Wrthi'n llwytho
Y penderfyniadau fel y mae cofnodion y cyngor yn eu cofnodi. Bydd crynodeb mewn iaith glir yn dilyn pan fydd wedi'i ysgrifennu.
RESOLVED – That the Sub Committee, having considered the application on its individual merits, the committee papers, the Licensing Act 2003, the Section 182 guidance, the council’s Statement of Licensing Policy, submissions made by the applicant and all other parties, and the oral evidence given by the applicant and objectors during the hearing in its determination of the matter, REFUSED the application. Members noted that the applicant demonstrated a significant lack of understanding of the licensing objectives and the legal requirements of the licensing regime. In particular, the applicant was unable to explain the licensing objectives when asked and provided inconsistent information regarding the operating hours of the premises. In particular, the applicant initially suggested that the premises had previously operated until 3am, which was later clarified as incorrect following advice from the Licensing Officer, and subsequently revised again during the hearing. The Sub Committee considered that this inconsistency reduced the weight that could be attached to the applicant’s evidence. Members further noted that the applicant was unable to provide clear or detailed explanations as to how the licensing objectives would be promoted. In particular, limited detail was provided in relation to staff training, with reliance placed on unspecified training to be delivered by a franchisor, without any clear understanding of its content or implementation. There was insufficient evidence of measures to manage customers during late night hours, including how difficult or intoxicated individuals would be dealt with. No robust dispersal policy or noise management measures were outlined, despite the premises seeking to operate until the early hours of the morning. The Sub Committee also found that the applicant did not demonstrate an understanding of the risks associated with late-night operation in a busy and densely populated area. The Sub Committee took into account the representations of the Ward Member, who highlighted existing issues on Crwys Road relating to noise, anti-social behaviour, and crime, particularly during late night hours. It was noted that the road already contained a substantial number of licensed premises and that residents had raised complaints about disturbance, waste management, and sleep disruption. The Sub Committee considered that the introduction of an additional premises operating until 3am was likely to add to the potential for noise and disturbance in the area, particularly in the absence of robust control measures. Whilst the Sub Committee acknowledged the applicant’s submission that the premises had not previously been the source of complaints, it gave this limited weight given that the premises had not been operating under a premises licence permitting late-night refreshment beyond 11pm. The Sub Committee also gave weight to the fact that this was the applicant’s first experience of the licensing process. However, this did not outweigh the concerns regarding the lack of understanding and the absence of appropriate safeguards. Having carefully considered all of the evidence, the Sub Committee was not satisfied that the applicant had demonstrated that the licensing objectives would be promoted. In particular, the Sub Committee found that granting the application would be likely to undermine the prevention of crime and disorder and the prevention of public nuisance, having regard to the nature of the area, the proposed hours, and the lack of adequate control measures. The Sub Committee resolved to refuse the application.
There were none.
Y penderfyniad fel y'i cofnodwyd
RESOLVED – That the Sub Committee, having considered the application on its individual merits, the committee papers, the Licensing Act 2003, the Section 182 guidance, the council’s Statement of Licensing Policy, submissions made by the applicant and all other parties, and the oral evidence given by the applicant and objectors during the hearing in its determination of the matter, REFUSED the application. Members noted that the applicant demonstrated a significant lack of understanding of the licensing objectives and the legal requirements of the licensing regime. In particular, the applicant was unable to explain the licensing objectives when asked and provided inconsistent information regarding the operating hours of the premises. In particular, the applicant initially suggested that the premises had previously operated until 3am, which was later clarified as incorrect following advice from the Licensing Officer, and subsequently revised again during the hearing. The Sub Committee considered that this inconsistency reduced the weight that could be attached to the applicant’s evidence. Members further noted that the applicant was unable to provide clear or detailed explanations as to how the licensing objectives would be promoted. In particular, limited detail was provided in relation to staff training, with reliance placed on unspecified training to be delivered by a franchisor, without any clear understanding of its content or implementation. There was insufficient evidence of measures to manage customers during late night hours, including how difficult or intoxicated individuals would be dealt with. No robust dispersal policy or noise management measures were outlined, despite the premises seeking to operate until the early hours of the morning. The Sub Committee also found that the applicant did not demonstrate an understanding of the risks associated with late-night operation in a busy and densely populated area. The Sub Committee took into account the representations of the Ward Member, who highlighted existing issues on Crwys Road relating to noise, anti-social behaviour, and crime, particularly during late night hours. It was noted that the road already contained a substantial number of licensed premises and that residents had raised complaints about disturbance, waste management, and sleep disruption. The Sub Committee considered that the introduction of an additional premises operating until 3am was likely to add to the potential for noise and disturbance in the area, particularly in the absence of robust control measures. Whilst the Sub Committee acknowledged the applicant’s submission that the premises had not previously been the source of complaints, it gave this limited weight given that the premises had not been operating under a premises licence permitting late-night refreshment beyond 11pm. The Sub Committee also gave weight to the fact that this was the applicant’s first experience of the licensing process. However, this did not outweigh the concerns regarding the lack of understanding and the absence of appropriate safeguards. Having carefully considered all of the evidence, the Sub Committee was not satisfied that the applicant had demonstrated that the licensing objectives would be promoted. In particular, the Sub Committee found that granting the application would be likely to undermine the prevention of crime and disorder and the prevention of public nuisance, having regard to the nature of the area, the proposed hours, and the lack of adequate control measures. The Sub Committee resolved to refuse the application.
Present Applicant: Jaisal Mohammed (Applicant) Jithin Joy (Manager) Ward Member: Cllr Norma Mackie Application An application for the grant of a Premises Licence had been received from J&SK Enterprises Limited 1.1 in respect of Chicking Cardiff, 132 Crwys Road, Cathays, Cardiff, CF24 4NR. The applicant had applied for the following: (1) In respect of the following licensable activities: (i) The provision of late night refreshment (indoors). (2) Description of Premises (as stated by applicant): “A ground floor restaurant and takeaway with seating for 12 people, the premises are located on main Crwys Road”. (3) Unless otherwise indicated the premises may be open to the public during the following hours and for any hours consequential to the non-standard timings: Monday to Sunday: 11:00 to 03:00 hours (4) To provide licensable activities during the following hours: (i) The provision of late night refreshment (indoors) Monday to Sunday: 23:00 to 03:00 hours. Applicant Representations Addressing the Sub Committee as the manager of the premises, Mr Joy explained that they used to open until 3am but this was then suspended at 12am. However, during questioning, the applicant also stated that the premises closed at 11pm, giving rise to inconsistency in the evidence provided regarding the historical operating hours of the premises. They had some regular customers who came by after midnight. The applicant also indicated that this was his first experience of the licensing process and was unclear of the purpose of the hearing. The Licensing Officer clarified that the application was for the sale of hot food and drink after 11pm. They had originally applied for a terminal hour of 3am, which was reduced to 2am on weekdays in consultation with Pollution Control. The Licensing Officer advised that there was no record of a premises licence permitting operation until 3am, and that such activity would have constituted an offence. Following this clarification, the applicant’s account of previous operating hours was revised during the course of the hearing Responding to questions from the Sub Committee, Mr Mohammed clarified that they always closed at 11pm, except for New Year’s Eve when they obtained permission from the council to close at 3am. They had been operating since July and the licence was in his name. They were seeking permission to open until 3am because they didn’t currently have this right. He did not feel they caused any public nuisance because the owner lived directly above the premises. Members asked Mr Mohammed whether he was familiar with the licensing objectives, to which he replied that he was not. Mr Mohammed confirmed that he had agreed to the police’s detailed conditions and that no alcohol would be sold at the premises, but he was unable to provide further detail as to how the licensing objectives would be upheld in practice. Members asked how staff would be trained to deal with difficult customers in the early hours. Mr Mohammed explained that the company was franchised with a head office in Dubai, and they would be responsible for delivering training. He was not sure on the details but assured the Sub Committee that staff would receive the proper training. Throughout questioning, the Sub Committee noted that a number of the applicant’s responses lacked detail and clarity, and limited reassurance was provided as to how the premises would be managed in a manner consistent with the licensing objectives. Ward Member Representations Addressing the Sub Committee as Ward Member for Cathays, Cllr Mackie explained that there was noise and disruption on Crwys Road on most nights, and it was worse at weekends. There were already more than 20 licensed premises on that road and she was concerned about allowing another to open until 3am. Students coming back home from town were likely to be loud, and the ward councillors received a lot of complaints from residents about their sleep being disrupted, as well as issues with waste management. She added that she also felt the council had a responsibility to its young people in terms of health, and eating fried food late at night was not good for them. She acknowledged that this was outside the scope of the Sub Committee but felt it was an important wider point in terms of policy. She added that she was not convinced that the applicants were fully aware of the licensing rules and how to apply them. In a busy area, premises needed staff who knew what they were doing and how to deal with people. Members asked how much antisocial behaviour had been recorded on Crwys Road. Cllr Mackie referred to South Wales Police crime statistics which showed relatively high levels of violence and antisocial behaviour in the area. Summing Up Summing up, Cllr Mackie asked the Sub Committee to think carefully about granting the licence. In the view of the Ward Members, it would not meet the licensing objective of reducing crime and disorder, and she did not feel that the applicant was sufficiently trained. She was also concerned about the issue of public nuisance. Summing up, Mr Joy emphasised that his premises had not specifically caused any public nuisance, and he felt that their customers were happy with their service. They hadn’t had any issues with waste management and had a contract in place for that. Decision RESOLVED – That the Sub Committee, having considered the application on its individual merits, the committee papers, the Licensing Act 2003, the Section 182 guidance, the council’s Statement of Licensing Policy, submissions made by the applicant and all other parties, and the oral evidence given by the applicant and objectors during the hearing in its determination of the matter, REFUSED the application. Members noted that the applicant demonstrated a significant lack of understanding of the licensing objectives and the legal requirements of the licensing regime. In particular, the applicant was unable to explain the licensing objectives when asked and provided inconsistent information regarding the operating hours of the premises. In particular, the applicant initially suggested that the premises had previously operated until 3am, which was later clarified as incorrect following advice from the Licensing Officer, and subsequently revised again during the hearing. The Sub Committee considered that this inconsistency reduced the weight that could be attached to the applicant’s evidence. Members further noted that the applicant was unable to provide clear or detailed explanations as to how the licensing objectives would be promoted. In particular, limited detail was provided in relation to staff training, with reliance placed on unspecified training to be delivered by a franchisor, without any clear understanding of its content or implementation. There was insufficient evidence of measures to manage customers during late night hours, including how difficult or intoxicated individuals would be dealt with. No robust dispersal policy or noise management measures were outlined, despite the premises seeking to operate until the early hours of the morning. The Sub Committee also found that the applicant did not demonstrate an understanding of the risks associated with late-night operation in a busy and densely populated area. The Sub Committee took into account the representations of the Ward Member, who highlighted existing issues on Crwys Road relating to noise, anti-social behaviour, and crime, particularly during late night hours. It was noted that the road already contained a substantial number of licensed premises and that residents had raised complaints about disturbance, waste management, and sleep disruption. The Sub Committee considered that the introduction of an additional premises operating until 3am was likely to add to the potential for noise and disturbance in the area, particularly in the absence of robust control measures. Whilst the Sub Committee acknowledged the applicant’s submission that the premises had not previously been the source of complaints, it gave this limited weight given that the premises had not been operating under a premises licence permitting late-night refreshment beyond 11pm. The Sub Committee also gave weight to the fact that this was the applicant’s first experience of the licensing process. However, this did not outweigh the concerns regarding the lack of understanding and the absence of appropriate safeguards. Having carefully considered all of the evidence, the Sub Committee was not satisfied that the applicant had demonstrated that the licensing objectives would be promoted. In particular, the Sub Committee found that granting the application would be likely to undermine the prevention of crime and disorder and the prevention of public nuisance, having regard to the nature of the area, the proposed hours, and the lack of adequate control measures. The Sub Committee resolved to refuse the application.
Rhan o fater a ddilynwyd ar draws 2 cyfarfod
Members were notified shortly before the Sub Committee that South Wales Police had withdrawn their objection as their proposed conditions had been agreed by the applicant.
There were none.
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.
Yn rhestru cynghorwyr presennol y cyngor yn unig. Nid yw aelodau cyfetholedig, swyddogion a chyn-gynghorwyr yn cael eu dangos.