The Licensing panel were asked to consider a full variation application of a premises license for The Page, 1-2 Parrock Street, Gravesend, Kent, DA12 1EW. The Panel were asked to determine the application for a full variation of a premise license following the submission of evidence from the licensee and Environmental Health.

The panel were information that on Monday 20 May 2024, a full variation application for The Page had been received. The application was to increase the hours for live music, recorded music, late night refreshment and the sale by retail of alcohol. The applicant had agreed with Kent Police to amend annex three, condition nine of the current license to cover door supervisors on a Sunday – found at appendix C.

On Monday 3 June 2024, an objection was received from Environmental Protection in relation to the public nuisance objective. On Thursday 13 June 2024, they submitted further supporting evidence, including video footage.

The Chair asked the Senior Environmental Health Technician to make his representation, and the following points were raised:

• Upon receipt of the application to extend their hours, Environmental Protection did consider it, but there was a history of noise complaints going back to August 2023. Whilst they did acknowledge that there were some occasions where there was not a nuisance noise, there were frequent claims of nuisance noise, which had been witnessed by officers on two separate occasions.
• Numerous video evidence had been submitted to support this claim.
• Environmental Protection had tried informal approaches to try and resolve the issue, such as site visits and sound tests, but these did not achieve the results they had hoped for. Due to this, environmental protection had to take enforcement action – this started with a community protection warning, which then progressed to a noise abatement notice and a community protection notice.
• They did an out of hours visit, which showed that they had breached the community protection notice which resulted in a £100 fixed penalty notice.
• The applicant did take some action in terms of sound proofing, which initially appeared to have positive results and the case was closed.
• Upon the receipt of the applicant’s submission for an extension of their hours, Environmental Protection thought it was prudent to go back to the complainant to ask how things were - the complainant was not informed of the application.
• The complainant had responded that there had been reoccurring noise and that whilst the applicant had been responsive when they had called, they had to be insistent with the calls.
• Environmental Protection would want to see a consistent sustained improvement with a lack of noise nuisance for around 6 – 12 months before consideration was given to an extension of hours. They advised 12 months in order to cover all seasons.

• Trust had broken down due to various issues such as the premises advertising a five-star food hygiene rating, but a food hygiene inspection had not yet taken place. The applicant advised this was an IT error. Environmental Protection believed that tobacco products had been used in shisha pipes at the premises – The Chair informed the panel that they were here to discuss the licensing matters and that the points mentioned were therefore noted, but no further action would be taken.

The Chair advised the applicant could proceed with asking their questions and the following was explained:

• The Senior Environmental Health Technician suggested that the applicant withdraw their application to extend their hours due to the on-going noise complaint. They recommended that the applicant implement the changes suggested to prove that they would work before the hours were extended.
• The Senior Environmental Health Technician was aware that the premises closed for five-weeks to undergo extensive sound proofing measures but noted that this was after a lengthy period of action undertaken by the environmental protection services.
• A noise notice was not an enforcement action. The legislation does not require an officer to have witnessed in person a nuisance in order to be satisfied and to serve notice. Environmental Protection had received video evidence, which they were happy to accept as genuine and proved a disturbance. Subsequently, three site visits were made and they observed for themselves the unreasonable level of noise.
• From the first site visit that Environmental Protection made, they suspected that the rear garden was where the noise was leaking from. It appeared there were no sound complaints coming from the front of the premises.
• Environmental Protection received an allegation from a member of the public that the premises were operating past their licensed hours (after 3am). This information was passed onto licensing – who then carried out their investigation via requesting CCTV footage. Licensing was satisfied that there were no breaches of license conditions.
• Unfortunately, due to a technical error, the applicant and objector videos could not be played for the panel.

Following the applicants’ questions, the Chair advised the panel could now open for questions, and the following was explained by the Senior Environmental Health Technician:

• Environmental Protection had visited the premises on a total of three occasions. The first was to advice the applicant of the complaint – no formal action was taken at that time. Environmental Protection suggested that the music played in the rear garden was background level. Two further visits included testing the sound equipment – at the time, the noise levels appeared fine, but officers had experienced the music far in excess of what was played during the tests.
• Regarding the front of the premises, there were no residents directly opposite and as such no noise complaints had been received. Those on Manor Road were opposite the rear area.
• The rear area was historically a garden, with fabricated walls and a retractable roof. The soundproofing measures that have been installed to date have not improved the noise nuisance.
• The Senior Environmental Health Technician believed that improvements could be made structurally to reduce the amount of noise leakage and potentially mitigate the noise nuisance. Other improvements such as restricting access to the rear area after a certain time to ensure the acoustic doors were closed could also offer improvement.

Mr Muritala, the applicant, made his submission to the panel and raised the following key points:

• The request for an additional hour was based on the observation that the majority of their customers preferred to arrive at their venue much later. Customers started to arrive between 11:45pm and 1am. They operate on a booking system and do not charge at the door, but they check ID – this process did not leave much time before they needed to announce the premises would be closing. The applicant noted that this had a major impact on their revenue.
• The business relied on weekend custom. Since the beginning of the year, they haven’t opened Monday – Wednesday as there was little to no custom.
• The original license of this premise was 4am, Thursday – Sunday. The reduction in the hours to 3am was a result of a license hearing where Kent Police requested a reduction in their hours.
• In this application, Kent Police, the Licensing department, the commercial department, Kent Fire, and Child Protection Services had not objected.
• Since taking over the premises a year ago, there has not been any recorded incidents.
• They understood that they had a noise complaint attached to the rear area and had addressed this over time.
• When the complaint was first received in September 2023, the applicant called their sound engineers (who were used by the previous owners and understood the premises well), who came and reduced the music in the rear garden. The premises were licensed to play music at 90 decibels, but they had reduced it to play at 60 decibels.
• The applicant had installed acoustic lobbies and changed to soundproof doors, new mats had been put on the roof in the rear garden, acoustic sound dampeners had been installed on the walls, the output on the base had been reduced as well as the size of the speakers.
• The rear garden had been excluded from the application as they knew that the long-term solution would be to erect a solid, well insulated roof above the rear area and to also build insulated walls around it.
• The premise was licensed to operate until 3am, but they were voluntarily looking to reduce the hours of operation at the rear to 12am. This meant that the doors and the acoustic lobby leading to the rear garden remained shut after 12am.

The Chair advised the Senior Environmental Health Technician and licensing that the floor was open for them to ask the applicant any questions, and the following was explained:

• The Senior Environmental Health Technician felt that going back to the original hours of operation (9pm) for the rear area was more appropriate.
• If the hours were granted, they would deal with the noise complaint via their new noise management plan. The applicant was confident that if the rear garden was closed at 12am, there would be no noise nuisance from the rear garden.
• The proposal from Environmental Protection, to shut the rear garden from 9pm, would mean shutting that area for good as it would generate no business.

The Chair advised that the floor was open for the panel to ask their questions, and the following was explained:

• The premises was licensed to operate as a nightclub, but the applicant wanted to move away from that classification and operate as a lounge.
• Food was served until 10:50pm.
• The premise capacity was 200, but since they opened, this had not been maxed. Capacity was around 165/170 maximum on their busiest days.
• They have runners and waiters/waitresses who operated via the QR code ordering system - most food was consumed in the rear area.
• The applicant had spoken with an architect, who has advised the best plan to mitigate the noise in the rear area was to build a solid roof and brick insulated walls. The architect was in the process of pulling together a plan which would be submitted for planning permission. In the meantime, a noise management plan had been produced.
• The whole establishment was closed at 3am, however, following the sound-proofing measures, they had been closing the rear garden at 1:30am.
• Security had been hired to ensure no one accesses the garden after 1:30am.
• The smoking area was located at the front of the premises.
• The request to move the opening time from 12pm to 3pm was due to a lack of business during those hours.

Legal confirmed with the applicant that on page 21 and 22 of the agenda pack, they were looking for two extra conditions to be added i.e. pending the complete sound proofing of the rear garden and practical testing to the satisfaction of EP team, the rear garden shall cease all licensable activities by 12am Monday to Sunday. The second condition was that the rear garden area should be cleared and the acoustic and triple glazed doors/lobbies to the rear garden should remain shut at 11:45pm until close of premises. Legal advised that within that condition, they were putting the satisfaction of the EP team – the applicant advised that satisfaction would be tested by a premises break out test.

The Chair thanked all those in attendance and advised deliberations would proceed.

Determination

The Panel considered all of the information provided in the report by the Licensing Officer; the written evidence and oral testimony presented by all parties attending the Panel; the Council’s Statement of Licensing Policy; the statutory guidance of the Secretary of State and the promotion of the four licensing objectives.

Having considered all those matters the Panel decided to grant the variation application with the amended operating hours and with the conditions put forward by themselves and by Kent Police:

1.     The licensable hours for Live Music -

·        Sunday to Thursday 12:00 to 01:00

·        Friday and Saturday 12:00 to 02:00

2.     The licensable hours for Recorded Music and Sale by Retail of Alcohol -

·        Sunday to Thursday 12:00 to 01:00

·        Friday and Saturday 12:00 to 04:00

3.     The licensable hours for Late Night Refreshment –

·        Sunday to Thursday 23:00 to 01:00

·        Friday and Saturday 23:00 to 04:00

4.     The opening hours of the premises –

·        Sunday to Thursday 12:00 to 01:00

·        Friday and Saturday 12:00 to 04:00

5.     The rear garden will be closed by 00:00, the clear up will start at 23:30.

6.     There will be door supervisors in place until the premises closes on a Friday, Saturday and Sunday.