Agenda and minutes

(Assistant to the Chief Executive) To declare interests in any item on this agenda.

There were no declarations of interest made pursuant to the Member’s Code of Conduct.

The Sub-Committee noted the agreed procedure for the conduct of business, and the Terms of Reference.

Exclusion: To consider whether, under Section 100(A)(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public and press should be excluded from the meeting for the items of business set out below on grounds that they will involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in the following paragraph(s) of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act (as amended) or are confidential under Section 100(A)(2):

The Local Government (Access to Information) (Variation) Order 2006, which came into effect on 1 March 2006, requires the Council to consider whether maintaining the exemption listed above outweighs the potential public interest in disclosing the information. Any member who considers that this test should be applied to any currently exempted matter on this agenda should contact the proper officer at least 24 hours prior to the meeting.

Confidential Items Commencement: Paragraph 9 of the Council Procedure Rules contained in the Constitution require:

(1)        All business of the Council requiring to be transacted in the presence of the press and public to be completed by 10.00 p.m. at the latest.

(2)        At the time appointed under (1) above, the Chairman shall permit the completion of debate on any item still under consideration, and at his or her discretion, any other remaining business whereupon the Council shall proceed to exclude the public and press.

(3)        Any public business remaining to be dealt with shall be deferred until after the completion of the private part of the meeting, including items submitted for report rather than decision.

Background Papers:  Paragraph 8 of the Access to Information Procedure Rules of the Constitution define background papers as being documents relating to the subject matter of the report which in the Proper Officer's opinion:

(a)        disclose any facts or matters on which the report or an important part of the report is based;  and

(b)        have been relied on to a material extent in preparing the report and does not include published works or those which disclose exempt or confidential information (as defined in Rule 10) and in respect of executive reports, the advice of any political advisor.

Inspection of background papers may be arranged by contacting the officer responsible for the item.

RESOLVED:

That, in accordance with Section 100 (A) (4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public and press be excluded from the meeting for the item of business set out below as it would involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in the paragraphs of Part 1 of Schedule 12 (A) of the Act indicated and the exemption is considered to outweigh the potential public interest in disclosing the information:

(Director of Corporate Support Services) To consider the attached restricted report.

The Sub-committee considered the renewal of a Hackney Carriage Driver’s Licence for Mr M Ward. The three Councillors that presided over this item were Councillors Mrs M McEwen, Mrs J Hedges and A Lion.  Members noted that officers did not have delegated powers to grant this application and, as a result, the application had to be considered by the Sub-Committee.

The Chairman welcomed the applicant and introduced the members and officers present. The Legal Officer informed the Sub-Committee of the circumstances under which the licence could not be renewed under delegated authority.

The applicant made a short statement to the Sub-Committee in support of his application, before answering a number of questions from members of the Sub-Committee. The applicant then made a short closing statement to the Sub-Committee before the Chairman requested that the applicant leave the Chamber whilst the Sub-Committee debated his application in private. The Chairman invited the applicant back into the Chamber and informed him of the Sub-Committee’s decision.

            RESOLVED:

That a Hackney Carriage Driver’s Licence be granted to Mr M Ward, subject to the Council’s standard terms and condition.

(Director of Corporate Support Services) To consider the attached restricted report.

The Sub-committee considered the application for a Hackney Carriage Driver’s Licence for Mr N Feher. The three Councillors that presided over this item were Councillors Mrs M McEwen, Mrs J Hedges and A Lion.  Members noted that officers did not have delegated powers to grant this application and, as a result, the application had to be considered by the Sub-Committee.

The Chairman welcomed the applicant and introduced the members and officers present. The Legal Officer informed the Sub-Committee of the circumstances under which the licence could not be granted under delegated authority.

The applicant made a short statement to the Sub-Committee in support of his application, before answering a number of questions from members of the Sub-Committee. The applicant then made a short closing statement to the Sub-Committee before the Chairman requested that the applicant leave the Chamber whilst the Sub-Committee debated his application in private. The Chairman invited the applicant back into the Chamber and informed him of the Sub-Committee’s decision.

            RESOLVED:

That a Hackney Carriage Driver’s Licence be granted to Mr N Feher, subject to the Council’s standard terms and condition with an additional condition that he undergo a CRB check on the renewal of his licence next year.

(Director of Corporate Support Services) To consider the attached restricted report.

The Sub-Committee considered an application for a Hackney Carriage Driver’s Licence for Mr JB Mathuranayagam. The three Councillors who presided over this item were Councillors Mrs M McEwen, Mrs J Hedges and A Lion. Members noted that officers did not have delegated powers to grant this application and, as a result, the application had to be considered by the Sub-Committee.

The Chairman welcomed the applicant and introduced the members and officers present. The Legal Officer informed the Sub-Committee of the circumstances under which the licence could not be granted under delegated authority.

The applicant made a short statement to the Sub-Committee in support of his application, before answering a number of questions from members of the Sub-Committee. The applicant then made a short closing statement to the Sub-Committee before the Chairman requested that the applicant leave the Chamber whilst the Sub-Committee debated his application in private. The Chairman invited the applicant back into the Chamber and informed him of the Sub-Committee decision.

RESOLVED:

That the application by Mr JB Mathuranayagam for a Hackney Carriage Driver’s Licence be refused as he did not meet the Council’s Licensing Criteria in respect of his record from the Criminal Records Bureau, which had revealed relevant driving offences.

(Director of Corporate Support Services) To consider the attached restricted report.

The Sub-committee considered the renewal of a Hackney Carriage Driver’s Licence for Mr F Akar. The three Councillors that presided over this item were Councillors Mrs M McEwen, Mrs J Hedges and A Lion.  Members noted that officers did not have delegated powers to grant this application and, as a result, the application had to be considered by the Sub-Committee.

The Chairman welcomed the applicant and introduced the members and officers present. The Legal Officer informed the Sub-Committee of the circumstances under which the licence could not be renewed under delegated authority.

The applicant made a short statement to the Sub-Committee in support of his application, before answering a number of questions from members of the Sub-Committee. The applicant then made a short closing statement to the Sub-Committee before the Chairman requested that the applicant leave the Chamber whilst the Sub-Committee debated his application in private. The Chairman invited the applicant back into the Chamber and informed him of the Sub-Committee’s decision.

            RESOLVED:

That a Hackney Carriage Driver’s Licence be granted to Mr F Akar, subject to the Council’s standard terms and condition.

(Director of Corporate Support Services) To consider the attached restricted report.

The Sub-Committee considered an application for a Hackney Carriage Driver’s Licence for Mr R Pluck. The three Councillors who presided over this item were Councillors Mrs M McEwen, Mrs J Hedges and A Lion. Members noted that officers did not have delegated powers to grant this application and, as a result, the application had to be considered by the Sub-Committee.

The applicant was not present and the Sub-committee considered his application in his absence. The Legal Officer informed the Sub-Committee of the circumstances under which the licence could not be granted under delegated authority.

RESOLVED:

That the application by Mr R Pluck for a Hackney Carriage Driver’s Licence be refused as he did not meet the Council’s Licensing Criteria in respect of his record from the Criminal Records Bureau, which had revealed relevant criminal and driving offences.

To invite the public and press back into the meeting for the remaining items of business.

RESOLVED:

That the public and press be invited back into the meeting for the remaining items of business.

(Director of Corporate Support Services) To consider the attached report.

The members who presided over this application were Councillors Mrs M McEwen, J Knapman and A Lion.

The Chairman welcomed the participants and introduced the members and offices present and the requested that the participants introduce themselves to the Sub-committee.

In attendance on behalf of the application was Mr R Taylor, Solicitor, and Mr D Haines, General Manager, Morrisons, Loughton.

In attendance on behalf of the objectors was Dr D Taylor, a local resident, Councillor R Barrett, ward councillor and local resident and Councillor L Leonard, speaking on behalf of David Linnell of the Loughton Resident’s Association.

(a)        The Application before the Sub-committee

The Assistant Director (Legal), Alison Mitchell, informed the Sub-committee that an application had been received on 15 October 2010 for a variation of an existing premises licence for Morrisons Supermarket, 246-250 High Road, Loughton. 

The District Council had received representations from 18 interested parties; 3 in favour and 15 against. Due to the objections received, the application could only be decided by Sub-committee.

(b)       Presentation of the Applicant’s Case

Mr R Taylor introduced the applicant's case, saying in essence it was a straightforward case to enable the supermarket to sell alcohol from 6am onwards and to remove embedded conditions. At present they have a licence to sell alcohol from 08.00 to 23.00, with variations for Sunday (10.00 to 22.30); Good Friday (08.00 to 22.30); and Christmas Day (12.00 to 15.00 and 19.00 to 22.30). In busy times, such as the run up to Christmas, they would be able to open up a bit earlier (7am) as they did last Christmas, but were not able to sell alcohol until 8am. They were not seeking to use it all year round, but only for busy peak trading times.  Similar applications had been made around the country for all Morrisons’ stores to get them into line. They were also seeking to remove the embedded conditions as they were anachronistic.

As for the representations received, he wanted to emphasise that they were not seeking to extend opening hours into the night. As for Crime and Anti-social Behaviour, the extension of hours would only be used occasionally; there would be no change to the delivery schedules so there would not be any increase in noise levels. They would look into the complaint about the Warburtons early delivery noises. As for Sunday trading, they were only allowed six hours trading on a Sunday and the Christmas Trading Act says that they cannot open at all on Christmas Day. The proposal that drunken youths would cause trouble, well, that would be a late night problem, and they were not asking for a late night extension. As for selling alcohol to under age patrons, Morrison’s had never been prosecuted for underage selling of alcohol. They operate a ‘Challenge 25’ system and the group uses ‘secret shoppers’ to check out its stores.

In conclusion this was an application for flexibility.

(c)        Questions from the Sub-committee to Applicants

Members asked what was the stores current opening  ...  view the full minutes text for item 61.

Director of Corporate Support Services) To consider the attached report.

The members who presided over this application were Councillors Mrs M McEwen, J Knapman and A Lion.

The Chairman welcomed the participants and introduced the members and offices present and the requested that the participants introduce themselves to the Sub-committee

In attendance on behalf of the applicant was Mr M Cohen, advocate, and Mr R Burns the applicant. No objectors were present.

(a)        The Application before the Sub-committee

The Assistant Director (Legal), Alison Mitchell, informed the Sub-committee that an application for a Street Trading consent (and not a licence, as Mr Cohen had argued) at the junction of Borders lane and Rectory lane, Loughton had been received.

The District Council had received representations from Loughton Town Council, Loughton Residents Association, the authority’s Environment and Neighbourhood Officer and a local resident.

A tabled note from the Environment and Neighbourhood Officer had indicated that he had come to an agreement with the applicant about litter and the area it should be collected from and had, as a consequence, withdrawn his representation.

(b)       Presentation of the Applicant’s Case

Mr Cohen started by saying that if the Sub-committee did not agree with granting of a licence then he would be content with asking for consent for street trading.

He addressed the objections received. One of the points raised was that it was to be sited in an inappropriate location. This was a slip road alongside Rectory Lane and has a grass verge used for parking. The serving hatch of the trailer would be facing the pavement and not the road and would not interfere with the traffic passing. The Town Council had said this was where a cycle lane would go, but there was no budget provision for a cycle lane and no certain plans for its placement. The submission from the LRA said it would attract youngsters; well, it is to be placed outside a college. It would allow people to stop and rest, which was a good thing. There would be no lights facing out onto the traffic side, and the trailer would be painted a dark green to blend in. As for the people who might park illegally, the applicant could not be held responsible for this, but there would be no passing traffic as it was a lay-by.

The applicant, Mr Burns had agreed with the Environment and Neighbourhood Officer that he would adopt his three conditions along with the plan for litter collection. Arrangements for waste removal had already been made, including waste water, food and packaging.

As for any noise pollution, this was already a busy road.

(c)        Questions to the Applicant

Members asked to be shown exactly where the trailer was to be parked. Mr Cohen said that consent did not have a marked pitch, unlike a licence.  The Council cannot lawfully mark a spot. It will be parked on the left had side of the slip road and it could be conditioned to be, for example, no less than 6 feet from the junction of Borders  ...  view the full minutes text for item 62.