To consider an application for a review of a premises licence in respect of ‘The King Charles II, 13 Broad Street, Ross On Wye, HR9 7EA’.

The Regulatory Sub-Committee was convened in order to determine an application for a review of a premise licence in accordance with Section 51 of the Licensing Act 2003. The Review was in respect of the Horse and Jockey, New Street, Ross-on-Wye and had been applied for by Mrs Rowena Clark, an interested party living in the vicinity of the premises. The review related to the following licensing objectives:

1.      The prevention of public nuisance

The Chairman introduced the Members and Officers and asked any interested parties to introduce themselves. The following attendees were noted:

·         Rowena Clark (Applicant)

·         Michael Rudd (Representing Claire Jones, in support of the review)

·         Maria Oates (Licensee)

·         Andrew Gooding (Licensee)

·         Joanna Cochran (Licensee’s Legal Advisor)

The Chairman advised all of the interested parties of the hearing procedures and asked if any person required an extension to the 10 minutes allocated for public speaking, no extensions to the time limit were requested. He then asked the Licensing Officer to present his report. The Licensing Officer advised Members that the applicant had confirmed in writing that the thumping noise referred to in her application was caused by loud music inside the premises and not the air conditioning units.

The Environmental Health Officer advised the Sub-Committee that she was aware of noise issues with regard to the King Charles II. She added that the Environmental Health Department considered applying for a review previously but matters had improved for a period of time. She felt that noise issues had recently become worse for the neighbouring residents and therefore requested that the following 2 conditions be added to the premises licence:

• The use of the rear external area in its entirety shall be prohibited between 23:30 hours and 10:00 hours the following day.
• A Dispersal Policy shall be written and maintained to the satisfaction of the Environmental Health Department.

She added that the premises did not operate as a normal public house and was being operated as a nightclub. Finally she added that moving the smoking area to the front of the premises could be beneficial as patrons could be observed by SIA registered door staff and CCTV.

In accordance with the Licensing Act 2003 (Hearings) Regulations 2005, Ms Cochran, representing the Premise Licence Holder, addressed the Sub-Committee. She presented Members with a brief background of the management structure and operational procedures of the premises. She advised the Sub-Committee that Mr Gooding wanted to work with the neighbouring residents in order to address the issues raised. She added that he had previously taken a number of actions to address the concerns such as reducing the volume of the music, removing the noisy cellar cooling systems, fitting air conditioning to stop windows being opened, and removing the patio heaters. She added that as well as these actions he had also taking a number of measures to reduce noise in the garden, she confirmed that a member of staff was now in the beer garden from 11.30pm to 1.30am and that they had stopped people congregating in the passageway which entered the garden. She advised the Sub-Committee that her client was happy to accept the dispersal policy as a condition but that in her opinion a no consumption condition could be problematic.

In accordance with the Licensing Act 2003 (Hearings) Regulations 2005, Ms Oates, one of the Premise Licence Holders, addressed the Sub-Committee. She advised the Sub-Committee that she was the member of staff responsible for supervising the garden area in the evening. She confirmed that she used a radio to remain in contact with other stewards and that noisy patrons were warned once before being asked to go back inside and that bottles were now not emptied into the outside bins at night. She felt that the premises had a good cliental and that she knew the majority of them personally. She added that these measures had only been put in place recently and hoped that the situation would now improve.

In accordance with the Licensing Act 2003 (Hearings) Regulations 2005, Mrs Clark, the applicant for the review, addressed the sub-committee. She advised Members of her reasons for applying for the review and gave details of a number of incidents of public nuisance and disorder relating to the premises.

In accordance with the Licensing Act 2003 (Hearings) Regulations 2005, Mr Rudd, representing a local resident, addressed the Sub-Committee. He advised Members that his daughter, who he was representing, lived opposite the front of the premises and that she had noticed more noise since the smoking area had been moved to the front of the building. He welcomed the dispersal policy and hoped that it would have a positive impact on residential amenity.

Prior to the Sub-Committee retiring to make their decision all parties present were given the opportunity to make a brief closing statement in order to sum up their comments.

The Sub-Committee retired to make their decision, the Legal Practice Manager and the Democratic Services Officer also retired to assist them with procedural matters.

RESOLVED

THAT the following conditions be attached to the premises licence.

• A dispersal policy of customers from the premises shall be put in place, details and commencement date of the policy to be agreed with the Council’s Environmental Health Department.

• No open containers shall be taken to, or consumed in, the external passageway or garden after midnight.

• All staff employed on the premises as stewards shall be SIA registered (including stewards operating in the garden area).

Please see the attached decision notice for further details.