Minutes:
The Applicant, Mr Roberts, presented his case. He explained that he had some additional documents which he would be referring to, which could be circulated to attendees at the Hearing if requested. Mr Roberts provided information on his personal and business background. He felt that his application for a premises licence confidently addressed the four Licensing Objectives.
The Sub-Committee were provided with information on the history of the site and the required planning permissions which had been granted. Mr Roberts explained that he had attended Parish Council meetings to provide information on his plans for No Twenty 9 and had copies of the minutes of the Parish Council meetings available. He explained that the Parish Council had initially not objected to the planning application, but at a subsequent meeting Mr Cartwright had raised concerns and asked for the application to be reconsidered. The application was then reconsidered and the Parish Council supported the application with a few comments. Mr Roberts provided information on how he planned to mitigate the comments made by the Parish Council. He explained that use of the Courtyard would be restricted to 9pm. He also referred to other Licensed Premises in the village and explained that another pub had a licence until 12pm, seven days a week.
Mr Roberts explained that the application for late night refreshment from 11pm to 11.30pm was to cover ‘drinking up’ time. Mr Roberts stated that he felt that he had satisfied the Mandatory Conditions and he would be the Designated Premises Supervisor. He explained that he held a Personal Licence and the Challenge 25 scheme would be introduced at the premises.
The Sub-Committee was informed that the conditions consistent with the operating schedule had been agreed by the Police as required and would be adhered to.
Mr Roberts provided a response to the seven letters received from other persons and highlighted the following:
· He did not agree with some of the distances that other persons had included in their representations and explained that there was not a direct line of view.
· The application for late night refreshment was to cover ‘drinking up’ time.
· He explained that some of the other persons had also objected to the planning application.
· He felt that Burnham Market was a vibrant village and the new car park was often busy, even in the evening.
· He did not feel that a 9.30pm end time and closure on a Sunday was appropriate, as other businesses in the village had longer opening times.
· He was not intending for the premises to be an events venue, it would be a Bar and Restaurant.
Mr Roberts explained that he had applied for an amendment to his Planning Application to bring his opening hours in line with the hours applied for under the Premises Licence. He also stated that he had a plan detailing the proximity of residents from his Premises and from the other Pub in the village.
The Licensing Manager clarified that live and recorded music could be provided at licensed premises between 8am and 11pm without requiring a licence. At the request of the Licensing Manager the additional information which Mr Roberts referred to was circulated to the Sub-Committee.
Mr Roberts responded to questions from the Sub-Committee and he explained that he had originally requested regulated entertainment on his licence, but this was subsequently withdrawn as he did not realise that this was no longer necessary. He explained that any live entertainment would take place in the bar area at the front of the premises.