Issue - meetings

Report of the Cabinet Member Development and Safety

The Cabinet Member Development and Safety, Councillor McKinlay, introduced the report which had been circulated with the agenda.  The report explained that Sexual Entertainment Venues (SEVs) are regulated under Schedule 3 of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1982 as amended by Section 27 of the Policing and Crime Act 2009. The amended provisions were adopted by Council on 11 October 2010 and the current policy statement was adopted by the Licensing Committee on 4 February 2011. On 16 September 2014, Cabinet had considered the consultation feedback and approved amendments to the current policy as outlined in section 7 of this report. Cabinet had taken the view that it was reasonable to set a nil limit for SEVs in predominately residential areas but to retain the existing policy in the town centre. He reminded Members that the authority was obliged to make a differentiation between locations which would not be the case if it applied a nil limit for SEVs across the whole borough. He highlighted that Cabinet had defined the town centre as the town centre shopping area, shaded blue in the map in appendix 3.

The Cabinet recommendations were now being forwarded to Council for their approval. He advised that if Council should not approve the recommendations today then technically they should go back to Cabinet for a final decision. However he indicated that Cabinet would accept Council’s decision today on the policy as the final one to be adopted by the authority.

In making these recommendations he did not consider the council was opening the floodgates and the Licensing Committee would still make an informed decision on each individual application.  His personal view was that it was much better to legalise and regulate these types of establishments rather than saying no outright and running the risk of them going underground or finding alternative ways to operate their businesses. It could also proliferate the use of Temporary Event Notices (TENS) during periods such as race week.

The Mayor invited Members to ask questions on the report and the following responses were given by the Cabinet Member assisted by the Business Support and Licensing Team Leader, Louis Krog

• If the amended policy was passed by Council, the SEV situated in Bath Road would fall outside the defined town centre area and therefore what would happen when its licence came up for renewal?
  • This would be a material consideration for the Licensing Committee when considering any renewal application and the applicant would have to give evidence as to why an exception should be made in their case to renew their licence.
• Would it be more sensible to redraw the map to include the other side of Bath Road (where the current SEV was situated) in the town centre area?
  • This could be done but there would be little point in doing this as an existing establishment would always have an argument that it is an existing business whatever area it fell into.
• Could the Cabinet Member clarify the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8

Report of the Cabinet Member Development and Safety

RESOLVED THAT

1.    the consultation feedback be noted

2.    the amendments to the policy as outlined in the draft policy attached at appendix 4 (and to include the redefinition of the central area as the central shopping area as shown in the map at appendix 4) be approved; and

3.    Council be recommended to adopt the amended policy

The Cabinet Member Development and Safety introduced the report which provided feedback on public consultation which had taken place on whether it was appropriate for the Council to limit the number of Sexual Entertainment Venues (SEVs) it should licence in the borough. This consultation was in response to concerns raised at the granting of an SEV licence in the town centre which attracted significant local opposition. He reported that the outcome of the response was a preferred zero limit of SEVs in the defined areas which were consulted upon. The Cabinet Member Development and Safety also reminded members that a petition had been debated at Council in July.

He explained that the recommendation for Council to now consider within the context of the amended policy would be that each application be considered on a case by case basis in the central shopping area. Accordingly the appropriate number of SEVs for outside of the central area was nil. In his view this would reduce to a minimum the impact on residential areas. Licensing Committee had been consulted on the appropriate boundary. The Cabinet Member highlighted that any applicant for an SEVin the central shopping area would be reminded of the restrictions outlined in the policy in terms of properties with sensitive uses or in sensitive locations.

A member commented on discussions held at the recent Licensing Committee in terms of failing to acknowledge the risk in licensing SEVs and in so doing damaging the reputation of an area. Other members believed that the recommended approach was sensible.

RESOLVED THAT

1.    the consultation feedback be noted

2.    the amendments to the policy as outlined in the draft policy attached at appendix 4 (and to include the redefinition of the central area as the central shopping area as shown in the map at appendix 4) be approved; and

3.    Council be recommended to adopt the amended policy