Shrewsbury & Atcham
Borough Council

PRESENT: Councillors Rees, Wagner and Mrs Williams.

Council’s Representative – Licensing Officer

Legal Advisor to the Sub-Committee – Assistant Solicitor

Clerk to the Sub-Committee – Administrative Assistant (Committee Services)

The following members declared their personal interest in the items shown below:

That Councillor Rees be appointed Chairman of this Sub-Committee for the duration of the meeting.

Consideration was given to an application from Sirdar Associates Ltd for a variation of a Premises Licence for Tempo, 22 Abbey Foregate, Shrewsbury.

The applicant’s representative, Mr Flood, the designated premises supervisor, Mr Anderson and Mr Pugh were in attendance. The applicant’s representative asked the Members of the Sub-Committee if an adjustment could be made to paragraph 2.3 of the Licensing Officer’s report to change the designated premises supervisor from Mr David Anderson (as currently stated) to read Mr Graham Pugh. The Sub-Committee’s Legal Advisor, the Licensing Officer and the Chairman of the Sub-Committee provided their views on this matter.

The Chairman of the Sub-Committee requested an adjournment in order to discuss the above matter with the Members of the Sub-Committee and the hearing was adjourned at 9.40 a.m. It reconvened at 9.45 a.m.

The Members of the Sub-Committee decided that the hearing continue with no change to paragraph 2.3 of the Licensing Officer’s report and paragraph 2.3 remain as "there would be a change of designated premises supervisor from Mr Lee Allen to Mr David Anderson". The Members of the Sub-Committee were in agreement that any further application would need to be dealt with separately.

The applicant’s representative presented the case to the Sub-Committee on behalf of his client during which he indicated that Tempo used to be known as the Ministry Nightclub. The designated premises supervisor, Mr Anderson, answered questions from the Licensing Officer, the objectors (Mrs Yates-Roberts, a local resident, Mrs Moylan, a local resident and Councillor Kenny, a local ward member, who were in attendance) and the Members of the Sub-Committee.

The Licensing Officer addressed the Sub-Committee outlining the contents of her report on the application. She informed the Members of the Sub-Committee that currently, Mr Anderson was unable to be the designated premises supervisor as he did not hold a personal licence and that an application had been received that morning for the transfer of the designated premises supervisor to Mr Pugh. Mr Pugh had a personal licence which was issued by the authority. The Licensing Officer answered questions from two objectors (Mrs Yates-Roberts and Councillor Kenny).

The objector, Mrs Yates-Roberts, presented her case to the Sub-Committee during which, she referred to an article in a recent newspaper regarding binge drinking and drink related incidents in relation to extended licensing hours. She answered questions from the applicant’s representative, the Licensing Officer and the Members of the Sub-Committee.

The objector, Mrs Moyland, presented her case to the Sub-Committee during which, she asked a question to Mr Anderson. At the discretion of the Chairman, Mr Anderson answered the question. She answered questions from the applicant’s representative, the Licensing Officer and the Members of the Sub-Committee.

The objector, Councillor Kenny, presented his case to the Sub-Committee and answered questions from the applicant’s representative, the Licensing Officer and the Members of the Sub-Committee.

During the summing up of all parties, and prior to the applicant’s representative being the last person to sum up, Councillor Mrs Williams stated that one of the letters received stated "there seems to be no monitor of underage drinkers in the club to which we have made numerous complaints to the Police but nothing is done" and that had the Police been present at the hearing, the Members of the Sub-Committee would have been able to ask the Police this question. The applicant’s representative responded to Councillor Mrs Williams’ statement by saying that both sons of the authors of the letter had been barred from his client’s premises at times over the last two years for disruptive behaviour in relation to drinking. He therefore requested that the Members of the Sub-Committee attach suitable weight to a letter which had not been backed up by oral evidence and had not been open to questions from either himself or any of the other parties in the room.

(Members of the Sub-Committee retired to consider the application, in private, at approximately 11.35 a.m. and reconvened at approximately 12.20 p.m.)

That, subject to the conditions attached to the existing Premises Licence, the conditions detailed in the Operating Schedule including the amendment to the condition under the Protection of Children from Harm objective to read "Children would not be permitted on the premises",

and the following additional condition:

• An admission policy be operated restricting the entrance to the premises after 00:00 hours.

The application for a variation of a Premises Licence in respect of Tempo, 22 Abbey Foregate, Shrewsbury be granted to Sirdar Associates Ltd as follows:

• Sale of Alcohol & Provision of Regulated Entertainment: (plays, films, live music, recorded music, performance of dance, provision of facilities for making music, provision of facilities for dancing and anything of a similar description):

Monday to Saturday - 10:00 to 02:30 the following morning; and

Sunday - 10:00 to 02:00 the following morning.

• Provision of Late Night Refreshment:

Monday to Saturday - 23:00 to 03:00 the following morning; and

Sunday - 23:00 to 02:30 the following morning.

• The permitted opening hours would be:

Monday to Saturday - 10:00 to 03:00 the following morning; and

Sunday - 10:00 to 02:30 the following morning.

Reasons

That the restriction on hours from those requested and the condition relating to the admission policy was necessary for the prevention of public nuisance.