To receive apologies for absence from Members.

None

To receive Declarations of personal and prejudicial interest (if any) from members/ officers in accordance with the provisions of the Members Code of Conduct adopted by Council from the 1st September 2008.

None

The Team Manager – Licensing presented a report, which asked the Sub-Committee to consider two Objection Notices submitted by the South Wales Police in respect of Temporary Event Notices served on the Licensing Authority, referred to as Notice A and Notice B in the report.

The Team Manager – Licensing outlined the report, and advised the Sub-Committee that as far as she was aware no agreement or compromise had taken place in advance of the meeting by the Premises Licence Holder of Eden and the South Wales Police, which would give rise to the South Wales Police withdrawing the two Objection Notices. Both parties in turn agreed that this was the case and therefore the Hearing would have to proceed.

The Team Manager – Licensing added, that other than the Objection Notices to the TEN’s attached at Appendix A to the report, the only other document that had been put forward by the Police was a letter dated 1 December 2016, which had been served on the Premises Licence Holder as well as being tabled at the meeting, giving detailed reasons as to why the South Wales Police were objecting to the TEN’s. She added that paragraph 4.1 of the report contained details of both the events applied for, as well as the hours that the Premises Licence had applied for on the weekends of ¾ and 10/11 December 2016.

The Chairperson then asked the Police representative, PC S Rowlatt to present her case, and I particular, the reasons why the Objection Notices to the events had been submitted.

PC Rowlatt then presented the case of the South Wales Police details of which were shown at the attached Appendix to these Minutes.

A Member referred to page 4 of the attached Appendix 1, and the investigation of the Police made on 6 November 2016 at 06:08 when there were only 4 Door Control staff on duty at the premises when there should have been more. She noted that the premises should have not been open to the public at this time and asked PC Rowlatt for clarification upon this.

PC Rowlatt advised that this was the time the entry was subsequently logged at the Police station, whereas the time of the investigation being made had been at 02:30.

The Member also referred to page 5 of Appendix 1, and the maximum number of patrons that should be at the premises at one time, i.e. 350 persons on the ground floor at any one time, and 150 on the first floor. However, it also referred to the fact that any TEN’s could only allow for 499 persons to be present at the premises at any one time, including members of staff.  She sought clarification upon this.

PC Rowlatt advised that the above information was correct, in that there was a slight difference in the number of patrons that should occupy the premises at one time, with this being a maximum of 499 including staff on TEN occasions, and 500 under the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3.