The Applicant presented she was an experienced operator with a Masters Qualification; she owned a licensed premises in Monton  which had been recognised by CAMRA for the third year running; she took time to educate her staff and some had their own personal licences.

 

The proposed business premises was to be a small Spanish charcuterie and deli providing specialist produce to take home and a small place to share food and drink, (good quality wines, sherries and beers that work well with the produce; it would be an intimate environment in a space of fifty square feet with five tables providing thirty covers, (granted A3 usage by Planning Department). It is intended to be high-end produce, very niche and not aimed at ‘bar hoppers’ or the late night drinking market.

 

During the day, it was anticipated they would be on the premises from 1030 and opening at 11oo to serve coffee/croissants/sandwiches and transpose into the specialist food types, mainly cold food in a typical Andalusian style.

 

The Applicant understood the Buddhist Centre was an holistic centre for people and this was in fact one of the reasons she had been attracted to the area so that she herself could attend the Centre. She understood their anxiety and emphasised she respected her neighbours and wanted a good relationship with them; the last thing she wanted to do was impact negatively on the community.

 

Nuisance from Noise:

 

The Applicant had engaged with the Responsible Authorities and had sound-proofed the unit, installed a self-closing door, CCTV, incorporated delivery and collection services and operating hours in line with their recommendations.

 

The Applicant noted the common theme in relation to the representations was ‘noise’ from the venue and to this end she had even proposed an acoustic company but they had not been able to gain access to the Buddhist Centre due to the period of mourning.

 

Furthermore, the Applicant was convinced the noise did not travel as following a workman on the premises playing very loud music, (for which she apologised), she requested he turn it up to the maximum level and then visited the Shrine Room, (at the front of the Centre looking out on to Turner Street) and no noise could be heard.

 

The Applicant spoke with the receptionist, ‘Kevin’ and both put their ears to the wall; nothing could be heard.

 

Another lady at the Centre, ‘Anita’ had spoken of hearing music throughout the day. As they were not yet open, the Applicant did not see how it could emanate from the premises and she advised there was a dance studio at the rear of the premises and potentially there could have been music from passing cars.

 

There were representations by residents of loud and disruptive behaviour and fighting in the street. Again, the Applicant explained they were not open yet and so this could not be attributable to her premises.

 

The Applicant was therefore convinced that any music would not travel. She did not intend to have any live music or DJs, just low level background music and a food culture experience whilst socialising including Ham Pairing evenings, Language Exchange evenings and a monthly Bodega, (Spanish Market).

 

When questioned, the Applicant confirmed there would be no outside seating and explained in her experience, when one offered really good produce and atmosphere, this was conducive to good behaviour and attracted well behaved people.

 

When questioned regarding managing the number of customers outside, the Applicant confirmed she had liaised with Claire Cunningham regarding this.

 

In respect of economic pressures, their overheads would be relatively low as they had purchased the building; there were no chefs and they intended to start with four part time members of staff.

 

Deliveries would be at the front of the building; there were minimal suppliers with a small range of deliveries.

 

Draft beer would be delivered but small kegs, (30 litres) which would be carried in.

 

The Committee was aware the main thrust of the objections had been the potential noise emanating from the premises by way of music and patrons gathering outside/leaving the premises.

 

The Committee gave due regard to the guidance provided in s182 of the Licensing Act 2003 in particular paragraphs:

 

2.15     …. It is therefore important that in considering the promotion of this licensing objective, licensing authorities and responsible authorities focus on the effect of the licensable activities at the specific premises on persons living and working (including those carrying on business) in the area around the premises which may be disproportionate and unreasonable. The issues will mainly concern noise nuisance, light pollution, noxious smells and litter.

 

 

2.17 Conditions relating to noise nuisance will usually concern steps appropriate to control the levels of noise emanating from premises. This might be achieved by a simple measure such as ensuring that doors and windows are kept closed after a particular time, or persons are not permitted in garden areas of the premises after a certain time. More sophisticated measures like the installation of acoustic curtains or rubber speaker mounts to mitigate sound escape from the premises may be appropriate. However, conditions in relation to live or recorded music may not be enforceable in circumstances where the entertainment activity itself is not licensable (see chapter 16). Any conditions appropriate to promote the prevention of public nuisance should be tailored to the type, nature and characteristics of the specific premises and its licensable activities. Licensing authorities should avoid inappropriate or disproportionate measures that could deter events that are valuable to the community, such as live music. Noise limiters, for example, are expensive to purchase and install and are likely to be a considerable example, are expensive to purchase and install and are likely to be a considerable burden for smaller venues.

 

 

2.19 Where applications have given rise to representations, any appropriate conditions should normally focus on the most sensitive periods. For example, the most sensitive period for people being disturbed by unreasonably loud music is at night and into the early morning when residents in adjacent properties may be attempting to go to sleep or are sleeping. This is why there is still a need for a licence for performances of live music between 11 pm and 8 am. In certain circumstances, conditions relating to noise emanating from the premises may also be appropriate to address any disturbance anticipated as customers enter and leave.

 

2.21 Beyond the immediate area surrounding the premises, these are matters for the personal responsibility of individuals under the law. An individual who engages in antisocial behaviour is accountable in their own right. However, it would be perfectly reasonable for a licensing authority to impose a condition, following relevant representations, that requires the licence holder or club to place signs at the exits from the building encouraging patrons to be quiet until they leave the area, or that, if they wish to smoke, to do so at designated places on the premises instead of outside, and to respect the rights of people living nearby to a peaceful night

 

The Committee also gave regard to the Statement of Licensing Policy, in particular Paragraph 7.26:

 

7.26 Where premises are in the direct vicinity of local residential properties, and where its                       discretion is engaged, the authority will give particular consideration to measures proposed in the application in relation to prevent nuisance, such as:

 – Prevention of noise or vibration escaping from the premises due to volume of music or                  plant and machinery noise

– Prevention of noise disturbance from people entering and leaving the premises (eg. queue management, dispersal policy)

 – Prevention of disturbance by people outside the premises (eg.) smoking areas

– Litter from the premises (This issue is considered particularly relevant in respect of late-night takeaways and smoking-related litter outside licensed premises)

– Disturbance caused by deliveries associated with licensable activities, including waste collection.

 

The Committee was mindful of the nature of the premises neighbouring the Applicant’s premises however, they were satisfied the Applicant had engaged with the local residents and Buddhist Centre staff and there was clearly a dialogue between them. The Applicant had also engaged with the Responsible Authorities without issue or contention.

 

Similarly, the Applicant had taken significant steps at considerable expense to address any potential noise issue by sound-proofing the premises and installing a self-closing door.

 

Given the positive attitude of the Applicant, the nature of the premises, operating hours, the proposed products, clientele and size, along with the conditions agreed with the Responsible Authorities the Committee was satisfied that any issue concerning noise could be addressed by way of the agreed conditions and the additional ones listed above.

 

The Committee considered the implementation of a dispersal policy however, they were of the opinion this would be disproportionate to the size and anticipated number of customers at the venue.

 

In reaching its decision the Committee also considered the Council’s Statement of Licensing Policy, the Licensing Act 2003, the Regulations made there under and the Guidance issued by the Secretary of State under Section 182 of that Act and the licensing objectives.

 

Decision

 

To grant the licence subject to the conditions agreed with The Greater Manchester Police, Licensing Out Of Hours Team and Trading Standards and with the following additional conditions: -

 

Conditions

 

1.    Patrons permitted to temporarily leave and then re-enter the premises, e.g. to smoke, shall not be permitted to take drinks or glass containers with them.

 

2.    Notices shall be prominently displayed at any area used for smoking, requesting patrons to respect the needs of local residents and use the area quietly.

 

3.    Notices shall be prominently displayed at all exits requesting patrons to respect the needs of local residents and leave the area quietly.

 

4.    A direct telephone number for the manager of the premises shall be publicly available at all times the premises are open. This telephone number is to be made available to residents in the vicinity.