Councillor Addis was elected as Chairman for the meeting.

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

To confirm as a correct record the Minutes of the meeting of a Sub-Committee held on 11 September 2014.

The Minutes of the meeting of the Sub-Committee held on 11 September 2014 were confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

To consider an application for a Review of a Premises Licence for Rock Garden, 40-44 Swan Street, Torquay TQ2 5EZ.

Members considered a report on an application for a Review of a Premises Licence for Rock Garden, 40-44 Swan Street, Torquay TQ2 5EZ.

Members noted that the application had been properly made and that the Applicants are Interested Parties and that the administrative requirements of Section 51 (3)(a) and (b) had been met and that the Representation had not been subsequently withdrawn and was not vexatious, frivolous or repetitious.

The Premises do fall within the Cumulative Impact Area.

Written Representations received from:

Members noted that there had been no additional Representations received from any other Responsible Authority or any other Interested Party and that although the Police had considered the application and had made a Statement, they were satisfied that the Premises currently met the Licensing Objectives ‘The Prevention of Crime and Disorder,’  ‘The Protection of Children from Harm’ and ‘The Promotion of Public Safety’ and therefore did not make a Representation.

The Senior Solicitor for the Local Authority informed the Respondent, Applicant, Responsible Authority and Interested Party that Members had attended a site visit at the premise on the 5^th November 2014 to familiarise themselves with the layout. During that visit, Members did not engage in any communication with any one other the Local Authority’s Senior Solicitor who was also present.

The Senior Licensing Officer advised Members that a DVD of video footage and photographs were submitted with the Review Application.  Copies of colour photographs which had appeared in black and white in the submitted report were circulated and Members viewed exerts of the video footage.

Request to extend the time for Oral Representations:

The Chairman agreed to the request from the Applicant and Public Protection to allow 20 minutes for Oral Representations. In doing so, each party were advised that they also will be permitted 20 minutes should they chose to require this time.

Oral Representation received from:

Upon advice from the Council’s Senior Solicitor, prior to consideration of the item in Minute 22, Members resolved that it was in the public interest not to exclude the press and public from the meeting, as the information contained within the report had been reported by the local newspaper and therefore was already in the public domain. Some personal details were agreed to be redacted from the report.

To consider an application for a Variation to a Premises Licence to Specify an Individual as the Premises Supervisor of Preston Cue Club, 3 Manor Corner, Manor Road, Paignton TQ3 2JB.

Members considered a report for an application for a Variation to a Premises Licence to specify an individual as the Premises Supervisor in respect of Preston Cue Club, 3 Manor Corner, Manor Road, Paignton TQ3 2JB.

Written Representations received from:

The Senior Licensing Officer advised Members that the Applicant had been informed that the Committee was taking place but had advised that the proposed Designated Premise Supervisor would be attending on their behalf.

Oral Representation received from:

Additional Information:

The proposed Designated Premise Supervisor explained to Members the personal reasons surrounding his conviction.

Decision:

That the application for a Variation to a Premises Licence to specify an individual as the Premises Supervisor in respect of Preston Cue Club, 3 Manor Corner, Manor Road, Paignton TQ3 2JB be refused.

Reason for Decision:

Having carefully considered all the written and oral Representations, Members noted the mitigating circumstances around the conviction but resolved that the proposed Designated Premises Supervisor did not in their opinion display a responsible attitude to alcohol by driving a car when he was four times over the drink drive limit and as such, they could not be satisfied that he was a suitable person to be the Designated Premises Supervisor of a Licensed Premises.