To appoint a Chairman for the duration of the meeting.

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That Cllr Grey be appointed Chairman for the duration of the meeting.

To receive any apologies for absence.

No apologies for absence received.

To receive any declarations of interest.

The Panel had previously visited the Pinks Gentlemen’s Club for a site visit.

To consider an application to renew the Sexual Entertainment Venue (SEV) licence for Pink Gentlemen’s Club, Basement, Darville House, Oxford Road East, Windsor SL4 1EF.

(Castle Without Ward)

The Chairman welcomed all the parties to the meeting, introduced the Sub-Committee Members and explained the procedure, which all indicated they understood.

The Council’s Licensing Officer, Steve Smith, introduced the application for Members to consider. Steve Smith explained that the application related to the renewal of a current SEV licence. Steve Smith gave further background on the premises explaining that the premises licence had been renewed without any concerns in 2014, 2015, 2016 and had only had one objection from the Ward Member this time at time of the renewal.

The Sub-Committee were informed that the conditions of the premises licence were very comprehensive and had always been adhered to. An additional condition had been added at the last renewal to change the hours of when the promotional vehicle could be used. The Licensing Team at RBWM and the Thames Valley Police had no concerns with the premises.

The Sub-Committee were reminded that they could, in this case, either renew the licence, revise the conditions or refuse the licence.

The Council’s Licensing Team Leader advised the Sub-Committee to have regard for national guidance and the Council’s own Licensing Policy.

Questions of the Licensing Officer

·         It was confirmed that there was no touching between the client and the dancer.

·         The last full inspection was completed ten months ago and there were no issues. Thames Valley Police regularly carry out checks and there have never been issues.

Applicant’s case

The Sub-Committee were informed that the applicant had gone further in fulfilling the condition for the promotion vehicle, the vehicle had been sold and was not used for publicising the venue.

The following points were highlighted to the Sub-Committee:

·         the club had been in the same location for some years;

·         the entrance was discreet and the club had a ground floor controlled entrance;

·         there had been no complaints to the club, the police or the licensing team to date;

·         the club was heavily regulated with a serious code of conduct;

·         the club had never breached any conditions;

·         there was a prohibition on touching and there was no physical contact between the client and the dancer.

The objection raised by Councillor Rankin was on the character and locality. There had been no changes to the club from the beginning. The locality was a mixed residential and commercial area.

Questions to the Applicant

The following points were summed up by the Sub-Committee:

·         No complaints had been received from any quarter except Councillor Rankin;

·         There was no vehicle publicising the club;

·         The club was heavily conditioned;

·         The club had a basement location;

·         The size of the club had not changed;

·         Advertising is done by distributing flyers after 10.00pm, it was very low profile.

The Objector was not present.

Decision

After careful consideration of all the evidence, the Sub-Committee decided to renew  the premises licence.

The Sub-Committee considered the written submissions provided by the applicant,

Officers of the Council and Objectors. The Panel also heard oral evidence provided from the following:

·         Steve Smith (Licensing Officer at the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.