Venue: By Microsoft Teams
Contact: Iona McMillan, Committee and Member Services Officer - 01436 658801
| No. | Item |
|---|---|
|
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE Minutes: Apologies for absence were received from Councillors John Armour, Jan Brown, Audrey Forrest, Amanda Hampsey, Daniel Hampsey, Graham Archibald Hardie and Liz McCabe. |
|
|
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST Minutes: There were no declarations of interest. |
|
|
CIVIC GOVERNMENT (SCOTLAND) ACT 1982, THE CIVIC GOVERNMENT (SCOTLAND) ACT 1982 (LICENSING OF SHORT-TERM LETS) ORDER 2022: APPLICATION FOR GRANT OF A SHORT-TERM LET LICENCE TO S & D FITZGERALD, 15 LOCH DRIVE, HELENSBURGH Minutes: 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 and their agent opted to proceed by
way of video call and Sarah Fitzgerald and Keith Shanks joined the meeting by
Microsoft Teams. Iain Martin, James and Patricia Crawford, and Margaret Watters,
Objectors, also opted to proceed by way of video call and joined the meeting by
Microsoft Teams. David Townsend and Colette Lafferty McGaw, Objectors, opted to proceed
by way of written submission and a copy of these objections were contained
within the Agenda pack and supplementary Agenda pack for this hearing. The Chair invited the Licensing Standards Officer to speak to the terms
of the report. Thereafter the procedure set out in Appendix 18 of the report was
followed and the Chair invited the Applicant and their Agent to speak in
support for their application. APPLICANT The Applicant advised that a substantive response to objections raised
had been submitted for the Committee’s information, and was included in the
Agenda pack. The Applicant advised that the property was her family home, and that
the intention was for the property to only be advertised for let during periods
when the family would be away from the home. She advised that they had two
young children, family and friends in the immediate area, and were fully
embedded in the community. She noted that she had been brought up in
Helensburgh and viewed it as her home. She advised that they had invested a lot
of time, money and energy into making the property their home and it was not
intended to be, either now on in the future, a commercial enterprise. She
emphasised that they were looking at using the property as a Short-Term Let
during periods where the property would otherwise be vacant due to the work
commitments of both her and her husband, who had recently undertaken a new
position as Head Teacher of a school in Dunblane, which occasionally required
boarding responsibilities and overnight care of pupils. The Applicant advised that it was not her intention for the property to
be used as a place to have parties. She noted that the property had two rooms
specifically set up for toddlers, and a climbing frame in the garden for
children. She noted that it was not a party house, and that this would not be
the intended or advertised purpose. She highlighted that the property was fully
compliant with all safety requirements, and a robust management plan was in
place to address any issues which may arise. The Applicant advised that they would also be using the services of a
Managing Agent, BnBHost, who had been highly recommended by a local Estate
Agent. She advised that this would assist in providing an extra layer of
protection around the management of the property, if a licence was to be
granted. The Applicant advised that she was a Human Rights lawyer, who had been
involved in shaping legislation around privacy laws in the UK. She advised that
she took the right to privacy very seriously and would take every step possible
to preserve her neighbour’s right to privacy. She highlighted that the
objections outlined in relation to privacy were largely speculative and were
not relevant to the application before the Committee. The Applicant also advised that there had never been any previous
complaints, when the family or guests were at the property, from neighbours in
relation to noise. She noted that the communal areas were not adjacent to the
party walls and were separated by numerous doors which assisted in reducing
noise transfer. The Applicant reiterated that the property was fully compliant with all
requirements and was a well-managed family home. She advised that it was not
the intention for the property to be used for full time letting, and that
people staying in the property would be allowed to do so only in well-managed
circumstances. The Applicant passed to her Agent to summarise additional details in
support of the application. The Applicant’s Agent advised that when first discussing the potential
Short-Term Let with the Applicant, respect for neighbours had been one of her
main priorities. He provided details of the management plan which had been
created in discussion with the Applicants, and the basis for much of this plan
was to ensure mutual respect and a peaceful co-existence between parties. He
outlined his companies significant experience in management, and ways in which
procedures were put in place to ensure neighbours were respected and
operational disruption was kept to a minimum. The Applicant’s agent advised that the property’s marketing would be
aimed towards families, and that the Applicant had made it clear during their meetings
that the children’s rooms would remain as children’s rooms and that the outdoor
play area would remain in place. He noted that this would naturally mean that
the property would not be attractive to large groups of adults, and that it
would be made clear in the advertising that the property was targeted towards
families. The Applicant’s Agent advised that they would have a robust vetting
process in place for guests wishing to stay in the property, including
background checks carried out by a third-party agency. He noted that this would
include verification of identity documents, credit card information and
additional verification by BnBHost staff trained in vetting, to request details
of all guests. He advised that, where guests did not agree to take part in this
vetting, or issues were raised during the vetting process, the booking would
not go ahead. He advised that, in addition to the above, it is the policy of
BnBHost not to allow Stag or Hen parties at any of their properties, and this
would be clearly stated to any potential guests. The Applicant’s Agent advised that they would ... view the full minutes text for item 3. |