Experience gained in Licensing of Places of Public Entertainment Licence (Cinema/Theatre) (with illustrated examples)
BD Case
Case no.: 01/05
| Nature: |
Alteration of seating layout to an existing cinema |
| Problems: |
The revised length for row of seats in the cinema box was 3.8m, which exceeds the limit of 3m as stipulated in the MOE code 1996. |
| Solution: |
The revised Practice Note for Authroized Persons and Registered Structural Engineers (PNAP) no.54 was issued by BD in October 2005, and the limit of 3m for the row of seats is relaxed subject to the prescribed site conditions. Hence, the length of 3.8m was accepted according to the revised PNAP 54. |
| Lesson learnt: |
Under the revised PNAP no.54, the seating layout design of the cinema is more flexible. The seating layout of the cinemas should comply with the following requirements:-
- The maximum length of a row of seats in a cinema box should not exceed 12m for a seatway with gangway on one side only, and 24m for a seatway with gangways on two sides.
- The number of seats in a row should not be more than that set out in Table A in accordance with the width of seatway.
Table A - Maximum number of seats in a row
| Width of Seatway (mm) |
Maximum number of seats in a row |
|
300 to 324
325 to 349
350 to 374
375 to 399
400 to 424
425 to 449
450 to 474
475 to 499
500 or more
|
7
8
9
10
11
12
12
12
Limited by the maximum length of seatway of 12m
|
14
15
18
20
22
24
26
28
Limited by the maximum length of seatway of 24m.
|
The width of seatway is the minimum clear horizontal distance between the back of one seat unit and the nearest projection of the seat unit in the row behind. Where seats tip up automatically, the width of seatway should be measured between the back of one seat unit and the maximum projection of the seat unit behind when the seat is in the tipped-up position.
|
Case no.: 02/05
| Nature: |
Addition of a raised platform to a new cinema. |
| Problems: |
The height of the proposed raised platform was more than 600mm and hence protective railing of 1100mm high around the platform should be installed as stipulated in the Building (Planning) Regulations. The installation of the protective railing would affect the design of the raised platform and the applicant found difficulty in compliance. |
| Solution: |
BD advised the applicant to reduce the height of the raised platform to less than 600mm. Under the Building (Planning) Regulations, protective railing to the raised platform with height of less than 600mm is not necessary. |
| Lesson Learnt: |
Applicant should consider to construct any raised platform with maximum height not more than 600mm if protective barrier would be a design constraint. |
FEHD Case
Case no.: 01/06
| Nature: |
Chemicals were used to provide certain effects during displaying cinematograph. |
| Problems: |
The applicant intended to use chemicals to create the effects of providing fog fluid, snow fluid and bio-bubble during displaying cinematograph. As the fog fluid contained propylene glycol, it would irritate eyes and repeated contact might cause skin sensitization. The snow fluid contained less than 0.5% triethanolamine and the substance could be absorbed into the body by inhalating the aerosol.
Department of Health raised adverse comment to the application for PPE (Cinema) Licence because short term exposure to high concentration of the aerosol would cause irritations to eyes, skin and respiratory tract and repeated contact might cause skin sensitization.
|
| Lessons Learnt: |
The applicant should ensure that any chemical used for creating desired effects during displaying cinematograph should not pose any harmful effect to the human. He should seek proper advice from relevant authority in advance before submitting the application for licence in order not to cause any undue delay in obtaining the licence. |
Case no.: 02/06
| Nature: |
Means of escape arrangement of cinema/theatre |
| Problems: |
Architecture Services Department (Arch SD) raised Cat.3 objection to the means of escape arrangement of the premises under application for licence. The requirements for such were as follows:
- The site of the Theatre should abut upon and have frontages to 2 or more thoroughfares;
- Accommodation for persons awaiting admission should be provided on the basis of 0.5 sq.m per person at a ratio of one in six persons for whom seating accommodation was provided.
|
| Lessons Learnt: |
The applicant should ensure that the means of escape of the premises comply with the building safety requirements as required by Arch SD before submitting the application for licence. |
Case no.: 01/07
| Nature: |
Use of Cinema as Theatre |
| Problems: |
Premises under application were once licensed as a cinema and business had ceased for many years.
Upon referral of this new PPE (Theatre) application to relevant departments for comment, Buildings Department raised objection on Cat. 3 requirements requesting the applicant to submit separate revised plans to Buildings Department for prior approval.
|
| Lessons Learnt: |
Before submission of an application for Places of Public Entertainment (Theatre) Licence, the applicant is advised to appoint an Authorized Person to verify the suitability of the premises concerned being used as a theatre, as required by Buildings Department. |
Experience gained in Licensing of Places of Public Entertainment Licence for Places Other Than Cinemas and Theatres (with illustrated examples)
BD Case
Case no.: 01/07
| Nature: |
Erection of a marquee for a Temporary Places of Public Entertainment licence (TPPEL) application at a Theme Park |
| Problems: |
Structural justification (S.J.) for the marquee submitted was found unacceptable but the marquee was being erected on site, which did not tally with the submitted S.J. The applicant found difficulty in revising the S.J. to meet safety standard in view of the short lead time before the start of the event. |
| Solution: |
BD requested the applicant to employ a Registered Structural Engineer (RSE) to undertake a contingency plan for the first 3 days of the event. The applicant have to replace the marquee with one that had been accepted by BD for the remaining TPPEL period. |
| Lessons Learnt: |
Applicant should allow sufficient time in submitting S.J. for temporary structures which had not been accepted by BD in previous application. |
Case no.: 02/07
| Nature: |
Games machines changed in position to cater for variety from time to time in Family Amusement Centre(FAC). |
| Problems: |
Games machines of FAC located on exit routes obstructing the access to exit staircase in a shopping arcade. |
| Solution: |
BD advised the applicant to delineate game zones on the layout plan where the games machines could be swop within the game zone without affecting the exit routes. |
| Lessons Learnt: |
Applicant should consider planning the disposition of the games machines by delineating game zones within the licence premises. |
