Agenda item

Application for the grant of a premises licence for Leeds Cricket, Football And Athletic Co Ltd, Headingley Rugby Stadium, St Michaels Lane, Headingley, Leeds, LS6 3BR

To receive and consider the attached report of the Chief Officer, Elections and Regulatory


The report of the Chief Officer, Elections and Regulatory presented an application for the grant of a Premises Licence for Leeds Cricket, Football and Athletic Co Ltd, Headingley Rugby Stadium, St Michael’s Lane, HEadingley, Leeds, LS6 3BR.


The following were in attendance for this item:


Paddy Whur (Woods Whur) – Applicant’s Representative

Justin Ions (Woods Whur)

Sue Ward (Headingley Stadium) - Operations Director

Sian Jones (Headingley Stadium) - Head of Customer Experience

Rachel Fox – Proposed DPS

David Dowse, G4S - Grounds Safety Officer, Headingley Stadium

David Cockerham – Objector

Daniel Shoreman – Objector

Richard Parr - Objector


The Legal Adviser to the Sub-Committee explained the procedures to be followed and the Senior Licensing Officer outlined the application.


The application was as follows:


Sale of alcohol, live music & recorded music:


Friday – 12:00 until 23:00, Saturday 11:00 until 23:00

Boxing or Wrestling


Friday and Saturday – 17:00 until 23:00

Non Standard Timings


The Sale of Alcohol, Live Music and Recorded Music will be restricted to the below hours for boxing/wrestling events


Friday & Saturday – 17:00 until 22:00


There had not been any objections from the responsible authorities and there had been agreement with the Environmental Protection Team to incorporate additional noise mitigation measures.  There had been 35 public representations which focussed on concerns regarding noise nuisance and anti-social behaviour.


The applicant’s representative addressed the sub-committee.  Issues highlighted included the following:


·  It was sough to add boxing, wrestling and recorded music to what was already covered in the existing licence.  The existing licence would be surrendered should this be granted.

·  There could only be the same frequency of events should the licence be granted and conditions had been tightened in agreement with the Environmental Protection Team with regards to noise pollution.

·  There had been discussions with local Ward Councillors, local residents and responsible authorities with regard to the application.  There had not been any objection from the responsible authorities as it was believed that conditions to the licence would promote the licensing objectives.

·  Professional advice had been taken to assist in the prevention of noise nuisance and there would be Event Management Plans which would cover noise management, litter, transport and crowd management.

·  Post event operations including cleaning of the area – it was noted that following a previous event a lot of glassware that had been discarded in the area came from other licensed premises.

·  Generators would be re-sited to prevent noise disturbance to residents.

·  Promoters would have to use the existing PA system which would be limited to permitted noise levels.  There had been an issue with noise nuisance at a previous event when a promoter had used their own system.

·  There would be provisional of portable toilets in and around the stadium.

·  There had not been any reports of disturbance following a music event at the stadium.

·  The Event Management Plan would cover all concerns that had been raised.


Local residents addressed the sub-committee with concerns to the application.  These included the following:


·  The recent music event had only had a small attendance.  There was still some disturbance from noise.  There had not yet been a fully attended music event.

·  There were a number of complaints following the last boxing match held at the venue due to noise nuisance.  This was mainly from the PA system although it had become overall noisier towards the event of the boxing match and it was fortunate that the final match finished early as it would have gone beyond the permitted time.

·  This was the fifth application in five years and all had been objected to.  Objections were made on the grounds of public nuisance and cause of harm to children.

·  Disturbance at the previous boxing event had included people drinking in the streets, openly drug taking; noise nuisance from the PA system and generators. Music from the venue was so loud that it woke children and privacy was also breached by a drone flying over resident’s gardens.

·  There were ongoing complaints with the Environmental Protection Team regarding noise being audible in residential properties.

·  The licence was not suitable for a heavily built up residential area.

·  There was no way the applicant could not guarantee that there would be noise disturbance or other problems including anti-social behaviour and litter.

·  The closest gardens were directly behind the stadium and Headingley was becoming a more family orientated area.

·  There were other more suitable venues in Leeds such as Elland Road and the Arena.

·  Granting the licence would have an impact on children and families.

·  There was no reference to decibel limits or how noise was measured.


In response to questions from the sub-committee, the following was discussed:


·  Issues raised by the objectors would be considered under the noise management strategy.  Any areas where generators were used would be soundproofed.

·  There had been previous licensing applications due to the redevelopment of the ground and to add boxing and live music to the licence.

·  The licence had been applied for to give flexibility in hosting events.  Putting on boxing matches reduced the opportunity for additional events.

·  There was regular communication between the applicant, local Ward Councillors and residents.  The applicant had also contacted the responsible authorities with regards to the kind of conditions and mitigating measures could be put in place.

·  There was provision to ensure that any future boxing match would not run beyond the permitted time.  There would be provisional bouts before the main event that would be withdrawn if events were not running on time.

·  There were insurance issues as to why security staff could not be employed for outside the venue.  This is why funding was made available for extra policing.

·  The use of drones was by licensed drone operatives and would not have breached the privacy of residents.

·  Residents had purchased their properties before these kind of events were held at the stadium and when the stadium was smaller.  The sound systems were now more audible in nearby residential properties.

·  Shuttle buses would be provided to take customers back to the city centre.

·  West Yorkshire Police were always involved at the pre-planning stage of any event.

·  There would be continuing work with the Environmental Protection Team to prevent noise nuisance to residents.

·  There was contact with bus and rail companies as part of the travel plan before any event.  The travel plan would also focus on parking.  Customers were encouraged to travel by public transport.

·  The stadiums PA system has noise limiters and the problems encountered previously would not have occurred if this system had been used.

·  It was accepted that there had been a mistake in letting the promoter use their own PA system at the last boxing event.  Various measures had been put in place to ensure this did not happen again and other mitigating measures had also been introduced to address concerns.

·  There would be constant monitoring of noise during any event and volumes could be lowered.

·  The applicant would be willing to accept that the licence be conditioned so that there was only a maximum of two boxing events per year.

·  Local residents still had concerns regarding the potential for noise disturbance as mitigating measures had been promised before.  It was felt that there should be further work and clear acceptable decibel levels be agreed.


In summary, the applicant’s representative reported that the main problem had occurred due to the promoter using their own PA system.  There had been a large amount of consultation work with Ward Councillors and local residents since.  The purpose of the application was for the addition of boxing/wrestling and live music to what was already permitted at the stadium.  Environmental Protection were comfortable with the proposed mitigation measures and would object to the licence if not.  The application was proportionate and would promote the licencing objectives with the proposed conditions attached.  It was requested that the application be granted.


The Chair concluded the open session of the hearing before the Sub-Committee went in to private session to make their decision.  All parties were informed that the decision would be sent within 5 working days.


The Licensing Sub-Committee carefully considered the report of the Chief Officer, Elections and Regulatory, the Statement of Licensing Policy and the representations submitted and made at the hearing.


RESOLVED – That the application be approved with an additional condition to limit the number of boxing events to two per year.



Supporting documents: