Agenda and minutes

The minutes of the meeting held on 21^st March 2011 were taken as read and signed as a correct record.

          The Committee met to consider an application which had been made under section 17 of the Licensing Act 2003 for a premises licence in relation to land at Daresbury.

          The hearing was held in accordance with the provisions of the Licensing Act 2003 and the Licensing Act (Hearings) Regulations 2005.

          The Committee heard representations in person on behalf of:

1.     The Applicant C I (Events) Ltd were represented by Simon Taylor who was accompanied by Jim King, Warren King (Vanguardia Acoustic Consultant) and Adam Oliver (Designated Premises Supervisor).

2.     Cheshire Constabulary were represented by Chief Superintendent Guy Hindle, PC Paul Mace, Nicola Linder and Ian Seville Police Licensing Officer.

3.     Halton Borough Council’s Environmental Health, Building Control and Enforcement Division were represented by Yeemay Sung Environmental Health Manager, Wendy Salisbury Principal Environmental Health Officer and Stephen Rimmer Divisional Manager Highways.

4.     Warrington Borough Council were represented by Phillip Ramsden and Paul Johnson.

5.     Councillor Hilary Greaves representing Daresbury Parish Council and Councillor Paul Kennedy (Warrington Borough Council) as interested parties.

          The Applicant began by outlining the nature and background to the application.

          Cheshire Constabulary elaborated on the fundamental objections set out in their representations.

          Halton Borough Council’s Environmental Health, Building Control and Enforcement Division had not objected to the grant of a 3 year licence but proposed a number of conditions should a licence be granted for the 3 year period.

          Councillor Greaves elaborated on the points raised in her written representation.

          Councillor Paul Kennedy elaborated on a number of points raised in his written representation.

          The Committee raised a number of questions which were put to the parties throughout the hearing.

          In addition, the Committee considered all of the written relevant representations from interested parties that had been made.

          Members were advised that letters making representations had been received from 19 interested parties. The representations had been placed on the application file and copies had been forwarded to the applicant, appropriate responsible authorities and to members of the Committee prior to the hearing. Only relevant representations were taken into account by the Committee (the Committee having determined what constituted a relevant representation from an interested party). Where a representation contained both relevant and irrelevant material only the relevant elements of the representation were taken into account.

          The vicinity of the site had been determined to be the area enclosed within a radius of 1.5 miles from the site (or just over 7 square miles.

          At the conclusion of the hearing the Committee retired to consider the application.

          RESOLVED: That