notification of chairman and outline of procedure

The Chairman opened the meeting by introducing the Sub-Committee and the Officers present. He explained that the Sub-Committee would consider two applications in turn and detailed the procedure that would be followed. The case for the Park Tavern would be heard first, followed by that for The Beach Public House.

part b minutes for information

application to vary premises licence under the licensing act 2003 – the park tavern, whitstable road, faversham

Mr Sinclair, the Agent, presented his case. He highlighted that the principal objection to the application was the extension of hours for playing music. Having taken the concerns of local residents on board, the Applicant had agreed to amend the proposed hours for the playing of music to end at 2300 each day. Noise complaints had not been received by Swale Borough Council (SBC) since March 2003. Mr Sinclair stated that London and Edinburgh Inns were very strict with the conduct of their tenants, and were mindful of the provisions of Sections 51 to 53 of the Act. In his opinion, the variation to the hours was reasonable, as the pub was situated on a main road and opposite a park. He concluded by stating that there would soon be a new tenant who had previously run the pub successfully.

The Environmental Protection Manager made reference to the memorandum from the Technical Support Officer included in the report, and stated that he would be concerned if outdoor events were included in the licence. He requested that a further condition be imposed stating that all doors and windows were to be shut during any live entertainment. Mr Sinclair responded that the Applicant would be happy for the provision of outdoor music to be deleted from the application, and that he was agreeable for a condition relating to doors and windows to be included, but suggested that this condition should apply after 9.00 p.m. whenever music was played. He also noted that the installation of air conditioning within the pub might be a priority, to ensure that doors and windows were not opened.

An Objector, Miss Laurance, presented the case for the Objectors. The pub was situated in a residential area, and any noise reverberated. Noise was generated not only by the playing of music, but also when people left the pub when it closed. She therefore objected to the proposed extension of opening times. She highlighted the fact that there had been a number of landlords in the pub in a short time, as no long-term landlord had been found. She concluded by stating that longer licensing hours did not promote responsible drinking attitudes, and extended the time during which local residents could be disturbed by people leaving the premises.

In response to a number of questions, Mr Sinclair stated that the pub had been closed for the previous fortnight as the last licensee had been dismissed, and that London and Edinburgh Inns had acted swiftly and responsibly in this matter. The pub was in the centre of a residential area, and therefore had the capability of serving the local community. In response to comments that patrons had been involved in fights within the pub, he highlighted that the Police had been consulted and had raised no objections to the application. A Member queried the requested opening time of 8 a.m. Mr Sinclair responded that he believed this would be for the serving of coffee and breakfast.

The Chairman then invited local residents to make comments.

The Sub-Committee adjourned to make their decision at 2.30 p.m. Members of the Sub-Committee, the Senior Solicitor and the Democratic Services Officer left the meeting and returned at 2.52 p.m. when the Sub-Committee reconvened.

application to vary premises licence under the licensing act 2003 – the beach, seaside avenue, minster.

Mrs Roberts, the Applicant, presented her case. She stated that the application for extended hours was made as other local public houses had applied for extended opening hours, and she felt it necessary to do so for her premises. Due to her concern for the welfare of her neighbours, windows and doors were kept shut and windows were locked at all times. Following receipt of a complaint of Statutory Nuisance in September 2005, some audio speakers within the pub had been removed, and air conditioning was being considered for installation in 2006. There was no intention of making The Beach an all night drinking venue. Mrs Roberts stated the opinion that a lot of problems in the area emanated from groups of teenagers who congregated on the beach itself, and not in her pub. The Beach did not try to attract young people and did not encourage 18th or 21st birthday parties. The pub did not allow entry or re-entry to the premises after 2300 hours, and she reminded patrons when leaving to be courteous to her neighbours. She informed the Committee that the pub had raised money for charities both locally and nationally, and she wished for direct dialogue with her neighbours, so that any problems which occurred could be resolved at the outset.

The Objector, Mr Harris, presented the case for the Objectors. He highlighted that Seaside Avenue was a residential area, and that there was a nursing home next to the pub. Local residents were concerned that following publicity of music evenings, there was a desire for the pub to become a nightclub. He reported that the music was often intrusive. Customers leaving the premises at closing time often caused problems, and Mr Harris highlighted an altercation on New Years Eve last year, when Mr Roberts had been assaulted. He concluded by stating that residents were entitled to peace and quiet, and therefore urged that the extension be refused.

The Environmental Protection Manager noted that 10 complaints regarding noise from the pub had been received by SBC this year, and a petition had also been received. A previous licensee had been issued with a statutory Noise Abatement Notice in 1995. He requested that if the Committee were minded to approve the application, extra conditions relating to doors and windows being kept closed and noise from music should not be audible at the boundary of adjacent dwellings should be included.

Mrs Roberts displayed a letter from the owner of The Beach, Mr Ernest Batten, giving his support to the application. Mr Harris highlighted that Mr Batten had received complaints from a local resident, although this was not mentioned in his letter.

The Sub-Committee adjourned to make their decision at 3.20 p.m. Members of the Sub-Committee, the Senior Solicitor and the Democratic Services Officer left the meeting and returned at 3.40 p.m. when the Sub-Committee reconvened.