Agenda item

Applicant: Mahmut Yurt

Other Persons: Cllr Eddie Newman (Westfield Parish Council)

Responsible Authority: Avon and Somerset Police, represented by Sergeant Geoff Cannon.

The parties confirmed that they understood the licensing procedure.

The Public Protection Officer presented the report.

The Applicant stated his case. He said that he ran a similar business elsewhere in partnership with his brother. A Member noted that the pitch on which he intended to operate was on an industrial estate where most of the units closed between 5 and 6pm and that there were no residences nearby. Where would his customers come from? Mr Yurt replied people would come to his van once it was known that he was trading there. He had previously run a successful business in similar circumstances.

Cllr Newman stated his case. He said that he knew the area very well. He believed that young people in fast cars would be drawn to the site as soon as it was known that a burger van was trading there. He foresaw problems of disorder, and in his view the police were already dreadfully overstretched.

Sergeant Cannon stated the case for the Police. He submitted that as there would be no people working or residing in the immediate vicinity during most of the time the Applicant would be trading, the clientele would be people from outside the area attracted by the presence of a van serving food. He suspected many of them would be young people in cars, who would sometimes drive recklessly. There was no CCTV cover in the vicinity. There were problems of anti-social behaviour and disorder nearby and he believed these would migrate to the vicinity of the van. He did not see the need for another hot food outlet, as there was already a chip shop and fast venues not far away.

The parties made their closing statements.

Cllr Newman said the van would be an attraction for young people. He did not believe that there were enough police to cover both ends of the town at the same time.

Sergeant Cannon said that the Police had worked very hard for a long time to reduce crime and disorder on the industrial estate. He believed that it was likely to increase again if the van started trading there.

The Applicant thanked the Sub-Committee for allowing him to state his case.

After an adjournment it was RESOLVED to refuse the application.

Decision and reasons

Members have had to determine an application for a Street Trading Consent at First Avenue Radstock. The application proposes an increase in the number of hours for the operation of the pitch between 4pm and 11pm daily. In determining the application members have taken into account the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1982, the Council’s Policy on Street Trading and the Human Rights Act 1998.

The applicant stated he would like to work in this area as he works elsewhere in the area with his brother. He was aware that the site would be closed but he had found with his previous business that over a period of time people start to come but that he would need to be patient.

Members heard from the objectors who feared the application if granted would cause a security risk to business and lead to anti-social behaviour and vehicle crime on the estate. These problems would then spread to other areas of the town as more and more customers would be attracted to the area later at night.

In reaching a determination Members were careful to take account of relevant matters, disregard irrelevant matters and balance the competing interests of the application and objectors. In all the circumstances, and whilst having had regard to the Council’s policy on Street Trading, Members departed from their policy and refused the application. Members considered that if the application was granted and the pitch operated in the evenings it was likely to cause nuisance and attract vehicle crime and anti-social behaviour back to an area that had been vulnerable in the past but that the police and locals had worked to reduce so successfully.