EPPING FOREST DISTRICT COUNCIL
COMMITTEE MINUTES

Committee:
Licensing Panel

Date:
3 June 2004

Place:
Council Chamber, Civic Offices,
High Street, Epping
Time:
10.10 a.m. - 11.15 a.m.

Members
Present:
Councillors D Kelly (Vice Chairman in the Chair), Mrs D Collins, Mrs J Davis,
L Martin, R Morgan, Mrs M Sartin, Mrs P Smith.

Other
Councillors:
-

Apologies:
Councillors M Dickins (Chairman), G Farren.

Advisory
Officers
Present:
J Nolan (Environmental Services), R Ferreira, L Cole (Legal Services),
G J Woodhall (Democratic Services).

Other
Officers
Present: K Tuckey (Environmental Services).

53. MINUTES

RESOLVED:

That the minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 29 April 2004 be
taken as read and signed by the Chairman as a correct record of the meeting,
subject to the following amendment:

(a) That Councillor R Morgan be included in the list of Councillors who gave
their apologies for absence.

54. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

(a) Pursuant to the Council's Code of Member Conduct, Councillors D Kelly,
Mrs D Collins, Mrs J Davis, L Martin, R Morgan, Mrs M Sartin, and Mrs P Smith
declared a personal interest in item (7) of the Agenda (Application to trade
in a designated Consent Street – Mr D Gregson t/a 'Buddy's Diner') of the
agenda, by virtue of knowing the District Councillor in attendance who had
objected to the application. The Councillors had determined that their
interest was not prejudicial and would remain in the meeting for the
consideration of the application and voting thereon.

(b) Pursuant to the Council's Code of Member Conduct, Councillor D Kelly
declared a further personal interest in item (7) of the Agenda (Application to
trade in a designated Consent Street – Mr D Gregson t/a 'Buddy's Diner') of
the agenda, by virtue of knowing David Tatapudi who had provided a reference
for the applicant. The Councillor had determined that his interest was not
prejudicial and would remain in the meeting for the consideration of the
application and voting thereon.

55. PROCEDURE FOR CONDUCT OF BUSINESS

The Panel noted the agreed procedure for the conduct of business, and its
terms of reference.

56. ORDER OF BUSINESS

The Chairman announced changes to the order of business in the agenda for the
remainder of the meeting for the Panel's approval.

RESOLVED:

That the item requiring the Exclusion of Public and Press from the meeting,
Hackney Carriage Driver's Licence Application – Mr M Coe, be deferred until
the other business had been transacted.

57. LATE NIGHT REFRESHMENT HOUSES ACT 1969 - THE KEBABERY,
112 HIGH STREET, EPPING

The Panel was informed that the Applicant had decided to withdraw the
application after the agenda had been printed, and that no consideration of
the matter was required.

58. LOCAL GOVERNMENT (MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS) ACT 1982 -
APPLICATION TO TRADE IN A DESIGNATED CONSENT STREET -
MR D GREGSON T/A 'BUDDY'S DINER'

The Chairman invited the participants to introduce themselves to the Panel. On
behalf of the application there was the applicant Mr Gregson in attendance
with his wife. Against the application there was one objector, District
Councillor Mrs A Grigg, a ward member for North Weald Bassett.

The Head of Environmental Services introduced the application and explained that
for the purposes of street trading, all streets within the District had been
designated consent streets. This meant that anyone wishing to trade must
first apply for, and obtain consent from the Council. An application for such
consent had been received from Mr David Leslie Gregson, who traded as 'Buddy's
Diner' in Canes Lane lay-by, North Weald. Environmental Services had
undertaken the required consultations and the applicant had placed a public
notice. Objections to the consent had been received from Councillor Mrs Grigg
and Councillor Stallan, both District ward members for North Weald Bassett,
and hence the case had been brought before the Panel for consideration. Two
character references had also been received on behalf of the applicant.

(a) Presentation of Applicant's Case

The Chairman invited the applicant to present his case, for which the central
issue would be the perceived litter problem at the lay-by. The applicant
agreed that during the winter months, the visible rubbish in the hedge was
unsightly but maintained that this rubbish had been present before he had
started trading in April 2003. The applicant provided a bin for use by
customers, which was removed daily, and cleared the lay-by of other litter
especially on Mondays. The applicant stated that, in his opinion, a clean
lay-by encouraged customers to stop and also to use the bins provided. The
applicant commented that there had been two litterbins in the lay-by provided
by the District Council, but now there was only one.

The applicant had instigated a petition amongst his regular customers to
support his claim that he had kept the lay-by clean and tidy, and had also
received a number of comments in the process. One customer, who worked at the
Ongar depot for Direct Services, claimed that the rubbish in the hedge had
been there for at least five years, whilst another customer, who was a Health
and Safety Officer, had told his workers not to clear the rubbish from the
hedge as it was too dangerous. The applicant had been told by the crew that
emptied the public litterbin, that they had requested the hedge be cut back to
enable the accumulated rubbish to be cleared but nothing had been done.

The applicant contended that the lay-by was now kept so clean that the resident
colony of rats was no longer present in the lay-by. The Panel were informed
that the applicant regularly saw a Council crew empty the public litterbin at
the lay-by, but had never seen a crew attempt to clear the accumulated rubbish
away from the hedge. In the opinion of the applicant, the majority of the
litter in the lay-by was left at evenings and weekends when the applicant was
not trading.

(b) Questions for the Applicant

During questioning by the Panel, the applicant revealed that any wastewater was
poured down the ordinary Highways drain at the site, and that there had been no
apparent problems with lorries parking at the site or any obstruction of the
adjacent highway. The applicant was also unaware of the owner of the boundary
hedge at the lay-by, and thought that it might be Epping Forest District
Council. The applicant stated that he would like to see the rubbish cleared
from the hedge, but acknowledged that the Hawthorn bushes posed problems in
this respect. The applicant also informed the Panel that although the
application was for trading until 16:30, on most afternoons trading had ceased
by 15:00.

District Councillor Mrs Anne Grigg, a ward member for North Weald Bassett who
was objecting to the Trading Consent, inquired of the applicant whether he
felt that the tables and chairs provided by the business encouraged his
customers to leave their cars and deposit their litter. The applicant replied
that his customers either placed their litter in the bin provided or staff
picked it up. The applicant reminded the Councillor that he kept the lay-by
clean and provided a litterbin for his customers.

(c) Presentation of Objections

There being no further questions, Councillor Mrs Grigg then proceeded to make a
statement objecting to the Street Trading Consent requested by the applicant.
Councillor Mrs Grigg agreed that the area was an eyesore in winter as the hedge
growth hid the problem in summer. It was stated that the presence of the
applicant's business increased the use of the lay-by leading to more litter
being dropped in the area, and the problem had worsened during the last twelve
months. Complaints had been received from residents about the amount of
litter in the lay-by, and although the Parish Council had not been notified
about the application, they did object on the grounds outlined by the District
Councillor. Councillor Mrs Grigg acknowledged that there was a problem with
litter from the nearby MacDonald's restaurant, but it was her view that
Buddy's Diner exacerbated the problem in the Canes Lane lay-by.
Councillor Mrs Grigg felt that the lay-by should be included upon the schedule
of a litter picking patrol, and had phoned the Highways department at Epping
Forest District Council to achieve this, but there had been no subsequent
improvement in the area.

(d) Questions for the Objector

In response to questions from the Panel, Councillor Mrs Grigg confirmed that she
only ever inspected the lay-by when the Burger Van was not there. The applicant
reminded the Panel that the litter that was there eighteen months ago could
not have come from his business, as he was not trading then. Councillor Mrs
Grigg contended that the litter problem had increased in the lay-by since
Buddy's Diner had started trading. The applicant retorted that the litter
left at weekends was predominantly from MacDonald's, but Councillor Mrs Grigg
maintained that not all the litter was from MacDonald's, and that if the
Parish litter-picked the lay-by then the litter soon returned.

(e) Applicant's Right of Final Reply

The applicant informed the Panel that the litter in the lay-by was not
generated by his business or by his customers, as there were bins provided in
the lay-by. The applicant contended that the lay-by was kept clean by his
staff and that the lay-by was cleaner for the presence of the Burger Van. The
applicant pointed out that all collected litter was taken home by the
Applicant and put out for domestic refuse collection.

(f) Panel's Consideration of the Application

The Chairman then requested that the applicant and his wife, along with
Councillor Mrs Grigg, leave the chamber while the Panel debated the
application in private session.

The majority of the Panel were supportive of the applicant; feeling that the
lay-by was a cleaner area for his presence and litter only appeared at
weekends when he did not trade. The Head of Environmental Services pointed
out that most ordinary people did not see a problem with pouring foul water
down a surface water drain, whilst the Chairman of the Panel pointed out that
Officers would brief the applicant upon the full set of terms and conditions
should his application be successful. Some members felt that the applicant was
not keeping the site clean and that Epping Forest District Council should cut
the hedge and clear the rubbish, although other members accepted that perhaps
this raised issues over the level of street cleansing undertaken within the
District.

Many members of the Panel were disappointed that Councillor Mrs Grigg had not
visited the lay-by whilst the Applicant was trading. It was felt that it was
not the applicant's responsibility to cut or clear the hedge; this was the
responsibility of Epping Forest District Council or Essex County Council. One
member of the Panel had visited the site whilst the applicant was trading and
informed the Panel that the drivers who stopped appreciated the business.
There was not much litter in evidence, and the applicant was clearly running a
clean business and was being responsible. The hedge should be cut back but
there was the issue of ownership between the District and County Councils. It
was felt that the rubbish strewn in the hedge was nothing to do with the Diner
or its customers, as the cleanliness of the lay-by attracted customers in the
first place.

The Chairman emphasised that it was only recently that a licence had been
required to trade in the street, and perhaps the applicant had not appreciated
the full set of conditions that had to be complied with. The applicant
plainly understood the litter issue and had attempted to deal with it.

(g) The Panel's Decision

The participants were invited back into the chamber whereupon the Chairman
announced the decision of the Panel to grant the consent and the Head of
Environmental Services informed the applicant that the Council's standard
terms and conditions would apply.

RESOLVED:

That Mr David Leslie Gregson be granted a street trading consent to sell fast
food from a towed burger van in Canes Lane, North Weald, subject to the
Council's standard terms and conditions.

59. EXCLUSION OF PUBLIC AND PRESS

RESOLVED:

That the public and press be excluded from the meeting for the items of
business set out below on the grounds that they will involve the disclosure of
exempt information as defined in the Paragraph of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of
the Local Government Act 1972:

Agenda Subject Exempt Information
Item No Paragraph No

8 Hackney Carriage Driver's Licence 4
Application – Mr M Coe

60. LOCAL GOVERNMENT (MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS) ACT 1976 -
APPLICATION FOR A HACKNEY CARRIAGE DRIVER'S LICENCE - MR M COE

The Panel considered an application by Mr M Coe for a Hackney Carriage Driver's
Licence. Members noted that Mr Cooper did not meet the Council's Licensing
criteria in that his Criminal Records Bureau record had revealed relevant
offences under the conviction criteria and, as a result, the Head of
Environmental Services could not issue the Licence under delegated authority.

The Chairman welcomed the applicant, and his partner, before he introduced the
Panel and Officers present. The Head of Environmental Services informed the
Panel of the circumstances under which the licence could not be issued under
delegated authority.

In a short statement to the Panel, the applicant outlined the circumstances
relating to his prior conviction. In response to questions from the Panel,
the applicant admitted that he had never been a taxi driver before and had not
applied to any other authorities for a Hackney Carriage Licence. The
applicant informed the Panel that he intended to undertake private hire work
in Sawbridgeworth, Harlow and Bishop's Stortford for Crown Cars, whose
Operator's Licence was issued by Epping Forest District Council, hence the
applicant had applied for his Hackney Carriage Licence with this authority as
well.

The Chairman requested that the Applicant and his partner leave the Chamber
whilst the Panel debated his application.

Despite the opinion of the Panel that the applicant had committed a very
serious offence, the Head of Environmental Services reminded the Panel that
the conviction would be 'spent' after a period of five years and would not
have to be declared by the applicant. The Panel felt that Crown Cars would
ensure that his insurance would be kept up to date and were minded to grant
the application.

The Chairman invited the Applicant back into the Chamber and informed him of
the Panel's decision.

RESOLVED:

That Mr M Coe be granted a Hackney Carriage Driver's Licence, subject to the
Council's standard terms and conditions.

61. END OF COUNCIL YEAR

As this was the last meeting of the extended municipal year, the Chairman
took the opportunity to thank the members of the Panel for their efforts over
the last thirteen months, and the support that they had given both the
Chairman and Vice-Chairman.
The Chairman passed on his best wishes to all members of the Panel, before
closing the meeting.

CHAIRMAN

846
Licensing Panel 3 June 2004