RECORD OF A HEARING FOR A NEW PREMISES LICENCE FOR AINSBURY, 7 THACKLEY ROAD, THACKLEY, BRADFORD (DOCUMENT “A”)

Commenced: 1010

Adjourned:      1050

Reconvened:  1130

Adjourned:      1135

Reconvened:  1150

Concluded:     1155

Members of the Panel:

Bradford District Licensing Panel: Councillors Slater (Chair), Dodds and Hawkesworth

Parties to the Hearing:

Representing the Licensee:

Mrs Townend, applicant

Interested Parties:

Councillor J Sunderland

Mr Spooner, local resident in objection

Responsible Authorities:

Mr Farmer, Environmental Health, Bradford Council

Observers

Mr Townend

Ms Townend

Mr Cheetham-Hudson

Representations:

The licensing officer in attendance summarised the background to the application and valid representations received as set out in the report.  Members were informed that the application requested the grant of a premises licence for the sale of alcohol and the provision of regulated entertainment.  A number of representations, including one from a Ward Councillor had been submitted and the Council’s Environmental Health Unit had asked that a condition be placed on the licence in order to address the prevention of public nuisance objective.

The applicant addressed the Panel explaining that the concerns of neighbours had been considered and a Ward Councillor had been asked to act as a mediator but had declined.  It was noted that objectors had not attended the Council’s Planning meeting when the proposal had been discussed and approved, subject to a number of conditions including soundproofing.  The applicant confirmed that it had been her decision to restrict the opening hours and the premises would be a micro pub serving cask ales in a quiet environment.  Members were informed that the premises could not be held responsible for the disturbance caused by the takeaway that closed at 11pm or the cricket club that was open until midnight.  The church opposite also created parking problems between 7 and 9pm.  There would be a designated area for smokers that would be cordoned off, food would not be served and bins would not be placed outside. 

In response to questions from the Panel, the applicant reported that:

·         The smoking area was owned by the property.

·         The planning officer’s recommendation had been to refuse the application.

·         The upstairs area would be used by people ‘vaping’ and there would be a designated area outside for smokers.

·         Patrons would be asked to be quiet and respect neighbours.

·         The property had been a shop until the 1970s.

·         The Council’s Planning Department would make a decision in relation to the soundproofing on 18 July 2019.

With regards to the Planning meeting, the Council’s Environmental Health Unit representative confirmed that an objection had been submitted to planning officers and added that constructive comments had been raised regarding the premises licence, as conditions would be required if it was granted. 

An objector informed the Panel that he had been given one weeks notice of the Planning meeting and local residents could not attend due to work commitments.  He stated that the premises would create noise nuisance with people coming and going.  It was a busy area and it could not be guaranteed that customers would  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.