Decision details
Application for a Street Trading Consent
Decision Maker: Licensing Sub-Committee (Taxis, Private Hire, and Street Trading Consent Matters)
Decision status: Recommendations Approved
Is Key decision?: No
Is subject to call in?: No
Decisions:
The Licensing Officer introduced the application.
The purpose of the item was to consider an application for a Street Trading Consent made by Lady Anne Evans for the hardstanding in front of public toilets, The Street, Bibury.
The Licensing Officer presented the report and explained that the application sought a six-month Street Trading Consent to permit the sale of pre-packed ice cream from a bicycle between 11.00am and 6.00pm, seven days a week, from 1 April to 30 September 2026.
The Sub-Committee noted the annexes to the report, including the mandatory Street Trading Consent conditions and the current Street Trading Policy. The Licensing Officer outlined the options available to the Sub-Committee, namely
1. Grant the consent as applied for;
2. Grant a temporary consent;
3. Grant the consent subject to additional conditions; or
4. Refuse the application.
In response to Members' questions, the Licensing Officer confirmed that any consent granted would require renewal at the end of the consent period. It was explained that renewals would not normally be subject to consultation unless a valid complaint had been received. Where a temporary consent was granted, a further application would be required, including a 28-day consultation period, with any objections resulting in the matter being referred back to the Sub-Committee for determination. There were no further member questions for clarity.
The Chair asked the officer to introduce the Applicant.
The Applicant was invited to address the sub-committee and the Chair commented that there was a maximum of 15 minutes to address the committee.
The Applicant addressed the sub-committee in support of the application. She explained that the proposal formed part of the existing business, Eleven Bibury, and involved the operation of a restored vintage bicycle fitted with an insulated freezer for the sale of locally produced, pre-packed ice cream during a six-month trading period. She advised that the proposal was intended to generate additional seasonal income to support the existing business.
The Applicant confirmed that only pre-packed ice cream would be sold and outlined the food hygiene measures in place, explaining that the products were sealed and protected from contamination. She advised that the main stock would be stored at the business premises and replenished throughout the trading day.
In response to concerns regarding tourism and congestion, the Applicant stated that the proposal was intended to serve existing visitors rather than attract additional visitors to Bibury. She explained that the proposed pitch was located on the hardstanding in front of the public conveniences, set back from the highway, and would not obstruct pedestrian access or access to the toilet facilities. The Applicant further advised that the bicycle would be removed from the site at the end of each trading day.
The Applicant also stated that the proposal would provide an additional trading point within the village, reducing demand at the existing business premises during peak periods. She confirmed that all waste would be removed from the site daily and expressed a willingness to provide additional litter bins, if required, as a condition of any consent. The Applicant also advised that she would support local river litter-picking initiatives.
The Applicant then thanked the Committee for their time.
The Chair invited the Sub-Committee to ask any questions for clarity:
Members of the Sub-Committee questioned the Applicant regarding the proposed location of the ice cream bicycle. The Applicant confirmed that it would be positioned beneath the tree, leaving the hardstanding available for public use, although the exact position could be varied if required.
In response to questions regarding footfall and the potential for public nuisance, the Applicant advised that the proposal was intended to serve existing visitors to Bibury and was not expected to attract additional visitors to the village. Members noted that, whilst overall visitor numbers were unlikely to increase, the proposal could result in greater activity in the immediate vicinity. The Legal Adviser reminded Members to move on from further discussion of footfall.
In response to questions regarding waste management, the Licensing Officer advised that waste collection arrangements did not form part of the application. The Applicant confirmed that an existing commercial waste contract was in place, comprising two scheduled collections each week together with privately arranged daily collections on the remaining days, and that the proposed bicycle would be included within those arrangements.
The Applicant also confirmed that no A-board signage, seating or tables were proposed as part of the application. The Legal Adviser reminded Members that environmental matters fell outside the remit of the Sub-Committee, and the Licensing Officer confirmed that Environmental Health had been consulted and had raised no objections.
The Chair asked if there were any more questions. It was confirmed that there were not.
The Chair invited other interested parties to speak on the matter.
A representative of Bibury Parish Council addressed the Sub-Committee in objection to the application.
They advised that the Parish Council's primary concern related to public safety, highlighting the restricted access to the proposed trading pitch, which was shared with the public conveniences, and the proximity of the site to a busy road. Concerns were raised regarding pedestrian safety, including the need for customers to cross the road, the potential for queuing and congregation, conflict with users of the public conveniences, and the absence of a road safety or public safety assessment. The representative also expressed concerns regarding congestion, obstruction, litter, waste, the potential impact on the local environment, and maintaining access for the contractors responsible for servicing the public conveniences. The Parish Council requested that the application be refused.
In response to Members' questions, the representative advised that the public conveniences were the only public toilet facilities in the village, although some local businesses also provided facilities. It was confirmed that queues formed at peak times and that there was no continuous footpath on the side of the road where the public conveniences were located, requiring pedestrians to cross the road.
In response to a question from the Applicant, the representative advised that, owing to limited parking, tourists were typically dropped off at various locations along the High Street.
The Chair invited the next objector to speak.
Mr Philip Challinor addressed the Sub-Committee in objection to the application. He explained that, as the Flood Warden for Bibury, he regularly undertook voluntary river litter picks and expressed concerns regarding the cumulative impact of the proposal on an already heavily visited village. Referring to reported visitor numbers at peak times, he raised concerns about increased pedestrian congestion, highway safety, accessibility for vulnerable and disabled people, and access to the public conveniences for maintenance vehicles. He also referred to the Council's duty to conserve and enhance the National Landscape and highlighted the presence of protected water voles within the locality. Mr Challinor further expressed concerns regarding additional litter, waste and the potential impact on the local environment.
The Chair and the Legal Adviser reminded Mr Challinor to confine his representations to material street trading consent considerations relevant to the application. The Legal Adviser confirmed that the application had been subject to consultation with the relevant Council departments and that no objections had been received.
In response to Members' questions, Mr Challinor advised that three to four sacks of litter, including cans and ring pulls, were collected from the river over the course of a week and confirmed that the local trout farm also undertook litter-picking activities. He explained that the public conveniences were cleaned at least twice daily using a service vehicle parked in the lay-by while the toilets were temporarily closed for cleaning.
In response to questions from the Applicant, Mr Challinor clarified that the reported figure of up to 10,000 visitors related to peak periods. In response to a question from the committee, he confirmed that he was unable to provide an estimate of the number of people using the public conveniences each day.
The Chair invited the Applicant to sum up.
In summing up, the Applicant highlighted their long-standing connection to the village and commitment to investing in the local community, emphasising that the proposal would provide an additional amenity for existing residents and visitors rather than increase tourism, and requested the Committee's support for the application.
The Sub-Committee retired to deliberate at 3.10 pm
The Sub-Committee returned at 4.27 pm
The Chair informed the Committee that Councillor Fowles had not participated in the determination of the application. Following the representations made by the applicant, consultees and objectors, Councillor Fowles considered that, in his capacity as the ward councillor, he was too closely associated with the matter and therefore requested to recuse himself from the debate and subsequent decision.
The Chair then confirmed that the Sub-Committee was quorate with three members and stated that the Sub-Committee had made a decision.
The Chair stated that in arriving at their decision the sub-committee had taken into account the requirement to promote the three street trading objectives:
1. Public Safety;
2. Public Order; and
3. Preventing nuisance or annoyance
As well as, relevant representations from statutory consultees; members of the public; the Parish Council and the Applicant; in addition the sub-committee also had regard to the Council’s statement of Street Trading Policy.
DECISION:
The Committee RESOLVED: to GRANT a Street Trading Consent for a temporary period until the 30 September 2026, liable to standard conditions and the further condition that:
1. The Street Trading Consent holder should ensure that adequate measures are in place to remove litter or waste arising from their customers and to prevent such litter from accumulating in the immediate vicinity of their premises. In particular, where necessary, the street trading consent holder should ensure that adequate measures be put in place to provide customers with sufficient receptacles for the depositing of waste materials.
Publication date: 29/06/2026
Date of decision: 25/06/2026
Decided at meeting: 25/06/2026 - Licensing Sub-Committee (Taxis, Private Hire, and Street Trading Consent Matters)
Accompanying Documents:
PDF 543 KB