Agenda and minutes

There were no apologies.

There were no declarations of interest.

There were no public questions.

1 August 2014

The minutes of the Licensing Committee held on 1 August 2014 were approved and signed as a true record.

·         23 July 2014 – Cheltenham Town Training Ground, Quat Goose Lane, Cheltenham, GL51 9RX

·         6 August 2014 – Mamma’s Kitchen, 10 Bennington Street, Cheltenham, GL50 4ED

The minutes of the Licensing Sub Committee meetings held on 23 July 2014 and 6 August 2014 were approved and signed as a correct record.

Mrs Marie Fullwood

The Senior Licensing Officer, Andy Fox, introduced the report which had been circulated to Members.  He advised that an application had been received from Mrs Marie Fullwood for a street trading consent.  Mrs Fullwood was proposing to sell specialist coffees, chilled drinks, cakes and biscuits from a mobile unit measuring 2.5m x 2.1m (8ft x6.8ft) on the High Street (facing East) adjacent to French Connection and Burger King.  Mrs Fullwood had applied to trade from Monday to Saturday 08:00 to 18:00 and Sunday 09:00 to 18:00, with extended hours (08:00 to 21:00) during late night shopping over Christmas.

The Officer referred members to point 5 in the report, outlining the objections received from:

• Howard Barber, Public Realm Designer, Cheltenham Borough Council
• Martin Quantock Cheltenham Business Partnership Manager
• Martin Levick, Senior Enforcement and Compliance Officer, Cheltenham Borough Council, and
• William Danter

All objections were along similar lines of direct competition with nearby businesses selling similar produce and not conducive to the character and appearance of the area. 

Appendix A of the report provided an image of the trading stall.

Appendices B and C of the report showed location maps of where trading would take place and other traders in the locality.

The officer referred members to the Council’s current policy in relation to street trading and said that members must be satisfied that the proposed street trading is such that ‘’it enhances the town’s reputation as a tourist and leisure destination, and is in keeping with the streetscape’’.

In reply to a question from a Member, the Officer said that Appendix C showed the other street traders in the vicinity, who were joined at varying times throughout the week and year by charity sellers and seasonal traders, such as the turkey man over the Christmas period.

The applicant Mrs Fullwood attended the meeting and spoke in support of her application.  She said they were a small family catering business, wishing to keep everyone in the family employed and that they would like to sell specialist coffees.

In response to questions from Members, Mrs Fullwood said that:

• The coffee bean would be specifically for sale in Cheltenham and be of a type that was not too bitter.
• The illustration of the unit was only a proposal and that it could be made specially to conform to how the committee would like it to look and smaller in size to the proposed 6ft x 8ft if required.
• The family were in the catering business but were not currently trading elsewhere.

Members were advised that they had the following recommendations to determine:

1. The application be approved because Members are satisfied that the application does comply with the provision of the Street Scene policy and the location is deemed suitable; or
   
   
2. The application be refused because it does not comply with the provision of the Street Scene policy as the proposed location is deemed unsuitable.

A vote on option 1 was LOST Voting (For 1, Against 7 with 2 abstentions)

A vote on option 2  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

Mr Aditya Rai

The Senior Licensing Officer, Andy Fox, introduced the report which had been circulated to Members.  He advised that an application had been received from Mr Aditya Rai for a Hackney Carriage vehicle licence on 14 August 2014 to license a Peugeot E7 registration SC57 UJF.  Mr Rai had failed to renew his vehicle licence on time and was now making a new application, however the vehicle in question was older than the maximum permitted age limit of 5 years from date of manufacture and thus members were being asked to determine whether the application be permitted.

The Officer added that Mr Rai’s previous licence had expired on 8 August 2014 and that despite numerous reminders he had failed to renew it in time.  The Licensing and Business Support Team leader having considered the facts, notified Mr Rai in writing on 8 August that he had decided not to renew his expired licence.  A copy of this letter was attached at Appendix A.

The Officer reminded members that this application must be determined on its merits as a new licence application and advised that the vehicle had passed all relevant assessments and was a disabled access vehicle.

In response to questions from members the Officer confirmed that :

• It was the same vehicle seeking a new licence
• The vehicle was 7 years old and that as it was a disabled access vehicle, it could continue working for 14 years.
• The vehicle had been purpose built as a disabled access taxi and specifically modified with sliding doors and built in ramps.
• Mr Rai’s licence expired on 8 August and that the letter refusing Mr Rai’s renewal was dated 8 August, confirming that the renewal was a day late.  Mr Rai’s application of 14 August was for a new licence.

The applicant Mr Rai attended the meeting and spoke in support of his case for a licence renewal.  Mr Rai told members that he had tried to renew his licence on 4 August but that his car was due for an MOT on 6 August which it subsequently failed and thus he thought he could not reapply for his licence without a valid MOT.  As the Depot was busy the car could not be fixed straightaway so it was left there for the work to be done and it passed its MOT on 8 August.   Mr Rai rang the council on 8 August to renew his licence, but was told it had expired. 

Members felt that the Officer’s stance had been unreasonable as it was only one day late, however the Officer pointed out that allowances were made for MOTs if they had been contacted and relevant forms stamped.

Councillor Thornton moved to vote, but questioned the resolution at 1.4.1, stating that the renewal should be granted.  The Solicitor advised the committee that it should vote on the recommendations as set out in the report.

Members were advised that they had the following recommendations to determine:

1.    The application be granted because the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

Mr Lance Stuart Hepworth

The Senior Licensing Officer, Andy Fox, introduced the report concerning the review of Mr Lance Stuart Hepworth’s Hackney Carriage Driver’s Licence which was due for renewal on 19 January 2015.  He advised members that Mr Hepworth’s licence was suspended on 14 August 2014 as Mr Hepworth had pleaded guilty on 11 August 2014 to the death of Katie Clutterbuck on 15 September 2013 by careless / inconsiderate driving. 

The Officer referred members to point 1.5 of the report stating that the Licensing Committee has the delegated authority to revoke a driver’s licence.  He also informed members that since writing the report Mr Hepworth had been sentenced to 7 months in prison and disqualified from driving for 3 years.

On points of clarification, the Officer confirmed that:

• In 3 year’s time Mr Hepworth would be able to re-apply for a new licence.
• Mr Hepworth could not attend to speak for himself as he was in prison and thus the decision should be made at this meeting.
• The committee were being asked to revoke his licence with immediate effect, despite the fact that he had now been disqualified from driving.
  
  

Members felt this was merely a matter of formality and the Chair moved to vote.

Members were advised that they had the following recommendations to determine.

1.    Mr Hepworth’s Hackney Carriage driver’s licence be continued with no further action because the Committee is satisfied that he is a fit and proper person to hold such a licence; or

2.    Mr Hepworth’s Hackney Carriage driver’s licence be revoked as the Committee considers him to no longer be a fit and proper person to hold such a licence in accordance with section 61(1)(b) of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976.
and

3.    Subject to the resolutions above, the Committee must also determine whether Mr Hepworth’s Hackney Carriage driver’s licence should be revoked with immediate effect in the interests of public safety in accordance with section 2B of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976.

Upon a vote it was (9 for, 1 against)

RESOLVED, that Mr Hepworth’s Hackney Carriage driver’s licence be revoked as the Committee considered him to no longer be a fit and proper person to hold such a licence in accordance with section 61(1)(b) of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976 and that it be revoked with immediate effect in the interests of public safety in accordance with section 2B of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976.

The Senior Licensing Officer, Andy Fox Officer introduced the report which summarised the results of the public consultation on whether Cheltenham Borough Council should limit the number of Sexual Entertainment Venues (“SEV”) it will license in the borough. Under the Council’s constitutional arrangements, the Licensing Committee acted as consultee to Cabinet/Lead Member on recommendations/responses for the adoption and review of the licensing policy.   The Committee therefore needed to consider the relevant facts and put forward a view for consideration by Cabinet.

The officer circulated a paper of the results of SEV consultations with other Council’s, as well as the Chair’s proposed framework for forming a resolution and Members were given time to read these.

He reminded Members that premises could provide relevant entertainment on an infrequent basis via a Temporary Event Notice (TEN) without the need for a SEV licence, this being for no longer than 24 hours on no more than 11 occasions a year, but that this report was concerned with the regulation of frequent sexual entertainment.

The Solicitor advised Members that the Council were not legally required to adopt such a policy but that it would be considered good practice to do so.  She added that the current policy, adopted on 4 February 2011, did not set a limit on the number of SEVs, but dealt with each application on a case by case basis.  However following the recent grant of a SEV licence that attracted significant local opposition, the Council had considered it appropriate to undertake consultation on whether to limit the number of licensed SEVs in the borough. She advised that the Council was empowered to set a limit on the number of licensed SEVs permitted in the relevant locality, with zero being an option, but that the relevant locality must be defined.  The whole of Cheltenham Borough cannot be defined as the relevant locality ruling out a total zero limit.

Appendix A gave a summary breakdown of the 174 responses received from the public consultation on the views of the town’s residents.

Members were also reminded that a petition had been submitted to the Council meeting on 21 July calling for it to adopt a zero limit and that it was resolved to refer the matter to Cabinet for consideration.  Members were also referred to point 4.8 in the report from the Gloucestershire Constabulary who said there were no statistics suggesting that SEVs were responsible for or increased the likelihood of sexual offences.

The Chair reminded Members that the sexual entertainment policy varied from the alcohol licensing policy in that there is no “presumption of grant”. Whilst acknowledging that all members have various moral views, they should consider the best interests of the borough as a whole; also a borough wide zero limit would not be in the spirit of the act.  He reminded that the committee were not acting today as regulatory body but as an advisory body to Cabinet.

Councillor McKinlay attended the meeting as Cabinet Member for Development and Safety in  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

None

3 October 2014

3 October 2014.