26 | The Committee considered an application for a new premises licence to hold a music festival at the above site on 26 and 27 July 2013. Similar events had been held over the past five years.
Representations had been received from local residents, Surrey Police and the responsible authority for environmental health, as set out in the annexes to the report.
The report also included a full operating schedule for the event, submitted by the applicant, based upon the conditions attached to the licence for 2012 and subsequent discussions after the event, covering:
Conditions relating to public health and safety Noise conditions Event security plan Traffic management plan Milestone conditions Event management team
The licensing officer presented the application to the Sub Committee, following which the parties were invited to make their submissions.
Submissions were made by the following parties:
Mr Nichols - applicant Mr Brown, Mr Gilbert, Mr Rayfield, Mr Guise and Mrs Cook - making representations against the application Mr Hume - representing Surrey Police Mr Long - representing the responsible environmental health authority
Councillor Mrs Renton, local ward councillor, attended the hearing and commented upon the application, however, the Chairman confirmed that the Sub-Committee would only consider oral submissions made by those who previously made written representations.
During the course of the hearing the following points were noted:
On behalf of the applicant:
Careful attention had been given to all the representations and the applicant noted that the main concerns were noise and trespass. The applicant initiated a meeting with the objectors to discuss what further measures might be appropriate to address their issues. In response to the discussion the applicant was proposing the following additional security measures: o Security agreed to cover the entrance to the driveway to Staplehurst Farm throughout the duration of the festival o Five dog units to patrol the three main footpaths, the drive to Mr Guise's property, and the boundary line alongside Mrs Cook's fence. o Each dog unit would have a marked 4x4 vehicle, which would be prominently parked with warning signs that security dogs were being used. o Two distinct security teams would be employed in 2013, to manage internal and external security. The applicant was happy for this to be conditioned. o It was recognised that the rapid response team had not been successful last year. A new security firm would be used in 2013 who would visit all neighbouring properties, and leave their details, so that residents could contact them immediately in case of any problems. Most of the people trespassing or causing a nuisance were well-known locally, and nothing to do with the genuine festival-goers. The footpaths were public land, and whilst the applicant was taking all the steps he could to prevent nuisance, his powers outside of the festival site were limited. With respect to noise, the applicant commented that there had been very few complaints the previous year, with none from the two properties closest to the venue. The festival had a proven track record and was well-managed or there would have been more complaints. This year, in response to the representations, the festival would run for only two days, rather than three as last year. The applicant was also willing to amend the application so that live music (section D), recorded music (section E but with the exception of the silent disco), and provision of facilities for dance (section J but with the exception of the silent disco) would finish at 00:00 midnight rather than at 02:00 each night. To manage this, the two stages would be run intermittently, with no loud rock music after 23:00. In response to a question, the applicant indicated that he was not minded to voluntarily offer a stopping time of 23:00, as it was his view that 00:00 was reasonable, in view of the late hours operated elsewhere for local bars and clubs. A half-hourly shuttle bus service was scheduled for 2013, between Redhill Station and Robins Cooke Farm, to reduce the number of cars driving to the event. The applicant was making every effort to accommodate the residents' objections, at considerable expense to himself. In response to a question, the applicant confirmed that he would be happy to provide additional road signage, although this would need to be subject to agreement with the Highways Authority and Surrey Police who already provided some signage. During the course of the hearing, the applicant indicated on the map the location of the access gates and indicated how traffic would be managed. Tickets for the event and for parking were only available online or from two local outlets. Tickets were not sold on the gates. There was always be a balance to be achieved, between the enjoyment of festival-goers, and potential disturbance to residents. The applicant believed that the measures proposed would be effective in achieving this. The festival would only be held for two days and it only occurred once a year.
On behalf of Surrey Police:
Mr Hume confirmed that the conditions set out in the police representations were the same as for the previous year, and that they had been agreed with the applicant.
The following incidents had been recorded by police at the 2012 event:
Four cases of theft involving mobile phones One assault involving travellers who had been ejected from the site One fight on the campsite, involving tent-owners
A small quantity of recreational drugs was handed over to the police by security guards who had confiscated it at the entry search check, but not sufficient to be of a serious concern.
On behalf of the responsible authority for environmental health:
Mr Long reported that the responsible authority was making representations because of the potential for noise nuisance, particularly after midnight.
Amendments were proposed to the noise conditions (3, 4 and 8) set out in the applicant's operating schedule and circulated at the meeting.
The intention was to reduce the potential for noise nuisance from electric amplified music, apart from performer vocals and the silent disco.
Condition 8 referred to the need to continue monitoring noise throughout the event. The applicant confirmed that this had always been his intention and that the proposed noise conditions set out in his application should have been amended to reflect this.
On behalf of the objectors:
The festival had evolved from a family-friendly event to one mainly directed at young people. The emanating noise, particularly from the bass sound, had a negative impact on the quality of life for residents. If the licence was to be granted, the music should be limited to 23:00, with sale of alcohol until 01:00, and the 2.4 metre Herras fencing should be erected along all the boundary with Mrs Cook's field. The proposed decibel control levels were too high, and reference was made to the WHO report which stated that noise above 40 decibel at night could be harmful to health. Other festivals only had a licence until 00:00 and there was no reason why Redfest should be different. The damage and mess from last year's festival was worse than in previous years. Fences had been damaged by people trying to get onto the site without paying, litter and unsavoury refuse was strewn on the residents' land which they then had to clear despite assurances from the applicant that he would operate litter patrols. Footpaths were not properly monitored and the security guards were ineffective. Promises made by the applicant last year were not fulfilled. The site was unsuitable for the event. There were too many footpaths and it was vulnerable to noise and intrusion. If the licence is granted there should be secure fencing throughout and dog patrols on duty all the time. The only time the residents had problems with travellers or trespass was during the Redfest festival and at no other times in the year. There should be clear guidelines to prevent any noise after 23:00, as in the past, before the applicant started using Temporary Event Notices (TENs) to circumvent the licence requirements. No use of TENs should be allowed. In response to a question, the licensing officer clarified that the legislation had now changed and any responsible authority could make representations against a TENS application, in the same way as any other licensing application. The applicant confirmed that, in any event, t was not his intention to apply for TENs at the 2013 festival. Local residents had called the contact line during the 2012 festival asking for the noise to be reduced, and were informed that the organisers had said that the level set could continue beyond 23:00. The security guard assigned to control the end of one resident's drive was only on duty there until 21:00 and there were problems with trespassers after he had left. The noise limiters had proved unsuccessful, there was no guarantee that the silent disco would be quiet, as people were likely to sing along to the music. Road access to the site for festival-goers and delivery vehicles was from a narrow lane with increased risk of accidents. Additional signage should be provided to warn people of traffic turning in and pulling out. A shuttle bus service had been promised before but it had failed to materialise. The bass noise from the music at night was particularly unbearable, causing close residents' walls and doors to shake and vibrate, and being audible and a source of nuisance to many people further afield. There should be no noise after 23:00. The positioning of the noise monitors needed careful consideration to be sure that they reflected the level of noise accurately.
(The Sub-Committee adjourned to deliberate at 3.22 pm and resumed at 4.41 pm to give its decision.)
|