Document Alternatives to a Saturation Policy

Library view optionsIconsList

Library home - Scrutiny Reports - 2006/07

Alternatives to a Saturation Policy

Most modern cities have developed a night-time economy and a lively one can be beneficial
to the city’s overall economic status. However, it is recognised that with this activity often
comes a number of problems, most of which are caused by people who have consumed too
much alcohol. Plymouth has a large number of licensed premises many of which, like most
cities, are concentrated in particular areas. As a result, the level of alcohol related incidents
in those areas is significantly higher than elsewhere in the city.
One of the tools that can be used to help limit the spread of licensed premises is the
adoption of a saturation policy. A saturation policy allows for any new license applications
received for a premise within the defined saturation zone to be refused on the grounds of
‘cumulative impact’ (this is explained later in the report) and the onus is placed on the
applicant to prove that the premise involved will not add to the problems already being
experienced in the area.
When the panel began its initial investigations into the possibility of a saturation policy for
Plymouth, as part of the Anti-Social Behaviour scrutiny review, many of us and indeed many
of those we spoke to then and during this review, were in favour of its adoption. However, it
soon became apparent that as well as the benefits this could bring there were also two
significant disadvantages, namely that a saturation policy could –
• restrict new opportunities and thus development of the night-time economy
• open the door to ‘bidding wars’ for licensed premises within the saturation zone
Bearing this in mind, we thought it would be beneficial to explore fully the alternatives that
were available to us and our partners before we made our final recommendations to
Cabinet. We thus began our review into ‘Alternatives to a Saturation Policy’.