Agenda item - Caps and Sarasota, 5-6 Western Road, Hove

Report of the Assistant Director of Public Safety (copy attached).

96.1    The Panel considered a report of the Assistant Director of Public Safety regarding an application for a variation of a premises licence under the Licensing Act 2003 for Caps and Sarasota, 5-6 Western Road, Hove.

96.2    Mr Simmonds, on behalf of the applicant, attended the hearing to make representations in favour of the application. Mr Deacon, an objector, attended the hearing to make representations against the application.

96.3    The Licensing Manager summarised the application as set out in the report and highlighted that the application was to vary the hours of the licence. She stated that the premises was within the Special Stress Area and so any application had to be considered with the implications of this in mind. There was some history of problems in the area with the last complaint being received in 2003.

96.4    Mr Simmonds asked if the Licensing Manager was aware that a Provisional Entertainment Licence had been successfully applied for at this premises, and the Licensing Manager confirmed that she was.

96.5    Mr Deacon then began his representation and stated that his main concern was about the impact of noise on his business, which was situated next door to the premises. He was unsure why the bar needed to open for live entertainment at 10:00 and felt that this could disturb his offices if allowed. Mr Deacon stated that he was not concerned about an alcohol licence being granted for this premises.

96.6    A Panel Member asked whether he had heard any noise emanating from the basement club and Mr Deacon replied that he had not, but that the premises was not open for business yet.

96.7    Mr Simmonds showed Mr Deacon a copy of a letter to the Health, Safety and Licensing Department at Brighton & Hove City Council, which listed a number of conditions that the applicant had agreed to in terms of controlling sound levels at the premises. Mr Simmonds asked if these conditions would help to alleviate his concerns and Mr Deacon replied that they would.

96.8    Mr Simmonds then began his representation on behalf of the applicant and stated that the business had been established in this location for many years. The business had operated as a nightclub in the basement and a restaurant on the upper floors in the past, which was the situation until 2005 when the business closed. The premises had now been refurbished and the applicant was applying for a variation of the existing licence to allow for a nightclub venue to be run in the basement and a café/bar style operation to be run on the ground and first floors, but without café/bar conditions.

            Mr Simmonds stated that extensive sound insulation had been installed and that several conditions had been agreed with the Environmental Health Officer to ensure that noise problems would not be an issue. He noted that the rear alleyway would be lit and CCTV was being installed. He felt that the area would be improved because of this by encouraging street drinkers and beggars to move on. Mr Simmonds noted that the Police had withdrawn their objection because the applicant had agreed to suitable conditions to ensure that the licensing objectives were upheld.

96.9    A Panel Member asked where smokers from the premises went currently and Mr Simmonds replied that they used an alley along the side of the premises. This was now covered by CCTV which Mr Simmonds felt would prevent any problems arising.

96.10  Mr Deacon asked if the ground floor was to be primarily used as a café/bar style area and Mr Simmonds agreed, although highlighted that the applicant was not proposing café/bar style conditions to ensure the area could be used flexibly.

96.11  Mr Deacon asked if sound insulation had been installed and Mr Simmonds replied that both the basement and ground floor had been insulated for sound and highlighted that this was especially important to the applicants as they currently lived above the premises.

96.12  The Licensing Manager made her final submission and highlighted that premises do not have to open for the full length of hours permitted on their licence and that paragraph 4.2 of the Statement of Licensing Policy stated that the amenity of nearby residents needed to be considered in terms of noise disturbance as a result of people entering and leaving the premises and from individuals of groups of customers gathering outside the premises when determining an application.

96.13  Mr Deacon made his final submission and stated that his main concern with the application was the potential for noise nuisance that could be created. He asked the Panel to take this into consideration when determining the application.

96.14  Mr Simmonds made his final submission on behalf of the applicants and stated that this application would rationalise the existing licence on the premises, making it easier to operate for the applicants, and easier to monitor for residents and the Licensing Authority. He stated that the Police had not objected to this application and felt that the extra conditions the applicants had agreed to would alleviate the concerns expressed by Mr Deacon.

96.15  RESOLVED – that the application for a Variation of a Premises Licence is granted for the following reason:

“The panel decided to grant the variation application. They felt that the conditions agreed between the applicant and the police and those agreed with the environmental health department (see below) in addition to those in the operating schedule, would answer the concerns expressed in relation to noise and meet the licensing objectives.”

1.   The front doors and windows on the ground floor must be kept shut when any regulated entertainment is being performed except for entry and exit.

2.   No drinks are to be taken outside between 23:00 and 10:00.

3.   All Live and Recorded music to be controlled via noise limiting devices and these are to be set at levels agreed by the Licensing Authority.

4.   At any time the basement is open from 22:00 onwards then a minimum of one Door Supervisor shall be on duty with the responsibility of controlling the entrance to the Basement and at any time on a Friday, Saturday or Sunday of a Bank Holiday Weekend when the Ground Floor venue is open, than from 22:00 hours an additional Door Supervisor with the sole responsibility of controlling entrance to the Ground Floor will also come on duty. Both Door Supervisors or their replacements will remain on duty until their particular venue closes to the public, but if both venues are open after 22:00 on a Friday, Saturday or Sunday of a Bank Holiday Weekend then one additional Door Supervisor [thus a minimum of three Door Supervisors after 22:00 when both floors are open] will always be employed, and at all times when either venue is open then a risk assessment will be carried out by the DPS or other responsible person and Door Supervisors additional to the stated minimum requirements will be employed based on that risk assessment and with specific roles to either one or both venues as is required.