Agenda item

To consider the following petition, submitted by the Chichester and Bognor Green Party:

“We, the undersigned, call on our Chamber of Commerce and District Council, to support the Traders’ Market.  Please sign below and let us know if you would like the market on the Cattle Market car park or on the city streets or if you don’t mind at all”

and the recommendation of the Cabinet (See report (Agenda Item 8) to Cabinet on 1 December 2015):-

That tenders be sought for the operation of the Traders market from 1 April 2016, including the introduction, on a trial basis for one year, of a precinct traders market on Wednesdays with the Saturday market remaining at the Cattle Market Car Park location.

Note: The Petition Scheme provides that the petition organiser will be given five minutes to present the petition at the meeting and the petition will then be discussed by councillors. The debate of a petition at a Council meeting should, subject to the discretion of the Chairman, not last more than 30 minutes.

The Council received the report circulated with the agenda (copy attached to the official minutes).

The Chairman drew attention to the petition organised by the Bognor and Chichester Green Partyand to the recommendation from the Cabinet. Very sadly, the organiser of the petition, Mrs Sarah Sharp, had been seriously injured in a road traffic accident on Friday and was in hospital. The Council wished to send their best wishes to her for a full and speedy recovery. Mrs Sharp had authorised her husband, Mr Bill Sharp, to present the petition on her behalf.

At the Chairman’s invitation, Mr Sharp presented the following petition:-

“We, the undersigned, call on our Chamber of Commerce and District Council, to support the Traders’ Market. Please sign below and let us know if you would like the market on the Cattle Market car park or on the city streets or if you don’t mind at all”

Mr Sharp stated that councillors might have heard that Chichester Traders Market was on the decline and full of tat. It was, indeed, in decline, but it was not full of tat. On the contrary, it was a source of vegetables, fish and eggs which were fresher and cheaper than those in shops. The issue of value for money was of particular importance, because Chichester had pockets of serious impoverishment. The market could not compete with the advertising budgets of major retailers, and it was a pressing issue to get the message of its quality and value for money out to potential customers.

The ‘Save the Market’ campaign was concerned that, if the market moved into the city centre pedestrian precinct, its benefits should not be lost through arbitrary controls on the size or quality of stalls. The present proposals were unclear in that respect. The market should not be ‘gentrified’. Whilst it would be good to introduce new, high quality traders, it was vital that the present hard-working traders should not be excluded. Any quality standards should be objective, and should be the subject of consultation with the public, explaining the impact on current traders. Many of the existing stalls were much larger than the typical farmers market stall, and some operated from vehicles or needed vehicles close by. Customer and stall-holders car parking would be closer in the Cattle Market than if the market was relocated to the precinct. Customers valued the relaxed space and opportunities for social interaction in the current location, which were not available in the city centre markets.

The Campaign Group, therefore, urged the Council to flesh out the details before making a decision on the future of the traders market.

Mrs Keegan, seconded by Mr Dignum, then presented the recommendation of the Cabinet, which had been made following consideration of the report of a Task and Finish Group and awareness of the petition. The Task and Finish Group had considered the results of a consultation with traders and businesses in the City Centre. The operator of the existing market had made it clear that the current arrangement was unsustainable. The Cabinet, therefore, recommended that the Saturday market should remain in its present location, but that a one year trial should be undertaken of a Wednesday market in the precinct. If this was agreed, the Cabinet would then seek tenders for the market to be run by a market operator, who would be authorised to trade by way of the grant of a street trading consent.

Mrs Apel asked about the impact on the shops in North Street and East Street of a traders market in the precinct. Mrs Keegan replied that it was difficult to know without a trial period. Some retailers welcomed the expected increase in footfall; others were fearful. However, experience at Winchester was that a precinct market had brought an additional £8m to the local economy.

On a point of order, Mr Ransley asked whether the Council should vote on the acceptance of the petition, in view of the fact that it had not indisputably reached the 1,000 signatures for entitlement to a full council debate under the Petition Scheme. The Chief Executive replied that there was discretion in the Petition Scheme for any petition of over 250 signatures to be considered at a full Council meeting and this process had been agreed because a Cabinet recommendation on the same topic was being considered by the Council and the petition organisers claimed that they did have more than 1,000 signatures.

Mr Connor stated that he had visited the markets in the City Centre and he did not see how the vehicles that operated in the traders market could be accommodated in the narrow streets. He and some other members expressed opposition to the proposal.

Mrs Dignum acknowledged the valued availability of fresh produce at the traders market. However, it was the traders themselves that had sought the move because business was declining. Doing nothing was not, therefore, an option. Public buying patterns had changed and might continue to do so. She felt that a time-limited trial would give a factual basis for a decision to be made on the longer term.

Mr Ransley asked, in the light of Mr Sharp’s remarks, whether it was proposed that restrictive conditions would be included in the tender documents. Mrs Keegan replied that the documents would contain criteria and standard specifications. However, it was not intended to govern whether goods would be high or low value. That was for the traders to determine. The conditions would be about the look and feel of the market. The specifications had still to be worked out and she agreed that they must not remove the ability of the market operator to run a viable market, but should rather attract traders. Mr Ransley pointed out that the specification would be critical and councillors and the public should have the opportunity to comment. Mrs Keegan agreed that councillors and the Business Improvement District would have the opportunity to comment, but it was not proposed to undertake a further public consultation.

Mr Ridd was not in favour of the market moving into the City Centre. He felt that more information was needed about the reasons for decline. Were the charges too high or the hours of operation too restrictive?

Mrs Keegan replied that simply not enough people shopped there. The traders market would continue in its present location on Saturdays, which was the prime shopping day. The trial of a Wednesday market in the precinct would be an opportunity to develop a thriving market and to provide information for future action.

Mr Shaxson commented that access for emergency vehicles must be preserved, and Mr Hayes asked that the Chichester Access group be consulted.

On a vote being taken, it was

RESOLVED

That tenders be sought for the operation of the Traders market from 1 April 2016, including the introduction, on a trial basis for one year, of a precinct traders market on Wednesdays with the Saturday market remaining at the Cattle Market Car Park location.