Agenda item

The Application

The application sought to vary the current licence by extending the licensed hours for the sale of alcohol on the premises from 00.30 to 02.00 hours, recorded music and the provision of late night refreshment from 01.00 until 02.00 hours on Friday and Saturdays. For both recorded music and the provision of light entertainment, the application envisaged a reduction of 30 minutes in the permitted times on Sundays. The application sought to add the provision of live music on Mondays to Wednesdays, between 12.00 to midnight, on Thursdays between 12.00 to 01.00 hours, on Friday and Saturdays between 12.00 to 02.00 hours and Sundays between 12.00 to 23.30 hours. The application stated “We request the additional hour for the main bar only. Terrace operation hours will remain the same. No change to rear of Premises Garden operation / times”.

The Case for the Applicant

The Applicant’s solicitor explained that the intention was for last orders on Friday and Saturdays to be given at 1.30 hours with a winding down period thereafter, and the premises closing at 02.00 hours. After contact with the police his client sought to address the possibility that his customers may leave the premises and walk along the High Street to other venues with later opening hours. The intention of the application is that customers will be able to remain on the premises until 2am on Fridays and Saturdays and there will be no extra journey through the Town Centre. Conditions had been agreed with the police including a requirement that there be a last entry time to the premises of 00.30 hours.

It had been agreed with the Council’s Environmental Health Officer that triple glazing would be installed on the High Street elevation. For financial reasons this could be undertaken within 6 months of the grant of permission. With reference to the objection from the planning department, the applicant had not applied to vary the planning condition or apply for a certificate of lawfulness. However, the planning and licensing regimes were separate. With respect to the Council’s Special Policy of Cumulative Impact, due to the last admission time there would be no additional customers in the premises and therefore no further detrimental impact on licensing objectives. The intention was to reduce the number of people journeys and customers could remain in the premises and not move uphill along the High Street to another premises with later hours. In response to a question, it was confirmed that the noise complaints since July 2023 had not been made in respect of later hours. The business had direct contact with residents living either side of the premises. The number of external smokers would be limited to three persons who would only smoke in a position where a door supervisor was positioned. The premises had operated using TENS in December and January. The premises had engaged a DJ on Fridays and Saturdays, either to the current permitted hours or to the hours permitted by the TENS.

The Case for the Objectors

The Council received two written objections from residents. The first representation expressed a concern that there was already significant late night noise from revellers leaving the Bridge Bar and that extending the opening times at the premises would have a detrimental effect to many residents both on the High Street and the surrounding roads. The second representation also referred to the area being severely affected by the noise from the High Street bars being open so late and expressed a concern that moving the opening time to 2am would set a precedent for other bars to follow. The local area was already severely affected by noise from High Street bars and pubs.

A representative from the Council’s planning department advised that the premises were subject to a planning condition which only permitted opening hours to 00.30 hours. There had been no application submitted by the business to extend these permitted hours or submit an application for a certificate of lawfulness (if it was claimed there has been a longstanding breach of the planning condition).

Reasons for Decision

Members considered the amended application, the written and oral representations, the Council’s Statement of Licensing Policy and statutory guidance. They concluded that the application should be refused.

The Council’s statement of licensing policy at paragraph 22.1 provided that:

There should be a clear separation of the planning and building control functions and the licensing regimes. Licensing applications should not be a re-run of the planning application process. The Licensing Authority will not grant an application for a new Premises Licence or Club Premises Certificate unless it is satisfied that all relevant planning permissions are in place where necessary.

…..When considering representations to the granting of a new Premises Licence or Club Premises Certificate or a variation of an existing licence or certificate, which is not subject to any planning conditions, the Licensing Sub Committee may request information as to any planning conditions attached to similar premises in the locality. The Sub Committee may consider the reason for the implication of such conditions and consider those in relation to the application being determined.

Although it was accepted that the policy could be more clearly worded, the committee concluded that the intention of the policy could not be to exclude considerations of planning conditions on a variation application, where a current planning condition on the application premises would be breached, but allow consideration of planning conditions on similar premises in the locality where no condition existed on the application premises.

The committee noted the submission for the Applicant’s solicitor that licensing and planning were separate regimes, but also noted that the Applicant had taken no steps to resolve the planning situation, either by way of an application to vary the planning condition or by an application for a certificate of lawfulness. Taking everything into account, it was concluded that the application was premature in advance of any progress being made to resolve the planning position and some weight should be given to the to the objection raised by the planning department.

The premises were located in an area subject to a Special Policy of Cumulative Impact. That policy stated:

In any area declared to be subject to a Special Policy of Cumulative Impact it would be the Licensing Authority’s intention to refuse to grant new premises/ club licences or variations, unless the application is such that the grant of the licence would have no further detrimental impact on the area and the promotion of the licensing objectives. This policy applies to all new premises licences and club premises certificates, including but not limited to night clubs, wine bars, pubs, restaurants, take-away premises, supermarkets, shops, theatres and cinemas and leisure services which include licensable activities e.g. Sports centres.

The Applicant’s solicitor said there would be no further detrimental impact on licensing objectives, as the intention was to reduce the number of people journeys and customers could remain in the premises and not move up the High Street to another premises with later opening hours.

We considered the closing times of premises in the High Street and Southend Road, as attached to the agenda papers. We noted that the only premises with licensed closing hours on Fridays and Saturdays at 2pm and beyond were Patricks, Bridge Bar and 10 Below. These premises were located in the section of the High Street north of Albemarle Road. The Committee considered if it were to allow the application, it would encourage other licensed premises in the vicinity of the application site to apply for extended hours. Rather than reducing the number of people journeys, the eventual outcome would be to encourage patrons to stay in this section of the High Street in the early hours of the morning, contributing to issues of cumulative impact that the licensing policy sought to prevent. For these reasons it was considered that the application would alter the character of the area with a detrimental impact on the character of the area and the licensing objectives relating to prevention of public nuisance and the prevention of crime and disorder.

Decision:

That the application be REFUSED.