The Team Manager Licensing presented a report which asked the Licensing Act 2003 Sub Committee to consider an application for a premises licence for the above premises.
She advised that the premises licence was for a premises licence which authorised the various licensable activities at the premises.
The requested timings were as followed:
Supply of Alcohol:
Monday to Saturday: 18:00 – 23:00 hours
The Team Manager – Licensing advised that there was an objection to this application by a resident. The objection had not been withdrawn by the applicant; however the objector was not in attendance.
The applicant, Mark Owen was in attendance with his legal representative Stuart Richards.
The Team Manager – Licensing asked Mr Richards to provide further details in support of Mr Owen’s application.
Mr Richards explained that Mr Owen was a member of a pool team and a player in the Bridgend and District Pool League. He said that there are approximately 15 teams that cover the Bridgend, Porthcawl and Maesteg area. He added that Mr Owen generally played on a Monday and a Thursday and intended to host these events at his games room in his house.
Mr Richards explained that the games room would be the only room in the house that was licenced to sell alcohol and therefore guests would not be allowed to transport the paid for alcohol off the premises.
Mr Richards added that Mr Owen had already held a number of events at his premises and sold alcohol through the Temporary Event licenses and claimed to have had around 14. He explained that no complaints had ever been received during these events from the general public, residents or the police.
Mr Richards added that the reason Mr Owen wanted to apply for a permanent licence was because it was cheaper and more convenient than applying for a Temporary Event licence every month.
Mr Richards explained that Mr Owen fully understood the concerns of the resident who objected to this application. The children’s playground that backed on to Mr Owens property was of course in his mind when considering the licence to sell alcohol and that was why the application was for sale and use indoors only. Mr Richards was however unsure of why Mr Owen had received a complaint for this application and not any previous applications and questioned the validity of Mr Moore’s claims as it was observed that Mr Moore was rarely home and claimed that it was only his son who lived at the address permanently.
A Member asked Mr Richards how this was going to be managed, for example, if a guest wanted to go outside to smoke.
Mr Owen replied stating that he has a personal security licence and aimed to staff the door to ensure guests were not leaving with alcohol. He explained that there was also a cigarette disposal bin outside his property to ensure that the guests were properly disposing on cigarettes.
Mr Richards explained that the parking availability was ample for the number of guests that Mr Owen would be having round at any given time. He said that there was room for 3 cars on the driveway and 5 cars at the bottom of the driveway totalling 8 cars, however, there was never a requirement for this many cars as many of his guests car shared with each other. He added that the street was a dead end street so it can be difficult for cars to enter and exit the street but parking had never been an issue.
A Member asked if it was only pool events that Mr Owen was hosting. Mr Owen confirmed that it was only pool events.
A Member asked for how long Mr Owen had been hosting events under a Temporary Event Notice.
Mr Owen stated that he had been hosting events for just over a year at approximately one a month. He added that there had never been a complaint from the previous events.
A Member asked how Mr Owen advertised these events to residents, including the applications. Mr Owen confirmed that he advertised the events in advance by placing notices around his street.
There were no further questions from Members and asked Mr Owen and Mr Richards to leave so that the committee could make a decision. Upon reconvening, it was:
RESOLVED: The decision read as follows:
“The Committee have considered your application and the representations made you in support of your application. The committee have heard that you have received 14 temporary event notices and there were no complaints as a result of these events.
The Committee have taken into consideration that there are no objections or representatives from the police or public protection and there is only one objection to this application. The committee have not attributed any great weight to this objection as there is no address on the email and the objector has not appeared before the committee today to ascertain further information from him. The Committee have no evidence that this application will undermine the licensing objectives and have determined to grant the application.”