Rother District Council
LICENSING & GENERAL PURPOSES COMMITTEE
GENERAL LICENSING PANEL
8 March 2010
Minutes of the General Licensing Panel held at the Town Hall, Bexhill-on-Sea on
Monday 8 March 2010 at 9.30am.
There were present:
Members of the General Licensing Panel:
Councillors R.V. Elliston, Mrs J.M. Hughes and C.F. Starnes.
Other Members present:
Councillor A.E. Ganly.
Interested Parties
Applicant: Mr. M. Hoad (Black Horse Committee-Chairman), Mr. P. Evans
(Pestalozzi), D. Martin (Pestalozzi) Ms. H. Dengate (Black Horse CommitteeVolunteers, Hospitality & Campers), Mr. D. Cable (Phoenix Security), Mr S. Skimgle
(Sound Solution Consultants).
Responsible Authorities: R. Parker- Harding, Head of Environmental Health, Nick
Dawson, Senior Environmental Health Officer – (Health & Safety), C. Barbera Senior
Environmental Health Officer (Noise), D. Welfare Senior Environmental Health
Officer (Licensing).
Objectors: Mr P. Attwood (Acoustic Associates), Mr. R.A. Archer, Mr. & Mrs. J.
Bartholomew, Ms. E.Z. Bullen, Mr. W.R. & Mrs. J.A. Cameron, Mr. & Mrs. R.
Chapman, Mr. R.A. Eldridge, Mr. & Mrs. R. Harrod, Mr. J. Hooker, Mr. & Mrs. K.
Taylor, Mr. C. Walters, Mr.& Mrs A Weston.
Advisory officers: Licensing and Litigation Lawyer and 2 Democratic Services
Officers.
Also present: 3 members of the public.
LP09/27. APPOINTMENT OF CHAIRMAN
Councillor Starnes was duly appointed as Chairman of the Panel for this
hearing at the previously adjourned meeting on 8 February 2010.
Councillor Starnes reconvened the hearing, as Chairman.
LP09/28. MINUTES
The Chairman was authorised to sign the minutes of the meeting of the
General Licensing Panel held on 8 February 2010 as a correct record of
the proceedings.
1
LP09/29. APPLICATION FOR A PREMISES LICENCE – BLACK HORSE
(5)
MUSIC FESTIVAL, PESTALOZZI VILLAGE, SEDLESCOMBE
Consideration was given to the report of the Director of Services that gave
details of an application for a premises licence for the Black Horse Music
Festival, Pestalozzi Village, Sedlescombe. The application had been
subject to representations and had therefore been referred to the General
Licensing Panel for determination. This hearing had been reconvened
following the adjournment on 8 February 2010. There had been a number
of reports submitted and circulated since the last adjourned hearing on 8
February 2010, including a noise report, stage timings, event contingency
and a traffic plan from the Applicant and an assessment of the noise
report produced by the Applicant from the Representors’ sound
consultant.
Prior to the commencement of the meeting, the Licensing and Litigation
Lawyer gave advice to the Representors present and the Applicant
regarding their rights to address the Panel and the grounds on which the
licensing application could be considered.
The Chairman introduced all who were present and gave general advice in
regard to the hearing. The Chairman advised all who were present that
given the predicted length of the hearing, it was anticipated that the
decision would not be made at the conclusion of the evidence gathering.
The Panel then proceeded to hear the case, following the adopted
procedure and all parties present at the hearing were invited to address
the Panel.
The meeting was adjourned twice to allow for breaks. The Applicant
amended the application by the deletion of the provision of facilities to
show films and altered the hours in respect of playing of live music and
playing of recorded music to finish at 23.00 hours on Friday, Saturday and
Sunday. Following discussion around noise breakout, the applicant offered
to set the decibel level 3db lower, at stage level (92db instead of 95db.)
Members deliberated on the application which was determined having
regard to the four licensing objectives and retired to make their decision in
private session, the outcome of which would be communicated in writing
to all parties as soon as possible.
RESOLVED: That the Premises Licence application be refused for the
reasons set out in Appendix 1.
CHAIRMAN
The meeting closed at 1.55pm.
GLP100308/lec
2
Appendix 1
Rother District Council
PREMISES: Pestalozzi International Village, Sedlescombe
Black Horse Festival 28 – 31 May 2010
DATE OF GENERAL LICENSING PANEL HEARING: 8 March 2010
Panel:
Cllr Starnes (Chairman), Cllr Mrs Hughes, Cllr R Elliston
Legal Adviser:
Andrew Eaton
Other Officers:
Lisa Anderson, Louise Cook (Democratic Services)
Debbie Welfare (Licensing Officer)
Relevant
Representatives:
Miss C. Barbera (Senior EHO)
Mr N. Dawson (Senior EHO)
Mr R. Parker-Harding (Head of Environmental Health)
Interested Parties: Mr R. Archer, Mr C. Waters, Mr W. R. Cameron, Mr. & Mrs. J.
(who attended)
Bartholomew, Mr Taylor, Mrs Taylor, Mr K. J. Weston, Mrs A. V.
Weston, Mr & Mrs R. B. Harrod, Mr J. Hooker, Mr R.H.
Chapman, Mrs Chapman, Ms E. Z. Bullen, Mr R.A. Eldridge, Mr
P. Attwood (Noise Consultant)
Applicant:
Mr M. Hoad Black Horse Festival (2009) Ltd
Mr P. Evans (Pestalozzi Village)
Ms H. Dengate Black Horse Festival (2009) Ltd
Mr D. Cable (Phoenix Security)
Ms D. Martin (Pestalozzi Village)
Mr S. Skimgle (Sound Solutions)
Application:
Premises Licence for Black Horse Festival
28 May – Monday 31 May 2010
Pestalozzi Village Estate, Sedlescombe
3
Decision:
REFUSED. We have listened carefully to all the representations made to the Panel
by, and on behalf of, the Applicant, Responsible Authorities (RDC Environmental
Health) and the Interested Parties and their witnesses.
We have also read the written representations included in the report to the Panel
from those interested parties who did not attend, together with the noise reports from
Sound Solutions on behalf of the Applicant, the noise report of Mr Attwood on behalf
of the Interested Parties, and the noise report of Miss C. Barbera, Senior EHO for
Rother District Council Environmental Health Noise Pollution Division.
We have considered the likely effects of the grant of this Premises Licence on the
promotion of the Licensing Objectives. We have had regard to the section 182
Guidance issued by the Secretary of State and also our own statement of licensing
policy. We have refused the application on the basis that the Applicant has failed to
demonstrate how this application would promote the Licensing Objectives.
REASONS: At the hearing, the Applicant provided and relied upon an assortment of
information in respect of the premises for the planned event for 28-31 May 2010
(The Black Horse Festival) in the grounds of the Pestalozzi International Village,
Seddlescombe. At the hearing the Applicant commented that much of the
operational, and in particular Health and Safety information, was in his head, but not
on paper yet, and that in time this information would be formalised if the premises
licence were granted. This future formal information would, the Panel was told,
provide a full site-specific health and safety assessment.
The Panel took the view that this approach was careless and failed to demonstrate
sufficient pre-application risk assessment. The level of attention and detail required
and expected in an operating schedule for this event and its proposed operation was
insufficient.
The Applicant failed to set out an adequate and appropriate operating schedule for
the premises which took into account, but is not limited to, the type of event, the
nature of the site, the proposed activities, and the proposed hours that such an event
required.
Overall, the Applicant failed to demonstrate how it proposed to promote the
Licensing Objectives. The Panel took particular note of the failure to properly and
sufficiently demonstrate how the applicant proposed to promote Public Safety and
the Prevention of Public Nuisance objectives.
In regard to the Public Nuisance Objective, the Members had before them:
Applicant's Noise Impact Report
This report set out a series of noise recordings from a simulated noise exercise
which utilised 'Pink' noise. The report informed that Pink noise is a reference signal
whereby all acoustic energy is distributed uniformly by octave throughout the audio
spectrum; making the total sound power on each octave equal. Pink noise is
commonly used in propagation tests given the even distribution of energy across the
entire available range.
4
Environmental noise levels were taken in the presence of pink noise generated at
the Festival site for a series of locations. The pink noise was verified at the mix
position to ensure that the source noise level was 95db(A). These findings showed a
range between 62db(A) at the nearest noise sensitive premises at 20 metres, to
38db(A) on the northern outskirts of Sedlescombe Village (660 metres).
The report concludes that with suitable noise limits and a noise action plan, the noise
levels from the proposed Festival are likely to be acceptable for the majority of the
population in Sedlescombe. The proposed noise action plan can be used to
investigate and further protect the public where complaint of noise nuisance is
received.
The noise action plan submitted to the Panel consisted of the proposal that
complainants contact the RDC EHO out of office contact number. This was
discussed at the hearing, and the Panel took the view that this proposal was
concerned with a response to complaints after the event and had little or no
preventative value. The Applicant further proposed that other concrete measures
would be considered when and if the premises licence was granted. The Panel took
the view that approach failed to demonstrate pre-application risk assessment and fell
well below the standard of detail required and expected in an operating schedule for
an event of this nature.
Interested Parties Noise Report
The Interested Parties conducted their own noise assessment to comment upon the
Applicant's report. The report highlighted three codes of practice utilised in the
Applicant’s report, that being:
1)
World Health Organisation – Night Noise Guidance for Europe 2009;
2)
World Health Organisation – Guidance for Community Noise 1999;
3)
Sound Insulation and Noise Reduction for Buildings 1999.
The codes of practice relied upon by the Applicant’s expert are primarily concerned
with setting an ideal benchmark for preserving health and wellbeing. It was
highlighted that no use was made of the code of practice providing guidance
specifically for concerts on open air sites. The Code of Practice Environmental Noise
Control at Concerts, The Noise Council, 1995. This code provides a practical
procedure to address problems of environmental noise control at concerts with a
view to preventing nuisance. The Members took the view that the Guidance provided
a complementary and practical tool to the submissions, information and Guidance
provided by the Applicant, Interested Parties and the Responsible Authority.
The Guidance sets out the criteria for concerts depending on their length, in this
case 4 days, and suggests that levels should not exceed background noise levels by
more than 15 db(A) over a 15 minute period, and lower where the event exceeds
23.00 hours. The report submitted by the Interested Parties, demonstrated how
Interested Parties’ properties would be affected throughout the geographical area
around the venue, by the use of propagation calculations based upon the 95db(A)
figure used in the Applicant’s report. The results showed the location of levels that
would exceed the criteria set out in the Code of Practice for Concerts 1995.
Senior Environmental Health Officer's Noise Report
5
The Panel also had the benefit of an independent report carried out by the Rother
District Council Environmental Health Team. This showed background noise levels
recorded at the site on 4 February 2010 of 40dbL (daytime) and 34db L (evening). It
highlighted the differing figures offered by the Applicant's report, and the propagation
calculations made by the Officer using the 95db level as set out by the Applicant.
The Officer's figures for propagation calculations showed significantly higher levels
than the Applicant's consultant and demonstrated the potential for breaches of the
Code of Practice on Concerts Guidance throughout the area.
The reports offered differing views, albeit the Members accepted that the Interested
Parties’ Consultant and the Responsible Authority's noise consultant arrived at
similar figures using the propagation calculations. On balance the Members
preferred and accepted the evidence offered by these propagation calculations.
The Members preferred and accepted the evidence of the Rother District Council
Environmental Health Officer and Mr Attwood the Noise Consultant for the Interested
Parties who demonstrated that levels would be much higher than those offered by
the Applicant, and certainly levels high enough to cause a public nuisance.
The Applicant was given an opportunity at the hearing to respond to the expert
evidence and also comment on its proposed operating schedule; the Panel listened
to these submissions carefully. The Panel took the view that the Applicant had failed
to demonstrate how it intended to be a ‘good neighbour’ to local residents: in
particular the Applicant failed to propose any suitable practical steps to prevent
disturbance to local residents.
Overall, the Panel took the view that on the evidence of the likely impact on the
prevention of Public Nuisance and the inadequacy of the operating schedule in the
application, specifically, but not limited to, noise matters and health and safety
issues, the inadequacies in the Applicant's proposed operating schedule and
submissions could not be remedied.
After the close of the evidence and discussion portion of the hearing the Applicant,
as part of its closing submissions, offered to amend its application in respect of hours
by reducing the proposed duration of regulated entertainment (music) by 59 minutes
from 23.59 to 23.00 for Friday, Saturday and Sunday. It was stated that the event
would close at 20.00 on Monday. The Panel considered this late amendment but
took the view that this in no way detracted from their general concerns, nor the
specific matters addressed above. The Panel took the view that the Applicant failed
to sufficiently demonstrate any suitable steps to promote the Licensing Objectives
throughout the entire duration of the proposed operation.
For these reasons the application is refused.
A written or electronic copy of this Statement will be publicly available to all Parties,
and published on the Council's website.
Signed:
Cllr. ………………………………..
Dated:
……………………………………..
6
Panel Chairman
Right of Appeal
Under the provisions of S.181 and Schedule 5 of the Licensing Act 2003 there is a
right of appeal against the decision of the Licensing Committee if you are aggrieved
at the outcome. This right of appeal extends to the applicant in the case of a refusal
or restrictions on the licence, or the imposition of conditions to the licence. The right
of appeal also extends to persons who have made representations where the licence
has been granted, or that relevant conditions have not been imposed upon the
licence. Full details of all the rights of appeal can be found within Schedule 5 of the
Act.
Any appeal should be made to the Magistrates Court, Bohemia Road, Hastings,
within 21 days from the date of notification of the decision. You must contact the
Magistrates Court to establish the formal procedure for the appeal.
7