Agenda and minutes
Licensing and Appeals Sub Committee Hearing Panel - Thursday, 20th June, 2024 10.00 am
Venue: Council Antechamber, Level 2, Town Hall Extension. View directions
Contact: Callum Jones
No. | Item |
---|---|
Exclusion of the Public The officers consider that the following item or items contains exempt information as provided for in the Local Government Access to Information Act and that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information. The Committee is recommended to agree the necessary resolutions excluding the public from the meeting during consideration of these items. At the time this agenda is published no representations have been that this part of the meeting should be open to the public. Minutes: A recommendation was made that the public be excluded during consideration of the following items of business.
Decision
To exclude the public during consideration of the following items which involved consideration of exempt information relating to the financial or business affairs of particular persons, and public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighed the public interest in disclosing the information.
|
|
Application for a Street Trader Consent - Student Biryani, Outside Haris Halal Meat, 372 Cheetham Hill Road, Manchester The report of the Director of Planning, Building Control and Licensing is enclosed. Additional documents:
Minutes: The Hearing Panel considered a report from the Director of Planning, Building Control and Licensing in respect of the above application. The written papers and oral representations of the parties who attended the hearing were also considered, as well as the relevant legislation. The Chair used the agreed procedure to conduct the hearing.
The Licensing Officer informed the panel that the application related to a hot food stall located at the frontage of Haris Halal Meat, 372 Cheetham Hill Road, M8 9LS. The applicant had submitted an application for a Street Trading Consent on 14 April 2024. The Council’s Licensing Unit had received one objection to the application from a nearby business. The main points of the objections received were:–
The applicant’s representative addressed the Panel. It was stated that whilst the items sold by the applicant were of a similar nature similar to those sold by the objector, they were not exactly the same. It was also stated that this business was the only source of income for the applicant, and he was not aware of the need for street trading licence and when this was made aware to him, he ceased trading. It was also reported that the applicant had consent from the shopkeeper to trade in front of his premises and it was clarified that the stall produced not on site waste as all of the food sold was prepared off site and prepackaged. The applicant representative noted that there had been issues with the objector and inappropriate behaviour but that the applicant had never retaliated to this.
Questions were asked of the applicant by the Panel, uncovering further information. This related to the length of time the applicant had been selling hot food without an appropriate licence, the use of the stall to previously sell vegetables before moving to hot food provision, the use of the stall by another individual to sell mangoes without the applicants permission and the absence of business waste arrangements at the applicants home arrangements.
The Licensing Officer summed up by stating that the Council’s Street Trading Policy set out what the panel should consider and provided grounds for refusal if required.
The applicant’s representative summed up by stating that the applicant had tried to find an alternative location but there was nothing close to where he lived. She also state that she felt the applicant should have a chance to earn an income. about any breaches of the current licence, which were simply mistakes.
In reaching its decision the Panel considered the Local Government Miscellaneous Provisions Act 1982 Schedule 4 and The Manchester City Council’s Street Trading Policy. The Committee noted that the stall had been operating for some time as the applicant had been unaware of the requirement for a ... view the full minutes text for item 64. |