Agenda item

Variation of conditions 4 and 16 of Planning Permission CC/98/00156/FUL (Change of use to A3 (food and drink) licensed premises) to i) vary condition 4 to allow later last orders up to 11.30pm on Fridays, Saturdays and Bank Holiday Mondays so as to align with the Premises License; and ii) vary condition 16 to control the timing and volume of amplified music.

Refuse, against officer recommendation

*Having declared a predetermination in the item Cllr Quail withdrew from the meeting.

Mr Mew presented the item. He gave a verbal update to inform the Committee that two further third-party comments had been received. He then drew attention to the Agenda Update sheet which included an additional consultee comment from CDC Environmental Protection; two additional third-party comments; points of clarification and amended/additional conditions.

Mr Mew outlined the application, which was located within the Chichester Conservation Area. He highlighted the site’s proximity to other buildings including the Prebendal School, the Bell Tower and the Dolphin and Anchor (Wetherspoons).

The Committee were shown a floor plan of the building, Mr Mew confirmed that no alterations were proposed as part of the development.

Mr Mew clarified the variations to the conditions as sought by the application.

Representations were received from;

Cllr Anne Scicluna – Chichester City Council

Alison Napier – Objector

Mrs Jane Langford – Objector

Mr Paul Nichols – Objector

Mr Michael Robson – Agent

In Cllr Burkhart’s absence the Chairman allowed Cllr Briscoe to read a statement on her behalf.

Officers responded to comments and questions as follows;

Responding to concerns regarding the variations to conditions; Mr Mew further clarified why the applicant was seeking to amend the condition 16. As Councillors had acknowledged on the site visit the sound from the venue was ‘barely audible’, however, barely audible could technically be in breach of the current conditions even though no harm was being caused.

Regarding the number of complaints received; Mr Mew informed the Committee that he was unaware of the exact number of complaints, however, there had been 15 pieces of correspondence received from April 2023.

On the matter on notice being given notice of a site visit; Mr Mew confirmed the venue had been made aware of the site visit, but this was reasonable. In addition, Mr Thomson explained a DJ event had replicated for the visit and compliance with the proposed levels had been demonstrated.

Addressing concerns that the venue were only compliant because they had been forewarned of the Committee visit; Mr Thomson informed the Committee that officers had undertaken an unannounced site visit in September 2023, the results from the venue showed compliance.

Mrs Stevens reminded the Committee they must consider whether the proposed conditions were acceptable.

Responding to concerns, Mr Thomson informed the Committee of his experience and qualifications in the field of noise management. He assured them the noise assessments undertaken and noise management plan were acceptable. The proposed maximum level of 80db was exceptionally low for a city centre.

Mr Thomson explained why the proposed Noise Management Plan, was more favourable than the current condition. He further explained how the use of a Noise Management Plan was standard practice and used as part of noise mitigation in a number of venues throughout the city.

Mr Thomson explained why the noise limits were not set from outside the venue.

Mr Thomson clarified what the abbreviation LAEQ stood for.

Responding to concerns that the noise limiter could be circumnavigated; Mr Thomson acknowledged that this could be done but it was reasonable to expect the venue not to do this. The limiter in place was the industry standard.

On the matter of a split decision; Ms Golding informed the Committee they were not able to make a split decision, they must vote on the proposal in front of them. She advised how they could propose a new recommendation which would reflect their view that part of the recommendation was acceptable and which they felt was not.

Responding to concerns the venue was a nightclub; Mr Mew assured the Committee this was not the case. He drew attention to paragraph 8.35d (page 99) which addressed these concerns in detail.

On the matter of the RADAR noise investigation: Mr Thomson explained why the report was not valid as a reason for refusal.

Regarding the number of complaints, the Chairman used his discretion to allow Ms Golding to be given a list of complaints from the public gallery. Mrs Stevens acknowledged the list, however, she advised the Committee that they had attended a site visit at which they witnessed compliance.

Following a vote, the Committee voted against the report recommendation to permit.

Having voted against the officer recommendation Cllr Briscoe proposed the Committee refuse the application due to the impact on the surrounding area and the potential harm to children at the Prebendal School.

Mrs Stevens advised the Committee further clarification would be required on the grounds for refusal as the Historic Buildings Advisor had raised no objections, the extended drinking hours would be unlikely to cause additional harm as the turning out of drinkers remained the same.

Mrs Stevens advised the Committee why, in officer opinion, Condition 16 was no longer reasonable.

Ms Golding explained why refusing the application because it was too technical for the public to understand would not be an acceptable reason.

Having considered officer advice Cllr Briscoe proposed the Committee refuse the application for the following reasons;

1)    The extended drinking hours will result in the harm to the neighbouring occupiers (officers will add appropriate policy)

2)    The audibility of music outside the premises will cause harm to the amenity of neighbouring properties.

Cllr D Johnson seconded the proposal.

Following a vote, the Committee voted in favour of Cllr’s Briscoe’s proposal to refuse for the reasons set out above.

Resolved; refuse; for the reasons set out above.

*Members took a ten minute break