Agenda item

In recent months, following a number of street trading applications, it is evident the Council requires a specific Policy to cover Street Trading and tighter internal processes which would be best achieved by implementing a new Street Trading Policy (“the Policy”).

The aim of the Policy is to create a street trading environment which ensures fair trading, protects the amenity of residents, ensures the safety of those trading, promotes diversity and consumer choice and provides applicants with advice and guidance on the Council’s approach to the administration for street trading consents and licences under Schedule 4 of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1982 (“the Act”).

Currently the licensing department rely on Schedule 4 of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1982 (“the Act”) when processing applications as no street trading policy exists. That said, the department does currently have a list of prohibited and consent streets (see Appendix II of the Policy) which were passed by Council on 10 July 2007.  These streets and the designation of streets as prohibited, consent or licence streets have not been reviewed at the current time. However, a review of the streets would be undertaken and reported within the next 18 months with amendments made thereafter.

Officers are therefore seeking member agreement in adopting the Policy following a 12 week public consultation which is due to expire on 11 March 2022.

The Headof RegulatoryServices advisedthat thereport hadbeen toRegulatory Services Committee for recommendation to this Committee.Email correspondence had been received from Watford Rural Parish Council seeking an opinion on whether they needed a street trading license for their own market inSouth Oxhey.Officers feltthat wasa matterwhich couldbe consideredoutside of thepolicy. Thepolicy doesnot nameSouth Oxheymarket butdid suggestthat markets do require a single trading license but not specifically for South Oxhey. The Legal advicethat WatfordRural ParishCouncil hadreceived conflictedwith thelegal adviceofficers hadreceived andwas amatter whichwould beexplored but outside of this policy.

AMember advisedthat theywere notvery happyto supportthe policywhile there wasan ongoingdispute betweenWatford RuralParish Council(WRPC) andthis Council.

Another Member also raised concern around the dispute with WRPC and agreeingthe policywhile thedispute wasstill takingplace. Interms ofthe options available they wished to opt for Option 2 to delay and allow the dispute to be resolved but wanted to understand if there would be any substantial risks in delaying adoption of the policy.

The Headof RegulatoryServices advisedthat theofficer viewwas thatthis policy did not add to or affect that decision on South Oxhey as the policy does not mentionSouth Oxheymarket andmentions marketsgenerally andthe viewwas that those markets would require a street trading policy.Evidence will be put before officerswhen theyconsider thecircumstances ofthe SouthOxhey market and it may no longer be required but there may be other markets in other circumstances that do require street trading.In terms of the delay we can continue to receive street trading applications and they would be assessedby officers outside anyof thenew policyrequirements as we havedone historically for a number of years.For officers the sooner we can move this policy forward the better.

A Member queried the roads excluded from street trading and referred to Chorleywood Whitelands Avenue and could not understand why the whole of Whitelands Avenue wasexcluded asit wasmostly aresidential streetapart from the Parade.

The Headof RegulatoryServices advisedthat anumber ofthe prohibitedstreets were residential.The decisionto prohibitthem wasmade byCouncil in2007 and neededupdating. Thereport doesadvise thatofficers wouldlook atthat overthe next 12-18 months.

A Member said if the Council had operated for a number of years without this policy and there was currently a dispute over markets surely a delay of a month or two would be more amicable and was struggling to see any disadvantages in delaying and wondered how many applications would be affected and impacted by the delay.

The Headof RegulatoryServices advisedthat theCouncil hadreceived veryfew applications over the last year and did not consider that significant numbers would be affected. However, they did not think that this policy had any bearing onthe decisionon SouthOxhey as itdoes notmention SouthOxhey specifically as amarket. Thereare othermarkets comingforward tostart operatingand they could be captured by this policy.Officers would continue discussion on South Oxhey market but whether Members adopt the policy or not tonight does not affect the view that would be taken on South Oxhey.

It appearedthat WRPC were the only Council which hadresponded but most of themarkets wouldbe puttogether bythe ParishCouncils. Hadwe checkedwith them that they had picked up on the consultation and would the Rickmansworth French market fall under this policy?Would the Parish Councils be able to fulfil the requirements of the policy?

Councillor Roger Seabourne moved the motion to adopt the Policy and moved Option 1 as set out in the report.The issue with regard to South Oxhey market had nothing to do with this policy.They did not wish for the Council to not have a policy for officers to follow.

The Head of Regulatory Services advised that the Council had gone out for consultation with a number of interested parties and residents initially.WRPC had advised that they had not seen the consultation so officers extended the consultation period for a further 21 days.They were not aware if officers had speciallyasked theParishes torespond tothe consultationbut theywere notified.

A Member said there understanding was that WRPC were not notified of the consultation but picked up details via a public notice and had not gone out to WRPC directly and was why the consultation period was extended. They had seen thelegal advicethat theCouncil wererelying onbut wasnot persuadedby it. Whilst there was the dispute with WRPC and the South Oxhey market they were not able to support the policy.

The Head of Regulatory Services said initially the consultation did not go out to theParishes but itwas extendedfor afurther periodso thatOfficers couldnotify them.

Councillor Matthew Bedford said it was good to receive the assurance that the correctprocedure wasfollowed andseconded CouncillorSeabourne’smotion to move Option 1 and agree the policy now.The whole reason why reports are published inadvance of meetings was so that Members can read them and flag up any concerns and did not wish to see a delay in agreeing the policy.

Councillor Ciaran Reed moved an amendment to the motion and proposed Option 2 which would give a further chance for consultation if required and also allowfor furtherinput intothe policyand forthe concernsraised tobe addressed. Thismotion wasseconded byCouncillorStephen Coxwho saidthey hadraised their concerns with officers at the Regulatory Services Committee meeting but was not convinced by the information received to them that WRPC did not have a case.

On beingput tothe Committeethe motionto gowith Option2 wasdeclared LOST by the Chair the voting being 4 For, 8 Against and 0 Abstentions.

On being put to the Committee the motion to go with Option 1 was declared CARRIED by the Chair the voting being 8 For, 4 Against and 0 Abstentions.

RESOLVED:

Agreedthe Policywith thefollowing amendments:

·       Thedefinitions sectionto includereference toLocal Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1982 as the Act.

·       Paragraph2.1.4 shouldbe amendedto removereference tosections 29-31 and add section 10.