Licensing and Regulatory Sub-Committee Minutes

Date:
Monday, 18th September, 2017
Time:
2:00 pm
Place:
New Council Chamber, Town Hall, Reigate
 
Min NoDescriptionResolution
Part I
7 APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE AND CONSTITUTION OF THE LICENSING & REGULATORY SUB COMMITTEE

There were no apologies and the membership of the Sub Committee was as set out in the agenda.

8 MINUTES

RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting held on 28 June 2017 be confirmed as a correct record.

9 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

There were no declarations of interest.

10 LICENSING HEARING PROCEDURE NOTE

RESOLVED to note the procedure note to be followed at the discretion of the Chairman.

11 APPLICATIONS DETERMINED THROUGH MEDIATION

RESOLVED, that the following applications determined through mediation be NOTED AND APPROVED:

 

i. Application ref: 17/00483/LAPREM for a new Premises Licence
Banstead Cricket Club, Avenue Road , Banstead

 

ii. Application ref: 17/00804/LAPREM for a new Premises Licence Crumbs Brewing Distribution, 26 Cockshot Road, Reigate

 

iii. Application ref: 17/01050/LAPREM for a new Premises Licence at
Chalk Hills Bakery, 75 Bell Street, Reigate
 

12 APPLICATION FOR A PREMISES LICENCE:
SURREY OKTOBERFEST, MEMORIAL PARK, LONDON ROAD, REDHILL

In attendance and speaking at the hearing:

 

Applicant: Mr C Raun

Making representations: Mr N Green on behalf of Miss F Green and Mrs M Greaves



The Sub Committee was requested to determine an application for a new premises licence for a Beer Festival (‘Oktoberfest’) to be held in Memorial Park, Redhill.

 

Full details of the application and representations received were as set out in the report.

 

Before inviting officers to introduce the report the Chairman reported that he had been notified of an agreement reached between the applicant and the responsible authority for environmental health.

 

Subject to the attachment of conditions to the licence the responsible authority for environmental health no longer wished to make representations against the application.

 

Details of the proposed conditions were tabled and the Chairman adjourned the meeting to allow all those present to read through them.

 

The hearing was adjourned at 2.05 pm
and resumed at 2.09 pm

 

 

The Chairman invited the licensing officer to introduce the report.

 

The Licensing Officer advised that the application was for a four-day event to be held annually, catering for up to 2000 people per day.

 

The table included at paragraph 3 of the report, would be affected by the agreement reached in that both live and recorded music would finish earlier than originally requested.

 

The written representations received covered topics which were not relevant under licensing legislation, such as parking provision. Only those representations relevant to the four licensing objectives should be taken into consideration by the sub-committee in determining the application.

 

Officers had attended a meeting of the Reigate and Banstead Safety Advisory Group on 16 August, together with the applicant and other responsible authorities including Surrey Police, at which the application was discussed.

 

At this meeting the applicant indicated that they would agree to have a condition on their licence requiring them to comply the arrangements detailed in the Event Management Plan. The Officer confirmed that a copy of the plan had been circulated to members of the sub committee under separate cover due to the confidential nature of some of the information contained therein.

 

It was noted that Surrey Police made no formal representations against the application.

 

Following the licensing officer’s introduction, the Chairman invited the applicant to make submissions in support of the application.

 

During the course of the presentation the following points were noted:

 

• The applicant was keen to reassure local residents that he would work with them to ensure they were not unduly disturbed, as he was keen for the event to become an annual one that everyone would enjoy.

 

• He had amended the application, to end both live and recorded music earlier in the evenings, in response to residents’ concerns.

 

• He would also be happy to provide and publicise a mobile phone contact number, available to residents throughout the event, so that they could immediately report any instances of noise nuisance.

 

• The music played was likened to ‘oomp pah pah’ bands, rather than heavy rock or loud music, so it would not be overly loud.

 

• The intention was for this to be a fun event, similar to the festivals run elsewhere in the country and for many years in Munich.

 

• The beer on sale would not be cheap, not being the main focus of the event, and this also tended to discourage excessive drinking.

 

• On site security would be provided, with a minimum of four staff employed and additional security staff at a ratio of 1 to every 100 guests.

 

• The busiest days were likely to be just Friday and Saturday, with an attendance of 1,000 to 1,500 people anticipated, and Sunday was always a family day.

 

• A recent festival held in Cardiff had run smoothly with no issues to report.

 

• At the end of the festival staff would be on hand to manage the dispersal of guests. Toilets would be available along the exit route so people could relieve themselves before leaving the site.

 

• Redhill had very good train and transport links and the expectation was that most guests would make use of this rather than coming by car, particularly with the earlier finishing times now proposed.


The Chairman thanked the applicant and invited Mr Green to make representations on behalf of Miss Green and Mrs Greaves, during which the following points were noted.

 

• The conditions agreed by the applicant in mediation with the responsible authority for environmental health allayed some of residents’ concerns.

 

• Nonetheless, the park would be inaccessible to local residents during the event and this was wrong. Local residents should not be prevented from using the park because it was being hired out for a private event.

 

• Alcohol would be sold and consumed late into the evening which gave cause for concerns because of potential anti-social behaviour.

 

• Lighting in the park was also poor and was a further safety risk.

 

• Parking in the area was very limited and inadequate for the event, meaning that residents were likely to be adversely affected.

 

The Chairman thanked everyone for their oral submissions and opened the floor to questions, during the course of which the following points were noted:

 

  • When asked why he had applied to hold a beer festival in Redhill, whereas most of the others he organised were in larger cities:

The applicant responded that a lot of people living in Redhill worked in London and that he saw the town as being part of greater London. There was limited entertainment available in Redhill and he believed it would be good to offer such an event in the area.

 

  • When asked why the application did not set a terminal date, at least for the first one to see how it went:

The applicant replied that the intention was to hold the event annually and the application had this in mind.

 

  • When asked where the noise readings would be taken from:

The applicant replied that readings would be taken from both inside and outside the tent. Speakers would be pointed inwards to limit noise escape as much as possible.

 

  • In response to a question about the provision of security staff:

The applicant confirmed that all security staff would be SIA registered, and explained that the number employed would be based upon bookings received in advance plus a contingency for guests just turning up on the day(s). This was standard practice and worked well, but in the event that more people than anticipated turned up on the day they would be denied entry if security provision was inadequate.

 

  • When asked whether he was in liaison with Surrey Police:

The applicant confirmed that he was not at present, but went on to explain that it was normal to make contact with the Police nearer the date of the event and to then remain in close contact with them throughout it. Security checks were always made in front of the tent, including bag searches, meaning that people would not be able to get inside unless and until they had been security checked. The applicant had a meeting arranged with the Police in London for the next day, in view of recent terrorist events, and he would be sure to follow any additional advice given.

 

  • In reply to a question about whether tickets were sold on the gate without prior booking:

The applicant replied in the affirmative.

 

  • When asked about any impact on the children’s play area:

The applicant replied that this would be separate from the event and views would be blocked by the tent. It was unlikely children would be using it in the evenings anyway. He undertook to ensure that the play area would be monitored daily and kept clean.

 

  • When asked what would happen to the park after the event, if there was any damage:

The applicant replied that he would be paying a fee for hire of the park and that it would be left clean. If there was any untoward damage, for example if it was very wet and grass was damaged, then he would cover the costs of any repairs necessary.

 

  • Mr Green asked what noise level 65dBA represented:

and it was noted that this was the standardised figure taken from the Code of Practice for such public events.

 

 

The Chairman ascertained that everyone had had an opportunity to put questions or seek clarifications and then invited the parties to make closing remarks.

 

The applicant concluded by saying that he would work hard to ensure that the festival was a success for everyone as he was keen for it to become an annual event.

 

Mr Green had no further submissions to make.

 

The Sub Committee adjourned to deliberate at 2.32 pm
and resumed at 3.06 pm to give its decision.



RESOLVED that the application be GRANTED subject to the following conditions :

 

1. There shall be no live music after 22.00hrs and no recorded music (including background music) after 22.45hrs.
 


2. Oktoberfest will arrange for a noise survey to be undertaken by a suitably qualified person and suitable measures shall be specified by that person (or another suitably qualified person) and those measures shall be put in place in order to ensure that the noise levels specified below will be met;
 


3. The sound levels from music at the event will not exceed 65 dBA measured as a 15 minute LAeq over any 15 minute period when measured at or close to the boundary of any residential premises to which the organisers are allowed access.



4. Oktoberfest will employ the services of a suitably qualified person to undertake noise measurements at the (accessible) boundaries of noise sensitive properties for the duration of the event. This will entail the measurement of noise levels in such a way that potential breaches of the 15-minute condition can be identified before they occur and corrective action taken to prevent a breach. The person undertaking these measurements will be able to immediately contact the person in control of the noise levels from the loudspeakers.
 


5. If the sound levels exceed 65 LAeq (15 minutes) the person monitoring the sound levels will have the authority to direct appropriate action to be taken to reduce the sound levels to below 65 LAeq (15 minutes) at the nearest noise sensitive properties during the events.
 


6. A noise complaint system will be put in place and shall consist of a named person with an allocated telephone number. The named persons shall be notified to the Local Authority’s Licensing Department not less than seven days prior to the event. This person will be contactable throughout the duration of the event with an allocated telephone number, such number to be provided to all the emergency services, the Licensing Team, the Environmental Protection Team and the Council's Emergency Call-Out Service prior to the event. A complaint from the public shall be channelled through the services as listed and appropriate responses from the organisers be made directly to the public. (An example of an appropriate response would be to explain the noise levels set and to make noise level checks at the complainant's property with a sound level meter. If noise levels exceed the 65 LAeq limit, appropriate action shall be taken by the sound engineers to reduce sound levels).
 


7. All power is to be supplied by super-silent generators only, to ensure no noise disturbance from unsilenced units. Between 23.00 hours and 09.00 hours no generator will be audible within any room of any noise sensitive premises, with the windows left open for normal ventilation. The test for compliance of this condition is that the noise will be no more than barely audible outside any noise sensitive premises.
 


8. A sound check will be conducted on a date and time to be agreed with the Licensing Authority. Members of the Environmental Protection Team shall be invited to be present to ensure that sound levels are set such that they do not exceed 65 LAeq (15 minutes). The Environmental Protection Team will be provided with at least 48 hours notice of the time of the intended sound check.
 


9. "Noise sensitive premises" includes premises used for residential purposes, hospitals and similar institutions, education establishments (when they are in use), places of worship and any premises used for any other purposes likely to be affected by the music.
 


10. For the avoidance of doubt 'noise' is defined as any music amplified or otherwise and any amplified vocal noise.

 

 

11. The licence holder shall at all times comply with the arrangements as detailed in the Event Management Plan (EMP) submitted with the application, or any subsequently revised document. Any minor revisions and/or updates to the current version of the EMP attached to the licence will be circulated to all Responsible Authorities annually at least 3 months prior to the event taking place, along with confirmation of the dates of the next event.

 


Reasons for the decision

 

The Licensing & Regulatory Sub Committee has carefully reviewed all the papers before it and has had close regard to all the oral submissions made at the hearing.


The reasons for the decision are as follows:

 

1. The applicant has put forward a detailed and comprehensive Management Plan to the satisfaction of the Sub Committee.

 

2. The responsible authority for environmental health has confirmed that the conditions to be attached to the licence, put forward by the applicant in mediation, overcome its concerns and that it no longer objects to the application.

 

3. The Sub Committee has noted the intention of the applicant to work closely with residents to ensure that the event does not cause nuisance.

 

4. The Sub Committee has had regard to the Licensing Objectives, and in particular Public Nuisance, Section 182 Licensing Act 2003 statutory guidance and its own Statement of Licensing Policy, in particular Section 8.

 

5. The Licensing Sub Committee has given due regard to the individual merits of this application, s149 Equality Act 2010, Human Rights/ECHR legislation in particular Article 8 and Article 1 First Protocol and the rules of natural justice.

 

General Observations


1. The Sub Committee is pleased to note the applicant’s reassurance on the following points:

 

i. that the children’s area will be kept clear and controlled throughout the event;


ii. that the applicant will provide and publicise a contact number throughout the park for residents to use during the event should they have concerns about the noise. This number should not be the same as that provided to the Police and other responsible authorities;


iii. that the applicant will ensure that the park is returned to its original condition at the end of the event, in particular if damage is caused to the grass; and


iv. that the applicant will maintain contact with Surrey Police prior to and during the event.