Meeting documents

There were no apologies for absence received.

There were no interests declared.

The Chairman introduced the parties and explained the procedure to be followed. The Hearing Regulations 2005 stated that the Authority must allow parties an equal period of time in which to present their evidence. It was agreed that the maximum time for each presentation be ten minutes.

The Chairman asked if anyone had any objections to the Members of the meeting.

There were no objections.

The Licensing Enforcement Officer presented the report to members, highlighting background information and the representations received. Since the production of the report there had been agreement from the Applicant and the Environmental Health Department had withdrawn their representation. She informed members that this application was being dealt with under the law and guidance in place prior to 25 April 2012.

There were no questions for the Licensing Enforcement Officer from the Applicant and Interested Parties.

Following a question from the Chairman, the Licensing Enforcement Officer stated the Applicant had held a licence for the 120,000 capacity for 12 months.

The applicant's representatives presented their case and highlighted the following points:

• The Applicant was seeking a 40,000 increased capacity under the premises licence, rather than having a number of orders and 1 or 2 variations.
• Not to minimise any of the concerns raised by the interested parties, he pointed out that in 2010 there was only one complaint received. This was remarkable for such a big event as "Down Load".
• The event had been running for 10 years at Donington Park.
• The premises licence covers all other events that take place, but "Down Load" had the most impact on capacity.
• The Applicant has the satisfaction of a very successful event which contributed to the economy of the local community.
• Charitable support had been provided to Parish Councils and other groups and this support would continue.
• The Applicant was committed to resolving any issues raised and following the concern over track management, a steward would be positioned by buildings on Slade Lane. This had been confirmed to the interested parties.
• A Traffic Management Plan had been produced which covered most of the issues raised
• The difference in the impact on traffic between the "Down Load" and MotoGP events was explained.
• The one way system proposals were explained, together with a change of start time to 9am which would reduce the impact on Schools and work traffic. It was emphasised that there may be traffic congestion. This change had been made following consultation with residents and Parish Councils.
• A "residents' line" would be available again during "Down Load" for residents to report any security or litter problems.

Following a question from the Chairman regarding a matter raised by Mr Presley regarding an accident involving his daughter as a result of the traffic diversions, the Applicant's Representative stated since the accident on the one way system was 5 years ago he was unable to comment on why the Interested Party was not made aware of the diversions in place at the time of the accident. It was emphasised that their current traffic plan had been approved by the Highways Authority and that they had worked closely with Leicestershire Constabulary. Stewards are now placed on every entrance to the one way system and residents notified of the times and diversionary routes. In extreme circumstances notices would also be displayed.

There were no questions from the Interested Party.

No objections had been received from Responsible Authorities.

Mr J Presley presented his representation. He stated that last year's event was excellent and he had no problem regarding the events held at Donington Park as his family regularly attend. After the accident a sign had been erected at the exit to the farm showing the direction of traffic. The point in writing the letter was to request that the Applicant notify surrounding neighbours of what they are going to do, to enable his family and others to make the necessary arrangements.

Noise was a problem when there was an easterly wind.

Litter collection works well in Leicestershire, but in Derbyshire there was a problem. He explained that he had collected 5/6 bags of refuse along the stretch of road near his farm.

He had also been subjected to abuse from teenagers urinating in front of one of the buildings on the farm.

In response to Mr Presley's representation comments from the Applicant's representatives were as follows:-

• The Applicant had made contributions to Parish Councils and worked hard with the community to compensate for any inconvenience.

• Noise - unfortunately there would be a certain amount of noise coming from events.

• The danger issues had been resolved for people who have local knowledge.

• There was now a telephone number for residents to ring to report litter and security problems.

In response to questions from members, the Applicant's representatives stated they would work with residents more, put up notices in front of people's properties and try to ensure that stewards do not leave until everyone was off site and closed down. We would review again each year and identify where improvements could be made.

There were no more questions.

The Interested Party made a closing statement and pointed out that he was not against events at Donington Park as it brought business and employment into the area. He wanted to raise awareness of the dangers and importance of notifying residents.

The applicant's representative made a closing statement reiterating points made earlier in the hearing.

At 7.23pm the Sub Committee adjourned to consider its decision and re-convened at 7.32pm.