Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Mark Irvine and Liz McCabe.

There were no declarations of interest.

Report by Regulatory Services and Building Standards Manager

The Chair welcomed everyone to the meeting.  In line with recent legislation for Civic Government Hearings, the parties (and any representatives) were given the options for participating in the meeting today.  The options available were by video call, by audio call or by written submission. 

For this hearing the Applicant, Roderick Scott, opted to proceed by way of video call and he joined the meeting by Microsoft Teams.

George Turner, Objector also joined the meeting by Microsoft Teams

Gaynor Wotherspoon, Objector was unable to attend the hearing and provided a written response which was contained in Supplementary Pack 1.

It was noted that one other Objector, Mr McKerracher, was not in attendance.

The Chair invited the Licensing Standards Officer to speak to the terms of the report.  Thereafter he outlined the procedure that would be followed and invited the Objector to speak in support of his Objection.

OBJECTOR

Mr Turner advised that he only became aware of this application when he was near the garden of the property and had seen a notice displayed in the window.  He said the window was some distance from the road.  He noted that on the Council website it stated that notices had to be displayed where they could be publically viewed.  He commented that he did not think it could be considered that this notice was in public view due to the distance away from the kerb.  He advised that he has since spoken to others in the street who were not aware of this application.  He suggested that if they had seen the notice there would have been more objections to this application.

Mr Turner said that he did not think the Applicant had tried to alleviate the concerns of neighbours and had shown little care for the residents in the street.  He advised that he was a Paramedic in town and that he had moved to Oban in 2019 to raise his family in a safe and caring community.  He said he found Nant Drive to be a respectful neighbourhood with a sense of community spirit.  He advised that he did not choose to live next to a hotel or guest house and that he moved to a purely residential area to live and bring up his children.  He advised that the previous tenants were always respectful to other neighbours and that he was still friends with them.  He commented that many short term let properties had people coming to party and they would not want neighbours telling them what to do and not do.

He said that the property was directly next to his property and that the application was for 7 people.  He said that suggested to him that this would be more than the average size family and possibly could be multiple groups.  He said he was concerned about anti-social behaviour which may be exacerbated by the use of the hot tub.

He advised that the driveway was shared with a small kerb stone and commented that for 7 people, car parking for 2 would not be sufficient and may lead to parking on the main road which would bring its own set of problems.  He advised that it would obscure his exit and entrance to his driveway.  He commented that mitigation was offered but said it was difficult to understand how that would be policed and adhered to.

He advised that his property, with garden and driveway, mirrored the Applicant’s property.  He said it was completely open except for a mid-body high fence to the rear.  He referred to multiple strangers arriving at all times.  He commented that he had asked for the direct number of the owner in case he needed to be contacted if there were any issues and that this was refused and that the number was for someone from the management company. He said this removed the personal touch and respect for others that lived in the area.

He advised that there was the potential for anti-social behaviour and noise at all times of the night which would probably lead to disturbance for his family, including loss of sleep, which would affect learning at school and functioning at work.  He referred to mitigation of a £1,000 deposit for damage or disturbance and questioned who would benefit from that money.

He referred to moving to a residential area and commented that encouragement should be given to properties being occupied by people that needed accommodation.  He said that the town had multiple short term lets and no accommodation for teachers, NHS workers and key workers.  He said the introduction of multiple Airbnbs would destroy the town.  He commented that hotel businesses could not get staff due to the town being too expensive to live in and there being nowhere else to live.  He questioned why this residential area could not be encouraged to remain as a residential area and that the property be used for a longer term let as it was before.

MEMBERS’ QUESTIONS

Councillor Martin sought and received confirmation from Mr Turner as to where the notice was displayed.

APPLICANT

Mr Scott advised that he ran a number of Airbnbs and long term lets in Oban and that he had been running these for a number of years in Oban and Argyll.  He said that he tried to supply a selection of accommodation at different levels.  He said that the property had previously been a long term let and that the previous occupants had been employed by him.

He advised that the property would be large enough to accommodate a minimum of 7 people and that quite often they got requests for more than that.  He advised that for this property they wanted to keep it to 7 people, maybe for a family or a family with friends.  He said he was trying to have a high quality residence for family occupation, with no intention of parties.  He referred to having other residences of a similar size with hot tubs and commented  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3.