Scarborough Council’s Licensing Sub-Committee has partially rejected an application from the Delmont Hotel to increase its licensable area although it did allow the bar to be moved to a different location within the premises.
At its meeting on Tuesday August 2, the committee heard from the applicant, Harold Scott, as well as members of the public and North Yorkshire Police.
The committee decreed that it would allow the location of the bar to be moved to the amended location on the plan submitted, though it noted that “the applicant has already made this change, without the initial permission of the licensing authority”.
The Delmont Hotel on Blenheim Terrace, Queens Parade also sought permission for recorded music to be played outdoors no later than 9pm, for live music to be played outdoors no more than 12 times a year, and for the service of alcohol in its outdoor seating areas.
However, the committee said it “accepted the evidence of residents” about complaints having been made and did “not accept the hotel’s evidence that there have not been complaints”.
The committee also said it accepted evidence of “staggering and intoxication”, “intimidating behaviour”, as well as “public urination and public drunkenness”.
According to the minutes of the meeting, residents have complained about public nuisance being caused by the playing of recorded music, which has affected residents including Andrew Collison who “has had difficulties working from home due to speakers being located several metres from his home”.
Councillors were also told that one resident “has had to move out of her front bedroom due to noise created by the outdoor activities at the premises.”
The committee said it was “unacceptable” to place a beer garden next to flats where people live, work and sleep.
North Yorkshire Police proposed a condition limiting the use of the beer garden to 10pm, but it was decided this was “not acceptable” due to additional complaints that the police “will not have been aware of”.
The application was also refused under the objectives of crime and disorder prevention.
The committee said it accepted evidence that people using the hotel "have been staggering about and intoxicated”, that there had been incidents of “intimidating behaviour, a neighbour was photographed through a bedroom window, there has been public urination and public drunkenness” and that it had “seen evidence of vomit from a patron at the premises”.
Minutes from the meeting state: “The applicant has not considered the effects of the problems caused to residents during the periods where the premises was allowed to operate with an outside area due to the relaxation of licensing laws brought about by the pandemic.”