Agenda and minutes

            An apology was reported on behalf of the High Sheriff (Councillor McAteer).

            The minutes of the meeting of 19th November were taken as read and signed as correct.  It was reported that those minutes had been adopted by the Council at its meeting on 1st December.

Councillor Smyth declared an interest in item 2d, namely, “Objection to the Renewal of an Entertainments Licence for Shaftesbury Bowling Club”, in that he had previously liaised with the objector in relation to the application and so he left meeting for the duration of the discussion on the item and did not vote.

The Committee noted a list of applications for licences which had, since its last meeting, been approved under the Council’s Scheme of Delegation.

The Committee noted a list of applications which had been approved under the Council’s Scheme of Delegation during November 2025.

The Director of Planning and Building Control provided the Committee with the details of the application from EZE Gaming Ltd., for the provisional grant of an Amusement Permit at 51 Rosemary Street. The applicant had expressed that they wished to relocate its existing amusement arcade from 13 North Street to the new location. The Director explained that the existing amusement arcade in North Street had been operational for over 20 years and that the applicant had advised that those premises would close if the new permit, for 51 Rosemary Street, was granted.

The proposed amusement arcade would house 48 gaming machines and the arcade currently operated by the applicant at North Street was licensed for the same number of machines, although on previous renewal inspections there were, in fact, fewer gaming machines.

The proposed opening hours of the amusement arcade were as follows:

·         Monday to Saturday (8.00am - Midnight) and

·         Sunday (12 Noon – 11.00pm)

The Committee was advised that planning permission for the change of use from retail to an amusement arcade was granted on 4th October, 2024, for the site in question.  The Director pointed out, however, that the planning approval for the site was not dependent on the relocation of the amusement arcade and was not subject to an agreement under Section 76 of the Planning Act (NI) 2011.

The Committee was advised that the First Non-Subscribing Presbyterian Church, located near the proposed site, had objected to the application, citing concerns about the amusement arcade being an unsuitable neighbour and its potential negative impact on the Church’s activities and the areas historical significance.

The Members were advised that a meeting between the applicant and the Church representatives had been held but no resolution had been reached.

The Council’s Amusement Permit Policy, ratified in 2013, outlined criteria for assessing applications.  The Policy generally presumed against granting new amusement permits in the Retail Core of Belfast City Centre unless part of a major retail-led development or upper-storey development.

The Director outlined that the application had been evaluated against five criteria in the Amusement Permit Policy:

·         Retail vibrancy: The site was in the Retail Core, where new amusement arcades were discouraged. However, the applicant had argued that the relocation was necessary for city centre regeneration;

·         Cumulative build-up: There were other amusement arcades nearby, but none in the same commercial block;

·         Impact on Belfast’s image: The site was near historic and listed buildings, including the First Presbyterian Church, but it was not considered to detract significantly from the area’s tourism appeal;

·         Proximity to residential areas: The site was not adjacent to residential properties.

·         Proximity to schools and vulnerable groups: No schools, youth centres or residential institutions for vulnerable people were located within 200 metres of the site.

The Director explained that the Committee was required to decide whether to grant or refuse the application based on the applicant’s fitness to hold the permit, the suitability of the premises, and any representations.

She explained that the objector wished to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4c

The Director of Planning and Building Control provided the details of the application which was before the Committee due to an objection having been received from a local resident in relation to the renewal of the 6-day Annual Indoor Entertainments Licence for the Shaftesbury Bowling and Recreation Club.  She outlined the history of the licence renewal process, including previous objections and resolutions.

The Committee was advised that the objection primarily concerned noise disturbances caused by loud music, particularly on Tuesday evenings and occasionally on weekends. The resident had claimed that the noise, including loud bass music and open windows during events, had negatively impacted their family’s health and well-being, causing disrupted sleep for young children. The objector had expressed dissatisfaction with the club’s efforts to address the concerns, stating that the club prioritised entertainment over the comfort of nearby residents. The objector had declined further liaison meetings, citing no new developments in their complaint.

The Members were advised that the applicant had responded to the objection by detailing measures taken to mitigate any disturbances, including reducing noise levels, turning off bass music, monitoring sound levels outside the hall, lining doors facing residential areas, and locking windows that faced nearby homes. Despite those efforts, the objector maintained that the noise remained disruptive and that they believed the club had not taken their concerns seriously.  The applicant had stated that they had no additional measures to propose beyond those already implemented.

The Director drew the Committee’s attention to noise complaints which had received by the Council’s Nighttime Noise Team during the previous licence period (February 2024 to January 2025) and the current licence period (February 2025 to November 2025). During the previous period, 17 complaints had been received.  However, most were either unsubstantiated or deemed not unreasonable for the time of day.  In the current period, 10 complaints had been received, with verbal warnings issued on three occasions due to witnessed noise levels.  The Members were advised that dance classes held at the venue did not require an Entertainments Licence, but that musical entertainment provided after the classes did.

            Due to technical difficulties in getting the objector to join the hybrid meeting, the Committee agreed to hear from the secretary of the Bowling Club, Ms. N. Hayden, first.

            Ms. Hayden was welcomed to the meeting and she outlined that the complaints focused on the dance classes which took place at the Club on a Tuesday evening between 7.00pm and approximately 10.30pm, with the hall emptying shortly after that time.  She stated that the Club comprised 80 members, 65 of whom were pensioners.  She explained that they had endeavoured to do their best not to make noise for the neighbours and that the Club members were very much part of the surrounding community.  The Members were advised that 10-12 letters of support for the club had been received from within the community.  She stated that they had triple glazing on one side of the building and double glazing on another, with extra soundproofing  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4d