Report by Regulatory Services and Building Standards Manager
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, Ailsa Griffiths,
opted to proceed by way of audio call and she joined the meeting by telephone.
The 3 Objectors, Dawne Cervantes, Mark Gunston and
Kate Clayton opted to proceed by way of video call and joined the meeting by
Microsoft Teams
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 Objectors to speak in
support of their Objections.
OBJECTORS
Dawne Cervantes
Ms Cervantes advised that the property in question was a Victorian
building with no sound proofing and her objection was based on her lived
experience. She said that the property
below her was used as an Airbnb and her lived experience had been a nightmare
at times. She said she taught at the
local primary school and was part of the island’s Emergency Response Team which
involved shift work at times. Her lived
experience was that most people that turned up to Airbnbs were in party mode
and had no consideration for local people going about their everyday
lives. She commented on hearing that
there would only be 4 people in this property, but she knew that regularly additional
people would turn up along with dogs and children. They would turn up in party mode and with no
sound proofing this was incredibly distressing to her. She advised that there was a very small,
shared garden for 4 flats and there were incidences of dogs running around.
She advised that despite information packs about recycling, she had
lost count the number of times she had to empty glass out of the bins. Glass had to be taken to the nearby recycling
depot on the island. She acknowledged
that some people that came were peaceful and fine but as a single women, when
people arrived in fully party mode at 11 pm, she was not inclined to knock on
their doors. She said that was why she
had objected to this application. She
said her preference would be for a long term lease but the Applicant did not
want to do that. She said she would have
no objection to a long term lease and commented that there was a huge need for
long term lets on the island. She said
that anyone you spoke to about Airbnbs had their own lived nightmare.
There were no questions for Ms Cervantes.
Mark Gunston
Mr Gunston said he would reinforce what Ms Cervantes had said. He referred to the objections made in respect
of the previous application considered by the Committee, and said that pretty
much everything that had been said at that hearing related to this
application. The main difference was
that related to a residential street and not neighbours in the same
building. He advised that he lived in
the village and that he was objecting on behalf of his brother who had a flat
within the building. He advised that the
building was totally unsuitable for Airbnb and should not be a consideration as
the walls were paper thin.
He said that Kilchattan Bay was a small community and that he loved
living here. He knew all his neighbours
and he did not have any Airbnbs in the building he lived in. He said that if anyone ever wanted to do
anything like put up a shed up or re-tile, they always contacted their
neighbours to run it by them. He advised
that as far as he was aware the person that lodged the application did not at
any time inform the other people in the building of her intentions. He said that, to him, was not community
minded. He said that he ran a small
business renting out kayaks and that he welcomed visitors. He said he welcomed residents, and welcomed
Airbnbs as long as the building was appropriate and did not negatively impact
others that lived there.
He said his knowledge of people who did live in buildings where there
was an Airbnb was that they had a negative experience due to noise. He advised that unless you lived there you
could not monitor how many would stay or how they would behave. He said there could be lots of partying, lots
of noise, and lots of overcrowding. He
advised that a much better alternative would be to do a long term let. He said there was a shortage of long term
lets and that the Applicant would be doing the island a service if she did
that.
Members Questions to Mr Gunston
Councillor Armour referred to long terms lets as opposed to Airbnbs and
asked how Mr Gunston would feel if this was a long term let and the person that
moved in was undesirable in his opinion.
Councillor Armour pointed out that the person would be there permanently
rather than on a temporary basis. Mr
Gunston said this was a valid point but not really a good argument for allowing
an Airbnb. He acknowledged that he would
not want a disruptive neighbour to be there but the short term let would lead
to a continuing stream of people you could not build a relationship with and
could not complain to the Council about.
Councillor Blair sought and received confirmation from Mr Gunston that
Ms Cervantes currently stayed in his brother’s house and that his brother
planned to retire there in the future. Councillor
Blair referred to Mr Gunston listening into the previous hearing, and asked how
Mr Gunston went about vetting before Ms Cervantes moved in. Mr Gunston explained that he had never been
in that position as he had never been a landlord. He said that Ms Cervantes was a family friend
that it was just an agreement with her.
He said he did not know what the procedure would be for vetting a
prospective tenant. He commented that he would probably look at having a
probation period.
Kate Clayton
Ms Clayton said she would reinforce everything said by the other
objectors. She said she lived in the
same building as the Applicant and that she had bought her flat at the same
time as Ms Griffiths. She said she knew
of the issues with the Airbnb next door to her and underneath Ms
Cervantes. She advised that even though
Ms Griffiths would not be doing Airbnb, but would be using a local agency on
the island, they did not vet anyone renting their properties. She advised that whether Ms Griffiths wanted
just couples did not matter as people would just book online and the agency
would take its profit and Ms Griffiths would get her money. She said it was the same as an Airbnb in
essence. She said there would be a
succession of people arriving. She said
that of course people would come to party.
She advised that she was an artist and that she had converted a
building in the garden for her studio.
She said she would be taking part in a local community event which would
involve people visiting her studio over a weekend. She said that would be completely different
than having hundreds of dogs and children.
She said that at the moment Ms Cervantes had an Airbnb underneath her
and the person was giving that up and would live there permanently in
October. She said that if Ms Griffiths
stayed there too this would be 4 single women together. She said that this would not mean they would
not have a good time. She referred to
the issue being about the succession of people arriving at an Airbnb. She commented that she had done this herself
in other places and that you could not guarantee who would come unless you
lived in the property. She advised that
a van came by 2 weeks ago to set up the property for guests and that she had to
tell them that the property had not received a short term let licence yet. She said that the property had been
advertised on the website and had to be taken down.
She advised that she would have no objection to a long term let for 6
months or a year. She said that for a
short term let anyone could turn up no matter what Ms Griffiths would
prefer. She said it was a no brainer and
not fair on so many levels. She advised
that she had her own entrance on the ground floor and that Ms Griffiths flat
was above hers. She said that access to
it was round the back, up a shared staircase, with Ms Cervantes on one side and
Ms Griffiths’ flat on the other. She
said that the disruption would be out of order for all of them and commented
that she would be very surprised if the Committee granted this and would be
very upset if they did.
Members’ Questions to Ms Clayton
Councillor Hampsey referred to all 3 objectors referring to noise and
asked if any of the noise complaints had been reported to authorities such as
the Council or Police. Ms Clayton said
no and commented that it would be pointless to do that because the people would
be gone the next day. She said that
Kilchattan Bay was a really popular place to visit and that the property could
have new people 2 or 3 times per week.
She said it was the principle of the matter that they did not want a
constant change of people living where they chose to live.
Councillor Kain asked if there had been any issues in the past with the
other flat that was let out as an Airbnb.
Ms Clayton said she was aware of serious issues experienced by Ms
Cervantes in terms of dogs and children being a nuisance and disturbing the
peace. She said it was more difficult
for Ms Cervantes as she worked shifts and had to sleep.
Councillor Kain referred to the thickness of the walls and the
transmission of noise between the walls.
Ms Clayton said they could not do anything about that.
Councillor Blair noted that Ms Clayton had used Airbnbs herself and
said he hoped that she was a good customer.
He commented that it would be a management issue in terms of noise. Whether it was an Airbnb or a full time
residence the noise, he said it would be the same due to the insulation of the
properties. He asked if the concerns
were about people being on holiday and perhaps extra noise above the normal
level. Ms Clayton said her concern was
about the extra noise. She said they
would have no idea who the people were and if they were just there for a
weekend having a party there would be no consideration for other people living
there. She advised that if the property
was let out permanently Ms Griffiths would be able to interview
candidates. She said the property would
be suitable for one person or maybe a couple.
She said it would not be suitable for young children due to all the
stairs. She said the noise question was
important but it was also the constant disruption of strangers. She said she
was an artist that this was her work place in their shared garden. She suggested that maybe if someone had
photos the Committee could see how small the shared garden was.
APPLICANT
Ms Griffiths referred to noise levels from the other property and said
that this needed to be taken up with the owner.
She said she had not let her property out yet. She felt that there was a lot of talk about
the potential for noise. She advised
that she had details in her welcome pack asking guests to be courteous to the
neighbours. She referred to the bins and advised that she had purchased a new
bin from the Council for recycling purposes and put a notice on the bin to say
no glass. The welcome pack also included details of where to take the glass to
be recycled.
She advised that she bought the flat for her own use and for family and
friends to use, with a view to doing some short term lets, but not to the extreme
suggested by the objectors. She referred
to the stairs and advised that you needed to use the stairs to access the
flat. She said that lots of flats had
outside stairs that were shared. She
said there would not be a succession of people coming and going and that it
would only be 2 or 3 times per year and probably not at all during the
winter. She said that Kilchattan Bay was
a popular holiday destination. She said
that she had been visiting there since she was a child and that she had cousins
that lived nearby and that was one of the reasons for buying this property so
that she could be near her family. She
said the issue of sound proofing came up during the inspection of the flat. She said that she had laid carpets throughout
to help with that. She commented that
other flats had wooden floors. She
referred to the request to let the flat on a longer term basis and advised that
she did not want to do that as she wanted to use it for herself and her family. She suggested that Mr Gunston’s kayak business
would be affected if he did not want tourists to visit Kilchattan Bay. She said that the flat only slept 4 and she
had requested no dogs. She said there
was no extra sleeping facilities for extra guests. She said that she was using a letting agency
on the island and was sure that if there were any issues they would be able to
sort them out.
Questions to Applicant from Objectors
Ms Clayton noted that Ms Griffiths would only rent the flat out 2 or 3
times per year and asked why bother if it was going to upset the
neighbours. Ms Griffiths commented that
this was all very negative.
Members’ Questions to Applicant
Councillor Forrest sought and received confirmation from Ms Griffiths
that no pets would be allowed in the flat.
Councillor Hampsey sought and received confirmation from Ms Griffiths
that she would be letting her property through Howat’s Housekeeping and
Property Services on the island.
Councillor Hampsey asked if the company carried out viewings of the
property to ensure all was in order if there were complaints. Ms Griffiths said if they were aware of any
issues they would communicate with her.
SUMMING UP
Objectors
Ms Cervante said she could accept an Airbnb in a detached property but
in an old Victorian block like this it was what she described earlier as her
lived experience despite a welcome pack.
Mr Gunston reiterated that he himself and other people in the village
were not against Airbnbs as long as they were in the right location. He said that this building was not suitable
for lots of visitors due to the noise.
Ms Clayton acknowledged this would not be an Airbnb management
operation. She said it would be operated
by a small staff that would come round to change the beds. She said she could not add anything further
other than to say this was a totally unsuitable house. She said that Ms Griffiths would not be able
to guarantee who came to the property.
She thought that Ms Griffiths should reconsider and she commented that
neighbourliness was important. She said
this was not about not wanting visitors to the island. She said this would not be her family and
friends, it would be strangers and their behaviour could not be guaranteed.
Applicant
Ms Griffiths questioned what the difference was between family and
friends coming and having a party and short term lets or long term lets with a
family of 4 with children running up and down the stairs.
All parties were asked if they were satisfied that they had said all
they wished to say.
Mr Gunston responded to the last comment by Ms Griffiths. He said that was not really a good argument
to have the property let out in the short term.
He said the difference would be if it was family and friends you could
talk to them.
Ms Cervantes said that if they were ever having parties they let their
neighbours know.
Ms Clayton said there was no comparison to make. She advised that it
was about developing relationships and you could not do that with someone that
just came for 2 days.
At this point the Committee agreed to retire and deliberate in private.
DEBATE
The Committee debated the merits of the application and objections
submitted.
Thereafter the Applicant and Objectors were invited back into the
meeting.
DECISION
The Committee agreed to grant a short term let licence to Ms Griffiths
subject to the addition of conditions in respect of Anti-Social Behaviour,
Littering and Disposal and Noise Control in Flatted Premises.
(Reference: Report by Regulatory Services and Building Standards Manager, submitted)