[Skip to content]


A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z

.

20 01 2004

A MEETING OF THE REGULATORY BOARD
 
WAS HELD ON 20 JANUARY 2004
 
The Mayor (Councillor Mrs Binfield) (ex-officio) (P), Chairman of the Policy and Organisation Board (Councillor Cully) (ex-officio), Councillor Allen (P), Mrs Angus (P), Carr (P), Clinton (P), Mrs Elshaw (P), Farr (P), Gill (P), Searle (P), Taylor (P) and Train (P).
 
 
169.
APOLOGY
 
 
An apology for inability to attend the meeting was submitted on behalf of Councillor Cully.
 
 
 
170.
MINUTES
 
 
It was reported that Councillor Mrs Cully who addressed the Board on item 145, did so as Ward Councillor for the residents of the neighbouring Chester Court and not as Ward Councillor for the proposed development. Members requested that this should be reflected in the Minutes.
 
 
 
RESOLVED: That the Minutes of the Regulatory Board held on 16 December 2003 be approved and signed by the Chairman as a true and correct record subject to the above amendment.
 
 
 
171.
DEPUTATIONS
 
 
It was reported that deputations had been received on planning applications K.13364/4, K.16417/1, K.1327/18-19 and K. 16461.
 
 
 
PART II
 
 
 
172.
REPORTS OF THE REGULATORY SERVICES MANAGER
 
 
The Regulatory Services Manager submitted a report on applications received for planning consent setting out the recommendation in each case (a copy of which is attached in the Minute Book as Appendix "A").
 
 
 
RESOLVED: That decisions be taken on each application for planning consent as detailed below.
 
 
 
173.
K.13364/4 – CHANGE OF USE FROM DWELLING (CLASS C3) TO A MIXED USE AS DWELLING AND DAY CENTRE FOR 10 PEOPLE
7 MILVIL ROAD, LEE-ON-THE-SOLENT
 
 
Members were informed that several letters had been received. One letter of objection had been received concerning the positioning of the site notice, one letter of support had been received from the applicant and one letter of support had been received from Hampshire County Council to the applicant.
 
 
 
Members were also informed that Condition 3 of the report should read:
 
The Day Centre use hereby permitted shall not be operated other than between the hours of 10.00am and 4.00pm.
 
Members were also informed that the third paragraph of the report should read as follows:
 
The applicant is the owner of Chesterholm Lodge a residential care home located approximately 120 metres to the east of the application site at 10 Britten Road. She lives at the application site with her daughter and wishes to operate a Day Centre for up to 10 people from 10.00am to 4.00pm daily.
 
 
 
In accordance with Standing Orders, Councillor Carter was permitted to address the Board as Ward Councillor. Councillor Carter made the following points:
 
 
 
·        He was representing the applicant, Mrs Moss;
·        That he felt many local residents were misguided in objecting to this proposal;
·        Lee-on-the-Solent had twice the national average of over 75 year old residents and that there was a critical need for Day Centres;
·        There would be no impact on neighbours as there would be no alterations to the property structurally, and the minibus that would be used ferry the customers would be parked on the property;
·        7 Milvil Road was easily accessible, it would have no impact on local residents and there were no grounds for refusal.
 
 
 
RESOLVED: That planning application K.13364/4 – 7 Milvil Road, Lee-on-the-Solent be approved subject to the conditions set out in the report of the Regulatory Services Manager, for the following reason:
 
  i.            That having regard to the provisions of Section 54A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and all other material considerations, it is considered that the proposal which does not involve any physical change to the property will not be harmful to the character of the area, or the amenities of neighbouring residents due to the distance of the facility from adjacent properties, the proposed hours of operation and the nature of the use. The parking provision meets the current standards. As such the proposal complies with Policies BE1, H12 and T6 of the Gosport Borough Local Plan and Policies R/DP1, R/H6, R/CF5 and R/T11 of the Gosport Borough Local Plan Review.
 
 
 
174.
K.8887/1 – ERECTION OF TWO STOREY REAR EXTENSION AND SINGLE STOREY SIDE EXTENSION TO FORM GARAGE
40 ASHBURTON ROAD, GOSPORT
 
 
Members raised concern about the level of impact on the neighbouring property no. 38 Ashburton Road.
 
It was proposed and seconded that a site visit should take place to assess the impact of the proposed development.
 
 
 
RESOLVED: That planning application K.8887/1 – 40 Ashburton Road, Gosport be deferred for a site visit to enable Members to gather more information to enable them to make a decision.
 
 
 
 
175.
K.16417/1 – ERECTION OF BLOCK OF 14 FLATS, FIRST FLOOR RAISED GARDEN AREA, CAR PARKING AND AMENDED ACCESS TO CLASSIFIED ROAD (as amended by letters dated 22.12.03 and 6.1.04 and plans received 23.12.03)
4/6 BROCKHURST ROAD, GOSPORT
 
Members were informed that the Head of Environmental Health (Commercial) had confirmed that the scheme for noise mitigation was satisfactory subject to the provision of mechanical ventilation.
 
 
Councillor Gill referred to a recent newspaper article in which this proposed site had been discussed. He wished it to be reported that the comments and questions he held on the site had been gathered before the article had been published.
 
 
 
Members discussed the impact the development would have on safety issues relating to exiting the site and free flowing traffic. Members were informed that while visibility was restricted and below the standards outlined by Hampshire County Council, this was not a reason in itself for refusal. Members were also made aware that the petrol station and garage, which had previously existed on the site, generated more traffic movements than this proposal.
 
 
 
RESOLVED: That planning application K.16417/1 – 4/6 Brockhurst Road, Gosport be approved subject to the developer entering into a planning obligation under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, as approved by the Council, relating to the payment of a commuted sum towards the provision and/or improvement of outdoor playing space, and subject to the conditions set out in the report of the Regulatory Services Manager, for the following reason:
 
  i.            That having regard to the provisions of Section 54A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and all other material considerations, the proposal would not be significantly harmful to the character or visual amenities of the area, the amenities of existing or prospective occupiers, or traffic/parking conditions in the locality. As such, the development complies with Policies BE1, BE2, H5, T6 and RL10 of the Gosport Borough Local Plan and Policies R/DP1, R/OS7, R/T11 and R/ENV5 of the Gosport Borough Local Plan Review.
 
 
 
176.
K.16507 – CONVERSION OF SINGLE DWELLING TO PROVIDE 4no. SELF CONTAINED FLATS (as amplified by letter dated 30.12.03 and amended plans received 05.01.04)
5 LINDEN GROVE, GOSPORT
 
 
Members were informed that 1 further letter of objection had been received. The issues it raised were covered in the report.
 
 
 
RESOLVED: That planning application K.16507 – 5 Linden Grove, Gosport be approved subject to the developer entering into a planning obligation under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, as approved by the Council, relating to the payment of a commuted sum towards the provision and/or improvement of outdoor playing space, and subject to the conditions set out in the report of the Regulatory Services Manager, for the following reason:
 
 
 
  i.            That having regard to Section 54A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and all other material considerations, the development of self contained flats in this existing residential area is appropriate and will not change the character of the area. The conversion works are appropriate and will not be harmful to the amenities of existing and prospective residents. The parking and cycle provision meets the current standards. As such the proposal complies with Policies BE1, H5, H9, RL10 and T6 of the Gosport Borough Local Plan and Policies R/DP1, R/H7, R/OS7 and R/T11 of the Gosport Borough Local Plan Review.
 
 
 
177.
K.13321/5 – ERECTION OF THREE STOREY DETACHED DWELLING AND GARAGE, 2no. TWO STOREY DWELLINGS WITH INTEGRAL GARAGES AND ERECTION OF SINGLE AND FIRST FLOOR EXTENSIONS TO EXISTING DWELLING (CONSERVATION AREA) (as amended by letters dated 12.12.03 and 17.12.03 and plans received 22.12.03)
112 PRIORY ROAD, GOSPORT
 
 
Members were informed that 1 further letter of objection had been received. The issues it raised were covered in the report.
 
An additional condition was proposed in order to protect the amenity of the occupiers of the adjoining properties and to comply with Policy BE1 of the Gosport Borough Local Plan:
 
20. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any Order revoking or re-enacting the Order), no additional windows shall be constructed in any east or west elevation of the existing dwelling, as extended or altered, without the prior consent in writing of the Local Planning Authority.
Reason
In order to protect the amenity of the occupiers of the adjoining properties and to comply with Policy BE1 of the Gosport Borough Local Plan.
 
 
 
Concern was raised by Members over the impact this proposed development would have on the character of the Hardway Ward where green open spaces were at a premium.
 
 
 
It was proposed and seconded that a site visit take place to assess the impact of a development on this site.
 
 
 
RESOLVED: That planning application K.13321/5 – 112 Priory Road, Gosport be deferred for a site visit to enable Members to gather more information to enable them to make a decision.
 
 
 
178.
K.13321/6 – CONSERVATION AREA APPLICATION – DEMOLITION OF A BLOCK OF 5 GARAGES, DETACHED GARAGE AND PARTIAL DEMOLITION OF EXISTING DWELLING (CONSERVATION AREA) (as amended by letters dated 12.12.03 and 17.12.03 and plans received 22.12.03)
112 PRIORY ROAD, GOSPORT
 
 
RESOLVED: That planning application K.13321/6 – 112 Priory Road, Gosport be deferred for a site visit to enable Members to gather more information to enable them to make a decision.
 
 
 
179.
K.11182/1 – ERECTION OF DETACHED TWO STOREY DWELLING AND CAR PARKING (as amended by letter dated 15.12.03)
LAND ADJOINING 102 GOSPORT ROAD, LEE-ON-THE-SOLENT
 
 
Members were informed that a typing error had occurred in the first paragraph of the report and that the word lounge should be replaced with the word kitchen.
 
 
 
RESOLVED: That planning application K.11182/1 – Land Adjoining 102 Gosport Road, Lee-on-the-Solent be approved subject to the developer entering into a planning obligation under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, as approved by the Council, relating to the payment of a commuted sum towards the provision and/or improvement of outdoor playing space, and subject to the conditions set out in the report of the Regulatory Services Manager, for the following reason:
 
  i.            That having regard to Section 54A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and all other material considerations, the dwelling can be accommodated on this site without detriment to the visual amenities of the area and in accordance with the parking standards and open space requirements. Furthermore, the design of the property is such that the proposal will not adversely affect the residential amenities of neighbouring residents. As such the proposal complies with Policies BE1, H5, T6 and RL10 of the Gosport Borough Local Plan and Policies R/DP1 and R/OS7 of the Gosport Borough Local Plan Review.
 
 
 
180.
K.1327/18 – ERECTION OF TWO STOREY SIDE EXTENSION WITH BASEMENT, ALTERATIONS TO CAR PARK AND BOUNDARY WALL (LISTED BUILDING IN CONSERVATION AREA) (as amended by letter dated 23.12.03 and plans received 24.12.03)
81 THE AVENUE, GOSPORT
 
 
It was reported that three further letters of objection had been received raising concerns over noise, loss of light and outlook, and requesting a restriction of hours, and that neighbours should be given notice of the meeting.
 
 
 
Members were informed that Principal Issue 4 should read as follows:
 
 
 
Residents have expressed concern about noise from the premises and disturbance caused by patrons leaving the premises late at night. In part, as residents accept, this is due to the unauthorised marquee which does not have any form of insulation. Whilst the proposed extension will be closer to the east than the original hotel building, the use of this part of the site will not have the same impact as an extension insulated to modern standards as it does on the marquee. The area of the premises open to the public is only slightly larger than currently in use and the additional activity caused by comings and goings as a result of the additional guest room is likely to be minimal. I am therefore satisfied that the development proposed will not result in undue noise and disturbance to occupiers of nearby residential properties.
 
Members were also informed that there was a typing error and two conditions had been listed in the report as Condition 11. The final condition should be Condition 12.
 
 
 
In accordance with Standing Orders, Mrs Buchanan was permitted to address the Board on behalf of the objectors. Mrs Buchanan made the following points:
 
 
 
  • Alverstoke was an old Saxon site, would the development of the site be supervised to ensure no important archaeological remains were destroyed;
  • Was the ancient boundary wall to the south to be destroyed;
  • How would the smells and fumes from the kitchen be contained;
  • The proposal was out of all proportion to the current building;
  • There would be excessive noise and inconvenience to local residents;
  • All but one of the people listed in the report as consulted had not received letters from Gosport Borough Council;
  • Had care be taken to gather opinion from those residents who were housebound;
  • As the Old Lodge was a Listed Building, the same rules about the owner being a custodian for later should apply.
 
 
 
In accordance with Standing Orders, Mr Buggy was permitted to address the Board on behalf of the objectors. Mr Buggy made the following points:
 
 
 
  • That he lived at no. 7 Green Road and was the only contiguous neighbour. That he did not object to the development in principle, but that it should be reasonable and bear in mind the quality of life for its neighbours;
  • There will be a substantial increase in noise and disturbance as the plans are for a larger public room and facilities, shifting the functionality of the premises from a hotel to a bar/entertainment venue. Consequently there should be strict controls on usage, noise levels and timings;
  • Without a full length wall between his property and the hotel, the side access would mean a greater security threat to his property and also a greater invasion of his privacy;
  • The large basement proposal would mean a real risk to the stability and structural integrity of his house, an impartial survey should be commissioned;
  • The building work would be noisy, dirty, protracted, disruptive, highly intrusive and will considerably reduce the quality of life for his family;
  • The proposed development would remove up to a quarter of the light aspect to the rear of his property and almost entirely remove any view to the right beyond the immediate site;
 
  • Customer parking will become more busy along Green Road, an area where spaces are already at a premium;
  • No consultation has been undertaken by the owner or the developer of the site;
  • No objections were originally received to the initial application several years ago as no. 7 Green Road and the hotel were owned by the same person. For the subsequent renewals, he had not been informed of the first and not allowed to attend the second. His written objections had been overruled without comment.
 
 
 
Members were advised that there was an existing extractor system. The effectiveness was controlled through the Environmental Health legislation. The use of the front garden at present was outside the control of the Local Planning Authority, but a condition was proposed to ensure that the parking spaces would be reserved for that purpose which would reduce the area available for eating and drinking. The addresses of unitary societies consulted for this application were the same as those used in previous consultations when replies had been received. Members were also informed that the construction of the building would be supervised under the provisions of the Building Control Regulations to ensure the structure was sound. It was reported that there would be no side access to the hotel, merely the kitchen. Members were informed that the basement had been extended because the garages were to be dismantled, resulting in a lack of storage space. 
 
 
 
Members were informed that the extension was not significantly larger than the extension previously approved.
 
 
 
It was proposed and seconded that a site visit should take place to assess the impact on neighbouring residents.
 
 
 
RESOLVED: That planning application K.1327/18 – 81 the Avenue, Gosport be deferred for a site visit to enable Members to gather more information to enable them to make a decision.
 
 
 
181.
K.1327/19 – LISTED BUILDING APPLICATION – DEMOLITION OF BOUNDARY WALL (IN PART), GARAGE AND FIRE ESCAPE, ERECTION OF TWO STOREY SIDE EXTENSION WITH BASEMENT AND INTERNAL ALTERATIONS (CONSERVATION AREA) (as amended by letter dated 23.12.03 and by plans received 24.12.03)
81 THE AVENUE, GOSPORT
 
 
RESOLVED: That planning application K.1327/19 – 81 the Avenue, Gosport be deferred for a site visit to enable Members to gather more information to enable them to make a decision.
 
 
 
182.
K.14767/4 – CHANGE OF USE FROM SHOP (CLASS A1) AND RESIDENTIAL UNIT TO SHOP (CLASS A1), TWO OFFICES (CLASS A2) AND FIRST FLOOR FLAT AND INSERTION OF WINDOW TO GROUND FLOOR SIDE ELEVATION (LISTED BUILDING IN CONSERVATION AREA) (as amended by plans received 21.11.03)
6 AND 6A CHURCH ROAD, GOSPORT
 
 
RESOLVED: That planning application K.14767/4 – 6 and 6A Church Road, Gosport be approved subject to the conditions set out in the report of the Regulatory Services Manager, for the following reason:
 
 
 
  i.            That having regard to Section 54A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and all other material considerations, the proposed uses are appropriate in this location. The proposed works will enhance the character and appearance of the Conservation Area and will not be detrimental to the Listed Building. As such the development complies with Policies BE1, BE3, BE4, BE9, BE12, S2, S4 and T6 of the Gosport Borough Local Plan and Policies R/DP1, R/DP7, R/S9, R/BH3, R/S5 and R/T11 of the Gosport Borough Local Plan Review.
 
 
 
183.
K.14767/5 – LISTED BUILDING APPLICATION – CONSERVATION WORKS INCLUDING REPLACEMENT GROUND FLOOR WINDOW (SIDE ELEVATION), STAIR CASE REMOVAL AND INTERNAL ALTERATIONS (CONSERVATION AREA) (as amended by plans received 21.11.03)
6 AND 6A CHURCH ROAD, GOSPORT
 
 
RESOLVED: That listed building application K.14767/5 – 6 and 6A Church Road, Gosport be approved subject to the conditions set out in the report of the Regulatory Services Manager, for the following reason:
 
  i.            That having regard to Section 54A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and all other material considerations, the proposed development would not have a detrimental impact on these Listed Buildings. As such the development complies with Policies BE11 and BE12 of the Gosport Borough Local Plan and Policy R.BH3 of the Gosport Borough Local Plan Review.
 
 
 
184.
K.5744/9 – LISTED BUILDING APPLICATION – REINSTATEMENT OF DOOR AND WINDOW TO SIDE ELEVATION (CONSERVATION AREA)
ANGLESEY HOTEL, 24 CRESCENT ROAD, GOSPORT
 
 
RESOLVED: That listed building application K.5744/9 – Anglesey Hotel, 24 Crescent Road, Gosport be approved subject to the conditions set out in the report of the Regulatory Services Manager, for the following reason:
 
  i.            That having regard to Section 54A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and all other material considerations, the proposed development would not have a detrimental impact on this Listed Building. As such the development complies with Policies BE11 and BE12 of the Gosport Borough Local Plan and Policy R/BH3 of the Gosport Borough Local Plan Review.
 
 
 
185.
K.4518/12 – ERECTION OF SINGLE STOREY REAR EXTENSION (LISTED BUILDING IN CONSERVATION AREA) (as amended by plans received 23.12.03)
4 HIGH STREET, GOSPORT
 
 
RESOLVED: That planning application K.4518/12 – 4 High Street, Gosport be approved subject to the conditions set out in the report of the Regulatory Services Manager, for the following reason:
 
 
 
  i.            That having regard to Section 54A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and all other material considerations, the extension to the ground floor use of the property is appropriate in this location and adequate car parking is to be provided. The proposed works will preserve the character and appearance of the Conservation Area and will not be detrimental to the settings of the Listed Building. As such the development complies with Policies BE1, BE3, BE9, BE11, BE12, S2 and T6 of the Gosport Borough Local Plan and Policies R/DP1, R/DP7, R/BH3, R/S3 and R/T11 of the Gosport Borough Local Plan Review.
 
 
 
186.
K.4518/13 – LISTED BUILDING APPLICATION – ERECTION OF SINGLE STOREY REAR EXTENSION (CONSERVATION AREA) (as amended by plans received 23.12.03)
4 HIGH STREET, GOSPORT
 
 
RESOLVED: That listed building application K.4518/13 – 4 High Street, Gosport be approved subject to the conditions set out in the report of the Regulatory Services Manager, for the following reason:
 
  i.            That having regard to Section 54A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and all other material considerations, the proposed development will not harm the character and setting of this Listed Building. As such the development complies with Policies BE11 and BE12 of the Gosport Borough Local Plan and Policy R/BH3 of the Gosport Borough Local Plan Review.
 
 
 
187.
K.16237/2 – ERECTION OF TWO STOREY REAR AND SINGLE STOREY SIDE EXTENSIONS AND CONSERVATORY
109 PRIVETT ROAD, GOSPORT
 
 
RESOLVED: That planning application K.16237/2 – 109 Privett Road, Gosport be approved subject to the conditions set out in the report of the Regulatory Services Manager, for the following Reason:
 
  i.            That having regard to the provisions of Section 54A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and all other material considerations, the proposal does not have a detrimental impact on visual or residential amenity due to the orientation of the plot, the separation distances between dwellings and the design which respects the existing characteristics of the property. As such it complies with Policies BE1 and BE3 of the Gosport Borough Local Plan and Policies R/DP1 and R/DP7 of the Gosport Borough Local Plan Review.
 
 
 
188.
K.15650/6 – DETAILS PURSUANT TO K.15650/2 – ERECTION OF LIGHT INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS WITH ASSOCIATED PARKING AND SERVICING (PLOT C1&C2 – PHASE 1) (as amended by plan received 12.12.03)
LAND AT FRATER GATE, FAREHAM ROAD, GOSPORT
 
 
Members were informed that a typing error had occurred in the second paragraph of the report and that the word two should be replaced with the word five.
 
 
 
RESOLVED: That planning application K.15650/6 – Land at Frater Gate, Fareham Road, Gosport be approved subject to the detailed plans and particulars pursuant to Additional Condition 01 (in part) attached to Outline Consent reference K.15650/2, relating to this defined phase in development only, and subject to the conditions set out in the report of the Regulatory Services Manager, for the following reason:
 
  i.            That having regard to the provisions of Section 54A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and all other material considerations, the proposal is acceptable in this location and as such it complies with Policies BE1, BE2, EMP1, EMP4 and NC2 of the Gosport Borough Local Plan and Policies R/DP1, R/DP6, R/T2, R/T3, R/EMP1, R/EMP7 and R/OS12 of the Gosport Borough Local Plan Review.
 
 
 
189.
K.16461 – ALTERATIONS TO EXISTING ROOF, INCLUDING GABLE BUILD UP AND ERECTION OF SINGLE STOREY REAR EXTENSION (as amended by plans received 21.11.03)
12 BURNEY ROAD, GOSPORT
 
 
In accordance with Standing Orders, Mr Sewell was permitted to address the Board as an objector. Mr Sewell made the following points:
 
 
 
  • That he was speaking on behalf of the local residents, and especially the elderly lady at no. 10 Burney Road;
  • The proposal would result in a 50ft by 9ft wall running along the length of her garden, blocking out light and view, while there would be windows and French Doors overlooking his property invading his personal space;
  • The proposal would affect the character of the bungalows in the area and potentially decrease their value.
 
 
 
It was proposed and seconded that a site visit should take place to assess the impact of the proposal on the neighbouring properties.
 
 
 
RESOLVED: That planning application K.16461 – 12 Burney Road, Gosport be deferred for a site visit to enable Members to gather more information to enable them to make a decision.
 
 
 
190.
APPLICATION FOR A VARIATION TO EXISTING PUBLIC ENTERTAINMENT LICENCES FOR EMMA'S AND NELSON'S
HIGH STREET, GOSPORT
 
 
Consideration was given to a report of the Regulatory Services Manager (a copy of which is attached in the Minute Book as Appendix "B"), which brought to the Board's attention an application to vary existing Public Entertainment Licence operating hours and the nature of operation of the premises. Members were handed extended conditions and Action Plan (copies of which are attached in the Minute Book as Appendices "C" and "D").
 
 
 
Members expressed concern over the levels of noise that were currently coming from the pub and nightclub and wanted to know what measures were being taken to ensure this problem would not escalate. Members were informed that decibel readings were taken every night to ensure the noise level did not become excessive, and that it the installation of noise regulating devices would be put in place in April. Members were also informed that the music in the pub would continue to be turned down at 11pm and all windows would be closed.
 
 
 
Concern was also raised over the back exit to the premises where trouble frequently occurred and there were no CCTV cameras in place to capture the troublemakers. Members wanted to know whether this rear exit could be closed and all troublemakers escorted from the premises via the entrance on the High Street. It was reported that the Fire Brigade had insisted this rear exit be open, but that a new Fire Officer had recently been assigned to the area and that new negotiations would be undertaken by the management asking whether this exit could be closed. Members were informed that troublemakers would be escorted to the front of the premises, but that in many cases they went round to the rear of the property and caused trouble anyway. Members were also informed that there was a CCTV unit in Minitt Road, which covered the rear exit.
 
 
 
Members also wanted clarification over the number of Door Security Operatives that would be in place. Members were informed that currently 6 security staff started the evening shift, with the new proposal being that 7 security staff would be in place. It was hoped that by opening the pub, trouble caused when queuing on the High Street could be avoided.
 
 
 
Clarification was also sought by Members over the appropriateness of conducting strip-searches in the kitchen area. It was reported that the area was actually the staff changing room, and was the only available private place where this could be conducted. Members were informed that while those asked were under no obligation to undertake a strip-search, failure to comply would result in them being ejected from the premises.
 
 
 
Members also raised concern over the proposed closing time of the nightclub. Members were informed that the proposal was for the club to stay open till 3am, but that alcohol would stop being served just before 2am, as it was now. It was hoped that this would help relieve pressure from the taxi ranks, as the exit times for Gosport's nightclubs would now vary. It was also reported that an admission fee would be charged for access to the pub, and this variation would only be for Friday and Saturday nights.
 
 
 
Councillor Mrs Cully, as Ward Councillor, informed the Board that she had met frequently with the management and was happy with the proposals and the Action Plan.
 
 
 
RESOLVED: That –
 
  i.            The variations be granted for a trail period till 31 August 2004 subject to the installation of a noise regulating device, and
 
ii.            That the variations be incorporated into a single site licence.
 
 
 
191.
ANY OTHER BUSINESS
 
 
Members were informed that a site visit was planned to take place at 4pm on 16 March 2004 along the proposed LRT route. A letter would be sent to Members shortly confirming this date.
 
 
 
 
 
CHAIRMAN
GOV.UK logo Hampshire County Council logo Hampshire Switch logo Portsmouth, Gosport and Havant Fairtrade logo NHS - 111 logo