensure that there are trained members of staff available during licensable hours to be able to reproduce and download CCTV images into a removable format at the request of any authorised officer of the Licensing Authority or a constable. (vii) The system shall also record clear images permitting the identification of individuals and be of evidential quality. (viii)There shall be clear signage indicating that CCTV equipment is in use and recording at the premises during operating hours. CCTV shall cover all areas the Public have access. • For events held in the Marquee, there will be a minimum of two SIA registered door staff from 19:00 hrs . The premises license holder/ DPS will risk assess the need for an earlier start time of door staff depending on the number of day guests. If door supervisors are present then the premises licence holder shall ensure that the following details for each door supervisor, are contemporaneously entered into a bound register kept for that purpose: (i) Full name; (ii) SIA Certificate number and or badge number, or registration number of any accreditation scheme recognised by the Licensing Authority (including expiry date of that registration or accreditation); (iii) The time they began their duty; The time they completed their duty. (v) This register is to be kept at the premises at all times and shall be so maintained as to enable an authorised officer of the Licensing Authority or a constable to establish the particulars of all door stewards engaged at the premises during the period of not less than 31 days prior to the request and shall be open to inspection by authorised officers of the Licensing Authority or a constable upon request. • A Challenge 25 scheme will be adopted in compliance with the age verification condition: Customers who appear be under 25 years of age will be required to prove their age when purchasing alcohol. Suitable forms of identification will be a passport, ‘Pass’ card or other identification recognized by the licensing authority in its statement of licensing policy. (b)Publicity materials notifying customers of the operation of the Challenge 25 scheme shall be displayed at the premises, including a Challenge 25 sign of at least A5 size at the entrance to the premises / marquee and where practicable at each point of sale. • All staff to be trained in the prevention of underage sales to a level commensurate with their duties. All such training to be updated as necessary, for instances when legislation changes, and should include training on how to deal with difficult. customers. The training should be clearly documented and signed and dated by both the trainer and the member of staff receiving it. The documentation shall be available for inspection on request by an authorised officer of the Licensing Authority or a constable. All records shall be kept for a period of 12 months. • The premises licence holder shall keep an ‘incident / refusals’ logbook in a bound book in which full details of all incidents are recorded. This shall include details of any refused sales and shall give details of the persons involved, incident description, time and date, actions taken and final outcome of the situation. This shall be completed as soon as possible and, in any case, no later than the close of business on the day of the incident. The time and date when the report was completed, and by whom, is to form part of the entry. The logbook is to be kept on the premises at all times and shall be produced to an authorised officer of the Licensing Authority or a constable when required. These records shall be kept for a minimum of 12 months. • All children to be supervised by a responsible adult during any licensable activity. • The Premises License Holder, Designated Premises Supervisor shall produce a noise management plan to adequately control noise from the premises. This is to include both internal and external areas and to be submitted and agreed in writing with the Pollution Control Team in Environmental Health. The noise management plan should include but is not limited to: • A list of mitigation measures implemented to reduce noise from the licensable premises, • Regular monitoring at the boundary perimeter during periods of amplified/unamplified entertainment, to ensure noise is not at a level to cause a nuisance at residential receptors, • Training of staff to undertake such observations and implement controls to reduce noise level, • To implement corrective actions to control noise during licensable hours, • Maintaining a written record of such observations and actions taken, to be kept for review upon request by any responsible authorities. This document once agreed should be enforced and updated regularly to ensure the continued compliance with the premises license. • The volume of amplified/unamplified live and recorded regulated entertainment must be at a level so as not to cause a nuisance at the nearest residential property. • Adequate notices shall be displayed in appropriate locations to instruct customers at each exit to respect the needs of local residents and leave the premises quietly. • The use of all outdoor areas of the “Lodge” is not permitted after 22:00. Other than access solely for the use of a smoking area. The smoking area shall not exceed the capacity of 10 persons at any one-time post 22:00. • The use of all outdoor areas relating to the “Marquee” is not permitted after 22:00. Other than access/egress to the toilet facility or for the use of a smoking area. The smoking area shall not exceed the capacity of 10 persons at any one-time post 22:00. • The Premises License Holder shall ensure that a sufficient number of suitable receptacles are located in appropriate locations for the depositing of waste materials such as food wrappings, drinks containers, smoking-related litter, etc. by customers. • The access track from the tarmac road to the proposed marquee site must be maintained in a good condition and fit for purpose. • Suitable edge protection must be provided and maintained along the western area of the proposed marquee site to minimise the risk of a person falling. • Suitable signage must be displayed in the vicinity of the ponds warning of open water. • A suitable means of lighting must be provided along the traffic route between the entrance from the public highway to any car parking area, and the traffic route between the car parking area and the lodge and the marquee site whilst licensable activities are taking place. • A sufficient number of suitable receptacles must be sited in appropriate locations for the depositing of waste materials such as food, food wrappings, drinks containers, smoking related litter etc. 18 The Licence Holder, designated premises supervisor, manager or other competent person shall manage any outdoor area by regularly patrolling these areas to ensure that customers do not behave in a rowdy, noisy or offensive manner. • The Licence Holder, designated premises supervisor, manager or other competent person shall risk assess the need for alcoholic beverages to be dispensed in polycarbonate, plastic or non-glass containers when licensable activities are taking place. • The premises shall be cleared of customers within 30 minutes of the last supply of alcohol on any day. • The premises licence holder or other competent person shall ensure that customer transportation has been arranged and details provided prior to the event taking place, as part of the hiring agreement. • In relation to events in the marquee the additional measures will be in place: There will be a minimum of 3 bar staff on at any one time, 1 of which will be the bar manager as well as the DPS or licence holder. The bar staff will make regular checks of the outside area ensuring that glasses are collected. • All staff with a responsibility for supplying or selling alcohol shall be vigilant in preventing adults buying alcohol on behalf of persons who are under 18 and will refuse such sales where they suspect that this may be about to occur, subject to the exemptions under Section 149 (5) of the Licensing Act 2003 which allows beer, cider or wine to be purchased for an individual aged 16 or 17, providing the beer, cider or wine is for consumption with a table meal and that a person aged 18 or over is accompanying the individual.
RESOLVED that the application for a new premises licence as set out in Section 1.3 of the Licensing Manager’s report be REFUSED. In making their decision, the Sub Committee considered all four Licensing Objectives, the Licensing Act 2003, revised Home Office Guidance and Caerphilly Council’s Licensing Policy. The decision of the Licensing and Gambling Sub Committee today in respect of an application for a new premises licence at Pizza Bites is that the application for the licence is refused. The Sub Committee have listened very carefully to all representations made on 20 July 2023 and read very carefully all the written representations received. The Sub Committee have considered all four Licensing Objectives, the Licensing Act 2003, the revised Home Office Guidance, and Caerphilly Council’s Licensing Policy. The reasons for the Sub Committee’s decision are set out below. The application was for a licence to be permitted to provide Late Night Refreshment (indoors only) for the following hours: · Sunday to Thursday 23.00 to 24.00 and · Friday to Saturday 23.00 to 1.00. The applicant has been running a takeaway food business from the premises for approximately the last 2 years. The evidence was that his current trading hours are 16.00 to 22.59 daily and is a mix of food sold to walk-in customers and food cooked and delivered to customers via remote ordering. He employs 2 delivery drivers to deliver orders. The applicant’s evidence was that the bulk of his late evening night trade is takeaways that are delivered rather than walk in trade. The Sub Committee needed to consider all four Licensing Objectives in the context of the licensable activity. Some evidence placed before the Sub Committee was not relevant for this purpose. An example was the evidence regarding parking being an issue for residents and patrons along Penallta Road during the daytime or early evening. This evidence needed to be assessed in terms of its relevance to the proposed licensable activity, being the provision of Late Night Refreshment from the premises between 23.00 – 24.00, and 23.00 – 1.00. The relevance on some evidence to this limited issue was not always apparent. Based on the evidence before it the Sub Committee reached the view that there was no evidence in regard to the promotion of the protection of children from harm. There was limited evidence touching on the promotion of public safety and the prevention of crime and disorder. The promotion of the prevention of public nuisance was the most relevant of the 4 licensing objectives in determining this application. The Sub Committee gave significant weight to the evidence from the Environmental Health Officer (“EHO”) (Responsible Authority) and in assessing this evidence were mindful of paragraph 9.12 of the Home Office Revised Guidance issued under Section 182 of the Licensing Act 2003 (“the National Guidance”). The Sub Committee regarded the EHO as an expert in her respective field which included issues around public nuisance. The evidence from the EHO largely revolved around noise nuisance being caused by the noise of delivery drivers, their vehicles, noise from the premises itself, and from people using the business and loitering outside the premises that was likely to occur between the hours of 23.00-1.00. Her evidence was that the service she works for had received noise complaints about the applicant’s premises/business earlier in the year, but no response was received from the applicant when invited by letter to contact the service to discuss. At the hearing, the applicant denies the noise was caused in connection to his business at the premises and sought to blame residents of the House of Multiple Occupation above his premises for the noise. This assertion at the hearing was the first response the EHO has had to such invitation to discuss the complaints. The noise complaints from residents appeared to involve the excessive revving of vehicle engines outside the premises by late night customers and or delivery drivers, bins being emptied from the premises at a late hour, extraction fans from the premises, music from customer vehicles and the vehicles of delivery drivers, delivery driver’s use of car horns to indicate their arrival back to the premises in readiness for the next delivery, occasional shouting by individuals using the premises or working within the business at a late hour. The applicant flatly denied the vast majority, if not all of, the allegations of noise nuisance being caused from or in connection with the premises. The Sub Committee found that the resident’s evidence in this regard was more credible. Two residents who gave evidence live in very close proximity to the premises and have observed patterns of behaviour and noise across an extended period of time. The Sub Committee determined that they were very unlikely to be confused about the type of noise nuisance being experienced or the source of such noise. The explanation offered by the applicant at the hearing that the noise was caused by residents of a House of Multiple Occupancy above the premises, was not supported by records held by the EHO or the evidence from the local residents. The Sub Committee took into account that the applicant had failed to respond to the invitation by the EHO to discuss the noise complaints earlier in the year. In short, the evidence of the two local residents living in close proximity and the EHO was preferred to the evidence of the applicant in this respect. The Sub Committee considered paragraph 11.1 of its own policy and considered the noise complaints with a focus on the likely effect of the Late Night Refreshment activity at the specific premises on persons living in the area around the premises. The Sub Committee gave considerable weight to the fact that Penallta Road was a tight mix of commercial and residential properties. It found it relevant that the vast majority of businesses along that road would close by 23.00 or earlier. The residences of two residents making representations appeared to be within 25-30 metres or so from the premises. The Sub Committee reached the view that there was likely to be disproportionate and unreasonable noise disturbances from the premises to local residents should the premises licence be granted. The Sub Committee took into account that the hours between 23.00-24.00 and 23.00-1.00 were hours which most residents would usually be asleep or attempting to get to sleep. The extension of trading hours sought via the premises licence had a significant likelihood of this being regularly interrupted, given the late hours were sought across all 7 nights. The Sub Committee considered the submission from the EHO that she could not formulate conditions within the proposed operating schedule that would adequately uphold the promotion of the prevention of public nuisance. Whilst the Sub Committee acknowledged that the Licensing Act 2003 is a permissive regime and grants of licenses should take place where promotion of the four licensing objectives can be sufficiently safeguarded, it reached a similar conclusion as the EHO. The noise nuisance was unlikely to be able to be prevented due to the nature of the business and the specific location of the premises. They agreed with the EHO that the potential noise nuisance arising between 23.00-24.00 and 23.00-1.00 could not be contained within the premises and aspects of the likely noise nuisance (such as car engines, car horns, customer noise and the like) would be difficult for the applicant to adequately manage. The Sub Committee took into account paragraphs 11.6 and 11.7 of its policy. They were of the view that this was an application, due to the specific location of the premises and the nature of the business, where the applicant would need to demonstrate a high standard of control to minimise the potential for public nuisance. They expected that the operating schedule accompanying the application would demonstrate an understanding of the potential risk for noise nuisance and the measures proposed to manage the same. The only proposal to address the potential noise nuisance at the late hours between 23.00-1.00 and 23.00-24.00 was to place a sign reminding customers to respect the needs of local residents. The existing noise complaints received by the EHO from local residents earlier in the year and the lack of meaningful engagement by the applicant to resolve such complaints, and the lack of any response from the applicant to any representations other than those made by Gwent Police, undermined the confidence the Sub Committee has in the applicant’s ability, and motivation, to manage the potential noise nuisance should the premises licence be granted. Given the specific location of the premises and the nature of the business the significant risk of very late night noise nuisance appeared to be minimised and downplayed by the applicant at the hearing and was not an issue he sought to engage with, during the consultation process. The vast majority, if not all, noise issues highlighted to the applicant was explained away as not having anything to do with his business at the premises. The Sub Committee reached the view that the resident’s evidence that contradicted this to be credible. The Sub Committee considered nearby premises that do have a premises licence for Late Night Refreshments, as set out within paragraph 1.3.2. The Sub Committee asked the EHO if noise complaints or service requests had been made in relation to those premises, to which the evidence was that there were no records of any noise complaints. She indicated that there had been an odour complaint which appears to have been resolved. The Sub Committee felt that this was a distinguishing element between other nearby licensed premises and the applicant’s premises, in that the later had caused resident noise nuisance complaints being made earlier in the year, prior to any licence application, whereas the other premises had not. The Sub Committee were aware that different locations of premises, even when near to each other, can create different issues at either premises. The specific location of the applicant’s premises, within the one-way system, in an area where parking can be a concern, the inappropriate parking within the rear access lane to resident’s homes, distinguished it from locations of other licensed premises in the area. The Sub Committee heard evidence from two local residents about the proliferation of rubbish in the immediate area which is alleged to have emanated from the applicant’s shop. The Sub Committee took the view that such issue was capable of both causing a public nuisance and being a form of anti-social behaviour. The Sub Committee recognised that the National Guidance (at paragraph 2.21) acknowledges that beyond the immediate area surrounding the premises, the matter would be one of personal responsibility of individuals under the law and the applicant would have a diminishing responsibility for such behaviour the further away from the premises it occurred. The Sub Committee took into account the close proximity of the relevant residents to the premises and the throwing of half-eaten food and associated used food containers onto private property, or being discarded in the street. On balance the Sub Committee felt that this issue went to the confidence it could currently place on the applicant in promoting the licencing objectives, as the applicant had not recognised this potential issue within his initial operating schedule or sought to engage with representations regarding this issue, but ultimately this was not a major factor in the Sub Committee’s decision. The Sub Committee received evidence from residents and Gwent Police that was relevant to the promotion of the prevention of crime and disorder licensing objective. The evidence from Gwent Police indicated a number of reports of anti-social behaviour (“ASB”) within/from Penallta Road – namely 29 reported ASB incidents, and 11 crime reports, between June 2022 and June 2023. The Sub Committee were not presented with any evidence of the nature of the ASB incidents reported, including any trends within the ASB reports that would indicate a particular/reoccurring problem within Penallta Road. There was no similar information for the 11 reported crimes. It was simply a numerical indication for a geographic area. The Sub Committee heard evidence from a local resident in regard to his partner alleged to have been threatened within the premises with a knife by an unknown member of the public in April of this year. Despite this being reported and investigated by Gwent Police, no reference to such alleged occurrence within the representations from Gwent Police to the Licensing Authority. The Sub Committee found the resident credible but the lack of direct evidence from the alleged victim and corroborative information from Gwent Police placed the Sub Committee in the unenvious position of trying to determine what weight should be given to a potentially serious incident without the necessary depth of evidence required in order to determine the impact of this alleged occurrence on the promotion of the relevant licensing objective. Given this, no meaningful weight was placed on this aspect of the evidence in determining the application. A recurrent element throughout residents’ evidence and the evidence at the hearing from Gwent Police was that the premises and its immediate area has increasingly become an area of congregation of youths, often creating ASB issues. One resident explained that the congregations can start shortly after the school day ends, around 4pm and continue for several hours. The Sub Committee recognised that the accumulation of youths that congregate near the premises in the hours prior to the hours sought under the Late Night Refreshment licence would not necessarily be relevant to determining the application. For instance, if the congregations occur between 4pm – 9pm then this would not necessarily be relevant in determining the licence. The Sub Committee accepted that the congregations of youths was an issue – and therefore has the possible potential to continue later into the evening should the premises remain trading beyond 23.00 each evening. Notwithstanding, the Sub Committee gave this limited weight in reaching its decision, given there was no significant detailed evidence as to whether the congregations are still prevalent around 23.00 which made it more likely for this to undermine the relevant licensing objectives (prevention of public nuisance, prevention of disorder) in respect of the licence applied for. The Sub Committee noted that the applicant indicated that he has sought the license to be able to compete with local competitors who are licensed to provide Late Night Refreshment after 23.00. The Sub Committee understood such motivation but unfortunately this commercial consideration was not relevant in its consideration of the promotion of the relevant licensing objectives. The Sub Committee had to base its considerations on the specific site of the premises, the nature of the business, its confidence conditions of any licence would sufficiently promote the licensing objectives, and confidence in the applicant’s ability to ensure the promotion of the licensing objectives. The Sub Committee, in this instance, was not adequately satisfied that the licensing objectives, principally the promotion of the prevention of public nuisance, would be sufficiently promoted. The decision notice advised that any person aggrieved by the decision had the right to appeal to the local Magistrates Court within 21 days from the date of written notification of the decision. The meeting closed at 12.06 p.m. _______________________ CHAIR