Agenda, decisions and minutes

Resolved: That Councillor Ravilious be elected to act as Chair of the hearing.

Introductions were made.

At this point in the meeting, Members and co-opted members are asked to declare any disclosable pecuniary interest, or other registerable interest, they might have in respect of business on this agenda, if they have not already done so in advance on the Register of Interests. The disclosure must include the nature of the interest.

An interest must also be disclosed in the meeting when it becomes apparent to the member during the meeting.

[Please see attached sheet for further guidance for Members].

Members were invited to declare at this point in the meeting any disclosable pecuniary interest or other registerable interest they might have in respect of business on the agenda if they had not already done so in advance on the Register of Interests. None were declared.

To consider excluding the Press and Public during the sub-committee’s deliberations and decision-making at the end of the hearing, on the grounds that the public interest in excluding the public outweighs the public interest in that part of the meeting taking place in public, under Regulation 14 of the Licensing Act 2003 (Hearings) Regulations 2005.

Resolved: That the press and public be excluded from the meeting during the sub-committee’s deliberations and decision making at the end of the hearing, on the grounds that the public interest in excluding the public outweighs the public interest in that part of the meeting taking place in public, under Regulation 14 of the Licensing Act 2003 (Hearings) Regulations 2005.

To approve and sign the minutes of the Licensing Hearing held on 5 September 2024.

Resolved: That the approval of the minutes of the meeting held on 5 September 2024 be deferred to the next meeting.

Hearing reconvened in private session at 12:16 hours on 30 September 2024.

PRESENT: Councillors Ravilious (Chair), Baxter, and Kilbane.

The Sub-Committee resolved to take no action in regard to the Premises Licence in accordance with Option 6.

Full reasons for the Sub-Committee’s decision will be included in the detailed Decision Letter which will be provided to the Applicant, Premises Licence Holder, and the Representor in due course.

There is a right of appeal for the Premises Licence Holder, Applicant, and the Representor, to the Magistrates’ Court against this decision. Any appeal to the Magistrates Court must be made within 21 days of receipt of the Decision Letter and sent to the following address:

Chief Executive

York and Selby Magistrates Court

The Law Courts

Clifford Street

York

YO1 9RE

Members considered an application by Andrew Dickinson for a Review of Premises Licence for Museum Gardens, Museum Street, York.

In considering the application and the representations made, the Sub-Committee concluded that the following licensing objective(s) were relevant to this Hearing:

1)    The Prevention of Public Nuisance

In coming to their decision, the Sub-Committee took into consideration all the evidence and submissions that were presented, and determined their relevance to the issues raised and the above licensing objective, including:

1)    The application and supporting documents.

2)    The Senior Licensing Officer’s report and her comments made at the Hearing. She outlined the report noting reasons for the application for the review of the licence and the information contained within the annexes to the report. She explained that the review had been brought to the sub-committee on the basis of the licensing objective of prevention of public nuisance, and that a noise complaint was received by City of York Council (CYC) after an event held by York Museums Trust in July 2024 where it was found that noise restrictions had been exceeded by 2 decibels (dB). It was noted that the licence held by York Museums Trust authorised the sale of alcohol and the provision of regulated entertainment. The Senior Licensing Officer highlighted that there was a representation received from Public Protection, CYC, as a responsible authority, in Annex 3. In response to questions from the Applicant, the Senior Licensing Officer reported that questions on details of noise complaints received since 2005 would be better posed to Public Protection.

3)    The Applicant’s representation at the hearing. Mr. Dickinson stated that York Museums Trust’s event in July continued from the early hours of the evenings, and that residents such as himself were not notified of the holding of the event. He put it to the sub-committee that a restriction of 25db was not a reasonable level and was too high as it caused disruption and discomfort for a long period, he then noted that low-frequency sound waves, which could travel further than higher-frequency sound waves, were not accounted for in the data collected by noise measuring devices which only measured the immediate site, he stated that rigorous noise prevention measures should be in place in residential areas where there were children and elderly residents. Mr. Dickinson stated that Manchester City Council had pursued processes to implement lower level noise restrictions if events were to be held within residential areas, and urged that this be considered in York. He submitted that the event was only broadly compliant’, and was therefore not wholly compliant with the conditions in place. He then stated that neuro-divergent people perceive noise differently, and that the noise regulations did not take this into account and should be more inclusive, and concluded that regarding the representation received by Councillor Mason seen in Annex 5 of the report, all members of the Sub-Committee should remain impartial.

In response to questions from the sub-committee, Mr. Dickinson stated that:

·         He had attempted to complain to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 29.