Venue: Court Room at Eastbourne Town Hall, Grove Road, BN21 4UG
Contact: Committee Services on 01323 410000
Apologies for absence.
There were none.
Declarations of Disclosable Pecuniary Interests (DPIs) by members as required under Section 31 of the Localism Act and of other interests under the Code of Conduct.
There were none.
All parties present introduced themselves and the Chair detailed the
procedure to be followed at the hearing. There were no objections to the procedure from those present.
The Specialist Advisor for Licensing outlined the report setting out the application for a new premises licence for 32-34 Cornfield Road.
Details of the application for a new premises licence were appended
to the report. When submitting an application for a new premises
licence under the Licensing Act 2003, the applicant was required to describe
any steps they intended to take to promote the four licensing objectives, as
defined by the Licensing Act 2003. These were appended to the report at
The premises in question is located within the cumulative impact zone
(CIZ) and where valid representations were received, the cumulative impact
policy (CIP) created a rebuttable presumption that the application be
Following a consultation period of 28 days, three representations had been
received and were included in part of the agenda pack circulated. The representations centred on the prevention of public nuisance and the prevention of crime and disorder.
Sussex Police as a responsible authority had mediated with the applicant
and agreed two conditions. A copy of the e-mail correspondence was attached at Appendix 3 of the report.
Kirsty Rolfe, Sussex Police Licensing Officer, proposed alternative conditions to those previously mediated with the Applicant. See Decision Notice.
Mr Tamal Taru Saha, representative of Mr Rabin Paul, Leaseholder of 28-30 Cornfield Road, made his submission on the grounds of the prevention of public nuisance. He raised concerns regarding the applicant’s proposal to play live music on Friday and Saturday evenings and on Christmas Eve and New Year’s Eve till 2am, stating there would be substantive noise pollution. He urged the Sub-Committee to refuse the application.
Melaine Bell, 34a Cornfield Road and representative of Martina Ercolini, Flat 3, 12 Lushington Road, said that public notices would not act as a deterrent to prevent people congregating and creating a disturbance. She said the external doors would probably be left open allowing noise from inside the premises to escape. She also said there would not be sufficient space outside the front of the premises on the pavement for people to pass a bench or a small table safely with a pram or in a wheelchair. She raised further concerns regarding refuse and live amplified music, stating that soundproofing was not considered necessary at the time when the flats were built and she was subsequently refused planning permission for UPVC windows. She said the application, if approved, would affect the quality of their lives.
Christian Schmidt, representative of the applicant, addressed the Sub-Committee, stating that he apologised on behalf of the applicant for the ambiguity of the wording in the application. He said the purpose of the businesses was as a gallery/book club with a cafe, not as a nightclub with DJ etc. He said the premises would open under conventional hospitality hours providing coffee, tea and snacks and occasionally there would be large ... view the full minutes text for item 15.