Agenda item

Report No: LSC/WS/23/004

The Business Partner (Litigation/Licensing) welcomed all present to the Hearing, reported that no declarations of interest had been received and introductions to the Panel were made.

The following parties were present at the Hearing:

(a) Applicant – Gemma Bailey

(b) Applicant – Stewart Gibson

The Licensing Officer presented the report which explained that an application had been received for a new premises licence in respect Bridgelands Farm, Cowlinge.  A copy of the application was attached at Appendix A to Report No LSC/WS/23/004 together with plans at Appendix B.

Members were advised that nine representations were initially received from local residents objecting to the application. However, following amendments made to the application seven withdrew their objection, copies of the remaining two representations were attached as Appendix C.

The Licensing Officer also drew attention to the document attached as Appendix D, which set out drafted conditions in relation to the prevention of public nuisance. Furthermore, the applicant had also agreed to install a sound limiter for all music and amplified speech.

If the Licensing Authority decided that this application should be refused it would need to show that the grant of the licence would:

1.   Undermine the promotion of the licensing objectives; and

2.   That appropriate conditions would be ineffective in preventing the problems involved.

If the Licensing Authority could not show the above, then the application should be granted.

In making their decision, Members were also advised to consider the Licensing Act 2003, the Guidance on the Act and the Council’s Statement of Licensing Policy.

The Sub-Committee then heard the submissions from the individuals present.

In presenting his case for the applicant, Stewart Gibson drew attention to the two representations attached to the agenda and highlighted that the only remaining matter referenced by the local residents was their concern with the request for licensable activities to be permitted until 11.30pm Sunday – Thursday and their wish for it to terminate at 10.30pm instead.

He assured the Committee that there was no intention to operate events seven days a week and referenced the restrictions that were in place as a result of the planning permission that was granted for the premises.

The Sub-Committee was then given the opportunity to ask questions of the applicant.

Following which, the applicant was given the opportunity to sum up.

The applicants, the observing Members and the Licensing Officer then retired to another room to allow the Sub-Committee to give further consideration to the matter.

Following all parties’ return to the meeting room the Business Partner (Litigation/Licensing) advised on the Sub-Committee’s decision.

With the vote being unanimous, it was

RESOLVED:

That, having taken into account all representations received both in writing and orally, the Sub-Committee was satisfied that the granting of the licence together with the proposed conditions, the operating schedule and assurances of the applicant was sufficient to promote the licensing objectives. The application was therefore GRANTED as applied for.

The Business Partner (Litigation/Licensing) concluded the Hearing by advising on the Right of Appeal against the determination of the Authority.