Agenda and minutes

To agree the procedure rules for remote meetings.

RESOLVED –

THAT the guidance be agreed.

An apology for absence was received from Councillor Pat Callaghan.

Councillor Matthew Kirk was in attendance as substitute.

There were no such declarations.

Broadcast of the meeting

The Chair to announce the following: “In addition to the rights by law that the public and press have to record this meeting, I would like to remind everyone that this meeting is being broadcast live by the Council to the Internet and can be viewed on our website for at least six months after the meeting. After that time, webcasts are archived and can be made available on upon request.

If you have asked to address the meeting, you are deemed to be consenting to being filmed and to the use of those images and sound recordings for webcasting and/or training purposes. If you are addressing the Committee your contribution will be recorded and broadcast.”

Webcasting

The Chair announced that the meeting was being broadcast live to the internet and would be capable of repeated viewing and copies of the recording could be made available to those that requested them. Those participating in the meeting were deemed to be consenting to being filmed.

Supplementary Agenda

The Chair also announced that since the publication of the main agenda, there had been two supplementary agendas published.

There was no such notification.

To approve the minutes of the meeting held on 2^nd March 2023.

Consideration was given to the Minutes of the meeting that took place on 2^nd March 2023.

RESOLVED –

THAT the minutes be approved and signed as a correct record.

Report of the Executive Director Supporting Communities

This is an application to vary a premises licence under section 34 of the Licensing Act 2003.

The application to vary a premises licence under section 34 of the Licensing Act 2003 was withdrawn prior to the hearing, and therefore would not be considered.

Report of the Executive Director Supporting Communities

This is an application to vary a premises licence under section 34 of the Licensing Act 2003.

Consideration was given to a report of the Executive Director Supporting Communities detailing an application for a variation to a premises licence under section 34 of the Licensing Act 2003.

The Licensing Officer took the Panel through the report and stated that four relevant representations opposing the applicant had been received from local residents.

The applicant’s legal representative, Graham Hopkins, confirmed that the application for a variation had been amended and requested that the condition regarding refuse collection was extended from 20:00hrs to 23:00hrs, rather than 23:30hrs as previously stated.

Edward Troupe outlined their objections to the application, as in their written submission.

Tom Stewart outlined their objections to the application, as in their written submission.

The applicant, Xue Mei Zhang, and the applicant’s legal representative outlined their application and responded to questions providing the following information:

• The application had been made because the current condition was deemed by the applicant to be overly restrictive.
• First Mile, the company contracted by the applicant for refuse collection, confirmed that they had occasionally experienced delays collecting waste due to traffic, staff shortages and other issues. However, despite occasional delays, First Mile has mostly complied with the contracted time and intends to stick to the agreed time of between 19:30hrs and 20:00hrs.
• The Licensing Authority suggested changing the condition to extend the time for waste collection to ensure compliance.
• The applicant was put on First Miles priority list after an incident occurred where rubbish was not collected for 48 hours.
• The issues with rubbish in the area were caused by people littering and dumping waste, and the applicant was not responsible for this.
• The applicant had made remedial efforts to address some of the issues that had been raised, such as putting bags of refuse on plastic trays so that oil and other liquid did not seep out onto the street.
• It was confirmed that staff were trained to know where waste needed to be placed and at which times.
• The applicant highlighted their contingency plan for occasions where First Mile were unable to make collections, which involved storing rubbish inside the premises until a different service could collect it. However, they expressed a need to have time to arrange this and had proposed extending the collection time to 23:00hrs to allow emergency collection service to be booked.
• The applicant clarified that extending the time to 21:00hrs was considered insufficient time to book an alternative service and for them to arrive.
• It was confirmed by the applicant that if the variation was granted, they would not change the current contracted time for waste collection, and it would remain the same.
• Responding to a question about morning waste collections, the applicant explained that a member of staff needed to be present when the collection occurs to ensure the rubbish was not left on the street for too long.

Edward Troup, an interested party, made some closing remarks.

The applicant’s representative made some closing remarks.

Decision and reasons

Panel Members confirmed that they had  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

It is drawn to the attention of members of the public and press that the reports relating to the items listed below are considered to be exempt within the meaning of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972, as amended. The Authority will be asked to pass a resolution, the effect of which is to exclude members of the public and press from the remaining part of the proceedings.

Information contained in the agenda items below is exempt because it falls within: Categories 1 of Schedule 12A Local Government Act 1972 (as amended).  The Proper Officer has considered all the circumstances of the reports and is of the view that on balance the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information.

Proposed resolution:- 

“THAT the press and public be excluded from the proceedings of Licensing Panel D on 11^th May 2023 during item 10 and the consideration of the Part II report on the agenda, on the basis that, were Members of the public to be present, there would be disclosure of exempt information as defined in Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972, as amended. 

Specifically:

Exempt Information Category 1 - Information which relates to an individual: the reason why the public interest favours withholding the information is that the release of such information could constitute or facilitate an unwarranted interference with the individual’s privacy.

RESOLVED –

THAT the press and public be excluded from the proceedings of Licensing Panel D on 11^th May 2023 during consideration of the following items on Part II of the agenda, on the basis that, were Members of the public to be present, there would be disclosure of exempt information as defined in Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972, as amended.

Specifically:

Exempt Information Category 1 – Information which relates to an individual: the reason why the public interest favours withholding the information is that the release of such information could constitute or facilitate an unwarranted interference with the individual’s privacy.

Report of the Executive Director Supporting Communities

This is an application to vary a premises licence under section 34 of the Licensing Act 2003

Consideration was given to the report of the Executive Director Supporting Communities, which outlined an application for a personal licence in accordance with Section 117 of the Licensing Act 2003.

PC Korbinian Cox, representing the Police, outlined their objection, as stated in the objection notice and answered questions.

The applicant highlighted the reasons that they felt that their application should be granted and answered questions.  

PC Cox made some closing remarks.

The applicant also made some closing remarks.

Decision and reasons

In deliberation, Members discussed whether there were exceptional or compelling circumstances for granting the personal licence application.  

Considering the applicant's criminal history and the current status of their rehabilitation, the Panel believed that granting a Personal Licence in this case would not be in the interest of public safety and would not align with the Licensing Act 2003 objectives.

Therefore, it was

RESOLVED –

THAT the personal licence application be rejected.

There was none.