Agenda item

Applicant: Rod Johnson

Objector: Patrick Rotherham (Chair, Vineyard Residents’ Association)

The parties confirmed that they had received and understood the procedure.

The Public Protection Officer summarised the application.

Mr Johnson stated his case. He said that his premises, a bar, were part of Bladud Buildings. The front of the premises faced south and so caught the sun, and he wished to take advantage of this by locating 2 tables and chairs on the pavement in front of the premises until 22.00 every day. The pavement at this point was 10 feet wide. He stated that his Licensing Act 2003 premises licence already authorised drinking outside the premises, that the area in front of the premises was also used as a smoking area and that other licensed premises in the vicinity already had tables and chairs outside.

Members put questions to Mr Johnson, in response to which he stated:

·  60% of his customers were aged 18-25, but there were no restrictions on who could enter the premises; the premises were a bar, not a nightclub, and there was no admission charge

·  food was not served at present, though this was being considered as an option in the longer term

Mr Rotherham stated his case. He introduced himself as Chair of the Vineyard Residents’ Association. He said that activities of the late night economy had impacted on residents over the years. This application represented a further extension into the daytime of drinking on the street. A great many retired people and children resided in the area, so there were many people around during the day. Residents felt under constant pressure. There was traffic congestion, air pollution and impacts from the night-time economy. This application was one more imposition on local residents. He requested the Committee either to refuse it, or to make the terminal hour 20.00.

The Principal Solicitor advised that the all the Sub-Committee could take account was the extent to which this application would result in an obstruction on the highway that would constitute a hazard for users of the highway.

The Chair asked Mr Johnson whether he would still be prepared to accept a terminal hour of 20.00, as offered in his supporting statement (Annex F to the agenda). He confirmed he would.

Following an adjournment, it was RESOLVED to grant the application with a terminal hour of 20.00.

Reasons for decision

In determining an application to place 2 tables with 8 chairs on the highway Members took account of the Highways Act and representations from the applicant and objectors.

Members approach this matter in terms of whether the application was likely to cause a public nuisance in highway terms. In doing so they had to decide whether these tables and chairs in this location were likely to obstruct the free passage of pedestrians or cause a hazard. In this regard Members noted the Highway Authority had not objected and the pavement width at the premises varied between 4 and 6 meters.

Whilst noting the objections were mainly on public nuisance grounds these related in general to matters arising from the late night economy. Accordingly, these fall to be dealt with by other statutory provisions rather than as in highway obstruction terms.

In all the circumstances Members considered the application reasonable and grant the application limited to 8 pm as suggested by the objector and agreed with the applicant. Authority is delegated to the Public Protection Officer to issue the permit with the attachment of the standard terms and conditions.