Agenda, decisions and draft minutes

Review of License - Guildhall Bar, Northern Area Licensing Sub Committee - Friday 6 January 2012 10.30 am

Venue: Council Chamber - Council Offices, Monkton Park, Chippenham, SN15 1ER. View directions

Contact: Marie Gondlach (Democratic Services Officer), direct line 01225 713597 or email  marie.gondlach@wiltshire.gov.uk 

Items
No. Item

1.

Election of Chairman

To elect a Chairman for the meeting of the Sub Committee.

Minutes:

Nominations for a Chairman of the Licensing Sub Committee were sought and it was

 

Resolved:

 

To elect Councillor Trevor Carbin as Chairman for this meeting only.

2.

Procedure for the Meeting

The Chairman will explain the attached procedure for the members of the public present.

Supporting documents:

Minutes:

The Chairman explained the procedure to be followed at the hearing, as contained within the “Wiltshire Licensing Committee Procedural Rules for the Hearing of Licensing Act 2003 Applications” (Pages 1 – 7 of the Agenda refers).

3.

Chairman's Announcements

The Chairman will give details of the exits to be used in the event of an emergency.

Minutes:

The Chairman gave details of the exits to be used in the event of an emergency.

4.

Declarations of Interest

To receive any declarations of personal or prejudicial interests or dispensations granted by the Standards Committee.

 

Minutes:

There were no interests declared.

5.

Licensing Application

To consider and determine an Application by Ms L Penfold for a Review of the Premises Licence in respect of the Guildhall Bar, 9 Oxford Street, Malmesbury, Wiltshire.

Supporting documents:

Minutes:

Application by Ms L Penfold for a Review of a Premises Licence; the Guildhall Bar, 9 Oxford Street, Malmesbury, Wiltshire.

 

The Licensing Officer introduced the purpose and scope of the application, the premises to which it related and the key issues for consideration.  The background of the history of the premises was outlined within the report (page 9 to 12 of the agenda refer).  The review of the licence had been requested on the grounds that the premises had been conducted in such a manner as to prejudice the licensing objectives.   The grounds stated were:

 

·      Prevention of Crime and Disorder:  the patrons of the premises stand and drink on the street, fight, break windows and behave in a threatening manner

 

·      Public Safety:  the patrons of the premises stand in the street and present a danger to late night traffic.

·      Prevention of Public Nuisance:  the noise levels from the premises and its patrons are very high.

 

Several of the parties who had made representation had also suggested actions the Licence holder could take to address their concerns, these included:

 

·         Hours of opening are restricted to closure at 11pm on all nights of the week.

·         Licensee formally warned that disturbances of any kind will result in immediate withdrawal of the licence.

·         Withdrawal of the Licence.

·         Restriction on opening hours.

·         Revocation of the Licence.

·         Engage constructively with local police to address issues mentioned in representations.

 

The Licensing Officer concluded by drawing the Committee’s attention to the Secretary of State 182 Guidance, paragraph 11.22, which was also outlined in the report (page 9 of the agenda refers).

 

In accordance with the procedure detailed in the agenda, the Applicant (Ms Penfold), the Responsible Authorities (Wiltshire Police represented by Ms Gallimore, Sergeant (Sgt) Alvis, Sgt Cook and Inspector Martin) and the Interested Parties (Mr Sykes, Mrs Sykes and Councillor Simon Killane, Unitary Councillor for Malmesbury) were given the opportunity to address the Sub Committee.

 

Key points raised by the Applicant, Ms Penfold, were:

 

·               The disparity between the size and “lifestyle” in Malmesbury and what was happening in Oxford Street every weekend;

·               The fact that the two premises in Oxford Street had later opening times than other premises in Malmesbury therefore attracting patrons “to finish their night” when the other premises closed; 

·               The effort Ms Penfold had been happy to make to mitigate the impact of living near a public house (such as secondary double glazing); however she had not expected and could not do anything to address issues linked with the neighbouring premises such as violence in the streets, broken glasses, smashed windows, vomiting, urinating, shouting, swearing, cars beeping their horns and playing loud music when collecting patrons. There were restrictions, linked with the conservation area status, to what Ms Penfold could do to protect her property, for example she could not put bars on the windows but was now forced to consider installing a CCTV system;

·               The door staff only seemed to have been effective for two weeks and now appeared to be  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.