A Cambridge City Council website

Cambridge City Council

Council and democracy

Home > Council and Democracy > Agenda item

Agenda item

Cambridge Museum of Technology

Minutes:

The Senior Technical Officer presented the report and outlined the application to consider a variation of the premises licence to supply alcohol on the premises from 11:00 to 22:00 on Monday – Thursday, from 11:00 – 23:00 on Friday and Saturday and 12:00 – 22:00 on Sunday. The premises currently had a licence that permits the supply of alcohol from 17:00 to 22:00 on Monday – Thursday, from 11:00-23:00 on Friday and Saturday and from 11:00 – 22:00 on Sunday which was granted in 2017.

 

Member Questions

 

The Senior Technical Officer made the following statements in response to Members’ questions:

  i.  There had been no noise complaints from previous events so officers assumed residents had no concerns.

  ii.  Licensed premises were routinely inspected to ensure they complied with conditions.

  iii.  The Museum of Technology had not yet been inspected, so Officers would check licence conditions had been met when they visited. Officers would assume conditions were complied with (before inspection) unless they received evidence to the contrary.

  iv.  Premises were inspected based on a program of risk. The Museum of Technology was seen as low risk.

  v.  Noted Member’s reference to noise issues in Appendix C of the Officer’s report, but re-iterated there had been no noise complaints for previous events. Retrospective complaints had been received in response to the current application.

 

Other Persons

 

The Committee received a representation in objection to the application from a local resident.

 

The representation covered the following issues:

  i.  Noise concerns.

a.  The museum was unique as it had a licence for amplified music although located next to a residential street. Expressed concern that extending the licence would extend amplified sound usage.

b.  The current licence holder was more considerate than the previous one so events were less intrusive.

c.  Expressed concern there appeared to be no limit on the amount of noise that could be produced on site.

  ii.  Communication with the Museum.

a.  There was no number to call in case of problems with museum events.

b.  People had difficulty contacting the local authority, so may have been deterred from logging noise concern calls with the council.

c.  Expressed concern that Temporary Event Notices (TENs) may allow third parties to have their own events that would not affect the museum (as the main licence holder) if there were any repercussions. IE the museum would not be penalised.

 

Member Questions

 

In response to Members’ questions the member of the public was unable to confirm how many neighbours had contacted environmental health services about museum noise issues.

 

The Chair asked the resident to ask neighbours to register any noise concerns with environmental health services or their ward councillors so they could be logged. The Chair said the application today was to consider the museum licence extension. General issues should be logged with environmental health services.

 

Environmental Health & Licensing Support Officer

 

The Environmental Health & Licensing Support Officer made the following points:

  i.  No complaints had been received to date.

  ii.  Issues in representations appeared to be linked to third party operator events.

a.  The party concerned was no longer operating.

b.  Historic complaints had not been logged with Environmental Health, so could not be followed up.

  iii.  Extra conditions had been recommended in the report to mitigate issues from future third party events.

  iv.  Third parties could not be stopped from applying for TENs, but these were considered on an individual basis.

  v.  The museum had been in contact with the resident association and their reactions had been positive.

  vi.  The local authority was limited in actions it could take. Future occurance of historic issues had been mitigated through conditions in the Officer’s report. Any reported issues could be followed up in future.

 

The Environmental Health & Licensing Support Officer read out a statement on behalf of Katy Bailey (Applicant’s Representative) that had been sent to local residents setting out plans for the site.

  i.  The application was for a change in hours.

  ii.  New events would be an extension of museum activities, there would be fewer third party events.

  iii.  Noise from the new music system could be capped, and the projection direction restricted.

  iv.  Staff would monitor how contractors parked (to address concerns from historic issues).

  v.  The Museum would continue to liaise with the Riverside Resident Association.

 

Summing Up

 

The Senior Technical Officer made the following points:

  i.  The Museum were responsible for the conduct of third party TENs operators.

  ii.  Issues would be monitored for background information about future events.

  iii.  A licence review would occur in response to officer concerns or a complaint from a member of the public.

  iv.  No licence permission was required for live/recorded music between 08.00 and 23.00. Conditions could only control music played outside these times.

  v.  Reiterated members of the public should log noise issues with Environmental Health Officers.

 

The member of the public said the statement from Museum Directors to residents came as a result of residents contacting the museum, not the other way round.

 

Members withdrew at 11:15 am and returned at 12:20 pm. Whilst retired, and having made their decision, Members received legal advice on the wording of the decision.

 

Decision

 

The Sub Committee resolved to grant the Premises Licence Variation, including conditions listed in Appendix E of the Officer’s report.

 

Reasons for reaching the decision were as follows:

·  The variation meets the four licensing objectives.

Supporting documents: