To receive apologies for absence.

To receive any details of Members nominated to attend the meeting in place of a Member of the committee.

There were no substitutes present at the meeting.

To receive declarations of interest in respect of items on the agenda.

To consider an application for a review of a premise licence in respect of The Ruby Takeaway, 23 Union Street, Hereford. HR1 2BT called by West Mercia Police under the Licensing Act 2003.

Members of the licensing Sub-Committee from the Council’s Planning and Regulatory Committee considered the above application, full details of which appeared before the members in their agenda, and the supplementary information published on 31 May 2024.

It was noted that the premises licence holder was not present at the meeting.

It was considered that the hearing should not go ahead in the absence of the licence holder. The sub-committee agreed that the review of a premises licence in respect of Ruby Chinese Takeaway should be heard at the next scheduled meeting on Friday 21 June 2024.

RESOLVED: That the review of a premises licence in respect of Ruby Chinese Takeaway be heard at the next scheduled meeting on Friday 21 June 2024

There was an adjournment at 10:33 a.m.; the meeting reconvened at 11:45 a.m.

To consider an application for a grant of an occasional premises licence in respect of Gemfest 2024,  "Farmland opposite", Great Howle Farm, Howle Hill, Ross-on-Wye, HR9 5SL under the Licensing Act 2003.

Members of the licensing Sub-Committee from the Council’s Planning and Regulatory Committee considered the above application, full details of which appeared before the members in their agenda, and the supplementary information published on 31 May 2024.

Prior to making their decision the Council’s Licensing Officer presented the report which outlined the options available to the Sub-Committee. One representation was received from the Responsible Authorities; Trading Standards – who asked for one condition which were agreed by the applicant. Fifteen relevant public representations had been received. A number of relevant public representations contained information that was not relevant e.g.: increased traffic, wildlife issues and Scheduled Monument in the area 'Great Howle Camp'. The Licensing Officer summarised the application, provided an overview of the representations received and outlined the licensing history relating to the licensing of the site.

The Sub-Committee heard from the public representatives that:

·         There was a significant risk of crime and disorder posed by the festival. At a similar event in 2009 there was serious sexualassault.

·         The increase of the number of people to the area undermined the safety and security of the local area. The presence of a large crowd increased the pressure on law enforcement and increasedthe likelihoodof opportunisticcrime. Thelocal policestation wasonly openpart time and was 20 minutes from thesite.

·         The festival was likely to result in an increase in litter and general disorderlocally.

·         It was queried where those attendees who were not camping would go when the festival closed.

·         The festival was located in an isolated, rural location with no public transport links, it was queried how people would access the site. Individuals travelling and arriving on site in cars would pose a safety risk as the site was accessed through narrow countrylanes.

·         Preventionof publicnuisance –The festivalwas locatedin alawful, lowcrime communityand tranquil setting andthis festivalwas unwelcome.The locationfor theevent wasnot suitablein the environment. This would undermine the licensing objective of the prevention of public nuisance.

·         There had been a lack of consultation with the localcommunity.

·         People below the age of 18 would attempt to attend the event and this would undermine the licensing objective of protecting children fromharm.

·         The impact of the music, which would be drum and bass and garage, with deep bass would undermine the licensing objective of the prevention of public nuisance. The noise from the festival site would echo round the valley. The noise from the festival constituted a noise nuisance under the Environmental Protection Act1990.

·         The topography of the area would amplify the sound from the festival site; the assessment of noise received failed to take account of the topography and was misleading. The volume and carry of noisefrom thesite couldbe affectedby anumber offactors includingair temperature, the frequency of the noise and the presence of acoustic barriers. Straw bales would be place to attenuate  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.