Agenda item

Click here to view the recording of this item.

At the request of the Chair the applicant, Rachel White, presented her case explaining that the intention was to hold a festival for five consecutive days each September.  There was no intention to hold other events.

She felt that last years event was successful in terms of promoting the licensing objectives and there were no major issues and was surprised by the Norfolk Constabulary representation.  Additional conditions which could be attached to the licence had been discussed and agreed with Norfolk Constabulary for future events. 

Rachel White addressed the concerns made by Norfolk Constabulary relating to the medical use of cannabis, how this would be managed in the future, and the incident relating to a DJ who had been recorded on social media as ‘pulling on a spliff’ on stage and the offsite arrest.  Information on the uses of hydroponics was also provided. Rachel White indicated that she was willing to work with Norfolk Constabulary to mitigate concerns, similarly to last year.

Rachel White referred to the representations made by Interested Parties and explained that they were similar concerns to those raised last year, however the Sub-Committee were minded to grant the application last year, so they must have been satisfied that the applicant had addressed concerns.  She referred to positive resident feedback and a positive comment on the event which had been published in the EDP.

It was acknowledged that the Sedge Fen area had not been considered last year, but since then work had been carried out with the Community Safety and Neighbourhood Nuisance Team on conditions to mitigate concerns, for example speaker orientation and wind direction.

The applicant responded to questions from all parties relating to the maximum number of attendees, sales forecasts and the potential to grow the event in the future.  It was acknowledged that there were issues with staffing last year because of Covid and conditions could be imposed on the licence to increase the number and efficiency of searches upon entry.

Rachel White responded to questions from Interested Parties relating to an ambulance being called, to which Rachel White commented that she was unaware of this incident, the images that were being used for marketing purposes and noise limits for personal music in the campsite.

Chris Brooks referred to the police representation and information was provided on accredited security staff, marshals and provisions suggested for future events.  It was explained that this could be conditioned, or could form part of the Event Management Plan.

Rachel White responded to questions from Members of the Sub Committee relating to the use of cannabis and how artists would be made aware that illegal activity, or the promotion of illegal activity on the site would not be tolerated.  It was also clarified that food and drink vendors would be required to replenish their supplies at certain times so as to not clash with day visitors entering or exiting the site.  Information on food safety checks was also provided.

It was confirmed that the Event Management plan was a live document to ensure that there was accurate provision and the aim was to be above minimum standards.  It was hoped that security provision could be agreed within the Event Management plan, but it could be conditioned if necessary.

Information was also provided on the types of vendors and trades who attended the event, the guidance that had been received from the Fire Service in terms of how many and what types of extinguishers should be available and how there would be an access path through the campsite.

Reference was made to the shuttle bus service and it was explained that this had not yet been finalised so had not yet been promoted.

Information was provided on how residents would be kept up to date and event organiser contact details would be circulated, which would include residents of Sedge Fen.