Wrthi'n llwytho
Does dim crynodeb o'r cyfarfod hwn eto. Caiff un ei ysgrifennu pan fydd y cyngor yn cyhoeddi'r cofnodion. Mae'r agenda a'r papurau isod.
Apologies for absence were received from P.C Taylor (Gwent Police), S. Lewis-Williams (Licensing Authority), and D. Lewis (Children’s Services)
There were no declarations of interest made at the beginning or during the course of the meeting.
The Chairman opened the meeting and introductions were made. The Legal Advisor to the Sub-Committee outlined the procedure for the meeting and reported that Members had previously familiarised themselves with the report of the Licensing Manager, the application and plan of the premises together with the written submissions from the responsible authorities and Resident objection to the application. The Licensing Manager presented the report and outlined the application submitted for a Determination of Premises Licence Application in respect of Morgan Jones Bowling Club, Morgan Jones Park, Nantgarw Road, Caerphilly CF83 1AP. The application sought to permit the following Licensable Activities between the months of April to September each year: · Supply of Alcohol (On Sales only) · Monday to Sunday 12:00hrs to 21.00hrs The Committee were informed that the application underwent a 28-day consultation period, during which responsible authorities proposed conditions, as set out in the report. The applicant had agreed to all proposed conditions, and there were no objections from the responsible authorities. There had been one resident objection to the application, but the resident had detailed that he did not intend to attend the meeting. The objection was documented in the report bundle. Attention was drawn to the local policy considerations as set out in within the Licensing Officers report and to the way in which the Sub Committee should deal with the application. The Sub Committee were also referred to the recommendation set out in the report, which considered the position of the Responsible Authorities of the Applicant’s ability to promote the Licensing Objectives (particularly the promotion of the Prevention of Public Nuisance Licensing Objective). Members were advised that the applicant had been appraised of the comments of the Responsible Authorities and responses to those comments which could be found on pages 39 to 48 of the report. The Chair thanked the Officer and all parties present, were invited to ask questions. There were no questions for Licensing and the Chair invited representations from the Applicant. The Chair queried the plan within the report at 2.1 where the license permits the sale of alcohol. It was confirmed that this was the only plan that had been submitted with the application The Chair invited Mr Cavanagh to provide an update. It was confirmed that there was a separate plan that included the bowling green and benches outside There was a discussion about the plan submitted with the application, specifically whether it included the Bowling Green and benches outside. It was clarified that only the clubhouse and veranda area were included in the submitted plan at 1.2 of the report. Any additional plan that had not formed part of the application could not be considered and would need to be addressed separately. The Legal Advisor stated that if the application was successful then a new plan showing the Bowling Green and benches for the sale of alcohol could be submitted to the licensing team for further consultation. The Applicant was advised to consult with the Licensing team and Environmental Health team regarding the new plan to address potential public nuisance and if necessary, apply for a variation to the premises licence to include the Bowling Green and benches area. The Chair invited the Applicant to make their representations. The Applicant explained that the licence was to help generate funds for the club, with alcohol sales primarily occurring on Wednesdays and Saturdays, it was clarified that the clubhouse was small accommodating up to 32 people, and the drinking culture was limited to light refreshments after games. It was also confirmed that the licence application included all days of the week to provide flexibility in case of rain affecting scheduled games. A Member sought clarification that this was for Members only and away teams. It was confirmed that it was for Members and away teams only, with no off-sales provision. It was also discussed that there maybe a few spectators that may attend but the numbers would be low, and they would also be effectively managed. The Legal Advisor clarified that the application sought on-sales only, meaning alcohol cannot be taken off the premises. This aligns with the club’s intention to prevent alcohol from being consumed in the park. There were no further questions for the Applicant and the Chair invited the Environmental Health Pollution Officer to present their representations. The Officer from Environmental Health Pollution confirmed that the hours applied for were reasonable, the seasonal operation was appropriate, and the conditions offered by the applicant and agreed upon with Environmental Health and the Police were sufficient to address public nuisance concerns and confirmed that Environmental Health had no objections to the application provided conditions were met. It was also emphasised that there would need to be further consultation if the outdoor area was to be included in the licensed area to address potential public nuisance issues. The Chair thanked the Officer and all parties present, were invited to ask questions. The Legal Advisor sought confirmation as to whether there had been any noise complaints from this premises. The Officer confirmed that no noise complaints had been received from the premises in the last twelve months. There were no further questions for Environmental Health Pollution Officer. All parties were then afforded the opportunity to sum up before the Licensing and Gambling Sub Committee retired to make its decision. In closing the Licensing Manager summarized the responsible authorities’ positions and confirmed that the Responsible Authorities were satisfied with the application and the agreed conditions, indicating no objections from them and highlighted the resident’s objection and emphasised the need to consider it in the decision-making process despite the resident not attending the meeting. Members were asked to consider all the representations before them, the evidence heard at the meeting, and all Licensing guidance when making their decision. The Sub Committee were reminded of the need to consider the promotion of the Licensing Objectives and whether the applicant would be able to meet the same The Chair thanked the Licensing Manager and advised that whilst the resident objector was not present the objection recorded in the report would be taken into consideration with all the evidence and representations within the report. The Environmental Health Officer had nothing further to add other than further consideration would be needed if there were any changes to the external area. The Chair thanked Officers and invited the Applicant to sum up. Mr Cavanagh confirmed that the current application would be adequate for their needs but stated if they decided to change anything then they would look to submit an application for a variation to their licence. The Chair thanked all parties for their submissions and handed over to the Legal Advisor to explain the procedure. The Legal Advisor informed all parties present that the Sub Committee would retire to consider the representations made at the meeting and they would be informed in writing of the decision in the next 5 days. The Sub Committee retired at 10:26am to make its decision and all other parties left the meeting. Following consideration of the application for Premises Licence Application. After taking into account the evidence (both written and verbal) at the hearing the Sub-Committee agree to grant the premises application for: · Supply of alcohol (On Sales Only) · Monday to Sunday 12:00 hours to 21:00 hours subject to the conditions of licence as set out in Appendix 12 of Licensing’s written report. The Sub-Committee gave significant weight that all Responsible Authorities who had responded to the consultation had reached agreement with the Applicant as to how their concerns would be addressed – resulting in the Appendix 12 mediated conditions. The sole remaining objection was from a resident, touching on two of the four licensing objectives, namely the prevention of public nuisance and the protection of children from harm. The objecting resident did not take up the opportunity afforded to him to expand, clarify and or amplify his relevant representations made during the consultation period. As such, the evidence as to the resident’s concerns was limited to the details within Appendix 10 of the licensing report. The representation was essentially that the existing use of the bowls club to play bowls was already causing him significant noise nuisance some evenings and he submitted the provision of alcohol will worsen this. Furthermore, the service of alcohol at the premises in the park would cause harm to children as the premises is located between the children’s play area and the splash pad within Morgan Jones Park. The Sub-Committee did not find the resident’s objections to be persuasive. The evidence at the hearing from the Environmental Health Officer was that across the last summer bowling seasons there was no history of receiving any noise complaints from any local resident. The activity was largely limited to one evening per week – between the hours of 18:00-20:00 and Saturday’s between 14:30-17:30. Those hours were not unusual or beyond the reasonable expected time range for such an activity, and the infrequency of the use made the prospect of the resulting noise being a nuisance to be remote. The Sub-Committee, given the objecting resident had offered no substantive evidence, determined that there was not an existing noise nuisance issue which impacted the current application and its promotion of the licensing objective to prevent public nuisance. The Sub-Committee noted that the resident objection was a single objection. In terms of the alleged significant noise nuisance, it only related to the single resident. The Sub-Committee took into account that taking the limited evidence at its highest, it may give rise to a private nuisance between the resident and the Applicant (though for the initial reasons above – even this appeared highly unlikely)– but there was no current evidence before it that it constitutes a “public nuisance”. The alleged nuisance was not suggested by the resident to effect anyone other than himself alone. Taking all relevant matters into account, in the judgment of the Sub-Committee the conditions of the licence was adequate to effectively promote the licensing objective of preventing public nuisance. This was not an instance that the application should be refused. The Sub-Committee gave significant weight to the concerns raised by Child Protection had been resolved with the Applicant as part of the consultation process. It was evident that Child Protection had engaged in the consultation and was aware of the location of the premises and its immediate surroundings. The location of the premises between the children’ s playground and the splash pad were not something Child Protection flagged as a concern. The Sub-Committee were shown photos of the premises and bowling green and some of the surrounding area within Appendix 3 of the report. The premises is relatively secluded, and the playing greens being encompassed by a significant hedge. The application was for on sales of alcohol only – limiting the licensable activity to the modest clubhouse and its small veranda. Taking all this into account the Sub-Committee were not persuaded that the physical location of the premises between the children’s playground and splash pad undermined the licensing objective of protecting children from harm such that the application should be refused. The Sub-Committee were more than content that the inclusion of the proposed licencing conditions 3, 5 and 7 (Appendix 12) were sufficient to promote the licensing objective of protecting children from harm. Any party aggrieved by the Sub-Committee’s decision, who has standing, may within 21 days of receiving written notification of the decision appeal this decision to the Gwent Magistrates.
Rhaid i gynghorwyr ddweud pan fydd ganddyn nhw gysylltiad personol â rhywbeth sy'n cael ei drafod, fel swydd, eiddo neu aelod o'r teulu. Mae buddiant sy'n rhagfarnu yn ddigon cryf i'r cynghorydd adael yr ystafell fel arfer a pheidio â chymryd rhan.
Caiff datganiadau eu darllen o'r cofnodion unwaith y byddan nhw wedi'u cyhoeddi.
Dyw'r cyngor ddim wedi cofnodi presenoldeb ar gyfer y cyfarfod hwn.
Yn rhestru cynghorwyr presennol y cyngor yn unig. Nid yw aelodau cyfetholedig, swyddogion a chyn-gynghorwyr yn cael eu dangos.