Agenda item

The Licensing Officer presented the report as detailed on page 8 of the agenda and drew members’ attention to the following points:

·         An application had been received from Elinor UK Holdings Ltd, for a premises licence to be granted under the Licensing Act 2003 for Thorne House, Thorne Coffin Yeovil;

·         The licensable activities applied for as amended included late night refreshment and supply of alcohol;

·         The applicant had confirmed that a notice had been displayed at the premises for the requisite period; the Licensing Officer had visited the premises and confirmed that notices were in place.  A further notice was placed in the Western Gazette;

·         The three representations from the Responsible Authorities had been withdrawn;

·         Fifteen relevant representations representing twenty persons were received from individuals and one relevant representation was received from a Parish Council;

·         Three letters and an email representing four persons were also received but not considered to be relevant representations;

·         A representation had also been received from a solicitor representing thirty local residents, fifteen of which were included in the twenty persons from whom a  relevant representation was received, four persons letter or email of concern was not a relevant representation and eleven other persons whom had not submitted an individual relevant representation;

·         The regulated entertainment element of the application had been withdrawn;

·         The supply of alcohol and late night refreshment would be restricted to guests of Agusta Westlands;

·         Members were informed about the Licensing Act 2003 being amended with regard to live amplified music and record music between 08:00 and 23:00 for up to 500 persons as outlined in the agenda;

·         The options available to the Committee;

·         The Right of Appeal as outlined in the agenda.

The Chairman invited Paul Coombs, Head of Site Facilities, Agusta Westland to address the Sub-Committee.  He advised that Agusta Westland had used Thorne House for over fifty years.  Thorne House was a country property with six bedrooms and a clock house which was used as a meeting facility.  Thorne House was used for conferences and internal meetings as well as meetings with perspective customers from the UK and aboard.  He explained that due to changes in legislation regarding bribery and corruption and to be as transparent as possible in business dealings they were required to issue a receipt to their guests during their stay at Thorne House.  He highlighted that to comply with the law and relevant rules and regulations they could not currently sell alcohol to their guests, the premises licence would allow any guests/VIPs/representatives attending the property to be provided with an invoice.  Paul Coombs explained that there are six bedrooms and the maximum number of guests staying at the property at any one time would be twelve but was typically less and more like six people as very rarely do they have couples staying, it was usually single guests that would stay.  With regard to larger groups attending for meetings and corporate events, the capacity would normally be no greater than thirty people.  He informed members that there were no plans to change how Thorne House currently operated.

The Chairman then invited Mike Larcombe to address the Sub-Committee.  He advised that his comments were also on behalf of Mrs Grimster and Mrs Larcombe.  Points mentioned during his representation included the following:

·         The amended application addressed some of the concerns but as they had not had the opportunity to make representation with regard to the amended application there were still some outstanding issues or inconsistencies that needed to be addressed such as:

-       There was no clear indication of the maximum number of people or vehicles attending at any time;

-       Although the supply of alcohol had been limited to midnight, it was for consumption both on and off the premises – why off the premises, in public areas?

-       Section L still stated that the premises were open to the public until midnight – why the public? where elsewhere it is noted that the facility is for residents and guests of Agusta Westland.

-       There were significant shortcomings in the responses to meeting the licensing objectives particularly in view of the potentially large numbers of people and vehicles attending. He highlighted that the response at section b did nothing to prevent crime and disorder and there was no mention of any positive controls to achieve public safety. 

Margaret Powell addressed the Sub-Committee on behalf of herself and her husband.  She referred to the amended application going someway to providing assurances to her concerns.  She sought clarification over whether the premises would be open to members of the public and was confused by Section L of the application form.  She felt that some of the steps taken to promote the licensing objectives were weak and unenforceable if there were a larger number of guests.  She explained that she had no problems with the way in which Thorne House was currently operated but would have concerns if Agusta Westland sold or handed over the building.  She also felt that the issue of numbers attending the venue was a vague area and that the venue could be an in-house facility that catered for lots of people.  

In response to questions, members were informed of the following:

·         The applicant had applied for less licensing activities in the amended application and therefore there was no need to request for interested parties to make any representations.  This would only be requested if the amended application was for more licensing activities than applied for in the original application;

·         A licence could be transferred to another entity in its entirety, however they would need to make an application to remove or vary any conditions of the licence pertaining to guests of Agusta Westland if the transferee was not intending this to be the case and/or vary the licence to make any other changes;

·         Hours open to the public was not a licensable activity but formed part of the Operating Schedule;

·         Conditions of the licence would override the details on the application form;

·         Paul Coombs, Agusta Westland confirmed that the second floor of the premises was out of use and was left empty for storage.  He confirmed that he was happy to withdraw the second floor of the premises from the application.

The Officers and Parties with the exception of the Legal Executive and Democratic Services Officer, attending in an advisory capacity only, withdrew from the meeting to allow the members of the Sub-Committee to consider their decision in private.

Members of the Sub-Committee considered their decision in private session and were mindful of the advice given to them during the private session. 

When the meeting was reconvened, the Chairman asked the Legal Executive to give a summary of the advice given to them during the private session.  She advised that the Sub-Committee had been asked to take into account the following points:

·         Members of the Sub-Committee would need to justify any conditions they wish to add to the licence;

·         Members were informed that there was a process for reviewing the licence if the anticipated concerns of public nuisance did materialise.

The Chairman informed those present at the hearing of the decision of the Licensing Sub-Committee.

In respect of the Application for a New Premises Licence for the property at Thorne House, Thorne Coffin, Yeovil, Somerset, BA21 3PZ, under Section 18 of the Licensing Act 2003, the Licensing Sub-Committee has determined to GRANT the Premises Licence, in accordance with the application as amended, but subject to the following conditions to promote the licensing objectives.

1. The relevant mandatory conditions under the Licensing Act 2003;
2. Conditions consistent with the Applicant’s Operating Schedule;

In reaching the decision, the Sub-Committee took full account of representations made by the Interested Parties with regard to the amended application. The Committee did have reservations about the number of persons that could attend corporate events at the premises but they took into account the assurances given to them that the capacity at any event would typically be no greater than 30 people. The committee felt therefore that no further conditions were required. They were also mindful that there is a process for reviewing the licence if the anticipated concerns of public nuisance did materialise due to the number of persons attending an event.

The Committee took note that the licence would not include the second floor of the premises as this was withdrawn at the hearing and no longer part of the Application.

The Parties should note that they will receive the Committee’s official decision in full in the written Notice of Decision which will follow shortly.

All parties are reminded that there is a right of appeal against the decision of the Licensing Authority.  Such an appeal is to be made within 21 days of the date of receipt of the formal Notice of Determination, and should be made to the South Somerset Magistrates Court.