03
Members received and considered the report delivered by the Licensing Officer regarding the application for a variation of premises licence of Thompsons News Stores Ltd, 96-99 St Peters Road, Great Yarmouth NR30 3AU. The Licensing Officer reported that the nature of the variation is to remove the following condition from the premises licence:
‘No single cans or bottles or beer or cider or spirit mixtures shall be sold at the premises’
It was explained that upon expiry of the 28 day representation, three valid representations were received from the Police, Licensing Authority and the Environmental Protection and Waste Team. Members were asked to decide on one of the following options:
- To grant the application on the terms requested
- To modify the conditions of the licence
- To reject the whole or part of the application
The Chair hereby invited Members to ask questions to the Licensing Officer, there were no questions at this time.
The Chair hereby invited Mr Kesavan (the applicant’s husband) to address the Committee on behalf of the applicant.
Mr Kesavan stated that he and his wife purchased the premises two years ago and at this time the condition in question was added to the licence by the Licensing Authority. It was explained that single cans were sold at the premises before Mr Kesavan purchased the property and that he would like to remove this condition. It was added that neighbouring premises are allowed to sell single cans and miniatures.
Councillor Newcombe request clarification as to why the condition was added by the Licensing Authority when Mr Kesavan bought the premises. Mr Kesavan clarified that there had been no incidents at the premises, however the condition was added when the licence was transferred into his wife’s name from the previous owner.
Councillor Newcombe asked what time in the day the premises sees the most alcohol sales. Mr Kesavan stated that most alcohol sales are in the evening.
Councillor Newcombe asked whether Mr and Mrs Kesavan believe that their alcohol sales would increase if the variation was granted. Mr Kesavan confirmed that he believed that sales would increase.
Councillor Newcombe asked what Mr and Mrs Kesavan would do to prevent an adverse impact on the community and queried how often they would be at the premises to supervise. Mr Kesavan state that alcohol is refused to those who are underage or visibly intoxicated, and that these refusals are recorded. It was added that refusals typically occur 2 to 3 times a week. Mr Kesavan clarified that either he or his wife are at the premises everyday between 5pm and 1am to supervise.
Councillor Newcombe asked why a different operating schedule was included in the application. The Solicitor stated that this application was advertised to the public solely for the removal of one condition, therefore the Licensing Sub-Committee would only be considering this specific matter.
The Chair hereby invited Mr C Brooks (Norfolk Constabulary) to address the Committee.
Mr C Brooks outlined the representation from the police in the agenda papers which was written by Sergeant Carroll. It was explained that, in recent months there have been street drinking and alcohol related anti-social behaviour issues on St Peters Road, as this location is a gathering point for individuals who are leaving pubs or who have been moved on from the Market Place. It was added that single cans of alcohol are often found on individuals who are involved in these incidents and the police believe that allowing this variation would be contrary to the licensing objectives.
Councillor Newcombe requested clarification on how often the police are called to this area for alcohol related incidents. Sergeant Caroll clarified that recent data collated in support of the Cumulative Impact Assessment highlights St Peters Road as a hotspot for alcohol related anti-social behaviour. It was added that these incidents are more common on weekends and that this area has a significant number of alcohol related incidents compared to the rest of the town, as displacement from the seafront, King Street and the Market Place make this area a common gathering point.
Councillor Newcombe asked how often single cans or bottles are confiscated during these incidents. Sergeant Caroll stated that officers attend this area roughly 3 to 4 times awake to remove single cans or bottles from individuals involved in anti-social behaviour. It was added that the police are committed to working with the Council to reduce levels of anti-social behaviour in the town, and that it has been noted that individuals who are displaced from the Market Place are seeking out premises to purchase single cans or bottles as the monetary loss if these drinks are confiscated is substantially less than if it was a case of beer or cider. Sergeant Caroll commented that, though there are other premises in the area that sell single cans or bottles, if more premises are allowed to sell these products it is likely that anti-social behaviour incidents will increase.
The Chair hereby invited the Licensing and Elections Manager to address the Committee on behalf of the Licensing Authority.
The Licensing and Elections Manager referenced the Cumulative Impact Assessment that was approved by the Licensing Committee on 9th March 2026 and explained that this condition would be expected on any new or varied licences in this area to reduce the impact that single use cans or bottles have on alcohol related anti-social behaviour.
There were no questions for the Licensing and Elections Manager.
The Chair hereby invited the Community Safety Officer to address the Committee on behalf of the Environmental Protection and Waste Team.
The Community Safety Officer explained that the Council introduced Public Space Protection Order (PSPO) No. 4 in April 2025 as a response to the number of complaints and incidents involving alcohol related anti-social behaviour. It was added that officers, alongside the police, now have the power to remove alcohol from an individual if they are in breach of PSPO No. 4. It was stated that the majority of the breaches of this PSPO have occurred in the area surrounding St Peters Road, with local residents complaining about street drinking, associated litter and intimidating behaviour. The Community Safety Officer explained that less single unit sales would encourage people to drink more responsibly whilst reducing the number of people gathering outside of premises on St Peters Road buying one drink at a time.
The Solicitor asked Mr Kesavan why a different operating schedule was submitted that seems unrelated to the application. Mr Kesavan stated that there were only two conditions that they had applied to remove. The Solicitor confirmed that this is a misunderstanding and that the applicants had only applied to remove one condition from the licence. After reviewing the papers, Mr Kesavan confirmed that he understands this application is solely for the removal of the condition in relation to single use cans/bottles.
Mr Kesavan stated that neighbouring premises are able to sell single use cans, so he believes that his premises should be able to do the same. The Licensing and Elections Manager stated that other premises may have this condition, however the Council are working towards the removal of single use cans from all premises though this will take time as conditions can only be altered on an existing licence through a variation applicant by the premises licence holder or a review triggered by a responsible authority. Mr C Brooks confirmed that the Police will be asking to include a similar condition this this on any further applications within the CIA area. It was added that the wording of this condition comes from Westminster, however the Police believe that the wording can be amended slightly as street drinkers involved in alcohol-related anti-social behaviour typically prefer single use cans or bottles of beer or cider over single use cans of spirit mixers. It was noted that the Police have recently spoken to a new applicant in this area who has agreed to add a condition preventing the sale of single use cans or bottles of beer and cider but allowing for the sale of single use spirit mixers. Mr C Brooks confirmed that the condition agreed with the new premises in the same area is as follows:
‘No single cans or bottles of beer or cider, normally only available in packs, shall be some from these premises’
Councillor Thompson requested clarification as to whether the premises, under the current licence, is able to sell miniatures or spirit. The Solicitor clarified that the current wording suggests that the premises cannot sell single units of any alcohol. Councillor Thompson stated that miniatures and pre-mixed cans of alcohol are just as bad as beer and cider so should also not be allowed. Mr C Brooks commented that historically strong largers and ciders tend to be found when the Police are called to anti-social behaviour incidents, so the focus is on.
The Solicitor explained that Members would have the ability to introduce a newly worded condition and asked whether the responsible authorities would agree to an alternative condition. Mr C Brooks stated that the Police would agree to an amendment to the wording of the condition in order to focus on the prevention of single use cans or bottles of beer or cider, as these are the drinks that typically attract street drinkers.
The Committee entered into a confidential debating session at 11:34am.
At 11:51am the Committee returned to the Council Chamber to hear the determination of the application in public.
The Chair hereby invited the Solicitor to deliver the Committee’s decision.
The Solicitor explained that the application was accepted in part, in that the controls over the sale of spirit mixers was removed. The Committee rejected part of the application, and modified the conditions of the licence by adding the wording as set our below to replace the condition that was the subject of the variation application:
‘No single cans or bottles of beer or cider, normally only available in packs, shall be sold from these premises’
The applicant was informed of the rights of appeal. Any appeal should be made in writing to a Magistrates’ Court within 21 days of receipt of notification of the decision appealed against.