Agenda and minutes

To receive any apologies/substitutions and to note changes to Committee membership following the annual meeting of Council on 13 May 2014.

Apologies were received from Councillors Bucknell, Drewett, Hewitt and Jacobs.  Councillor Moss was substituting for Councillor Bucknell and Councillor J Osborn was substituting for Councillor Drewett.  The Chairman welcomed Councillor Nick Watts to the Committee.

To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 28 April 2014 (copy attached).

The minutes of the meeting held on 28 April 2014 were presented to the Committee.

Resolved:

That the minutes of the meeting of the Licensing Committee held on 28 April 2014 be approved and signed as a correct record.

The Chairman reported that training for new Committee members would be taking place in the next couple of weeks.

As there were members of the public present for item 8 (Cumulative Impact Area – Salisbury) this item would be moved forward on the Agenda and considered after the public participation.

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

There were no declarations of interest.

The Council welcomes contributions from members of the public.

Statements

If you would like to make a statement at this meeting on any item on this agenda, please register to do so at least 10 minutes prior to the meeting. Up to 3 speakers are permitted to speak for up to 3 minutes each on any agenda item. Please contact the officer named above for any further clarification.

Questions

To receive any questions from members of the public or members of the Council received in accordance with the constitution. Those wishing to ask questions are required to give notice of any such questions in writing to the officer named above no later than 5pm on Friday 23 May 2014.

Please contact the officer named on the first page of this agenda for further advice. Questions may be asked without notice if the Chairman decides that the matter is urgent.

Details of any questions received will be circulated to Committee members prior to the meeting and made available at the meeting and on the Council’s website.

No questions had been submitted prior to the meeting.  There were four members of the public present who wished to make statements in relation to item no 8 on the Agenda – Cumulative Impact Area – Salisbury.

Cllr Matthew Dean – Salisbury City Council

Summary of points raised:

·         Salisbury City Council had discussed the results of the consultation and do not feel a CIZ is appropriate for Salisbury and request that the licensing Committee does not agree to implement it;

·         Salisbury has the highest shop occupancy in the South West, but lots of work is being done to find alternative uses for empty shops to create a vibrant leisure and tourism economy;

·         If a CIZ was to be implemented this would mean a moratorium on new businesses who may wish to invest in the city;

·         Salisbury already has “Purple Flag” status and the Council as Licensing Authority does a good job with issuing and monitoring licenses under the current arrangements; and

·         The imposition of a CIZ would represent an administrative burden to the Council and to business at a time when resources and capital are scarce.

A Petition containing 17 signatures with the following statement was handed to the Chairman.

“1.  We the undersigned believe that the Wiltshire Council proposal to introduce a Cumulative Impact Zone (CIZ) would be very damaging to the economy and environment of Salisbury and would harm the economic viability of our City Centre.

2.  Further, it would place an additional administrative and financial burden on businesses and Wiltshire Council, reduce transparency and democratic accountability for no tangible advantages.

3.  We therefore call upon the Licensing Committee of Wiltshire Council to reject these proposals”.

Mr Dominic Imms – Cambridge Wine Merchants

Summary of points raised:

·         There has been good investment in the city recently and if there was a CIZ in Salisbury this may mean that retailers move to out of town areas;

·         The number of contributors to the consultation was small (82) in comparison to the size of the population (42,000) and we do not feel it represents the wants and needs of the city; and

·         If the implications of having a CIZ in Salisbury were fully explained in the consultation then there may have been different responses received.

Ms Amanda Newbery – Chairman of Business Improvement District

Summary of points raised:

·         Salisbury is working to pull together as a city to balance out its evening and night time economy;

·         The Business Improvement District Group considered the consultation and were not in support of the proposal of a CIZ.  This is made up of a number of different people, but we query if this was only counted as one response to the consultation; and

·         Please act with caution and don’t do anything to damage Salisbury at this sensitive time.

Cllr John Walsh – Salisbury City Council/Wiltshire Council.

Summary of points raised:

·         I wish to ensure a balanced approach to the problems and wish to respect the residents of the city but also enjoy an  ...  view the full minutes text for item 28.

A briefing note has been prepared by the Enforcement Manager, Environment Services to provide an update to the Licensing Committee on the current situation with regard to the Scrap Metal Dealers Act (2013).

Peter White (Enforcement Manager, Environment Services) presented an update on the current situation with regard to the Scrap Metal Dealers Act (2013).

Members raised some queries which included:

·         The appeal process – This is an internal appeal heard by Senior Council officers.  After that any appeal would be heard by the Magistrates Court.

·         “Silent partners” within a business – All applicants are assessed as to their suitability.  It may be that silent partners may not be as suitable and the Council are wary of those but can only consider those on the application but would be vigilant on visits to the site, etc.

·         What is your proactive approach? – The Council works closing with the Police, carries out site visits and relies on intelligence from Council Officers who are about in the district and identify potential problems/breaches of a licence.

Resolved:

That this Scrap Metal Update be noted and that future half yearly updates be received by the Committee.

The report of the Public Protection Team Leader (Licensing) requests that the Licensing Committee re-ratify its decision made at the Licensing Committee meeting on 6 February 2012 in relation to the adoption of Cosmetic Piercing and Skin Colouring legislation and byelaws.

Linda Holland (Public Protection Team Leader) presented a report which requested that the Committee re-ratify a decision made at the Licensing Committee meeting on 6 February 2012 in relation to the adoption of Cosmetic Piercing and Skin Colouring legislation and byelaws. 

Linda apologised that due to an omission the decision was never referred to Full Council to be formally adopted.  She felt that it was important for the Council to have one set of unified byelaws.

Members suggested a couple of minor inclusions/amendments to the byelaws relating to tongue piercing, the definition of sterilisation and including reference to his and her hands.

Resolved:

That the Committee re-ratify the decisions of the Licensing Committee of 6 February 2012 – namely to recommend to Council that:

i)               The provisions of Section 14, 15, 16 and 17 of the Local Government (Miscellaneous) Provisions Act 1982 be adopted and should come into effect on 1 August 2014.

ii)             Byelaws in the form of the model set out in pages 16 to 21 of the agenda (with amendments as discussed at the meeting) be adopted and submitted for confirmation.

iii)            The current byelaws which had previously been adopted by the ex-district Councils be revoked on the confirmation of the new model byelaws.

The report of the Public Protection Team Leader (Licensing) providesinformationfollowing the recent Cumulative impact area survey carried out for the Salisbury area and asks the Committee to consider the adoption of a special licensing policy.

Linda Holland (Public Protection Team Leader) presented a report which provided information following the recent cumulative impact area survey which was carried out for the Salisbury area.  The report asked the Committee to consider the adoption of a special licensing policy.

The Committee had heard from 4 members of the public (as detailed under minute number 28 above) and copies of letters/emails from the following were circulated at the meeting and these are appended to these Minutes:

·         Letter from Cllr John Lindley, Salisbury City Council, 28 May 2014

·         Email from Dominic Imms, Cambridge Wine Merchants, 29 May 2014

·         Email from Cllr Matthew Dean, Salisbury City Council, 28 May 2014

·         Email from David Andrews, VisitWiltshire, 30 May 2014.

In response to the statements made during the public participation, Naji Darwish (Head of Service – Public Protection) stated that:

·         The CIZ is a tool for the Licensing Committee to be able to manage licences in a better, more efficient way;;

·         At present, if no objections are received to an application then the licence has to be granted.  If there was a CIZ in place this would still be the case.  A CIZ allows the Committee to consider the impact of multiple licensed premises on the community at large;

·         The imposition of a CIZ to Salisbury would not mean that all applications within that area are declined, it would ask for a greater quality of application to be submitted, e.g. CCTV, the use of plastic glasses and better staff training, etc; there is no intention to restrict – just to stop a less effective business from setting up in the area;

·         There would be no impact on the Police and Council time if a CIZ were to be implemented;

·         The CIZ would support the Purple Flag objective and the Council also wishes to create a diverse night time economy; and

·         I agree that a response of 82 is not an indicative view of all those in Salisbury, but the opportunity was given for responses.

Cllr Hutton (Portfolio Holder) commented that a CIZ would be another layer of scrutiny and that Council was not wishing to stop business coming to Salisbury but to protect existing ones.  He supported the views of the Officers and agreed that the response to the consultation was disappointing.

Members discussed the issues and made the following points:

·         The Purple Flag status means a lot to Salisbury and is bigger than Chippenham or Trowbridge.  If we have trouble with premises we can suspend or revoke their licences;

·         It is a long and costly process to get to the suspension or revocation of a licence stage – support the reduced area for the proposed CIZ.  See it as a necessary tool and we can give it due regard but do not have to use it as it not compulsory;

·         As a Committee we requested Officers to look at this for us and see it as a step in the right direction.  Question if Salisbury Hospital were included in the consultation process?  ...  view the full minutes text for item 31.

Members are asked to note the future meetings of the Licensing Committee, all to commence at 10.30am and to be held in the Kennet Room, 1^st Floor, County Hall, Trowbridge:

Monday 8 September 2014 and

Monday 8 December 2014.

Members noted the dates of future meetings of the Licensing Committee as detailed below, all to start at 10.30am:

Monday 8 September 2014

Monday 8 December 2014.

The possibility of holding an extraordinary meeting in Salisbury would be investigated although members did not wish for a precedent to be set on moving meeting locations.

There were no urgent items.