Loading
The decisions as the council's minutes record them. A plain-language summary follows once it has been written.
RESOLVED That in accordance with Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the Meeting for consideration of the current item of business on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information under Schedule 12A to the Act. The Sub-Committee then resumed in open session. DECISION The Sub-Committee has considered carefully all of the representations which have been made, which includes those documents contained in the agenda pack, and the additional representations it has heard during the hearing. The Sub-Committee has made its decision based on the representations it considers relevant to the issues before the Sub-Committee, which are whether effectively all 4 of the licensing objectives are being promoted, but more specifically the licensing objective of the prevention of public nuisance, through the proposed operation of the premises licence requested. The Sub-Committee has heard from and on behalf of the residents who have made representations and has considered those representations. These representations included evidence of events which had taken place which would not have been within the ambit of the licensing regime to control, and it is likely that there may be ongoing issues for example with traffic over which the Licensing Sub-Committee also has no remit. This is not to say that the residents were not entitled to raise the issues that have been raised, due to the lack of clarity in the application. None of the Responsible Authorities has made representations, which the Sub-Committee notes and considers to be an important factor in its deliberations. On balance the Sub-Committee considers that, subject to the limits and conditions to be placed on the premises licence as detailed below, the application as made and as clarified by the applicant promotes the licensing objectives and the application can be granted. Whilst the Sub-Committee notes that the applicant indicated that he would be content with a maximum occupancy figure of 3,000 persons in the licensed area at any one time, the Sub-Committee considers that it is not appropriate for the Sub-Committee to agree occupancy limits, which is the remit of the Fire & Rescue Service. The Sub-Committee notes that the applicant is already fully aware of the occupancy limits imposed for the internal areas. The Sub-Committee has decided that there is to be a condition on the premises licence that, for partially or wholly non-ticketed licensable events, the applicant is to contact the Licensing Team at the Council, to be given an indication by the Licensing Team whether or not an event management plan is to be required ahead of a proposed event, the initial contact from the applicant to be not less than 30 days before the proposed event. It is pre-supposed and expected by the Licensing Sub-Committee that the applicant, as is the statutory requirement, will have already submitted and agreed a fire and safety risk assessment to the Fire & Rescue Service, which will include the setting of the appropriate maximum occupancy figure. Due to the lack of detail contained within the application as to the specific meaning of what are to be key special events, the Sub-Committee considers that it is limited to granting the hours of operation of the premises licence for the various specified licensable activities to the hours contained in the standard timings in the application. As the standard terminal time for opening is 23:59 hrs this means late night refreshment must cease at that time. As such there are no other modifications to the premises licence, but it does mean a limit in terminal hours for all other licensable activities to 11pm (including indoor sporting events; live music (indoors/outdoors); recorded music (indoors/outdoors); performances of dance; and supply of alcohol). Subject to the above conditions, the application is granted. Whilst not part of the decision, the Sub-Committee wishes to express its hope that the applicant will strive to continue working with the local residents.
RESOLVED That in accordance with Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the Meeting for consideration of the current item of business on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information under Schedule 12A to the Act. The Sub-Committee then resumed in open session and announced the following decision: DECISION The Sub-Committee has carefully considered all representations made before it from all parties, both written and spoken. The Sub-Committee is tasked with deciding whether the driver is a fit and proper person to be allowed to continue to hold a licence. The Sub-Committee in deciding this always has at the forefront of its deliberations and as its primary consideration public safety. The Sub-Committee has taken into account all matters pertaining to the applicant which are before it. The Sub-Committee has had regard to the relevant sections of its adopted Guidance on Determining the Suitability of Applicants and Licensees in the Hackney & Private Hire Trades, and its own Policy. It is well within those Policies to revoke the licence, and the consideration of the Sub-Committee has to be whether the driver has provided sufficiently persuasive reasons for the Sub-Committee to depart from its Policies. The Sub-Committee’s options include taking no action against the licence, revoking the licence or suspending the licence for a period of time. The driver has expressed remorse. The Sub-Committee finds that the driver has continued to drive as a taxi driver without incident since the offence took place, a period of some 10 months, and that the driver has a loyal customer base reliant upon him. The Sub-Committee has been advised that the driver has held a licence for over 20 years. As stated above, the Sub-Committee’s main deliberation has been about whether there are exceptional circumstances to depart from its policy and not take any action against the licence. The Sub-Committee finds that there are no such exceptional circumstances. However, the Sub-Committee also finds that, from the representations it has heard, it is not the only option to revoke the licence. The primary concern of the Sub-Committee is the issue of public safety. The driver’s action, whilst in no way condoned, does not merit full revocation of the licence, and the Sub-Committee’s decision, taking into account all factors presented to it, is to suspend the licence for a period of 3 months, to reflect that it is considered to be a serious matter. As this decision is based on public safety grounds, the suspension is of immediate effect, irrespective of any appeal lodged by the driver.
The Principal Solicitor advised the Committee that although Councillor David Howlett has not himself made representations he had been nominated to speak on behalf of residents. It was noted that therefore he did not require the consent of the Chairman as he was there in his capacity as speaking on behalf of one or more of the residents who had made representations
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED That in accordance with Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the Meeting for consideration of the current item of business on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information under Schedule 12A to the Act. The Sub-Committee then resumed in open session. DECISION The Sub-Committee has considered carefully all of the representations which have been made, which includes those documents contained in the agenda pack, and the additional representations it has heard during the hearing. The Sub-Committee has made its decision based on the representations it considers relevant to the issues before the Sub-Committee, which are whether effectively all 4 of the licensing objectives are being promoted, but more specifically the licensing objective of the prevention of public nuisance, through the proposed operation of the premises licence requested. The Sub-Committee has heard from and on behalf of the residents who have made representations and has considered those representations. These representations included evidence of events which had taken place which would not have been within the ambit of the licensing regime to control, and it is likely that there may be ongoing issues for example with traffic over which the Licensing Sub-Committee also has no remit. This is not to say that the residents were not entitled to raise the issues that have been raised, due to the lack of clarity in the application. None of the Responsible Authorities has made representations, which the Sub-Committee notes and considers to be an important factor in its deliberations. On balance the Sub-Committee considers that, subject to the limits and conditions to be placed on the premises licence as detailed below, the application as made and as clarified by the applicant promotes the licensing objectives and the application can be granted. Whilst the Sub-Committee notes that the applicant indicated that he would be content with a maximum occupancy figure of 3,000 persons in the licensed area at any one time, the Sub-Committee considers that it is not appropriate for the Sub-Committee to agree occupancy limits, which is the remit of the Fire & Rescue Service. The Sub-Committee notes that the applicant is already fully aware of the occupancy limits imposed for the internal areas. The Sub-Committee has decided that there is to be a condition on the premises licence that, for partially or wholly non-ticketed licensable events, the applicant is to contact the Licensing Team at the Council, to be given an indication by the Licensing Team whether or not an event management plan is to be required ahead of a proposed event, the initial contact from the applicant to be not less than 30 days before the proposed event. It is pre-supposed and expected by the Licensing Sub-Committee that the applicant, as is the statutory requirement, will have already submitted and agreed a fire and safety risk assessment to the Fire & Rescue Service, which will include the setting of the appropriate maximum occupancy figure. Due to the lack of detail contained within the application as to the specific meaning of what are to be key special events, the Sub-Committee considers that it is limited to granting the hours of operation of the premises licence for the various specified licensable activities to the hours contained in the standard timings in the application. As the standard terminal time for opening is 23:59 hrs this means late night refreshment must cease at that time. As such there are no other modifications to the premises licence, but it does mean a limit in terminal hours for all other licensable activities to 11pm (including indoor sporting events; live music (indoors/outdoors); recorded music (indoors/outdoors); performances of dance; and supply of alcohol). Subject to the above conditions, the application is granted. Whilst not part of the decision, the Sub-Committee wishes to express its hope that the applicant will strive to continue working with the local residents.
The Sub–Committee considered a report by the Director of Community Services for the grant of a new premises licence by D?r Cymru Welsh Water, Llys Y Fran Reservoir, Clarbeston Road SA63 4RR. The Chair drew attention to an error in the agenda pack where it had referred to Westfield as the applicant; however, it was confirmed that the applicant was D?r Cymru Welsh Water. It was noted that representations had been received from ten ‘other persons’ within the statutory period and produced at appendix 3. Representing the applicant was Mr Mark Hillary, Visitor Attraction Manager at Llys Y Fran Reservoir, who was present at the Hearing and addressed the Committee in support of the application. Following the presentation of the applicant’s case a number of questions were put by Members of the Sub-Committee, which were answered by Mr Hillary. Councillor David Howlett was present at the Hearing and was representing ‘other persons’ Mr Paul Griffiths; Mr and Mrs Livingstone; Mr Phillip Dunseath; Ms Wendy Sturgess and Mr Christopher Ousey, who had requested that he speak on their behalf, and all of whom had made written representations. Councillor David Howlett advised that he lived in close proximity to the application site; however, he had sought advice from the Interim Deputy Monitoring Officer and after considering that advice felt he was happy to speak at the Hearing on behalf of the ‘other persons’ as indicated above, Councillor David Howlett then addressed the Committee in support of those written representations and answered a number of questions put to him by the Members of the Sub-Committee. One of those ‘other persons’ Mr Jon Stangroome who was also present at the Hearing addressed the Sub-Committee in support of his written representations and answered a number of questions put to him by the Members of the Sub-Committee. The Legal Adviser sought points of clarification from Mr Mark Hillary on defined licensed areas and hours of operation on special events. The applicant was given the opportunity to sum up the application. The Legal Adviser then outlined the options for consideration by the Sub-Committee. The Sub-Committee then retired to undertake its consideration of the application and representations submitted. RESOLVED That in accordance with Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the Meeting for consideration of the current item of business on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information under Schedule 12A to the Act. The Sub-Committee then resumed in open session. DECISION The Sub-Committee has considered carefully all of the representations which have been made, which includes those documents contained in the agenda pack, and the additional representations it has heard during the hearing. The Sub-Committee has made its decision based on the representations it considers relevant to the issues before the Sub-Committee, which are whether effectively all 4 of the licensing objectives are being promoted, but more specifically the licensing objective of the prevention of public nuisance, through the proposed operation of the premises licence requested. The Sub-Committee has heard from and on behalf of the residents who have made representations and has considered those representations. These representations included evidence of events which had taken place which would not have been within the ambit of the licensing regime to control, and it is likely that there may be ongoing issues for example with traffic over which the Licensing Sub-Committee also has no remit. This is not to say that the residents were not entitled to raise the issues that have been raised, due to the lack of clarity in the application. None of the Responsible Authorities has made representations, which the Sub-Committee notes and considers to be an important factor in its deliberations. On balance the Sub-Committee considers that, subject to the limits and conditions to be placed on the premises licence as detailed below, the application as made and as clarified by the applicant promotes the licensing objectives and the application can be granted. Whilst the Sub-Committee notes that the applicant indicated that he would be content with a maximum occupancy figure of 3,000 persons in the licensed area at any one time, the Sub-Committee considers that it is not appropriate for the Sub-Committee to agree occupancy limits, which is the remit of the Fire & Rescue Service. The Sub-Committee notes that the applicant is already fully aware of the occupancy limits imposed for the internal areas. The Sub-Committee has decided that there is to be a condition on the premises licence that, for partially or wholly non-ticketed licensable events, the applicant is to contact the Licensing Team at the Council, to be given an indication by the Licensing Team whether or not an event management plan is to be required ahead of a proposed event, the initial contact from the applicant to be not less than 30 days before the proposed event. It is pre-supposed and expected by the Licensing Sub-Committee that the applicant, as is the statutory requirement, will have already submitted and agreed a fire and safety risk assessment to the Fire & Rescue Service, which will include the setting of the appropriate maximum occupancy figure. Due to the lack of detail contained within the application as to the specific meaning of what are to be key special events, the Sub-Committee considers that it is limited to granting the hours of operation of the premises licence for the various specified licensable activities to the hours contained in the standard timings in the application. As the standard terminal time for opening is 23:59 hrs this means late night refreshment must cease at that time. As such there are no other modifications to the premises licence, but it does mean a limit in terminal hours for all other licensable activities to 11pm (including indoor sporting events; live music (indoors/outdoors); recorded music (indoors/outdoors); performances of dance; and supply of alcohol). Subject to the above conditions, the application is granted. Whilst not part of the decision, the Sub-Committee wishes to express its hope that the applicant will strive to continue working with the local residents.
Moved by Councillor Jon Cole; Seconded by Councillor Aaron Carey RESOLVED That the public be excluded from the meeting during the consideration of the following item of business in accordance with Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972 on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraph 14 of Part 4 of Schedule 12A to the Act; and that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED That in accordance with Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the Meeting for consideration of the current item of business on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information under Schedule 12A to the Act. The Sub-Committee then resumed in open session and announced the following decision: DECISION The Sub-Committee has carefully considered all representations made before it from all parties, both written and spoken. The Sub-Committee is tasked with deciding whether the driver is a fit and proper person to be allowed to continue to hold a licence. The Sub-Committee in deciding this always has at the forefront of its deliberations and as its primary consideration public safety. The Sub-Committee has taken into account all matters pertaining to the applicant which are before it. The Sub-Committee has had regard to the relevant sections of its adopted Guidance on Determining the Suitability of Applicants and Licensees in the Hackney & Private Hire Trades, and its own Policy. It is well within those Policies to revoke the licence, and the consideration of the Sub-Committee has to be whether the driver has provided sufficiently persuasive reasons for the Sub-Committee to depart from its Policies. The Sub-Committee’s options include taking no action against the licence, revoking the licence or suspending the licence for a period of time. The driver has expressed remorse. The Sub-Committee finds that the driver has continued to drive as a taxi driver without incident since the offence took place, a period of some 10 months, and that the driver has a loyal customer base reliant upon him. The Sub-Committee has been advised that the driver has held a licence for over 20 years. As stated above, the Sub-Committee’s main deliberation has been about whether there are exceptional circumstances to depart from its policy and not take any action against the licence. The Sub-Committee finds that there are no such exceptional circumstances. However, the Sub-Committee also finds that, from the representations it has heard, it is not the only option to revoke the licence. The primary concern of the Sub-Committee is the issue of public safety. The driver’s action, whilst in no way condoned, does not merit full revocation of the licence, and the Sub-Committee’s decision, taking into account all factors presented to it, is to suspend the licence for a period of 3 months, to reflect that it is considered to be a serious matter. As this decision is based on public safety grounds, the suspension is of immediate effect, irrespective of any appeal lodged by the driver.
Having convened in private session under the terms of Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the Sub-Committee considered comments from both Mr Nigel Lewis, Dyfed-Powys Police Licensing Officer and the Lead Officer (Licensing), on the report by the Director of Community Services regarding the application for a combined Hackney Carriage/Private Hire Vehicle Drivers Licence for Mr G H. The applicant was present at the Hearing and was provided the opportunity to present his case to the Sub-Committee, including answering questions. The Legal Adviser then outlined the options for consideration by the Sub-Committee. The Sub-Committee then retired to undertake its consideration of the matter and the representations submitted. RESOLVED That in accordance with Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the Meeting for consideration of the current item of business on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information under Schedule 12A to the Act. The Sub-Committee then resumed in open session and announced the following decision: DECISION The Sub-Committee has carefully considered all representations made before it from all parties, both written and spoken. The Sub-Committee is tasked with deciding whether the driver is a fit and proper person to be allowed to continue to hold a licence. The Sub-Committee in deciding this always has at the forefront of its deliberations and as its primary consideration public safety. The Sub-Committee has taken into account all matters pertaining to the applicant which are before it. The Sub-Committee has had regard to the relevant sections of its adopted Guidance on Determining the Suitability of Applicants and Licensees in the Hackney & Private Hire Trades, and its own Policy. It is well within those Policies to revoke the licence, and the consideration of the Sub-Committee has to be whether the driver has provided sufficiently persuasive reasons for the Sub-Committee to depart from its Policies. The Sub-Committee’s options include taking no action against the licence, revoking the licence or suspending the licence for a period of time. The driver has expressed remorse. The Sub-Committee finds that the driver has continued to drive as a taxi driver without incident since the offence took place, a period of some 10 months, and that the driver has a loyal customer base reliant upon him. The Sub-Committee has been advised that the driver has held a licence for over 20 years. As stated above, the Sub-Committee’s main deliberation has been about whether there are exceptional circumstances to depart from its policy and not take any action against the licence. The Sub-Committee finds that there are no such exceptional circumstances. However, the Sub-Committee also finds that, from the representations it has heard, it is not the only option to revoke the licence. The primary concern of the Sub-Committee is the issue of public safety. The driver’s action, whilst in no way condoned, does not merit full revocation of the licence, and the Sub-Committee’s decision, taking into account all factors presented to it, is to suspend the licence for a period of 3 months, to reflect that it is considered to be a serious matter. As this decision is based on public safety grounds, the suspension is of immediate effect, irrespective of any appeal lodged by the driver.
Councillors must say when they have a personal link to something being discussed, such as a job, a property or a family member. A prejudicial interest is one strong enough that the councillor usually leaves the room and takes no part.
Declarations are read from the minutes once they are published.
Lists the council's current councillors only. Co-opted members, officers and former councillors aren't shown.