Agenda item

To consider and determine an Application for a Premises Licence made by Box Catering Ltd in respect of 8 Market Place, Box, Corsham, SN13 8NZ.  The report of the Public Protection Officer (Licensing) is attached.

Application by Box Catering Ltd for a Premises Licence in respect of 8 Market Place, Box, Corsham, SN13 8NZ

 

Licensing Officer’s Submission

 

The Sub Committee considered a report (circulated with the agenda) seeking determination for an application for a Premises Licence, for which two relevant representations had been received. Teresa Isaacson (Public Protection Officer – Licensing) introduced the report about the application which was for the following licensable activity:

 

·       Sale by retail of alcohol (On sales only) 12:00-22:00 everyday

·       Hours open to the public 09:00-22:00 every day (not a licensable activity)

 

It was noted by the Sub Committee that there were four options available to them:

 

1.    To grant the licence subject to such conditions as are consistent with those included in the operating schedule submitted with the application, modified to such extent as the Sub Committee considers appropriate for the promotion of the licensing objectives, together with any mandatory conditions required by the Licensing Act.

2.    To exclude from the scope of the application any licensable activity.

3.    To refuse to specify a person as the designated premises supervisor.

4.    To reject the application.

 

 

The Public Protection Officer (Licensing) then highlighted that since the time of the application the Applicant had changed their name from VD Catering Ltd to Box Catering Ltd.

 

The following parties attended the hearing and took part in it:

 

On behalf of the Applicant

 

·       Two representatives on behalf of Box Catering Ltd.

 

Relevant Representations

 

·       Three local residents were in attendance who, between them, had made two relevant representations in objection to the application as it was made.

 

Responsible Authorities

 

·       There were no Responsible Authorities present.

 

The Chairman advised that the written representations had been read and considered by the members of the Sub Committee in advance of the meeting.

 

He then invited the Applicant to introduce their application.

 

Applicant’s Submission

 

The Applicant’s representatives spoke in support of granting the Premises Licence, highlighting the following points:

 

·       The Director of Box Catering Ltd had around 23 years’ experience in catering and hospitality, including on Viking Cruise Line. They were based in in nearby Rudloe and ran a food catering business that had supported events in Box. The company was known in the community and had received positive feedback.

·       Their intention was to open a cosy family restaurant serving homemade food. They felt that this would be more versatile than their existing gazebo as it would allow them to operate in a wider range of weather conditions. 

·       The premises was on the site of a former butcher’s shop, so it would be a positive thing for the community to bring new life to the street. The shop had closed following the retirement of the butcher. The Applicant had agreed a 10-year lease on the site, which had been vacant for a few months.

·       They felt that it would be better for the community if they applied for a licence as it would give them greater control over the consumption of alcohol on the premises than if customers were able to bring their own drinks.

·       The Applicant had invested time learning rules and regulations about the sale of alcohol. They would keep a book to maintain a record of people that tried to buy drinks with fake identity cards.

·       The premises would not allow drinking outside, so people would not be able to take alcoholic drinks away.

·       No surround sound system would be installed, it was only intended to play background music through a small radio.

·       There would be no rubbish collections between 7pm and 11am in order to control noise associated with managing waste. They would likely use the same waste provider used by the nearby nursery so that collections could be at the same time.

·       They would try to purchase as much food locally as possible, including from beef and egg farms in the nearby village. They also expected to employ four or five local people.

 

Sub Committee Members’ Questions

 

In response to the Members’ questions to the Applicant, the following points of clarification were given:

 

·       It was anticipated that there would be approximately 21 seats in the main seating area and an additional three seats in the bar area, so it was likely that there would be fewer than 38 people eating in the restaurant. The maximum capacity of 38 included staff and customers.

·       The floor plan provided was indicative and had been drawn by the Applicant in preparation for the licensing process.

·       A sign would be displayed on the building to remind people to restrict noise to a level that did not disturb neighbours. 

·       Information about parking would be available on the restaurant’s website.

 

Questions from Those Who Made a Relevant Representation

 

In response to questions to the Applicant from those that had made a relevant representation, the following points of clarification were given:

 

·       Customers would be allowed to come in and purchase drinks to consume inside the premises without buying food.

·       If someone was drunk, they would not be sold more alcoholic drinks and, if they were causing trouble, then the police would be contacted.

·       The bar area would be very small but would provide an area separate from the main restaurant where staff could prepare drinks.

 

The Licensing Officer (Public Protection) provided a point of clarification about the responsibility that the Applicant would have for people leaving the premises and causing disturbance if the licence was granted. She explained that the Licensing Act requested that reasonable measures were put in place, such as asking people to disperse and putting up a sign requesting respectful behaviour towards neighbours.

 

The Senior Solicitor also clarified that the Sub Committee were unable to consider parking in their deliberations, as this fell outside of the scope of the Licensing Act. 

 

Responsible Authorities’ Submissions

 

There were no representatives of Responsible Authorities present.

 

 

Submissions from Those Who Made Relevant Representations

 

Representation 1

 

·       Although supportive of the business coming to Box, they had concerns about the opening hours and the serving of alcohol. They lived close by and could hear lots that went on in the premises.An elderly neighbour also shared similar concerns.

·       Box Market Place was a narrow road, and the acoustics meant that sound travelled far.

·       The Market Place was currently quiet after 6pm when the local business closed.

·       There was a single glazed window in the kitchen area of the premises through which noise could easily penetrate.

·       They felt that the ideal solution would be to reduce the opening hours and not permit the sale of alcohol.

 

Representation 2

 

·       They were supportive of a restaurant opening at 8 Market Place but had concerns about noise pollution in the evenings.

·       The premises had operated as a butcher’s shop for 60 years.

·       The property to the rear of the premises, the Lycetts, was planned to be converted into purely residential property.

·       There were currently five bedrooms within eight and a half metres of the rear of 8 Market Place and this number was expected to increase to eight once the Lycetts had been converted.

·       As the premises was only single storey, they felt that sound would not dissipate in the same way that it would if it was in a taller structure.

·       An air conditioning unit on a nearby convenience store had had to be removed as it exceeded noise regulations. The noise generated by 38 people was likely to be louder than the air conditioning unit.

·       The two cafes in Box did not serve food in the evenings but had busy lunchtime and morning trade.

 

 

 

Sub Committee Members’ Questions

 

There were no questions from the Sub Committee.

 

 

Questions from the Applicant:

 

In response to questions from the Applicant to those that made relevant representations, the following points of clarification were given:

 

·       Their primary concerns were about opening times, as they felt that 10pm was a late closing time for a residential area where lots of children lived.

·       They did have concerns about noise pollution travelling through the kitchen window of the restaurant. 

 

The Applicant’s representatives also stated that it was not their intention that the restaurant would be open until 10pm every day as the Company Director had to attend university one day a week in London. Furthermore, they noted that there were no windows to the rear of the premises as they had been blocked off with insulating materials. This meant that there would be no overlooking of the bedrooms behind, and that noise pollution would be reduced.

 

In response to a question from the Applicant about whether there was a cut off time after which noise could be categorised a substantial nuisance, the Licensing Officer (Public Protection) explained that it was her understanding that anything after 11pm could be considered a substantial nuisance. However, she emphasised that she was not a noise specialist.

 

One of the representatives noted that they had not seen the windows to the rear of the premises boarded up.

 

Closing Submissions

 

Attendees that had made a relevant representation and the Applicant’s representatives were given the opportunity to make closing submissions but were satisfied that they had already made the points that they wanted to make.

 

 

 

Points of Clarification Requested by the Sub Committee

 

No points of clarification were requested by the Sub Committee.

 

The Sub Committee then adjourned at 11:10am and retired with the Senior Solicitor and the Democratic Services Officers to consider their determination on the licensing application.

 

The Hearing reconvened at 11:25am.

 

 

The Senior Solicitor advised that he gave legal advice to the Sub Committee relating to the Licensing Objectives.

 

The Chairman reiterated that there would be other avenues to raise concerns about parking and that the licence could be reviewed if significant noise pollution occurred.

 

 

The Northern Area Licensing Sub Committee RESOLVED: 

 

Decision:

 

Arising from consideration of the report, the evidence and submissions from all parties and having regard to the Statutory Guidance, the Council’s Statement of Licensing Policy and the Licensing Act 2003, the application for a Premises Licence in respect of (8 Market Place, Box, Corsham) be GRANTED for the licensable activities and shown below:

 

Licensable Activities	Days	Timings
Sale of alcohol (on sales only)	Monday to Sunday	12:00 – 22:00
Hours open to the public (Not a licensable activity)	Monday to Sunday	09:00 – 22:00

 

 

Reasons

 

In reaching its decision, the Sub Committee took account of all the oral representations from those parties present at the hearing and all the written evidence provided. The Sub Committee also considered the relevant provisions of the Licensing Act 2003; the four Licensing Objectives; the Guidance issued under Section 182 of the Licensing Act 2003; and the Licensing Policy of Wiltshire Council.

 

The Sub Committee noted the concerns raised about the potential noise disturbance to a residential area, especially outside of normal working hours. They also considered commitments by the Applicant, including those listed in Section M of the Application Form, about how they would promote the Licensing Objectives. The Sub Committee heard steps that would be taken to meet these objectives including that training that would be provided to staff and that a contact number would be available should any undesirable behaviour arise.

 

Noting that there had been no representations made by any of the Responsible Authorities, the Sub Committee found that, as long as the Applicant implemented the steps they had committed to in Section M of the Application Form, there was no evidence to demonstrate that the application would adversely impact on the Licensing Objectives. The Sub Committee therefore concluded that, based on the evidence presented, the application should be granted without modification. They were satisfied that such a decision was reasonable and legally sound.

 

Being mindful of concerns from residents, the Sub Committee added two advisory comments about the provision of appropriate information for customers using the premise.

 

• To make parking information for customers available on the restaurant’s website.

 

• To display appropriate signage, about considerate behaviour and minimising noise, on the building.

 

Right to Appeal

 

The Premises Licence Holder, any Responsible Authority(ies) and Interested Parties who made representations were informed that they may appeal the decision made by the Licensing Sub Committee to the Magistrates Court. The appeal must be lodged with the Magistrates Court within 21 days of the written notification of the decision.  In the event of an appeal being lodged, the decision made by the Licensing Sub Committee remains valid until any appeal is heard and any decision made by the Magistrates Court.