Minutes of a meeting held on 12th December, 2016.
Present: Councillors A.G. Powell, J.W. Thomas and Mrs. M.R. Wilkinson.
Also present: Licensing Officers (Vale of Glamorgan Council), Environmental Health Officer (Vale of Glamorgan Council) and South Wales Police.
The Assistant Democratic Services Officer explained as to the procedure to be used for the hearing and advised that copies were included within the agenda.
(a) Appointment of Chairman -
Councillor J.W. Thomas was elected Chairman for the duration of the hearing.
(b) Declarations of Interest -
No declarations were received.
(c) Licensing Act 2003 - Application for Variation of Premises Licence - 10 Broad Street, Barry, CF62 7AA -
Also present: Mr. L. McGowan (Applicant), Mr. D. Sheppard (Applicant’s Representative) and Mr R. Buckeridge (Other Person).
The Chairman welcomed those present to the Sub-Committee hearing and invited all present to introduce themselves.
In presenting the report, the Licensing Officer advised that the Licensing Act 2003 centred around four licensing objectives. The objectives were:
The prevention of crime and disorder
The prevention of public nuisance
The protection of children from harm
On 16th January 2007 a Premises Licence was granted for 10 Broad Street, Barry, under The Licensing Act 2003. The application proposed use of the premises was as a restaurant with background music.
In July 2009 the Premises Licence was subject to a variation to add the provision of live music and performance of dance. A copy of the current Licence was attached to this Report at Appendix A.
On 17th October 2016 an application for the variation of the Premises Licence was received by the Licensing Authority. The operating schedule of the application indicates that it was intended to use the premises as a night club. The application form was attached at Appendix B to this Report.
The variation application for consideration sought to vary the Premises Licence as follows;
Sun to Thurs 12.00 to 23.30
Fri & Sat 12.00 to 01.00
Sun to Wed 07.00 to 00.30
Thurs 07.00 to 01.30
Fri & Sat 07.00 to 03.30
Sale of Alcohol
Mon to Thurs 12.00 to 23.30
Fri & Sat 12.00 to 00.30
Sun 12.00 to 23.30
Sun to Wed 07.00 to 00.00
Thurs 07.00 to 01,00
Fri & Sat 07.00 to 03.00
Live Music, Recorded Music & Performance of Dance
Mon to Thurs 18.00 to 23.30
Fri & Sat 18.00 to 00.30
Sun 18.00 to 23.00
Sun to Wed 12.00 to 00.00
Thurs 12.00 to 01.00
Fri & Sat 12.00 to 03.00
Late Night Refreshment
Sun to Thurs 23.00 to 23.30
Fri & Sat 23.00 to 00.30
Sun to Wed 23.00 to 00.00
Thurs 23.00 to 01,00
Fri & Sat 23.00 to 03.00
The application further requested the terminal hour for licensable activity be 03.00, with closing at 03.30, on the following days;
Sunday before Bank Holidays
New Year’s (sic)
The Sub-Committee was advised to note that there was an administrative error in the 'Opening Hours' section of the application, where the terminal hour for Sunday to Wednesday was given as 12.30 rather than 00.30.
On 25th October 2016 a representation was received from South Wales Police. This was followed by a further submission on 9th November 2016. A copy of these representations were attached to the Report at Appendix C.
On 14th November 2016 a representation was received from the Environmental Health Department. The representation was attached to the Report at Appendix D.
On 8th November a representation was received from Mr Buckeridge, who owns properties in close proximity to the premises. The representation was attached at Appendix E to this Report.
The Chairman invited the Applicant to make their representations in support of their application.
Mr. Sheppard, representative for the Applicant, Mr. McGowan, advised that they had submitted an application to increase the hours for the sale of alcohol and informed the Sub-Committee that the premises was more of a restaurant rather than a nightclub, and food would be served from 12.00 Noon until 9.00 p.m. There were no disco facilities in the premises, and the variation requested was in order that their clientele would be able to remain in the premises for a drink following food. He further advised that the Applicant was willing to negotiate the hours applied for. Mr. McGowan advised that he was mindful of the people who lived in the area and did not intend to use the licence until 3.00 a.m. but only until 2.00 a.m. He did not want the premises to be seen as a nightclub; it would be a quiet cocktail bar serving food such as tapas, with no D.J. or dance floor.
The Chairman asked the Applicant to confirm what they proposed in terms of hours for the premises. Mr. Sheppard advised that they were looking at a 2.00 a.m. with a 3.00 a.m. for pre-booked events if needed. An extension of hours would allow clients to drift from the premises at between 1.00 a.m. and 1.30 a.m. and provide clients with a bit of flexibility.
The Chairman asked whether there were any questions from the other parties. A Member of the Sub-Committee asked for clarification in terms of the hours being requested. Mr. Sheppard advised they were willing to mediate in order to ensure that everyone was happy, although they did not want the same restricted hours as the previous restaurant. He advised that other premises in the area had increased their hours, and again reiterated that they wanted to have a late licence in order that clients could generally drift out of the premise over a period of time. He confirmed that they were requesting 2.00 a.m. for the finish of the sale of alcohol and a 2.30 a.m. terminal hour for the premises. The Chairman asked for clarification that they were no longer asking for a 3.00 a.m. licence and Mr. Sheppard reiterated that they were not, and were now requesting a 2.30 a.m. terminal hour.
There being no further questions, the Chairman asked the officer present from South Wales Police (SWP) to provide their representations.
The officer informed the Sub-Committee that SWP had objected to the terminal hours on Christmas Eve and Christmas Day as applied for and proposed the terminal hours of midnight for Christmas Eve and 2.00 a.m. on Christmas Day. This would bring the premises in line with the other late night drinking venues in the area. In addition they had proposed conditions relating to door staffing for the premises which included levels of door staff, use of body cams, PubWatch membership and a designated smoking area.
A Member of the Sub-Committee asked what concerns the Police had in relation to the hours requested for Christmas Eve and Christmas Day and the officer advised that SWP was concerned about anti-social behaviour. A Member asked the officer whether there was any evidence, in terms of the licencing objective, the prevention of public nuisance, to show that this premises had created a public nuisance, and if so, why was this not included within their representations. The officer advised that the premises had only been open a week, and there was no indication of any issues in relation to public nuisance in relation to this premises. The officer reiterated that SWP wanted the opening hours to be in line with other premises in the area as they wanted to prevent anti-social behaviour in the area.
A Member asked whether the officer felt that the request for two door staff from opening at 7.00 a.m., rising to four from 9.00 p.m. was reasonable, and maybe it would be better if door staff were engaged on the basis of a ratio of the number of people in the premises. In response, the officer advised that they felt that the proposed number of door staff was necessary as every day would be different, and they would not be able to know how many people would be in the premises from day to day.
The Chairman provided the Applicant with the opportunity to question the representative from South Wales Police. Mr. Sheppard advised that they had met with the Police and discussed the PubWatch option and body cams, and advised that at present, they had one staff member with a body cam. He advised that the maximum number of people in the premises would be 250, and proposed a ratio of 1 security personnel per 75 people. He advised that the premises was no different than Wetherspoons; it was not like a club and he felt that the conditions should mirror how the premises would be managed. He was of the opinion that the condition to have all door staff wearing body cams and the number of door staff were excessive.
The Licensing Officer advised that the door staff conditions were proposed by South Wales Police and it was for the Sub-Committee to consider the time from which door staff would be needed at the premises. Mr. Sheppard advised that they would have at least one door staff engaged from 21:00 hours, but there would be more on weekends in order to manage the number of people at the premises. He was of the view that door staff would not be required at the premises from Sunday through to Thursday.
A Member queried the Police’s proposals that door staff would be required from 7.00 a.m. Mr. Sheppard reiterated that he felt there was no need for door staff from this hour only on Friday and Saturday evenings from 7.00 p.m. and confirmed the change in hours as previously requested. He again confirmed that they would have door staff at least one to start at 9.00 p.m. (with a body cam) on a Friday and Saturday, with others joining at 10.00 p.m. with a maximum of three door staff.
A Member asked whether, if the premises had a large party of clients earlier in the day, would there be additional security staff. Mr. Sheppard advised that the owner and staff had security passes, therefore, did not see a beneficial reason of employing extra staff. He advised that the security staff were also employed to manage those individuals they did not want to access the premises. They wanted to protect their clientele and advised that most places policed their own numbers.
The Chairman provided the Environmental Health Officer (EHO) with the opportunity to make their representations to the Sub-Committee.
The EHO made reference to the licence variation in July 2009, to add the provision of live music and performance of dance. Furthermore, the planning permission for the venue did not allow the performance of dance. The EHO advised that they had met with the applicant on the site; however, no mediation had taken place since that meeting, on the advice of the Licensing Authority, as representations had been received from Other Persons which had not be mediated.
The EHO made reference to the proposed conditions in regard to access/egress to the premise and use of the area to the rear of the premises within their representations. The EHO also made reference to the current planning permission for the venue and stated it did not have the appropriate planning permission necessary for the hours and activities proposed by the Applicant. A copy of the planning permission was attached to the representations within Appendix D. The EHO advised that there was no evidence that condition 7 of the planning permission had been signed off and this would have a bearing on the ability of the building to contain noise. They expressed concern in relation to the use of the building as a licensed premises on both floors as there was a lot of glass, with poor insulation, which was not effective in order to contain noise. The officer also advised of concerns in relation to the use of the first floor for entertainment and the flat roof area for a smoking area.
The Chairman asked whether the Applicant had any questions on these representations. Mr. Sheppard informed the Sub-Committee that a new planning application had been submitted, which requested the removal of conditions 3 and 8 on the current planning permission and they were currently waiting on the outcome of this application. They were not thinking of having bands in the premises, or for it to be a night club, if anything, it would be individuals with a guitar and background music. They proposed to use the left hand door as the entrance, and at present the upstairs was in development, but not in use. They would be putting sound proof boxes into the premises and there was a smoking area, which would hopefully reduce the amount of people on Broad Street. He advised that they shared the concerns about the noise from the back area of the premises. The Chairman asked for confirmation in relation to whether the application was for the same hours on both floors, and whether the application was looking to licence both areas and Mr. Sheppard confirmed that it was.
The Chairman asked for clarification in regard to the proposal from Environmental Health, that there be only one entrance whereas, South Wales Police were asking for two. The Environmental Health Officer advised that the door to the left of the premises was a double door, and they were keen that it stayed as such to create an acoustic lobby and disabled access. They advised that neither door could be removed without limiting fire exits and they should both remain unless the Fire Authority puts a request in to make changes.
A Member asked for clarification in relation to the proposal from the Police that there should be a separate entrance, to the main entrance, for the smoking area. Mr. McGowan provided clarification on this point and advised that they had agreed to the suggestion from Environmental Health, that the double door would be the main door, and felt this was a good idea. Furthermore, there would be a smoking box on the front of the building, and they would rope off an area in order that smokers could use this area. The Chairman asked whether this would be accessed via the main lobby area and it was confirmed that it would be a cordoned off area, in order that door staff could keep check on the clientele. The Chairman asked whether both Environmental Health and South Wales Police were happy with the suggestions of only one entrance/exit and the smoking area, and both representatives confirmed that they were.
The Chairman invited the Other Person to make their representations to the Sub-Committee.
Mr. Buckeridge advised that he had contested all of the applications for 3.00 a.m. licences in the Broad Street and High Street areas, however, all had been granted. The area was surrounded by noise from late night premises in the area. He informed the Committee that he had lost a long standing tenant, of 14 years, after the first 3.00 a.m. licence had been granted and advised that he was making representations on behalf of the tenants living in his properties. His representations had been put forward in regard to the licensing objective of the prevention of public nuisance. He was concerned that this current application was for a night club, under the guise of a restaurant. He stated that there would be no food served after 9.00 p.m. and was therefore of the view that it was a nightclub as the application was for a 3.00 a.m. licence. He felt that there was room for a quality venue in Barry, but that a terminal hour of 1.30 a.m. was late enough. There were 3.00 a.m. venues in the area which did not allow admittance after 1.30 a.m., therefore, they would need to leave this venue by 1.00 a.m. to go to the other venues. If the premises was catering for clientele who wanted a quiet drink, they did not need a 3.00 a.m. licence.
In regard to smoking areas Mr. Buckeridge made reference to other premises in the vicinity which had beer gardens, and felt that in light of this, it was strange that there was a suggestion that this premises could not use the flat roof of the building, for a smoking area as the noise emanating from the other premises was considerable.
Mr. Buckeridge advised that consideration should be people living in the area, all of the buildings in the vicinity had been built with accommodation, therefore there were a lot of residents in the area.
The Chairman asked if there were any questions for Mr. Buckeridge on his representations. Mr. Sheppard asked whether his flats were currently rented out, and he confirmed that he currently rented out three flats. Mr. Sheppard advised that the reason they were requesting 2.30am for the terminal hour, was in order to provide flexibility and so not all of their clientele were leaving the premises at the same time. It was a nice venue where people could go to eat, and although he realised it looked like a night club, it was not what they wanted for the business. A Member of the Sub-Committee asked Mr. Buckeridge where his flats were located and he advised that all three flats were at Number 12 Broad Street between Gordon Bennetts and Bar Code.
The Chairman asked the Environmental Health Officer whether there had been any noise complaints in relation to this area in recent years. The Officer advised that historically, there had been noise complaints from tenants, in relation to premises in the vicinity. The complaints from tenants centred mainly around individuals leaving the premises in the area.
A Member asked whether there had been any recent sound measuring in the area and the EHO advised that there had not been. Sound measuring had been carried out when the Licensing Act came into force. This was one of the reasons they had concerns about the use of the first floor, as peoples bedrooms were at the back in the premises. The officer advised that they had been in the area as late as 3.00 a.m., to consider the noise level in the area, before and after this application had been made. A Member asked how recently noise monitoring had taken place, and the EHO advised that they had not had monitoring equipment in the area since 2005, although they had received a number of reports from noise consultants in regard to planning applications in the area, had compared the figures, and there was not much difference between 2005 and present.
A Member asked whether the area was noisy, and if so, how long had it been a noisy area. The EHO advised that it was a noisy area, and the noise levels had increased in the last 10 years since the late night economy had stopped at Barry Island. They had monitored noise since 2005/06, but only in relation to specific premises or noise complaints. They had encouraged other licensed premises to block up the first floor windows to try and contain noise. There was no respite from the noise made by individuals leaving the premises in the area, taxis, take aways and arguments on the street. It was very difficult to control as they did not know which premises the individuals had come from.
A Member expressed the view that a tenant may know the area they were moving into and the EHO accepted this point, however, stated that a tenant may view a flat at 3.00 p.m. not 3.00 a.m. and expressed the view many of the tenants living in the area were coming off the homeless list, and had little choice as to where they lived.
Mr. Buckeridge expressed the view that the majority of noise emanated from the beer gardens of nearby premises, which was how the noise problems had started, as they were unregulated.
Mr. Sheppard advised that there were not many premises in the area historically that did not have a licence and there were not many brand new premises. In addition, there had been a huge increase in the number of takeaways in the area. He was of the view that it was much easier for the police to police one area, and they worked with the police to control the area.
The Chairman asked the Licensing Authority whether they had received any complaints in relation to the licensing objectives in this area. The Licensing Officer advised that any complaints had been dealt with by Environmental Health, however, there had been no complaints in relation to breaches of the licensing conditions, such as noise etc.
The Chairman expressed the view that the PubWatch condition suggested by the South Wales Police would be very difficult to enforce. They could encourage them to become members of the PubWatch and attend monthly meetings, however, it would be very difficult to enforce this as a condition on a licence. In response, the South Wales Police advised that they appreciated this, and advised that the Appellant had agreed to join the PubWatch and attend the monthly meetings. They still felt that the earlier closing times for Christmas Eve and Christmas Day were required yet after consideration, felt that door staff were not required from 7.00 a.m., however, at least two would be required at 7.00 p.m. and another two from 9.00 p.m. The reason being that, as food service would stop at 9.00 p.m., people would therefore only be drinking at the premises, and this may help prevent any anti-social behaviour.
The Environmental Health Officer advised that smoking and drinking should not be allowed on the flat area at the back of the building. It overlooked private rooms, would be difficult to manage and provided a fire exit. The EHO was concerned that people may try to access the building via the fire exit, and the fire exit should only be used as such and nothing else. Furthermore, they were of the opinion that the building could not accommodate the noise that would be generated. In regards of the playing of live music the Deregulation Act 2015 stated that the premises could play live music without a licence, therefore the EHO was unsure why they were requesting this. In reference to the closing times, the EHO confirmed that these would be as per their representations, included within the report at Appendix D.
The Chairman asked Mr. Buckeridge whether he had anything further to add, and he advised that he did not.
The Chairman asked the Applicant whether he had anything further to add. In response, Mr. Sheppard advised they would be happy to reduce the Christmas hours as they appreciated the issues raised by the police and would be happy to close at midnight on both days. He further confirmed that they would cease licensed activities at 11.30 p.m. on those days and that the terminal hour would be midnight on both days. Mr. Sheppard confirmed that in terms of New Year’s Eve they would be requesting the same hours as for Friday and Saturday nights, that was licensed activities to stop at 2.00 a.m. and the terminal hour to be 2.30 a.m. They felt that 9.00 p.m. was a reasonable time to start employing door staff for the premises, and expressed the view that very few premises in the area had door staff at 7.00 p.m. In terms of the building, Mr. Sheppard advised that moving forward there would be noise reductions put in place, with double noise reduction on the side of the building where Mr. Buckeridge’s flats were. He reiterated that there was not the need for a night club, the premises was a late restaurant for dining and somewhere for clients to stay following food.
Following the summing up, and there being no further questions, the Licensing Sub-Committee retired to consider the application in private.
On return the Chairman confirmed that the application was for the variation of a premises licence at 10 - 11 Broad Street, Barry, CF62 7AA. The application was for the sale of alcohol, regulated entertainment (including live music/playing of recorded music/performance of dance/entertainment of a similar description) and late night refreshments.
He confirmed that representations had been received from Responsible Authorities which consisted of the Licensing Authority, South Wales Police, Environmental Health and Other Persons.
In delivering the decision of the Committee, the Chairman précised the representations presented by all parties at the hearing:
The Applicant stated that they did not intend the premises to be a night club, but wanted to extend the hours for what they were currently licensed for.
The Applicant had agreed to reduce the hours requested on Fridays and Saturdays and also on non-standard days particularly in regard to the hours for Christmas Eve and Christmas Day
The Applicant stated that when the upstairs was brought into use it was intended that sound moderation would be fitted
The Applicant was in agreement with the proposals of the Police and the Environmental Health Officer for smokers
The Applicant stated that a planning application had been submitted to accommodate the proposed changes to the licence.
South Wales Police
The Officer conceded that door staff from 7.00 a.m. was not appropriate, but asked for at least one SIA registered door supervisor from 7.00 p.m. increasing to three from 9.00 p.m.
The Police requested that all door staff wore body cams and made footage available on request to the police.
The Officer agreed that the condition of membership of PubWatch would be unenforceable.
The Officer agreed that the current arrangements for a smoking area were acceptable
The Environmental Health Officer had concerns in relation to the access to the rear flat roof area, and increased noise levels late at night, which could breach the Licensing Objective of the Prevention of Public Nuisance, due to noise breakout.
The Officer requested that the acoustic lobby be the only means to access and egress to the premises (except for fire exits).
The Officer accepted that Broad Street was a noisy area at night, but felt measures should be taken not to exacerbate this problem.
The Officer requested that the first floor of the premises not be used for licensed activities.
Mr. Buckeridge was concerned in regard to his tenants as their flats would be surrounded by noise and requested a terminal hour of 2.00 a.m.
The Chairman advised that following consideration of the application, the representations of the Other Person, Responsible Authorities and the Applicant, and having considered the Home Office guidance, along with the Council’s Statement of Licensing Policy, and also taking into account the Licensing Act 2003, as amended, in particular the licensing objectives, the Licensing Sub-Committee had
(1) T H A T the application be granted as amended as detailed below:
Sale of Alcohol
Sunday to Wednesday 07.00 to 00:00
Thursday 07:00 to 01:00
Friday and Saturday 07:00 to 02:00
Sunday to Wednesday 07.00 to 00:00
Thursday 07:00 to 01:00
Friday and Saturday 07:00 to 02:00
Late Night Refreshments
Sunday to Wednesday 23.00 to 00:00
Thursday 23:00 to 01:00
Friday and Saturday 23:00 to 02:00
Sunday to Wednesday 07.00 to 00:30
Thursday 07:00 to 01:30
Friday and Saturday 07:00 to 02:30
Non Standard Timings
Christmas Eve and Christmas Day -
Sale of Alcohol 07:00 to 23:30
Regulated Entertainment 07:00 to 23:30
Opening Hours 07:00 to 00:00
Sundays before Bank Holidays/Good Friday/Boxing Day/New Year’s Eve the licensed hours will be the same as for a normal Friday or Saturday.
(2) T H A T the application be subject to conditions consistent with the operating schedule and following additional conditions:
(i) On Fridays, Saturdays and Sundays before Bank Holidays, Good Friday, Christmas Eve, Christmas Day, Boxing Day and New Year’s Eve there is to be one member of door staff on duty from 21:00, rising to a minimum of three at 22:00 until closing. At least one member of the door staff must wear an operational body cam and footage be made available to the police upon request.
(ii) There is to be a designated smoking area to be cordoned off and supervised.
(iii) The door marked as D1 on the licensing drawings should be the main and only access to the premises and the lobby shall operate as an acoustic lobby at all times, that is, both doors shall be maintained in a closed position, except for access and egress so as to prevent a noise breakout.
(iv) Glass bottles should not be emptied into external skips and bins after 22:00 or before 09:00.
(v) No amplification voice or instrumentation of music shall be permitted in external areas, such as the pavement area.
(vi) Openable windows and doors to the premises should be kept closed from 23:00 onwards, regardless of whether entertainment is taking place or not and should be kept closed whilst regulated or unregulated entertainment is taking place.
(vii) Clearly legible notices shall be displayed at all exits from the premises requesting the public and staff to respect the needs of local residents and to leave the premises and area quietly.
Reasons for decision
The Chairman advised that the Sub-Committee considered that this was a current business which was in possession of a premises licence, and was requesting extended opening hours. Members noted that it was a noisy area with many late night establishments. No specific complaints had been received by the Responsible Authorities relating to this premises. The agreed hours offered by the Applicant should go some way towards alleviating any problems with noise which were raised at the hearing by the Environmental Health Officer and Other Person.
The Chairman advised that the Members of the Sub-Committee felt that with the safeguards they had put in place, through conditions and with good management the variation should not cause a breach of the four licensing objectives, but if this was not the case then the licence could be reviewed.
The Chairman took the opportunity to advise that the Applicant had the right of appeal against the decision of the Committee. The appeal must be made in writing and within 21 days to the Cardiff and Vale of Glamorgan Magistrates Court. Should the Applicant be in any doubt as to their legal rights they should take independent legal advice.