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.

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.

The report of the Director of Planning, Building Control and Licensing is enclosed.

The Hearing Panel considered a report from the Director of Planning, Building Control and Licensing regarding a proposal to revoke a street trader consent at the above address. 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 consent had originally been granted on 2 March 2024. When the application was received, it drew no objections therefore did not require hearing at a Sub-Committee. Since granting the consent, complaints had been received, particularly from a local business. The complaints received engaged compliance officers who had found evidence of non-compliance with the conditions of the consent. This included trading incorrect hours and in different locations than where consent had been granted. Issues had been raised regarding the blocking of vehicular access to the neighbouring business. It was noted that road safety was compromised by the location of the Street Trading vehicle, and this was contrary to the aims of the Council’s Street Trading policy. The Licensing officer noted that written representations had been received from the Consent holder, as well as their legal representative. The neighbouring business had not been notified of the original application which was an oversight. However, the Licensing officer still felt it appropriate to revoke the Street Trader Consent.

The panel queried if the complaints received were all from the same person. The Licensing officer stated that several complaints had been received from the neighbouring business and a complaint was also received from a local Councillor.

The consent holder, supported by their daughter, stated that they had submitted several applications for consent that were refused due to the locations being prohibited. They then found Johnson Square, which was confirmed by the Premises Licensing team as being an available location. The consent holder had noticed several abandoned cars on the site and informed the Council but was told that they would have to find a way around this problem themselves. They spoke to the owner of the neighbouring business before setting up the trailer and they instantly had a negative reaction. A local Councillor complained to the consent holder when the trailer was not in the correct place. The consent holder informed them that they had been asked to move to allow access to a nearby building. The consent holder did not understand why there had been such a fight against them trading.

The Licensing officer queried why the consent holder had been trading outside their permitted hours. The consent holder stated that they had not been trading but had been preparing for the next day or cleaning up at the end of the day, which can take up to an hour and a half.

The Licensing officer also queried if most customers were on-foot or in vehicles. The consent holder noted that most were on-foot but if customers came in a vehicle, they would direct them to a  ...  view the full minutes text for item 97.