Skip to main content

Agenda item

Consideration of Street Trading Licence Applications for the Berwick Street Market

Minutes:

LICENSING SUB-COMMITTEE No. 6

Wednesday 27th September and Thursday 28th September 2017

 

Membership:              Councillor Tim Mitchell (Chairman) and Councillor Melvyn Caplan.  Councillor Barbara Grahame was unable to attend as she was unwell.

 

Legal Adviser:             Barry Panto

Policy Adviser:            Chris Wroe

Committee Officer:     Jonathan Deacon

Presenting Officers:   Rosalind Hick and Robin Grey.  Heidi Lawrance also in attendance.

 

 

Applicant

 

Aaron Lee (company name – Budy’s Bao Bao)

 

 

Nature of application

 

Preferred Pitch – 1130.  Alternative pitch(es) considered – none.

Trading days – Monday to Saturday

Type of commodity – hot takeaway food

Description of commodity – Asian (East), Chinese, Street Food.

 

 

Decision:

 

Mr Lee’s application was one of forty four submitted for new street trading licences at Berwick Street Market. In reaching a decision, the Licensing Sub-Committee took account of all the details in the report, including the summary of each application and the officers’ scoring based on the criteria set out in the report; any supplementary information provided by each applicant within the report; and any additional submissions made by applicants who attended the hearing to make oral representations. Mr Lee did not attend the hearing. The Sub-Committee considered all the applications before reaching its final determination and exercised a wide discretion so as to allocate as far as possible in accordance with policy and the criteria set out in the report. In some cases the Sub-Committee did not entirely agree with the scoring in the report as it was considered that criterion 2 was vague in its description and criterion 3 was difficult to interpret accurately, especially as so many of the applications involved the sale of food. The Sub-Committee also took into account the preferences expressed for a particular pitch and, in allocating those pitches, it also had regard to what was being sold (or would be sold) by other traders in adjacent pitches.       

 

The Sub-Committee granted Mr Lee permission to trade at Pitch 1130 Monday to Saturday, subject to the requirements set out in paragraph 2.1 of the Licensing Sub-Committee report being satisfied.  In deciding to grant the application, the Sub-Committee took into account that Mr Lee would be operating at the pitch Monday to Saturday.  In keeping with the criteria set out in the report, the Sub-Committee was keen to score applicants more highly if they applied for every day of the working week.  Operating on a Saturday would add to the vibrancy of Berwick Street Market.

 

The Sub-Committee also took into account that Mr Lee’s application did include some diverse commodities which differed from what was on offer elsewhere in the Market.

 

In granting the application, the Licensing Sub-Committee wanted to stress that the licence was granted to the individual applicant who had to make full personal use of that licence. Although assistants could be engaged to help out when the trader was temporarily absent, the trader was expected to be present at the pitch most of the time.

 

 

 

Applicant

 

Adrian Serrano Gomez (company name – Mind the Cow)

 

 

Nature of application

 

Preferred Pitch – 1105.  Alternative Pitch(es) considered –  any pitch.

Trading days – Monday to Friday

Type of commodity – hot takeaway food

Description of commodity – American (North), United States, Artisan, Barbecue, salads, street food.

 

 

Decision:

 

Mr Gomez’s application was one of forty four submitted for new street trading licences at Berwick Street Market. In reaching a decision, the Licensing Sub-Committee took account of all the details in the report, including the summary of each application and the officers’ scoring based on the criteria set out in the report; any supplementary information provided by each applicant within the report; and any additional submissions made by applicants who attended the hearing to make oral representations. Mr Gomez did not attend the hearing, though he had indicated that he intended to do so. The Sub-Committee considered all the applications before reaching its final determination and exercised a wide discretion so as to allocate as far as possible in accordance with policy and the criteria set out in the report. In some cases the Sub-Committee did not entirely agree with the scoring in the report as it was considered that criterion 2 was vague in its description and criterion 3 was difficult to interpret accurately, especially as so many of the applications involved the sale of food. The Sub-Committee also took into account the preferences expressed for a particular pitch and, in allocating those pitches, it also had regard to what was being sold (or would be sold) by other traders in adjacent pitches.       

 

The Sub-Committee refused the application, pursuant to section 12(1)(d) of the City of Westminster Act 1999.  This was on the basis that the pitches at Berwick Street were all allocated to traders and there were no pitches remaining.

 

In deciding to refuse the application, the Sub-Committee took into account that Mr Gomez was proposing to operate from the Market Monday to Friday.  In keeping with the criteria set out in the report, the Sub-Committee was keen to score applicants more highly if they applied for every day of the working week.  This included Saturdays.  This would add to the vibrancy of Berwick Street Market. 

 

The Sub-Committee considered that it was a difficult decision.  However, there were sufficient strong candidates who had applied to operate the pitches Monday to Friday, resulting in this application being refused. Other applicants had scored more highly for providing a range of commodities which differed more significantly from what was already on offer at Berwick Street Market.

 

 

 

Applicant

 

Afiya Titus (company name – Lime Hut)

 

 

Nature of application

 

Preferred Pitch – 1107.  Alternative Pitch(es) considered –  any pitch.

Trading days – Monday to Friday

Type of commodity – hot takeaway food

Description of commodity – Caribbean, Fusion, Grill, Halal, Salads, Street Food, Vegetarian.

 

 

Decision:

 

Ms Titus’ application was one of forty four submitted for new street trading licences at Berwick Street Market. In reaching a decision, the Licensing Sub-Committee took account of all the details in the report, including the summary of each application and the officers’ scoring based on the criteria set out in the report; any supplementary information provided by each applicant within the report; and any additional submissions made by applicants who attended the hearing to make oral representations. Ms Titus did attend the hearing. The Sub-Committee considered all the applications before reaching its final determination and exercised a wide discretion so as to allocate as far as possible in accordance with policy and the criteria set out in the report. In some cases the Sub-Committee did not entirely agree with the scoring in the report as it was considered that criterion 2 was vague in its description and criterion 3 was difficult to interpret accurately, especially as so many of the applications involved the sale of food. The Sub-Committee also took into account the preferences expressed for a particular pitch and, in allocating those pitches, it also had regard to what was being sold (or would be sold) by other traders in adjacent pitches.      

 

The Sub-Committee granted Ms Titus permission to trade at Pitch 1109 Monday to Friday, subject to the requirements set out in paragraph 2.1 of the Licensing Sub-Committee report being satisfied.  In deciding to grant the application, the Sub-Committee took into account that Ms Titus was seeking to provide a hot food takeaway commodity which was not currently available in the Market. In particular, she mentioned that her offer was unique in that it was a healthy option that was not typical of Caribbean food.

 

The Sub-Committee noted that there appeared to be some discrepancies as to the traders who were stated to be operating start-up businesses and those who were not.  The Sub-Committee was satisfied that Ms Titus was operating a start-up business.  Members were impressed by Ms Titus’ enthusiasm at the meeting for contributing to the vision for Berwick Street Market as a ‘jewel in the crown’ in the heart of Soho.  Ms Titus also advised the Sub-Committee that she had provided food at a number of pop up summer clubs and cinemas, independent coffee shops and business launches.  She had previously catered for 150 people at 70 Berwick Street.

 

In granting the application, the Licensing Sub-Committee wanted to stress that the licence was granted to the individual applicant who had to make full personal use of that licence. Although assistants could be engaged to help out when the trader was temporarily absent, the trader was expected to be present at the pitch most of the time.

 

 

 

Applicant

 

Ahmed El Shimi (company name – Wow Shees)

 

 

Nature of application

 

Preferred Pitch – 1105.  Alternative Pitch(es) considered – Mr El Shimi amended his application at the meeting so that he would be prepared to trade from any pitch.

Trading days – Monday to Saturday

Type of commodity – hot takeaway food

Description of commodity – Egyptian food.

 

 

Decision:

 

Mr El Shimi’s application was one of forty four submitted for new street trading licences at Berwick Street Market. In reaching a decision, the Licensing Sub-Committee took account of all the details in the report, including the summary of each application and the officers’ scoring based on the criteria set out in the report; any supplementary information provided by each applicant within the report; and any additional submissions made by applicants who attended the hearing to make oral representations. Mr El Shimi did attend the hearing with Ada El Shimi. The Sub-Committee considered all the applications before reaching its final determination and exercised a wide discretion so as to allocate as far as possible in accordance with policy and the criteria set out in the report. In some cases the Sub-Committee did not entirely agree with the scoring in the report as it was considered that criterion 2 was vague in its description and criterion 3 was difficult to interpret accurately, especially as so many of the applications involved the sale of food. The Sub-Committee also took into account the preferences expressed for a particular pitch and, in allocating those pitches, it also had regard to what was being sold (or would be sold) by other traders in adjacent pitches.   

  

The Sub-Committee granted Mr El Shimi permission to trade at Pitch 1106 Monday to Saturday, subject to the requirements set out in paragraph 2.1 of the Licensing Sub-Committee report being satisfied.  In deciding to grant the application, the Sub-Committee took into account that Mr El Shimi would be operating Monday to Saturday.  In keeping with the criteria set out in the report, the Sub-Committee was keen to score applicants more highly if they applied for every day of the working week.  Operating on a Saturday would add to the vibrancy of Berwick Street Market.

 

The Sub-Committee noted that Mr El Shimi’s preferred pitch was 1105.  However, Pitch 1105 was sought by a number of traders and the Sub-Committee considered that it was appropriate, given that there was another strong candidate who had scored more highly, to provide Mr El Shimi with an alternative pitch at Berwick Street Market.  Mr El Shimi had advised at the hearing that he was willing to accept a pitch other than 1105.

 

The Sub-Committee considered that Ahmed El Shimi and his brother Adam El Shimi, who was his business partner, would be able to contribute to the vision for Berwick Street Market as a ‘jewel in the crown’ in the heart of Soho.  The brothers had demonstrated at the meeting and in their written statement that they had a clear idea of their business. Ahmed El Shimi would be able to bring his experience from working at various events and festivals to Berwick Street Market.

 

The Sub-Committee also considered that Mr El Shimi had been given too low score in the report against the criteria as to whether there was a similar product being already offered at Berwick Street Market.  Members had noted that there were no other pitches currently offering hot food which is Egyptian. 

 

In granting the application, the Licensing Sub-Committee wanted to stress that the licence was granted to the individual applicant who had to make full personal use of that licence. Although assistants could be engaged to help out when the trader was temporarily absent, the trader was expected to be present at the pitch most of the time.

 

 

 

Applicant

 

Alberto Colombo (company name – Michetta – Panino Italiano)

 

 

Nature of application

 

Preferred Pitch – 1107.  Alternative Pitch(es) considered –  any pitch.

Trading days – Monday to Friday

Type of commodity – cold takeaway food

Description of commodity – Italian, Gourmet, Sandwiches, Street Food, Vegetarian.

 

 

Decision:

 

Mr Colombo’s application was one of forty four submitted for new street trading licences at Berwick Street Market. In reaching a decision, the Licensing Sub-Committee took account of all the details in the report, including the summary of each application and the officers’ scoring based on the criteria set out in the report; any supplementary information provided by each applicant within the report; and any additional submissions made by applicants who attended the hearing to make oral representations. Mr Colombo did not attend the hearing. The Sub-Committee considered all the applications before reaching its final determination and exercised a wide discretion so as to allocate as far as possible in accordance with policy and the criteria set out in the report. In some cases the Sub-Committee did not entirely agree with the scoring in the report as it was considered that criterion 2 was vague in its description and criterion 3 was difficult to interpret accurately, especially as so many of the applications involved the sale of food. The Sub-Committee also took into account the preferences expressed for a particular pitch and, in allocating those pitches, it also had regard to what was being sold (or would be sold) by other traders in adjacent pitches.      

 

The Sub-Committee granted Mr Colombo permission to trade at Pitch 1123 Monday to Friday, subject to the requirements set out in paragraph 2.1 of the Licensing Sub-Committee report being satisfied.  The Sub-Committee noted that Mr Colombo’s preferred pitch was 1107.  However, the Sub-Committee considered that it was appropriate, given that there were exceptional reasons for another trader to be granted Pitch 1107, to provide Mr Colombo with an alternative pitch at Berwick Street Market.  Mr Colombo had set out in his application that he was willing to accept a pitch other than 1107.

 

In deciding to grant the application, the Sub-Committee took into account that Mr Colombo’s application was in keeping with the criteria which scored applicants more highly for providing a range of commodities which add vibrancy and diversity.  Mr Colombo’s range differed from what was on offer elsewhere in the Market in that it appeared to specialise in cold takeaway food.

 

In granting the application, the Licensing Sub-Committee wanted to stress that the licence was granted to the individual applicant who had to make full personal use of that licence. Although assistants could be engaged to help out when the trader was temporarily absent, the trader was expected to be present at the pitch most of the time.

 

 

 

Applicant

 

Alessandra Muin (company name – Friuliamo.com Ltd)

 

 

Nature of application

 

Preferred Pitch – 1105.  Alternative Pitch(es) considered –  none.

Trading days – Wednesday to Friday

Type of commodity – hot takeaway food

Description of commodity – European (South), Italian, Artisan, Gluten Free, Organic, Vegan, Vegetarian.

 

 

Decision:

 

Ms Muin’s application was one of forty four submitted for new street trading licences at Berwick Street Market. In reaching a decision, the Licensing Sub-Committee took account of all the details in the report, including the summary of each application and the officers’ scoring based on the criteria set out in the report; any supplementary information provided by each applicant within the report; and any additional submissions made by applicants who attended the hearing to make oral representations. Mr Muin did not attend the hearing. The Sub-Committee considered all the applications before reaching its final determination and exercised a wide discretion so as to allocate as far as possible in accordance with policy and the criteria set out in the report. In some cases the Sub-Committee did not entirely agree with the scoring in the report as it was considered that criterion 2 was vague in its description and criterion 3 was difficult to interpret accurately, especially as so many of the applications involved the sale of food. The Sub-Committee also took into account the preferences expressed for a particular pitch and, in allocating those pitches, it also had regard to what was being sold (or would be sold) by other traders in adjacent pitches.       

 

The Sub-Committee refused the application, pursuant to section 12(1)(d) of the City of Westminster Act 1999.  This was on the basis that Pitch 1105 at Berwick Street had been allocated to another trader and was no longer available. 

 

Ms Muin had specifically requested to trade from Pitch 1105.  However, Pitch 1105 was sought by a number of traders and the Sub-Committee decided there was a stronger candidate who had scored more highly against the criteria and would be given the opportunity to trade from this pitch.  The criteria included that the trader had applied to operate at the pitch Monday to Saturday (whereas Mr Muin only wanted to trade from Wednesday to Friday). The Sub-Committee was keen to score applicants more highly if they applied for every day of the working week.  This would add to the vibrancy of Berwick Street Market.  Members had also noted that the successful trader had established a start-up business and had given more details at the hearing as to how he would be contributing to the vision for Berwick Street Market as a ‘jewel in the crown’ in the heart of Soho.

 

 

 

Applicant

 

Alfredo Vazzano (company name – Lil Vivienne Limited)

 

 

Nature of application

 

Preferred Pitch – 1106.  Alternative Pitch(es) considered –  any pitch.

Trading days – Monday to Saturday

Type of commodity – hot takeaway food

Description of commodity – English, Italian, Artisan, Baked Goods, pizzeria, street food.

 

 

Decision:

 

Mr Vazzano’s application was one of forty four submitted for new street trading licences at Berwick Street Market. In reaching a decision, the Licensing Sub-Committee took account of all the details in the report, including the summary of each application and the officers’ scoring based on the criteria set out in the report; any supplementary information provided by each applicant within the report; and any additional submissions made by applicants who attended the hearing to make oral representations. Mr Vazzano did not attend the hearing. The Sub-Committee considered all the applications before reaching its final determination and exercised a wide discretion so as to allocate as far as possible in accordance with policy and the criteria set out in the report. In some cases the Sub-Committee did not entirely agree with the scoring in the report as it was considered that criterion 2 was vague in its description and criterion 3 was difficult to interpret accurately, especially as so many of the applications involved the sale of food. The Sub-Committee also took into account the preferences expressed for a particular pitch and, in allocating those pitches, it also had regard to what was being sold (or would be sold) by other traders in adjacent pitches.

       

The Sub-Committee refused the application pursuant to section 12(1)(d) of the City of Westminster Act 1999.  This was on the basis that the pitches at Berwick Street were all allocated to other traders and there were no pitches remaining.

 

The Sub-Committee considered that other applicants had scored more highly for providing a range of commodities which differed more significantly from what was already on offer at Berwick Street Market. However, it was also noted that this applicant was proposing to use a vehicle as part of the receptacle.  This is contrary to criteria 1(4) under policy ST1 of the Council’s street trading policy. 

 

 

 

 

Applicant

 

Andrew White (company name – Laska East)

 

Nature of application

 

Preferred Pitch – 1114.  Alternative Pitch(es) considered –  any pitch.

Trading days – Monday to Friday

Type of commodity – hot takeaway food

Description of commodity – Asian (East), Asian (South East), Singaporean, gluten free, gourmet, rice based dishes, soups, street food, vegan, vegetarian.

 

 

Decision:

 

Mr White’s application was one of forty four submitted for new street trading licences at Berwick Street Market. In reaching a decision, the Licensing Sub-Committee took account of all the details in the report, including the summary of each application and the officers’ scoring based on the criteria set out in the report; any supplementary information provided by each applicant within the report; and any additional submissions made by applicants who attended the hearing to make oral representations. Mr White did not attend the hearing. The Sub-Committee considered all the applications before reaching its final determination and exercised a wide discretion so as to allocate as far as possible in accordance with policy and the criteria set out in the report. In some cases the Sub-Committee did not entirely agree with the scoring in the report as it was considered that criterion 2 was vague in its description and criterion 3 was difficult to interpret accurately, especially as so many of the applications involved the sale of food. The Sub-Committee also took into account the preferences expressed for a particular pitch and, in allocating those pitches, it also had regard to what was being sold (or would be sold) by other traders in adjacent pitches.        

 

The Sub-Committee refused the application, pursuant to section 12(1)(d) of the City of Westminster Act 1999.  This was on the basis that the pitches at Berwick Street were all allocated to other traders and there were no pitches remaining.

 

The Sub-Committee took into account that Mr White was proposing to operate from the Market Monday to Friday.  In keeping with the criteria set out in the report, the Sub-Committee was keen to score applicants more highly if they applied for every day of the working week.  This included Saturdays.  This would add to the vibrancy of Berwick Street Market. 

 

The Sub-Committee considered that it was a difficult decision.  However, there were sufficient strong candidates who had applied to operate the pitches Monday to Friday, resulting in this application being refused. Other applicants had scored more highly for providing a range of commodities which differed more significantly from what was already on offer at Berwick Street Market.

 

 

 

Applicant

 

Anthony Withstandley (company name – Salt Beef and Rye)

 

 

Nature of application

 

Preferred Pitch – 1127.  Alternative Pitch(es) considered –  none.

Trading days – Monday to Saturday

Type of commodity – cold takeaway food

Description of commodity – European, Polish, United States, Baked goods, cheeses, kimchi, kosher.

 

 

Decision:

 

Mr Withstandley’s application was one of forty four submitted for new street trading licences at Berwick Street Market. In reaching a decision, the Licensing Sub-Committee took account of all the details in the report, including the summary of each application and the officers’ scoring based on the criteria set out in the report; any supplementary information provided by each applicant within the report; and any additional submissions made by applicants who attended the hearing to make oral representations. Mr Withstandley did not attend the hearing. The Sub-Committee considered all the applications before reaching its final determination and exercised a wide discretion so as to allocate as far as possible in accordance with policy and the criteria set out in the report. In some cases the Sub-Committee did not entirely agree with the scoring in the report as it was considered that criterion 2 was vague in its description and criterion 3 was difficult to interpret accurately, especially as so many of the applications involved the sale of food. The Sub-Committee also took into account the preferences expressed for a particular pitch and, in allocating those pitches, it also had regard to what was being sold (or would be sold) by other traders in adjacent pitches.       

 

The Sub-Committee granted Mr Withstandley permission to trade at Pitch 1127 Monday to Saturday, subject to the requirements set out in paragraph 2.1 of the Licensing Sub-Committee report being satisfied.  In deciding to grant the application, the Sub-Committee took into account that Mr Withstandley would be operating Monday to Saturday.  In keeping with the criteria set out in the report, the Sub-Committee was keen to score applicants more highly if they applied for every day of the working week.  Operating on a Saturday would add to the vibrancy of Berwick Street Market.

 

The Sub-Committee also took into account that Mr Withstandley’s application did include some diverse commodities.  Mr Withstandley’s range differed from what was on offer elsewhere in the Market in that it included items such as cheeses, Kim Chi and kosher food. 

 

The Sub-Committee did note a photograph which appeared to show that some hot food was provided which would have meant that the applicant would not have been marked as highly under the criteria as a cold takeaway food trader.

 

In granting the application, the Licensing Sub-Committee wanted to stress that the licence was granted to the individual applicant who had to make full personal use of that licence. Although assistants could be engaged to help out when the trader was temporarily absent, the trader was expected to be present at the pitch most of the time.

 

 

 

Applicant

 

Ashok Patel (company name – Quick Bites)

 

 

Nature of application

 

Preferred Pitch – 1106.  Alternative Pitch(es) considered –  any pitch.

Trading days – Monday to Saturday (amended at hearing from Monday to Friday)

Type of commodity – hot takeaway food

Description of commodity – Asian (North East), Indian, Barbecue, Cold Beverages, Curries, Grill, Halal, Kebab, Rice Based Dishes, Wraps.

 

 

Decision:

 

Mr Patel’s application was one of forty four submitted for new street trading licences at Berwick Street Market. In reaching a decision, the Licensing Sub-Committee took account of all the details in the report, including the summary of each application and the officers’ scoring based on the criteria set out in the report; any supplementary information provided by each applicant within the report; and any additional submissions made by applicants who attended the hearing to make oral representations. Mr Patel did attend the hearing with Krsna Patel. The Sub-Committee considered all the applications before reaching its final determination and exercised a wide discretion so as to allocate as far as possible in accordance with policy and the criteria set out in the report. In some cases the Sub-Committee did not entirely agree with the scoring in the report as it was considered that criterion 2 was vague in its description and criterion 3 was difficult to interpret accurately, especially as so many of the applications involved the sale of food. The Sub-Committee also took into account the preferences expressed for a particular pitch and, in allocating those pitches, it also had regard to what was being sold (or would be sold) by other traders in adjacent pitches.        

 

The Sub-Committee granted Mr Patel permission to trade at Pitch 1124 Monday to Saturday, subject to the requirements set out in paragraph 2.1 of the Licensing Sub-Committee report being satisfied.  In deciding to grant the application, the Sub-Committee took into account that Mr Patel had amended his application at the hearing so that he would be operating Monday to Saturday.  In keeping with the criteria set out in the report, the Sub-Committee was keen to score applicants more highly if they applied for every day of the working week.  Operating on a Saturday would add to the vibrancy of Berwick Street Market.

 

In granting the application, the Licensing Sub-Committee wanted to stress that the licence was granted to the individual applicant who had to make full personal use of that licence. Although assistants could be engaged to help out when the trader was temporarily absent, the trader was expected to be present at the pitch most of the time.

 

The Sub-Committee noted that Mr Patel’s preferred pitch was 1106.  However, Pitch 1106 was sought by several traders and the Sub-Committee considered that it was appropriate, given that there was another strong candidate who had scored more highly against the criteria, to provide Mr Patel with an alternative pitch at Berwick Street Market.  Mr Patel had set out in his application that he was willing to accept a pitch other than 1106.

 

 The Sub-Committee considered that whilst Mr Patel did not have a start-up business, he would be able to contribute to the vision for Berwick Street Market as a ‘jewel in the crown’ in the heart of Soho.  Mr Patel was likely to be able to bring his experience from working in other markets to Berwick Street Market.

 

 

 

Applicant

 

AsnarQamar (company name – Khao)

 

Nature of application

 

Preferred Pitch – 1105.  Alternative Pitch(es) considered –  none.

Trading days – Tuesday to Thursday

Type of commodity – hot takeaway food

Description of commodity – Asian (North East), Asian (South), Fusion, Halal, Stews.

 

 

Decision:

 

Ms Qamar’s application was one of forty four submitted for new street trading licences at Berwick Street Market.  In reaching a decision, the Licensing Sub-Committee took account of all the details in the report, including the summary of each application and the officers’ scoring based on the criteria set out in the report; any supplementary information provided by each applicant within the report; and any additional submissions made by applicants who attended the hearing to make oral representations. Mr Qamar did not attend the hearing. The Sub-Committee considered all the applications before reaching its final determination and exercised a wide discretion so as to allocate as far as possible in accordance with policy and the criteria set out in the report. In some cases the Sub-Committee did not entirely agree with the scoring in the report as it was considered that criterion 2 was vague in its description and criterion 3 was difficult to interpret accurately, especially as so many of the applications involved the sale of food. The Sub-Committee also took into account the preferences expressed for a particular pitch and, in allocating those pitches, it also had regard to what was being sold (or would be sold) by other traders in adjacent pitches.       

 

The Sub-Committee refused the application, pursuant to section 12(1)(d) of the City of Westminster Act 1999.  This was on the basis that Pitch 1105 at Berwick Street had been allocated to another trader and was no longer available. 

 

Ms Qamar had specifically requested to trade from Pitch 1105.  However, Pitch 1105 was sought by a number of traders and the Sub-Committee decided there was a stronger candidate who had scored more highly against the criteria and would be given the opportunity to trade from this pitch.  The criteria included that the successful trader would be operating at the pitch Monday to Saturday.  In keeping with the criteria set out in the report, the Sub-Committee was keen to score applicants more highly if they applied for every day of the working week.  Operating on a Saturday would add to the vibrancy of Berwick Street Market.

 

The successful trader had also given more details as to how he was contributing to the vision for Berwick Street Market as a ‘jewel in the crown’ in the heart of Soho.

 

 

 

Applicant

 

AyoubeAderrab (company name – Italian Fashion)

 

 

Nature of application

 

Preferred Pitch – 1105.  Alternative Pitch(es) considered – any pitch.

Trading days – Monday to Friday

Type of commodity – Non-food

Description of commodity – Men’s / Women’s clothing.

 

 

Decision:

 

Mr Aderrab’s application was one of forty four submitted for new street trading licences at Berwick Street Market. In reaching a decision, the Licensing Sub-Committee took account of all the details in the report, including the summary of each application and the officers’ scoring based on the criteria set out in the report; any supplementary information provided by each applicant within the report; and any additional submissions made by applicants who attended the hearing to make oral representations. Mr Aderrab did not attend the hearing, despite indicating that he was intending to do so. The Sub-Committee considered all the applications before reaching its final determination and exercised a wide discretion so as to allocate as far as possible in accordance with policy and the criteria set out in the report. In some cases the Sub-Committee did not entirely agree with the scoring in the report as it was considered that criterion 2 was vague in its description and criterion 3 was difficult to interpret accurately, especially as so many of the applications involved the sale of food. The Sub-Committee also took into account the preferences expressed for a particular pitch and, in allocating those pitches, it also had regard to what was being sold (or would be sold) by other traders in adjacent pitches.        

 

The Sub-Committee granted Mr Aderrab permission to trade at Pitch 1117 Monday to Saturday, subject to the requirements set out in paragraph 2.1 of the Licensing Sub-Committee report being satisfied.  The Sub-Committee noted that Mr Aderrab’s preferred pitch was 1105.  However, Pitch 1105 was sought by a number of traders and the Sub-Committee considered that it was appropriate, given that there were other strong candidates who had applied to operate Monday to Saturday, to provide Mr Aderrab with an alternative pitch at Berwick Street Market.  Mr Aderrab had set out in his application that he was willing to accept a pitch other than 1105. 

 

In deciding to grant the application, the Sub-Committee took into account that Mr Aderrab’s application was in keeping with the criteria which scored applicants more highly for providing a range of commodities which add vibrancy and diversity.  Mr Aderrab’s range differed from what was on offer elsewhere in the Market in that this involved men’s and women’s clothing.

 

 

 

Applicant

 

Ben Cooper Perers Cook (company name – Lord of the Wings)

 

 

Nature of application

 

Preferred Pitch – 1105.  Alternative Pitch(es) considered –  any pitch.

Trading days – Monday to Saturday

Type of commodity – hot takeaway food

Description of commodity – American (North), United States, Street Food.

 

 

Decision:

 

Mr Cook’s application was one of forty four submitted for new street trading licences at Berwick Street Market. In reaching a decision, the Licensing Sub-Committee took account of all the details in the report, including the summary of each application and the officers’ scoring based on the criteria set out in the report; any supplementary information provided by each applicant within the report; and any additional submissions made by applicants who attended the hearing to make oral representations. Mr Cook did attend the hearing. The Sub-Committee considered all the applications before reaching its final determination and exercised a wide discretion so as to allocate as far as possible in accordance with policy and the criteria set out in the report. In some cases the Sub-Committee did not entirely agree with the scoring in the report as it was considered that criterion 2 was vague in its description and criterion 3 was difficult to interpret accurately, especially as so many of the applications involved the sale of food. The Sub-Committee also took into account the preferences expressed for a particular pitch and, in allocating those pitches, it also had regard to what was being sold (or would be sold) by other traders in adjacent pitches.         

 

The Sub-Committee granted Mr Cook permission to trade at Pitch 1105 Monday to Saturday, subject to the requirements set out in paragraph 2.1 of the Licensing Sub-Committee report being satisfied.  In deciding to grant the application, the Sub-Committee took into account that Mr Cook would be operating at the pitch Monday to Saturday.  In keeping with the criteria set out in the report, the Sub-Committee was keen to score applicants more highly if they applied for every day of the working week.  Operating on a Saturday would add to the vibrancy of Berwick Street Market.

 

The Sub-Committee also took into account that Mr Cook was seeking to provide a very specific hot food takeaway commodity which was not currently available in the Market.

 

The Sub-Committee noted that there appeared to be some discrepancies as to the traders who were stated to be operating start-up businesses and those who were not.  The Sub-Committee was satisfied that Mr Cook was operating a start-up business.  Members were impressed by Mr Cook’s enthusiasm at the meeting for contributing to the vision for Berwick Street Market as a ‘jewel in the crown’ in the heart of Soho.  Mr Cook had also researched his product in the United States and had been working recently in pop up restaurants and pubs.

 

In granting the application, the Licensing Sub-Committee wanted to stress that the licence was granted to the individual applicant who had to make full personal use of that licence. Although assistants could be engaged to help out when the trader was temporarily absent, the trader was expected to be present at the pitch most of the time.

 

 

 

Applicant

 

Carla Monsora Damasceno Casadei (company name – Young Vegans)

 

 

Nature of application

 

Preferred Pitch – 1105.  Alternative Pitch(es) considered –  none.

Trading days – Monday to Friday

Type of commodity – hot takeaway food

Description of commodity – English, Baked goods, gluten free, gourmet, locally sourced, street food, vegan.

 

 

Decision:

 

Ms Casadei’s application was one of forty four submitted for new street trading licences at Berwick Street Market.  In reaching a decision, the Licensing Sub-Committee took account of all the details in the report, including the summary of each application and the officers’ scoring based on the criteria set out in the report; any supplementary information provided by each applicant within the report; and any additional submissions made by applicants who attended the hearing to make oral representations. Ms Casadei did not attend the hearing. The Sub-Committee considered all the applications before reaching its final determination and exercised a wide discretion so as to allocate as far as possible in accordance with policy and the criteria set out in the report. In some cases the Sub-Committee did not entirely agree with the scoring in the report as it was considered that criterion 2 was vague in its description and criterion 3 was difficult to interpret accurately, especially as so many of the applications involved the sale of food. The Sub-Committee also took into account the preferences expressed for a particular pitch and, in allocating those pitches, it also had regard to what was being sold (or would be sold) by other traders in adjacent pitches.        

 

The Sub-Committee refused the application, pursuant to section 12(1)(d) of the City of Westminster Act 1999.  This was on the basis that Pitch 1105 at Berwick Street had been allocated to another trader and was no longer available. 

 

Ms Casadei had specifically requested to trade from Pitch 1105.  However, Pitch 1105 was sought by a number of traders and the Sub-Committee decided there was a stronger candidate who had scored more highly against the criteria and would be given the opportunity to trade from this pitch.  The criteria included that the successful trader had applied to operate at the pitch Monday to Saturday.  The Sub-Committee was keen to score applicants more highly if they applied for every day of the working week.  This would add to the vibrancy of Berwick Street Market. 

 

Members had also noted that the successful trader had established a start-up business and had given more details as to how he was contributing to the vision for Berwick Street Market as a ‘jewel in the crown’ in the heart of Soho.

 

 

 

Applicant

 

ChiomaOkpara (company name – Spice Shack)

 

 

Nature of application

 

Preferred Pitch – 1107.  Alternative Pitch(es) considered – 1106, 1109, 1110

Trading days – Monday to Saturday

Type of commodity – fresh produce

Description of commodity – African (East), Asian (Central), European (Central), Mediterranean, Middle Eastern, Moroccan, Artisan, Dried fruits and nuts, Dried goods, olvies, pre-packed foods.

 

 

Decision:

 

Ms Okpara’s application was one of forty four submitted for new street trading licences at Berwick Street Market. In reaching a decision, the Licensing Sub-Committee took account of all the details in the report, including the summary of each application and the officers’ scoring based on the criteria set out in the report; any supplementary information provided by each applicant within the report; and any additional submissions made by applicants who attended the hearing to make oral representations. Mr Okpara did attend the hearing. The Sub-Committee considered all the applications before reaching its final determination and exercised a wide discretion so as to allocate as far as possible in accordance with policy and the criteria set out in the report. In some cases the Sub-Committee did not entirely agree with the scoring in the report as it was considered that criterion 2 was vague in its description and criterion 3 was difficult to interpret accurately, especially as so many of the applications involved the sale of food. The Sub-Committee also took into account the preferences expressed for a particular pitch and, in allocating those pitches, it also had regard to what was being sold (or would be sold) by other traders in adjacent pitches.         

 

The Sub-Committee heard from Ms Okpara that she had applied originally to provide commodities such as herbs and spices.  However, her business partner had pulled out of the partnership and she could no longer guarantee that she would be able to provide what she had originally applied for.  If she found a suitable business partner she would be keen to return to this concept.  However, if she did return to this concept she intended to operate at the pitch on Fridays and Saturdays to see how the business worked with a new partner.  Ms Okpara had an alternative plan to provide crepes, smoothies and juices on site.

 

The Sub-Committee was of the view that the application ought to be considered as originally presented.  It would be very difficult for the Sub-Committee to determine that she had a better claim for a pitch when she had decided to change the commodities that she might want to sell because of her business arrangements and especially as she could not be sure that she would be able to trade every day of the week. The Sub-Committee therefore considered that due to unfortunate circumstances Ms Okpara was currently not able to operate the pitch in the way she had intended when she had submitted the application. In those circumstances it did not believe that it was appropriate to grant the application. 

 

The Sub-Committee refused the application, pursuant to section 12(1)(d) of the City of Westminster Act 1999.  This was on the basis that the pitches at Berwick Street were all allocated to other traders and there were no pitches remaining.

 

 

   

 

 

Applicant

 

Christopher Gay (company name – Wannapull)

 

 

Nature of application

 

Preferred Pitches – 1105 & 1106 (2 pitches required).  Alternative Pitches considered –  any pitches.

Trading days – Monday to Saturday

Type of commodity – hot takeaway food

Description of commodity – Pulled chicken/beef/lamb/pork with salads.

 

 

Decision:

 

Mr Gay’s application was one of forty four submitted for new street trading licences at Berwick Street Market. In reaching a decision, the Licensing Sub-Committee took account of all the details in the report, including the summary of each application and the officers’ scoring based on the criteria set out in the report; any supplementary information provided by each applicant within the report; and any additional submissions made by applicants who attended the hearing to make oral representations. Mr Gay did not attend the hearing. The Sub-Committee considered all the applications before reaching its final determination and exercised a wide discretion so as to allocate as far as possible in accordance with policy and the criteria set out in the report. In some cases the Sub-Committee did not entirely agree with the scoring in the report as it was considered that criterion 2 was vague in its description and criterion 3 was difficult to interpret accurately, especially as so many of the applications involved the sale of food. The Sub-Committee also took into account the preferences expressed for a particular pitch and, in allocating those pitches, it also had regard to what was being sold (or would be sold) by other traders in adjacent pitches.        

 

The Sub-Committee refused the application pursuant to section 12(1)(d) of the City of Westminster Act 1999.  This was on the basis that the pitches at Berwick Street were all allocated to other traders and there were no pitches remaining.

 

The Sub-Committee also considered that other applicants had scored more highly for providing a range of commodities which differed more significantly from what was already on offer at Berwick Street Market. However, it was also noted that this applicant was proposing to use a vehicle as part of the receptacle.  This is contrary to criteria 1(4) under policy ST1 of the Council’s street trading policy. The vehicle would also require the use of two pitches. Whilst the Licensing Sub-Committee was prepared to exceptionally allocate two adjacent pitches to the same trader where special circumstances prevailed, it was not prepared to do so simply to accommodate a vehicle that did not comply with policy.   

 

 

 

Applicant

 

ClaudiuNicolae Benchea (company name – Paella Fellas)

 

 

Nature of application

 

Preferred Pitch – 1105.  Alternative Pitch(es) considered –  any pitch.

Trading days – Monday to Friday

Type of commodity – hot takeaway food

Description of commodity – European (Central), Mediterranean, Spanish, Butcher, Fish Monger, Fruit & Vegetables, Fish & Seafood, Street Food.

 

 

Decision:

 

Mr Benchea’s application was one of forty four submitted for new street trading licences at Berwick Street Market. In reaching a decision, the Licensing Sub-Committee took account of all the details in the report, including the summary of each application and the officers’ scoring based on the criteria set out in the report; any supplementary information provided by each applicant within the report; and any additional submissions made by applicants who attended the hearing to make oral representations. Mr Benchea did not attend the hearing. The Sub-Committee considered all the applications before reaching its final determination and exercised a wide discretion so as to allocate as far as possible in accordance with policy and the criteria set out in the report. In some cases the Sub-Committee did not entirely agree with the scoring in the report as it was considered that criterion 2 was vague in its description and criterion 3 was difficult to interpret accurately, especially as so many of the applications involved the sale of food. The Sub-Committee also took into account the preferences expressed for a particular pitch and, in allocating those pitches, it also had regard to what was being sold (or would be sold) by other traders in adjacent pitches.     

 

The Sub-Committee granted Mr Benchea permission to trade at Pitch 1128 Monday to Wednesday, subject to the requirements set out in paragraph 2.1 of the Licensing Sub-Committee report being satisfied. 

 

The Sub-Committee noted that Mr Benchea’s preferred pitch was 1105.  However, Pitch 1105 was sought by a number of traders and the Sub-Committee considered that it was appropriate, given that there was another strong candidate who had scored more highly and was willing to operate from the pitch on Saturdays, to provide Mr Benchea with an alternative pitch at Berwick Street Market.  Mr Benchea had set out in his application that he was willing to accept a pitch other than 1105.

 

The Sub-Committee did score applicants more highly who had applied to operate a pitch Monday to Saturday.  They also scored applicants more highly if they applied to operate a pitch Monday to Friday and in the event their range of commodities differed from what was on offer elsewhere in the Market.  The Sub-Committee was not satisfied that the commodities offered by Mr Benchea were as distinctive from what was offered at the Market as by some of the other candidates.  Members considered that it was appropriate to grant Mr Benchea permission to trade Monday to Wednesday at Pitch 1128 as these days were not required by the applicant who had been granted a licence for that pitch from Thursday to Saturday.

 

In granting the application in part, the Licensing Sub-Committee wanted to stress that the licence was granted to the individual applicant who had to make full personal use of that licence. Although assistants could be engaged to help out when the trader was temporarily absent, the trader was expected to be present at the pitch most of the time.

 

 

 

 

 

Applicant

 

Daniel Iyayi (company name – Street Food Connoisseurs Ltd)

 

 

Nature of application

 

Preferred Pitch – 1105.  Alternative Pitch(es) considered –  any pitch.

Trading days – Monday to Saturday

Type of commodity – hot takeaway food

Description of commodity – Chinese, English, Lebanese, Ice Cream, Patisserie, burgers, cold beverages, gluten free, gourmet, grill, halla, hot dogs, hot beverages, locally sourced, rice based dishes, sausages, smoothies, street food, vegetarian, wraps.

 

 

Decision:

 

Mr Iyayi’s application was one of forty four submitted for new street trading licences at Berwick Street Market.  In reaching a decision, the Licensing Sub-Committee took account of all the details in the report, including the summary of each application and the officers’ scoring based on the criteria set out in the report; any supplementary information provided by each applicant within the report; and any additional submissions made by applicants who attended the hearing to make oral representations. Mr Iyayi did attend the hearing. The Sub-Committee considered all the applications before reaching its final determination and exercised a wide discretion so as to allocate as far as possible in accordance with policy and the criteria set out in the report. In some cases the Sub-Committee did not entirely agree with the scoring in the report as it was considered that criterion 2 was vague in its description and criterion 3 was difficult to interpret accurately, especially as so many of the applications involved the sale of food. The Sub-Committee also took into account the preferences expressed for a particular pitch and, in allocating those pitches, it also had regard to what was being sold (or would be sold) by other traders in adjacent pitches.       

 

 

The Sub-Committee granted Mr Iyayi permission to trade at Pitch 1103 on Saturdays, subject to the requirements set out in paragraph 2.1 of the Licensing Sub-Committee report being satisfied.  In deciding to grant the application on Saturdays, the Sub-Committee took into account that Mr Iyayi proposed to operate Monday to Saturday.  In keeping with the criteria set out in the report, the Sub-Committee was keen to score applicants more highly if they applied for every day of the working week.  This added to the vibrancy of Berwick Street Market.

 

The Sub-Committee did not grant the opportunity for Mr Iyayi to operate at the Market Mondays to Fridays because there were a number of strong candidates who scored more highly against the criteria.  Other applicants had scored more highly for providing a range of commodities which differed more significantly from what was already on offer at Berwick Street Market.

 

The Sub-Committee noted that there appeared to be some discrepancies as to the traders who were stated to be operating start-up businesses and those who were not.  The Sub-Committee was not entirely satisfied that Mr Iyayi was operating a start-up business.

 

The Sub-Committee noted that the report had referred to Mr Iyayi using a vehicle as the receptacle which is contrary to criteria 1(4) under policy ST1 of the street trading policy.  However, Mr Iyayi clarified at the meeting that he would actually be using a flatpack street hut.

 

The Sub-Committee considered that whilst Mr Iyayi did not have a start-up business, he would be able to contribute to the vision for Berwick Street Market as a ‘jewel in the crown’ in the heart of Soho.  Mr Iyayi was likely to be able to bring his catering experience to Berwick Street Market such as to add vibrancy to the market on a Saturday.

 

In granting the application in part, the Licensing Sub-Committee wanted to stress that the licence was granted to the individual applicant who had to make full personal use of that licence. Although assistants could be engaged to help out when the trader was temporarily absent, the trader was expected to be present at the pitch most of the time.

 

 

 

 

Applicant

 

Darell Mark (company name – The Jerk Drum)

 

 

Nature of application

 

Preferred Pitch – 1105.  Alternative pitch(es) considered – any pitch.

Trading days – Monday to Saturday

Type of commodity – hot takeaway food

Description of commodity – Caribbean, Jamaican, barbecue, curries, rice based dishes, salads, stews, street food, vegetarian, wraps.

 

 

Decision:

 

Mr Mark’s application was one of forty four submitted for new street trading licences at Berwick Street Market.  In reaching a decision, the Licensing Sub-Committee took account of all the details in the report, including the summary of each application and the officers’ scoring based on the criteria set out in the report; any supplementary information provided by each applicant within the report; and any additional submissions made by applicants who attended the hearing to make oral representations. Mr Mark did attend the hearing. The Sub-Committee considered all the applications before reaching its final determination and exercised a wide discretion so as to allocate as far as possible in accordance with policy and the criteria set out in the report. In some cases the Sub-Committee did not entirely agree with the scoring in the report as it was considered that criterion 2 was vague in its description and criterion 3 was difficult to interpret accurately, especially as so many of the applications involved the sale of food. The Sub-Committee also took into account the preferences expressed for a particular pitch and, in allocating those pitches, it also had regard to what was being sold (or would be sold) by other traders in adjacent pitches.

  

The Sub-Committee granted Mr Mark permission to trade at Pitch 1125 Monday to Saturday, subject to the requirements set out in paragraph 2.1 of the Licensing Sub-Committee report being satisfied.  In deciding to grant the application, the Sub-Committee took into account that Mr Mark would be operating Monday to Saturday.  In keeping with the criteria set out in the report, the Sub-Committee was keen to score applicants more highly if they applied for every day of the working week.  Operating on a Saturday would add to the vibrancy of Berwick Street Market.

 

The Sub-Committee noted that Mr Mark’s preferred pitch was 1105.  However, Pitch 1105 was sought by a number of traders and the Sub-Committee considered that it was appropriate, given that there was another strong candidate who had scored more highly against the criteria, to provide Mr Mark with an alternative pitch at Berwick Street Market.  Mr Mark had set out in his application that he was willing to accept a pitch other than 1105.

 

Mr Mark had referred at the meeting to currently working at markets in the King’s Cross and Portobello Road areas.  The Sub-Committee considered that Mr Mark would potentially bring useful experience from working in other markets to Berwick Street Market.  However, it was important that he gave up existing commitments at other markets in order that he was able to comply with the application and operate at Berwick Street Market Monday to Saturday.  

 

In granting the application, the Licensing Sub-Committee wanted to stress that the licence was granted to the individual applicant who had to make full personal use of that licence. Although assistants could be engaged to help out when the trader was temporarily absent, the trader was expected to be present at the pitch most of the time.

 

 

Applicant

 

Davide Del Gatto (company name – Savage Salads)

 

 

Nature of application

 

Preferred Pitch – 1107.  Alternative Pitch(es) considered –  1109.

Trading days – Monday to Friday

Type of commodity – hot takeaway food

Description of commodity – Mediterranean, Grill, Meze, Salads.

 

 

Decision:

 

Mr Del Gatto’s application was one of two submitted to vary street trading licences from existing licence holders who wish to trade from an additional pitch at Berwick Street Market.  In reaching a decision, the Licensing Sub-Committee took account of all the details in the report, including the summary of each application and the officers’ scoring based on the criteria set out in the report; any supplementary information provided by each applicant within the report; and any additional submissions made by applicants who attended the hearing to make oral representations. Mr Del Gatto did attend the hearing. The Sub-Committee considered all the applications before reaching its final determination and exercised a wide discretion so as to allocate as far as possible in accordance with policy and the criteria set out in the report. In some cases the Sub-Committee did not entirely agree with the scoring in the report as it was considered that criterion 2 was vague in its description and criterion 3 was difficult to interpret accurately, especially as so many of the applications involved the sale of food. The Sub-Committee also took into account the preferences expressed for a particular pitch and, in allocating those pitches, it also had regard to what was being sold (or would be sold) by other traders in adjacent pitches.  

    

The Sub-Committee granted Mr Del Gatto permission to trade at Pitch 1107 Monday to Saturday, subject to the requirements set out in paragraph 2.1 of the Licensing Sub-Committee report being satisfied.  The Sub-Committee considered that there were exceptional reasons for Mr Del Gatto to be given the opportunity to trade from this pitch in addition to pitch 1108.  There is no policy against a trader having two pitches, provided the trader makes full personal use of both licences, but there had to be very good reasons why a trader should be granted an additional pitch rather than granting that pitch to a different applicant. 

 

Members had been impressed that Mr Del Gatto and his business partner, Kristina Gustafsson, had a very clear idea at the hearing how they contributed to the vision for Berwick Street Market as a ‘jewel in the crown’ in the heart of Soho.  Their existing stall at Pitch 1108 is one of the most successful and busiest stalls in Berwick Street Market.  They promoted the business on social media and had published a book which attracted people from around the world to the Market.  They had also extended their menu and upgraded their stall.  They were seeking additional space after five and a half years of trading.  This would ensure that there was not excessive queuing. 

 

The Sub-Committee had emphasised that it was important that Mr Del Gatto traded throughout the day and not just lunchtime.  Mr Del Gatto and his business partner, Kristina Gustafsson had responded to this positively, stating that they were prepared to open earlier at 10:00 and would trade through to 16.00.

 

The Sub-Committee also considered that Mr Del Gatto had been unfairly penalised by the criteria set out in the report.  He had scored no points because his was not a business being started for the first time and he also scored no points due to the commodities being provided elsewhere.  It was clear that the commodities were currently being provided elsewhere by Mr Del Gatto himself at pitch 1108. 

 

In granting the application, the Licensing Sub-Committee wanted to stress that the licence was granted to the individual applicant who had to make full personal use of both licences, as indicated above. Although assistants could be engaged to help out when the trader was temporarily absent, the trader was expected to be present at both pitches most of the time.

 

 

 

Applicant

 

Dennis Varischetti (company name – The Greedy Guts)

 

 

Nature of application

 

Preferred Pitch – 1105.  Alternative Pitch(es) considered –  none.

Trading days – Monday to Saturday

Type of commodity – hot takeaway food

Description of commodity – Angus Beef Burgers and Polish Sausages.

 

 

Decision:

 

Mr Varischetti’s application was one of forty four submitted for new street trading licences at Berwick Street Market. In reaching a decision, the Licensing Sub-Committee took account of all the details in the report, including the summary of each application and the officers’ scoring based on the criteria set out in the report; any supplementary information provided by each applicant within the report; and any additional submissions made by applicants who attended the hearing to make oral representations. Mr Varischetti did not attend the hearing. The Sub-Committee considered all the applications before reaching its final determination and exercised a wide discretion so as to allocate as far as possible in accordance with policy and the criteria set out in the report. In some cases the Sub-Committee did not entirely agree with the scoring in the report as it was considered that criterion 2 was vague in its description and criterion 3 was difficult to interpret accurately, especially as so many of the applications involved the sale of food. The Sub-Committee also took into account the preferences expressed for a particular pitch and, in allocating those pitches, it also had regard to what was being sold (or would be sold) by other traders in adjacent pitches.        

 

The Sub-Committee refused the application, pursuant to section 12(1)(d) of the City of Westminster Act 1999.  This was on the basis that Pitch 1105 at Berwick Street had been allocated to another trader and was no longer available. 

 

Mr Varischetti had specifically requested to trade from Pitch 1105.  However, Pitch 1105 was sought by a number of traders and the Sub-Committee decided there was a stronger candidate who had scored more highly against the criteria and would be given the opportunity to trade from this pitch.  The criteria included that the successful trader was providing a commodity which differed more significantly from what was already on offer at Berwick Street Market.  Members had also noted that the successful trader had established a start-up business and had given more details as to how he was contributing to the vision for Berwick Street Market as a ‘jewel in the crown’ in the heart of Soho.

 

 

 

Applicant

 

Dominika Maria Brych (company name – Filthy Coffee)

 

 

Nature of application

 

Preferred Pitch – 1105.  Alternative Pitch(es) considered –  any pitch.

Trading days – Monday to Friday

Type of commodity – fresh produce

Description of commodity – Hot Beverages.

 

 

Decision:

 

Ms Brych’s application was one of forty four submitted for new street trading licences at Berwick Street Market.  In reaching a decision, the Licensing Sub-Committee took account of all the details in the report, including the summary of each application and the officers’ scoring based on the criteria set out in the report; any supplementary information provided by each applicant within the report; and any additional submissions made by applicants who attended the hearing to make oral representations. Ms Brych did not attend the hearing. The Sub-Committee considered all the applications before reaching its final determination and exercised a wide discretion so as to allocate as far as possible in accordance with policy and the criteria set out in the report. In some cases the Sub-Committee did not entirely agree with the scoring in the report as it was considered that criterion 2 was vague in its description and criterion 3 was difficult to interpret accurately, especially as so many of the applications involved the sale of food. The Sub-Committee also took into account the preferences expressed for a particular pitch and, in allocating those pitches, it also had regard to what was being sold (or would be sold) by other traders in adjacent pitches.       

 

The Sub-Committee granted Ms Brych permission to trade at Pitch 1119 Monday to Friday, subject to the requirements set out in paragraph 2.1 of the Licensing Sub-Committee report being satisfied. 

 

The Sub-Committee noted that Ms Brych’s preferred pitch was 1105.  However, Pitch 1105 was sought by a number of traders and the Sub-Committee considered that it was appropriate, given that there was another strong candidate who had scored more highly against the criteria and was willing to operate from the pitch on Saturdays, to provide Ms Brych with an alternative pitch at Berwick Street Market.  Ms Brych had set out in her application that she was willing to accept a pitch other than 1105.

 

In deciding to grant the application, the Sub-Committee took into account that Ms Brych’s application was in keeping with the criteria which scored applicants more highly for providing a range of commodities which add vibrancy and diversity.  Ms Brych’s range differed from what was on offer elsewhere in the Market in that this involved tea and coffee and not hot food.

 

In granting the application, the Licensing Sub-Committee wanted to stress that the licence was granted to the individual applicant who had to make full personal use of that licence. Although assistants could be engaged to help out when the trader was temporarily absent, the trader was expected to be present at the pitch most of the time.

 

 

 

Applicant

 

Fabio Severo (company name – Mediterranean Paella)

 

 

Nature of application

 

Preferred Pitch – 1105.  Alternative Pitch(es) considered –  none.

Trading days – Monday to Friday

Type of commodity – hot takeaway food

Description of commodity – Spanish, Gluten Free, rice based dishes, vegan.

 

 

Decision:

 

Mr Severo’s application was one of forty four submitted for new street trading licences at Berwick Street Market.  In reaching a decision, the Licensing Sub-Committee took account of all the details in the report, including the summary of each application and the officers’ scoring based on the criteria set out in the report; any supplementary information provided by each applicant within the report; and any additional submissions made by applicants who attended the hearing to make oral representations. Mr Severo did not attend the hearing. The Sub-Committee considered all the applications before reaching its final determination and exercised a wide discretion so as to allocate as far as possible in accordance with policy and the criteria set out in the report. In some cases the Sub-Committee did not entirely agree with the scoring in the report as it was considered that criterion 2 was vague in its description and criterion 3 was difficult to interpret accurately, especially as so many of the applications involved the sale of food. The Sub-Committee also took into account the preferences expressed for a particular pitch and, in allocating those pitches, it also had regard to what was being sold (or would be sold) by other traders in adjacent pitches.   

 

The Sub-Committee refused the application, pursuant to section 12(1)(d) of the City of Westminster Act 1999.  This was on the basis that Pitch 1105 at Berwick Street had been allocated to another trader and was no longer available. 

 

Mr Severo had specifically requested to trade from Pitch 1105.  However, Pitch 1105 was sought by a number of traders and the Sub-Committee decided there was a stronger candidate who had scored more highly against the criteria and would be given the opportunity to trade from this pitch.  The criteria included that the successful trader had applied to operate at the pitch Monday to Saturday.  The Sub-Committee was keen to score applicants more highly if they applied for every day of the working week.  This would add to the vibrancy of Berwick Street Market.  Members had also noted that the successful trader had established a start-up business and had given more details at the hearing to how he would be contributing to the vision for Berwick Street Market as a ‘jewel in the crown’ in the heart of Soho.

 

 

 

Applicant

 

Fayz Mohammed Hamidi (company name – Afghan delights)

 

 

Nature of application

 

Preferred Pitch – 1104.  Alternative Pitch(es) considered –  none.

Trading days – Wednesday

Type of commodity – hot takeaway food

Description of commodity – Asian (East), Halal, Curries, Rice based dishes and Salads.

 

 

Decision:

 

Mr Hamidi’s application was the sole application to vary an existing street trading licence in order to trade on an additional day.  In reaching a decision, the Licensing Sub-Committee took account of all the details in the report, including the summary of each application and the officers’ scoring based on the criteria set out in the report; any supplementary information provided by each applicant within the report; and any additional submissions made by applicants who attended the hearing to make oral representations. Mr Hamidi did not attend the hearing. The Sub-Committee considered all the applications before reaching its final determination and exercised a wide discretion so as to allocate as far as possible in accordance with policy and the criteria set out in the report. In some cases the Sub-Committee did not entirely agree with the scoring in the report as it was considered that criterion 2 was vague in its description and criterion 3 was difficult to interpret accurately, especially as so many of the applications involved the sale of food. The Sub-Committee also took into account the preferences expressed for a particular pitch and, in allocating those pitches, it also had regard to what was being sold (or would be sold) by other traders in adjacent pitches.       

 

The Sub-Committee granted Mr Hamidi permission to trade at Pitch 1107 on Wednesdays, subject to the requirements set out in paragraph 2.1 of the Licensing Sub-Committee report being satisfied.  Mr Hamidi already operates at the pitch on Mondays, Tuesdays, Thursdays and Fridays.  The Sub-Committee in granting the application was content with the criteria that scored Mr Hamidi highly on the basis that he currently holds a licence to trade on Berwick Street Market and that he has displayed commitment and loyalty to the success of the Market through his attendance over the length of time of his licence.

 

In granting the application, the Licensing Sub-Committee wanted to stress that the licence was granted to the individual applicant who had to make full personal use of that licence on all days of the week. Although assistants could be engaged to help out when the trader was temporarily absent, the trader was expected to be present at the pitch most of the time.

 

 

 

 

 

Applicant

 

Felipe Nemem Cardini (company name – Dolce Maria LLP)

 

 

Nature of application

 

Preferred Pitch – 1130.  Alternative Pitch(es) considered –  none.

Trading days – Monday to Saturday

Type of commodity – hot takeaway food

Description of commodity – Mediterranean, Argentinean, Italian, Pizzeria.

 

 

Decision:

 

Mr Cardini’s application was one of forty four submitted for new street trading licences at Berwick Street Market.  In reaching a decision, the Licensing Sub-Committee took account of all the details in the report, including the summary of each application and the officers’ scoring based on the criteria set out in the report; any supplementary information provided by each applicant within the report; and any additional submissions made by applicants who attended the hearing to make oral representations. Mr Cardini did not attend the hearing. The Sub-Committee considered all the applications before reaching its final determination and exercised a wide discretion so as to allocate as far as possible in accordance with policy and the criteria set out in the report. In some cases the Sub-Committee did not entirely agree with the scoring in the report as it was considered that criterion 2 was vague in its description and criterion 3 was difficult to interpret accurately, especially as so many of the applications involved the sale of food. The Sub-Committee also took into account the preferences expressed for a particular pitch and, in allocating those pitches, it also had regard to what was being sold (or would be sold) by other traders in adjacent pitches.      

 

The Sub-Committee refused the application, pursuant to section 12(1)(d) of the City of Westminster Act 1999.  This was on the basis that Pitch 1130 at Berwick Street had been allocated to another trader and was no longer available. 

 

Mr Cardini had specifically requested to trade from Pitch 1130.  However, the Sub-Committee decided there was a stronger candidate who had scored more highly against the criteria and would be given the opportunity to trade from this pitch.  The criteria included that the successful trader was providing a commodity which differed more significantly from what was already on offer at Berwick Street Market. 

 

 

 

Applicant

 

Giuliana Maieli (company name – Pizzolo)

 

 

Nature of application

 

Preferred Pitch – 1105.  Alternative Pitch(es) considered –  any pitch.

Trading days – Monday to Saturday

Type of commodity – hot takeaway food

Description of commodity – Mediterranean, Italian, Baked goods, Cold Beverages, Pizzeria, Street Food.

 

 

Decision:

 

Ms Maieli’s application was one of forty four submitted for new street trading licences at Berwick Street Market. In reaching a decision, the Licensing Sub-Committee took account of all the details in the report, including the summary of each application and the officers’ scoring based on the criteria set out in the report; any supplementary information provided by each applicant within the report; and any additional submissions made by applicants who attended the hearing to make oral representations. Ms Maieli did not attend the hearing. The Sub-Committee considered all the applications before reaching its final determination and exercised a wide discretion so as to allocate as far as possible in accordance with policy and the criteria set out in the report. In some cases the Sub-Committee did not entirely agree with the scoring in the report as it was considered that criterion 2 was vague in its description and criterion 3 was difficult to interpret accurately, especially as so many of the applications involved the sale of food. The Sub-Committee also took into account the preferences expressed for a particular pitch and, in allocating those pitches, it also had regard to what was being sold (or would be sold) by other traders in adjacent pitches.        

 

The Sub-Committee granted Ms Maieli permission to trade at Pitch 1129 Monday to Saturday, subject to the requirements set out in paragraph 2.1 of the Licensing Sub-Committee report being satisfied.  In deciding to grant the application, the Sub-Committee took into account that Ms Maieli would be operating Monday to Saturday.  In keeping with the criteria set out in the report, the Sub-Committee was keen to score applicants more highly if they applied for every day of the working week.  Operating on a Saturday would add to the vibrancy of Berwick Street Market.

 

The Sub-Committee also took into account that Ms Maieli was seeking to provide a hot food takeaway commodity which was not currently available in the Market.

 

The Sub-Committee noted that Ms Maieli’s preferred pitch was 1105.  However, Pitch 1105 was sought by a number of traders and the Sub-Committee considered that it was appropriate, given that there was another strong candidate who had scored more highly, to provide Ms Maieli with an alternative pitch at Berwick Street Market.  Ms Maieli had set out in her application that she was willing to accept a pitch other than 1105.

 

In granting the application, the Licensing Sub-Committee wanted to stress that the licence was granted to the individual applicant who had to make full personal use of that licence. Although assistants could be engaged to help out when the trader was temporarily absent, the trader was expected to be present at the pitch most of the time.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Applicant

 

HeikoKhoo (company name – Street Theatre Stall)

 

 

Nature of application

 

Preferred Pitch – 1128.  Alternative pitch(es) considered – any pitch.

Trading days – Thursday to Saturday

Type of commodity – non-food

Description of commodity – Restored, Retro, Second-hand, Up-cycled, Vintage, Variety Store, Memorabilia and Collectibles, Artists’ materials, Souvenirs, Promotional stall.

 

 

Decision:

 

Mr Khoo’s application was one of forty four submitted for new street trading licences at Berwick Street Market. In reaching a decision, the Licensing Sub-Committee took account of all the details in the report, including the summary of each application and the officers’ scoring based on the criteria set out in the report; any supplementary information provided by each applicant within the report; and any additional submissions made by applicants who attended the hearing to make oral representations. Mr Khoo did not attend the hearing. The Sub-Committee considered all the applications before reaching its final determination and exercised a wide discretion so as to allocate as far as possible in accordance with policy and the criteria set out in the report. In some cases the Sub-Committee did not entirely agree with the scoring in the report as it was considered that criterion 2 was vague in its description and criterion 3 was difficult to interpret accurately, especially as so many of the applications involved the sale of food. The Sub-Committee also took into account the preferences expressed for a particular pitch and, in allocating those pitches, it also had regard to what was being sold (or would be sold) by other traders in adjacent pitches.    

 

The Sub-Committee granted Mr Khoo permission to trade at Pitch 1128 Thursday to Saturday, subject to the requirements set out in paragraph 2.1 of the Licensing Sub-Committee report being satisfied.

 

In deciding to grant the application, the Sub-Committee took into account that Mr Khoo’s application was in keeping with the criteria which scored applicants more highly for providing a range of commodities which add vibrancy and diversity.  Mr Khoo’s range differed from what was on offer elsewhere in the Market in that this involved non-food items.

 

In granting the application, the Licensing Sub-Committee wanted to stress that the licence was granted to the individual applicant who had to make full personal use of that licence every day of the week. Although assistants could be engaged to help out when the trader was temporarily absent, the trader was expected to be present at the pitch most of the time.

 

   

 

 

Applicant

 

Joel Sigala de Leon (company name – Sigala Bros)

 

 

Nature of application

 

Preferred Pitches – 1107.  Alternative Pitches considered – any pitch.

Trading days – Monday to Friday

Type of commodity – hot takeaway food

Description of commodity – American (Central), American (South), Mexican, Artisan, Butcher, Fruit & Vegetables, Fusion, Gourmet, Rice based dishes, Stews.

 

 

Decision:

 

Mr Sigala de Leon’s application was one of forty four submitted for new street trading licences at Berwick Street Market.  In reaching a decision, the Licensing Sub-Committee took account of all the details in the report, including the summary of each application and the officers’ scoring based on the criteria set out in the report; any supplementary information provided by each applicant within the report; and any additional submissions made by applicants who attended the hearing to make oral representations. Mr de Leon did not attend the hearing despite indicating that he was intending to do so. The Sub-Committee considered all the applications before reaching its final determination and exercised a wide discretion so as to allocate as far as possible in accordance with policy and the criteria set out in the report. In some cases the Sub-Committee did not entirely agree with the scoring in the report as it was considered that criterion 2 was vague in its description and criterion 3 was difficult to interpret accurately, especially as so many of the applications involved the sale of food. The Sub-Committee also took into account the preferences expressed for a particular pitch and, in allocating those pitches, it also had regard to what was being sold (or would be sold) by other traders in adjacent pitches.       

 

 

The Sub-Committee refused the application pursuant to section 12(1)(d) of the City of Westminster Act 1999.  This was on the basis that the pitches at Berwick Street were all allocated to other traders and there were no pitches remaining.

 

The Sub-Committee also considered that other applicants had scored more highly for providing a range of commodities which differed more significantly from what was already on offer at Berwick Street Market. However, it was also noted that this applicant was proposing to use a vehicle as part of the receptacle.  This is contrary to criteria 1(4) under policy ST1 of the Council’s street trading policy. 

 

 

 

Applicant

 

Juarez Santos (company name – Junior’s BBQ)

 

 

Nature of application

 

Preferred Pitch – 1105.  Alternative Pitch(es) considered –  none.

Trading days – Monday to Friday

Type of commodity – hot takeaway food

Description of commodity – Brazilian, Charcuterie/deli meats, barbecue, burgers, rice based dishes, salads.

 

 

Decision:

 

Mr Santos’ application was one of forty four submitted for new street trading licences at Berwick Street Market.  In reaching a decision, the Licensing Sub-Committee took account of all the details in the report, including the summary of each application and the officers’ scoring based on the criteria set out in the report; any supplementary information provided by each applicant within the report; and any additional submissions made by applicants who attended the hearing to make oral representations. Mr Santos did not attend the hearing. The Sub-Committee considered all the applications before reaching its final determination and exercised a wide discretion so as to allocate as far as possible in accordance with policy and the criteria set out in the report. In some cases the Sub-Committee did not entirely agree with the scoring in the report as it was considered that criterion 2 was vague in its description and criterion 3 was difficult to interpret accurately, especially as so many of the applications involved the sale of food. The Sub-Committee also took into account the preferences expressed for a particular pitch and, in allocating those pitches, it also had regard to what was being sold (or would be sold) by other traders in adjacent pitches.       

 

The Sub-Committee refused the application, pursuant to section 12(1)(d) of the City of Westminster Act 1999.  This was on the basis that Pitch 1105 at Berwick Street had been allocated to another trader and was no longer available. 

 

Mr Santos had specifically requested to trade from Pitch 1105.  However, Pitch 1105 was sought by a number of traders and the Sub-Committee decided there was a stronger candidate who had scored more highly against the criteria and would be given the opportunity to trade from this pitch.  The criteria included that the successful trader had applied to operate at the pitch Monday to Saturday.  The Sub-Committee was keen to score applicants more highly if they applied for every day of the working week.  This would add to the vibrancy of Berwick Street Market.  Also the successful trader was providing a commodity which differed more significantly from what was already on offer at Berwick Street Market. 

 

Members had also noted that the trader who was allocated Pitch 1105 had established a start-up business and had given more details at the hearing as to how he would be contributing to the vision for Berwick Street Market as a ‘jewel in the crown’ in the heart of Soho.

 

 

Applicant

 

Khaled Alwan (company name – Tripoli Express)

 

 

Nature of application

 

Preferred Pitch – 1129.  Alternative Pitch(es) considered –  any pitch.

Trading days – Monday to Saturday

Type of commodity – hot takeaway food

Description of commodity – Middle Eastern, Cold Beverages, Grill, Kebab, Kosher, Salads, Vegetarian, Wraps.

 

 

Decision:

 

Mr Alwan’s application was one of forty four submitted for new street trading licences at Berwick Street Market. In reaching a decision, the Licensing Sub-Committee took account of all the details in the report, including the summary of each application and the officers’ scoring based on the criteria set out in the report; any supplementary information provided by each applicant within the report; and any additional submissions made by applicants who attended the hearing to make oral representations. Mr Lee did not attend the hearing. The Sub-Committee considered all the applications before reaching its final determination and exercised a wide discretion so as to allocate as far as possible in accordance with policy and the criteria set out in the report. In some cases the Sub-Committee did not entirely agree with the scoring in the report as it was considered that criterion 2 was vague in its description and criterion 3 was difficult to interpret accurately, especially as so many of the applications involved the sale of food. The Sub-Committee also took into account the preferences expressed for a particular pitch and, in allocating those pitches, it also had regard to what was being sold (or would be sold) by other traders in adjacent pitches.        

 

The Sub-Committee refused the application pursuant to section 12(1)(d) of the City of Westminster Act 1999.  This was on the basis that the pitches at Berwick Street were all allocated to other traders and there were no pitches remaining.

 

The Sub-Committee considered that other applicants had scored more highly for providing a range of commodities which differed more significantly from what was already on offer at Berwick Street Market and that did not involve hot food. However, it was also noted that this applicant was proposing to use a vehicle as part of the receptacle.  This is contrary to criteria 1(4) under policy ST1 of the Council’s street trading policy. The Sub-Committee also noted that a photograph submitted by Mr Alwan which could potentially have been an alternative receptacle was larger than a 3m x 3m pitch.

 

 

Applicant

 

Meherya Khalid (company name – Continental Bread)

 

 

Nature of application

 

Preferred Pitch – 1110.  Alternative Pitch(es) considered –  none.

Trading days – Monday to Saturday

Type of commodity – fresh produce

Description of commodity – Artisan, Baked Goods, Patisserie, Organic.

 

 

Decision:

 

Ms Khalid’s application was one of forty four submitted for new street trading licences at Berwick Street Market.  In reaching a decision, the Licensing Sub-Committee took account of all the details in the report, including the summary of each application and the officers’ scoring based on the criteria set out in the report; any supplementary information provided by each applicant within the report; and any additional submissions made by applicants who attended the hearing to make oral representations. Ms Khalid did attend the hearing. The Sub-Committee considered all the applications before reaching its final determination and exercised a wide discretion so as to allocate as far as possible in accordance with policy and the criteria set out in the report. In some cases the Sub-Committee did not entirely agree with the scoring in the report as it was considered that criterion 2 was vague in its description and criterion 3 was difficult to interpret accurately, especially as so many of the applications involved the sale of food. The Sub-Committee also took into account the preferences expressed for a particular pitch and, in allocating those pitches, it also had regard to what was being sold (or would be sold) by other traders in adjacent pitches.       

 

The Sub-Committee granted Ms Khalid permission to trade at Pitch 1110 Monday to Saturday, subject to the requirements set out in paragraph 2.1 of the Licensing Sub-Committee report being satisfied.  In deciding to grant the application, the Sub-Committee took into account that Ms Khalid would be operating Monday to Saturday.  In keeping with the criteria set out in the report, the Sub-Committee was keen to score applicants more highly if they applied for every day of the working week.  Operating on a Saturday would add to the vibrancy of Berwick Street Market.

 

The Sub-Committee also took into account that Ms Khalid’s application was in keeping with the criteria which scored applicants more highly for providing a range of commodities which add vibrancy and diversity.  Ms Khalid’s range differed from what was on offer elsewhere in the Market in that this involved fresh produce and did not involve hot food.

 

The Sub-Committee noted that there appeared to be some discrepancies as to the traders who were stated to be operating start-up businesses and those who were not.  The Sub-Committee considered that whilst Ms Khalid and her husband, Mr Ahmad (who represented her at the meeting) did not have a start-up business, they would be able to contribute to the vision for Berwick Street Market as a ‘jewel in the crown’ in the heart of Soho.  Mr Ahmad demonstrated at the meeting that he and his wife had a clear idea of their business and would be able to bring their experience from working in North Street Market in Guildford to Berwick Street Market. 

 

In granting the application, the Licensing Sub-Committee wanted to stress that the licence was granted to the individual applicant who had to make full personal use of that licence. Although assistants could be engaged to help out when the trader was temporarily absent, the trader was expected to be present at the pitch most of the time.

 

 

 

Applicant

 

Mustafa Taskan (company name – Miro Salads)

 

 

Nature of application

 

Preferred Pitch – 1125.  Alternative Pitch(es) considered –  none.

Trading days – Monday to Friday

Type of commodity – hot takeaway food

Description of commodity – Turkish, Vegetarian, Salads, Rice Based dishes, Wraps, Meze, Grill and Cold Beverages.

 

 

Decision:

 

Mr Taskan’s application was one of two submitted to vary street trading licences from existing licence holders who wish to trade from an additional pitch at Berwick Street Market.  In reaching a decision, the Licensing Sub-Committee took account of all the details in the report, including the summary of each application and the officers’ scoring based on the criteria set out in the report; any supplementary information provided by each applicant within the report; and any additional submissions made by applicants who attended the hearing to make oral representations. Mr Taskan did not attend the hearing. The Sub-Committee considered all the applications before reaching its final determination and exercised a wide discretion so as to allocate as far as possible in accordance with policy and the criteria set out in the report. In some cases the Sub-Committee did not entirely agree with the scoring in the report as it was considered that criterion 2 was vague in its description and criterion 3 was difficult to interpret accurately, especially as so many of the applications involved the sale of food. The Sub-Committee also took into account the preferences expressed for a particular pitch and, in allocating those pitches, it also had regard to what was being sold (or would be sold) by other traders in adjacent pitches.       

 

The Sub-Committee refused the application, pursuant to section 12(1)(d) of the City of Westminster Act 1999.  This was on the basis that Pitch 1125 at Berwick Street had been allocated to another trader and was no longer available. 

 

Mr Taskan had specifically requested to trade from Pitch 1125.  This is due to the fact that he currently trades from Pitch 1126.  The Sub-Committee did not consider that there were exceptional reasons for Mr Taskan to be given the opportunity to trade from Pitch 1125 in addition to pitch 1126.  There is no policy against a trader having two pitches provided the trader makes full personal use of both licences, but there had to be very good reasons why a trader should be granted an additional pitch rather than granting that pitch to a different applicant. 

 

Mr Taskan had not provided any additional information as to how he contributed to the vision for Berwick Street Market as a ‘jewel in the crown’ in the heart of Soho.  There were also strong candidates for Pitch 1126 who deserved to be given the opportunity to start up their businesses in Berwick Street Market.  These included candidates who had applied to operate from a pitch on Saturdays.  In keeping with the criteria set out in the report, the Sub-Committee was keen to score applicants more highly if they applied for every day of the working week.  This would add to the vibrancy of Berwick Street Market.

 

 

 

Applicant

 

Nigel Salem (company name – The Jucie Lucie)

 

 

Nature of application

 

Preferred Pitch – 1130.  Alternative Pitch(es) considered –  any pitch.

Trading days – Monday to Saturday

Type of commodity – hot takeaway food

Description of commodity – American (North), Burgers.

 

 

Decision:

 

Mr Salem’s application was one of forty four submitted for new street trading licences at Berwick Street Market.  In reaching a decision, the Licensing Sub-Committee took account of all the details in the report, including the summary of each application and the officers’ scoring based on the criteria set out in the report; any supplementary information provided by each applicant within the report; and any additional submissions made by applicants who attended the hearing to make oral representations. Mr Salem did not attend the hearing. The Sub-Committee considered all the applications before reaching its final determination and exercised a wide discretion so as to allocate as far as possible in accordance with policy and the criteria set out in the report. In some cases the Sub-Committee did not entirely agree with the scoring in the report as it was considered that criterion 2 was vague in its description and criterion 3 was difficult to interpret accurately, especially as so many of the applications involved the sale of food. The Sub-Committee also took into account the preferences expressed for a particular pitch and, in allocating those pitches, it also had regard to what was being sold (or would be sold) by other traders in adjacent pitches.       

 

The Sub-Committee refused the application, pursuant to section 12(1)(d) of the City of Westminster Act 1999.  This was on the basis that the pitches at Berwick Street were all allocated to other traders and there were no pitches remaining.

 

The Sub-Committee considered that it was a difficult decision.  However, there were sufficient strong candidates who had applied to operate the pitches, resulting in this application being refused. Other applicants had scored more highly for providing a range of commodities which differed more significantly from what was already on offer at Berwick Street Market.

 

 

 

Applicant

 

PatimapornSaekhow (company name – Yaay Yaay)

 

 

Nature of application

 

Preferred Pitch – 1105.  Alternative Pitch(es) considered –  none.

Trading days – Monday to Saturday

Type of commodity – hot takeaway food

Description of commodity – Asian curries, rice based dishes, salads, soups and stews.

 

 

Decision:

 

Mr Saekhow’s application was one of forty four submitted for new street trading licences at Berwick Street Market.  In reaching a decision, the Licensing Sub-Committee took account of all the details in the report, including the summary of each application and the officers’ scoring based on the criteria set out in the report; any supplementary information provided by each applicant within the report; and any additional submissions made by applicants who attended the hearing to make oral representations. Mr Saekhow did not attend the hearing. The Sub-Committee considered all the applications before reaching its final determination and exercised a wide discretion so as to allocate as far as possible in accordance with policy and the criteria set out in the report. In some cases the Sub-Committee did not entirely agree with the scoring in the report as it was considered that criterion 2 was vague in its description and criterion 3 was difficult to interpret accurately, especially as so many of the applications involved the sale of food. The Sub-Committee also took into account the preferences expressed for a particular pitch and, in allocating those pitches, it also had regard to what was being sold (or would be sold) by other traders in adjacent pitches.    

 

The Sub-Committee refused the application, pursuant to section 12(1)(d) of the City of Westminster Act 1999.  This was on the basis that Pitch 1105 at Berwick Street had been allocated to another trader and was no longer available. 

 

Mr Saekhow had specifically requested to trade from Pitch 1105.  However, Pitch 1105 was sought by a number of traders and the Sub-Committee decided there was a stronger candidate who had scored more highly against the criteria and would be given the opportunity to trade from this pitch.  The criteria included that the successful trader was providing a commodity which differed more significantly from what was already on offer at Berwick Street Market.

 

 

 

Applicant

 

Rafael Campestrini (company name – Chalana Limited)

 

Nature of application

 

Preferred Pitch – 1107.  Alternative Pitch(es) considered –  any pitch.

Trading days – Monday to Saturday

Type of commodity – hot takeaway food

Description of commodity – American (South), Brazilian, Fish and seafood, fusion, gluten free, grill, halal, locally sourced, street food, wraps.

 

 

Decision:

 

Mr Campestrini’s application was one of forty four submitted for new street trading licences at Berwick Street Market.  In reaching a decision, the Licensing Sub-Committee took account of all the details in the report, including the summary of each application and the officers’ scoring based on the criteria set out in the report; any supplementary information provided by each applicant within the report; and any additional submissions made by applicants who attended the hearing to make oral representations. Mr Campestrini did attend the hearing. The Sub-Committee considered all the applications before reaching its final determination and exercised a wide discretion so as to allocate as far as possible in accordance with policy and the criteria set out in the report. In some cases the Sub-Committee did not entirely agree with the scoring in the report as it was considered that criterion 2 was vague in its description and criterion 3 was difficult to interpret accurately, especially as so many of the applications involved the sale of food. The Sub-Committee also took into account the preferences expressed for a particular pitch and, in allocating those pitches, it also had regard to what was being sold (or would be sold) by other traders in adjacent pitches.       

 

The Sub-Committee granted Mr Campestrini permission to trade at Pitch 1104 on Saturdays, subject to the requirements set out in paragraph 2.1 of the Licensing Sub-Committee report being satisfied.  In deciding to grant the application on Saturdays, the Sub-Committee took into account that Mr Campestrini proposed to operate Monday to Saturday.  In keeping with the criteria set out in the report, the Sub-Committee was keen to score applicants more highly if they applied for every day of the working week.  This added to the vibrancy of Berwick Street Market.

 

The Sub-Committee did not grant the opportunity for Mr Campestrini to operate at the Market Mondays to Fridays because there were a number of strong candidates who scored more highly against the criteria.  Other applicants had scored more highly for providing a range of commodities which differed more significantly from what was already on offer at Berwick Street Market.

 

The Sub-Committee considered that whilst Mr Campestrini did not have a start-up business, he would be able to contribute to the vision for Berwick Street Market as a ‘jewel in the crown’ in the heart of Soho.  Mr Campestrini was likely to be able to bring his experience from working in other markets such as at Bermondsey to Berwick Street Market.

 

In granting the application, the Licensing Sub-Committee wanted to stress that the licence was granted to the individual applicant who had to make full personal use of that licence. Although assistants could be engaged to help out when the trader was temporarily absent, the trader was expected to be present at the pitch most of the time.

 

 

Applicant

 

Rowland Okpara (company name – What! Jerk)

 

 

Nature of application

 

Preferred Pitch – 1105.  Alternative Pitch(es) considered –  1105, 1106, 1107, 1109, 1110.

Trading days – Monday to Saturday (amended at hearing from Monday to Friday)

Type of commodity – hot takeaway food

Description of commodity – African (West), Caribbean, Jamaican, Nigerian, Barbecue, Burgers, Cold Beverages, Fusion, Grill, Rice Based Dishes, Street Food, Vegetarian, Wraps.

 

 

Decision:

 

Mr Okpara’s application was one of forty four submitted for new street trading licences at Berwick Street Market. In reaching a decision, the Licensing Sub-Committee took account of all the details in the report, including the summary of each application and the officers’ scoring based on the criteria set out in the report; any supplementary information provided by each applicant within the report; and any additional submissions made by applicants who attended the hearing to make oral representations. Mr Okpara did attend the hearing. The Sub-Committee considered all the applications before reaching its final determination and exercised a wide discretion so as to allocate as far as possible in accordance with policy and the criteria set out in the report. In some cases the Sub-Committee did not entirely agree with the scoring in the report as it was considered that criterion 2 was vague in its description and criterion 3 was difficult to interpret accurately, especially as so many of the applications involved the sale of food. The Sub-Committee also took into account the preferences expressed for a particular pitch and, in allocating those pitches, it also had regard to what was being sold (or would be sold) by other traders in adjacent pitches.       

 

 

The Sub-Committee granted Mr Okpara permission to trade at Pitch 1114 Monday to Saturday, subject to the requirements set out in paragraph 2.1 of the Licensing Sub-Committee report being satisfied.  In deciding to grant the application, the Sub-Committee took into account that Mr Okpara had amended his application at the hearing so that he would be operating Monday to Saturday.  In keeping with the criteria set out in the report, the Sub-Committee was keen to score applicants more highly if they applied for every day of the working week.  Operating on a Saturday would add to the vibrancy of Berwick Street Market.

 

The Sub-Committee also took into account that Mr Okpara’s range of commodities did differ from what was on offer elsewhere in the Market.

 

The Sub-Committee did consider that there were applications from strong candidates which demonstrated a greater need for the pitch options Mr Okpara requested.  However, he did indicate that he would be prepared to accept a different pitch and he scored sufficiently highly against the criteria to warrant being granted a pitch at Berwick Street Market Monday to Saturday.

 

The Sub-Committee considered that whilst Mr Okpara did not have a start-up business, he would be able to contribute to the vision for Berwick Street Market as a ‘jewel in the crown’ in the heart of Soho.  Mr Okpara demonstrated at the meeting that he would be able to bring his experience from working in Goodge Street Market to Berwick Street Market. 

 

In granting the application, the Licensing Sub-Committee wanted to stress that the licence was granted to the individual applicant who had to make full personal use of that licence. Although assistants could be engaged to help out when the trader was temporarily absent, the trader was expected to be present at the pitch most of the time.

 

 

 

Applicant

 

SanamSajjad (company name – Paratha Rolls)

 

 

Nature of application

 

Preferred Pitch – 1105.  Alternative Pitch(es) considered –  any pitch.

Trading days – Monday to Friday

Type of commodity – hot takeaway food

Description of commodity – Asian (South), grill, halal, street food, wraps.

 

 

Decision:

 

Mr Sajjad’s application was one of forty four submitted for new street trading licences at Berwick Street Market. In reaching a decision, the Licensing Sub-Committee took account of all the details in the report, including the summary of each application and the officers’ scoring based on the criteria set out in the report; any supplementary information provided by each applicant within the report; and any additional submissions made by applicants who attended the hearing to make oral representations. Mr Sajjad did not attend the hearing. The Sub-Committee considered all the applications before reaching its final determination and exercised a wide discretion so as to allocate as far as possible in accordance with policy and the criteria set out in the report. In some cases the Sub-Committee did not entirely agree with the scoring in the report as it was considered that criterion 2 was vague in its description and criterion 3 was difficult to interpret accurately, especially as so many of the applications involved the sale of food. The Sub-Committee also took into account the preferences expressed for a particular pitch and, in allocating those pitches, it also had regard to what was being sold (or would be sold) by other traders in adjacent pitches.        

 

The Sub-Committee refused the application, pursuant to section 12(1)(d) of the City of Westminster Act 1999.  This was on the basis that the pitches at Berwick Street were all allocated to traders and there were no pitches remaining.

 

The Sub-Committee took into account that Mr Sajjad was proposing to operate from the Market Monday to Friday.  In keeping with the criteria set out in the report, the Sub-Committee was keen to score applicants more highly if they applied for every day of the working week.  This included Saturdays.  This would add to the vibrancy of Berwick Street Market. 

 

The Sub-Committee considered that it was a difficult decision.  However, there were sufficient strong candidates who had applied to operate the pitches Monday to Friday, resulting in this application being refused. Other applicants had scored more highly for providing a range of commodities which differed more significantly from what was already on offer at Berwick Street Market.

 

Applicant

 

Sandro de Castro Silva (company name – Gelatology)

 

 

Nature of application

 

Preferred Pitch – 1107.  Alternative Pitch(es) considered –  none.

Trading days – Friday and Saturday

Type of commodity – fresh produce

Description of commodity – Italian, ice cream, gluten free, gourmet, locally sourced, organic, street food, vegan, vegetarian.

 

 

Decision:

 

Mr de Castro Silva’s application was one of forty four submitted for new street trading licences at Berwick Street Market.  In reaching a decision, the Licensing Sub-Committee took account of all the details in the report, including the summary of each application and the officers’ scoring based on the criteria set out in the report; any supplementary information provided by each applicant within the report; and any additional submissions made by applicants who attended the hearing to make oral representations. Mr de Castro Silva did not attend the hearing. The Sub-Committee considered all the applications before reaching its final determination and exercised a wide discretion so as to allocate as far as possible in accordance with policy and the criteria set out in the report. In some cases the Sub-Committee did not entirely agree with the scoring in the report as it was considered that criterion 2 was vague in its description and criterion 3 was difficult to interpret accurately, especially as so many of the applications involved the sale of food. The Sub-Committee also took into account the preferences expressed for a particular pitch and, in allocating those pitches, it also had regard to what was being sold (or would be sold) by other traders in adjacent pitches.       

 

The Sub-Committee granted Mr de Castro Silva permission to trade at Pitch 1107 on Saturdays, subject to the requirements set out in paragraph 2.1 of the Licensing Sub-Committee report being satisfied.  In deciding to grant the application on Saturdays, the Sub-Committee took into account that Mr de Castro Silva’s application did include some diverse commodities.  Mr de Castro Silva’s range differed from what was on offer elsewhere in the Market in that it included items such as ice cream.

 

The Sub-Committee did not also grant the opportunity for Mr de Castro Silva to operate at the Market on Fridays because there were a number of strong candidates who had applied to operate Mondays to Fridays and there were no other pitches available on those days.  In keeping with the criteria set out in the report, the Sub-Committee was keen to score applicants more highly if they applied for every day of the working week.  This added to the vibrancy of Berwick Street Market.

 

In granting the application, the Licensing Sub-Committee wanted to stress that the licence was granted to the individual applicant who had to make full personal use of that licence. Although assistants could be engaged to help out when the trader was temporarily absent, the trader was expected to be present at the pitch most of the time.

 

 

Applicant

 

Sarah Brock (company name – Lillis Organics)

 

 

Nature of application

 

Preferred Pitch – 1121.  Alternative pitch(es) considered – none.

Trading days – Monday to Saturday

Type of commodity – fresh produce

Description of commodity – Fruit and vegetables, cold beverages, organic.

 

 

Decision:

 

Ms Brock’s application was one of forty four submitted for new street trading licences at Berwick Street Market.  In reaching a decision, the Licensing Sub-Committee took account of all the details in the report, including the summary of each application and the officers’ scoring based on the criteria set out in the report; any supplementary information provided by each applicant within the report; and any additional submissions made by applicants who attended the hearing to make oral representations. Ms Brock did attend the hearing. The Sub-Committee considered all the applications before reaching its final determination and exercised a wide discretion so as to allocate as far as possible in accordance with policy and the criteria set out in the report. In some cases the Sub-Committee did not entirely agree with the scoring in the report as it was considered that criterion 2 was vague in its description and criterion 3 was difficult to interpret accurately, especially as so many of the applications involved the sale of food. The Sub-Committee also took into account the preferences expressed for a particular pitch and, in allocating those pitches, it also had regard to what was being sold (or would be sold) by other traders in adjacent pitches.       

 

The Sub-Committee granted Ms Brock permission to trade at Pitch 1121 Monday to Saturday, subject to the requirements set out in paragraph 2.1 of the Licensing Sub-Committee report being satisfied.  In deciding to grant the application, the Sub-Committee took into account that Ms Brock would be operating at the pitch Monday to Saturday.  In keeping with the criteria set out in the report, the Sub-Committee was keen to score applicants more highly if they applied for every day of the working week.  Operating on a Saturday would add to the vibrancy of Berwick Street Market.

 

The Sub-Committee also took into account that Ms Brock’s application was in keeping with the criteria which scored applicants more highly for providing a range of commodities which add vibrancy and diversity.  Ms Brock’s range differed from what was on offer elsewhere in the Market in that this involved fruit and vegetables, cold beverages including juices, organic food and not hot food.

 

The Sub-Committee noted that there appeared to be some discrepancies as to the traders who were stated to be operating start-up businesses and those who were not.  The Sub-Committee was satisfied that Ms Brock was operating a start-up business. 

 

In granting the application, the Licensing Sub-Committee wanted to stress that the licence was granted to the individual applicant who had to make full personal use of that licence. Although assistants could be engaged to help out when the trader was temporarily absent, the trader was expected to be present at the pitch most of the time.

 

 

Applicant

 

Selma Homateni (company name – Now Savannah Taste)

 

 

Nature of application

 

Preferred Pitch – 1105.  Alternative Pitch(es) considered –  none.

Trading days – Thursday to Saturday

Type of commodity – hot takeaway food

Description of commodity – Fish and seafood, gluten free, gourmet, grill, rice based dishes, salads, stews, street food, vegan, vegetarian, wraps.

 

 

Decision:

 

Ms Homateni’s application was one of forty four submitted for new street trading licences at Berwick Street Market. In reaching a decision, the Licensing Sub-Committee took account of all the details in the report, including the summary of each application and the officers’ scoring based on the criteria set out in the report; any supplementary information provided by each applicant within the report; and any additional submissions made by applicants who attended the hearing to make oral representations. Ms Homateni did not attend the hearing. The Sub-Committee considered all the applications before reaching its final determination and exercised a wide discretion so as to allocate as far as possible in accordance with policy and the criteria set out in the report. In some cases the Sub-Committee did not entirely agree with the scoring in the report as it was considered that criterion 2 was vague in its description and criterion 3 was difficult to interpret accurately, especially as so many of the applications involved the sale of food. The Sub-Committee also took into account the preferences expressed for a particular pitch and, in allocating those pitches, it also had regard to what was being sold (or would be sold) by other traders in adjacent pitches.        

 

The Sub-Committee refused the application, pursuant to section 12(1)(d) of the City of Westminster Act 1999.  This was on the basis that Pitch 1105 at Berwick Street had been allocated to another trader and was no longer available. 

 

Ms Homateni had specifically requested to trade from Pitch 1105.  However, Pitch 1105 was sought by a number of traders and the Sub-Committee decided there was a stronger candidate who had scored more highly against the criteria and would be given the opportunity to trade from this pitch.  The criteria included that the successful trader had applied to operate at the pitch Monday to Saturday.  The Sub-Committee was keen to score applicants more highly if they applied for every day of the working week.  This would add to the vibrancy of Berwick Street Market.  Members had also noted that the successful trader had established a start-up business and had given more details at the hearing as to how he would be contributing to the vision for Berwick Street Market as a ‘jewel in the crown’ in the heart of Soho.

 

 

 

Applicant

 

SewookJoo (company name – Cheecok Ltd)

 

 

Nature of application

 

Preferred Pitch – 1109.  Alternative Pitch(es) considered –  any pitch.

Trading days – Monday to Friday

Type of commodity – hot takeaway food

Description of commodity – Asian (North East), Japanese, Korean, Artisan, Fusion, Gluten Free, Halal, Rice Based Dishes, Salads, Sushi, Vegetarian.

 

 

Decision:

 

Mr Joo’s application was one of forty four submitted for new street trading licences at Berwick Street Market. In reaching a decision, the Licensing Sub-Committee took account of all the details in the report, including the summary of each application and the officers’ scoring based on the criteria set out in the report; any supplementary information provided by each applicant within the report; and any additional submissions made by applicants who attended the hearing to make oral representations. Mr Joo did not attend the hearing. The Sub-Committee considered all the applications before reaching its final determination and exercised a wide discretion so as to allocate as far as possible in accordance with policy and the criteria set out in the report. In some cases the Sub-Committee did not entirely agree with the scoring in the report as it was considered that criterion 2 was vague in its description and criterion 3 was difficult to interpret accurately, especially as so many of the applications involved the sale of food. The Sub-Committee also took into account the preferences expressed for a particular pitch and, in allocating those pitches, it also had regard to what was being sold (or would be sold) by other traders in adjacent pitches.        

 

The Sub-Committee refused the application, pursuant to section 12(1)(d) of the City of Westminster Act 1999.  This was on the basis that the pitches at Berwick Street were all allocated to traders and there were no pitches remaining.

 

The Sub-Committee took into account that Mr Joo was proposing to operate from the Market Monday to Friday.  In keeping with the criteria set out in the report, the Sub-Committee was keen to score applicants more highly if they applied for every day of the working week.  This included Saturdays.  This would add to the vibrancy of Berwick Street Market. 

 

The Sub-Committee considered that it was a difficult decision.  However, there were sufficient strong candidates who had applied to operate the pitches Monday to Friday, resulting in this application being refused. Other applicants had scored more highly for providing a range of commodities which differed more significantly from what was already on offer at Berwick Street Market.

 

 

 

Applicant

 

Simon Hather (company name – Stickman)

 

 

Nature of application

 

Preferred Pitch – 1121.  Alternative Pitch(es) considered –  none.

Trading days – Monday, Wednesday and Friday

Type of commodity – hot takeaway food

Description of commodity – Asian (East), Mediterranean, Greek, Lebanese, Moroccan, Grill, Kebab, Salads, Street Food, Vegan, Vegetarian.

Decision:

 

Mr Hather’s application was one of forty four submitted for new street trading licences at Berwick Street Market.  In reaching a decision, the Licensing Sub-Committee took account of all the details in the report, including the summary of each application and the officers’ scoring based on the criteria set out in the report; any supplementary information provided by each applicant within the report; and any additional submissions made by applicants who attended the hearing to make oral representations. Mr Hather did not attend the hearing. The Sub-Committee considered all the applications before reaching its final determination and exercised a wide discretion so as to allocate as far as possible in accordance with policy and the criteria set out in the report. In some cases the Sub-Committee did not entirely agree with the scoring in the report as it was considered that criterion 2 was vague in its description and criterion 3 was difficult to interpret accurately, especially as so many of the applications involved the sale of food. The Sub-Committee also took into account the preferences expressed for a particular pitch and, in allocating those pitches, it also had regard to what was being sold (or would be sold) by other traders in adjacent pitches.       

 

The Sub-Committee refused the application, pursuant to section 12(1)(d) of the City of Westminster Act 1999.  This was on the basis that Pitch 1121 at Berwick Street had been allocated to another trader and was no longer available. 

 

Mr Hather had specifically requested to trade from Pitch 1121.  However, the Sub-Committee decided there was a stronger candidate who had scored more highly against the criteria and would be given the opportunity to trade from this pitch.  The criteria included that the successful trader was providing a commodity which differed more significantly from what was already on offer at Berwick Street Market.  The successful trader had also applied to operate at the pitch Monday to Saturday.  In keeping with the criteria set out in the report, the Sub-Committee was keen to score applicants more highly if they applied for every day of the working week.  This would add to the vibrancy of Berwick Street Market.

 

 

 

Applicant

 

Soraya Moghaddam (company name – Waffle Doodle-Doo)

 

 

Nature of application

 

Preferred Pitch – 1101.  Alternative Pitch(es) considered –  any pitch.

Trading days – Wednesday to Friday

Type of commodity – hot takeaway food

Description of commodity – American (North), Canadian, Halal.

 

 

Decision:

 

Ms Moghaddam’s application was one of forty four submitted for new street trading licences at Berwick Street Market.  In reaching a decision, the Licensing Sub-Committee took account of all the details in the report, including the summary of each application and the officers’ scoring based on the criteria set out in the report; any supplementary information provided by each applicant within the report; and any additional submissions made by applicants who attended the hearing to make oral representations. Ms Moghaddam did not attend the hearing. The Sub-Committee considered all the applications before reaching its final determination and exercised a wide discretion so as to allocate as far as possible in accordance with policy and the criteria set out in the report. In some cases the Sub-Committee did not entirely agree with the scoring in the report as it was considered that criterion 2 was vague in its description and criterion 3 was difficult to interpret accurately, especially as so many of the applications involved the sale of food. The Sub-Committee also took into account the preferences expressed for a particular pitch and, in allocating those pitches, it also had regard to what was being sold (or would be sold) by other traders in adjacent pitches.       

 

The Sub-Committee refused the application, pursuant to section 12(1)(d) of the City of Westminster Act 1999.  This was on the basis that the pitches at Berwick Street were all allocated to traders and there were no pitches remaining.

 

It was noted that pitch 1101 was only available on a Saturday, though Ms Moghaddam had indicated that she would accept any pitch within the market.

 

In deciding to refuse the application, the Sub-Committee took into account that Ms Moghaddam was proposing to operate from the Market Wednesday to Friday.  In keeping with the criteria set out in the report, the Sub-Committee was keen to score applicants more highly if they applied for every day of the working week.  This would add to the vibrancy of Berwick Street Market.  There were sufficient strong candidates for the pitches who were willing to operate Monday to Friday.

 

The Sub-Committee also considered that the applicant was providing more variants than purely savoury waffles and that the recommended score in the report was higher than was reflected in the criteria for hot food traders with a product offer which is not currently on offer on the market.

 

 

 

Applicant

 

Stella Boakye (company name – Big Mama Food)

 

 

Nature of application

 

Preferred Pitch – 1128.  Alternative Pitch(es) considered –  any pitch.

Trading days – Monday to Friday

Type of commodity – hot takeaway food

Description of commodity – African (West), Ghanaian, Barbecue, fusion, gluten free, gourmet, halal, locally sourced, rice based dishes, salads, sausages, stews, street food.

 

 

Decision:

 

Ms Boakye’s application was one of forty four submitted for new street trading licences at Berwick Street Market. In reaching a decision, the Licensing Sub-Committee took account of all the details in the report, including the summary of each application and the officers’ scoring based on the criteria set out in the report; any supplementary information provided by each applicant within the report; and any additional submissions made by applicants who attended the hearing to make oral representations. Ms Boakye did attend the hearing. The Sub-Committee considered all the applications before reaching its final determination and exercised a wide discretion so as to allocate as far as possible in accordance with policy and the criteria set out in the report. In some cases the Sub-Committee did not entirely agree with the scoring in the report as it was considered that criterion 2 was vague in its description and criterion 3 was difficult to interpret accurately, especially as so many of the applications involved the sale of food. The Sub-Committee also took into account the preferences expressed for a particular pitch and, in allocating those pitches, it also had regard to what was being sold (or would be sold) by other traders in adjacent pitches.        

 

The Sub-Committee refused the application, pursuant to section 12(1)(d) of the City of Westminster Act 1999.  This was on the basis that the pitches at Berwick Street were all allocated to traders and there were no pitches remaining.

 

In deciding to refuse the application, the Sub-Committee took into account that Ms Boakye was proposing to operate from the Market Monday to Friday.  In keeping with the criteria set out in the report, the Sub-Committee was keen to score applicants more highly if they applied for every day of the working week.  This included Saturdays.  This would add to the vibrancy of Berwick Street Market. 

 

The Sub-Committee considered that it was a difficult decision.  However, there were sufficient strong candidates who had applied to operate the pitches Monday to Friday, resulting in this application being refused. Other applicants had scored more highly for providing a range of commodities which differed more significantly from what was already on offer at Berwick Street Market.

 

 

Applicant

 

Tim William James (company name – The Wrap Game LDN)

 

 

Nature of application

 

Preferred Pitch – 1105.  Alternative Pitch(es) considered –  none.

Trading days – Tuesday to Friday

Type of commodity – hot takeaway food

Description of commodity – American (Central), American (North), American (South), Street Food, Wraps.

 

 

Decision:

 

Mr James’ application was one of forty four submitted for new street trading licences at Berwick Street Market. In reaching a decision, the Licensing Sub-Committee took account of all the details in the report, including the summary of each application and the officers’ scoring based on the criteria set out in the report; any supplementary information provided by each applicant within the report; and any additional submissions made by applicants who attended the hearing to make oral representations. Mr James did not attend the hearing. The Sub-Committee considered all the applications before reaching its final determination and exercised a wide discretion so as to allocate as far as possible in accordance with policy and the criteria set out in the report. In some cases the Sub-Committee did not entirely agree with the scoring in the report as it was considered that criterion 2 was vague in its description and criterion 3 was difficult to interpret accurately, especially as so many of the applications involved the sale of food. The Sub-Committee also took into account the preferences expressed for a particular pitch and, in allocating those pitches, it also had regard to what was being sold (or would be sold) by other traders in adjacent pitches.        

 

The Sub-Committee refused the application, pursuant to section 12(1)(d) of the City of Westminster Act 1999.  This was on the basis that Pitch 1105 at Berwick Street had been allocated to another trader and was no longer available. 

 

Mr James had specifically requested to trade from Pitch 1105.  However, Pitch 1105 was sought by a number of traders and the Sub-Committee decided there was a stronger candidate who had scored more highly against the criteria and would be given the opportunity to trade from this pitch.  The criteria included that the successful trader was providing a commodity which differed more significantly from what was already on offer at Berwick Street Market.  The successful trader had also applied to operate at the pitch Monday to Saturday.  In keeping with the criteria set out in the report, the Sub-Committee was keen to score applicants more highly if they applied for every day of the working week.  This would add to the vibrancy of Berwick Street Market.

 

 

 

Applicant

 

Waqas Mir (company name – Pyala)

 

 

Nature of application

 

Preferred Pitch – 1105.  Alternative Pitch(es) considered –  any pitch.

Trading days – Monday to Friday

Type of commodity – hot takeaway food

Description of commodity – \Pakastani wraps.

 

 

Decision:

 

Mr Mir’s application was one of forty four submitted for new street trading licences at Berwick Street Market.  In reaching a decision, the Licensing Sub-Committee took account of all the details in the report, including the summary of each application and the officers’ scoring based on the criteria set out in the report; any supplementary information provided by each applicant within the report; and any additional submissions made by applicants who attended the hearing to make oral representations. Mr Mir did not attend the hearing. The Sub-Committee considered all the applications before reaching its final determination and exercised a wide discretion so as to allocate as far as possible in accordance with policy and the criteria set out in the report. In some cases the Sub-Committee did not entirely agree with the scoring in the report as it was considered that criterion 2 was vague in its description and criterion 3 was difficult to interpret accurately, especially as so many of the applications involved the sale of food. The Sub-Committee also took into account the preferences expressed for a particular pitch and, in allocating those pitches, it also had regard to what was being sold (or would be sold) by other traders in adjacent pitches.       

 

The Sub-Committee refused the application, pursuant to section 12(1)(d) of the City of Westminster Act 1999.  This was on the basis that the pitches at Berwick Street were all allocated to traders and there were no pitches remaining.

 

The Sub-Committee took into account that Mr Mir was proposing to operate from the Market Monday to Friday.  In keeping with the criteria set out in the report, the Sub-Committee was keen to score applicants more highly if they applied for every day of the working week.  This included Saturdays.  This would add to the vibrancy of Berwick Street Market. 

 

The Sub-Committee considered that it was a difficult decision.  However, there were sufficient strong candidates who had applied to operate the pitches Monday to Friday, resulting in this application being refused. Other applicants had scored more highly for providing a range of commodities which differed more significantly from what was already on offer at Berwick Street Market.

 

 

 

Applicant

 

ZawMyo Thwin (company name – Sawadee)

 

 

Nature of application

 

Preferred Pitch – 1128.  Alternative Pitch(es) considered –  any pitch.

Trading days – Monday to Friday

Type of commodity – hot takeaway food

Description of commodity – Asian (South East), Thai, Locally sourced, street food, vegan, vegetarian.

 

 

Decision:

 

Mr Thwin’s application was one of forty four submitted for new street trading licences at Berwick Street Market.  In reaching a decision, the Licensing Sub-Committee took account of all the details in the report, including the summary of each application and the officers’ scoring based on the criteria set out in the report; any supplementary information provided by each applicant within the report; and any additional submissions made by applicants who attended the hearing to make oral representations. Mr Thwin did not attend the hearing. The Sub-Committee considered all the applications before reaching its final determination and exercised a wide discretion so as to allocate as far as possible in accordance with policy and the criteria set out in the report. In some cases the Sub-Committee did not entirely agree with the scoring in the report as it was considered that criterion 2 was vague in its description and criterion 3 was difficult to interpret accurately, especially as so many of the applications involved the sale of food. The Sub-Committee also took into account the preferences expressed for a particular pitch and, in allocating those pitches, it also had regard to what was being sold (or would be sold) by other traders in adjacent pitches.       

 

The Sub-Committee refused the application, pursuant to section 12(1)(d) of the City of Westminster Act 1999.  This was on the basis that the pitches at Berwick Street were all allocated to traders and there were no pitches remaining.

 

In deciding to refuse the application, the Sub-Committee took into account that Mr Thwin was proposing to operate from the Market Monday to Friday.  In keeping with the criteria set out in the report, the Sub-Committee was keen to score applicants more highly if they applied for every day of the working week.  This included Saturdays.  This would add to the vibrancy of Berwick Street Market. 

 

The Sub-Committee considered that it was a difficult decision.  However, there were sufficient strong candidates who had applied to operate the pitches Monday to Friday, resulting in this application being refused. Other applicants had scored more highly for providing a range of commodities which differed more significantly from what was already on offer at Berwick Street Market.

 

 

Supporting documents: