Meeting documents

There were no apologies for absence.

There were no declarations of interest.

The Chairman introduced the parties and explained the procedure to be followed. The Hearing Regulations 2005 stated that the Authority must allow parties an equal period of time in which to present their evidence. It was agreed that the maximum time for each presentation be ten minutes.

The Licensing Enforcement Officer presented the report and highlighted background information, representations received and referred to the Special Policy in Ashby.

There were no questions for the Licensing Enforcement Officer.

The Legal Advisor drew the commitee's attention to the fact that a representation had been received from the Town Clerk on behalf of Ashby Town Council, however no representative from the Town Council was present. The Legal Advisor asked the committee to consider if they were happy to continue with the hearing and refer to the written representation from the Town Council or would they like to defer the hearing until a representative of the Town Council could attend the hearing. The Committee all agreed to continue with the hearing and refer to the written representation.

The applicant did not wish to present his application. He stated that he had completed all the forms required and was now awaiting the decision. The applicant stated he was happy to answer any questions that were put to him.

The Legal Advisor asked the applicant if he had received a copy of the report and asked if the applicant was happy with the content and if there was anything further that he wished to add. The applicant said he was happy with the report and had no further comments to add.

A Member asked the applicant if he had any previous experience of operating similar premises. The applicant stated that he had previously owned a van that was situated in Leicester and a takeaway shop also in Leicester, both of which he had for approximately a year each.

Mr N Marshall - an objector, referred the members to page nineteen of the report. He asked the applicant how he would intend to keep the street clear of litter. The applicant stated that he would have full cleaning equipment and he would have a member of staff working with him to ensure that the area around the van was kept clean.

Mr N Marshall asked the applicant how he intended to control any anti social behaviour in the area and also to explain what measures he planned to use to protect children from harm as there was no detail on his form, only that no alcohol would be sold on the premises. In response to both questions the applicant stated that he could not control the behaviour of his customers. He did not want to harm anyone with his business and children could be around the whole area but that he could not do anything about it.

Mr P Prior - a witness, stated that Union Passage was where many of the potential customers would congregate and this was where most of the trouble in the past had happened. The Police had been called on many occasions and come the morning the passage would be covered in litter. The applicant stated that he was only responsible for his premises and there was nothing he could do.

Sergeant S Moore then presented his representation on behalf of the Leicestershire Constabulary as detailed in the report. He asked for the application to be rejected. He stated that the Police did not oppose the applicant and did not wish to prevent him from making a living. The reasons for the objection were to do with the situation and problems, which arise in the town centre. The Council had agreed to the saturation policy for Ashby and he felt that nothing had been said so far to prove that this premises would not undermine this policy. He also raised concerns that the applicant could not control the behaviour of his customers and that the van would act as a magnet that could exacerbate these issues. Sergeant S Moore stated that a similar application had been before the committee in the past and it had been refused on similar grounds to those as set out in the representation. Sergeant S Moore than handed over to PC Phillips, who had been an officer in Ashby for 12 years.

PC Phillips stated that if the application was granted then it would have an impact on limited Police resources. At the end of the night when the pubs and clubs closed there could be up to three hundred people on the streets and at present there were officers available to deal with them. If the applicant was to operate at the other end of the town the limited resources would have to be divided between the two areas. PC Phillips also stated that he had witnessed anti-social behaviour when a burger van had previously operated in the area and matters had improved since the previous van had left. There had been no serious incidents in the past 12 months.

Mr S Leeland - Environmental Potection Officer from the District Council presented his representation. He stated that he had concerns that the van would encourage people to stay in the area for longer and therefore become a nusiance to the local residents. He also asked that should the licence be granted that it did not go past 1.00am.

Following a concern from Mr P Prior, a Member asked PC Phillips if people were allowed to carry bottles around the town centre.

PC Phillips stated that Ashby Town Centre was an alcohol free zone and that if the police did see people carrying bottles in the street they were confiscated, but that this was difficult to enforce with limited resources.

Mr C Tandy - an objector, presented his representation as detailed within the report.

Mr P Solomon - an objector presented his representation as detailed within the report. He stated that the police had made a valid point with regards to the spilt of resources and also stated the since the previous burger van had left the area all aspects of life had greatly improved and that he did not want to go back to the previous state of affairs.

Following a question from a member about the issues that had been raised along Union Passage, PC Phillips stated that there had been an improvement since the previous burger van was removed.

Mr N Marshall - an objector presented his representation as detailed within the report. He also referred to inofrmation concerning the situation when the previous burger van was present and how it had improved since the previous van had been removed. He also stated that this was no reflection on the Applicant.

In a closing speech the applicant stated that he would be new to Ashby and would be just there to serve food. He did not want to promote crime and felt that litter would be produced from elsewhere, but he would do his best to keep the area around his van clean.

At 7.25pm the Sub Committee adjourned to consider its decision and re-convened at 8.00pm.

The Legal Advisor read out the Members decision, findings of fact and the reasons for the decision.