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 to retire into private session in order to receive legal advice pursuant to Paragraph 16 of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972. Having had regard to the relevant paragraphs of the Licensing Authority’s Statement of Licensing Policy and the guidance issued by the DCMS and the Home Office, it was: UNANIMOUSLY RESOLVED having considered all the evidence before it, that the application for the variation of the premises licence should be granted on the terms and conditions agreed between the applicant and the responsible authorities. In coming to its decision, the Sub-Committee made the following findings of fact; • The premises had been closed for the last 5 years but retained the benefit of a Premises Licence. • The premises is located in a residential street. • The applicant is the owner of other licensed premises and has experience of operating such businesses. • The Police did not object to the granting of the application on prevention of crime and disorder grounds. • Environmental Health Services did not object to the application on prevention of public nuisance grounds. • The applicant had accepted representations by the Police and Environmental Health Services regarding changes to the proposed operating schedule and licence conditions should the application be granted. • The Licensing Authority had no record of previous complaints about the premises and did not object to the granting of the application subject to the agreed additional conditions. In coming to its decision, the Sub-Committee attached weight to the views of the 3 responsible authorities, none of which recommended that the application be refused. The Sub-Committee also noted that concerns and fears about what might happen if the application was granted, which are unsupported by real evidence, were not matters which it could properly consider. The Sub-Committee recognised that it must not duplicate other statutory regimes and that issues relating to development control and listed buildings were not matters that it should consider. Whilst recognising that the concerns expressed by the objectors were genuine and heartfelt, the Sub-Committee is obliged to consider the application in accordance with relevant legislation and statutory guidance. Issues of need are not relevant and there is no ‘saturation’ or ‘cumulative impact’ policy in relation to this street. This means that the Sub-Committee should only refuse the application if it is satisfied on the balance of probabilities that to grant it would undermine one or more of the licensing objectives. Whilst noting the evidence provided by the objectors, in the view of the Sub-Committee this was outweighed by the views of the of the Responsible Authorities and there was no real evidence before the Sub-Committee that those views were wrong. Accordingly, the Sub-Committee was satisfied that to grant the application, as amended by the agreement between the applicant and Responsible Authorities, would not undermine any of the licensing objectives and that the proposed additional licence conditions accepted by the applicant were appropriate to promote those objectives.
There were no declarations of personal interest.
Y penderfyniad fel y'i cofnodwyd
RESOLVED to retire into private session in order to receive legal advice pursuant to Paragraph 16 of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972. Having had regard to the relevant paragraphs of the Licensing Authority’s Statement of Licensing Policy and the guidance issued by the DCMS and the Home Office, it was: UNANIMOUSLY RESOLVED having considered all the evidence before it, that the application for the variation of the premises licence should be granted on the terms and conditions agreed between the applicant and the responsible authorities. In coming to its decision, the Sub-Committee made the following findings of fact; • The premises had been closed for the last 5 years but retained the benefit of a Premises Licence. • The premises is located in a residential street. • The applicant is the owner of other licensed premises and has experience of operating such businesses. • The Police did not object to the granting of the application on prevention of crime and disorder grounds. • Environmental Health Services did not object to the application on prevention of public nuisance grounds. • The applicant had accepted representations by the Police and Environmental Health Services regarding changes to the proposed operating schedule and licence conditions should the application be granted. • The Licensing Authority had no record of previous complaints about the premises and did not object to the granting of the application subject to the agreed additional conditions. In coming to its decision, the Sub-Committee attached weight to the views of the 3 responsible authorities, none of which recommended that the application be refused. The Sub-Committee also noted that concerns and fears about what might happen if the application was granted, which are unsupported by real evidence, were not matters which it could properly consider. The Sub-Committee recognised that it must not duplicate other statutory regimes and that issues relating to development control and listed buildings were not matters that it should consider. Whilst recognising that the concerns expressed by the objectors were genuine and heartfelt, the Sub-Committee is obliged to consider the application in accordance with relevant legislation and statutory guidance. Issues of need are not relevant and there is no ‘saturation’ or ‘cumulative impact’ policy in relation to this street. This means that the Sub-Committee should only refuse the application if it is satisfied on the balance of probabilities that to grant it would undermine one or more of the licensing objectives. Whilst noting the evidence provided by the objectors, in the view of the Sub-Committee this was outweighed by the views of the of the Responsible Authorities and there was no real evidence before the Sub-Committee that those views were wrong. Accordingly, the Sub-Committee was satisfied that to grant the application, as amended by the agreement between the applicant and Responsible Authorities, would not undermine any of the licensing objectives and that the proposed additional licence conditions accepted by the applicant were appropriate to promote those objectives.
The Legal Services Manager briefed all present on the procedure for the meeting which had been convened to consider an application to vary a premises licence received from Cross Keys, 2 Prospect Place, Llanelli. The variation sought to allow: Supply of Alcohol: Friday and Saturday 10:00 - 00:00, Sunday 10:00-23:00. Sunday before a bank holiday Monday and Boxing Day/Night to 10.00-00.00. Remove the current restricted hours for Good Friday and Christmas Day. Remove the consumption of alcohol conditions (a) to (j) on the current licence and replace with a standard 30 minutes drinking up time. Opening Hours to be amended to Sunday to Thursday 10:00-23:30, Friday and Saturday 10:00-00:30. Remove the Embedded conditions in Annex 2. Remove the following conditions from Annex 3 – Public Safety 1, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 and 13. Amend condition 2 in Annex 3 - Protection of Children to - The premises can employ people aged over 16 if supervised. Amend condition 3 in Annex 3 - Protection of Children to – No children under the age of 16 years to remain on the premises after 22:00 unless they are attending a pre-booked event of function. The Sub-Committee noted that the following documentation was attached to the report:- Appendix A – Copy of the original application; Appendix B – Copy of the current Premises Licence; Appendix C – Dyfed Powys Police representations Appendix D – Environmental Health representations; Appendix E – Licensing Authority representations; Appendix F – Other representations. In addition, the following supplemental information had been circulated to all parties in advance of the meeting:- • Appendix F – Additional Information from Cllr. Rob James. • Applicant supporting Information The Licensing Authority representative referred to the representations detailed within Appendix E to the report making reference to the application as amended. The Members and all parties were afforded the opportunity of questioning the Licensing Authority representative on the representations made. The Licensing Authority representative referred to Dyfed Powys Police representations (Appendix C to the report) and noted that whilst not objecting to the variation, the police had requested that the 18 suggested conditions detailed within their representation be added to the premises licence in order to promote the Licensing Objectives. The Sub-Committee was advised that the applicant has agreed to these representations with an amendment, and the representations subsequently withdrawn. In reference to the Environmental Health representations detailed within Appendix D to the report, the Licensing Authority representative confirmed that the objection had been removed in light of the agreed amendments to the application. Several objectors were in attendance at the meeting and objectors referred to the information detailed in Appendix F of the report and the additional supplementary information, making reference to the application as amended. Those objections included potential parking and traffic issues, anti-social behaviour from patrons including noise nuisance and disturbances, urinating on the street, drug use and littering and the impact on residential properties and their families. The Members and all parties were afforded the opportunity of questioning the objectors on the representations made. The Applicant’s representative referred to the application as amended and responded to the complaints received. He advised the Sub-Committee that issues experienced by the residence were prior to the Applicant taking ownership of the Cross Keys and that the application being considered was a minor change to the existing licence. He confirmed that following representations from the Police and Environmental Health, amendments and conditions had been agreed to mitigate any impact on the residents. All parties were afforded the opportunity of questioning the applicant and his representative on the representations made. The Sub-Committee thereupon UNANIMOUSLY RESOLVED to retire into private session in order to receive legal advice pursuant to Paragraph 16 of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972. Having had regard to the relevant paragraphs of the Licensing Authority’s Statement of Licensing Policy and the guidance issued by the DCMS and the Home Office, it was: UNANIMOUSLY RESOLVED having considered all the evidence before it, that the application for the variation of the premises licence should be granted on the terms and conditions agreed between the applicant and the responsible authorities. In coming to its decision, the Sub-Committee made the following findings of fact; • The premises had been closed for the last 5 years but retained the benefit of a Premises Licence. • The premises is located in a residential street. • The applicant is the owner of other licensed premises and has experience of operating such businesses. • The Police did not object to the granting of the application on prevention of crime and disorder grounds. • Environmental Health Services did not object to the application on prevention of public nuisance grounds. • The applicant had accepted representations by the Police and Environmental Health Services regarding changes to the proposed operating schedule and licence conditions should the application be granted. • The Licensing Authority had no record of previous complaints about the premises and did not object to the granting of the application subject to the agreed additional conditions. In coming to its decision, the Sub-Committee attached weight to the views of the 3 responsible authorities, none of which recommended that the application be refused. The Sub-Committee also noted that concerns and fears about what might happen if the application was granted, which are unsupported by real evidence, were not matters which it could properly consider. The Sub-Committee recognised that it must not duplicate other statutory regimes and that issues relating to development control and listed buildings were not matters that it should consider. Whilst recognising that the concerns expressed by the objectors were genuine and heartfelt, the Sub-Committee is obliged to consider the application in accordance with relevant legislation and statutory guidance. Issues of need are not relevant and there is no ‘saturation’ or ‘cumulative impact’ policy in relation to this street. This means that the Sub-Committee should only refuse the application if it is satisfied on the balance of probabilities that to grant it would undermine one or more of the licensing objectives. Whilst noting the evidence provided by the objectors, in the view of the Sub-Committee this was outweighed by the views of the of the Responsible Authorities and there was no real evidence before the Sub-Committee that those views were wrong. Accordingly, the Sub-Committee was satisfied that to grant the application, as amended by the agreement between the applicant and Responsible Authorities, would not undermine any of the licensing objectives and that the proposed additional licence conditions accepted by the applicant were appropriate to promote those objectives.
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.