Agenda item

To consider the attached application for a new Premises Licence in respect of The Stag PH, Brentwood Road, Ongar.

The three councillors that presided over this application were Councillors M Sartin (Chairman), S Heather and K Williamson.

 

The Chairman welcomed Mr H Lamprell, applicant, Mr D Barker, agent, Mr M Tingey, Manager, Ms T O’Reilly and (Councillor) Mr P Keska to the meeting. Mr D Allen, Ms C Duyt, Mr and Mrs K Garner and Mr S Randall were attending as objectors to this application. The Chairman introduced the Members and officers present and outlined the procedure that would be followed for the determination of the application.

 

(a)          Application before the Sub-Committee

 

The application was for a new premises licence at The Stag PH, Brentwood Road, Ongar, Essex, CM5 9DH. The premises, trading as The Stag PH, had been sold to Faberdean EC Ltd in October 2020, with a consent agreement to transfer, but no transfer application was received from the new owners by the Licensing Authority. McMullens surrendered the premises licence in November 2021 with immediate effect, as detailed in the report. The Council was not aware the premises had continued to trade without the authorisation of a premises licence until an incident in January 2022, which had involved Essex Police. Following a visit of the premises, the Council issued a warning letter that advised the premises to cease trading all licensable activities until a premises licence has been applied for and granted. The Licensing Manager, D King, introduced the application, which was for the following licensing activities:

 

Provision of Films

Monday to Sunday 10.00 – 23.00 on and off premises

 

Provision of Indoor Sporting Events

Monday to Sunday 10.00 – 23.00

 

Provision of Live Music

Monday to Sunday 10.00 – 23.00 on and off the premises

 

Provision of Recorded Music

Monday to Sunday 10.00 – 23.00 on and off the premises

 

Provision of anything of a similar description above

Monday to Sunday 10.00 – 23.00 on the premises

 

Late Night Refreshment

Monday to Sunday 10.00 – 23.00 on and off the premises

 

Sale by Retail of Alcohol

Sunday to Thursday 10.00 – 00.00am, Friday to Saturday 10.00 – 01.00 on sales only

 

Seasonal Timings Christmas Eve -Christmas Day 10.00 – 01.00

News Year’s Eve – News Years Day 10.00 – 01.00

 

Opening Times of the premises

Sunday to Thursday 10.00 – 00.30, Friday to Saturday 10.00 – 01.30

 

Seasonal Timings

Christmas Eve – Christmas Day 11.00 – 01.00

News Year’s Eve 11.00 – 01.00

 

The application had been received on 18 January 2022. The Operating Schedule set out conditions which would be attached to the licence if this application was granted. The Responsible Authorities had all received a copy of the application, it was also advertised at the premises and in a local newspaper. All residences and businesses within 150 meters radius of the premises were individually consulted.

 

The authority had received 12 representations of objection from local residents and 18 representations of support from local residents including a petition. A response from Essex Police with recommendations had been agreed by the applicant and these conditions were attached to the report. The objections related to the prevention of crime and disorder, the prevention of public nuisance and the protection of children from harm.

 

(b)          Presentation of the Applicant’s case

 

The Manager explained that the company had reapplied for a premises licence and copied the original licence, so was seeking to have it reinstated.

 

Mr P Keska addressed the meeting on behalf of the applicant, as a private individual not as a councillor, and stated that the application was only before the Sub-Committee because the previous licence held by McMullen & Sons Ltd had been allowed to lapse and had not been transferred to the new owners. The Stag was a local pub in south Ongar, popular with local residents and families because of the food served and the garden on the premises. The tenant would be agreeable to a reduction in the timings of outdoor music, if the noise was a problem to neighbouring residents. The Licensing Panel was aware that the option to request a review of the premises could be undertaken, and the licence could be revoked. Mr Keska asked the Sub-Committee to consider granting the application with such restrictions as deemed necessary to support the licensing objectives.

 

(c)          Questions for the Applicant from the Sub-Committee

 

·       Were there noise limiters to monitor outside music? The Manager replied that staff used a hand sound monitor. When the premises had previously applied for a TENS (temporary event notice), staff had constantly monitored the sound level and only occasionally had the volume gone a little high but use of a limiter would be okay.

 

·       The Council’s Legal Officer, G Oakley, asked if the applicant would reduce the hours applied for outdoor music provision and did this include the provision of films, live music and recorded music outdoors? The Manager replied he would be prepared to review the times externally and reduce the hours from 23.00 to 22.30. The Council’s Licensing Manager, Mr King, advised the Sub-Committee that licensed premises were permitted to have live and recorded music until 23.00, as long as the applicant met certain criteria and did not exceed the number, but it was for the whole area of the premises including the beer garden. The Manager replied the premises followed the guidelines on music levels but did not exceed this level because of their noise limiters.

 

(d)          Questions for the Applicant from the Objectors

 

There were no questions from the objectors.

 

(e)          Presentation of the Objectors

 

Ms C Duyt remarked that during live music sessions on Sunday afternoons she was concerned by noise levels as the throbbing music caused vibrations in her house, which was opposite the pub. There was also the behaviour of children, who she had seen on occasions throwing things at cars driving along Brentwood Road, and the noise nuisance from people leaving the pub when walking along the footpath.

 

Mrs K Garner stated that she had lived next door to the pub for 21 years and was not against the pub being there but McMullen had never played music outside. She appreciated that after Covid the pub started to play music outside but last summer the music had been intolerable. She was not against the pub but did not want any music played outside because the noise levels were so loud that she had recorded the noise on several occasions. It was both the noise levels from outdoor music and films because the marquee backed onto her property. This was happening during afternoons on Saturdays and Sundays, so it was not about later hours but the noise levels.

 

Mr D Allen advised the Sub-Committee that his greatest concern was the use of Hunters Close for parking, which included bad parking both in this road and on the main road, by blocking a bus stop and restricting access to Hunters Close. The parking was such that it would also prove difficult for emergency vehicles to reach even the pub.

 

Mr S Randall informed the Sub-Committee that he lived in Hunters Close and wanted the pub to work but it was about the loud music that was heard coming from the pub and he was surprised limiters were being used. He and other residents wanted the music level to be turned down as it needed to be managed and the patrons’ behaviour needed to be managed better. Bad parking did cause access problems to Hunters Close residents. If the licence was granted, he asked the Sub-Committee to take into consideration restricting the music volumes and operating times of events.

 

(f)           Questions for the Objectors from the Sub-Committee

 

Mrs Garner was asked if she had reported the loud music to the Council’s Environment and Neighbourhoods officers. She replied, no, but had contacted the pub several times because they wanted to be good neighbours, although a neighbour had contacted the Council. This application had given residents the opportunity to actually raise their concerns about the loud music.

 

Mr Allen was asked if Hunters Close was a private road in which case the North Essex Parking Partnership would not become involved and were notices displayed. Mr Allen confirmed it was a private road and the residents were dealing with the Management Company on parking issues in Hunters Close. The Management Company would be putting up signs and be applying to the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency for car owners’ details to issue fines. Also, the residents provided access to the pub premises under a covenant. In his opinion, the pub’s patrons should be more considerate to the residents and not park so badly.

 

(g)          Questions for the Objectors from the Applicant

 

The Manager commented that he understood the parking issues in Hunters Close.

 

(h)          Closing statement from the Objectors

 

Mrs K Garner observed that although the licence before the Sub-Committee had been reported as being the same as the previous licence, pub activities had been taken outside the premises after Covid, whereas before McMullen had kept this indoors. The loud music and volume levels from people singing along to the music outside was intolerable to many residents.

 

(i)            Closing statement from the Applicant

 

The Manager appreciated the residents’ patience and did communicate with them. The staff did not ignore music complaints and did monitor noise levels and follow the guidelines. When parking issues had come to his attention, he had put cones out at weekends, but residents also used the pub car park. It was up to the local authority and police to deal with parking issues on the main road. Live music with people talking and enjoying themselves was held externally on Saturdays once a month and every other Sunday until 20.00, so these did not go near the allocated times. Staff did ask parents to monitor their children’s behaviour and staff also monitored the outside area during the summer. Live music was usually outside from May to September but for other months it depended on trade when there might be live music held inside the pub.

 

(j)            Consideration of the Application by the Sub-Committee

 

Before going into private session, the Council’s Legal Officer drew to the Sub-Committee’s attention that it stated in the application under the prevention of public nuisance (page 111 of the agenda) that no music would be played in or transmitted to the outside drinking area; doors and windows would remain closed during the performance of live/recorded music and discos except for the ingress/egress of customers; the patio/outside seating area would be closed to customers at 23.00 every day; and the manager and staff would encourage customers to leave quietly. This seemed to contradict what had been reported by residents at this meeting. The Manager apologised to the Sub-Committee and stated that the wording, “no music would be played in or transmitted to the outside drinking area”, should not be part of this application and was therefore incorrect, which the Chairman corroborated with the Applicant. The Manager continued that under legislation any premises could play live or recorded music until 23.00. The Council’s Licensing Manager agreed and was from 08.00 to 23.00 on any day for a premises licensed to sell alcohol, provided the audience did not exceed 500 people.

 

The Chairman advised that the Sub-Committee would go into private deliberations to consider the application. The Council’s Legal Officer asked the Chairman if its Licensing Manager could remain in attendance during the private session in case the Sub-Committee needed further advice, which was agreed by all parties.

 

During their deliberations the Council’s advisory officers gave the Sub-Committee the following advice:

 

·       conditions imposed must be appropriate, be capable of being enforceable and must not undermine the licensing objectives

·       that each case must be determined on its own merits and

·       the Committee was entitled to find its own facts, determine what weight should be given to the evidence before it, and to reach its own conclusions. The Committee, when finding facts, must apply the “civil test” of “the balance of probabilities”. While the Committee was not, itself, a court. It had to apply the same test for evidence as a civil court.

 

The Sub-Committee noted all of the submissions and representations, both oral and written, that had been made in relation to this application and had considered what was appropriate to promote the four licensing objectives and the relevant parts of the Council’s Licensing Policy and the Home Office’s guidance.

 

RESOLVED:

 

That the application for a premises licence in respect of The Stag Public House, Brentwood Road, Ongar, Essex CM5 9DH be granted for:

 

The provision of films ON the Premises only between 10.00am and 21.30 but otherwise as contained in the application

 

The provision of Indoor Sporting events as contained in the application

 

The provision of live music ON the Premises only and otherwise as contained in the application

 

The provision of recorded music ON the Premises only and otherwise as contained in the application

 

The provision of anything of a similar description as contained in the application

 

Late night refreshment as contained in the application

 

The sale by retail of alcohol as contained in the application

 

Seasonal timings as contained in the application

 

Opening times of the Premises as contained in the application

 

Subject to:

 

1.         the conditions as submitted by the applicant within their application with the exception of the first 2 bullet points in the Licensing Objectives (d) on page 111 of the Agenda and

 

2.         the conditions agreed with Essex Police as set out on pages 172 to 175 of the Agenda in so far as they add to or supersede the applicant’s conditions

 

3.         For the prevention of public nuisance, a noise limiter shall be used to control the volume of live, recorded music and amplified sound so that it cannot be heard by Noise Sensitive Premises;

 

which the Sub-Committee considered were reasonable and proportionate and would not undermine the licensing objectives; and

 

4.         The mandatory conditions contained in Sections 19 - 21 of the Licensing Act 2003.

 

The applicants and the objectors were reminded of their right of appeal to the Magistrates Court within 21 days of date of the written notification of this decision and of the review mechanism under the Licensing Act 2003 because of any matters arising in the future at the Premises in connection with any of the four licensing objectives.