northlincs.gov.uk

PRESENT: Councillor Barkworth in the chair.

Councillors Clark, Ellerby, Swift and Vickers

The sub-committee met at Pittwood House, Scunthorpe.

790 DECLARATIONS OF PERSONAL OR PERSONAL AND PREJUDICIAL INTERESTS AND SIGNIFICANT CONTACT WITH APPLICANTS, OBJECTORS OR THIRD PARTIES (LOBBYING) – There were no declarations of personal or personal and prejudicial interests.

791 MINUTES – Resolved – That the minutes of the meeting held on 30 June 2009, having been printed and circulated amongst the members, be taken as read and correctly recorded and be signed by the chair.

792 (12) LOCAL GOVERNMENT (MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS) ACT 1982 APPLICATION FOR GRANT OF STREET TRADING CONSENT – MR. P. KEANE (T/A COFFEE REPUBLIC), COLE STREET, SCUNTHORPE – The Service Director Neighbourhood and Environment submitted a report concerning an application for a street trading consent at the above location. Details of the application were outlined in the report.

The Service Director in his report reminded the sub-committee that the options available to it under the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1982 when considering such applications were: –

• To grant the consent as applied for with no additional conditions or restrictions.
• To grant the consent, subject to different conditions or restrictions.
• To refuse the consent, as applied for.

Mr Keane attended the meeting, and introduced himself to Members as the Manager of Coffee Republic. Mr Keane explained that the application for the street trading consent had been submitted with the hope that the ice cream van would encourage visitors to Scunthorpe town centre to adopt a more circular route of the town centre, therefore incorporating Jubilee Way and the Parishes area within their visit.

Mr Keane advised Members that this was a new venture and concept for the town centre and explained that a similar scheme had been introduced in the Princes Quay, Hull and had been successful in achieving higher footfall within the vicinity.

Mr Keane confirmed that local traders had been consulted over the proposal and it had been welcomed in the current difficult economic climate.

The sub-committee members engaged in further discussion with the applicant and then convened for deliberation.

Resolved – That the application be granted.

(Reason to grant – following the submission from the applicant and in view that this was a sole request dealt with on its merits, the Committee was minded to grant the application with the addition of the standard Street Trading Conditions along with an additional condition that the ice cream van was in position prior to 10.00am and left after 16.00pm, but before 19.30pm.

The Committee considered it appropriate to deviate from the council’s policy due to the current trading climate and the benefit the ice cream van would have in bringing additional footfall to the Parishes area.

The Committee was satisfied that the ice cream van would cause little noise and odour to the area and that the refuse facilities provided in the area would be suitable for the running of the ice cream van).

793 LOCAL GOVERNMENT (MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS) ACT 1976 TOWN POLICE CLAUSES ACT 1847 – APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF HACKNEY CARRIAGE/PRIVATE HIRE VEHICLE DRIVERS LICENCE – The Service Director Neighbourhood and Environment submitted a report advising members of an application for review of a Hackney Carriage/Private Hire Drivers Licence to be determined by the sub-committee.

The report contained background information on the process for determining such applications, the information to be taken into account and the circumstances in which the sub-committee could refuse a licence.

The options available to the sub-committee when considering the application were:

• To revoke the licence.
• To suspend the licence for a set period of time.
• To take no action.

Should the sub-committee refuse the application or impose additional terms, conditions or restrictions then the applicant may appeal to the Magistrates Court within 21 days from the date on which he was notified of the decision. Should the Magistrates uphold the decision of the council, the applicant had further recourse to the Crown Court.

The procedure for dealing with such applications at meetings of the sub-committee had previously been circulated to members.

Resolved – That the public be excluded from the meeting for consideration of the following item (Minute 793(i) refers) on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraphs 1 and 2 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972 (as amended).

793 (i) (13) MR G A

Mr G A attended the meeting for consideration of the item. Also in attendance was Ms S Cresswell, Integrated Systems Coordinator, Safeguard and Practice who gave an account of the events that had lead to Mr G A’s appearance before this sub-committee, and answered questions relating to reported incident.

The sub-committee considered the evidence and submissions and also ascertained that the reason for no representation from Humberside Police was due to the lack of evidence.

Resolved – (a) That the licence remain in force, however in order to obtain a licence in future the applicant would be required to obtain a Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) check on an annual basis, (b) that no further contracts for education or social services within the Council would be undertaken by Mr G A, (c) that the applicant receive a strongly worded warning as to his conduct and that any future offence or inappropriate behaviour would result in him coming back before this committee where a much more severe view would be taken, which could result in the revocation of his licence, and (d) that the applicant was advised to consider the appropriateness of his behaviour towards children in the future.