Interactive webcast player

Licensing (Premises) Sub-Committee
Tuesday, 18th August 2026 at 2:00pm

 
Share this agenda point
  1. Harry Thomas - Democratic Services Officer
Share this agenda point
  1. Cllr Phil Gomm
Share this agenda point
  1. Cllr Kathy Gibbon
  2. Cllr Phil Gomm
  3. Cllr Michael West
  4. Cllr Phil Gomm
  5. Sarah Coates - Licensing Officer
  6. Cllr Phil Gomm
  7. Sarah Phillips - Legal Officer
  8. Cllr Phil Gomm
  9. Harry Thomas - Democratic Services Officer
  10. Cllr Phil Gomm
  11. Applicant
  12. Cllr Phil Gomm
  13. Applicant's Representative
  14. Cllr Phil Gomm
  15. Interested Party
  16. Cllr Phil Gomm
  17. Interested Party
  18. Cllr Phil Gomm
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
  1. Sarah Phillips - Legal Officer
  2. Cllr Phil Gomm
Share this agenda point
  1. Sarah Coates - Licensing Officer
  2. Cllr Phil Gomm
  3. Interested Party
  4. Cllr Phil Gomm
  5. Interested Party
  6. Cllr Phil Gomm
  7. Cllr Kathy Gibbon
  8. Sarah Coates - Licensing Officer
  9. Cllr Phil Gomm
  10. Sarah Coates - Licensing Officer
  11. Cllr Phil Gomm
  12. Sarah Coates - Licensing Officer
  13. Cllr Phil Gomm
  14. Interested Party
  15. Cllr Phil Gomm
  16. Sarah Coates - Licensing Officer
  17. Interested Party
  18. Cllr Phil Gomm
  19. Applicant's Representative
  20. Cllr Phil Gomm
  21. Applicant's Representative
  22. Sarah Phillips - Legal Officer
  23. Cllr Phil Gomm
  24. Sarah Phillips - Legal Officer
  25. Cllr Phil Gomm
  26. Applicant's Representative
  27. Sarah Phillips - Legal Officer
  28. Applicant's Representative
  29. Cllr Phil Gomm
  30. Sarah Coates - Licensing Officer
  31. Applicant's Representative
  32. Harry Thomas - Democratic Services Officer
  33. Sarah Phillips - Legal Officer
  34. Cllr Phil Gomm
  35. Applicant's Representative
  36. Cllr Phil Gomm
  37. Interested Party
  38. Applicant's Representative
  39. Cllr Phil Gomm
  40. Applicant
  41. Interested Party
  42. Applicant
  43. Cllr Phil Gomm
  44. Interested Party
  45. Cllr Phil Gomm
  46. Applicant
  47. Applicant's Representative
  48. Applicant
  49. Interested Party
  50. Applicant
  51. Applicant's Representative
  52. Cllr Phil Gomm
  53. Interested Party
  54. Applicant's Representative
  55. Interested Party
  56. Applicant's Representative
  57. Interested Party
  58. Applicant's Representative
  59. Cllr Phil Gomm
  60. Interested Party
  61. Cllr Phil Gomm
  62. Applicant's Representative
  63. Cllr Phil Gomm
  64. Interested Party
  65. Cllr Phil Gomm
  66. Interested Party
  67. Cllr Phil Gomm
  68. Sarah Phillips - Legal Officer
  69. Cllr Phil Gomm
  70. Interested Party
  71. Cllr Phil Gomm
  72. Cllr Michael West
  73. Cllr Phil Gomm
  74. Cllr Kathy Gibbon
  75. Applicant's Representative
  76. Cllr Kathy Gibbon
  77. Applicant's Representative
  78. Cllr Kathy Gibbon
  79. Applicant's Representative
  80. Cllr Kathy Gibbon
  81. Applicant's Representative
  82. Cllr Kathy Gibbon
  83. Cllr Phil Gomm
  84. Applicant's Representative
  85. Interested Party
  86. Applicant's Representative
  87. Cllr Phil Gomm
  88. Applicant
  89. Cllr Phil Gomm
  90. Applicant's Representative
  91. Cllr Phil Gomm
  92. Applicant's Representative
  93. Cllr Phil Gomm
  94. Applicant's Representative
Share this agenda point
  1. Applicant's Representative
  2. Cllr Phil Gomm
  3. Interested Party
  4. Cllr Phil Gomm
  5. Interested Party
  6. Cllr Phil Gomm
  7. Interested Party
  8. Cllr Phil Gomm
  9. Cllr Michael West
  10. Interested Party
  11. Cllr Michael West
  12. Cllr Phil Gomm
  13. Applicant's Representative
  14. Cllr Phil Gomm
  15. Cllr Kathy Gibbon
  16. Interested Party
  17. Cllr Phil Gomm
  18. Interested Party
  19. Cllr Phil Gomm
  20. Interested Party
  21. Cllr Phil Gomm
  22. Interested Party
  23. Cllr Phil Gomm
  24. Interested Party
  25. Cllr Phil Gomm
  26. Cllr Kathy Gibbon
  27. Interested Party
  28. Cllr Kathy Gibbon
  29. Cllr Phil Gomm
  30. Applicant
  31. Cllr Phil Gomm
  32. Applicant's Representative
  33. Cllr Phil Gomm
  34. Sarah Coates - Licensing Officer
  35. Cllr Phil Gomm
  36. Applicant's Representative
  37. Sarah Phillips - Legal Officer
  38. Applicant's Representative
  39. Cllr Phil Gomm
  40. Sarah Phillips - Legal Officer
  41. Applicant's Representative
  42. Sarah Phillips - Legal Officer
  43. Applicant's Representative
  44. Sarah Phillips - Legal Officer
  45. Applicant's Representative
  46. Cllr Phil Gomm
  47. Sarah Phillips - Legal Officer
  48. Applicant's Representative
  49. Sarah Phillips - Legal Officer
  50. Cllr Phil Gomm
  51. Interested Party
  52. Cllr Phil Gomm
  53. Interested Party
  54. Cllr Phil Gomm
  55. Applicant's Representative
  56. Cllr Phil Gomm
  57. Webcast Finished

Harry Thomas - Democratic Services Officer - 0:00:09
Okay, we're started. So good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. The first business on the agenda

1 Confirmation of Chairman

is just to confirm the chairman for the hearing and I think Councillor Phil Gomme has been
selected to chair the hearing, so I'll hand over to him now.

2 Introductory remarks by the Chairman

Cllr Phil Gomm - 0:00:19
Thank you very much, Harry, as we move on. Good afternoon and welcome to the Buckenshire
Licencing Subcommittee hearing in relation to an application to vary the premises licence
at the Swan to High Street Iver SL 09 NG. As per the Licencing Act of 2003 and regulations
made there under, licences subcommittees are not protruding from holding remote hearings
as they are unaffected by the requirements relating to the Local Government Act of 1972
and therefore hearings may be conducted online and attended remotely by members and officers.
The public and the press can still see and hear the hearing through the live webcast and members
of the public have been allowed into the virtual hearing to speak where they have registered to do
say. So I'm the chairman of the hearing, I'm Philip Garm, I chair, I, oh sorry, my ward is the
going to go around to my colleagues that are joining us on the meeting today and the first
Cllr Kathy Gibbon - 0:01:31
one is Councillor Gibbon. Hello good afternoon so I'm Councillor Gibbon and I'm the Member for
Cllr Phil Gomm - 0:01:37
Cllr Michael West - 0:01:38
Bearden, Kingsbrook and Wig. And Councillor West. I'm Councillor Mike West and I'm
Cllr Phil Gomm - 0:01:48
board member for Haines, Hollis, Green and Loudwater. Very good colleagues thank you very much
And as we move on, we're going to move on to Sarah Coates, our licencing officer.
Good afternoon, everyone. I'm Sarah Coates. I'm the licencing officer for Buckinghamshire
Sarah Coates - Licensing Officer - 0:01:58
Cllr Phil Gomm - 0:02:01
Council. Thank you. And she will present the report
and provide advice on any matters relating to licencing policy, guidance and practise.
And then as we move on, our legal advisor, very important person, Sarah Phillips.
Sarah Phillips - Legal Officer - 0:02:15
Good afternoon, my name is Sarah Phillips, I'm the legal officer today.
Cllr Phil Gomm - 0:02:24
Thank you and Sarah is here to advise the panel on licencing and government, local government law.
This is also to ensure that when the committee makes a decision, it's both within its powers and legally sound.
Moving around the screen, we then go on to Harry Thomas.
Harry Thomas - Democratic Services Officer - 0:02:39
Hello everyone, I'm Harry Thomas, I'm here with Democratic Services for the Economic Council.
Cllr Phil Gomm - 0:02:41
Very good and again Harry Thomas's Democratic Services and Harry supports us in all of the
meeting and also can help us and advise on council procedure. Now we're going to come
down to all those that are in attendance and I'll go through them in the following order.
I hope I pronounced everybody's name correct. Apologies if I don't get it quite right but
we go there and then we see if anyone's in the room that hasn't been registered on here.
So, Ravvitsingh, Lailia is the applicant, is that correct, sir?
Applicant - 0:03:21
Yeah? Yeah, that's correct. Thank you very much. And then we move on to Matthew Phipps,
Cllr Phil Gomm - 0:03:24
Applicant's Representative - 0:03:29
is the agent for the applicant? Yes, present. Very good, thank you. Then we move on with the
Cllr Phil Gomm - 0:03:32
interested parties we've got Samantha Lavender. Hi yeah that's me sorry it comes up as Etherington
Interested Party - 0:03:38
Cllr Phil Gomm - 0:03:44
as that's my unmarried name and I'm using my work email. Oh so it's very confusing.
It's confusing me in the hearing but don't worry we'll get there by the end of that.
Interested Party - 0:03:56
Then moving down on interested parties we've got Councillor Judy Cook. Yeah hi. Thank you.
Cllr Phil Gomm - 0:03:59
Continuing, another interested party is Dale Norton.
Thank you.
And another interested party, Patrick Allen.
Present.
Thank you. And is there any, I can't see maybe the whole screen is, I think that's it, of anyone in the meeting, is that correct, Harry?
Yes, that's correct, yeah.
It's just I can hear some sound in the background.
It sounds like there's another empty mic somewhere,
but okay, not a problem.
So I can confirm that if a relevant person is not present,
their representations would have been read
and will be considered when reaching a decision.
I'd like to ask that nobody apart from the panel members
and officers use the chat function
that we use quite often every now and again.
So we now move on to agenda item three,

4 Declarations of interest

which is do we have any apologies of absence?

3 Apologies for absence

No, Chairman, we don't.
Thank you. And continuing on to agenda item 4,

4 Declarations of interest

turning now to declarations of interest,
which is a very important issue within the council
under the council's code of conduct.
Do any members have any declarations of interest
which they wish to bring to the attention of the subcommittee?
No.
No.
Thank you. For those who don't realise if anyone has any connexions or knows of the
applicant, that's where we sort of normally declare that interest. But thank you very
much colleagues for that as well. Okay, on to agenda item five, we have the virtual licencing

5 Hearing Procedure Rules

committee hearing procedure rules, which are appended to the agenda pack for information.
Please couldn't parties in attendance confirm that they have seen and understood the procedure to be followed during this hearing.
Everybody? Yep. Very good.
So if everyone's happy in attendance, happy to proceed with the meetings, we'll continue happy to proceed.
Yeah, it looks a bit, we're ready to go.
So the purpose of the hearing should be born in mind
at all times to enable those with a right to appear
to advance their point of view and concerns
to test the case of their opponents.
And also to assist the subcommittee to gather evidence
and understand the relevant issues.
Please be reminded that parties should only address
the subcommittee in relation to matters previously raised
or submitted within their concerns. So the subcommittee may depart from this procedure
if it considers it necessary or equitable to do so during the hearing. Do we have any preliminary
issues? Yes chair there's one preliminary point from legal to voice and that is that a letter was
Sarah Phillips - Legal Officer - 0:06:57
received from Councillor Cook over the weekend on behalf of
Iver's parish council. That letter has been shared with
members subject to redactions to ensure that it only relates to
the prevention of public nuisance licencing objective,
which was the objection advanced during the consultation period.
Thank you.
Thank you very much. And to be aware, colleagues did consider
Cllr Phil Gomm - 0:07:24
you know that was that in the time frame yes it was so we accepted that and I understand that all parties
accept that letter at that point because if it'd been 24 hours 24 hours or less before
it would have been a slight issue but it wasn't so that's why we accepted it into the hearing
moving forward. So as we move on to agenda item six we now need to consider the officer report

6 The Swan, 2 High Street, Iver, SL0 9NG (Variation)

being presented this afternoon in respect to the variation to the premises licence
located at the Swan to High Street, either SL -09 -NG. Please note that you should only address the
subcommittee in relation to matters previously raised. Any lay evidence would only be considered
with the consent of all parties, that there wasn't any except for there was a bit of a
I'd now like to invite the Licencing Officer, Ms Coates, to present on the reporting outline,
outlining the details of the application and representations received. So Sarah Coates,
over to you. Thank you, Chair. The application being considered
Sarah Coates - Licensing Officer - 0:08:43
today has been submitted by Matthew May of TLT Solicitors on behalf of Ramveet Singh
The Swan is located at the end of Iver High Street on the junction of Swan Road, the B470,
Iver Lane and Thorny Lane North.
The surrounding area comprises a mixture of retail, hospitality and residential properties.
The premises consist of a ground floor bar and restaurant area with an adjoining garden,
patio area and car park.
The premises was originally granted, the premises licence was originally granted during the
transitional arrangements under the Licencing Act in 2005.
The licence has been transferred on several occasions since then, with no significant
changes made to the licence.
On 30 June 2025, the licence was transferred to the current premises licence holder and
designated premises supervisor, Mr Leila.
On 13 July 2025, the Licencing Authority received an application for review of the premises
licence from a member of the public on the grounds of the prevention of public nuisance,
the prevention of crime and disorder and public safety. Following a hearing, the licencing
authority resolved to modify the licence conditions to address concerns relating to the noise
nuisance and promote the licencing objective of preventing public nuisance. On the 7th
of November, 2025, licenced officers...
Sorry to bother you a second, but a few people have, well, Mr Phipps, I don't know if you're
still in the meeting or not, it would be wrong of Sarah Coates to deliberate on the, here,
sorry about that, we have to know that you're in the room, I do apologise. Samantha Evelton,
as Woody said, she's on a hospital, that's a bit difficult, but if everyone else could make sure
we can see you. Forgive me, Chair, because I've got the agenda on a different screen,
it looked like I was looking away and so I just turned my camera off so it didn't appear rude.
Thank you very much, sorry Sarah, over to you again.
No that's okay, thank you. On the 7th of November 2025, licencing officers conducted a site visit
and identified that a large outdoor marquee had been erected within the patio and garden area
which did not form part of the authorised premises licence plan. The licence holder was advised that
either a variation application would be required to amend the plan or the marquee would need to be
removed to ensure compliance with the existing licence.
A previous variation application was submitted on the 5th of March, seeking to amend the
premises licence plan and various conditions.
The application attracted representations and was due to be determined at hearing.
However, following a review by the licencing authority and legal services, the application
was deemed invalid due to inaccuracies and could not proceed.
The applicant was advised that a new variation application would be required or alternatively
the marquee would need to be removed to ensure compliance with the existing premises licence.
A valid application to vary the premises licence was received on the 23rd of June 2026 and
seeks the following changes.
To amend the approved premises licence plan to reflect the configuration of the outdoor
area including the addition of the outdoor marquee, to remove the car park, kitchen,
storage areas and toilet facilities from the licenced area and to amend licence conditions
10, 11, 12, 13, 15 and 17 so that references to the existing outdoor area are updated to
specifically include the patio, marquee, garden and all structures within those areas. The
or the overall operating style of the premises, all other conditions will remain unchanged.
The application was subject to statutory consultation period of 28 days during which terms of police
and environmental health responded with no objection to the application.
No other responses were received from the licencing authority, fire and rescue authority,
local planning authority, trading standards, safeguarding and child protection unit or
the primary care trust.
Six valid objections were received from local residents and the parish council.
The representations were made primarily on the grounds of prevention of public nuisance,
prevention of crime disorder and public safety.
The objections primarily relate to concerns regarding the noise arising from the use of
the marquee and its proximity to neighbouring residential properties.
objectives state that the current use of the marquee has already resulted in noise disturbance
and raised concerns regarding use of the marquee as an event space, potential intensification
of activities in the outdoor area, a perceived lack of sound in the station within the marquee
and have also raised concerns around alleged breaches of existing licencing conditions
and incidents of disorder at or near the premises. Members are reminded that the determination
must focus only on the variations sought by the application and the extent to which those
variations are likely to impact the licencing objectives.
Environmental health has raised no objection and considered that the proposed amended conditions
ensure that the marquee will be subject to the same controls and restrictions already
applicable to the existing outdoor area.
They also emphasise the importance of the effective management of the premises to minimise
the risk to public nuisance.
Members should consider whether the conditions offered
by the applicant are appropriate and proportionate
for the promotion of the licencing objectives.
The proposed conditions are set out
in paragraph 10 of the report.
In determining this application,
members must have regard to Buckinghamshire Council's
statement of licencing policy
and the Home Office Section 182 guidance
issued under the Licencing Act 2003.
In relation to the prevention of public nuisance, the Council's licencing policy highlights
the need to consider issues such as noise escape from the premises, the management of
the outdoor areas, customer arrival and departure, the suitability of the premises location and
the complaints, procedures and engagement that the premises has in place with local
residents.
The section 182 guidance advises that licencing authorities should focus on the specific impact
of licenced activities on those living and working in the vicinity of the premises. The
panel is also required to have regard to human rights. The decision regarding this application
will have human rights implications in respect to both the applicant and the persons making
relevant representations, which also need to be considered equally and fairly so that
the decision is proportionate and the right balance is met. You should also consider Article
Article 8 and Article 1 of the first protocol and that is the right to respect for private
and family life and peaceful enjoyment of property and possessions and that can include
a licence. So the following options are available to members today. You can grant the variation
application subject to any conditions considered appropriate and proportionate to promote the
licencing objectives. You can reject the variation application in its entirety or you can grant
the variation application subject to different conditions for different parts of the premises
or licenced activities if this is considered appropriate and proportionate to promote the
four licencing objectives and in response to the representations received. The subcommittee is asked
to note that it may not reject the whole or part of the application or modify, add or vary the
existing conditions merely because it considers it desirable to do so. That concludes my summary
Cllr Phil Gomm - 0:16:31
chair but I'm happy to answer any questions. Very good, thank you very much Sarah Coates,
That's very good.
Always your briefs are there to the point
which we really appreciate.
So I'm gonna move round the table as such.
Does the app wish to put any questions
to the licencing officer?
So no, thank you very much.
I thought it was very clear.
Thank you very much.
Yeah, she's very good.
Making sure it's precise to the point.
So now I'm gonna go round to the interested parties.
If you'd like to put any questions
to the licencing officer.
if you'd like to put your hand up,
if you'd like to ask a question.
Anyone interested parties?
Nope. Oh, Mr. Allen, microphone you need to put on
and ask your question.
Good afternoon.
Interested Party - 0:17:22
In the hearing last, I think it was September,
It had been proposed that there was a limit to the licence, but the council decided a
variety of conditions to be applied to keep the noise down for the neighbourhood.
I would question, first of all, whether anybody has satisfactorily inspected whether those
conditions have been met.
Cllr Phil Gomm - 0:17:56
So Mr Allen, you drifted off what the officer just reported.
I didn't think we sort of went into that.
This is a separate application.
The application is from Marquee which has been put up and is essentially breaking the
parameters of which were previously proposed.
It's also required that there should be some soundproofing and I don't believe any soundproofing
Interested Party - 0:18:16
has been added.
And so what is the question?
Mr Allen, you'll be able to ask the applicant what is said with some of those questions.
OK, when it comes down, but that drifted slightly.
Cllr Phil Gomm - 0:18:35
And I will assure you, all colleagues have written, read the reports previously of the previous applications, etc.
OK, very good.
OK, is there any other direct questions you'd like to ask Ms. Coates?
Okay, so now we move on then. If no interested parties would like to ask a question,
do any members have questions to put to the licencing officer?
No questions, correct. Thank you. Councillor Gibbon. Yes, I have one.
Cllr Kathy Gibbon - 0:19:09
I noticed that they're requesting to remove the kitchen from the licensable area,
But as there was previously complaints about smells emanating from the kitchen, unpleasant smells,
if it's no longer licenced, will that be affected in any way or will they still be expected to change the philtres
and make sure there's no smells going into the neighbourhood?
Sarah Coates - Licensing Officer - 0:19:38
They've not applied to remove that condition as part of the licence, so therefore it would still be enforceable.
However, it's more enforceable with support from environmental health as opposed to licencing, really.
We would work together to address any complaints that were received in response to offensive smells.
Since the review, I don't believe we've received any complaints around that condition.
So it's not been a concern or an issue up until now.
Cllr Phil Gomm - 0:20:15
Okay, lovely. I've got a couple as I always do. And the first one is, you mentioned in
your deliberation just then, we haven't heard from certain parties that normally would do
like planning. Was planning aware of this application?
They were consulted as part of the application yeah they there was no response received from
them. No response okay. I would like to say for the um the interesting part is looking
in planning doesn't come in to what we're going to be talking about today but I've just
covered that because I know some of you are concerned with the marquee but planning does
not come under our remit although I'm shocked that planning did not respond to a question
asked by our officers. So as we move on, you also mentioned reports of breach of condition
within your report then. Was that report that say come to you as licencing or was that was
that report you've picked up from the submissions that have been put in by others? So since the
Sarah Coates - Licensing Officer - 0:21:22
The review took place in September 2025.
We've had no valid complaints that have been backed up
by evidence that there has been any licence breach.
I myself have visited the premises on two occasions
and spoken with the licence holder and the general manager.
We have carried out our usual compliance cheques
that we would just carry out at any licence premises
and announced.
There were some very low level non -compliance
with the general premises licence things like the premises licence summary not being displayed
and a record of, I haven't got exactly in front of me, but there was a record that wasn't being kept
but in both occasions that I've spoken with the licence holder and the general manager
they have actioned any suggestions given to them and they've then not been a problem at the next
the next visit that we've carried out so they have worked with us to understand the conditions of their licence.
Cllr Phil Gomm - 0:22:29
OK. And my last question, this is where I got confused. I don't normally get too confused.
Just going down to their licences on their licence they have at present.
So they have like they can have live music both indoors and outdoors until 2 a .m. in the morning.
Is that correct? They are 55. Bear with me one moment. No problem.
No, that's not correct. So they are only permitted to have entertainment in the form of live or recorded music outside and in the covered areas until nine o 'clock.
by the looks of this.
Is that in a condition that's been put in place?
It is, yeah.
Okay.
Sir, if it helps, it's page 50 if it helps, condition 12.
Thank you.
Bear with me.
My laptop has completely closed down my email, so I'm trying to...
Don't worry, no, no.
...to load up again, I'm sorry.
That's okay, Mr Phoebes just pointed us in the direction, so, which is good.
And then, so they're restricted to till nine o 'clock on those.
And then with recorded music, again, that's the same?
Or is that restricted until nine o 'clock?
Or is it?
No, it's the same.
So a condition that was added at the review on the 11th of September,
Condition 12 is no regular entertainment in the form of live and or recorded music
be permitted after 9pm in the covered areas, outdoor spaces or garden of the premises, say for two events per calendar year, on either a Friday or a Saturday night, only when regulated entertainment in the form of live or occasional music will cease by 11. So it's, it basically takes away the deregulation. So any, they can't do do that without the, it's under the usual deregulation rule.
Sure, and the only reason I'm asking these questions is because you'd be shocked at how many people do watch our hearings.
And I just opened the book for those that don't get a chance to read all of the bits.
And then on other entertainment involving music, indoor only, so that's the next one down again on page 55, and that's again till 2am in the morning.
Or is that restricted?
With me.
And I would assume when you have other entertainment, music and dance, I would assume like DJ?
Yeah, that's recorded music, yeah.
Ah, so now you've probed me because you said, so does that mean recorded, you just used the terminology recorded music, does that mean a DJ could operate outside?
till nine or was that just a slip of the towel?
Wow it's...
I agree DJ's got recorded music, I'm with you 100 %
Yeah. This pops up at different hearings.
Yeah so it could take place outside as long as it was within the current conditions of their licence.
Sarah Coates - Licensing Officer - 0:25:45
Lovely. With what's set out at the review.
Cllr Phil Gomm - 0:25:49
Yeah I will go to the applicant on that one as well. I'm sure they're willing to answer.
So that's the end of my questions. Now I notice that Samantha Everington has got her hand
up. Now we've really gone past your point of asking questions but I'm quite a good chairman
and allow a little bit of leverage ever again. Would you like to ask a question?
Interested Party - 0:26:14
It was just a quick question about the noise outside until nine o 'clock. Is that still
the condition that you shouldn't be able to hear it outside their boundaries even before
nine o 'clock or is it after that just after nine o 'clock?
That's an interesting one. Outside their boundary is not within their remit.
Cllr Phil Gomm - 0:26:31
Sarah Coates - Licensing Officer - 0:26:34
Yeah I don't think there's a condition currently on the licence that would stop you
hearing the music outside of the boundary before nine o 'clock on those days. So if they were to
have an event outside with recorded music in the garden for example until nine o 'clock and
heard that outside of the perimeter that wouldn't necessarily be a breach of their licence.
Sorry I just thought that was part of their conditions last time that we shouldn't be able
Interested Party - 0:27:03
to hear any noise or music across the fence that's what I thought maybe I was wrong.
Cllr Phil Gomm - 0:27:13
Can I suggest, bring that up when you do, yeah you're gonna speak aren't you?
Okay, bring that up in the hearing and then we can dig into that a little bit.
Okay, thank you. Yeah, no problem. So that's the end of Sarah
Cates Sarah, thank you very much. Very good. So we now go on to, I'd like now to invite
the applicant, Ramya Singla, or his representative, Mr Matthew Phipps, to present their case.
So the hearing is over to you gentlemen. So thank you very much. I proposed to the
Applicant's Representative - 0:27:49
to introduce you to the application.
Excuse me, typical.
I propose to introduce you to the application
and then what I would like to do with your permission
is effectively canter you through your agenda papers,
just giving you paragraph and page numbers as we go
so that when you later come to retire,
it hopefully will have made sense
and perhaps for the benefit of your legal officer as well.
So this is an application for a variation to an existing licence that seeks to allow
a marquee effectively at the top of the garden space. That's it. There is no change to the
hours. There are no change to the licence for activities. There are proposed to be some
revision to the conditions and Sarah has touched on those and I will take you through the detail
of those, but I think it's fair to say that all they do, and your agenda report confirms
as much, is effectively provide clarity that all of the existing conditions attached during
the review in I think the summer of last year equally apply to the marquee space at the
top of the garden.
It's right that there was a review last year and that review effectively imposed stringent
conditions on the licence and as we've just touched on them those are effectively set
out on page 48 of your report and a few pages thereafter.
We can come on to look at those in due course.
But those are not being lessened in any way in this application.
and I make no apology for saying that.
It seems to be the sense that in some way
we're removing the conditions or getting rid of them
or undermining, I think one of the representations
is we're undermining the decision that was made
by your previous colleagues.
That just isn't right, I'm afraid,
and that is not an interpretation that we think is fair.
The background to the application is that
there was an application submitted as Sarah said,
I'm bound and afraid to observe by a different advisor that was essentially at the last minute
deemed to be non -compliant for licencing requirements.
And so that application was effectively dropped.
We then submitted, first of all, I'm going to say a minor variation.
Sarah's team took the view that this wasn't a legitimate minor variation.
and then we submitted a full variation.
And as you will have seen at page 13 of the report,
Sarah's team advised that the marquee would need to be removed
to ensure compliance or an application would need to be submitted.
And so we submitted an application, that's drawn objections,
we're here to determine that application.
The application conditions that we'll look at in due course effectively come from and
are in line with the Environmental Health Officer's advice or at least the representation
he served to the earlier aborted application. He served a representation to that application,
express some concerns about it, some of which are about conditions, we've adopted his proposals.
This is a successful public house with a significant Indian cuisine food offer.
A lot of the representations talk about this space being an event space and I suspect,
and you've asked the question about regulated entertainment, whether we can have it at two in the morning,
what the conditions and restrictions are. I suspect a lot of the focus here is about
this sense that we're creating an event space. The marquee is going to sit over the existing
patio space that is already part of the licence. It's in part at least a weather protection.
The sense that it is creating an event space, I'm afraid we don't recognise and nor do we
accept.
Indeed, the marquee is laid out to tables and chairs, our restaurant is thriving, which
is at the rear of the interior of the premises.
A lot of people use the marquee and tables and chairs particularly to eat and to dine
and to drink.
Let's not dance around it.
It's a pub, but a lot of people use it for that.
There aren't events and we are struggling
with this suggestion of the creation of an events space.
The issue of compliance has been raised
and I will come on to that,
but Sarah's dealt with that, I think very fairly,
but just to be clear on the 23rd of July of this year,
Sophie Needs from your environmental and licencing team wrote to the premises following the most
recent inspection confirming compliance. So the suggestion of compliance breaches we don't
recognise and I thought it was very interesting that Etherington talked about a condition that
obliges sound to be inaudible over the fence of the pub and that being a challenge that may perhaps
illustrate why there's a suggestion of a failure to comply, because there may be a misunderstanding
about what the actual conditions are in the first place. But I mean obviously that's a guess and
I'd be the first to admit it. So, dealing with the conditions point, your colleague,
Councillor Gibbon raised the issue of whether the removal of the kitchen space in any way
undermines the grip that the authority has over the premises.
If I just explain that, that is no part of this.
When this premises was first given a licence in 2005 and with all due respect to, I suspect
your predecessors, both the officers and the councillors, we were all feeling our way.
And so plans were submitted that if they were submitted now would probably raise an eyebrow
as a minimum and generate challenge from the officers as to whether it was a legitimate
plan. It is, at least in my experience, very, very unusual for anyone to include a kitchen
or the lavatories or the offices or the back of house areas to which the customer has no
access within the licenced area.
Kitchens can be included where they're perhaps a very grand restaurant where there may be
a table where you can eat and dine in the kitchen and have the sort of theatre of a
kitchen.
But as good as our restaurant is that isn't the proposition here.
It's just a regularisation issue Councillor Gibbon.
It is not a point that we consider of significance.
If you have any concern about that, leave the red line covering the kitchen.
It really doesn't change the condition about noise, smell, extract and so forth, which
is not being impacted by the application.
And it's also worth saying that this application, if granted, significantly reduces the licenseable
area because the current licence plan, as you will see, and we'll come to it as we go
through the agenda has the car park as a licenced area and this application regularises the
plan correctly we will say and so the car park is not part of the licenced demise. The
references made Chair to the submissions that arrived yesterday and if I can just touch
on those for a moment because I think actually they come to the substance of the entire application.
I don't have a paginated number for that but I understand they've been circulated to
to members. It's a two -page document but if you go to the penultimate probably the last substantive
excuse me paragraph there it says that the proposed marquee and covered area will make the
space more usable and potentially more intensively used? Yeah, absolutely. That's right. It does
make it more usable. If it's smashing down thunder and lightning, we can't use the space.
And that may mean, if you're minded to grant it, that people might be out there when it's
raining who wouldn't otherwise be. That is not a reason to refuse this application. That
is not a negative. A representation that says we don't want the garden to be used in the
otherwise legitimate pub is not respectfully a legitimate representation nor the basis
on which an application should be used. And I will suggest to you that that is the substance
of what we are talking about here. Will this make the space more usable? Yes, I think is
the only straight thing to say,
and that is not a reason to reject the application.
So if we may then, I'd just like to go through the agenda.
And so I got the point both in your comments
about Sarah being brief and to the point
and that being a welcome observation,
but also I suspect because as you fairly flagged,
you've read all the papers as have your colleagues.
I'm gonna continue through the agenda
and only those parts of it that I think are relevant,
but if you want to interrupt me at any point just please go ahead.
So, Paragraphs 2 .3 sets out the decision notice and the reasoning in Appendix 3 for the review.
That's what's got the new conditions on it in addition to the licence that we looked at at page 48.
The comment about an application needing to be submitted, all the marquee being removed,
that's set out at the top of page 13.
At paragraph 3 .2, there's clarification that the conditions that currently apply to the outside area
will apply to the patio, marquee, garden and all structures within that area.
that is the extent of the changes to the conditions,
a clear encapsulation that if you're minded to grant,
the restrictions and controls that were imposed
in the time of the review will apply to the marquee
and all other as activities and conditions remain unchanged.
That's again, page 13.
If you go then through page 14,
you will see the words effectively,
which includes the patio, marquee and garden and all structures within.
That wording is added to Condition 10, which is about notification to neighbours of regulated entertainment taking place in the outdoor space.
To Condition 11, ensuring that there's suitable and sufficient staff to monitor the outside space.
that there's no regulated entertainment other than at 9pm or on two occasions per month until 11pm and Fridays and Saturdays at that.
That there's to be a qualitative assessment of the level of noise generated.
and that's 15, 17 that there's to be regular cheques
of the outdoor space, including the patio marquee garden
and all structures within, and that's set out
through those various pages up to page 15.
Through then onto page 16, first of all,
you see that the police have not objected.
Just before I turn to the police, if I may,
Councillor, I was struck by the point you said
that you were shocked that planning had not made a representation or had not responded.
Respectfully I would just ask you to reflect on that if I may, only insofar as this is
a process where absent any objection a licence must be granted. And so it is I'd suggest
very common for responsible authorities not to respond where they have no concerns. And
And so equally with child protection or trading standards or the other officers, there isn't,
to my mind at least, there isn't anything shocking about the lack of a response. It
genuinely happens all the time. But I mean, don't take my word for it. Obviously you can
speak to your life's answer and your...
Cllr Phil Gomm - 0:41:31
No, no, Mr. Phillips, when I chair a meeting and one of our departments has asked for some
information. I expect at least a yes or a no. No response I find not good and therefore
I use point terminology.
Sorry I get the point, I leave that with you. So the police as you have seen have responded
Applicant's Representative - 0:41:49
and they have confirmed that they have no objections and when you come to retire I will
say that that is a powerful observation about this application and your legal advisor will
no doubt bring to your attention paragraph 9 .12 of the National Guidance, which effectively
says that they're the experts in the field and that they are to be treated as such. And
then when you come to consider issues of concern like antisocial behaviour that are raised
by the residents, that the experts in that area have chosen not to object, I say is also
a powerful point and the point I do make unashamedly is that in a process that obliges the licence
to be granted absent an objection, these officers know full well that no objection, and they
did in this case precisely confirm no objection, that's effectively an endorsement of the application
and there's no other fair interpretation of it. You'll see within the representations
that there's reference to an incident on the 23rd of June and that there was a fight and
frankly a nasty one at that outside the pub. That's true and we engaged with the police.
That was the first I think England game of the World Cup. I'm not so close to the dates
to be able to promise you it was the first date of the first England game but I'm pretty
sure it was and things did get out of hand and we engaged with the police. We changed
our procedures and protocols, we continue to show a number of World Cup matches, all
very successfully thereafter. And the fact that we engage with the police cooperatively,
collaboratively, had discussions with them, I say is a point, and I appreciate this may
stick in the drawer of the representers, but it's actually a point in our favour. They
have engaged with us recently. We didn't do things as well as we should have done and
people were poorly behaved as a minimum, but that the police with that knowledge then chose
not to object, I'd say is important to consider. And the Environmental Health Officer at paragraph
4 .15 confirms no objection and that represents, or those comments are set out on page 85 and 86
of your report. And I'm sorry, I hope it's all right to just jump around the agenda a little,
but I will take you to that if I may. Page 86 to quote the officer,
environmental health, therefore welcome the proposed modified conditions,
which are written to now include the marquee and other outdoor structures to
fall under the same control as outdoor spaces.
The environmental health request that the applicant is made aware of our
response as without continued strict management,
management control of activities carried out at the premises,
because the risk of potential public nuisance is high given the close proximity to sensitive
receptors.
And I say that's a very fair point well made.
They endorse the conditions that we've proposed and without wanting to unduly flatten the
environmental health, I suspect in significant part because he prompted us to put them in
the application.
But he makes the fair point that we will need to be on our toes to deliver this successfully
And if we are not on our toes, then it is likely that we will be in some difficulty
with environmental health and or the nearby residents.
But he does not object the application, because he effectively concludes that the conditions
fairly balance the issues.
There is inevitably in all licencing applications, risk.
if we were here to manage out risk, or as I think it's articulated within the representations
from the interested parties, potential, if we had to eradicate potential risk, then no
application would ever be granted. And so that the Environmental Health Officer says,
happy with the conditions, but you need to be on top of it. That's a challenge that we
entirely accept. And I hope that the comment from Sarah, when she was making mention of
her compliance visits that we've engaged properly and that when she came back she found that
matters have been attended to properly, we'll offer you some confidence that we can and
we'll do that. The licencing officer's observations are set out at 5 .1 and the top of page 17
just highlights that members are reminded the termination of the applications relate
to the variation application sought for the committee's benefit, there is no change to
the hours nor to the regulated entertainment that is currently permitted. There's no attempt
to extend that in any way. The existing restrictions indoors, the existing restrictions outdoors
will continue to apply. The agenda just to go through that highlights, and it was touched
on by Sarah, page 20, a complaints procedure. And you'll have seen the conditions that were
attached by the committee last year, and it doesn't provide for a complaints procedure.
We would be entirely content for there to be a condition on the licence if you're
minded to grant it, and I appreciate it, Senev, if you're minded to grant it, that a
number be made available to all residents, including the parish council,
so that they may get in touch with us and if it was preferred to be an email
or indeed both, there would be no issue with that at all. I should say that I
think it's right that the number of the residents do have Mr Lally's contact
details and I think they're on WhatsApp and so on and so forth but if it was felt that
it would be a good condition to see on the face of the licence then there's no issue
with that and I can understand the point that Sarah makes.
The agenda report goes through to the national
guidance and that is touched on at the bottom of page 20. On the national guidance a number
of paragraphs are quoted to you.
Mr Fitz, sorry could you hold on a sec, we've just lost one of our...
I saw it sort of, I'm beginning, I missed the fact that...
Has he left or?
Yes I believe so.
Did you want to give him a, do you want to do a two minute adjournment just to see in case it's an
IT thing? I'm very happy to, there's no issue with my end.
Just wait one sec while he investigates, thank you.
Did it look like it was a...
It looks like he dropped it out deliberately.
He was on the telephone talking.
Everyone's going to wonder how does this guy keep an eye on everybody?
It's my job.
But he was on the phone and then he opted out.
So Sarah Phillips, I've got my suggestion.
Sarah Phillips - Legal Officer - 0:49:38
If I could have a moment just to cheque our hearing rules, I'd be grateful. Thank you.
No problem, thank you. Everyone just bear with us please and we'll just cheque. We'd like to make sure it's fair for everybody.
.
Let me know if you'd like me to take the plunge, Sarah Phillips, I'm happy to do so.
Sorry it took me a moment to download the rules so I'm just on the relevant section.
Yeah so if you want me just to take a plunge I'm happy to do so to take it away but
if you'd like to read up on it I just
And Harry if you'd like to take it down as a note for future for me to say if anyone intends to leave the meeting just to say so just quickly would be helpful.
Yeah, if you don't mind noting that down and we could discuss that to put that into the agenda items.
Chair, I don't think the rules actually assist us. They only deal with if one of the members were to
drop out and I sound to be corrected if Democratic Services have a different view, but otherwise
I think you're welcome to proceed how you think is best appropriate.
Cllr Phil Gomm - 0:52:28
Thank you. Mr. Fitz, Mr. Lallier are you available please?
Yep. Yes. Very good. Okay so with the gentleman dropping out, I can't remember his name, I do
apologise. He was on the phone maybe so it's happened or whatever he's just dropped out
But in that process, we all were eager to get on with the hearing and I suggest we continue back to the meeting.
Sadly, Harry Thomas, if he attempts to get back in, he's missed part of the meeting and it would be wrong to allow him to come back in.
Sarah Phillips, would I be a bit right there? That's how we see it in planning and if someone misses part of the hearing, they don't know the whole storey.
Sarah Phillips - Legal Officer - 0:53:19
the situation I've dealt with before in a licencing hearing where someone's attempted
to be readmitted so honestly I don't know of an authority on the correct way to proceed.
I would be inclined depending how much of the hearing has moved on to potentially readmit
the objector and if that proves to be disruptive because it's causing repetition then perhaps
we could assess that position but I would be inclined to readmit him if he does come back.
Cllr Phil Gomm - 0:53:46
Okay, I'll decide when that may be a curse. Okay, thank you very much. Mr Phipps,
back to you as you was deliberating pretty well. Thank you. Do you mind if I just pass an
Applicant's Representative - 0:54:00
observation for Ms Phillips's benefit, if this is inappropriate just correct me, but
where a committee member drops out, obviously the hearing can't proceed because they can't then be
readmitted to make a decision where they may have missed the evidence. I think where a
party drops out and with Miss Phillips's point about repetition, I wouldn't be objecting
to if they come back, they come back. I mean, they're entitled to come and go a little bit.
It would be my observation for what it's worth. Anyway.
I disagree a bit with that, Mr. Phillips. It's like, you know, people should be listening
and stuff like that. That's the whole idea. We all give our time. Let's move forward.
Thank you. So, so at bottom of page 20, your agenda quotes the national guidance and there's a couple of paragraphs that are not quoted that I do wish to quote to you.
And again, perhaps for Miss Phillips benefit, the first is paragraph one one eight one point one eight.
And that says we're making licencing decisions. All licencing authorities should consider the need to promote growth and deliver economic benefit.
You'll have heard that quoted to you, I suspect,
on more than a dozen occasions in the last nine months
or so since it came into effect.
And then paragraph 912, I'll just quote properly
rather than reference as I did earlier.
Each responsible authority will be an expert
in their respective field.
And in some cases, it is likely
that a particular responsible authority
will be the licencing authority's main source of advice
in relation to a particular licencing objective.
For example, the police have a key role in managing the nighttime economy and should
have good working relationships with those operating in their local area.
I don't dispute any of the parts that are quoted to you, but those struck me as two
that you might want to later reflect on.
Just going through then, the proposed licence conditions are set out at page, forgive me,
26, and although they are already in the licence, I am just going to highlight what's in the
licence because there was an issue earlier as to what is and what isn't in the existing
licence. An incident book to be maintained, SIA door supervisors to be risk assessed,
CCTV to be comprehensively installed,
notification to management when there's regulated entertain,
sorry, notification to immediate neighbours by management
when entertainment takes place outside,
no less than 14 days,
sufficient members of staff to monitor the outside area,
entertainment restricted to 9 p .m. save
on two occasions per month when it would be permitted
on a Friday or Saturday to go until 11 p .m. The outdoor space to close at 10 and 11 p .m.
other than for smoking, essentially. The offensive smells condition that Councillor Gibbons touched
on. The qualitative assessment of noise generation. A written record of those noise assessments to be
maintained regular cheques of the outdoor space, a log book for when regulated
entertainment takes place, notices challenge 25 policy and those are all on
the licence were all imposed by the committee last year and are all proposed
to remain and will remain. The point about the quality of the plan, it needn't
but I'll leave you to have a look at page 33 later.
That's the existing plan.
And I hope where the application granted or not,
the plan is a better plan that is now proposed
than that which was approved in 2005,
as you'd reasonably expect.
The application, I needn't take you through
because we've covered all of the detail on that.
And that gets us through to page 77.
The conditions that are proposed to set out again,
then page 77 and nine, the plan page 81,
and the police confirmation of no objection 83,
the environmental health confirmation
of no objection 85 and six.
And then we come to the representations.
So just touch on some of the points.
Obviously the representers will speak for themselves.
Reference to soundproofing.
There's no condition about soundproofing currently.
We're not opposed to soundproofing, but candidly, to invest in soundproofing before you have a permission for the thing in the first place is the issue.
But we haven't been having events.
That's what I think the soundproofing is all directed toward, this sense that we're going
to have a disco or something similar in that space, which respectfully isn't right.
And it isn't right in the obvious part because we're only allowed to be effectively outside
until 9pm with any form of regulated entertainment other than on two occasions per year.
The reference then to violence, noise and rubbish, I mean I've touched on the police position obviously.
We have upped our game in terms of the rubbish collections and our bins and I think that it's fair to say that during the World Cup when we were particularly busy,
We were in need of a prod there, but that's all been done.
As reference again to number of similar objections,
but you'll find then at page 89,
there is a little list within the third from last paragraph
of the representation for, of the sort of conditions that the objector would invite
you to consider were you minded to grant the licence. And I just take you through those,
if I may. So first of all, that there are stringent additional conditions imposed. So
first of all, restrictions on the use of amplified music. So we say unashamedly that's plain
to see is already on the licence. That equally applies to DJ's private functions. We accept
that, we agree it already does that. That the hours of operation within the marquee
are controlled, we accept that, there's no change to the proposed hours at all. There's
reference to maximum occupancy. There is no increase to the size of space that's, bless
you. There's no change to the size of the space. I've already mentioned that the car
parts being removed, if anything, this application significantly diminishes the licenseable area
that's able to be operated. There are mandatory SIA dual supervisors for organised events.
I do make the point we have to risk assess, police are happy, police are content with
us, that's more a matter I'd say for the police. We can't have every organised event having
SIA. What if we had a tenth birthday party at lunchtime? That just wouldn't respectfully
be proper. Prohibition of Glassware outside the main building, you already have seen that
we've got restrictions on glassware. We can't, if I may say so, make this pub so unattractive
that no one ever wants to go there. There's times to have plastic, of course, but that
isn't every time at all.
Mr Phipps, I thought you'd just ask you at that point what restrictions on glassware
Sarah Phillips - Legal Officer - 1:02:20
already exist?
Applicant's Representative - 1:02:26
I think that in the outside space conditions, I'm sorry I'm scrolling in the background,
I'll need to find the page.
Thank you, no, take your time.
No, no, it's fine. So, condition 13, outdoor space permitted closed 10 o 'clock and 11 o 'clock
on Friday Saturday except for the person smoking no drinks permitted. And forgive me, yeah,
sorry, it's no drinks permitted outside rather than no glass permitted outside. So, there's
no glass, no drinks at all. Forgive me, you're quite right to pick me up on it.
Okay, so other than condition 13, which deals with no drinks going outside once the outside
area is closed. You're understanding as well.
Yeah, I think that there's no I haven't. I know you're quite
right. There isn't I have in mind that I thought that there
was a condition about glass collection. But I'm, forgive me
if I'm wrong on that, then I apologise. I thought that the
individuals charged with monitoring the outside space had
to do so in regard to glass. Can I come back? Can I have a look
that a little bit, David. Well done, you're right, it's a prohibition on glass, on glassware rather
than glass, if that makes sense. Everybody just bear a second. Samantha, you've got your hand up,
Cllr Phil Gomm - 1:03:43
could you wait and you will get an opportunity to ask applicant questions if you'd like to just take
a note down. I also noticed that Sarah Coates has got her hand up. Sorry, I was just going to try
Sarah Coates - Licensing Officer - 1:03:57
and help with the confusion. I think there was sort of a voluntary, very temporary unwritten
condition agreed between Thames Valley Police and the applicant after the event on the 23rd of June
where the incident happened outside from the World Cup football match and the applicant agreed that
for the rest of the football matches taking place they would only use plastic glasses. I think that
might be where the confusion is coming from. Thank you, I think that that makes perfect sense. Thank you very much.
Sarah. And then robust noise management measures being the last of the conditions proposed in the
Applicant's Representative - 1:04:31
representation, which we say the conditions clearly are. Before I turn to representation five,
what I would like to do is jump, if I might, just to the recently submitted submissions document,
because that too, on the second, on the fourth page, that sets out nine conditions that you're
invited to consider if you're minded to grant it.
Now entirely except the submission is predicated
on the basis of please refuse it.
I'm not trying to undermine that point.
But if you're minded to grant it,
they ask you to look at nine conditions.
And I'll just take you through those if I may.
No outdoor amplified music in the marquee or cupboard area
unless expressly permitted by an existing condition
subject to the existing restrictions.
That's agreed, there's no attempt to change that.
The existing outdoor event notification requirement
to apply to every event using the new area. It's not a new area. It's an area with a tarpaulin
over it. And so that's all agreed and there's no attempt to change that. Clear maximum capacity,
there's no attempt to increase the space. It's impossible to increase the space. You'll
have seen the plan for yourself. If anything, it significantly diminishes the space because
the loss of the car part. Adequate staff supervision of the entire garden market in the covered
area. That's what our conditions expressly and specifically do in line with the EHO
recommendations. No drinking or customer congregation outside the permitted garden
as say for any existing limited smoking provision. That's an existing condition
expressly provided for. No speakers or amplified sound positioned in a way that
directs sound toward neighbouring residential properties. That's not an existing condition.
We're happy to agree that. We are not here to aggravate our neighbours. A written noise management
procedure and incident log available for inspection.
It's a different wording, but we have to go outside
and cheque and we have to take a written note of that.
So we'd say that that's covered.
Clearly identified management contact
for neighbouring residents with complaints recorded
and acted upon properly.
That's a good suggestion.
And I accept the point.
I've already touched on it with you.
Sorry, there's someone trying to come in, sir.
And if you all can see that, or first just me.
Harry? Yes, it's somebody that we have contacted as an interested party, so I can admit her in.
Harry Thomas - Democratic Services Officer - 1:06:54
Harry, this is an interested party who didn't indicate that they were attending today, is that right?
Sarah Phillips - Legal Officer - 1:07:02
Yes, yeah. In the circumstances, Chair, this interested party has missed an awful lot of the hearing now.
Correct. And again, I'm with you on that one. This is a discussion we have.
So sorry, no, we're nearly two thirds of the way through a meeting. They might have been looking in, but I would have preferred them to have been here. So sadly, no, Harry.
Cllr Phil Gomm - 1:07:31
Okay.
Applicant's Representative - 1:07:37
Yes, so management contact details.
I've touched on that with you already,
but we accept that's a good suggestion.
No attempt to resist that.
And then confirmation of all necessary planning,
building control, fire safety requirements been addressed.
So you've touched on planning,
but I think you'd probably be take
from your legal advisor.
It's commonly accepted that duplication
isn't appropriate in licencing.
We're here to deal with licencing, not the other regulations.
So as much as we can say yes, very happy to,
we're not here to say no.
Then just jumping back, if I might,
to the representations themselves,
or the agenda, forgive me, itself, which I need to find.
If this application is not inconsistent
with the decision made of the review panel last year. It doesn't undermine the conditions
in any way that were imposed. The reference in the submission document keeps talking about
this isn't suitable to be a minor variation. This isn't a minor variation application.
I don't know if that was drafted in respect of a different application and copied across
or something like that, but there's lots of reference to it being a minor variation. It's
not a minor variation. It talks that submission about risk. I've addressed you on the issue
of risk. We cannot pretend to manage away every last risk. What we are here to consider
is the likelihood of that risk under materialising and undermining the licencing objectives.
Possibility I think is one of the words that's used in one of the representations. We're
The fifth representation says that there's been glass found in the car park and that
that has been a point of concern.
One might, solicitor -wise, say well we don't know where that came from, we don't know whose
that is, but a condition that we clear up our car park at the rear of our premises,
there's no resistance to that.
We're not here to be aggravating or negative.
and then as I say the last one touches again on the issue of soundproofing.
Were we to have an event, were we to have any music, were we to have any
regulated entertainment, then we're very happy to investigate and undertake
soundproofing, but the fundamental point is we're not allowed to cause a public
nuisance. That's not the same as saying we're not able to be audible, ever. There
is a pub there, you will know there is a pub there if you live next door or in proximity.
But the point about soundproofing is fairly made and I've probably addressed it enough.
I've gone on a bit longer than perhaps I first expected but I hope the committee will forgive
me and that's really all from us. I'm not pretending we're in court, I'm not going to
be asking Mr Laleo's name, address etc. He's here, if we have questions we will do our
Cllr Phil Gomm - 1:10:46
to answer them between us. Thank you very much Mr Phillips, you've covered that extremely well for
us and I'm sure we've got some questions as we could go along. So, okay as we continue then down
through the agenda does the Licencing Officer have any questions to put to the applicant?
No thank you Chair. Okay now I'm going to move around to the interested parties to put questions
to the applicant. I know that Samantha, if you don't mind, you had a question during the
deliberations from Mr. Pipsey, you got your question there? Yeah, sorry I have a baby as well
so she might be a bit noisy so I'll try and be as quiet as I can. Welcome to the baby, I don't mind.
Interested Party - 1:11:30
Just regarding to the private parties that you say that don't happen in your event space,
Let's call it an event space because not this weekend, the weekend before, I had to call
up on three occasions in one night that I was told that there was a private party going
on in this event space and that I kept being told that the noise would go off. My first
phone call, I got told that it would be going off in 10 to 20 minutes. My second phone call,
20 minutes later, I was told the noise wasn't even that bad. And basically I had to deal
with it. And I then said, no, I'm not dealing with this. This is it's quarter to 11 at night.
I can hear your party going on in my flat. And then the music was turned down. So the
fact that you're saying that there are no events in this space over just the past couple
of weekends, there have been events in this space and it has been used as a private function
area.
Well, certainly that's not been my understanding. Mr Lahlia can probably talk to the detail
Applicant's Representative - 1:12:35
of what happened the weekend before last. But I took events as meaning that we're having
regulated entertainment, some form of disco or dancing or something like that. And as
I understand, it's laid out to tables and chairs. I'm not saying there hasn't been a
dinner or a party or that the people haven't known each other. But it's not my understanding.
We've had anything that could fairly be described as events. Mr. Lali, you probably probably
jump in at this point if you would.
Yeah, if that answer would be appreciated.
Cllr Phil Gomm - 1:13:01
You're on mute.
Sorry, I'm on mute.
Applicant - 1:13:07
There wasn't an event two weeks ago, I think it was just a rather busy evening which we had
where there's a lot of families who came in and there was a lot of food getting served into
quarter number by 11 o 'clock the marquee was closed at the licencing time.
So it could have been access noise from that customers talking a bit louder than normal
because it was a rather busy night compared to a normal Friday evening.
Samantha, if you'd like to come back on that, please.
Interested Party - 1:13:40
Hi, yeah, I've got the call log on my phone that shows it was the 24th of July.
And if it was a restaurant playing that loud of music, I'm sure you wouldn't have had that many customers
because it was party music and it was nightclub music so I really don't see that that was
a restaurant event because I would have left it that was my restaurant I was visiting.
Mr Dahlia, that was more than two weeks ago that was about three and a half weeks ago that was on
Applicant - 1:14:12
the 25th of July you were saying, you started looking at the calendar, yeah 24th.
And I was told on the phone by the duty manager that it was an event and it was a private party.
OK. OK. Could I can I ask why why you didn't report that to the environment team or did you?
Cllr Phil Gomm - 1:14:31
No, I thought by calling them that was enough. I just had to call them. I didn't know that was the steps that I had to take.
So yeah, I didn't know that.
Yeah, it shouldn't be the steps that you should have to take, but I'm just asking that question in general.
Yeah, no, I didn't know that that would be a good step to take.
OK.
And I also had to call, sorry again, I had to call the weekend before that where I complained about, it sounded like there was bass coming from this tent area.
When I called, I was then informed that it was a car outside with their exhaust banging and that they had already left the area so they couldn't say anything to them.
they were then going to be banned from the restaurant but then they came back the next
day and did the exact same thing with their loud exhaust. Okay so that's difficult for the applicant
to deal with that sort of stuff but at least you brought it to their attention and they knew and
they said they would do something about it so okay any other questions you'd like to put forward to
the applicant? I'd also like to ask just another one about the event but when I look on your
Interested Party - 1:15:36
Instagram page a while ago you were selling tickets for an event for this thing called
Natasha pop -up brunch and they were tickets for the 6th of April. All these postings have
been taken down now from your Instagram page as well as a post from the 6th of November
last year and in the title you've put that the marquee will be up for private hire and
that is still on your Instagram page now. So just where Mr Phillips says that this is
not an event space, you were marketing it to the general public as an event space. Yeah,
and just other comments about what Mr Phillips has said about other things, but I just don't
want to keep talking if it's not relevant.
Okay, well I think there are relevant questions for you to ask. Mr Lillia?
Cllr Phil Gomm - 1:16:27
Applicant - 1:16:30
It wasn't more for hires, it was more for just group bookings offering the space. It must have been
worded from our side. It was just for larger, more families group bookings to come.
Inside the restaurants, our biggest table is six to eight people, whereas together bigger
booking for like 15 to 20 people of a bigger family to come, we have that marquee available
knowledge space there. That was more than an arse out. It's our mistake for
wording it wrong, saying we can offer larger bookings, not as an event.
Sir, I know it's not my time to ask a question, but would it help if Mr Lali
Applicant's Representative - 1:17:06
just explained the number of people that could be accommodated within the
marquee? Because it may be that when I've been talking about events, I've
been thinking, you know, there's a big function or something. How many people
could you get in the marquee, Mr Lali?
Mr Fitz, you took my funder away for a while, sir. You and I seem to be
travelling the same journey. Thank you very much. No good question.
Applicant - 1:17:29
We have about 10 tables in there. So it's about 47 chairs.
Sorry, I just like to go back to that Instagram post. Quoting your quote, it
Interested Party - 1:17:42
says now available for private hire for birthday events or and then I can't see
the rest.
Meaning like sorry, I mean like 15 like groups of but is up to is bigger tables available
Applicant - 1:17:53
So if there's a bigger group or a birthday party for families to offer like Matthew mentioned like a 10 year olds birthday
They can have that private side over there just to give them there might be kids running around with a bit more space for them
Instead of money running the main pub restaurant
Okay
Right, next.
Can I answer it in this way? Forgive me, give me a minute, sure. Can I answer it in this way?
Applicant's Representative - 1:18:16
If the challenge is it's an event space and it's available for someone to have a party within it, then I'll concede the point.
I've been, an event space hadn't meant that to me, but if the challenge is, well, because it's available for someone, they could have it themselves, then it makes it an event, then I'll accept the point.
I think Mr Fitts it's like definition of an event, you know there's an event of would
Cllr Phil Gomm - 1:18:44
it be just for a family dinner of say 50 people or another sort of event would be a party
with some music. So to try and define that is quite a difficult one. Councillor Julie
Cook. Thank you, Chair. I was just going to raise this question of the definition of event
Interested Party - 1:19:03
myself because on the applicant's own Instagram page as well,
they were advertising that space and giving the example of coming
and watching the football games where they had directed a separate TV
to the one inside, large screen TV.
So that's now erected out there.
To me, that is an event.
Come and see the football.
Come and see, you know, England play.
That is an event, not just a disco, which most people don't go to now anymore.
If the question is, would you accept that people coming to watch the football is an event, then yes, I'm bound to.
Applicant's Representative - 1:19:48
I would make the point, of course, neither the TV nor the watching of football is a licence of activity,
and so it's not much concern of today. But if we want to call that an event, I'm happy to call that an event.
Interested Party - 1:20:01
I would think that we need to expand this definition of event as to fit modern day society.
I said that. Had England won the World Cup, we would have called that an event. So I'm happy to take that one.
Applicant's Representative - 1:20:09
Mr Phipps, do you have to remind us?
Yes.
Interested Party - 1:20:13
And if, just as a second point, Mr Phipps describes the outdoor space as a tarpaulin,
an area with a tarpaulin over it.
That same Instagram picture shows that it's a marquee, that's curtained areas with festival
lights, party lights and as the applicant said, multiple chairs.
My assessment from looking at that would be approximately 50 seated.
That doesn't include the number standing.
So it is not just a simple covering.
This is more the nature of something that people hire for private events,
as well as having events that the community may go to.
So hence this causes issues.
but Mr. Foopes I think has conceded that the definition of events needs to expand and I
just wanted to point out the nature of the structure. Thank you. Yeah I accept obviously
Applicant's Representative - 1:21:21
as answering that question that then yes I accept it's decorated nicely. I wasn't wanting to suggest
that it's not. The point I was trying to make is this is not enlarging the garden, this is not a
creation of a new space and it felt to me important to point out to the committee that
the marquee, the tarpaulin covers an area that is already licenced. We're not licencing
this space, it's already licenced. What we're here to do is whether to legitimise the tarpaulin
and its best -to -enlighten. It's not the licencing of the space that we're here to do because
that's already part of the licence demise.
Yeah, for what it's worth.
Okay. Um, okay.
Cllr Phil Gomm - 1:22:12
Mr. Allen, over to you.
Thank you, Chair.
Interested Party - 1:22:26
I think what hasn't yet been considered in terms of the noise issue,
it's not just about music.
When there's a large gathering of people in the area
which is now potentially becoming a marquee,
it is very noisy, a lot of voices,
and swearing, bad language, abusive language
can easily be heard.
A lot of just general noise from a crowd of people
which isn't music.
So this is part of the whole problem.
Mr. Phipps said that with the Marquis, this is going to become more intense.
This is a bad thing.
This makes what is already a bad thing potentially even worse.
So I would ask that Mr. Phipps and Mr. Lallier take serious consideration if they want to
promote this area in the way they have been doing, that they do put up some proofing.
and I feel this should be conditional on this process going forward. Thank you.
Cllr Phil Gomm - 1:23:32
Thank you very much. Bear with me one second.
Mr. Pipps, Mr. Lally, would you like to answer to that question?
Yes. It's just been considered that when it comes back to us.
Applicant's Representative - 1:23:49
No, I hear that. I think that I hope I've raised it before now. I thought I had. We're
not close to the idea of doing soundproofing. I have to say we have considered the issue
predominantly focused on the issue of regulated entertainment. It hasn't been a focus for
the existence of people in a beer garden, I'm bound to admit. And I think Mr. Lalia
would say without feeling too embarrassed about it that the issue of soundproofing,
the cost and expense of soundproofing would follow the permission rather than undertake
the soundproofing in advance, which is not to be aggravating but is to be truthful.
And you know and again that's what we should look forward and just to let the
Cllr Phil Gomm - 1:24:36
interested parties know that when we do consider that within a condition or whatever,
If the application did get passed and we put conditions in there and these things went wrong,
it's your opportunity then not just to speak to the applicant but also to speak to our environment team and also the licencing team.
And we will make sure, depending on what way this goes, even if we decide not to pass this,
I think we need to be a bit more open and share those phone numbers with contact details with the interested parties moving forward.
Okay, Mr Allen again.
Interested Party - 1:25:21
Mr Chairman, thank you for giving me time. This has gone rather long than I expected and I think I've said what I wanted to say about the soundproofing.
And that's my main point, if I may, can I take my leave?
You may, Mr Allen. Thank you very much for your attendance and for your polite gestures along the way.
Very good of you, sir. And enjoy the rest of the afternoon.
And you.
Thank you.
Cllr Phil Gomm - 1:25:42
Samantha Everington, you did have your hand up, I noticed, again.
I can't remember what it was about now.
It went past the question.
Interested Party - 1:25:54
Would your baby remember?
No, she's too busy with her dummy at the moment, not paying attention.
Cllr Phil Gomm - 1:26:02
Just a little bit of my sense of humour while we're here, because the meeting's going extremely well, everyone's being so well.
Okay, right, so that's the end of our interested parties. I'm now going to move round to our memo. Sarah Phillips has got her hand up.
to jump on. I just wanted to ask Mr. Fitz and Mr. Lallier, my understanding is that we had a couple
Sarah Phillips - Legal Officer - 1:26:22
of conditions offered during your submissions. I've proposed wording in the chat. If I have
misunderstood and these aren't conditions that you're proposing but merely effectively
caveatting in case the panel are minded, then please let me know. But if they are conditions
that you're offering now. I'd be grateful if you can confirm if the wording is acceptable.
Yeah, they look fine. Thank you. But I'm thinking now only because Skim read them,
they look absolutely in line with what was discussed and what was part of the
written submission submitted yesterday. So, yeah.
Thank you. And any parties should be able to see how those conditions have been drafted in the chat.
Very good. Right, over to members. Members, Councillor West, hold on a sec. So just before
Cllr Phil Gomm - 1:27:23
I nearly started then, Councillor Julie Cook slipped her hand up. We have passed your section
but I will give you a bit of airway. It's really just a clarification from what
Interested Party - 1:27:33
has put in, if now is the time to ask for clarification for those draught conditions that
she's put in, because is now the time to ask a question on that?
Well, let me just get passed by members and we can flip back to that. Just give...
Thank you. Okay. Right. Okay. Councillors, over to you,
Cllr Phil Gomm - 1:27:55
Cllr Michael West - 1:28:01
Councillor West. Yes, first of all, thank you, Mr. Pipps. You've given us the most detailed
information I think I've heard in an application meeting. So there is very little left for me to
ask. I would like to ask a question of Julie Cook, if I may, if you allow me to do that at this point.
Well, we get to interested parties. You haven't got that far yet.
Cllr Phil Gomm - 1:28:39
Okay, I will save that.
That's it. I'm sure she'll look forward to that, Councillor West.
Councillor Gibbon.
Cllr Kathy Gibbon - 1:28:53
All right, thank you Chairman. It's really just, it's just really elaborating on your answers
because you really went through everything extremely clearly and thoroughly Mr Phipps,
so thank you very much for all that. It also helped clarify things in my own mind which I
assume is what you were intending to do.
Yes, good though.
What are the circumstances do you think would lead to requiring these SIA supervisors?
Applicant's Representative - 1:29:29
The difficulty is that the answer which is not a helpful answer is as long as a piece of string
I suppose. So if we take the football as an example, we had the first match, things went
a little bit awry, engaged with the police, sat down with them and agreed, right, football
therefore is greater risk than was first perceived, believing that it would be sort of well received
all round. Let's have SIA for every football match thereafter. Christmas would be an obvious
one where naturally people are out more often, particularly if you've got people coming off
the back of office parties or you know the sort of unusual celebrations people tend to
go out a little bit more often in December so December you'd expect to have them more.
There are certain high days and holidays for example St Patrick's Day I know a lot of my
clients can't speak for Mr Lally but you would expect to have SIA for that, that sort of
thing. I'm sorry it's not a very precise answer but that sort of thing.
Yeah, but I'm just sort of checking you would have like a proper risk assessment so.
Oh, sorry, forgive me, yes.
Cllr Kathy Gibbon - 1:30:37
Before you tell the events.
Forgive me, sorry, yes.
Also, following that incident on the 23rd, you have sort of talked quite a bit about what you have done.
I mean, could you elaborate a little bit more about what steps you are taking to make sure that doesn't happen again?
Applicant's Representative - 1:31:00
Well, Mr. Lally, you may want to jump in, but the incident arose, I believe it was the
Ghana match, which I think is the first match of the World Cup that England played. And
the World Cup, the popularity of the World Cup, I think it's fair to say probably took
us by a bit by surprise. And so that's when we had the engagement with the police, sat
down, worked out right, what are we doing? Let's manage it a little bit more robustly
and so forth. So it included SIA, it included having plastics, it included very closely
managing the outside area, it included making sure that smokers were away from residents
when they came outside the front of the premises, it included making sure that we had I think
an increased number of waste collections that we did, you know waste collection in the outside
areas that we made sure ash days were or you know in frankly fag butts were you know cleared up and
so on and so forth that that sort of thing but we didn't have any issues arising again candidly it
worked. So if anything if there was sort of so you're much better prepared now so so you'd sort
Cllr Kathy Gibbon - 1:32:12
would you be able to spot that if something could get sort of serious?
Well...
I think it could be designed so you'd be prepared in the future if like if you could see things
escalating escalating you'd be prepared to do something about it or call the police or
something like that?
Yeah I mean Councillor the the solicitor in me is desperate to say yes of course to that
Applicant's Representative - 1:32:37
but I think it's only fair to say that there are going to be events from time to time that
catch us by surprise. I think anything other than that, I'm,
you know, my nose risks elongating like Pinocchio
really, there will be things that catch us out. But we are
alive to that issue particularly, we have a really
strong relationship with the police. I've seen, for example,
where we put the screen in the outside area in order to put the
football on, which we weren't doing anything wrong. It's not a
of activity having TV, but we, you know, engaged with the police, told them we were doing it,
said look this is what the proposals are. So I think we're probably already on that
road but I would be loathe to give you an answer that suggests that it's impossible
to imagine any circumstances in which we could ever be caught out again because that's life.
Cllr Kathy Gibbon - 1:33:34
That's fair enough. My only other question really is, I'm a little bit concerned about
that it does appear to be disturbing residents, the other people outside. So I'm assuming
that Samantha Etherington spoke about which went on to 11. I'm assuming that was one of
two that you have per calendar month. So I just want to sort of ensure that you don't
be that they these things they do stop at nine and they don't sort of creep on till
later is that the case? I think that that's fair and I think that and I appreciate that
Applicant's Representative - 1:34:16
Samantha's raised the point but if you have a look at the representations I know the issue
of compliance is raised but it's raised candidly rather opaquely with oh we're concerned that
they're not compliant and we obviously have a comment about it needing to be inaudible
at the over the over the fence earlier. We are compliant and our view is we're in good
order that was I think the event night I think the 24th was a Friday I had a quick look in
the calendar on the other screen and therefore there's nothing illegitimate about that operation
a quarter to 11 because 11 is the legitimate is the legitimate time and yeah so so yes
I think that that's right to say that. And that's as far as I could see, I haven't, and
I'm not planning on quoting it to you, but I suspect that Sarah has seen it, if indeed
she wasn't the author of it. The letter of the 23rd of July made claim that there'd been
an inspection, I think it said it was coincidental to the licencing application, but with respect
I did rather raise an eyebrow at that thinking it can't be that coincidental. And the report
seemed to me to be a positive report. It doesn't mean it didn't say you might think about this,
might think about that. That's every visit that one's ever had with the licencing officer but
there was nothing in it that said we are very concerned by X or Y it all seemed to be in order.
Okay thank you I think that's all from me at the moment.
Cllr Kathy Gibbon - 1:35:35
Cllr Phil Gomm - 1:35:38
Lovely, I'm conscious that the time is moving on. I just noticed, although it's past time
Samantha for your question but I'm sure you remember the one that you forgot.
So would you like to ask the question? Yeah it was just, I know you're saying that you
Applicant's Representative - 1:35:54
can play music till 11 o 'clock at night in your garden, but having the respect for your
Interested Party - 1:35:55
neighbours who don't want to go to bed after 11 o 'clock at night that are getting up and
working at getting up at five o 'clock in the morning to go to work, having to listen to
blaring music that you can hear in your front room and dread going into the bedroom because
that's where the music is loudest. I just want that to be documented that yes, although
you can play that music, have respect for your neighbours who are working in professional
that need to be on the ball. You can't be tired when you go to work in the morning.
Applicant's Representative - 1:36:26
I think that's a very fair point. There's no challenge to that at all. I entirely accept the point and it's well made.
Yeah, I think moving forward on that, if the decision is to approve or whatever, whatever we decide to do, Samantha,
Cllr Phil Gomm - 1:36:37
we need to get some numbers to you. It's quite clear, even as it stands, you know, you need to go to the venue to make a place.
But you also need to let the authorities know as well just to help back up.
I'm sure moving forward it will be.
I just wanted to say I'm sorry, Sir, Samantha, I know you've got a young kid and maybe it might be harder for you to come out.
Applicant - 1:36:58
But after this you could personally take my number and if the manager in place hasn't dealt with it you could personally call me and I'll make sure it's dealt with quicker so you don't have to leave.
Thank you.
Very good.
OK.
I've lost where I'm going.
Cllr Phil Gomm - 1:37:12
Time is just ticking away.
Oh I have some questions, that's what it is. So just a few, so you know I would the definition
of events is all over the place but I'm not really too bothered. What I want to look at
is it's quite clear that the marquee is to do an expansion of like the restaurant. That's the
impression I'm getting, it's where people could go and sit down and enjoy the food that the restaurant,
Greatly if I'm wrong, but enjoy the food that the premises serves.
It's more of an extension of the restaurant.
I think that's right, but I don't want to undersell the pub element here.
Applicant's Representative - 1:37:56
This is a pub with a really good food offer rather than a restaurant with a really good beer offer, if that makes sense.
And so it's laid out to tables and chairs.
The food offer is thriving.
We are doing really well.
We want to accommodate more food eaters.
But if, and forget the explanation, if we went out for dinner and when we finished dinner,
if I wanted to stay and have a few pints, no one's going to say on your way out the door.
And then is it a restaurant then or am I actually just involved in a pub at that point?
That's, I don't want you, I don't want to oversell that.
I don't want you thinking this is a restaurant.
It's not fair to say that, but it's laid out to tables and chairs.
You can have a drink.
A lot of people eat.
But does every single person who's ever in that marquee eat no? No is the straight answer.
Cllr Phil Gomm - 1:38:47
Yeah I'm just trying to get down to and then the next thing is you know they're concerned about
the size you say about 50 chairs laid out. 47 I think. Yeah yeah and then you know again when
they turn around and say I'm just trying to speak openly here when I'm listening and then on the
you know, you see some pictures with some lining and like festive lights, you know, the little twinkle lights, whatever.
Then that's why I was just asking the question about was you making it more of an extension, a better extension, not trying to get the right word,
but some of them more pleasantly you could sit down.
Let me say this. Have we decorated it in such a way as to make it attractive? Yes, absolutely.
Applicant's Representative - 1:39:36
We make candidly no apology for that at all.
No, what would I expect you to?
And it is not, and I'll take the correction of it, it's not just a bit of tarp and you
go in and go well this is pretty grim but at least I'm dry when it's raining. We wanted
you to go in there and say well this is nice. You know, I'll take that criticism of my earlier
comments I think that's that's fair but it's but that's all it is it is still a tarpaulin
marquee and we've made it look as nice as we can make it and I think some of the panels
have got sort of the plastic within it so it looks like a bit like a window but we know
it's not a window it's a marquee window so it looks as good as that sort of thing can
look is probably the best way to get it. Which, see, you're sort of leaning to get, and again I'm
Cllr Phil Gomm - 1:40:26
not discriminating, he's a good clientele to come along and enjoy what's there. Okay, that's the end
of my questions, so now we go on as we keep going forward. Is there any other points the applicant
would like to make before I move on to our interested parties? No, could I just ask, it's a
Applicant's Representative - 1:40:48
and I'm sorry to ask, you couldn't have a two minute comfort break could we?
And I mean two minutes, if I could just pop the loo, Kenny.
So Harry, we're going to drop out for a few minutes. What should we say? What's the time now?
15 .45, shall I say 15 .50? Five minutes?
OK, five minutes break.
Thank you.

6 The Swan, 2 High Street, Iver, SL0 9NG (Variation)

Applicant's Representative - 1:41:19
Okay, we're up and running. Okay, so this is the opportunity. We've listened to the applicant,
Cllr Phil Gomm - 1:41:29
now it's down to our interested parties. I know one of them has left Mr Allenby's point of view
across what his concern was in question time. So we're just going to go around. And Mr Norton,
sorry. Oh yeah, he never did come back did he? No. No, thank you very much for reminding me of that.
So we've had two of the interested parties leave the meeting, but they expressed that
they needed to, while Mr Norton didn't actually just to speak.
But so we're going to go around the table.
I'd like to move on to Councillor Julie Cook.
If you would like to put your points across, please remember, keep it to your papers that
you submit if you can as tight as you can, please.
Over to you.
Certainly, Councillor, it's simply that we believe the noise is unacceptable.
Interested Party - 1:42:17
It is an intensification of activity.
It is an extra 40, 50, 60 people that can be seated in all weathers.
As stated by Mr Phillips, we want you to go there.
So it is a significant expansion given the size of the pub to be there.
we believe that the pub, because of its size,
is encouraging those large groups.
Large groups mean noise, so that's going to happen.
Regardless of any events, we've already discussed
that this concept of what we understand to be an event
and perhaps what was being interpreted elsewhere is different.
So we...
And we find it extraordinary that these premises,
this additional activity space has been in operation for 12 months,
that no attempt has been made for acoustic management
while at the same time professing to be considerate of the neighbours.
So we are considering this to be a public nuisance.
It is having an impact on residents.
And I can only say that Irish wants to keep the pub going.
We also want residents to be well.
We also talked about, Mr Phipps talked about growth before.
And I'd like to remind Mr Phipps that there is several aspects in economics
that contribute to growth.
The first one is labour.
And one of the key drivers of labour productivity is wellbeing, mental health.
And Samantha has raised the impact on her mental health with the excess noise.
So please remember that growth is just not a commercial activity,
as in terms of revenue.
I think that's all I want to say.
I know that Councillor West wanted to ask questions,
so I'm quite happy to take those.
I should say beforehand, in our case of if you're minded to approve,
sorry, that's a planning technique that we always use
when we write our submissions,
They are more than what Mr Pheebs has said.
He's said six and eight he would agree to,
and I'd like to make some comments when appropriate
about the drafting to further clarify,
but we actually do mean to go further that we think
because of this intensification and inner marquee,
which is quite frankly difficult to achieve appropriate
Acoustic Management that we have to have very tight controls on that.
We're on those things that we can have tight controls over.
I'll stop there. You're on mute, sir.
Thanks for the change. Thank you very much for pointing that out.
Cllr Phil Gomm - 1:45:18
So when you say controls, what do you refer to?
Yeah, so the things that we can control, although probably it's easy to talk in what we can,
Interested Party - 1:45:28
if I've got a really annoying voice or I laugh really loudly, that's very difficult to control.
What is possible though to control is how close I am to the neighbours, the hours that
I'm there.
Likewise, it's easier to control what happens inside that space, such as music, TVs, et
So we can put quite more time limits, we can put volume limits, and then of course the
kind of acoustic management that we would apply.
That we recognise that there's some things that are harder to control, but if we achieve
some benefit.
Does that answer your question sufficiently?
Yeah, I could see Sarah Phillips is taking, we're just trying to just dig in a little
bit, she went on about conditions.
Cllr Phil Gomm - 1:46:18
And really, if that's something you want to sort of,
Sarah, if you'd like to correct me,
but if you'd like to throw that in the mix now,
so that the officer can get ahead of the game.
Sure.
Well, for example,
I quite like Sarah's one about the licence holder,
to assure the positioning of the speakers, etc.
Interested Party - 1:46:38
But then my next part is the use of speakers.
Now, it's my fault,
I probably should have written that more fully.
The user speakers in an entertainment space have limiters on, things called limiters.
So they're a piece of technology.
So the user speakers, whether any of these speakers, would have limiters.
Now this is not a backyard AV job then.
This is not just go buy a speaker and put it up.
This is being professionally installed and those limiters are monitored and are unable
to be changed by a casual user.
So it's expanding the use of speakers to include limiters and being able to monitor to have
logs that have not been changed.
We are very aware of those.
I figured you would, but I wanted to elaborate.
When I said use of speakers, that's what I had in mind, but I didn't use those words.
The other one is the direct telephone number for the manager of the premises.
we also talked about a complaint procedure
and that Parrish would have access to that
because people do come to Parrish because we're there.
Basically, we're the closest mind of government.
A direct telephone manager to the direct telephone number
might not be as useful to us as an email
and I'd like a written log as well of any kind of issue.
so I prefer that written form as proof so that we have it.
I think from hearing what Samantha had to say,
and having spoken to people not just about this matters,
but others about, are you reporting this?
Many residents kind of get a bit overwhelmed
by constantly reporting it, and they need a bit more help.
And we need to do that, about you can report, it's OK.
to do that, and I think that would make these matters
because I don't think we can conclude, although you may have to,
that the absence of reporting does not mean an absence of issues.
I'm just relating through my other list.
Yeah, our broader definition of events means that if the applicant
and wishes to have that broader defined event that the normal procedure of only two a month
and within certain times should apply, not that they're in addition to the regulated
entertainment. I think that's the correct phrase. I think that's explained.
Okay. Very good. Thank you. We took notes down there so we could discuss that afterwards.
Cllr Phil Gomm - 1:49:34
afterwards before I move on to Samantha. Does the licencing officer have any questions that
she would like to ask Councillor Cook? I don't thank you chair. Does the applicant have any
questions they'd like to ask Councillor Cook? No thanks very much. Thank you and then colleagues
any questions? Councillor Gibbon, Councillor West. Councillor West does.
Cllr Michael West - 1:50:05
Yes, you've touched on the subject already, but environmental health have had no complaints
about previous events. I understand you're a parish counsellor.
Yeah, as the parish council received complaints, if so, were those complaints during events or were
after, the absence of complaints actually during, I'm going to call them events because
quite frankly you can call them what you like, but the absence of complaints during events
actually is relevant to me and it strikes me that if the parish council has had complaints,
what has the parish council actually done with that information?
Why is it environmental health are not actually aware of any problems associated with noise?
So first of all, parish council wouldn't be open.
You don't have a recorded message or?
No.
And it's outside the scope of parish council's offices work.
What we tend to get is counsellors addressed personally
after the effect, or someone turns up to a meeting
and they might say something.
And I'm talking generally now.
Interested Party - 1:51:34
In case of matters concerning this property and myself,
which is all I can directly speak to,
it's people contacting me after the event and saying,
They're just not following the regulations or the conditions.
And they say, well, tell me what you mean and have you reported it.
And that's when I often hear people at despair saying,
I've tried to report it, it's too hard.
Environmental health, who is the appropriate authority,
requires that I've got an app and I can't get it working.
Things along those lines.
And I understand that from a human perspective
and try and encourage them to keep their proposals.
but in answer to you, it is outside the scope of parish council's work.
Parish council is not open at the times that this would be open,
it would be an operation to take in real time complaints.
Thank you.
I am familiar with our parish council's work actually.
I'm all myself.
Cllr Michael West - 1:52:36
I also know that if anybody within my parish has a complaint,
the first thing they will do is ring a parish council office.
Okay, thank you very much Councillor West. I know Mr. Fitz has got your hand up, so is it?
Do you want to go back to the place?
Cllr Phil Gomm - 1:52:53
Applicant's Representative - 1:52:59
I don't want to interrupt Councillor Gibbon, but it's just, I mean it's arguably it's a point for your legal officer as much as anything else,
but I can ask it as a question, but I don't want to interrupt the flow. If I just may come back on Councillor West's point to Councillor Cook, that would be great.
Yeah, yeah. Councillor Gibbon.
Cllr Phil Gomm - 1:53:13
Yeah, just one question, really.
Cllr Kathy Gibbon - 1:53:14
I keep hearing about how the conditions are being broken,
if that's the correct word, or not upheld.
So what exactly is going on?
Is it the volume of the noise?
Is it the time?
What exactly, what conditions aren't being met?
I can't speak on the first hand because I don't go to the pub.
And I think that is a question for those that are first hand.
Interested Party - 1:53:41
What I am told, maybe Samantha, is what I'm told is the hours,
the volume and the absence of door supervisors are the types of elements
that this is hearsay and in a normal court proceeding that would not be admissible.
So I would refer that to be boy on a mine.
Okay, I see Samantha's waiting to get going. I think I see that.
Cllr Phil Gomm - 1:54:10
Councillor Cook, I'd like to ask just a couple of questions you picked up about the growth and
Interested Party - 1:54:16
all that sort of stuff, I understand that. But as a parish council, you said that activities have
been going on there for 12 months and stuff like that, but at no time have you ever as a parish
Council register to complain to the environment team or to licence him?
So I've just learned about the 12 months based on the background.
I became aware of and Council became aware because it was raised to us of the structure
in March, and that was around the time when the first application.
So we learned that that application was getting submitted.
But from the introduction today, it talked about November, that that marquee existed.
Cllr Phil Gomm - 1:55:15
So I'm going to be a bit hard on you now, but so the Paris councils were unaware that there was a marquee and there was entertainment music going on there?
We were aware that the pub, which they are able to do,
was have entertainment.
We were unaware that there was a marquee and what it was used for.
Interested Party - 1:55:27
And we became aware around about March.
Certainly someone sent me a picture when I said,
tell me what your saying is there, dated in March.
and then around very shortly after there was the first application,
through which we responded.
And we put in our concerns at that time.
So we did raise them, and we raised them through the licencing process.
So there weren't official complaints that came to the Parish Council
Cllr Phil Gomm - 1:56:09
that they were submitting to the licencing or environment team?
No.
We don't encourage people to make a formal complaint to us.
Interested Party - 1:56:16
we encourage them to make formal complaints to Bhagwan Sri because they have the first -hand knowledge.
I'm confused. Sorry, I'm going to dig on this.
So you get people to do an unformal complaint to you as the parish council that represents you?
No, no. People come and complain to us. We do not seek out complaints.
No, no, OK. So if people make complaints to you?
To which we respond, you need to raise that with, we give advice, we signpost.
These are the appropriate departments that you should talk to.
Right, okay, okay. I get where you're coming from now.
Right, okay, that's the only question that I had.
Okay, thank you very much. So we're going to move on to Samantha Averington.
Cllr Phil Gomm - 1:57:11
Interested Party - 1:57:12
I couldn't unmute myself fast enough then. I just wanted to say about the people are saying in their
comments about the licencing things not being followed and that I think it's to do with like
the CCTV and we had an issue in our it was our car park that had glass thrown over the wall.
It wasn't the pub's car park you know in the beginning someone said about glass being in
car park, it wasn't actually the pub's car park, it was our black car park that had glass in it.
And when the police went to go speak somebody said that the CCTB wasn't adequate, you couldn't see,
you couldn't make out anything from the CCT because it was so rubbish.
I think that was one of the terms. And the other one that I've commented about was about not having
the security or the SSE person on the door, despite having the incident with the football,
no from then on there was no more there was no security on the door and even after that I found
glass outside the pub the top of the bottleneck that could have been used as a weapon which I
assume that they had problems with previously. That's what I think the licence what sorry I
don't know your name what Julie was saying about the licencing not being followed that's what I can
to that. Okay and again I don't want to be too hard but I get you said you didn't really know
about the reporting system about maybe going to the environment team or licencing with that. You
went to the police though didn't you for what you just said? Yeah for the glass being thrown over
Cllr Phil Gomm - 1:58:53
the fence. Okay okay we'll take your notes down from that and add two if required as we go on.
Any, anything else Samantha you'd like to bring to our attention?
No, I think throughout the whole thing I've made all my comments clear.
I think there was nothing really more to add than what I've already said.
OK. Do members have any questions they'd like to ask of Samantha?
None from me, Chair.
Thank you.
Councillor Gibbon?
That's where my mouse gets lost.
Cllr Kathy Gibbon - 1:59:31
So there's a lot to read. I'm hoping, I'd have to cheque me if I'm not right about this, but
am I right in that if there's an event that goes on till 11,
the residents need to be informed of this? Is that correct? And if so,
So were you aware of that one Samantha at the very end, actually, Evan?
No, we've never been informed about any events going on in the pub ever since the last committee
meeting where it was informed that we should be involved and informed, but we've never
Interested Party - 2:00:04
been informed or involved about any events. I've had to go snooping on Instagram to see
if there's anything coming up to plan, but not that I can see, no. And none of our residents
in the flats, all because there's 12 of us here, have ever been notified in our letterbox
about anything going on?
Is that a council given? Yes, that was the only query I had but I'm
not quite sure whether that's right whether they have to inform them it's
Cllr Kathy Gibbon - 2:00:29
just something I think I read so I might be corrected on that. Well I'm
going to dig a little bit deeper that because
Cllr Phil Gomm - 2:00:37
Mr Lani has said that he had a WhatsApp group
for the area, is that correct? That's what I heard earlier.
No?
There's no WhatsApp group chat but a lot of local residents have my number and they do message me via WhatsApp.
Applicant - 2:01:00
OK. OK, thank you very much.
Right, Mr. Fitz, you had your hand up.
Cllr Phil Gomm - 2:01:06
Oh, hold on. Before we go any further, the interesting part is that I left and I'd like to say thank you for staying to the end.
Is there anything else you'd like to add, either of you, before we move forward?
Nope. OK. Mr Phipps, you seem to be wanting to say something?
Sorry, I was, but actually I think it's probably a point. I'll just make it in my closing remarks.
Applicant's Representative - 2:01:31
we're not in court and the whole crossing domination is pretty un -edifying for all of us.
So I've got a couple of points I'll pick up on, one from the council and one from, well,
one from both of the council. Yeah, okay, very good. So as I said,
Cllr Phil Gomm - 2:01:43
our interested parties now, we're now going to move to closing submissions,
should you wish to make any, and I'll do them in the following order. So we first go licencing
officer, then we go to the applicant and then any interested parties if you would like to add,
I just want to close the submission. So firstly licencing officer Cerakos, it's over to you.
Sarah Coates - Licensing Officer - 2:02:07
Thank you chair. I don't really have any closing submissions. I just think it's really important
to outline the complaints process from a licencing and EH perspective that are very similar.
So to facilitate an investigation into sort of any concerns raised about compliance with the
breaches, we would need evidence of things such as times, dates or a diary of incidents
that relate to potential breaches. There was mention of using an app, but you can also
just keep a diary on plain paper and provide it. We usually ask for around two weeks at
a time so we can see a pattern. It's obviously very difficult for us to investigate complaints
if we only have hearsay and no solid evidence to back that up.
So I just hope that in the future we won't need to deal with any complaints,
but if for whatever reason there is a reason for someone to get in touch with the Licencing
Authority or Environment Health, that is the correct way to do it. Thank you.
Thank you very much Sarah and again for your submission that's good. It sounds to me that
Cllr Phil Gomm - 2:03:12
Councillor Cook seems to be a champion of the area and is sort of is pushing that through. So
So maybe a link from Councillor Cook to yourself would help that process within the area and
working of course along the applicant there as well.
So now I move on to the applicant.
Have you got any closing submissions you'd like to make please?
I do.
Applicant's Representative - 2:03:41
I did see your legal officer had her hand raised a minute ago and I appreciate it's
now gone down actually so maybe the point's gone away.
Thank you.
I just, I was going to draw everyone's attention. I put a condition in the chat, which I think
Sarah Phillips - Legal Officer - 2:03:52
might have been what Councillor Gibbon was getting at. So I thought perhaps you would
like to address that in your closing. Thank you. Thank you, Jan. And I'm mindful
Applicant's Representative - 2:04:04
of the time having sort of expanded fairly beyond what I first thought I was going to
be addressing you on. But can I do the closing in this way? Can I do the sort of broad principle
point first. What we know from the parish council is that on March 26th they became
aware of an application that was prompted by your licencing service to legitimise the
marquee. And they had no idea it had been put in there in November. So this source of
all the difficulty and problem that we are told
is going to emanate from the legitimization of this marquee
didn't cause any issue for six months or five months,
four months, whatever.
I'm not gonna fall out with anyone over the dates.
So that really, I think is the prism
through which this entire representation
needs to be considered.
We didn't know it was there.
We didn't have any complaints.
we didn't have any issues. But then when an application is put in, there's an objection served
and an objection saying, oh it's bound to cause problems and I really ask you to consider that
very carefully because through that prism I say respectfully the representations are fatally
undermined and I'm sorry to be so harsh about it but I have to be. The second point is that insofar
As far as Councillor Cook is concerned,
I really do ask you to look at page 87 of your agenda.
This is what the parish council said,
and Councillor Cook is only here
for and on behalf of the parish council.
The conditions are insufficient
as the marquee is not appropriate as an entertainment venue
due to its proximity to residential properties.
The parish council requests that the marquee's
soundproofing is significantly improved.
that's the representation. And so I am sorry to say that all of the materials, complaints,
concerns, problems, SIA door staff, that is not developing the representation that was
served. And I appreciate your legal officer has very carefully considered the materials
that arrived yesterday from the planning committee who I understand effectively themselves represent
the parish council, but I'll ask you to be very circumspect with all of the new oral materials
that were put in at the end there and I can't, you can't fail to hear it, but the weight that
you attach to that new material I ask you to be very careful about, because that's the extent of
representation. We've gone back and forth around events and I'm, solicitors are terrible,
terribly pedantic, I get the point, but it does go to Chancellor Gibbons point about condition 10,
I think, which is the critical point. We are obliged to notify the residents no less than 14
days before we have regulated entertainment outside. We haven't had regulated entertainment outside.
So that's where I think this events business we're getting lost with in my mind and I'll accept
wrongly perhaps and it was it was a presumption I shouldn't have made but when I said disco and I
get Councillor Cook's point that who goes to a disco but then I've got more white hair than
anyone else on this call. But anyway, I get the point that my
definition of events is perhaps a bit unduly restricted. But
actually, it doesn't matter. Have we had regulated
entertainment such that it entertains an audience in the
scheme that the licencing legislation sets out? No. Are we
allowed to have music on in the background? Yeah. Can that
occasionally be a bit loud? Yeah. That's not we are not in
breach of our conditions and all of the compliance,
commentary that suggests that we are.
I ask you again to be very circumspect and to look carefully at that.
And the most obvious point to make with all due respect to Samantha is
you've got a condition that says that music needs to be inaudible at the sight
barrier. No, we don't.
So it's no wonder that people think we're in breach of our conditions.
the gentleman who dropped off recently, forgive me I've missed his name, said that we had
to have soundproofed our marquee. No we haven't. We're not in breach of a condition that doesn't
exist. And so again, I ask you really to refer to Sarah Coates's explanation to you. There
are unflagged visits, we had a couple of issues, I hope I'm not being flippant when I say as
do lots of premises, we weren't displaying the summary of our licence and when they came
back we'd sorted that out. So the idea that this is some lawless premises I ask you to
be very careful with that. Could we do a bit better in some regard? Yeah, I'd take that,
That's fine. And having a number that's available, both a formal number for the pub
but also a slightly more informal distribution of Mr Lalia as the owner's specific mobile
number so that he can engage with those residents who haven't already got his number, we're
entirely content with all of that. And do we need to position any speakers in the marquee
in a sensitive manner away from residents? Absolutely. We're not here to be awkward.
But all of the other conditions that Councillor Cook flagged are in the licence.
And you needn't take my word for it, I'm sure Ms Phillips is, well I think self -evidently after glassware comment,
is more familiar with the licence conditions than I am.
I'll ask you to sort of, when she retires with you, to look at those conditions.
But everything is in there.
The responsible authorities, and I hear the point about the failure to respond point,
I do get that, so that may, from a council perspective, that may take the view that's
disappointing, but from an applicant perspective, what that means is they did not have concern
about this application.
The police and environmental health who did engage positively, engaged in a positive manner
that said I am happy for this application to be granted.
I mean you can dance the language up any which way you cut it but that's a fundamental what they say
and ultimately this whole application really comes down to environmental health and the police and
and that where quote your paragraph 9 12 again but what's the what's the point you're familiar
with it that is very compelling I would I would say um then there's a couple of additional points
that the issue of noise limiters is raised have a look if I may say at the conditions we've got
We've got to have people outside monitoring, we've got to do noise qualitative assessments,
we've got to record those qualitative assessments.
That's what's called a proportionate reasonable condition for the premises at hand.
We are not a 2000 capacity nightclub, we're not a music festival.
And I would invite you to be resistant to the idea of attaching a raft of conditions
that might be appropriate for someone.
This is a pub with a bit of a garden that wants to enclose and incorporate some of its
garden with a marquee.
And I'll take the tarpaulin criticism, it is nicely appointed, it does look good, and
I probably barely should say, I don't think you could fairly call it an adjunct just to
the restaurant, it's an adjunct to the pub as well.
But the space isn't getting any bigger, the hours aren't getting any longer, the
licence activities aren't extending, none of the conditions that are restrictive and
controlling and they are respectfully restrictive and controlling. 9pm, the latest that we can
have regulated entertainment, five of the seven days a week. And we're allowed, I think,
entertainment on two occasions per month, only on a Friday and Sunday. I mean that is
restrictive. That's, you know, that may well be the proper decision from last year, but
let's not be thinking that this is a big liberal licence allowing us any amount of activity.
And so when you boil it down, this is not an inappropriate application and the fact
that some people have been a bit disappointed by some of the conduct and for example the
manager not responding clearly not responding as positively as he should do when Samantha
made the call to him three weeks ago. I mean that is a point when we had the little break
I did speak to Mr. Lally about for 30 seconds while we had the adjournment. You know, are
we perfect? No. Are we so bad you need to refuse this application? No. Your legal officer
has proposed a couple of conditions. We're very content with those. If there are others
happy obviously to hear them, but we're going to invite you to grant the application.
Cllr Phil Gomm - 2:13:39
that's it. Thank you very much Mr Phipps. Sarah Phillips has got her hand up. Thank
you chair. I just because there was quite a lot of discussion in your submission Mr
Sarah Phillips - Legal Officer - 2:13:51
Phipps as to regulated entertainment I wondered because that is quite a technical point and
And this premises is even more technical than others because what would normally be deregulated
is now regulated again.
For the purpose of absolute clarity to all the parties present, my interpretation of
the existing premises licence for The Swan, applying mainly condition 12 of that premises
licence, is that regulated entertainment for the purposes of this premises would be any
recorded music or live music being played after 9pm in the
garden or in the marquee applying? You're shaking your
head, Mr. Phipps, do you have a different, do you have a
different understanding?
Yeah, I do. Recorded music in and of itself is not regulated
Applicant's Representative - 2:14:43
entertainment, respectfully. Otherwise, it would be called
recorded music. So it's regulated entertainment is
entertainment that entertains or partially entertains the audience and that's the definition
from the either the act or the guidance. So if you go into Tesco's and you hear music
in the background that's not regulated entertainment. So regulated entertainment has to be entertaining
for the audience.
And although on this premises licence it says, and if I bring it up, that even in circumstances
Sarah Phillips - Legal Officer - 2:15:18
where live and recorded music would usually be considered deregulated, for this licence
it is regulated.
No, so forgive me. So what I, my submission is, and obviously it's a matter for you, not
Applicant's Representative - 2:15:41
on a matter for me. And what I say is this, what the Section 177A de -regulation does is
this. The starting point is that before 11 o 'clock, any licenced premises permitting
sale of alcohol can have live or recorded music until 11pm, provided it's to an audience
of more than 500. Because the government has considered that live and recorded music is
effectively de minimis and of no concern. If it then generates concern, you can initiate
to review and then we can do the usual courtesy that's extended licence premises can be removed
and that's what's happened here. And so regulated entertainment is not deregulated here but it still
has to be regulated entertainment and so recorded music, background music is not regulated
entertainment. So we're allowed to do that, we can't have regulated entertainment, we can't have
DJ and I'm sorry to use the word again a disco and we can't have a live band entirely accept that
but the idea that we're not allowed any music whatsoever outside that that's that's not right
Sarah Phillips - Legal Officer - 2:16:49
sorry. I wonder Mr Phipps if rather than um getting into it here but could you send me your authorities
and I'll take it no if you're giving there's no authority for it it's how you just
Applicant's Representative - 2:16:58
I'm sorry, excuse us, two solicitors in the room can't agree whether it's raining or not.
But it's not about that.
It's what's regulated entertainment, what's recorded music.
Is there a difference between the two?
Yes. So there's no...
You must have an authority if you say that I'm misinterpreting.
Forgive me, but I'm bound to flip it.
Just the definition.
I'm going to flip it the other way. Having two separate phrases but construing them is
meaning the same thing without in any way being cheeky I'd say what's the authority for that?
Okay we'll look at that. I'm going to leave that there. Okay.
Cllr Phil Gomm - 2:17:42
Right so there we go with submissions there. Sarah Phillips has just plated her stuff. Just
Just going back to that a minute Sarah, if you don't mind me, what would,
what about some of them we put it down as background music, we restrict it into background music?
Sarah Phillips - Legal Officer - 2:18:09
What about that one? Well, chair I struggle because this, the condition to me has been entirely
explicit on the existing premises licence that it says regulated entertainment brackets
in the form of live music and or recorded music?
Yes, so we could have a play, we could have a play or we could have a film and that restriction
does not apply to that form of regulated entertainment. It only refers to the two musical entertainments,
Applicant's Representative - 2:18:42
namely recorded music. So we're not restricted. If we want to put a play on, we can put a
on, because that has not restricted us.
My point, sorry to jump in, my point is the definition of regulated entertainment does
not incorporate all recorded music.
Because were that the case, Tesco's, sorry Tesco's, I don't know why I'm picking on you,
but whoever it might be, you couldn't have them playing recorded music, could you?
Because that would then on your definition be regulated entertainment, and they wouldn't
have a premises licence for allowing consumption on the premises.
Okay Sarah we've had a condition though where we've controlled the volume
Sarah Phillips - Legal Officer - 2:19:24
outside but put in a background music. There was something I can't
anyway right. I think sir all that we can do is I will
revisit the law when we break and I will provide
you advice on the law and you have heard Mr Phipps' submissions. And of course
That's if we decide to approve as we move forward.
Cllr Phil Gomm - 2:19:45
So, okay.
Thank you, Chair.
Okay, thank you.
Down to closing submissions still.
Samantha Everington, would you like to do a closing submission?
No, thank you.
Very good.
Councillor Cook.
Thank you.
There's a couple of things I want to say.
Interested Party - 2:20:08
First of all, we learnt in the hearing of last year
that there was a pergola, which we were aware of,
but we learnt in that hearing that it had never had planning permission
and the noise that emanated from the use of that pergola
was part of the considerations.
We became aware, as I've said, that there was a marquee,
so we thought the pergola was there,
that it had been more than 10 years,
so then planning permission would be granted, unfortunately, for its use.
We then became aware that it was not the Pagoda anymore, it was now a marquee, which is substantially
different.
So I do actually take homage to the fact that the inference that we have been somehow negligible,
negligent as a council, is I think incorrectly levied.
No one said that to you.
I didn't say that.
I'm sorry, that's what I interpreted it as.
And you know, we are a parish council and I am...
From whom?
At Mr Phipps' point about why we didn't act beforehand.
Let me deal with this please.
Cllr Phil Gomm - 2:21:19
Councillor Cook, I appreciate what you said, but when it comes down to planning it doesn't come down to licencing, so just fine.
But parish councils do a good job.
Thank you. Thank you very much. We appreciate your support because as you know it's a thankless task.
Interested Party - 2:21:34
In terms of the assertion that our if -minded -to -approved
type conditions are already all included, they are not.
And it's over and above six and eight.
For example, and I'm only going to give one example for brevity.
Number one, no outdoor amplified music.
music, that includes background music and live entertainment.
So we have deliberately used a word, perhaps through ignorance of regulated, that having
heard that debate, we mean amplified music, that we should not be using it in the covered
area except in the limited area that had previously been set out.
We request that the committee is mindful of this need for balance,
as you were before, and that's all we ask for,
and we think that we need to be careful
because this nicely decorated additional space
creates considerable additional capacity
and different behaviours in the clientele,
which leads to different noise.
Thank you very much.
Cllr Phil Gomm - 2:22:58
Okay, very good. So there we go, both of our interested parties that were left and the applicant and licencing have done their sort of closing submissions there.
So that concludes the evidence in this matter. Before I conclude the hearing though, is there any party present who does not consider that they have had a fair hearing?
Anyone? Oh, so it's the pitch.
Applicant's Representative - 2:23:32
I've had a very fair hearing. Could I simply, I will not make a pitch. Could I invite Sarah to look at paragraph 1119 of the National Gardens issued under section 182. That's the point about recorded music isn't regulated entertainment. I found it in the background.
Thank you, I will. Thank you.
Cllr Phil Gomm - 2:23:42
Sorry, Chair, I've had a very fair hearing and if I caused any offence to Councillor Cook, that was not my intention at all.
No, and I, you know, it happens. Anyway, whatever. It's, right, so that's very good. We've listened to all the President's submissions and all the evidence and everyone's happy that they've had a fair hearing.
So the subcommittee will now retire together with the legal advisor and Democratic Services Officer for the matter to be determined.
The subcommittee will come to a decision which will be sent to the applicant and all other
parties who submitted relevant representation with the time limits set out in regulations
together with details of any right of appeal. Please can all party, other than members,
the legal advisor and democratic services now leave the hearing. But before you do,
I would like to say to everyone that's attended our meeting, I do say it to quite a few, thank
you so much for attending the meeting today. It's been very well mannered. I'm sure we've
covered a lot of ground and hopefully we'll come to some conclusion along the way. But
thank you very much. Enjoy the rest of the day and the baby. Enjoy our meeting and you'll
hear from us very soon. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you all. Bye bye.