Licensing Sub Committee minutes

Decided · A decision has been taken.

The Licensing Sub Committee met on 8 January 2026 to consider an application to vary the premises licence for The She, 9 George Street, Hastings, TN34 3EG. p1p5p13

The application sought removal of embedded restrictions on permitted hours, and removal, on Fridays, Saturdays, days before a Bank Holiday, New Year's Eve and specified special occasions, of a condition requiring alcohol sales after 21:00 to be made by waiter or waitress service to seated customers who had eaten or intended to eat. p5p13

The Sub-Committee granted the application in part, approving removal of the embedded restrictions but refusing the variation to remove the post-21:00 seated and waiter or waitress service condition. p13

The Sub-Committee said the refusal reflected the Cumulative Impact Policy presumption against applications likely to add to cumulative impact, and that the applicant had not demonstrated that granting the application would not add to that impact. p14p16

1 further sentence of this summary was held back by verification and is not shown. We only publish claims that survived checking against the cited passages.

Show the 5 passages this is based on

• p1Licensing Sub Committee — minutes of the meeting on 08/01/2026
• p54. Application for a full variation to a Premises Licence with representations for The She, 9 George Street, Hastings, TN34 3EG The Lead Practitioner - Licensing presented the report concerning an application for a full variation of the premises licence at 9 George Street, Hastings. The Lead Practitioner - Licensing stated that the application represented a substantial variation and was comparable to considering a new licence, due to the nature of the changes sought and the representations received from Sussex Police and the Licensing Authority. The licence holder sought removal of existing conditions, which fell into two categories. The first related to embedded conditions originating from historic legislation, including outdated provisions concerning operating hours and children’s certificates. Those conditions were described as administrative in nature, and their removal alone would typically have been managed by a minor variation. The second category related to a condition added at a Sub-Committee hearing in February 2003. That condition required sales of alcohol after 21:00 to be made only by waiter or waitress service to patrons who were seated and consuming or intending to consume a meal. Alcohol could not be served at outside tables unless accompanied by food. The application sought removal of that condition on Fridays, Saturdays, any day preceding a Bank Holiday. New Year’s Eve and special occasions as listed by Hastings Borough Council (for example Hastings Carnival (Procession-day); Hastings Bonfire celebrations; May Day Bank Holiday Monday- Jack in the Green event & Biker May Day Rally. It was emphasised that removing the seated?service condition would fundamentally alter the style of operation and effectively create a vertical?drinking environment. As the premises lay within the Cumulative Impact Zone, the policy required applicants to demonstrate that their proposals would not add to existing problems in the area.
• p13The Agent thanked the Sub-Committee and reiterated the key points of the application. The Sub-Committee were reminded that the premises had operated eleven temporary event notices over the preceding months without incident, which was suitable evidence of responsible management. It was stated that the concerns raised by the responsible authorities during the process had been addressed promptly and effectively. Reference was again made to the national licensing policy framework, which encouraged flexibility and diversification in the hospitality sector. The Agent stated that the measures offered within the application were robust and provided stronger safeguards than those applied to many other premises in George Street. It was the Applicant’s position that the proposed variation would not negatively impact the prevention of public nuisance and that the overall conditions remained among the strongest in the locality. The Sub-Committee retired to deliberate at 2:57pm and reconvened at 3:27pm to announce its decision. Decision The Licensing Sub-Committee considered an application by the premises licence holder to vary the premises licence for The She, 9 George Street, Hastings, TN34 3EG (HOP50149). The application sought: (1) removal of embedded restrictions 1–3 on permitted hours, and (2) removal (on Fridays, Saturdays, days preceding a Bank Holiday, New Year’s Eve and specified special occasions) of the condition requiring post-21:00 alcohol sales to be by waiter/waitress service to seated persons / persons who have eaten or booked to eat, with substantial refreshments available at all times. The Sub-Committee granted the application in part: Approved removal of embedded restrictions 1–3; and Refused the variation to remove the post-21:00 seated / waitress service / substantial refreshment condition.
• p14Matters considered In reaching its decision the Sub-Committee had regard to 1/ the application and operating schedule, 2/ the CIZ risk assessment submitted by/for the applicant, 3/ the representations from the Licensing Authority (as Responsible Authority) and Sussex Police, 4/ the Council’s Statement of Licensing Policy including the Cumulative Impact Policy (CIP) and the approach to determining applications in the George Street CIZ, 5/ the committee report and the submissions made at the hearing. No representations were received from residents/interested parties. Reasons – (A) grant of removal of embedded restrictions 1–3 The removal of the embedded restrictions was uncontested: both Responsible Authorities supported their removal. The Sub-Committee was satisfied that removing these historic embedded restrictions (carried over from the pre-2003 regime) was an appropriate and proportionate modernisation of the licence and did not undermine the licensing objectives in this case. Reasons – (B) refusal of the post-21:00 seated / waiter/waitress service condition variation The Sub-committee refused the second variation proposed for the following reasons. 1. The premises lies within a Cumulative Impact Zone (CIZ) and the policy presumption applied. The premises is within the George Street CIZ. The Council’s Statement of Licensing Policy provides that applications (including variations) that are likely to add to cumulative impact will normally be refused following relevant representations, unless the applicant demonstrates that granting the application will not add to the cumulative impact and will not undermine the licensing objectives. The Sub-committee treated this presumption as rebuttable, assessed the application on its individual merits, and considered whether the applicant had demonstrated an exceptional/compelling basis to depart from the CIZ policy approach in this instance. 2.
• p16The applicant did not rebut the CIZ presumption: the risk assessment and proposed controls did not go far enough to mitigate and establish “no additional impact”. The applicant provided a CIZ risk assessment and offered various controls. However, the Sub-committee was not satisfied that the risk assessment and evidence presented demonstrated that removing the post-21:00 restriction (on the requested days) would have no negative cumulative impact / would not add to cumulative impact. In particular, the evidence did not go far enough to address the public nuisance risks (noise, congregation, dispersal and street impacts) and the wider CIZ concerns relating to crime and disorder and ASB during peak times. 5. The hearing evidence suggested the purpose was to attract new custom, reinforcing the concern about a material shift in operation. The applicant explained the commercial difficulty caused by requiring customers to sit after 21:00. When asked whether the change was to meet an existing need or to attract new custom, the applicant confirmed it was to attract new business/custom. The Sub-committee therefore concluded that this was more than minor operational flexibility and indicated a shift in how the premises would trade on peak nights, increasing the risk of adding to cumulative impact. 6. Offered “fallback” measures reinforced the concern that the proposal would facilitate a different style of premises on peak nights. The Sub-committee noted that some measures suggested in the event of grant (for example clearing tables/chairs to create standing space, the use of door staff, roped entry and similar measures) are controls typically associated with managing higher footfall and alcohol-led/standing-drinking environments. This reinforced the Sub-committee’s view that the likely effect of the variation would be to facilitate a materially different mode of operation during the most sensitive times in the CIZ. 7.