Agenda and minutes

Councillor Willingham was elected Chair of the meeting.

There were no declarations of interest.

The Lucky Onion LLP 129-133 Promenade, Cheltenham

The Chair informed the meeting that on 22 January Cllr Harman, the Licensing Team Leader and himself had undertaken a socially distanced site visit to the Lucky Onion.

Cllr Mason, attending on behalf of residents in the area, was allowed to address the meeting on an initial procedural issue. He raised the issue of the late publication of the acoustic report and asked whether, due to the timing of this, it could legitimately be given consideration at the meeting. He urged the sub-committee to adjourn the hearing in order to allow time for this report to be fully reflected upon by all parties concerned.

The Head of Law was requested to provide advice to the sub-committee in this respect. She clarified that there was nothing within the regulations which would prohibit the submission of a report prior to the hearing. However, if either the objectors, Cllr Mason, or any other party wished to make representations on the submission, the sub-committee should reflect as to whether additional time should be granted to allow consideration of the report.

Cllr Mason explained that he, and some of the objectors, had not had sufficient time to reflect fully on the report following its late submission and therefore had not had the opportunity to make representations on this additional information.

Speaking on behalf of one of the Interested Parties, the Queens Hotel, Mr Charalambides raised a further procedural point.  He questioned whether there was a protocol for site visits and asked whether the acoustic report had been discussed at the site visit declared by the Chair. He also asked whether his client or any of the other objectors were also given the opportunity for the sub-committee to visit their premises which were in the vicinity of the site.

On behalf of the sub-committee, the Chair clarified that site visits were common as Members were not always familiar with the premises. He confirmed that the acoustic report had not been discussed, as it was not available to the sub-committee at that stage.

The Licensing Team Leader added that site visits were carried out in accordance with the authority’s Probity in Licensing guide. He confirmed that Mr Connor had accompanied the party on site and the focus was on the premises in question, rather than adjacent premises.  The acoustic report had only been received at 5pm on Friday afternoon via email. The council’s current policy was not to undertake planning or licensing site visits due to current circumstances but, on this occasion, Members felt it was important to gain an understanding of the lie of the land.

Mr Charalambides requested a short adjournment for him to take instruction from his client on the site visit, which he deemed to be ‘special treatment’ due to not having had sight of the Probity in Licensing guide.  The Chair stated that site visits were a regular occurrence and were not special treatment.  The adjournment was granted by the Chair.

Upon resumption, speaking for the Queens Hotel, Mr Charalambides supported the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3.

None.