Councillor Spacagna was elected as Chairman for the meeting.

To receive apologies for absence, including notifications of any changes to the membership of the Sub-Committee.

It was reported that the membership of the Sub-Committee had been amended for this meeting by including Councillor Johns instead of Councillor Douglas-Dunbar.

To confirm as a correct record the Minutes of the meeting of a Sub-Committee held on 3 July 2025.

The Minutes of the meeting of the Sub-Committee held on 3 July 2025 were confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

To consider an application for a new Premises Licence in respect of Tomo Burger, South Quay, The Harbour, Paignton. 

Members considered a report on an application for a Premises Licence in respect of Tomo Burger, South Quay, The Harbour, Paignton. 

Written Representations were received from:

Oral Representations were received during the meeting from:

Decision:

That the application for a Premises Licence in respect of Tomo Burger, South Quay, The Harbour, Paignton be refused. 

Reason for Decision:

Having carefully considered all the written and oral representations, Members unanimously resolved to refuse the application, as they could not be satisfied on the evidence before them, that to grant the application as submitted, with that proposed by the Public Protection Officer by way of additional conditions, would result in all of the Licensing Objectives being promoted. 

In coming to their decision, Members considered what if any additional conditions could be added to that proposed by the Public Protection Officer, as opposed to a refusal, and determined that without sufficient soundproofing in place between the premises and the residential properties immediately above, there were no conditions which could be added to mitigate the highest probability of noise breakout emanating from within the premises that would directly undermine the Prevention of Public Nuisance, Licensing Objective.

Members further noted that whilst the outside area was intended to be used by patrons, there were no conditions proposed for this area of operation and in of itself, would add to noise nuisance and the undermining of the Prevention of Public Nuisance Licensing Objective, given the immediate proximity of the neighbouring residential properties. 

The video shown during the meeting by the applicant also evidenced to Members, that the premises had no sound proofing between the premises and the residential properties immediately above and having seen the footage, the Public Protection Officer confirmed that in his opinion that the premises did not have sufficient sound proofing and therefore this operation could cause a public nuisance. 

Members considered the appropriateness of sound proofing and the applicant  ...  view the full minutes text for item 11.