Agenda item

The report of the Chief Officer Elections and Regulatory advises Members of an application for the grant of a premises licence, made by Back Nine Golf Limited, for Back Nine Golf 2 Oxford Street, Guiseley, Leeds, LS20 9AX.

The report of the Chief Officer advised Members of an application made under section 17 of the Licensing Act 2003 ("the Act") for a new premises licence in respect of Back Nine Golf, 2 Oxford Street, Guiseley, Leeds, LS20 9AX

In attendance for this item was Mr John Flanagan - applicant.

The Legal Officer outlined the procedure for the hearing.

The Licensing Officer provided the following information:

·  This is the first application for a premises licence for these premises. The applicant’s name is Back Nine Golf Limited. The proposed designated premises supervisor is Mark John Flanagan.

·  The application was for the sale of alcohol for consumption on the premises, every day from 10:00 hrs until 22:30. No non-standard timings for bank holidays or special occasions were proposed.

·  A redacted version of the application, together with a plan of the basement floor and a picture of the back door of the premises, had been attached at Appendix A of the submitted report. The applicant proposed to promote the licensing objectives by taking the steps identified in section M of the redacted application form.

·  A map which identifies the location of this premises was attached at Appendix B.

·  It was noted that a representation had been received from West Yorkshire Police in their capacity as a responsible authority. Negotiations had taken place with the applicant prior to the hearing and the operating schedule had been amended to include the measures agreed with West Yorkshire Police. A copy of the agreement was appended to the report at Appendix C.

·  Representation had also been received from Environmental Health Services and this had also been negotiated prior to the hearing. A copy of the agreement was attached at Appendix D.

·  The application had attracted representation from members of the public with six individual letters of objection, all of which were opposed to this application on the grounds of public nuisance. Redacted copies of the representations were attached at Appendix E.

Mr Flanagan provided the Sub-Committee with the following information:

·  There was now a high demand for indoor golf. The venue would have a state of the art golf simulator which can track a real golf ball. The technology would allow players to play different courses such as St Andrews. Players would be able to hire golf clubs or bring their own.

·  The duration of a round of golf would be approximately 45 minutes. Players would hire the room for 1 hour and there could be up to 3 players per room.

·  Mr Flanagan said that this type of indoor golf was more popular in London at present with no venues like this in Leeds.

·  He was of the view that this type of venue had a good economic case and would provide a sustainable business. He informed the Sub-Committee that he had tried to buy a light industrial unit, but these were hard to acquire.

·  Players would book online with prices approximately £30 peak time and £20 off peak. The rooms could only accommodate 3 people. The opening times of 10:00am to 10:30pm was to capitalise on the demand which he knew there was. He hoped that he would be able to facilitate competitions and corporate events.

·  In addressing the objectors’ concerns he explained that people would be directed to use the Orchard Lane car park which was free so as not to have people parking on the road or to the rear of the premises.

·  The rear door would only be used in case of emergency, with the front door used for entry and leaving the premises. No music would be played at the premises.

·  The bar area could only hold 16 people and it was envisaged that more people would play on their own rather than in groups of 3. It was his view that most of the people using the venue would be driving so would not be consuming large amounts of alcohol, there was a coffee machine. There would be no public entry to the bar unless booked to play golf. There would be no stag parties and no SKY TV as this was not economically viable.

·  Mr Flanagan was of the view that if 250 people were booked to play this would be an excellent week for business.

·  Bins for bottles etc would be kept inside the premises.

·  People wishing to smoke or vape would be requested to do so across the road from the premises.

·  He would adhere to the measures agreed with the police and had already ordered Check 25 signs.

·  Mr Flanagan lived within the area and was of the view that this venue would not have a negative impact on the community, he had spent £30,000 renovating the premises.

·  Close to the premises was an Italian Restaurant and a Café Bar which both had a premises licence.

·  He envisaged that the golf venue would mainly cater for the 50-70 age group.

In response to questions from Members Mr Flanagan provided further information:

·  He and his business partner had no previous experience of bar management on a day-to-day basis, but he did have experience of running events.

·  He had no issues if the Sub-Committee wished to impose conditions.

·  He had already been approached to hold a birthday party for a 7-year-old and he was thinking of holding junior sessions on Saturday mornings.

·  On competition days the whole venue could be hired.

·  The screen was specially designed so that the screen measured the tension of the ball so that it dropped to the ground. There was a 30cm gap between the screen and the wall, to insulate the sound from the ball being hit. There was only a slight risk of the ball ricocheting if the ball was hit particularly hard, there was padding round the screen. It was his view that there would be no audible sound to the flat above.

·  The booking system would give time slots to customers but there would be no time limit set if people wished to stay chatting in the bar after their game. The booking system would open two weeks prior to the opening of the venue on 25^th September. There would be a controlled entry with people ringing a bell for access and they would be asked to attend 15 minutes prior to the commencement of the game to allow enough time for check in.

·  No one would be allowed to play under the influence of alcohol as there would be concerns that the system could be damaged, and they would be asked to leave the premises.

·  The Environmental Protection Team had not conditioned that the rear is not used but Mr Flanagan was happy if the Sub-Committee wished to impose this as a condition. In his view the rear of the premises was not aesthetically pleasing, so he did not think people would want to use the rear door.

In summing up Mr Flanagan said that it was important that everything was right from a personal aspect, and he was conscious to do everything properly. He believed in the value of community spirit and felt this would be right for the community in which he lived.

Members discussions included:

·  Bar was to be secondary to the golfing experience.

·  Online booking only.

·  Limited amount of people on the premises at one time.

·  Model business case.

·  Thought about issues in relation to parking.

·  Local person so aware of the community and area.

·  Conditions to be imposed in relation to rear door and emptying of bins.

RESOLVED – To grant the premises licence subject to the following additional conditions:

·  Rear door not to be used except in emergency as an exit.

·  No bins to be emptied between 23:00 and 07:00.

The meeting concluded at 12:30