Hearing in relation to an application for a review
of a premises licence in respect of the Ardview
Inn, 67 Frederick Crescent, Port Ellen, Isle of Islay PA42 7BD. The following papers are enclosed:- Report by Depute ClerkÌý (pages 3-5) Application for a review of a premises licence by Dr. Patrick McGrannÌý (pages 7-10) Noise Logs x 10 covering the period 27/05/22 to
05/11/23Ìý (pages 11-32) Letter dated 11/08/23 from Andy McClements, Environmental Health Officer to Angela Smith,
Ardview InnÌý
(pages 33-34) Log of calls made to Police Scotland 101Ìý (pages 35-39) Emails dated 12/08/22 to and from Islay Community
CouncilÌý (pages 41 43) Report by Licensing Standards Officer dated
24/10/23Ìý pages (45-46) Letter dated 06/11/23 from Police ScotlandÌý (pages 47-48) Statement by Andy McClements,
Environmental Health Officer received 07/11/23Ìý (pages 49-53) Ìý |
Minutes:
Susan
Mair, Depute Clerk advised that this was a hearing to consider a request for a
review of the premises licence in respect of the Ardview
Inn received from Dr P.J McGrann, Frederick Street, Port Ellen, Islay, PA42 7BD
(Appendix 1), who was in attendance. The licence holder for the premises is
Eilean Properties Limited, the sole director of which is Archie McArthur who
was in attendance and accompanied by his son, Grant McArthur and the designated
premises manager, Angela Small. Stuart Anderson, who resided across the road
from the premises, was also in attendance.
Dr
McGrann advised that there had been numerous emails between Eric Dearie,
Licensing Standards Officer and himself and he wished to achieve a resolution
regarding the issues. Dr McGrann advised that he had welcomed the re-opening of
the premises and disagreed that he was a serial complainer. He said that he had
a meeting with Archie McArthur regarding noise issues on 28th May
2022 but there had been no dialogue since then and although sound proofing was
installed, it was inadequate. He said that he had never been challenging and
was always polite and courteous and he did not instigate any sound test. He
advised that he had visited the premises to discuss his concerns but he was
then barred because it was alleged that he was disruptive to staff and customers,
an allegation that he completely refuted. Dr McGrann confirmed he sent 3
letters to the owners after that but received only one reply and was not aware
of any Police visits. He said that there had been continuous noise coming from
the hand driers and jukebox and basic tests had been undertaken by two
Environmental ߣsirÊÓƵ Officers which showed a sense of vibration had become
more acute. Dr McGrann added that the majority of the time the premises ran
satisfactorily.
Stuart
Anderson advised that he had the same issues and had provided video and
photographic evidence but he understood that this could not be made available.
Mr Anderson said that the premises were trying to attract a younger clientele
which he had no problem with, although Archie McArthur had told him that he
would only be permitting persons 21 years and over, but he sought the right to
have some privacy in his own home. He said there had been incidents whereby
patrons had urinated outside the premises and brawls had taken place and he
felt that the premises were not being properly managed. He added that there was
never any Police presence and that he only asked for some common courtesy.
Angela
Small referred to the matter regarding 21 year olds and stated that the
premises had always permitted adults aged 18 years and over. Ms Small asked Mr
Anderson when the photographic evidence was from and he replied a few months
ago.
Grant
McArthur referred to the issues raised by Dr McGrann and said that it appeared
the premises were not expected to hold any type of entertainment. Mr McArthur
advised that the noise from the hand driers had been addressed with the
installation of new ones and he could not prevent the door from banging due to
windy conditions. He said that quiz nights were held regularly for local
charities and patrons emanating from the premises was difficult to monitor
along with the mess outside but the cleaners did try to keep on top of this as
did the staff. When they took over the premises he had provided Dr McGrann with
his mobile number and told him to contact him if he had any issues. He advised
that Dr McGrann had started recording noise levels immediately and thought this
was strange. If Dr McGrann had any major concerns he wondered why he did not
contact the premises manager but instead he would enter the premises demanding
that the music be turned down and as a result was barred from the premises. He
added that a noise management plan was already in place; live entertainment was
only held once a month and a door steward was employed to manage the internal
and external areas.
Archie
McArthur said that some of the issues noted by Dr McGrann were simply not
correct. Mr McArthur advised that he had been a licence holder for over 25
years and he had considerable experience of running licensed premises. He said
that Dr McGrann was kept informed of the progress and sound proofing was
installed at Dr McGrann’s request. He thought that the conversion from one
property to three had not been carried out correctly as it did not comply with
building standards’ requirements, hence the issues with noise and vibration. He
said that he may install CCTV in the future and look into getting a ‘soft
close’ front door. He thought that Dr McGrann’s complaints seemed to be
selective regarding the times when he made the complaints.
It
was noted that there had been a considerable amount of Police visits to the
premises. Angela Small advised that she was not aware of the byelaws for the
external area and once notified, the area was no longer used. Ms Small said
that the jukebox was turned off in the area next to Dr McGrann’s house and any
live entertainment was held at the furthest point within the premises from his
house. Police Scotland regularly drove by the premises and occasionally entered
to request the music be turned down. She added that they have a refusals book
and are extremely strict on underage drinking.
Archie
McArthur advised that it was a small community where 90% of patrons, who take
the distillery tours, visit the local bars and hotels on a regular basis.
Dr
McGrann said that Archie McArthur mentioned numerous conjectures and asked him
what they were. Mr McArthur explained that they cannot be held responsible for
what happens outwith the premises and reiterated that
they employed an extra member of staff as a door steward which, in his opinion,
was not required as they operated a zero tolerance policy. Dr McGrann disagreed
that his complaints were selective and asked Mr McArthur what he meant by this.
Mr McArthur explained that no-one else had any issues with the premises and he
felt that some complaints were received when the premises were quiet then no
complaints had been received when they were busy.
Mark
Irvine enquired about the letter received from Police Scotland (Appendix 2) and
asked Sergeant David Holmes, in visits to the premises, was he satisfied all
complaints had been dealt with. Sergeant Holmes advised that no enforcement was
required regarding the noise complaints as it related more to disruptive
behaviour occasionally outside the premises. Environmental ߣsirÊÓƵ had dealt
with the noise issues.
Dougie
Philand asked Sergeant Holmes if the premises were a hotspot for this type of
behaviour. Sergeant Holmes explained that, in general, more complaints were
received about premises within built up areas and said that licence holders and
premises managers could only do so much.
Dougie
Philand asked Dr McGrann why he had not contacted the licence holder after
being provided with the mobile phone number. Dr McGrann thought he had to
liaise with the premises manager rather than the licence holder, which he did.
Jan
Brown referred to the report from Environmental ߣsirÊÓƵ (Appendix 3) which
mentioned a noise monitor that could be placed in Dr McGrann’s house and
wondered if this had been carried out. Susan Mair advised that an Environmental
ߣsirÊÓƵ Officer was unable to attend today’s hearing and it was a matter for
the Board to decide whether they required further information in this regard
prior to making a decision.
Jan
Brown enquired if that was an option for Dr McGrann and had it been dealt with.
Mr McArthur said they had installed a noise monitor in the premises previously
but it did not record anything.
Dr
McGrann stated that he wanted his log to stand but added that there had been
significant improvements in the last year and was grateful for this.
Audrey
Forest said that this was an unfortunate situation and referred to Mr
McArthur’s mitigations and could not see what else he could do. She said that a
licence holder cannot be held responsible for people passing the premises and
reports from Police Scotland seemed to be very positive and therefore she would
not like to see the licence change.
Mark
Irvine said he echoed this as the licence holder and premises manager seemed
very responsible and suggested that a noise monitoring device be installed
which would benefit both parties.
Jan
Brown agreed and said that the licence holder and premises manager had taken
responsibility regarding the complaints and that the Licensing Standards
Officer and Environmental ߣsirÊÓƵ would need to continue to monitor any future
issues.
Dougie
Philand had similar comments and said that as there were two offers of
communication from Mr McArthur and Angela Small he thought this should be
sufficient to resolve any issues.
Both
Liz Mccabe and Graham Hardie agreed with the comments.
Luna
Martin suggested that external CCTV be installed which would perhaps help
matters going forward.
In
summing up, the Chair advised that he was of the view that grounds for review
of the licence had not been established and therefore it would not be
appropriate for any further action to be taken.
With
no-one else being otherwise minded, this became the decision of the Board.
Supporting documents: