Agenda item

The Sub-Committee were required to consider a licence application for the following premises:

Redz Bar

25 High Street

Hemel Hempstead

Hertfordshire

HP1 3AA

The Chairman introduced herself, the members on the Sub-Committee and the officers present.

The Chairman asked the members of the Sub-Committee to confirm that they had read the agenda. Councillors Mrs Bassadone and Mrs Sutton confirmed they had read the documents at hand.

The Chairman asked the Members of the Sub-Committee if they had visited the premises. Councillor Mrs Bassadone said she was familiar with the premises.

The Chairman asked R Hill if he had anything to add to the report.

R Hill advised that the premises had been licenced previously but had lapsed and this application would be treated as a fresh matter. He drew members’ attention to the 4 objections which were included within the agenda and advised that Environmental Health have withdrawn their representations as additional conditions have been agreed with the applicant and added to the application. He said the other 3 objections were from residents.

The Chairman invited the applicant, Mr Russell, to make representations to the committee.

Mr Russell gave details of his previous employment within the Police service and felt that because of this he was dedicated to the safety of the public. He explained that Redz has been known as various different names and was a licensed premises 25 years ago, after which many residents moved into the Old Town knowing that this venue existed. He said the Old Town had recently undergone a face lift which had attracted new visitors and he would like those people to also visit Redz. He said there was only one entry and exit and all the premises on the ground floor were commercial, not residential. He explained that he has spent a lot of money on Redz to make it attractive, as did the previous owner, Mr Blennerhassett, who was present to support the applicant.

Mr Russell explained that there was a hairdressers above Redz and the owner was aware of the premises and had no objections. He explained that due to no floor covering in the hairdressers, it would cause more noise to Redz than the other way round and he had discussed laying floor boards with the owner.

Mr Russell advised they would be using a jukebox during opening hours and the sound system was hand built by an acoustic engineer. The venue has a reduced amount of speakers, a noise limiter and the amplifiers are locked away in a cupboard. He explained that the operating hours he has applied for were similar to other venues in the Old Town and there was a maximum capacity of 98 which includes his staff members and this was considerably lower than other local premises. He hoped he had addressed most of the issues and welcomed any questions from the committee.

Councillor Mrs Bassadone noted that there were four pubs in the Old Town and queried what time they closed. R Hill advised that there were various closing times but it ranged from 00:30 to 03:30.

Councillor Mrs Bassadone asked if the Old Town Hall cellar was still in use and what time it closed. R Hill advised that it was still in use and closed at midnight.

Councillor Mrs Bassadone asked if the premises had disabled access. R Hill said that disabled accessibility would fall under the Equalities Act rather than the responsibility of this committee.

Miss Scott said she was present to represent Miss Wardell as she wasn’t able to attend the meeting. She circulated a letter to the committee from Miss Wardell explaining her reasons for her objections.

Councillor Mrs Bassadone asked if Miss Wardell had enquired about double glazing. Miss Scott was unsure. Mr Russell said it was possible to have double glazing with sash windows but it would be more expensive than standard windows. 

Questions:

Councillor Mrs Sutton asked how the applicant planned to control drunk individuals from causing a disturbance. Mr Russell advised that he had very experienced door staff and he felt he was a firm but fair person and he would manage the problem as well as he possibly could. He added that the door staff wouldn’t allow individuals out on to the High Street with alcohol.

Councillor Mrs Sutton asked what ladies night would be and if there was an age limit. Mr Russell advised there would be male dancers on ladies night and that there was no age limit.

Councillor Mrs Bassadone queried what late night refreshments would be available and if the premise had a kitchen. Mr Russell explained that there would be no food preparation at the premises, only crisps, nuts and snacks would be available.

R Hill asked if tea and coffee would be served there as under law this is considered as late night refreshments. Mr Russell confirmed that tea and coffee would be available.

Councillor R Sutton asked the applicant if he would be at the premises all the time. Mr Russell confirmed he lived locally and this was his sole job so he would be there the majority of the time.

The meeting was adjourned at 11.06 am.

The meeting reconvened at 11.26 am.

Resolved:

The Licensing of Alcohol and Gambling Sub-Committee referred to the Council’s statement of licensing policy and had regard, as they must, to this alongside the 4 licensing objectives.

They reached their decision based on the evidence that had been put before them in relation to the premises, and not on any policy ground.

The application was for a new premises licence at 25 High Street, Hemel Hempstead, Hertfordshire, HP1 3AA. Although those premises held a licence previously, under a different company, this was deemed a fresh application. 

The application requested a licence authorising licensable activities as set out at Appendix A.

They received objections from the Environmental Health Department, however, these objections have been withdrawn and the additional conditions read out by Mr Hill earlier were now to be attached alongside those outlined in Annex 1 and Annex 2. They have taken them into consideration in their deliberations.

They have also seen representations from the residents objecting to the application. These 3 residents live beside and above the premises. They cite incidents of nuisance suffered previously when the premises were owned and run by another company. As this was a fresh application, problems suffered because of mismanagements by a previous licensee are only examples of what may happen. They are not conclusive evidence that these will occur or occur to the same extent under any new licence. In any event they felt that the additional conditions suggested by the Environmental Health Department are sufficient to address the residents’ concerns.

They also noted that there were concerns about the late closing time. However, the proposed closing times mean that the applicant’s clients will not be leaving at the same time as those coming from nearby public houses.

Therefore, the Committee, by a majority of 2 to 1, is minded to grant the licence with the additional conditions. Should nuisance occur then the licence is liable to being called in and reviewed with a view to revoking or limiting the activities and opening times.

The meeting finished at 11.30 am.