Agenda and minutes

There were none.

Members had attended a site visit at the premises on the day of the meeting in the presence of the Licensing Officer.

Report of the Case Officer.

The Senior Licensing Officer presented the report of the Licensing Team Leader as published.

In reply to members questions, the Officer confirmed that:

·         This application did not relate to the granting of permission for any objects on the highway.

·         Cheltenham Borough Council had reviewed its policy on the distribution of flyers and there was also a condition on the application restricting distribution of leaflets.

·         He was unaware of any complaints to the council about this venue during the past 5 years, just one complaint in 2017 about lone working of a member of staff.

·         A sexual assault at a venue in Birmingham, referred to in the objections, had no connection to the applicant for this licence, nor any relevance to the application.

In reply to a question from Objector, Eileen Bailey, as to whether a SEV licence could be revoked within  the year once granted, the Officer explained that a venue needed a premises licence in the first instance and that in serious cases the Police had the power to ask a Council to review a premises licence and revoke it.

Another Objector, Maggie Stewart from GRASAC, asked for clarification as to whether the Chief of Police was informed or whether he did not reply in the time frame.  The Officer confirmed that the Police were sent an email informing them that this application had been received.

Objector, Patricia Grieve, queried that this application was requesting a licence from 6pm, which deviated from Council policy.  The Officer confirmed that there was National and local guidance on granting licences and that although the Council’s default position was to grant licences from 8pm to 4am, each application was considered individually and policy could be departed from if the committee so agreed.

The Chair invited the four Objectors to address the committee.

Objector, Patricia Grieve made the following points:

·         There should be equity of access across the town and many women of all ages avoided the town centre when races were on.

·         From reading the Equality Act, all people should feel that they can walk wherever within the vicinity of the premises and not being afforded this opportunity was concerning. 

In reply to a Member question about when feeling uncomfortable in the town and whether it was race week in general or how specifically this was related to this venue, the Objector continued that she could not claim it was this particular venue, but that during race week the behaviour of people during the daytime on the bus near the train station was inappropriate and some of the conversations, although not specifically related to sexual entertainment, had a disregard to women and made people uncomfortable.

Objector, Eileen Bailey made the following points:

·         In the evening during race week it did not feel safe at the bus stops by the Two Pigs.

·         There was a belief that although the club was not supposed to be advertised it was in the Regent Arcade.

·         When people left a sexual entertainment venue that had been open from  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3.

There were none.

There were none.