Agenda item
BELLE VUE,
BANGOR, LL57 2EU
To consider
the above application
Minutes:
Everyone was welcomed to the meeting by the Chairman, Cllr Tudor Owen. The panel
and the officers were introduced to everyone present. It was announced that
everybody had up to 10 minutes to share their observations. It was also noted
that the Members had visited the site.
APPLICATION TO VARY A PREMISES LICENCE –
BELLE VUE, HOLYHEAD ROAD, BANGOR
On behalf of the premises: Mr Christopher Jere, Bethany Shooman
Local Member: Cllr June Marshall
Others in attendance: Mr Ian Williams (North Wales Police), Mrs Arfona
Davies (Upper Bangor Association / Local Resident)
The report and recommendation of the Licensing Section.
a)
Submitted – the report of the Licensing
Manager providing details of Mr Christopher Jere's
application for a premises licence for Belle Vue,
Holyhead Road, Bangor. In accordance with the application form, the nature
of the proposed variation was to extend the premises’ licensable area to
include the outbuildings in the beer garden to operate as a bar, and that the
alcohol supply hours in the beer garden were the same as that of the public
house. In addition, it was
proposed to reduce the opening hours of the establishment from 08:00 - 01:30
Monday to Sunday to 09:00 - 01:30 Monday to Sunday.
Reference was made to the fact that the applicant had included
appropriate steps to promote the four licensing objectives as part of his
application.
Following a consultation period, it was noted that observations from
North Wales Police noted that they did not object to the application, but
proposed that the CCTV installed on the premises was subject to specific CCTV
conditions. One objection to the application was received from
a local resident, where it was suggested that the applicant failed to display
the notice in a prominent position on the premises, and on the grounds of the
licensing objectives of Public Safety and Preventing Public Nuisance.
It was added that a Licensing Enforcement Officer
had visited the premises on 7 July 2015 to check that the notice had been
displayed in accordance with the regulations. The Licensing Authority was satisfied that the notices complied with
regulations.
b)
In considering the application, the following
procedure was followed:-
·
Members of the Sub-committee and the applicant were
given an opportunity to ask questions of the Licensing Manager.
·
The applicant was invited to expand on the
application.
·
Consultees were
given an opportunity to submit their observations.
·
The licensee, or his representative, was invited to
respond to the observations.
·
Members of the Sub-committee were given an
opportunity to ask questions of the licensee.
·
Members of the Sub-committee were given an
opportunity to ask questions of the consultees.
c)
In response to the report the Licensing Manager was
asked for the definition of a ‘beer garden’. It was noted that the beer garden was part of
the premises and was within the boundary and had been included on the current
licence, but that the application involved using the building in the garden to
sell beer. In terms
of the use of a smoking area, it was noted that there was alternative
legislation for this.
In addition, it was confirmed that the applicant had displayed a notice
on the premises for the appropriate period of 28 days.
ch) In elaborating on the application, the
applicant noted that he was happy with what had been submitted and confirmed
that operational CCTV had been installed in the building in accordance with
Police requirements.
It was noted that it was an application to formalise the use of the
outhouse to for the sale of alcohol, rather than having to apply for a
temporary licence to host events.
d)
Following a site visit, the applicant was asked
what his intention was in terms of managing the gate at the rear of the
premises. The
applicant noted that the gate would only be open in emergencies, but that it
was not possible to lock it. CCTV had now been installed outside and therefore it would be possible
to monitor the gate.
It was also noted, should the application be approved, that it would
enable a member of staff to be outside in the garden to monitor the gate. It was added that
the car park was locked at 6:30pm.
In response to a concern that people went out to
the front of the building to smoke and drink, the applicant noted that CCTV had
been installed near the bar to monitor this. He noted that he was very willing to improve
this situation, and, if the bar in the garden was approved, the hope was to encourage
people to use the garden rather than the front of the building.
dd) In response to the application, Mr Ian
Williams noted on behalf of the Police that they did not have much evidence to
refuse the application. It was added that Belle Vue had made 10
applications for temporary licences during 2014/2015 and 8 applications this
year so far. The
applicant's intention was to not have to pay for a temporary licence for every
temporary event. In terms
of calls to the Police, it was noted that six events had been recorded - three
crimes of theft and damage and three were general calls for support from the
premises. No noise
complaints had been recorded.
In terms of the CCTV
condition, it was noted that it was a general condition to ensure consistency
with other users. He was
aware that a new system had been installed in the premises and that the
applicant had complied with conditions. It was added that 16 cameras had been
installed, but there was no programme to monitor that these were use. It was emphasised,
if the condition had been imposed on the contract, there was an expectation for
the equipment to be operational.
In response to the
police's observation, the applicant noted that the Police regularly used the
premises' CCTV as the location of the public house was prominent in Upper
Bangor.
e)
In response to the application, a Local Resident
(who objected to the application) noted the following observations:
·
A planning application was necessary due to new use
·
Needed to prevent use of outside area to reduce the
number of smokers
·
Needed to control the number who were allowed to
use the beer garden
·
Public Safety needed to be considered
·
Increase in noise pollution
·
Plenty of public houses in Upper Bangor offered entertainment
·
Neither the Police nor Gwynedd Council had control
over the situation
The Local
Member was permitted to submit observations although he had not submitted
written observations.
In
response to the application, a Local Member (who objected to the application on
the grounds of noise pollution) noted the following observations:
·
Improvements to the area had been made
·
Natural application for music to enjoy the outdoor
area
·
Difficult to control noise levels
·
Other public houses with beer gardens had a
condition that live / recorded music was not to be played simply because the
garden was within a residential area.
In response to a Local Member’s observation, the
Licensing Manager noted that music rights already existed on the premises'
current licence. Regarding
an observation about controlling numbers in the beer garden, it was noted that
the Fire Service had not submitted an objection to the application. In terms of noise
complaints, it was noted that they needed to be referred to the Environmental Health
Service.
f)
When summarising his application, the applicant
noted that he was aware that families and older adults lived in the area and
that they had invited Members of the Upper Bangor Association to discuss their
plans. They did
not want to be labelled as anti-social innkeepers and were seeking, within
reason, to conform to local residents' requirements. It was reported that there was no intention
to play loud noises - it was likely that acoustic music would be played, and
that the beer garden was relatively sheltered. The panel was reminded that no objection had
been received from direct neighbours.
ff)
The relevant parties left the meeting.
The
members of the Sub-committee discussed the application, considered all the evidence
submitted, and gave particular attention to the principles of the Licensing Act
2003, namely -
• Crime and
Disorder
• Public
Safety
• Preventing
Public Nuisance
• Protection
of Children from Harm
The Sub-committee
was willing to approve the application in line with the Police's
recommendations regarding CCTV. There were no grounds to the evidence or complaints, and it was
suggested that noise complaints for the future would be passed on to the
appropriate service.
Well wishes were expressed to the applicant with the new initiative.
RESOLVED to approve the application for a premises licence in accordance
with the objectives of the Licensing Act 2003 together with ensuring that CCTV
is installed within the premises in line with specific CCTV conditions
The Solicitor
reported that the decision would be confirmed formally by letter sent to
everyone present. He also
notified that they had the right to appeal the decision within 21 days of
receiving the letter.
The meeting commenced at 2:00pm and concluded
at 3:00pm.
Supporting documents: