To receive apologies for absence.

Apologies for absence were submitted on behalf of Councillor CM Bartrum.

To receive details any details of Members nominated to attend the meeting in place of a Member of the Committee.

Councillor H Davies was appointed named substitute for councillor CM Bartrum.

To receive any declarations of interest by Members in respect of items on the Agenda.

GUIDANCE ON DECLARING PERSONAL AND PREJUDICIAL INTERESTS AT MEETINGS

The Council’s Members’ Code of Conduct requires Councillors to declare against an Agenda item(s) the nature of an interest and whether the interest is personal or prejudicial.  Councillors have to decide first whether or not they have a personal interest in the matter under discussion.  They will then have to decide whether that personal interest is also prejudicial.

A personal interest is an interest that affects the Councillor more than most other people in the area.  People in the area include those who live, work or have property in the area of the Council.  Councillors will also have a personal interest if their partner, relative or a close friend, or an organisation that they or the member works for, is affected more than other people in the area.  If they do have a personal interest, they must declare it but can stay and take part and vote in the meeting. 

Whether an interest is prejudicial is a matter of judgement for each Councillor.  What Councillors have to do is ask themselves whether a member of the public – if he or she knew all the facts – would think that the Councillor’s interest was so important that their decision would be affected by it.  If a Councillor has a prejudicial interest then they must declare what that interest is and leave the meeting room.

Councillor Mrs H Davies declared a prejudicial interest in agenda item 5 – Application to Register Land at Argyll Rise Belmont as a Town Green - spoke as a Local Ward Member then withdrew from the meeting for the duration of this item, in accordance with the provisions of the Council’s Constitution.

To approve and sign the Minutes of the meeting held on 15 July 2008.

RESOLVED:            That the Minutes of the meeting held on 15th July, 2008 be approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman

To determine whether land at Argyll Rise, Belmont, Hereford should be registered as a town green.

Ward: Belmont

The Chairman explained that thirty minutes would be allocated for speaking by the representatives of the applicants and by the representative of Herefordshire Housing Limited (HHL).  He added that each principal side would then be allowed a further ten minutes for summing up purposes.

The Principal lawyer (Corporate) explained the circumstances which had led to the application being made to the Council and presented a report for the Committee to determine whether land at Argyll Rise, Belmont, Hereford should be registered as a Town Green. He said that the land was part of a larger area which had been purchased for housing purposes in 1959 by the former Hereford City Council under the powers of the Housing Act 1957 and was subsequently laid out as open space as part of the surrounding housing development during the 1970s.  In November 2002 the land was one of a number of open spaces included in a transfer of the Council’s housing stock to HHL.  He advised that the Council had received two applications, from the same Applicants, to register the Land as a Town Green. The first application was received on the 6th February 2006 and the Council placed notices for two weeks in the Hereford Times and on the Land stating that the application had been made and requesting any objections to be sent to the Council. The only objection received was from HHL.  He advised that In line with a procedure followed by other Registration Authorities the Council had arranged for a non-statutory Public Inquiry which had been conducted by a barrister (Inspector) to hear evidence and legal arguments from the applicants and HHL.  He explained that although the landowner would remain the legal owner, if the land was registered as a Town Green, registration would effectively prevent any development of land that would interfere with recreational use.  He described the definition of a town or village green in Section 22 of the 1965 Act under which the first application had been made, which provided that :

“land on which for not less than twenty years a significant number of the inhabitants of any locality, or of any neighbourhood within a locality, have indulged in lawful sports and pastimes as of right, and either;

continue to do so, or

have ceased to do so for not more than such period as may be prescribed, or determined in accordance with prescribed provisions”

He explained the conclusions of the Inspector about the status of the land following its transfer to HHL as being that certain tests were met in so far as a significant number of local people had used the Land for lawful sports and pastimes for at least 20 years up to the date of the application.  However the Inspector considered that, since the Council had laid out the Land as open space for the benefit of local residents in connection with the Housing Act power used to develop the surrounding housing, use of the Land had been by an implied  ...  view the full minutes text for item 31.

To consider an early review of Hackney Carriage Fares in Herefordshire. 

The Licensing Officer presented a report about a request which had been made by the Herefordshire Taxi Association for an early review of the Hackney Carriage Fares in Herefordshire.  He explained the powers available to the Council under the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976 to set the table of fares based on the time and distance for a journey and all other charges in connection with passenger use.  He said that the current fares were reviewed by the Committee in October 2007 but that since then there had been a substantial increase in the fuel costs facing the trade. 

Mr J Jones of the Herefordshire Taxi Association explained the costs facing the trade and the practical issues of altering metres to accommodate a new scale of fares. He said that the substantial rise in fuel costs had led to the trade having to meet a 10% increase in costs across the board and he explained how those costs were broken down.

Having considered the matter, the Committee decided that thee should be an increase of 10% for taxi fares.  The Licensing Officer suggested that following 14 days of advertisement, the increase should take effect from 8 September 2008, and remain in force until a scheduled review in October/November 2009

RESOLVED THAT

The request for a taxi fares increase be accepted as set out above and that providing that there are no public objections during the consultation period ending 4 September 2008; implementation of the increase on 8 September 2008 be delegated to the Acting Head of Environmental Health and Trading Standards.  If any objections are received, the matter will be brought back to the Committee for further consideration.

To consider implementing a revised vehicle licence condition and the position of current applicants for new vehicles.

A report was presented by the Principal Lawyer suggesting the implementation of a revised vehicle licence condition 3 because of interpretation problems with the way in which it is currently worded.  He said that licence conditions were last reviewed in April 2007. Condition 3 related to existing vehicle licences and stipulated that written authorisation must be obtained from the Licensing Officers before a new or replacement new vehicle was purchased and tested.  Under 3.3 the conditions stated that a proposed new vehicle must comply with the following:

“a licence with a wheelchair access vehicle cannot at anytime be replaced with a non-wheelchair access vehicle.  A saloon may be replaced with a saloon or upgraded to a wheelchair access vehicle’’

This had given rise to interpretation problems as to “like for like” and in particular in relation to saloon cars.  Issues of interpretation had arisen between what constitutes a saloon car and what constitutes a multi-purpose vehicle (MPV).  The essential purpose of condition 3.3 was to ensure that Herefordshire’s fleet of taxi/private hire vehicles contained an adequate and expanding growing number of wheelchair accessible vehicles.  By amending the condition as proposed the protection for wheelchair accessible vehicles would be preserved but the unnecessary distinction between the wide variation of other types of vehicles would be removed.  This would empower Licensing Officers to permit vehicle changes quickly and efficiently without the need to refer matters to Regulatory Committee in future.   The Committee discussed the matter and the Licensing Officer expressed some reservations about the practical issues involved and the aims of moving towards a greater number of wheelchair accessible vehicles. There were issues about whether the conditions should be based upon accessibility or sill height rather than seating. Having discussed the issues concerned with the officers and considered the alternatives that were available, the Committee felt that there was merit in the matter being deferred for the officers to give it further consideration.

RESOLVED THAT

Consideration of the matter be deferred for further discussions by the Officers.

To note the procedural arrangements for the meeting.

The Committee noted the procedural arrangements for hearing appeals to ensure that the laws of natural justice were followed to give a fair hearing to the applicants and to the Licensing Officers.

To consider an application for the reinstatement of an expired vehicle licence.

A report was presented by the Licensing Officer about an application for the re-instatement of a hackney carriage hire vehicle licence outside the Councils policies.  He said that Mr Smith’s licence had expired on 12th July, 2008 and that he had applied to renew it on 15th July.  The policy for renewal stated that “All applications received after the date of expiry will be treated as Grants and not renewals and the appropriate conditions and fees will apply”.  Mr Smith said that he had been a few days late with his application but hoped that it could still be dealt with as a renewal.  The Committee felt that sufficient leaway could be afforded to the officers to allow renewals up to seven days after the expiry of a licence and report the matter to the next meeting of the Committee, rather than the situation where several weeks could elapse before the matter was determined by the Committee and before which the applicant would not be able to use the vehicle. 

Having considered all the circumstances regarding the application, the Committee was satisfied with Mr Smith’s explanation and agreed that the application could be treated as a renewal and not a new application.

RESOLVED THAT:

An application from Mr B Smith to deviate from the standard condition number 9.5, in respect of plate No.H256 for a Skoda Superb be accepted and granted as a renewal.

To consider an application for the reinstatement of an expired vehicle licence.

A report was presented by the Licensing Officer about an application for the re-instatement of a hackney carriage hire vehicle licence outside the Councils policies.  He said that Mr Ingram’s licence had expired on 7th July, 2008 and that he had applied to renew it on 10th July.  The policy for renewal stated that “All applications received after the date of expiry will be treated as Grants and not renewals and the appropriate conditions and fees will apply”.  Mr Ingram said that he had been a few days late with his application but hoped that it could still be dealt with as a renewal. 

Having considered all the circumstances regarding the application, the Committee was satisfied with Mr Ingram’s explanation and agreed that the application could be treated as a renewal and not a new application.

RESOLVED THAT:

An application from Mr RE Ingram to deviate from the standard condition number 9.5, in respect of plate No.H266 for a Skoda Octavia be accepted and granted as a renewal.

EXCLUSION OF THE PUBLIC AND PRESS 

In the opinion of the Proper Officer, the following items will not be, or are likely not to be, open to the public and press at the time they are considered.

RESOLVED:         that under section 100(A)(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting for the following item of business on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Schedule 12(A) of the Act, as indicated below.

These items disclose information relating to any particular applicant for or recipient of or former recipient of, any service provided by the authority.

To consider an application for a hackney carriage/private hire driver’s licence.

The Licensing Officer referred to agenda item No. 11 and provided the Committee with the circumstances which had given rise to the need for an application for a dual Hackney Carriage/Private Hire driver’s licence being referred to the Committee.  The applicant provided the Committee with details of the circumstances which had given rise to her receiving a conviction and the reasons why she felt that she should be allowed to become a licence holder. 

Having considered all of the facts put forward by the Licensing Officer and the applicant, the Committee considered that the applicant was a fit and proper person under the meaning of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976 and that she could be granted a licence.

To consider an application for a hackney carriage/private hire driver’s licence.

The Licensing Officer referred to agenda item No. 12 and provided the Committee with the circumstances which had given rise to the need for an application for a dual Hackney Carriage/Private Hire driver’s licence being referred to the Committee.  The applicant provided the Committee with details of the circumstances which had given rise to him receiving a conviction and the reasons why he felt that he should be allowed to become a licence holder. 

Having considered all of the facts put forward by the Licensing Officer and the applicant, the Committee considered that the applicant was a fit and proper person under the meaning of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976 and that he could be granted a licence.