Others invited:
Elizabeth Williams (Licensing
Officer, North Wales Police)
Mr Jonathan Smith (Park Holidays
UK Representative)
Mr John Flack (Head of Entertainment, Park Holidays UK)
Mr Gavin Cox (Bryn Teg General Manager)
Councillor Berwyn Parry Jones (Local Member)
Fiona Zinovieff (Local resident)
Ffion Muscroft (Public Protection Officer)
The Chair welcomed everyone to the meeting.
a)
The Licensing Department's Report
Submitted – the report of the Licensing Manager providing details of an application
to vary a premises licence, made by Park Holidays Ltd, in relation to seeking the right to make amendments
to the location plan of the licensed
bar area of y Lolfa and the dining
area. In addition, they had requested the right to add the licensed activities of Plays, Boxing and Wrestling, and indoor dance performances
on Monday to Sunday 09:00 in the morning until midnight.
It was confirmed that every part of the outlined plan for the licensed area would
remain unchanged, and that the licensed activities and hours on the current licence would remain
the same. They had requested the right to change a condition on the licence in order
to comply with the changes to the outlined plans. The applicant did not propose any additional
measures to those included on the operating schedule of the current licence, in order to promote
the licensing objectives. There was no change
to the hours of licensable activities, nor to the conditions in the operating schedule.
It was noted that
the Licensing Authority Officers had sufficient evidence that the application had been submitted in accordance
with the requirements of
the Licensing Act 2003 and the relevant
regulations.
Attention was drawn to the responses received during the consultation period. It was noted that objections to the application had been received from several
nearby residents, the Community Council and the Local
Member who referred to concerns in relation
to the Licensing Objectives
of Public Nuisance (continued and increased noise disruption, mainly) and Public Safety. It was highlighted that the Public Protection Department had confirmed that complaints had been received. North Wales Police had no objection to the application.
The Licensing Authority recommended refusing the application based on the evidence presented; unless the applicant could propose noise control
measures in the operating schedule, and restrict regulated and licensable activities entertainment to indoors only.
Since publishing the report, the applicant had proposed conditions and had also provided the case study Taylor v Manchester City
Council, indicating the
solicitors' wish to make the point on the applicant's behalf that the Licensing Authority should be considering the matters that were
the subject of the variation
rather than conditions / and licensable
activities that were already included
on the licence. The proposed conditions were as follows:
·
Wrestling and boxing
as licensable activities shall be removed from the application.
·
Live music and
recorded music shall be played indoors only.
·
No waste or
recyclable materials, including bottles, shall be moved, removed
or placed in any outside area between 23:00 and 08:00 the following day. [To
replace the current condition under 'Public Nuisance']
·
All windows and doors
(including bi-folding doors) shall be kept shut after 23:00 when Regulated
Entertainment is taking place, except for the immediate entry and exit of
persons.
·
A phone number shall
be made available during the provision of Regulated Entertainment for those
people who had made representations against the variation of the Premises
Licence.
It was highlighted that the applicant's solicitors had sent in a draft
of the application before submitting it to the Environmental Protection
Officer, because of a history of noise complaints. It was agreed with the
Officer that there would be no Environmental Health objection to the variation
application should the applicant be willing to remove the right to hold
regulated entertainment outside the premises from the licence. When the
application was submitted, it did not include the agreed variation to restrict
entertainment to indoors only because of the history of noise complaints. This
was therefore the basis for the recommendation in the report.
Based on the new conditions proposed, the Licensing Authority
recommended approving the application.
b)
In considering the application, the following procedure was followed:-
·
Members of the Sub-committee
were given an opportunity to ask questions of the Council’s representative.
·
At the Chair’s discretion, the applicant or his representative were invited to ask questions to the Council’s representative.
·
The applicant and / or
his representative were invited to expand on the application and to call witnesses
·
Members of the Sub-committee
were given the opportunity to ask questions of the applicant and/or
his representative.
·
At the Chair's discretion, the Council’s representative was invited to ask questions to the applicant or his representative.
·
Every Consultee was invited to support any written representations.
·
The Council’s representative and the applicant
or his representative were given the opportunity to summarise their case.
c)
Elaborating on the application, the applicant's representative noted as follows:
·
The application was to include the showing of films
·
The holiday park had been bought
by Park Holidays Ltd in July 2022, therefore many of the complaints referred to were historical complaints.
·
A site manager had been appointed and his phone number would be available
·
Work had been undertaken to alter the floor plan of the licensed area
·
There was no application to extend the hours of the sale of alcohol
·
The conditions proposed would serve to alleviate concerns
In response to a question regarding closing the windows to suppress noise and whether this was part of the existing licence, the applicant's representative stated that it was not included on the licence but was part of good practice
for the future.
In response to a question regarding admission times for the public,
the applicant's representative
stated that the holiday park was open to caravan owners and their guests. He added that the sale of alcohol would stop at 2am and that they were not applying
to change this.
The Solicitor stressed that the conditions on the current licence could not be discussed, and that only the variation was being examined
ch)
The consultees
in attendance took the opportunity to expand on the observations
they had submitted by letter.
Cllr Berwyn Parry Jones (Local Member)
·
He welcomed the proposed conditions – this was a U-turn
·
He hoped the company would keep
to their word – he had not seen a change in the past – reassurance was needed
·
The floor plan required updating to specify the alterations
·
Since the bi-folding doors had been installed, this had led to the noisiest night yet – the coronation ceremony
·
He had doubts about the practicality of shutting doors and windows, but understood
that there was an air conditioning system in place
·
He accepted that the Park had new owners, but it appeared that greater
consideration was being given to the amenities of the Park's residents rather than those of local residents (who were to a degree closer to the noise than the caravan owners were)
·
The noise suppression proposals had been submitted hastily and there was no certainty that
this would be successful – he suggested deferring the decision on the application until a revised scheme had been submitted and the Park managers had made the effort to put effective
noise control and suppression measures in place.
Fiona Zinovieff
·
There was more noise as
a result of installing the new bi-folding doors
·
There were no complaints in
2022 because there was no entertainment being held
·
The noise on the night of the coronation had been unbearable
·
The noise carried to neighbouring houses
·
The renovations had meant that the entertainment area now backed onto
the nearby dwellings – there were only
open doors on the boundary
·
Promises had been made in
the past, but they had not been fulfilled
Elizabeth Williams
(North Wales Police)
·
Noise complaints were a matter for the Public Protection Department
In response to a question regarding the number of complaints that had been received, she noted that
complaints had been made to the Public Protection Department on the night of celebrating the coronation, and in response there
was now strict control of keeping the bi-folding doors shut during licensable
activities.
Taking advantage of the right to summarise their case, the applicant's representative noted;
·
The company had 64 sites, therefore it was not a small company
·
Safety conditions had been proposed
·
The floor plan had been revised
·
A phone number would be available for local
residents
·
There were no additional hours
proposed in the application
·
They hoped to improve the situation and that the licence would not need reviewing
Taking advantage of the right to summarise their case, the Licensing Manager noted:
·
The proposed conditions submitted had changed the recommendation
·
Should the Sub-committee
decide to approve the application and accept the conditions, the wording of the conditions would need to be clear in terms of explaining
their operation and enforcement – the Sub-committee
had effective conditioning powers
d)
All parties were thanked for
making representations on the application.
The respondents and the Licensing
Manager withdrew from the meeting while the Sub-committee members discussed the application.
In reaching its decision, the Sub-committee considered the applicant's
application form along with written observations submitted by interested
parties, the Licensing Officer's report, and the verbal representations from
each party at the hearing. The Council's Licensing Policy and Home Office
guidelines were considered. The Sub-committee gave due consideration to all the
representations and weighed these up against the licensing objectives under the
Licensing Act 2003, namely:
i.
Prevention of crime and disorder
ii.
Prevention of public nuisance
iii.
Ensuring public safety
iv.
Protection of children from harm
The Sub-committee
disregarded observations that had been submitted if they were irrelevant to the
above objectives.
RESOLVED: To approve
the application in accordance with the requirements of the Licensing Act
2003.
The current licence shall be varied as follows:
The plan submitted with the application to be revised as a result of the fact that licensable
activities shall take place indoors
only.
To add the following
activities to the licence:
Dramas: Indoors
Sunday 09:00 - 24:00
Monday 09:00 - 24:00
Tuesday 09:00 - 24:00
Wednesday 09:00 - 24:00
Thursday 09:00 - 24:00
Friday 09:00 - 24:00
Saturday 09:00 - 24:00
Films: Indoors
Sunday 09:00 - 24:00
Monday 09:00 - 24:00
Tuesday 09:00 - 24:00
Wednesday 09:00 - 24:00
Thursday 09:00 - 24:00
Friday 09:00 - 24:00
Saturday 09:00 - 24:00
Indoor Sporting events:
Sunday 09:00 - 24:00
Monday 09:00 - 24:00
Tuesday 09:00 - 24:00
Wednesday 09:00 - 24:00
Thursday 09:00 - 24:00
Friday 09:00 - 24:00
Saturday 09:00 - 24:00
Dance Performances:
Indoors
Sunday 09:00 - 24:00
Monday 09:00 - 24:00
Tuesday 09:00 - 24:00
Wednesday 09:00 - 24:00
Thursday 09:00 - 24:00
Friday 09:00 - 24:00
Saturday 09:00 - 24:00
Live Music – This activity to be restricted to being held indoors
only from now on
Recorded Music – This activity to be restricted to being held indoors
only from now on
To vary the current conditions as stated in the application,
but further revised to account for the fact that
the licensable activities have now been
restricted to being held indoors only,
and that the plan has subsequently been revised as noted above.
To add the following
conditions to the licence:
No waste or recyclable
materials, including bottles, shall be moved, removed or placed in any outside
area between 23:00 and
08:00 the following day.
[To replace the current
condition under 'Public Nuisance']
All windows and doors
(including, to avoid any misunderstanding, the bi-folding doors) shall be kept shut
after 23:00 when Regulated Entertainment is taking place, except
for the immediate entry and exit of persons.
A phone number shall be made available during the provision of Regulated Entertainment for those people
who had made representations against the variation of the Premises Licence to be considered in a hearing on
26 May 2023.
Particular consideration was given to the following.
In the context of Preventing Crime and
Disorder the Police had no objections to
the application, and no evidence had been submitted which related to this
principle.
In the context of Public Safety one respondent
believed the bar area was very small for the number of intended customers, but
capacity was a matter for the fire risk assessment rather than the licensing
system. Many respondents had noted that the road towards the entrance of Bryn
Teg was narrow, busy and dangerous, but there was no
evidence to suggest that the application should be refused on this basis.
In the context of Preventing public nuisance, people's experience
of disruption because of noise carrying from the holiday park over the years
were noted, with several residents stating that the noise had been bad enough
and happening regularly enough that they had complained repeatedly to the local
member, to the Council and directly to the former managers of Bryn Teg.
It was noted from some of the responses that there had been instances where
doors and windows had not been shut during entertainment inside the building;
as a result, noise could be heard loudly and clearly in dwellings outside the
park.
Several respondents noted that glass bottles were being emptied into
recycling containers outside late at night after licensable activities had
ended. This was despite the fact that there was a
condition on the premises' current operating schedule specifying that this was
not to happen.
Officers had confirmed that noise complaints had been received from local residents regarding licensable activities at the
Holiday Park, and that there had been attempts to get the Park managers to
suppress the noise.
Nevertheless, it was noted despite this that the Environmental Health
Service had not made representation based on an understanding that the
applicant's intention was to restrict the current licensable activities to
being held indoors only, and that the application had now been revised to
address the Authority's concerns.
Specific conditions had been proposed to address noise, and officers
explained that closing doors and windows was a very effective method of
controlling noise. It was also noted that an air-conditioning system had now
been installed so that it would not be necessary to open the windows when it
was hot.
It was noted that the problems had arisen during the time of former
owners and managers, although there had been one recent case where a window was
left open, but a new, specific condition would address this.
On a more general note, it should be noted that the sub-committee could
only consider the specific variation that was the subject of the application.
Should problems arise with the running of the premises from a licensing
perspective, then the legislation provided a review procedure where the
authority could be requested to review any aspect of the licence if needed.
In the context of Protecting Children from Harm, no
evidence had been submitted that related to this principle.
The Sub-committee was pleased to note that the
applicant had considered the representations made and had been willing to
compromise by revising the application and offering to reduce the activities
that were already on the licence. In
these circumstances the Sub-committee was satisfied that the application as
revised was in accordance with the four licensing objectives, therefore the
application was approved
The Solicitor reported
that the decision would be formally confirmed by letter to everyone who had submitted written observations. He added that all parties to the application had the right to submit an appeal
to Caernarfon Magistrates' Court
against the Sub-committee's
decision. Any such appeal should
be lodged by giving notice of appeal to the Chief Executive, Llandudno Magistrates’ Court, Llandudno within 21 days of the date that the appellant
receives the letter (or a copy of the letter) confirming the decision.