Agenda item

The Licensing Sub-Committee agreed to bring forward this item.

The three Councillors that presided over this item were Councillors P Keska (Chairman), L Hughes and A Lion.

The Chairman introduced the members and officers present and outlined the procedure that would be followed for the determination of the application. The Chairman welcomed Mr P Gould and Mr K Crunkhurn, the applicant, for the Sun Inn, and M Richardson, the Council’s Environment and Neighbourhoods (EN) Officer.

(a)          Application before the Sub-Committee

The Licensing Compliance Officer, D Houghton, introduced the application. The application had been made by Mr K Crunkhurn for a Temporary Event Notice (TEN) under the Licensing Act 2003 for the Sun Inn, Common Road, Nazeing EN9 2DE. This was for a temporary event on 2 June 2018 from 14.00 – 22.00 hours with a maximum of 400 people that would be allowed to be present at any one time. The TEN application was also for the sale by retail of alcohol, the provision of regulated entertainment and the provision of late night refreshment. The application had been received on 18 April 2018.

The responsible authorities, Essex Police and the Council’s Environment and Neighbourhood Team, had been consulted. The Council had received a Counter Notice detailing an objection from the EN Officer, which related to the prevention of public nuisance.

The Legal Officer advised that under the Licensing Act 2003, the Licensing Sub-Committee could not impose any conditions. The EN Officer could ask for conditions to be changed with the applicant but she had no knowledge of any consent to change from Essex Police.

(b)       Presentation of the Applicant’s Case

The applicant’s representative and the Designated Premises Supervisor (DPS), Mr P Gould, said that the applicant, Mr K Crunkhurn, was the manager of the Sun Inn Public House. Last year three summer events were organised at the premises and they were very successful and had helped sustain the pub during the winter. Therefore they wanted to organise three similar events this year. An event had been held on 5 May 2018, which had gone ahead as the Council had not raised an objection.

(c)       Questions for the Applicant from the Sub-Committee

The Sub-Committee asked what had transpired from the site visit that the EN Officer had carried out in April 2018. The DPS replied they had discussed several options and he had implemented some of the suggestions, such as reducing the event hours from 14.00 – 22.00 hours to 15.00 – 20.30 hours and used directional speakers, but the stage had not been re-positioned. This time he would re-site the stage further away from residential properties. The Sun Inn was licensed to play music from the patio and, as the speakers had been positioned to play away from the premises, he had thought the noise level was fine.

The Sub-Committee said that an EN Officer had visited on the night of 5 May 2018 and asked if the stage could be moved to the middle of the field. The DPS said that as there were three cottages on one side and one on the other, if the stage was moved to the middle of the field, directional speakers were used and the noise level kept to 95 decibels (dB) then he thought this would be acceptable to the neighbours. He would be happy to reduce the hours applied for, but was advised by the Legal Officer the Licensing Act 2003 did not allow the Licensing Authority (the Council) to makes changes to this application.

The Sub-Committee remarked that the DPS had stated that there had been no problems but the Council had received nine complaints from the event on 5 May 2018. The DPS explained that at last year’s event the noise was a nuisance to the three adjacent cottages. The directional speakers were aimed towards the properties to the rear at this year’s 5 May event, to which the Sub-Committee replied that there had been complaints then. The DPS said yes there were complaints, but he had used directional speakers so the noise was going towards the direction of Nazeing Common.

The Sub-Committee asked how litter was collected during an event that 400 people could be attending in the field, to which the DPS replied that the staff would do this.

The Sub-Committee asked if the weekend footfall was quite high, to which the DPS replied yes if the weather was good.

The Sub-Committee asked what the on and off sales were served in, to which the DPS replied that plastic glassware was used. Also the security staff on the site would not allow customers to leave the site with alcohol. The Sun Inn did not have an off-licence for the premises.

(d)       Questions for the Applicant from the Objector

There were no questions to the applicant.

(e)       Presentation of the Objector

The EN Officer said that the Council had objected to this next event in June owing to the amount of disturbance likely to be caused. The Noise Abatement Notice was served after an event last year on the grounds of noise nuisance. The Council had not objected to 5 May 2018 event but he reported that they had received complaints from the Back Lane area. The question in this case was, could these events go ahead in future because of the noise nuisance? A minimum level of 95 dB was quite considerable, and if the wind was blowing then the neighbours might hear up to 10 dB more, depending on the wind direction. The DPS could get written permission from neighbours, but this might be difficult to obtain. The Council’s duty noise officer had monitored the noise on 5 May from 450 metres away and reported that the noise was excessive, causing a public nuisance and was breaching the Noise Abatement Notice. Directional speakers pointed to the rear clearly had not worked because of the loud volume of music monitored. The Council used informal guidance which in a rural setting advised using only 65 dB over a 15-minute period. Therefore, the music at the May event was much higher. At the levels that the Sun Inn staff had been playing their music, if this was repeated again at the premises, it could cause a noise nuisance. The Council had suggested increasing the number of speakers around the site so the music could be played at a lower volume. The Sun Inn also wanted to apply for another TEN for an event in July this year. Was the Council willing to authorise this TEN to allow this event to happen which might cause a noise nuisance to the neighbours? If the Council prosecuted on a breach of the Noise Abatement Notice, the applicant could face a hefty fine. It would therefore be better for the Council and the applicant to find a workable solution and ‘meet on middle ground’.

(f)        Questions for the Objector from Sub-Committee

There were no questions for the objector.

(g)       Questions for the Objector from the Applicant

The DPS said to the EN Officer that the Sun Inn was allowed to have three events over the course of a year and that there had been other TENs during last year.

(h)       Closing statement from the Objector

The objector had nothing further to add to his original statement.

(i)        Closing statement from the Applicant

The DPS offered to reduce the hours applied for on this TEN, but was advised by the Legal Officer the Licensing Act 2003 did not allow the Licensing Authority (the Council) to alter this application. However, the DPS and applicant could discuss any such changes with the Council’s EN Officer and Essex Police after this meeting, but would be required to submit another TEN.

(j)        Consideration of the application before the Sub-Committee

Members of the Sub-Committee, the Legal Officer and Democratic Services offices withdrew from the Chamber to consider the application in private. During their deliberations the Sub-Committee received no further advice from the officers present.

            RESOLVED:

(1)    That the application for a Temporary Event Notice for the Sun Inn, Common Road, Nazeing EN9 2DE be refused.

(2)    That the Sub-Committee had received evidence there was a Noise Abatement Notice after the previous event last year. The Environmental Officer advised about the music volume required for a large event, and to avoid public / statutory nuisance was not possible bearing in mind the close position of a number of neighbouring residential premises to the Sun Inn.