Capacity of a nightclub - advise?

[kurnal]

The sprinkler system may justify a 20% increase in numbers if all other things such as fire separation between other occupancies in the building and the spec and maintenance of the system are up to the mark.

This is because it COULD justify  an assessment of lower risk and a target evacuation time of 3 minutes.

[Clevelandfire]

Premises Licences certainly to my knowledge do not have safe capacity limits put on them, but a suitable and sufficient fire risk assessment should have.

Most licensing solicitors will try to but as little as possible within the licensing objectives to prevent the need for paying for a variation every time something changes. I don`t have a problem with that. Most licensing objectives are covered by and enforced by other legislation.

Im sorry to sound rude but you are badly misinformed. Fire Authorities can and will  set occupany figures on a premises license under the Licensing Act where they see fit. You are confusing the RRO with the Licensing Act. Under the RRO the fire authority can not directly* enforce numbers. Instead it expects you to set occupancy figures in your fire risk assessment. It can of course go to enforcement if it disagrees with numbers you have set or ask a review of your premises license if it feels the license holder isn't playing ball. Please please dont think you can "get round it". And don't listen to breweries they can be very naughty at this. They sometimes see themselves above the law.

[Dinnertime Dave]

Im sorry to sound rude but you are badly misinformed. Fire Authorities can and will  set occupany figures on a premises license under the Licensing Act where they see fit. You are confusing the RRO with the Licensing Act. Under the RRO the fire authority can not directly* enforce numbers. Instead it expects you to set occupancy figures in your fire risk assessment. It can of course go to enforcement if it disagrees with numbers you have set or ask a review of your premises license if it feels the license holder isn't playing ball. Please please dont think you can "get round it". And don't listen to breweries they can be very naughty at this. They sometimes see themselves above the law.

Its ok you don’t sound rude, debate is healthy and any FSO should expect to be challenged.

My information is based on the paragraph 2.20 - 2.28 of Guidance under section 182 of the Licensing Act 2003, it was issued in June 2007. It spells out the new responsibilities for Fire Authorities and recommends that Licensing Authorities should not seek to impose fire safety conditions on licences.

This information has been brought to my attention in an article in the October edition of the Licensing Review and confirmed by solicitor working for the licensing department at my local council.

Anyone who wants a copy of the article I can fax it, sorry I’ve only got a hard copy.

[jokar]

That is correct, the RR(FS)O inArticle 43 states that " fire safety conditions can not be held on a licence where the Order applies".  I know that is a para phrase but it is succinct enough for me.

[CivvyFSO]

Some local authorities may be willing to put occupancy figures on under "public safety" as opposed to "fire".

[Midland Retty]

I think there is confusion here.

To try and clear this up a little:-

a) Fire Authorities have a duty to consult on licensing applications. They can ask the applicant to sign up to voluntary conditions. A voluntary condition maybe that the fire authority says "you will agree to have only 150 people in this bar" The applicant dioesn't have to agree to that but if they do not the fire authority will continue with its representation and the licensing authority will hold a hearing. The licensing authority can overrule the fire authority if required or thwey can uphold their representation and say "yes we agree with the fire service and you wont get your license until you agree to the fire authorities occupancy fighures". Conversely they can say "We think the fire authority are being too onerous on this occassion and we will issue the license without occupancy firgures imposed"

2) Yes the Fire Authority should only use its primary legislation but dont forget that:-
   
a) The RRO can only apply once the premises are trading. If the building isnt trading and is empty the RRO doesn't apply. ANd if you did have a process where the applicant was allowed to open the premises against the fire service approval the fire authority could issue a restruiction or prohibition notice as soon as it opens for trade.

b) The Fire Authority is a statutory consultee and has a duty to consult with the licensing authority on all   applications.

c)CivvyFSO mentioned "Public safety as apposed to fire". Public safety includes the issue of fire safety so that is not quite true.

[CarlyD]

The main entrance exit is 3000mm wide all the way down. Although I did not put that in as I was told you have to discount the largets exit?

[jokar]

CarlyD, in truth you can only have the number of people that you can get out safely.  That figure according to one of your earlier posts is 780.  There is no way around that unless you want to ignore those figures and trade anyway.  The outcome will be at some stage the FRS will come and have alook and enforce the figure or something will happen.

In Rhode island in the states sometime ago now, I would send you the video but it is probably too big, 300 plus people were in a single storey club attending a live gig.  The premises had 4 exits but the fire spread so rapidly that 101 people died.  That is the reality out there.  You can get lots of info by googling the Station nightclub fire.

[Dinnertime Dave]

I think there is confusion here.

To try and clear this up a little:-

a) Fire Authorities have a duty to consult on licensing applications. They can ask the applicant to sign up to voluntary conditions. A voluntary condition maybe that the fire authority says "you will agree to have only 150 people in this bar" The applicant dioesn't have to agree to that but if they do not the fire authority will continue with its representation and the licensing authority will hold a hearing. The licensing authority can overrule the fire authority if required or thwey can uphold their representation and say "yes we agree with the fire service and you wont get your license until you agree to the fire authorities occupancy fighures". Conversely they can say "We think the fire authority are being too onerous on this occassion and we will issue the license without occupancy firgures imposed"

Yes they could ask the applicant to volintarily sign up to a occupancy figure. If they say no my fire risk assessment has set an occupany figure. I don`t want it on my licence because if it changes I have to pay to vary my licence. What to we do then?

If we make representation, the Licensing Committe can only grant or refuse the licence they can`t put fire safety conditions on the licence. If the Fire Authority are asking for the occupancy figure then it must be a fire safety condition. Also, the committee can`t say you can have your licence when you have done what the Fire Authority want - It has to be yes or no. Licensing Committees have put fire safety conditions on licences in the past they are now being told the can`t do it. Just to muddy the waters what if the police ask for the occupancy figure what would be the decision of the committee then?

[slubberdegullion]

All guidance, including BS5588 Pt6,  point to the principle that the number of escape routes is based on the occupancy factor and include the discounting of one. Thats great until you read the 3rd pargraph of BS5588 Pt6 6.6.1. which ends by saying:-

"If all exits from the assembly space are final exits, then the fire cannot affect any part of the escape routes outside the assembly space. As any fire should be visible to the occupants at an early stage, it is not considered neccessary to discount one of the exits from such assembly areas if three or more exits are provided."

There's nothing like consistancy, is there?

nearlythere, you're quoting a recommendation that was removed a number of years ago.  Provocatively, they left in the commentary that discusses the issue you mention but the associated recommendation is gone.  

The principle could be considered to hold in certain cases...

...or maybe not.  It's left open...


As a point of general interest on the topic being discussed, DD9999 usually gives higher numbers than ADB by virtue of the high ceilings that are usually present in such premises.

Stu

[Midland Retty]

If we make representation, the Licensing Committe can only grant or refuse the licence they can`t put fire safety conditions on the licence. If the Fire Authority are asking for the occupancy figure then it must be a fire safety condition. Also, the committee can`t say you can have your licence when you have done what the Fire Authority want - It has to be yes or no. Licensing Committees have put fire safety conditions on licences in the past they are now being told the can`t do it. Just to muddy the waters what if the police ask for the occupancy figure what would be the decision of the committee then?

No Dinnertime Dave. If any of the statutory consultees / responsible authorities make representation against a new license and it goes to a hearing the Licensing committee can either go with the concerns of the responsible authority or ignore them.

Lets say the fire service makes reps that they are unhappy about the public Safety Objective not being actively promoted due to insufficient fire warning and detection.

The Fire Service set out the reasons as to why it is concerned at the licensing hearing. Lets imagine that the licensing committee agrees with the fire service it will become a condition of the license that the applicant has to sign up to and carry out the Fire Authority's recommendations before the license is issued (or where voluntary conditions are signed up to works are completed before opening to the public).

So yes the licensing committee can say "no we wont issue your license until you sign up the fire authority's voluntary conditions " afterall they cant just say "No we arent going to issue the license" and leave it at that!

They lawfully have to explain why they wont grant a license and what works need to be done so that you can have the license issued.  

How do I know all this? well i happen to deal with this process on a daily basis.

So whichever way you look at it youve got to comply. Call them voluntary conditions, call them whatever you want if you don't undertake to action them you will either find your license won't be issued or a review of your premises license will be called or the fire authority may issue seperate enforcement action under the RRO.

The police can set occcupancy fugures if they wish as can environmental health.

Where these clash the lowest figure is taken.

So if for example the fire service want an occupany figure limited to 200 persons, police want it for 175 and Environmental Health want to be 220 then 175 (being the lowest) will be the figure used.

You say you dont want to have numbers imposed on your license. Has the licensing authority done so already? have they commented that they want to impose numbers, because sometimes they won't - it all depends on the premises. if you have a big premises with multiple exits they might not impose occupancy firgures on it.

If they do want to impose numbers think of the absolute maxuimum you'd want in at anyone time and submit that with your application based on the available exit widths you currently have and floor space etc. if you need an increase over and above your maximum in future that should automatically tell you that you may need to have building works done to increase floor space and or exit widths which will probably lead to a variation of your license anyway.

[Dinnertime Dave]

I think M R we are going to have to agree to disagree,

If you manage to get fire safety conditions put on licences then I take my hat off to you. I have had conditions put on licences prior to June 2007 but not since. It is said that if you put two fire safety officers or fire safety professionals in a room then they will disagree; it appears that if you put two different Licensing Authorities in a room they will also disagree.    

As already stated my information is based on the paragraph 2.20 - 2.28 of Guidance under section 182 of the Licensing Act 2003, it was issued in June 2007. It spells out the new responsibilities for Fire Authorities and recommends that Licensing Authorities should not seek to impose fire safety conditions on licences and as Joker points out ‘Article 43 says that fire safety conditions can not be held on a licence where the order applies”.

My local Licensing department will enforce this to the letter. They have also informed me that they no longer have the option of provisionally granting the licence and then allowing it to come into force when any work is done ( which personally I think is a mistake) - it is Yes or No.

I too deal with licensing on a daily basis, I too are in the Midlands but with a different licensing authority that uses different rules.

[Midland Retty]

Dinnertime Dave Im going to have to ask you to stop behind after school. Youre heading for double detention.

The confusion comes because the RR(FS)O does not always apply to a Licensing application.  

The reason it doesn't apply is that empty premises which aren't either occupied or trading can't come under the auspices of the RRO. If no one is in the rpemises no one is at risk!

If it is an empty pub and a new licensee wishes to take it over the RRO can't apply until the pub is trading.

So we use the licensing act to reply to the licensing authority and make sure the fire safety provisions are addressed.

You can't enforce risk assessment using the licensing act and would need to do that under the RRO

We here don't put fire safety conditions put on a license ... they're public safety conditions that are put on the license - it just so happens some of those objectives might relate to fire safety.

So the LA may say "We arent granting the license Mr Bloggs because the public safety objective is not being adequately promoted in terms of means of escape from the licensed bar" for instance.

So in which case the applicant will say "Right what do I need to do then to get you to issue that license?" and the licensing authority will say " meet the public safety objective by signing up to these voluntary conditions (which will include comments about improving means of escape  ) or come up with a suitable alternative of equal standing and we will issue the license"

OR

The LA will issue the license but the fire authority will go in under the RRO and do it that way once premsies open.

Thats how you can still impose fire safety related conditions on a license.

Both mechanisms exist but the RRO can deal with the non licensed parts as well as the licensed parts of the premises and only becomes applicable when the building is occupied or trading

[Dinnertime Dave]

If it is an empty pub and a new licensee wishes to take it over the RRO can't apply until the pub is trading.

So we use the licensing act to reply to the licensing authority and make sure the fire safety provisions are addressed.

I agree, don`t want detention can I go out to play now. Good debate though. Love to discuss TEN`s next.

[wee brian]

Nothing in the RRO about it not applying to empty buildings - It does - the FRA is a bit easier to do though.