Agenda item

Applicant: Eiderdown Ltd, represented by John Willmott (Director)

Interested Parties: Ian Herve, Ceris Humphreys, Ms Board, Mrs Glyde

Responsible Authority: Avon and Somerset Police, represented by Martin Purchase (Liquor Licensing Officer)

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

The Senior Licensing Officer summarised the application, which was for a new premises licence authorising the sale and supply of alcohol 24 hours a day for consumption both on and off the premises. She advised members that the application was put on the basis that off sales were required to allow consumption of alcohol in the garden, which was not shown on the submitted plans. The Police had made a representation proposing a condition that

“There shall be no consumption of alcohol after 10pm each day in any outside area”.

The applicant had agreed in writing to this condition.

Mr Willmott stated the case for the applicant. He explained that he was a Director of the operating company and personal owner of the premises. He said that the premises had recently undergone a major refurbishment and he wanted to be able to offer wine, not beer or spirits, to bona-fide guests. There was significant demand for a bottle of wine with meals. He would also like guests to be able to consume wine in the garden. He was happy to accept the Police condition that there should be no alcohol consumed in the garden after 10pm. In fact, he would be quite prepared to accept 9.30pm as the terminal hour for the consumption of alcohol in the garden. He explained that the application for off sales had been made because he had been advised that as the garden was not part of the licensed premises, off-sales would be required to allow guests to consume wine in the garden. There was no intention to sell alcohol to people coming in off the street.

The Senior Legal Adviser advised members that in his opinion an off-licence was not required in order for alcohol to be consumed in the garden. In his view, the garden and outside areas were part of the premises, notwithstanding that they were not shown on the submitted plans. Mr Willmott said that if this was the case, he would withdraw his application for an off-licence. In response to questions from Members, Mr Willmott stated:

• he would accept a condition imposing a terminal hour of 9.30pm for drinking in the garden

• the garden was not in a fit state for use by guests at present

• it would be possible for guests to have tea and coffee in the garden

• Villa Magdala was a five-star guest house and the clientele consisted mostly of middle-aged professionals; hen parties were not accepted; the daily rate was £120-£150 on weekdays and £150-£170 at weekends

The Interested Parties put questions to Mr Willmott. Mr Herve stated that he lived next door but one to the premises. He asked at what time the sale of alcohol would commence. Mr Willmott replied that a complimentary glass of bucks fizz would be offered with breakfast.

Mrs Humphreys asked what lighting would be used in the garden at night and whether there would be tables and chairs there. Mr Willmott stated that it would be low-level lighting, not floodlighting; it would be like the lighting used to illuminate a footpath. There would be tables and chairs.

Mr Purchase asked for further clarification as to whether an off sales licence was required for consumption of alcohol in the garden and the Senior Legal Advisor repeated his advice that in his view it was not required. A Member asked if it would be possible for the Sub-Committee to restrict the consumption of alcohol to the garden and prevent it from taking place in the car park. The Senior Legal Adviser replied that there could be conditions to address areas of concern.

The Interested Parties stated their cases. Mrs Humphreys said that she would also speak on behalf of Mrs Glyde, who had had to leave the meeting as the start had been delayed. Mrs Humphreys said that it was important that clear conditions were imposed on the licence. She was concerned that there should be conditions which would apply to future purchasers of the premises. She would strongly object to sales of alcohol taking place in the garden. She said that the fact that the clientele would be up-market was no guarantee of good behaviour. She felt that noise and light from the garden would have a detrimental impact on the locality; sounds would carry at night when background noise had reduced. She was pleased that the applicant had offered to terminate activity in the garden at 9.30pm, but she felt that this was not enough. There were elderly people and children in the vicinity and some people suffering chronic illness. She said that guests of a bed and breakfast establishment should not commence drinking until the late afternoon, and requested that a condition should be imposed to this effect. She also felt that there should be no drinking off the premises and no drinking or music in the garden and a condition restricting lighting there. She then spoke on behalf of Mrs Glyde. She said that Mrs Glyde’s husband suffered from an illness and spends most of the time in bed. He would be adversely affected by nuisance caused by activities in the garden at any time of day.

In response to a question from a Member, she said that she had no concerns about guests drinking indoors, but was concerned about guests being able to drink all day, which she felt worked against government efforts to control the harm arising from the consumption of alcohol, and she did object to the use of the garden for drinking. Another Member complimented her on the clarity of her written representation, but said that he was inclined to doubt her presumption that the licence as applied for would “inevitably” result in public nuisance. He was also doubtful that, as had been suggested, people would “preload” on alcohol which they had to purchase at hotel prices. She responded that as the area was a very quiet one, noise from the garden on summer evenings would be bound to cause nuisance. She also suggested that the offer of free bucks fizz with breakfast would encourage people to drink more. It was not clear that people would not be able to purchase alcohol at other premises and drink it in the garden. She felt that there was some lack of clarity in what was currently proposed. A Member commented that it would be for the management to prevent guests from bringing their own drink into the premises.

Mr Purchase stated his case. He said that though the applicant had agreed the condition proposed by the Police that there should be no consumption in the garden after 10pm, it was not stated at what time consumption could commence there, which was an important issue under a 24-hour licence.

The parties were invited to sum up.

Mr Willmott said people who had overindulged would be refused access to the premises. The Villa Magdala was not a fly-by-night operation. He would be happy to accept a start time for drinking in the garden.

Following an adjournment, the Sub-Committee RESOLVED to grant the application as applied for, but limited to the sale of alcohol for consumption on the premises, subject to conditions consistent with the operating schedule, the mandatory conditions imposed by the Licensing Act 2003 and the following additional conditions:

“There shall be no consumption of alcohol in the car park at any time”

“No alcohol shall be consumed in the garden between 9.30pm and midday on any day”

Authority was delegated to the Licensing Officer to issue the licence accordingly.

REASONS

Members have today determined an application for a new Premises Licence for Villa Magdala, Henrietta Road, Bath for the supply of alcohol for consumption on and off the premises 24 hours every day. In doing so they have reminded themselves of the Licensing Act 2003, Statutory Guidance, the Council’s Statement of Licensing Policy and the Human Rights Act 1998.

Members are aware that the proper approach under the Licensing Act is to be reluctant to regulate in the absence of evidence and must only do what is necessary and proportionate to promote the licensing objectives based on the evidence before them.

This application attracted representations on the licensing objective of public nuisance. Those representations which fell outside of the Licensing Act 2003 were disregarded by members. They considered the relevant representations and took account of the evidence put before them. This included evidence from residents raising concerns about noise and lighting in the garden and consumption of alcohol in the garden. Members also noted the representation from the police also raising concerns regarding consumption of alcohol in the garden. Members noted the representations from the applicant, in particular that the applicant will accept a restriction on consumption of alcohol in the garden.

Members were careful to balance the competing interests of the applicant and those of the interested parties and responsible authority in reaching a decision. Accordingly, Members have done only that which is reasonable and proportionate in the circumstances and have decided to grant the Premises Licence as applied for save that it shall be limited to sales of alcohol for consumption on the premises. Having considered advice from the Legal Officer and the Senior Licensing Officer, members are of the view that the premises includes the garden and other outside areas.