The Buckinghamshire Council Licensing (Premises) Sub-Committee met on Monday 13 July 2026 to consider an application to vary the premises licence for S&S Kitchen, located at 58 Kingsbury, Aylesbury. The committee ultimately rejected the application, citing concerns about the potential for increased public nuisance and crime and disorder.

S&S Kitchen, 58 Kingsbury, Aylesbury

The Licensing (Premises) Sub-Committee considered an application to vary the premises licence for S&S Kitchen, located at 58 Kingsbury, Aylesbury. The applicant, S&S Kitchen (Bucks) Ltd, sought to change the venue's operation from a restaurant to a nightlife-oriented venue. This involved extending the terminal hours for the sale of alcohol, late-night refreshment, and live music on Saturdays, Sundays, and bank holidays until 4 am. The application also proposed adding recorded music, including that played by a DJ, and replacing existing conditions with those from the operating schedule.

The application was met with objections from Thames Valley Police, the Environmental Health Authority, and Public Health, as well as representations from interested parties.

Environmental Health raised concerns about the proposed extended hours and the introduction of DJ-led music, deeming them unsuitable due to the premises' proximity to residential properties. They highlighted a history of noise complaints from previous events held under Temporary Event Notices (TENs) and stated that the proposed operating schedule lacked sufficient detail regarding noise management, acoustic assessments, and soundproofing. Charlie Robinson, representing Environmental Health, emphasised that the proposed boundary checks were insufficient and that the premises' structure was not ideal for a nightclub operation.

Thames Valley Police objected on the grounds of preventing crime and disorder, arguing that extending hours beyond 2 am would increase the risk of alcohol-related crime and anti-social behaviour, particularly at a time when police resources are reduced. Trevor Hooper, the police licensing officer, noted that the current policing model for the town centre's night-time economy is structured around demand decreasing after 2 am, and later hours would strain resources. He also highlighted concerns about smoking areas becoming focal points for disorder and the potential for increased pressure on policing across the wider district. The police suggested that a termination of alcohol sales at 2 am and a closing time of 2:30 am would be acceptable, along with additional conditions such as no smoking at the front of the premises and an extra staff member dedicated to safeguarding vulnerable individuals.

Public Health objected due to the area's high levels of alcohol-related harm, crime, anti-social behaviour, and deprivation. Sarah Winchester, a consultant in public health medicine, stated that the proposed changes would likely increase alcohol consumption and exacerbate existing risks, particularly concerning crime and disorder, public safety, and the protection of children from harm. She noted that the ward in question is in the top 20% in Buckinghamshire for crime, anti-social behaviour, violent crime, sexual offences, and alcohol dependency treatment rates.

The applicant, Stevi Beckford, the Designated Premises Supervisor for S&S Kitchen, acknowledged the concerns raised and stated that the application aimed to operate under a permanent licence with clear conditions rather than relying on repeated TENs. She highlighted investments in measures such as door staff, communication systems, and CCTV.

Karen Gray, an interested party and guarantor for a neighbouring residential property, expressed significant concerns about noise disturbance from previous events, stating that crockery had shaken in cupboards and televisions were inaudible due to the DJ's volume. She noted that the building's structure was unsuitable for a nightclub and that residents had previously had to leave their homes during TENs events. She also raised concerns about the potential for increased anti-social behaviour from patrons congregating outside and the impact of late-night operations on residents' ability to sleep.

The Sub-Committee ultimately rejected the application. They placed significant weight on the representations from Environmental Health, agreeing that the proposed hours and nightclub-style operation were unsuitable given the proximity to residential properties and the history of noise complaints. The committee found the applicant's proposed conditions insufficient, particularly the lack of objective noise limits and acoustic evidence. They also noted that the period between 2:30 am and 4:00 am was identified by the applicant as their busiest, suggesting the application aimed to attract customers from other venues closing earlier, which would likely lead to further public nuisance and undermine licensing objectives. The committee also considered the police's concerns about increased crime and disorder with extended hours.

The decision was communicated in a Decision Notice, which stated that the Sub-Committee had resolved to reject the application to vary the premises licence. The reasons cited included the failure to demonstrate how the licensing objectives, particularly the prevention of public nuisance and crime and disorder, would be promoted. The Sub-Committee concluded that granting the variation would undermine these objectives.