Agenda item

Sandford Parks Lido, Keynsham Road, Cheltenham

Licensing Officer, Phil Cooper, introduced the report as circulated with the agenda. An application had been made by Sandford Lido Limited for a premises licence in respect of Sandford Parks Lido, Keynsham Road, Cheltenham. The application was for a licence to authorise the sale of alcohol, the performance of plays, the exhibition of films, the performance of live and recorded music and the performance of dance.

A copy of the application was attached at Appendix A, together with site plans at Appendices B, C and D.

Following concerns raised by residents shortly after the application was originally submitted, the applicants revised their application to reduce its scope and identified a maximum number of occasions per year when the licence would be used to provide licensable activities.  These were detailed in paragraph 1.3 of the report, together with the times and days of the week when these activities would happen.

The two tables in paragraph 1.3 showed the applicants’ proposals firstly in relation to the normal operation of the premises throughout the year, and secondly in relation to a proposed annual six week winter event.

The Licensing Officer referred members to the operating schedule listing the steps the applicant intended to take to ensure that the activities at the premises would not cause crime or disorder, risk public safety, present a public nuisance or cause children to be harmed. These steps were listed in full in Appendix A. He informed the sub-committee that if a premises licence was granted it would be subject to binding conditions consistent with the steps shown in the operating schedule.

He advised members that no objections had been received from the nine responsible authorities. However 49 representations had been received mostly from residents living in the area.  Their objections were summarised in 4.1 of the report and were reproduced in full at Appendix E.

The representations related principally to such matters as the potential for noise nuisance from events at the premises as well as the potential for the sale of alcohol at the premises to risk public safety, cause harm to children and lead to crime and disorder both at the premises and in its vicinity.

The Officer advised that in making their decision the sub-committee must take into account all of the relevant representations and the steps the applicant had proposed to take in relation to promoting the licensing objectives.

Having given due consideration to all the relevant issues, the sub-committee may grant the licence as applied for, in which case it will be subject to mandatory conditions as well as conditions consistent with the steps proposed by the applicants. Alternatively if the sub-committee was satisfied that to grant the licence as applied for would compromise one or more of the licensing objectives, they may refuse the application in full, or they may grant the licence subject to such modifications or conditions as are appropriate to promote the four licensing objectives. 

In response to questions from a member, the Officer confirmed that since the application had been submitted, there had been a change in law, in that the performance of plays and dance may now be provided without the need for a license, so long as the audience was no more than 500 and the events ended by 11pm and if a premises already had a licence to sell alcohol then live and recorded music could be provided between 8pm and 11 pm for an audience of up to 500 without the need to have a licence for that entertainment.  The Officer also clarified that at any stage, following the grant of a premises licence, any interested party may apply to the Licensing Authority to review a premises licence because of problems arising at the premises that are connected with any of the four licensing objectives.

The Chair asked that the part of the application in relation to the winter event be discussed first and invited a representative of the applicants to address the committee.  There were four representatives present, namely Julie Sargent, Sandford Park Lido Business Executive, Iain Barton Sandford Parks Lido Events Manager, Susannah Moffat the DPS and Stu Phillips the Winterland Organiser.  Mr Stu Phillips addressed the committee.

Mr Phillips informed members that he wanted to produce a high quality, themed Christmas event that would attract people from a 30-40 mile radius of Cheltenham.   It would be properly monitored and well run and would combine education, conservation and fun.  He planned to attract schools to visit in the day time, working with The Wilson and conservationists from London to give talks.  The stalls would have an Edwardian / Victorian theme and the Santa’s Grotto would be of a high standard.  He informed members that they had already decided to reduce the length of time the event would run in the first year from 6 to 4 weeks in view of comments from the neighbours.  He assured members that there would be good security and monitoring in place and that this might even be a deterrent to any anti-social behaviour in the park.

Mr Phillips said he was aware that a couple of similar projects in the country had failed, but informed members that he had been organising such events for 30 years, that this would be very different and that he wanted to make Cheltenham known for its Christmas event.

A number of questions from the members were put to the applicant, which were answered as follows:

·         The event had been reduced to 4 weeks as a result of neighbour comments, but also because a 6 week event needed planning permission.  So it would be trialled for 4 weeks this year and if it proved its worth, extended to six weeks next year.

·         The applicant confirmed the winter event would run from 5 December 2015 to 3 January 2016.

·         A sustainability project had been carried out on the capacity of the car park, which showed that the summer season would still be busier than this winter event and that the car park was sufficient to carry the expected number of vehicles which would attend.

·         One member was concerned about the sale of alcohol at an event primarily for children.  The applicant stressed that this would be very  strictly monitored.  If anyone was drunk they would not be allowed in and would be escorted away.  Whilst in the premises, situations would be closely monitored by security.  The applicant said he had a clean licence and wanted the added attraction of being able to offer mulled wine, beer, wines etc, to adults who would bring their children and who could have a drink whilst the children were entertained.  He didn’t want to restrict it to just mulled wine as he would like to invite various alcohol suppliers, eg CAMRA.   He confirmed that they would operate the Challenge 21 scheme, and felt the kind of alcohol on sale was not associated with thugs.

·         The applicant confirmed that plastic glasses would be used and that the consumption of alcohol would be in a contained area, namely the marquee.

·         He confirmed that he would join Cheltenham’s Night Safe scheme and be linked in to the town centre and be receptive to warnings of disorder from / to the Police.

·         He confirmed that CCTV was already installed, that staff would all have the relevant DBS checks for working alongside minors and that trained First Aiders would be on site.

·         In reply to a reservation on the use of live animals, the applicant informed that he was working with conservationists and that Birdland were advising on the penguins.

·         From the plan submitted of the winter event at Appendix C, the stalls appeared to be placed on the raised areas a couple of feet high which raised the issue of public safety.  The applicant replied that the height was just over a foot and that a balustrade around the stalls would be created with steps and a handrail.

·         A similar observation was made in relation to public safety and the pool and the applicant advised that a 1.8m high barrier with perspex for viewing would be erected around the pool, some 2 feet away from the edge of the pool.  He confirmed that there would be no swimming during the winter event or indeed at any time when alcohol was on sale.

·         The applicant reassured members that there were no plans to have fireworks or strobe lighting, which could cause annoyance for neighbours.

·         With regard to questions about noise control, the applicant advised that although there would be background music on the ice rink the noise level would be kept below the maximum limit of 96 decibels.  He said it was directional sound that went from side to side and that there would be a canopy above the ice rink that would catch the rising sound.  The only gap would be about one and a half metres between the barrier around the rink and the top of the canopy.  He confirmed that the rink would be operational from 10am with the last skate at 9pm (8pm on Sundays). 

In summing up, the Sandford Lido Business Executive, Julie Sargent, said that this was a great opportunity for the Lido to be used during the winter and for people to be able to engage in an unique experience in an unique setting.

The Chair then referred back to the summer side of the application. In response to a question from a member, the Licensing Officer reported that using TENs, the Lido had run several events over the course of 5 years, with six such events in 2014, and that licensing had not received any complaints.   Environmental Health, noise control, had received a complaint last year against just one event in 5 years, which was a staff party and this had been dealt with verbally.

A member asked what type of plays and music would be staged and whether these would include heavy rock and musicals and again expressed the concern about the sale of alcohol in the vicinity of a swimming pool.

The Sandford Lido Business Executive replied saying that in the last year they have held 5 live music events, 4 of which were jazz evenings on a Sunday which finished at 9pm and one was a Blues Brothers Tribute band.  She continued that they would like to be able to serve alcohol during the interval at these and other events and that alcohol would be served in the cafeteria and contained to that end of the Lido.  She reiterated that alcohol would not be served during public swimming sessions, only in the evenings once swimming had finished. She also added that all evening events had two life guards on duty and although there was no barrier around the pool, the covers were put on and lifeguards were present.

Councillor Paul Baker attended the meeting and spoke as councillor and local resident.  He informed the committee that he lived in Keynsham Road and represented Charlton Park ward.  Councillor Baker congratulated the applicants.  He was delighted that they had listened to the views of residents and had reduced the number of hours that alcohol would be sold and the number of events.  He felt reassured that so long as the management were responsive to and aware of residents’ views and that the licence could be reviewed at any time, that he would be happy to support this application.  He felt that the winter event would be a great bonus for the town and was pleased that in the first year it would be limited to 4 weeks to see how it went, especially with regard to noise control.

Mr Baker felt that most of the objections had been to the original application, but now that it had been modified with some restrictions, it reflected a good balance and residents should be happy that the Lido had been willing to listen and modify.

Members adjourned from the Council Chamber at 11.03 to discuss their decision.

Members returned to the Council Chamber at 11.13.

The Chair stated that the committee had been impressed with the applicants’ command of the situation and that this was appreciated and he read out their decision.

In respect of the application by Sandford Lido Limited in relation to Sandford Parks Lido, Keynsham Road, Cheltenham, the sub-committee has had regard to the statutory guidance issued by the Secretary of State, the Council’s adopted policy statement, the representations made and the evidence it has heard. In particular the sub-committee has sought to promote the four licensing objectives when determining the application, those being the prevention of crime and disorder, public safety, prevention of public nuisance and the protection of children from harm.

The decision of the sub-committee was as follows: -

To grant the licence as applied for, subject to the following conditions being added to the licence in relation to the winter event:

1. Commitment to join night safe
2. Staff to ensure that people consuming alcohol in the marquee area will not take the alcohol outside of the marquee area.

The sub-committee had placed these conditions on the licence for the purpose of promoting the licensing objectives.

In all other respects the sub-committee had found thatthe licensing objectives were satisfied and that the conditions imposed on the licence would ensure the licence met these objectives.

The interested parties were reminded that should the applicant fail to meet the licensing objectives that they could report matters to the Licensing Authority and the applicant and that the licence could be the subject of a review.

The chair wished the applicants every success with the winter event and closed the meeting.