Interactive webcast player

East Lothian Licensing Board
Thursday, 27th August 2026 at 10:00am

 
Share this agenda point
  1. John McMillan - Councillor
  2. John McMillan - Councillor
  3. Linda Gillie - Clerk
  4. John McMillan - Councillor
  5. John McMillan - Councillor
Share this agenda point
  1. Police Representative
  2. John McMillan - Councillor
Share this agenda point
  1. Licensing Standards Officer
  2. John McMillan - Councillor
  3. Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor
  4. John McMillan - Councillor
  5. Dugdale, Fiona
  6. John McMillan - Councillor
  7. Clerk to the Licensing Board
Share this agenda point
  1. John McMillan - Councillor
  2. Audrey Junner
  3. John McMillan - Councillor
  4. Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor
  5. John McMillan - Councillor
  6. Licensing Standards Officer
  7. John McMillan - Councillor
  8. Police Representative
  9. John McMillan - Councillor
  10. Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor
  11. John McMillan - Councillor
  12. Clerk to the Licensing Board
  13. Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor
  14. Clerk to the Licensing Board
  15. Linda Gillie - Clerk
  16. John McMillan - Councillor
  17. Clerk to the Licensing Board
  18. John McMillan - Councillor
  19. Clerk to the Licensing Board
Share this agenda point
  1. External Representative
  2. Clerk to the Licensing Board
  3. Police Representative
  4. Clerk to the Licensing Board
  5. Licensing Standards Officer
  6. John McMillan - Councillor
  7. External Representative
  8. John McMillan - Councillor
  9. Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor
  10. John McMillan - Councillor
  11. Dugdale, Fiona
  12. External Representative
  13. Clerk to the Licensing Board
  14. Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor
  15. Clerk to the Licensing Board
  16. Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor
  17. Licensing Standards Officer
  18. Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor
  19. John McMillan - Councillor
  20. John McMillan - Councillor
  21. Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor
  22. John McMillan - Councillor
  23. Clerk to the Licensing Board
  24. John McMillan - Councillor
  25. Licensing Standards Officer
  26. John McMillan - Councillor
  27. Dugdale, Fiona
  28. John McMillan - Councillor
  29. Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor
  30. John McMillan - Councillor
  31. Gilbert, Neil
  32. John McMillan - Councillor
  33. Clerk to the Licensing Board
  34. John McMillan - Councillor
  35. Gilbert, Neil
  36. John McMillan - Councillor
  37. External Representative
  38. Clerk to the Licensing Board
  39. John McMillan - Councillor
  40. Clerk to the Licensing Board
Share this agenda point
  1. External Representative
  2. MR RONALD S ANDERSON
  3. Police Representative
  4. Clerk to the Licensing Board
  5. Licensing Standards Officer
  6. John McMillan - Councillor
  7. Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor
  8. Police Representative
  9. Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor
  10. John McMillan - Councillor
  11. Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor
  12. John McMillan - Councillor
  13. Gilbert, Neil
  14. John McMillan - Councillor
  15. Dugdale, Fiona
  16. John McMillan - Councillor
  17. Linda Gillie - Clerk
  18. Gilbert, Neil
  19. John McMillan - Councillor
  20. Clerk to the Licensing Board
  21. Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor
  22. External Representative
  23. Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor
  24. John McMillan - Councillor
  25. Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor
  26. John McMillan - Councillor
  27. Dugdale, Fiona
  28. Clerk to the Licensing Board
  29. John McMillan - Councillor
  30. Gilbert, Neil
  31. John McMillan - Councillor
  32. External Representative
  33. Clerk to the Licensing Board
  34. John McMillan - Councillor
  35. Clerk to the Licensing Board
Share this agenda point
  1. External Representative
  2. Clerk to the Licensing Board
  3. Police Representative
  4. Licensing Standards Officer
  5. John McMillan - Councillor
  6. Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor
  7. John McMillan - Councillor
  8. Linda Gillie - Clerk
  9. Gilbert, Neil
  10. John McMillan - Councillor
  11. External Representative
  12. Clerk to the Licensing Board
Share this agenda point
  1. External Representative
  2. Clerk to the Licensing Board
  3. Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor
  4. Clerk to the Licensing Board
  5. John McMillan - Councillor
  6. Clerk to the Licensing Board
  7. External Representative
  8. External Representative
  9. Clerk to the Licensing Board
  10. Presenting Officer
  11. Fiona Constable
  12. John McMillan - Councillor
  13. Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor
  14. External Representative
  15. Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor
  16. External Representative
  17. Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor
  18. External Representative
  19. Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor
  20. External Representative
  21. Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor
  22. External Representative
  23. Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor
  24. External Representative
  25. Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor
  26. John McMillan - Councillor
  27. External Representative
  28. John McMillan - Councillor
  29. Fiona Constable
  30. John McMillan - Councillor
  31. Clerk to the Licensing Board
  32. John McMillan - Councillor
  33. Fiona Constable
  34. External Representative
  35. Fiona Constable
  36. John McMillan - Councillor
  37. External Representative
  38. John McMillan - Councillor
  39. Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor
  40. Clerk to the Licensing Board
  41. Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor
  42. External Representative
  43. Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor
  44. John McMillan - Councillor
  45. External Representative
  46. John McMillan - Councillor
  47. External Representative
  48. John McMillan - Councillor
  49. Fiona Constable
  50. John McMillan - Councillor
  51. External Representative
  52. John McMillan - Councillor
  53. Police Representative
  54. Clerk to the Licensing Board
  55. Licensing Standards Officer
  56. John McMillan - Councillor
  57. Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor
  58. John McMillan - Councillor
  59. Dugdale, Fiona
  60. John McMillan - Councillor
  61. Gilbert, Neil
  62. John McMillan - Councillor
  63. Clerk to the Licensing Board
  64. Linda Gillie - Clerk
  65. Gilbert, Neil
  66. John McMillan - Councillor
Share this agenda point
  1. Clerk to the Licensing Board
Share this agenda point
  1. Audrey Junner
  2. Clerk to the Licensing Board
  3. Police Representative
  4. Clerk to the Licensing Board
  5. Licensing Standards Officer
  6. John McMillan - Councillor
  7. Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor
  8. John McMillan - Councillor
  9. Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor
  10. John McMillan - Councillor
  11. Linda Gillie - Clerk
  12. Gilbert, Neil
Share this agenda point
  1. John McMillan - Councillor
  2. Clerk to the Licensing Board
  3. Licensing Standards Officer
  4. John McMillan - Councillor
  5. Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor
  6. John McMillan - Councillor
  7. Linda Gillie - Clerk
  8. Audrey Junner
  9. John McMillan - Councillor
  10. Clerk to the Licensing Board
Share this agenda point
  1. John McMillan - Councillor
  2. Linda Gillie - Clerk
  3. John McMillan - Councillor
Share this agenda point
  1. Clerk to the Licensing Board
  2. John McMillan - Councillor
  3. Licensing Standards Officer
  4. Police Representative
  5. Clerk to the Licensing Board
  6. John McMillan - Councillor
  7. Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor
  8. Licensing Standards Officer
  9. Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor
  10. John McMillan - Councillor
  11. Clerk to the Licensing Board
  12. External Representative
  13. John McMillan - Councillor
  14. External Representative
  15. John McMillan - Councillor
  16. External Representative
  17. John McMillan - Councillor
  18. John McMillan - Councillor
  19. Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor
  20. John McMillan - Councillor
  21. External Representative
  22. John McMillan - Councillor
  23. Clerk to the Licensing Board
  24. John McMillan - Councillor
  25. Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor
  26. John McMillan - Councillor
  27. Clerk to the Licensing Board
  28. John McMillan - Councillor
  29. External Representative
  30. John McMillan - Councillor
Share this agenda point
  1. Clerk to the Licensing Board
  2. John McMillan - Councillor
  3. Linda Gillie - Clerk
  4. Gilbert, Neil
  5. Webcast Finished

John McMillan - Councillor - 0:00:00
John McMillan - Councillor - 0:00:01
Good morning everyone and may I welcome you to this meeting of the East Lothian Licencing
Board being held here in Haddington today 26th of August and I'm going to ask our clerk
to read the statement.
Linda Gillie - Clerk - 0:00:18
The public business of this meeting is being recorded and live streamed via the council's
website in order to allow members of the public access to the democratic process
in East Lothian. East Lothian Licencing Board is the data controller under the
Data Protection Act 2018. Data collected as part of the cordon will be retained
in accordance with the council's policy on record retention and the webcast of
this meeting will be publicly available for up to five years. I'll now call a roll
call of attendance.
Councillor Dugdale.
present. Councillor Gilbert present. Councillor McMillan present.
Councillor Menzies present. And we have apologies from Councillors
McGuire and Bruce. Could I ask if anyone has any declarations of interest please.
John McMillan - Councillor - 0:01:13
Just to announce that I am chairing in Councillor McGuire's absence as nominated deputy and I
make a statement of transparency in my other roles, in my civic roles, I have been at events
in Papel Stedding and indeed opened the Stedding in the presence of our officers and other
members of parliament and member of Scottish parliament, so I wanted to make that completely
clear that although I have no interest in a statement of transparency, I attended those
events in my civic role.
Thank you.
John McMillan - Councillor - 0:01:59
I'd be happy to move to our first item of business.

1. Minutes for Approval - East Lothian Licensing Board, 25 June 2026

Item number one, minutes for approval, East Lothian Licencing Board of 25th June 2026.
Colleagues are we happy to approve those minutes?
Happy to approve.
Thank you.
Before we move to official business, I wanted to note that Mike Upton's last board with
us from Police Scotland and Mike, congratulations on events and promotion and I think family
events as well.
So all of our thanks to you and Sam, we're going to hear from you during the event but
You are welcome in the shadowing role.
Welcome.
Police Representative - 0:02:47
Thank you very much.
Thank you.
John McMillan - Councillor - 0:02:50
Let's move to our next item.

2. Licensing Standards Officer - Activity Report

Item number two.
We have licencing standards officer activity report and we can hear from our LSO.
Welcome, Karen.
Karen, welcome.
Licensing Standards Officer - 0:03:02
Thank you.
I will keep this brief as I know we have a lot of business today.
Bear with me for a couple of minutes.
So I've created an activity report for this meeting because I think it's important that
board members hear the result of some of their decisions.
So I'm just going to cover the FIFA World Cup where the board gave a general extension
for all the home matches and this was very welcome and well received by Premises.
We created a dedicated webpage and notification forms were well used by Premises.
The approach was supported by the Licencing Forum.
I and PZ Upton here held an engagement event which again was well attended by premises
to give information and some guidance.
During the course of the World Cup the licencing team didn't receive a single complaint in
relation to any of the hours used for the general extension and it promoted good relations
with the licencing trade.
At the moment I'm running a project to introduce the Ask for Angela campaign which is originally
developed by Lincolnshire County Council and has also been adopted by many local authorities.
It encourages venues to display promotional material advising customers that if they feel
unsafe say in a day, a social situation or really any situation that they can approach
staff and ask for Angela. We have started the campaign, we held a training session on
the 22nd of July whereby 40 people were trained including representatives from East Lothian
Council which was social work, protective services, we had a number of premises licence
holders and premises managers come. So the hope is that we can spread it wider and training
sessions for other premises will start to take place. I'm very grateful to everyone
that came along in playing their part and hopefully it will create a safer night time
John McMillan - Councillor - 0:04:49
economy. Karen thank you and I personally welcome this
report I think it highlights all the work that you do both in almost in two
roles inspection role and advisory role and I think the work on the World Cup
was exemplary and I know that you got a lot of feedback on that and a lot of
engagement but I'm just going to welcome any questions or comments from from
fellow members of the board would anyone like to come in? Leanne?
Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor - 0:05:20
So no questions, I think the report was really clear and left no questions and no opportunities
because it has been so clear and transparent so thank you for that. A couple of bits of
feedback on the World Cup, I attended a couple of matches in one of the clubs that was close
to me, really positive, really positive engagement for everybody that was there. I look forward
to the police report to see if there were incidents that haven't been picked up by the
as I could see it was really positive. I then spoke with several licensees in my
ward and they all had really positive comments for the entire team. They said
that it was a good and easy transition to make. They were a bit frustrated with
the dates but that wasn't always within anybody's gifts apart from FIFA's so
that was the only negative comment they had and clearly not in any of our
gifts. So thank you all for your hard work on that, really worthwhile and on
they asked for Angela, great advertisement for one council. We keep saying about one
council, this ties in really well with our equally safe policy and how we expand that.
So again, huge thanks to the entire team because we always know it's not one person, although
your team is slightly more than that at the minute. It's not one person, it's a team effort,
so thank you.
John McMillan - Councillor - 0:06:40
Thank you, Leanne. Fiona, would you like to come in? Fiona?
Dugdale, Fiona - 0:06:47
Yes, sorry, I was slow to unmute. Thank you for this report. I just wanted to comment
on Ask for Angela Work. I think it's really important that that work has started and that
someone and yourself has actually instigated this work again. It's a really important project
and I really, really thank you for taking this forward.
I'm just going to take somebody to step forward to say,
come on, we can do this.
So I'm really, really pleased about this.
And thank you so much for everything else you've done
during the World Cup.
And it's really heartening to hear about the positive
feedback on that as well.
Thank you.
John McMillan - Councillor - 0:07:29
Thank you.
And I just note that point that we made in terms of the whole
team because I think during the year the licencing standards officer work comes through but every
board meeting we rely on the whole team to be providing us with papers, support, advice
and I think our clerk doing a great job and supported by our committee clerk so an opportunity
to note the work and to note all the feedback. So just formally are we happy
Clerk to the Licensing Board - 0:08:11
to note that report? Shall we move on to our next business please?

3. i) Premises Licence Application - Dukes of West Barns, Ground Floor, 5 Duke Street. West Barns, Dunbar EH42 1UR

Yeah we've got premises licence application 3 -1 Dukes of West Barnes
ground floor 5 Duke Street West Barnes Dunbar and we have the
applicant on online and I'd ask if they want to say a few words to the board in
John McMillan - Councillor - 0:08:40
support of their application. Thank you and just in terms of process it's going
to be my way of working that we'll ask the applicant throughout this meeting to
speak first then we'll ask the objectors and then we'll take questions and then
hear from police and LSO and police. Just so people know how we are going to conduct
business today. May I welcome the applicant and ask you to introduce yourself online.
Audrey Junner - 0:09:10
Thank you. Thank you very much. Good morning everyone.
My name is Audrey from Hill Brown Licencing Solicitors and I am representing the applicant
today. I am really pleased to present this licence application to you for Dukes of West
Burns. The premises itself was purchased by my clients in 2022. And it was in a real state
of disappear at that point, a lot of work had to be done and they invested a considerable
amount of money in completely transforming the premises into what it is today, which
is a really welcoming community cafe with separate art studios and a gallery space.
It's very much a family business. And so you have Robin who is on the gallery side of things
deals with all the art curation and Sophie who manages the cafe and that side of the business.
They opened the business in November 2023 after those renovations and it's been a really lovely
addition I think to the area since then. A licence is being sought really to complement
that existing offer, it's not to change the operation at all other than to allow them to
offer customers a glass of wine with lunch, for example, or to cater to private dinners
or offer a glass of wine or something like that at gallery events that they might have.
This will not be a pub, which I think is reinforced by the fact that they have been open for three
years and the premises has opened obviously without a licence and this is something which
come later in the business. As I said, they see this as really been a complementary part
and an ancillary to the main offer that they have. At the moment they open from
10 in the morning till 4, so it's very modest hours in terms of trading hours.
We have requested a 10pm terminal hour in the application, but this is really just to give them
a little bit of flexibility around things like those private dinners that I mentioned and those
slightly later, but there's no plans to trade the CAFE element
in at all past 4pm as things stand. And there have been a
couple of objections and I think I'm not sure if the objectors
are present, but if they are, you will no doubt hear from them
in after myself. And I'm happy to further address those. But I
understand in that those objectors would be apprehensive
about this premises being licenced. And I think that
really comes from their experiences in relation to the previous operators here. This used
to be a licenced premises, it used to be a pub. And it's my understanding, although I
wasn't obviously involved in this, that there was real challenges involved with the previous
operators and that was very difficult time for the neighbours. And indeed, this board
actually revoked that premises licence, hence why there wasn't a licence to be transferred
to my clients and a new application is required. And I note that one of the objectors says that
he likes the current set up and under and welcomes it to the area. So I think really I would just
like to be assured Mr. Bambry that there is no intention to change those current arrangements,
not looking to pivot the business into a public house here. And I think it's really important
that we make that distinction between the previous operators
and my clients and not only the difference in the way
that they operate the business,
but also the way in what the business is
and what the levels of a potential nuisance would be
from this business.
It's very much a modest operation.
And as I see primarily in being operated
during the daytime hours.
There are some, there is some mention
in the objections about parking.
That's obviously not a licencing issue.
But I think maybe just to touch on it briefly to say that
the operators here, my clients actually pay
the local bowling club every year to use,
for their customers to use their car park
in addition to the other spaces which are around.
And they're very clear with customers when booking
that they need to be mindful of neighbours
in terms of parking.
And there's notices to that effect on their website as well.
So it's something that is very much in their minds as operators.
Your Honours, I really would commend the application to you as I see it as a very modest application
in terms of what they're looking to do from a licencing perspective.
But the licence really would complement what they're doing at the moment.
And in my submission, it wouldn't cause nuisance or disturbance to two neighbours.
The LSO is obviously still to present their report as well, but what if the condition's
being requested in relation to the outside area and it's just to confirm that there's
absolutely no issue with us accepting that condition, which limits the use of the area
for music and things like that.
There's again no intention to offer that in that space.
And as the hours are 10pm, it wouldn't be used after that time anyway.
So that standard curfew would apply to the outside space.
One thing which came up as part of the application process
is that it should honour patients to have BYOB listed
as an activity on an operating plan
if that's to be offered from a venue.
So that has been included because they do run art classes
where they would like to sell off for that BYOB option.
So that does form part of the application.
Other than the objections which hopefully have been addressed, there isn't any further
representations for me to deal with.
Subject to questions that you have, for me, I would ask the honours to support the application
and move grant.
Thank you.
Audrey, may I thank you for that.
Thank you for announcing that there have been objections which are included in our pack.
John McMillan - Councillor - 0:15:26
My understanding is that the objectors don't wish to speak.
So given that you have invited questions, I'm going to ask colleagues if they have any
questions of you now.
Leanne, would you like to come in first?
Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor - 0:15:40
Thank you, Provost.
So my only question now, because you answered my other one about the BYOB, is would the
business be acceptable to changing the outside hours for the use of the garden to finish
at 8pm. That would keep us in line with other licencing decisions we have had. There is
a use of an outside space and noting the fact that there are residential premises on either
side.
I think they would be amenable to that if that is the standard approach that the board
has taken with other premises. I suppose I would mention that obviously there haven't
being any concerns at this stage so any concerns from neighbours are speculative
at this point and given the nature of the business, I wouldn't suggest
that it's necessarily required to limit it but certainly if that's
your owner's view then they would operate to that hour in line with your
John McMillan - Councillor - 0:16:43
owner's kind of standard approach. Thank you. Thank you, thank you Leanne. Audrey
I thank you for your respect but I think we've tried to do away with being called your honours
so thank you.
It's no attempt at false modesty but we tried to just dispense with that.
But thank you for the clarity and we may come to that discussion around the 8 o 'clock deadline
later.
Thank you again.
I will turn to LSO for any comments on this application.
Thank you, I will keep it brief.
Licensing Standards Officer - 0:17:22
Audrey has covered most of what is in my report so I am happy with the addition of the BYOB
that has been put forward and you will note the condition that I had recommended.
Just a little bit of engagement that we have had at the premises.
I have met with Sophie Ward, the premises manager, she seemed very knowledgeable and
no concerns about the activities that are about to take place or should take place should
the application be granted.
John McMillan - Councillor - 0:17:48
Thank you.
Any police comments?
Police Representative - 0:17:54
No comments or objections.
John McMillan - Councillor - 0:17:59
Thank you.
I'm confusing my provost role with chairing a licencing board.
I think if there are any questions for the LSO or the police, not noting any, happy to move to comments on this.
My own view is that the 8 o 'clock deadline is useful just to prove to residents that we're serious about controlling noise.
However, my very limited visits to the premises were around Andrew Cymru's exhibition of the
cancer tapestry.
I was hugely impressed by the engagement with the community and I didn't know of the car
parking arrangements.
I would hope that any problems with community concerns as it goes on to trade will be well
handled. I think I have that reassurance from Audrey as agent from comments from
police and LSO so I would be in favour of granting this with the condition
proposed by our LSO and I would like to propose that we we maintain the
Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor - 0:19:31
consistent standard of an eight o 'clock deadline. Leanne, Councillor Mignon.
So I was going to suggest that condition and again it's just for the standardised and I
think also it will build confidence with residents nearby and help build that relationship which
hasn't been sullied because of anything to do with current owners but clearly there's
always a lack of trust when you've been burnt previously so I think that will help.
Again looking at the business model I don't see that there would be any issues with this
business but I don't see any other issues with other businesses who have
John McMillan - Councillor - 0:20:06
also implemented the the APM for the outside area. Thank you and I should have
said that you know acknowledging the concerns I think we've heard the
explanations as you pointed out from from the agent and those concerns
relate I think to past issues. I would have the confidence that good
relationships will be maintained and you know I think you've made the point about
parking and noise there are means for objective should those problems occur
there are means for objectors to contact the council and the authorities and to
deal with any any problems that might arise and I'm not seeing other
Clerk to the Licensing Board - 0:20:52
colleagues looking to come in on this so could I ask the clerk just to summarise
I was just going to seek a quick clarification, I was going to say Provost's Chair, in terms
of the suggestion you've put forward, Councillor Menzies did suggest that she was supporting
but just wanted to clarify that that was a seconding for the full piece.
Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor - 0:21:15
Clerk to the Licensing Board - 0:21:18
I should have said that Carlo, sorry, I'm happy to second that.
Accordingly we will go to the vote in terms of what's being put forward with the additional LSOs conditions and limiting the position to 8pm.
For the garden only.
For the garden only, for the outside area. Sorry.
Linda Gillie - Clerk - 0:21:45
So this is the roll call vote for Dukes of Westbarns premises licence application as
described by the clock to the licencing board with the conditions and the
amendment. So councillor Dugdale. Happy to support as described with the
LSO conditions and the amendment of the 8 p .m. for the outside area.
Councillor Gilbert. Support with amendment.
Councillor McMillan. Also support with amendment.
And Councillor Menses. Support with amendment.
Thank you that's a unanimous.
John McMillan - Councillor - 0:22:20
Clerk to the Licensing Board - 0:22:28
May I thank you again just for the clarity of that and wish you and the applicants well and we're going to move to next business. Thank you very much.
Thank you. May I just ask one point of clarification just before moving on to the next matter.
Just in relation to the condition because I didn't have sight of that prior to the hearing,
is there 8pm restriction on the use of the area or on sales within the area?
It would be on the sales and use of the premises of the area.
The sales and use?
Yes.
Thank you for clarifying.
John McMillan - Councillor - 0:23:10
Apologies for that.
I think it's just as I said a normal consistent standard.
So I hope that does help.
And again our good wishes and that continuing neighbourhood and community engagement is welcomed.
Could we move to our next business please?
Clerk to the Licensing Board - 0:23:26
Thank you.

3. ii) Premises License Application - Gullane Bowling Club, 14a Hall Crescent, Gullane EH31 2HA

The next item on the agenda is item 32, premises licence application for Gullen Bowling Club, 14A Hall Crescent, Gullen.
And we have the applicant, John Barrett.
I'll invite Mr. Barrett up to the, in this case, there are no objectors speaking.
Thank you.
Mr. Barr, would you like to say a few comments about your application?
Yeah, thank you.
External Representative - 0:24:05
At the moment we're running with occasional licences through the bowling season.
So the bowling season runs for about four months.
We play league games on Friday nights at home, which is when most of our licences get used.
We do also run an invitational event and an open and a closing day.
Um, so obviously we don't at the moment have enough licences to actually have the
bar open every time we play matches.
And that's why we're, we're looking to get a full premises licence. Um,
as far as the drinking areas are concerned, we have,
we have a small clubhouse,
but we also have seating areas outside the clubhouse that we use.
And as far as the usage is concerned,
Our league games tend to run until about nine o 'clock at night
So we do have people sitting outside watching and drinking on the days when we've got occasional licences until nine o 'clock at night
After that it all goes indoors
I
Think that's probably about all I've got to say this stage
Clerk to the Licensing Board - 0:25:12
Thank you, and can we hear from Police Scotland? You've got any comments?
Police Representative - 0:25:19
Clerk to the Licensing Board - 0:25:20
No comments or objections. Thank you.
And our LSO. Thank you.
Licensing Standards Officer - 0:25:27
So this premises I've worked a lot with over the past three years.
It's been quite a while and given guidance.
So I welcome this application.
I know that the premises has used the occasional as well and there's been no complaints,
but they are limited by the 12 that they've chosen to apply for over the course of the season.
In terms of the application, I have one comment in relation to the on -sales hours.
They have asked for on -sales hours of 10am to commence, which is out with board policy,
which starts at 11am.
And then also a terminal hour of 11pm daily, which is within board policy.
It's up to the board in relation to deciding that and take each application on its own
merits.
As it's a club premises licence application, it can't be considered in terms of overprovision
and the club constitution has been supplied and is compliant with the Act.
And guidance has been given to the club in relation to the requirements of the Act with
staff training and display of signage.
I've recommended two conditions that you'll see in my report in relation to public entertainment
and that the use of the outdoor area ceases at 10pm.
I have put 10pm in relation to this situation as the applicant has described, often bowling
matches go on beyond that 8pm, albeit it is a residential area, whilst they have been
using the occasional licences, over the last three years I have not received a single complaint
in relation to the use of that area.
John McMillan - Councillor - 0:26:53
We might take questions for the applicant.
Any questions for the applicant?
Leanne?
Is there any food available at the bowling club?
External Representative - 0:27:14
It's a tradition with bowling clubs that after a match you provide pies for the opposition.
That, apart from packets of crisps and biscuits, is it, basically.
John McMillan - Councillor - 0:27:28
Yeah, I wouldn't expect the commercial, but I know a couple of times that I've been there
and there has been some sort of food, so it was just to cheque if there was food available.
Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor - 0:27:35
So if you've got pies there for the bowlers rather than them.
That is just for the bowlers after the match, yeah.
There is nothing for people that have come along to watch.
John McMillan - Councillor - 0:27:42
Thank you, Leanne.
Fiona, would you like to come in now?
Dugdale, Fiona - 0:27:50
Yes, thank you. Can I just cheque on the LSO mentioned the on -sales starting at 10 o 'clock
in the morning. So I just wanted to ask the applicant the reason for that.
External Representative - 0:28:02
Yeah, thank you for that. We were advised that if we were running a morning event and
We didn't have the licence starting at 10. We wouldn't be able to sell tea and coffee to people that have come along to these events
Now there's one event we do run in the year our invitational which does start early and we would sell
Alcohol if we had the licence from that time because these guys get thirsty and they're gonna be there all day
But there is in general it was just because of the the tea and coffee issue
Clerk to the Licensing Board - 0:28:38
Think I think our client wants to make a comment on that. Yeah, no that thank you chair and in terms of
It's proper the tea and coffee should be mentioned within the licence in terms of what your what your overall activities are
but in terms of
the trade the questions about trade trading and sale of
Alcohol and if you're content with the policy position of the living em and that's the clarification
If the licence could say tea and coffees from such and such a time and then afterwards alcohol
sales would come in and be the licenced part of it.
If you're content with that position or if that's the position that you were actually
achieving, we can take it through the board decision and if it's approved, take that amendment.
Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor - 0:29:32
Yep, that's not a problem.
Thank you.
Leanne would like to come back and answer this.
There's a question more for Carlo.
If we were to keep it to our usual which is 11, would there be an exception available for the club?
For the Invitational, because that can bring in a lot of money for small clubs, especially small non -profit clubs.
Clerk to the Licensing Board - 0:29:55
The licence time, if the board permitted it earlier, then they would be licenced from 10 o 'clock.
and if it's as by like application states at the moment it would be licenced from 10
10 a .m. and I'd say those policy hours and if it's just for tea coffee and
Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor - 0:30:19
opening up then there wouldn't be any reason why they couldn't do that if you
were to take it for the later time as was being indicated by the applicant
don't know if that's helped would there still be an option name so that if you
have an invitation or two that there is a separate application process to open just
on that day a little bit earlier. I'm not sure if because you can't have an occasional
and a full licence, is there an exemption, is there a change that's allowed?
Licensing Standards Officer - 0:30:51
Can I jump in? This has been explained to the premises but because this is a club premises
licence they will only be permitted in terms of selling alcohol to members and guests of
members which will include visiting teams and they are aware of that in terms of their
responsibility. In addition to that they can use an occasional licence if they wanted to
open that up and that not be open to non members or the community as such. They also have the
option say for example on that day to put in an application for an extended hours application
to commence alcohol sales on that particular occasion at any time they wish to extend that
out with their current licenced hours. So yes if they wanted to put that application
Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor - 0:31:31
in relation to a one off event, then that option is there for them.
John McMillan - Councillor - 0:31:33
Could I just cheque, John, how do you feel about that?
If we were restricting you normally to 11 o 'clock but you could come back in on those
special occasions for the variation for the occasional licence, would that how would that
suit you talking about being once a year that you'd use the ten o 'clock that's
John McMillan - Councillor - 0:32:02
absolutely perfect thank you thank you I think colleagues might want to reflect
Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor - 0:32:13
on that and beyond would you like to come in yeah I'm not going to suggest
that as a condition I'm thinking it through as a members club it's not open
to the public from 10am. It was more what were the options available if we were to choose.
But I'm not suggesting that. I'm happy to go with the LSO's report on this one, particularly
knowing the area, knowing that residential properties are set back a bit. I'm not proposing
John McMillan - Councillor - 0:32:45
a change on that unless other members are doing so.
In fact, if we were to grant the application, it would still be possible for the club to
come in and change the occasional licences.
It was an open event in the future for a one -off.
Clerk to the Licensing Board - 0:33:11
If you were to grant as applied then they wanted something that was different to what was already in the licence for a one off.
That may be permissible, we'd have to look at the operating plan just to make sure that that was covered off in terms of what they were looking to do.
John McMillan - Councillor - 0:33:49
What's applied for is 10am at the moment and if that were approved and taken forward it would be 10am so it would depend if they were wanting to do anything outside of those.
But I think the LSO has reminded us that this is a club licence, so it's players and members
and guests, and it's not the open invitational.
I was getting a sense of members of the public coming in and watching, observing, whatever,
and therefore if we were to grant the application, the club would need to be aware of that and
come in again for a separate permission.
Am I right?
Just so that the applicant's clear.
Licensing Standards Officer - 0:34:29
The applicant would like to open up the premises in terms
of those that are not members and their guests
in order to sell them alcohol without the use of an alcohol
sales book and being present with a member,
like you're saying, pretty much an open day,
then they would need the use of an occasional licence
for that time period at the club.
The application as it is applied for would grant on sales hours across the whole time
for 10am.
If the board wished to change that, then it would need to change to 11am on the operating
plan.
I just want to be absolutely clear for the applicant.
John McMillan - Councillor - 0:35:05
And Fiona, Councillor Dugdale, would you like to come in?
Thank you.
Dugdale, Fiona - 0:35:11
Thanks for that clarification from LSO.
I would be, I think the applicant said they would be happy with an 11am start for on -sales
and then to deal with that one -off occasion differently as per I realise those intervention
there under an occasional licence, I would be happy with that.
John McMillan - Councillor - 0:35:33
And if that's a proposal, I think I would be happy to second that.
Do we have any questions for LSO or the police? No. I'm going to move on to comments then.
Would anyone like to comment on this application?
Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor - 0:35:54
I completely respect the proposal on the table. I think where I'm coming from is knowing that
the residential house opposite isn't sitting right on top.
I know the home next door gets quite a bit of enjoyment out of the club being there
and I feel change in it and then asking for the one off is on of this
but that's just my personal opinion on it and I would be happy to back it as the LSO has recommended
but also fully respect that there is that suggestion there to change.
John McMillan - Councillor - 0:36:33
Thank you. Neil, Councillor Gilbert?
Yes, I am like -minded to go ahead with what the LSO has suggested and keep the hours as in the report.
Gilbert, Neil - 0:36:48
Thank you.
John McMillan - Councillor - 0:36:54
I am noting comments from colleagues.
I am going to ask our clerk to summarise for us.
Make any comments?
Clerk to the Licensing Board - 0:37:07
Chair, the situation has put forward, there are three items to consider in terms of the
we have the initial application as as provided and before you we have a
seconded position which is the application but with the change to the
opening hours for sale of alcohol from 10 a .m. to 11 a .m. which would result in a
change to the operating plan and there's the other option on refusal.
If you want to take a vote, we can do that as we do for council meetings and take a vote
on everything and then the majority would then come forward and if there was a tie on
one of them we could then vote on those ones separately after that.
John McMillan - Councillor - 0:38:16
Okay, that makes sense. I think it makes sense to me colleagues happy to move to a vote. Yes
Gilbert, Neil - 0:38:32
So this is the roll call vote for Gullin bowling club
and it's there are three options before as described by the licence the clock to
the licencing board if you could indicate which option you're voting for
thank you councillor Doug deal thank you I'd be
voting for the end on sales commencement to be 11 a .m. as the client said they
were happy with that councillor Gilbert yeah voting for the
as presented by the licencing officer.
Councillor McMillan.
The amended 11 o 'clock.
And Councillor Menzies.
As presented by the LSO.
So that's a tie 2 -0.
I think that sadly leaves me in the casting vote role.
Just want to clarify that.
Apologies, I also when I was summarising had admitted that there were conditions being
suggested by the LSO which haven't been incorporated but if you want to pick up on that after.
John McMillan - Councillor - 0:39:56
I think you're right to point that out and I was assuming that we were all, however we
voted the conditions we would apply either in the amendment as seconded or in the report.
So thank you for clarifying that.
Colleagues just to confirm that wouldn't change your vote in any way.
Thank you.
I do think I have the casting vote.
John, I think for me the 11 o 'clock option, I prefer just in terms of consistency, I think
that you have heard the options around 10 o 'clock for the Invitational.
I hope that is not too onerous.
I'm really heartened by the superb feedback that you've had from Councillor Minnis, but
in my casting vote I'm going to go for the 11 o 'clock start time.
So colleagues, I have heard your views, I respect them, but I think the 11 o 'clock start
time is important to uphold and I'm going to do that.
Thank you very much.
External Representative - 0:41:01
Would you like to summarise now first, Carol?
Thank you.
Clerk to the Licensing Board - 0:41:10
In summary, that's approval of the licence with the event of conditions brought through
from the LSO and with the amendment to the operating plan from 10 a .m. to 11 a .m. and
thank you.
John McMillan - Councillor - 0:41:34
Thank you very much for coming in and again wish you well.
Can we move to our next business, please?
Clerk to the Licensing Board - 0:41:41
We have item number four which is provisional premises licence application
as the Express PFS Tranent 151 and 2157 High Street Tranent and we have Mr.

4. ii) Major Variation - Asda Express PFS Tranent, 151/157 High Street, Tranent EH33 1LP

Hazard presenting alongside his client. I will ask Mr. Hazard to interest his client and provide any comments that he has on his application.
External Representative - 0:42:09
Yes, thank you. Good morning, convener. Good morning, councillors.
Niall Hazard, appearing as agent for the principal solicitors, Gosh Chalks, they're based in Hull,
and I provide agency appearance for Scottish licencing work for them.
I'm accompanied by Louise Mercer, who is the general manager of this particular site.
I'm happy to proceed with my presentation and I'll try and address the issues raised in the objection.
In terms of my submission, I suppose four distinct parts, I will do a brief introduction
to the applicant, I'm not going to give you a potted history of AASDA but really just
focus on their convenience for court strategy.
I then unfortunately, I hear you all say, have to deal with the excluded premises test
and take you through some market research but you'll be very pleased to know I don't
intend to do that page by page, line by line.
You have the market research in your packs.
If you're with me in relation to the market research and obviously the LSO's side of that
and has confirmed that indeed in the LSO opinion it meets the statutory test then obviously
I'll give you some detail on the plans for this, the merits of the application and so
on.
So in terms of ASDA and convenience retail on petrol forecourts I appeared before this
board in connexion with the petrol filling station in Haddington Retail Park and at that
time I advised the board about as the strategic move into convenience on those
four courts when customers are there to fill up. Such as the commitment as they
have in putting their ASDA Express sites into petrol filling stations. They
acquired 400 petrol filling stations across the UK and Ireland from euro
garages to really supplement what they had in a deal that was worth some 2 .3
billion pounds and it's not for me to necessarily break the news I think we
all recognise that we're moving away from from petrol and diesel and therefore
part of this strategy is to prepare for the future to respond to customer
demand for convenience and to safeguard the jobs at these particular sites. So as
they are seeking to incorporate a convenience offer across their
garage estate in UK and Ireland and it's a ruling programme to upgrade the
to bring together the fuel which is which is important and obviously they're
moving into charging and things as well for electric vehicles. Convenience so a
good range depends on the size of the store but proper grocery fresh frozen
larder household food to go and pretty much a small complimentary alcohol offer
in relation to what you would expect in a convenience store so stuff that's there
if you went in for a pizza you could pick up a bottle of wine to accompany
of that. In terms of this storey it's next on that ruling programme having
transitioned over from a co -op a good few years ago and as a result of it
being a petrol filling station the starting point for any liquor licence
application is to commission market research to establish whether or not the
premises meet what's known as the excluded premises test. What I should
stress is that across the Scottish estate as they are only bringing forward
provisional premises licence applications where the market research
in their view supports that test and I can say that because in a number of the
studies commissioned where they didn't meet the test which will come on to
describe no provisional premises licence application has been lodged. And in terms
of the excluded premises test I fully admit it is a very odd test and feels
quite outdated, a bit clunky, but effectively what the law says is a
starting point for a petrol filling station is that it's excluded from being
able to obtain a liquor licence unless it can meet the criteria initially set
down in the Act but heavily glossed by various key court decisions. What the
applicant must demonstrate through the market research is a recognisable number
of persons in a locality and who as a matter of their purchasing habits treat
the premises, the forecourt, as a principal source of either groceries or
fuel and without wishing to spoil the climax of the report it is always fuel
in these petrol filling stations.
It's very, very rare in my experience,
having done dozens and dozens of these applications,
that people do find themselves reliant on a petrol filling
station for grocery, but fuel meets that test.
What the courts have said in judging the matter,
evidence of alternative outlets, isn't necessarily
something which means that people can't
feel that they are reliant.
And the test for reliance is not absolute reliance.
It's not that they have nowhere else to go.
it's the fact that they would be materially disadvantaged should they not be able to obtain
the fuel as it always is from the site in question.
Turning then to the market research for this particular site, I believe it's in members
papers starting at page 123.
As I say I'm not going through it line by line, thankfully Taylor McKenzie are the premier
research company in this field, they have done more of these reports I would suggest
and I've probably had hot dinners, what they do is they capture the key essence of the
research in an executive summary which I'll focus on.
Before I do that, what I should stress is that this is actual in -person market research.
So this is conducted with boots on the ground at the particular site interviewing real customers
as they come and go and what you'll see is that that process took place between the 24th
and 28th of March this year.
That's on page 124 of members' papers.
In terms of the methodology, there's some 374 customers who were interviewed, but they
always do a situation where it's a random sample size, so it's a one hit, one miss type
scenario, so they don't advertise everyone that's going in and out, sorry, they don't
research with everyone that's going in and out, they will ask someone questions and if
they've asked that person, they won't ask the next person.
The idea is to create a randomised sample size so that if they returned at any other
time, they would get the same results.
Turning to the crux of the matter, they identified a core population of interest.
That population of interest to be deemed local had to reside within one mile.
There was some 24 .1 % of persons interviewed were there.
From that population of interest, a recognisable number, some 34 .3 % of persons, believed that
they would be materially disadvantaged should they not be able to use that facility.
and that in essence in my view meets the statutory test. A couple of other just
points that to point out from the papers that you have before you whilst we're
taking a locality at one mile which is fairly standard in these situations when
you look at the postcode data contained in page 130 of the report actually the
average travel distance for that population of interest is much tighter
it's much more local at 0 .4 miles and then when you look at the question of
material disadvantage, what Taylor -McKenzie helpfully do is they record that open -ended
questions at page 145 of members papers which tell you why people feel there would be disadvantage
and typically it's around convenience, it's the closest one, it's on my way to and from
work or home etc. So it gives you an idea of what people say. So it would be my preliminary
submission that the market research does in fact meet the test and as I say I'm heartened
that I'm not necessarily in disagreement with the LSO on that point.
Turning then, if I may, to the merits of the application.
We have one public objection which somewhat confused us.
And I say us, I mean the principal agents, myself and Louise more importantly.
She's been with the company and at this site for 11 years.
She's worked both in the main store and in the petrol filling station.
The first thing she said to me was she can never remember any community complaints
being fed back to store management about any aspect of the store it is very well
run and seems to be well received. The second thing is in relation to the
specific complaint about access and egress via the path from Glenay Gardens
that really would be only applicable to the main store because you would have to
go up the path into sort of the main store and then back out onto the High Street
to come to the petrol filling station there's not a sort of direct route
without bypassing the store and we did wonder whether there was some
confusion I don't know if the objectors online or in person about the
application being for the petrol filling store as opposed to the actual site
itself and for the points of doubt, as I don't believe they've any right to close
that path, they would never dream of it, it's a well -used path, it's a cut through
for people coming from there going to local schools and so on and so forth but
we do wonder if there's a slight conflation between the petrol filling
station and the Mayan Asda and again that's perhaps heightened by the fact
that there's talk of thefts etc. thefts of alcohol. We've never sold alcohol, we're
here looking for a new licence so they couldn't be stealing it from the petrol
filling station. So I'm not really sure what I can make of the objection but
suffice to say you know it's been noted as I've said they've not had any
complaints and they monitor stock losses. We can say there's never any thefts from
the store but certainly they're not out with the sort of parameters that they
see elsewhere. It's all risk assessed. In terms of the actual application itself
I described it as a small ancillary offer. It's very small indeed the proposal before you is only 2 .7 metres squared
You'll see from the layout plans
It should be at page 117 of your papers that and it's right beside the tell so it's under direct supervision
be a small selection of chilled alcohol to be a small selection of an
Ambient alcohol and it's away from the door
So as I say right by the till obviously the pet filling station is fully covered by state -of -the -art CCTV
Inside and out and they have detailed staff training programmes in place
They have the state -of -the -art till systems which recognise age restricted products don't allow you to sell certain products like this the statutory hours
Etc. They all tie in with the CCTV systems. So individual transactions can be reviewed based on the total receipts
you can go back and cheque the CCTV. The full weight of ASDA's company training
policies and procedures would be in place here so in addition to things like
Challenge 25, electronic refusals logs etc at least two personal licence holders
associated with this store, probably three, and there's also ASDA pride
themselves on engaging external test purchasing at which for the avoidance of
any doubt and for the benefit of police colleagues in attendance isn't under 18
It is an external test purchasing company that sends in people over the age of 18 but
who look clearly under the age of 25 in order to audit the Challenge 25.
They wouldn't be allowed to use miners but that's a reserve for the police.
Ultimately this is all about securing the viability of these petrol filling stations
going forward.
It is a very important strategic strand as the bow in bringing in convenience to these.
And also as we discussed with the Harrington retail park, it does serve a slightly different customer demand.
Some people don't want to have to go in if they're picking up only a small number of items and engage around the larger stores.
When people are doing what I've described as a big shop, they want to be able to come in, kill two birds with one stone, fill up their car, grab a pizza, some kitchen roll and if possible maybe a cold beer and take that back in a convenient manner.
We do have the objection but we have no concerns raised by any other statutory
consultee or any other party and on that basis I'd commend the application to you
and ask you to grant the application subject of course to any questions for
me or Louise. Thank you.
I note that we have the objector online and I'd like to invite them in for comments to the board.
Mr Anderson.
Yes, can you hear me okay?
We can, thank you.
Yes, great.
MR RONALD S ANDERSON - 0:54:08
I will keep this short.
I think that East Lothian Council and ASDA have both had a number of huge years of objections
to the way they carry out their business and the access through a community is just unacceptable
now.
every year it seems to get worse. And I think that East Lothian Council should be made aware
of the fact that it's just going down that street that one day something terrible is
going to happen. This access to the council to Asdas should be closed from Greny Gardens
to Asdas. And it won't affect Asdas' business in any way, any matter. In fact, it will increase
their security and make things better for them. That is basically all my objections
in a nutshell there.
Mr Anderson, thank you. I am going to ask my colleagues now if they have any questions either
for the applicant or for yourself. So if you stay online, I am going to just ask colleagues if they
like to ask any questions. Councillor Minnis is going to lead off with questions. I've got one
quick one for yourself Mr Anderson. So as a Tranent resident, if you were being asked about ASDA
and asked if that was your local convenience store, can you just tell me, do you consider
the store or the petrol station when somebody would ask you that? Both, you know, because
sometimes the queues in Asbury because they don't want to pay the staff can be
huge so sometimes if you just want a packet of crisps or something you just go to the
petrol station it's easier you know. Would you go to the petrol station if you wanted like a
packet of bacon and half a dozen rolls? Absolutely yes of course if they sold it
but they don't do it. Thank you Mr Anderson. Thank you.
My question is also for you Mr. Anderson. We are going to let Councillor Gilbert come in. He may have the same question.
Councillor Gilbert, Neil.
Thank you chair. I have a couple of questions for the applicant.
Are you able to provide the board with your sales figures, just rough percentages and income levels between the sale of fuel and the sale of groceries?
I'm just going to take instructions on that, thank you.
So I have a line for my rather rusty mental arithmetic.
I'm not going to specify the exact figures for commercial reasons but we're looking at
something in the region of 12 .5 to 15 % is grocery and then in terms of
cash value not in terms of numbers of transactions the remainder would be fuel.
Okay thank you for that and my second question is for reading the report am I
correct in saying that the market research identified absolutely no one
that uses the premises as their principal source of groceries? Absolutely
correct on that and as I think I very candidly admitted in my introduction to
the report the very curious test is that to meet what the Act and the Court of
Session have said it is either and principal source of groceries or
principal source of fuel and in my experience to meet that such a test it
is almost exclusively a fuel reliance that meets that test there need not be
any reliance on it for groceries at all as is the way the law works as curious
as it may sound. Okay thank you chair there's some of my questions.
Sorry microphone on. Councillor Meeus you may have a question for the applicant. I should have carried on after Mr. Anderson but that was my mistake.
So we've had a really great presentation and I want to thank you for that. Just wanted to ask where are we in the transition towards it becoming a convenience store?
I use the store weekly, it's not a convenience store.
Currently it's a petrol station, so where are we in that transition?
It hinges on the grant of the licence, so ultimately in terms of that there would be
the need to remodel the store in order to incorporate the alcohol and then it would
be a case of bringing in the relevant SKUs that would support that and create that more
convenience less petrol store feel to it.
It has been branded and again you'll have a much better local knowledge as an ASDA for
number of years but as part of this overall ruling programme this is the point
where they've got to where they're looking at emphasising that more
convenient software. In terms of footprint, the size of the stores
varies greatly and again just by way of comparison you've got the one that's
stone stone roughly from here, bigger footprint has you know a food to go
element etc in it and those types of things aren't available everywhere but
it is a case of trying to build out those skews and build a more rounded
convenience offer with a small 2 .7 metre square in this case, alcohol as in silvery.
Thank you and I was really, I was heartened to hear you say about the test. I think actually
here the test has been met. I think for me the issue is the legislation around the test is very
poor given we've got a jet petrol station that also sells alcohol within a mile of the ASDA one
But what I wanted to come around with on the questions that were asked were people made clear when you're talking about ASDA
and talking about the convenience store that they meant the petrol station and not the store.
Because if I was asked as a resident who uses it every week if someone said is this your primary use for shopping
I'd probably say yeah but I don't mean the petrol station because unless I want to buy a double decker and a can of coke
I'm going to the store nothing else is available in there.
Yes indeed and I should have perhaps mentioned this. I've lost the members pages so the pagination I'm going to refer to now is the small pagination on the bottom right hand of the actual report.
But all of the questions are produced in full so you can see that. The way in which the survey works is it's very clear and indeed don't just take my word for it, the actual research itself for Councillor Gilbert's question makes it clear that no one saw this as their principal source of grocery.
and that reliance was demonstrated in relation to the reliance on fuel.
The way it actually works in practise is what they're looking to do is they interview, as
I say, on a one -stop, one -miss type basis.
So if I was to stop you in an interview, I'd go through the questions as they're set out
in the report.
In order for you to continue through to the next round of questioning, you need to meet
the criteria that's required.
So if for example I said to you question number two, how far do you live from the store?
And you say well actually I'm just travelling through Tranent to go to Edinburgh
I'm from Edinburgh
Then we would thank you for your time because you wouldn't then be relevant for the purposes of this you'd still be recorded as an
Interviewee, but you wouldn't be part of that population of interest because you're not a local resident
So actually the people that get the whole way through it and the people that created that published of interest the
24 point whatever it was percent. They are people that have answered the
answers to the question which put them in the population of interest then it
goes through and asks them about their reliance whether it's grocery or fuel if
it was neither they say well actually we actually prefer the jet then they
wouldn't be reliant on fuel at all and move on and so on and so forth so that's
the process it goes through it's absolutely in my view crystal clear what
they're being asked and why and then whenever they give an answer which is
not for the purposes of the test it's all recorded so you get the correct
percentages but we don't ask them to stay and answer the rest of the
question asked there'd be no point. So when you were talking about thefts and you
said it was a relatively low number again are we talking about theft from the
petrol station or theft from the main store? I actually asked Louise about both
because her background issues worked in both. Unfortunately all retailers will
attest that shoplifting is a problem but but ultimately in terms of those sort of
limits and again you'll appreciate that some of the the commercial speaker
around tolerable levels and all of that. But it is within what they would expect.
It's not a particularly high number which causes any concern. The risk
assessment that as they would do either for a convenience store or for a main
store would mean that if it got to a level where they were concerned they
would enhance that security for example store of security guards etc and they're
not at that stage for this one as I understand it. Okay that surprises me
because after I tested what Mr. Anderson said if you go along to the end of that
path any day of the week, any time of the day, you will find a drug user selling
alcohol that's come directly from the store, including the first two gardens
are like a mini mart unfortunately and that I'm not saying that by any pride at
all, it's the reality so I'm wondering if there's an under reporting of
thefts from the main store or if it's just not being captured in the figures?
I don't know the answer to that I suppose without wishing to digress too
much into the main store certainly when I've dealt with the configuration of any
of the petrol filling stations what they're always very good at is obviously
the main store does suffer generally speaking from a much larger footprint
the alcohol could be much further away from the tills more space to cover less
you know if you like people per square metre supervising it I think the
heartening thing I hope for members when considering this application is the
location of the alcohol right at the till so that it is directly under the
supervision of the staff that are there constantly on the till. So if you look at the plan as
I said, I think it's page 117 in your papers, the red box is right in front of where the
staff will be standing. So not only do you have the benefit of the CCTV as a deterrent,
you actually have staff being able to see who's left in water from a fridge.
As they're going to remove the glass that's currently, well I think it's perspex or something
that's currently there because I know there's usually one member of the staff but they're
fully enclosed, a belief for the loan security. So is that going to be opened up so that there's
... if I was a shoplifter and I'm walking in and someone is basically encaged in perspex
then they are no threat, they're not going to stop me. And shoplifters are generally
not put off by CCTV as Tranet folks will show you.
I'll take away from it. I think the difficulty is when we're talking about the staff supervision
there is a fine line between the deterrence of AHCCTV and supervising staff and I totally
take the point there will be some people who will not care a jot about either. I suppose
as they have their own views on as and when staff should potentially put themselves in
physical harm's way by challenging and what I can say without hopefully saying something
which gets me into any trouble of supporting the press is they would prefer staff to be
safe than for example any sort of stock loss. I'll leave it there because I don't want that
to be reported in any way in the press that is a negative.
But I think the primary concern will always be
for staff safety as opposed to the loss
of a particular item, whether that be alcohol
or any other high value item like meat.
Thank you.
Thank you, Joe.
Thank you both.
Mr. Anderson, Ronnie, if you're still with us.
Yes, yes.
I just wanted to be clear from what you said
from what I've read on page 131 in a package of papers, you are really objecting to the path
and not to anything around the application for the petrol station and liquor?
The path is the main problem. The path is bad for us as security, it is bad for the local residents
and it's closed and it doesn't make any difference.
But the main thing is, I mean,
people would even go to the petrol station and buy beer,
they often come up to Glenay Gardens and Conga Green
and drink it and the local residents have it.
And I'm not sure where you live
and what your environment is,
but these days, if you say anything to young kids,
you're in trouble.
Thank you. I've got lots of experience and am very proud of having gone to school at
Ross High and shopping in Asda and even remembering when it was Dud Baxter's yard, but that's
taking it away back into previous centuries. So just thank you for that. I don't think
there are any more questions at this stage, so can we move on to hearing from LSO employees
Hopefully Scotland will have any comments on this application.
No comments.
I will take any questions at the rise.
Police Representative - 1:07:27
Clerk to the Licensing Board - 1:07:28
Thank you and our LSO.
Thank you.
Licensing Standards Officer - 1:07:39
Niall has covered much of my report for me so I will keep this brief.
But yes, having reviewed the information that was given in terms of the survey, it does
show that the test is met essentially on the fuel element, not the grocery element has
been described.
Just for the board's information, I have given a breakdown of all the premises that are within
800 metres of that premises as per board policy.
But I have no further comment in relation to the application.
John McMillan - Councillor - 1:08:07
Any questions for police or for LSO?
Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor - 1:08:13
Just one for the police and it would be if you have any numbers of the reports of thefts or reports of antisocial behaviour that have begun because of a theft or around the store?
Police Representative - 1:08:30
I have not got specific figures in front of me. In my role over the past year I monitor
any calls that come into licenced premises daily as does certainly features but off the
top of my head it's not one that draws a lot of attention from me in that I'm not seeing
it day by day, week by week. Does that answer your question?
Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor - 1:08:50
John McMillan - Councillor - 1:08:51
It does. Thank you.
Thank you. I don't think Fiona or Neil are looking to come in on this and I have no questions so please could we move to any comments on this application?
Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor - 1:09:05
Leanne, Councillor Miele.
Thank you, Provost. I'm happy to come in first and as a local member I know Fiona is too. I think this one's particularly important to me.
and I think Niall and I have been in a meeting before
and it won't be the first time that we're going to be on opposing sides of this one.
I'm minded against this application
and it's not because I don't think that the company is very deserving
and it's not because I don't think the staff do a great job.
I wouldn't be a repeat customer if I thought either of those.
I understand fully that they've met the test.
I think the legislation around that test is weak
and I'm keeping that as polite as I can.
I think people are not seeing that as a convenience store
and I get that there's a transition and we're not there yet,
but it's a petrol station, and it's a petrol station
which is 100 metres from the door of the main store.
The main store, and I say this as a shopper there,
is poorly staffed at most times.
We rely on schools or self -checkouts all the time.
The staff are under a lot of stress and that's visible stress. When there's shoplifters in there, they're well known.
They're well known to most of us within Tranent, let alone the staff in there.
You can see the stress levels rising, you can see that they don't have the ability, the means or the backup to deal with that.
And having worked in a shop, I get that. It's a terrible place to be.
I think this opening alcohol in the petrol station just across the forecourt is going
to literally have them where they open a door, they walk in, they fill their boots with whatever
they want, they walk back out again, not a care in the barn.
For me it's not keeping our community safe, it's not giving us that community safety that
we must meet as part of our five objectives and for that reason I can't
John McMillan - Councillor - 1:11:07
support the application. Thank you. I'm going to move to Councillor Dilbert then
Councillor Dugdale. Yes thank you chair. I'm basically going to fully agree with
what Councillor Minnis already said and I'll keep my comment fairly brief and
to me the premises are not yet operating as a convenience store and if we were to
grant a licence today we would effectively be granting it to what is
currently a fuel station which to my understanding is an excluded premises
for these purposes and for that reason and that reason is the main one I am not
Gilbert, Neil - 1:11:47
John McMillan - Councillor - 1:11:49
minded to grant a licence at this stage. Thank you Neil. Fiona, Councillor Dugdale.
Dugdale, Fiona - 1:11:51
Thank you, thank you. I've listened to the presentations and the questions and the
answers. I was looking carefully at the research findings and I know that the act is strange
and how it determines this, but I can see that the test that has been set through the
act has been made by this. I've also heard about the transition to this being a convenience
store and I'm not clear that issues with anything surrounding that would impact my decision
on this particular application. So what was also reassuring for me was the
location of the alcohol at really close site of the people who are working
there and on the basis of those three pieces of evidence that have been
presented to me today I would support this application. Thank you.
John McMillan - Councillor - 1:12:53
Thank you. Neil, I think you presented really well and really fairly. I've noted your comments
and it's slightly more diplomatic than Councillor Bruce who was the previous chair, that this
is an odd test and there are questions about the legislation. I think when we look at absolute
use and material use and need, I have some concerns about the market research in terms
of living within a mile, the number of people that use it and whether it's material. I think
there is no doubt that the material use for fuel is there and you can you've
convinced us with facts of it twelve and a half percent I'm concerned about the
path and I think there are different means that's not for me it's not
necessarily a licencing issue but it's one hope with local members and there
two on this board that we will look at in terms of safety. However, given the
proximity of the main store and given the concerns that I've heard from local
members, I am minded not to grant this in terms of safety, community well -being and
I think that the test is one that leads me to believe that legislation is not sufficient,
is not well drafted and needs to be looked at.
We have that store in close proximity.
I enjoy visiting it.
I think it is easy to do it.
I do feel conflicted about this because I enjoy my French holidays as people know
and the liberal attitude there when we see alcohol, wine, food and drink displayed together
I welcome that, but here in this specific location I don't think there is a material need
Therefore I'm going to vote not to grant the application.
I hope my grounds are clear enough.
Given that we have already expressed our intention, I think we just need to move directly to the
vote.
So I'm going to ask for the roll call vote.
Linda Gillie - Clerk - 1:15:38
This is the roll call vote for the provisional premises licence for Alstor Express in Tranent.
Councillor Dugdale and Grant Councillor Gilbert refuse
Councillor Macmillan refuse Councillor Menzies refuse that application is refused on a
Gilbert, Neil - 1:16:03
vote of three to one obliged thank you honours it's incumbent upon me as the
agent on behalf of the principles to ask for two things whether you'd be minded
to grant the direction generally as your clerk will advise there's a prohibition
on reapplying for the same premises within the period of one year unless at the hearing
you agree to grant the direction to the applicant, we would allow them to forego that one year
period and then the second thing obviously for the purposes of reporting back to the
principal agents I would be grateful if you would note a request for a statement of reasons
in relation to the grounds for refusal.
John McMillan - Councillor - 1:16:41
I think on the second one we will clearly present that but I just wanted to be clear
about your first request.
Clerk to the Licensing Board - 1:16:48
So just Mr. Hazard is requesting
almost a forgiveness in terms of coming forward earlier
within a year's period.
So I'm going to make an assumption
that Mr. Hazard can confirm.
The part of that is because they've heard
what the board have said and they may come forward
with some changes in terms of the application and present something
slightly different to the board albeit not potentially materially different to
what was there for the board to consider. It's good governance from the board's
perspective and to have their decisions upheld for a period of time unless
there's a substantial change but I suspect and I might let Mr. Hazard
provide more reason for that but I suspect that is something he can take
back with his client and consider whether small changes or more detail and
around what was being proposed and could come forward to the board for further
Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor - 1:17:55
consideration would you like to respond and then I'll bring in council me yes
External Representative - 1:18:01
yes certainly one of the things that I'd noted in relation to the members
comments and discussion around this was the state of transition from petrol
filling station to convenience. Now I'm not close enough to the store rollout
programme to know exactly when that would have been scheduled for obviously
contingent on the alcohol licence but working around about the other way
around if ASDA were looking to fast forward or make those changes within the
next year it would seem a shame if they couldn't have the opportunity to come
Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor - 1:18:29
back having made those changes to address some of the concerns with an
application and that was my reason for seeking the direction and clearly as mr.
Grilly's pointed out and there is the materiality element of it but by seeking
the direction it removes any debarring around that and that would really be it
they certainly wouldn't be bombarding your honours with simply application
after application unless something had changed thank you and I should have
noted in my comment that whole point about convenience that you very clearly
John McMillan - Councillor - 1:18:57
made and the convenience of having that store in proximity but if you were maybe
Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor - 1:19:05
materially changing. I think I'd like to hear what colleagues think.
Councillor Minnis.
Yeah so for me and I have raised it and I'm quite open about it.
It's not a convenience store at present but that wasn't my the basis on my
decision. My decision and again the test that was made I accept it but I don't
think that the legislation is right and that for is skewed but my decision has
been made on the fact that I believe we would be putting the public in general and staff
at risk by allowing alcohol to be sold within that area. There is already an alcohol sales
outlet less than 100 metres walk away on the same site with ASDA so that wouldn't be a
change for me if it already had the cough machines and it was all bells and whistles.
my opinion on should can we guarantee community safety would rely on a
security guard going in and or additional safety measures not
John McMillan - Councillor - 1:20:07
necessarily more offers of stock. Thank you does anyone else want to come in?
Sorry just looking at my board I don't see anyone else looking to come in. Fiona?
Dugdale, Fiona - 1:20:22
John, could you clarify the question again, please?
I'm just going to ask the clerk to make it very precise.
But I think what Neil is asking is that if ASDA were to come back earlier than the normal
year with material changes, would we be prepared to allow them to do that?
Clerk to the Licensing Board - 1:20:58
Neil. Can I come in? I think what Mr. Hazard had asked was for permission to come in with an application within a year in which they've made changes which may or may not be material to it.
if there was a material change it could come forward anyway in terms of, the board could consider that if there was a substantial material change to the premises
this is where there's maybe some changes but they may not be, potentially might not be considered material
and the direction here is to take away any argument at the time as to what materiality bar would be
so that the application could come to the board for consideration within the time.
And just noting as it's the 27th of August today, Mr Hazard wouldn't be able to bring something forward
until the next year's time in terms of that.
So you'd be looking at, there might be a bit of a debate over whether it would be the board for in August
but it would certainly be before the September board if there was a substantial change or
an application.
This would be to bring something forward earlier before that board.
Thank you.
Fiona, are you clear?
John McMillan - Councillor - 1:22:13
Any further questions?
I have no further questions.
I would support an application, listening to a further application before that one year
period has passed if that were to be submitted. So that would be my view.
Thank you. And I would be feeling the same that if you had ideas and I don't want to
propose solutions, you've heard Councillor Mieus's view, you've heard the support generally
of Councillor Dugdale to the application, but I think you've heard the real concerns
that have been expressed around market research, around the legislation, however that might
go.
But I certainly would want to, in the sense of supporting a local business that employs
local people, that could create a convenience store that is truly a convenience store, if
we were having evidence of that and you had proposals, then I think that would be worthy
of consideration.
so I don't know how we word this but I think if if Councillor Gilbert
Neal if you've no comments on this I'm going to ask our clerk just to confirm
that the statement of reasons will will be provided as requested but I think
there is a proposal from Councillor Dugdale by myself that we would be prepared
or two of us at least would be prepared to hear a proposal within the year.
Gilbert, Neil - 1:23:59
Would you like just to confirm where we're going to vote?
Yeah just to cover off the statement of reasons point first and then come back into the vote
Mr Hazard, we've heard that in terms of legislation we need to provide you with a statement of
reasons on request so that will come forward and within the time frame set out.
In terms of the other point, if we can ask the clerk to put a vote and then we can have
a clear determination from the board.
So this is a vote on whether an application would be permitted before the
the year's period was up.
Councillor Dugdale. Thanks yes I would be prepared to hear an application before
the year was up thank you councillor Gilbert no refuse
councillor McMillan and I would support and councilman Z's so we have a tight
vote again it's over to me and I do think for the reasons I gave earlier in
terms of business and convenience and, you know, looking at the legislation and the market
John McMillan - Councillor - 1:25:26
research, I'd certainly like it to be tighter.
But if you were coming forward with a second application, I'm going to take the decision
that the board would hear it before next August.
Thank you.
External Representative - 1:25:42
Thank you very much.
Clerk to the Licensing Board - 1:25:45
Thank you.
Thank you again.
We will move to our next business.
John McMillan - Councillor - 1:26:00
Mr Anderson, thank you for coming in.
We will deal with your comments around the path and the issues there under separate acts
within the council. Thank you very much.
We're going to ask you to log off.
Could I be kept up to date with it?
Sorry?
Could I be kept up to date with it?
Yes, we certainly will.
And the local members and myself will deal with that.
Thank you very much.
I have comments with you. I didn't mean to offend you about your situation as to what you were living or that sort of thing.
It was just a...
No offence heard or taken.
So thank you very much for coming along.
Clerk to the Licensing Board - 1:26:41
Thank you we're going to move on if you log out thank you thank you let's move
to next business. Thank you taking us to the next item which is item five major

4. i) Major Variation - Dunglass Pavillion, Dunglass, Cockburnspath TD13 5XF

variation for Dunglass pavilion Dunglass Coburns path TD 13 5 XF and we have Mr.
McDonald acting for the applicant and ask Mr. McDonald if he wants to say some
words and support of the application and introduce this client.
External Representative - 1:27:17
Good morning convener, Councillors, Alison McDonald at McDonald Licencing.
Sitting next to me is Marie White, the business manager of Dun Glass.
I'm also accompanied by Joyce Usher, one of the directors of the premises licence holder
who is sitting in the public area. Marie as a business manager is really involved
in the day -to -day operation of the premises so we thought it more
appropriate for Marie to come up but obviously either will be happy to
answer any any questions. This is Dunglasses State which is a major events
venue, Your Honours. They do over 50 weddings per year and various other
Events as well. They are looking to add another facility to their licence namely
Markets, they would like to be able to have some markets
and as was pointed out to
To them by your LSO. This would need to be added to
The premises licence so we are adding markets as an additional activity
It may be that some of these market stalls might be specialist whiskey or
out our beer stalls so we've added off sales as well. That is the gist of the
application. Your papers would indicate that the police have no adverse comments
and nor your LSO. There are no objections by members of the public so I will just
stop my presentation there but obviously we are more than happy to answer any
Clerk to the Licensing Board - 1:29:02
questions that the board members may have. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. McDonald can I ask
Police Representative - 1:29:08
please Scotland if you've got any further comments. No comments to make.
Licensing Standards Officer - 1:29:10
Thank you. No issues with what is proposed and I've received no complaints
John McMillan - Councillor - 1:29:22
about the premises. Thank you Mr. McDonald as always thank you. I'm going to invite
colleagues for any questions and I'm not seeing anyone coming in so I'm gonna
Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor - 1:29:39
move directly to comments anyone like to comment on this application we on can
something is I think I'm just gonna link a comment and their previous application
that was it was a different divider it was new hills I think seeing this spread
of getting small traders in and producers in across East Lothian is a positive one.
I think it allows us to sell ourselves far better than we have done previously and it's
something I really welcome. So I would be minded to support the application and wish
you all the best with it and look forward to Christmas markets. I do like a Christmas
market.
John McMillan - Councillor - 1:30:09
I often realise that I've got many roles in this council and I try to keep them separate
and objective.
I agree with Councillor Minnis, we set out in our economic strategy over 13 years ago
to be Scotland's leading coastal leisure and food and drink destination.
I'm very proud of that ambition.
I think in many ways we can claim it with the work that we do.
I think that granting this licence enables you to grow your business, it enables you
to promote East Lorian food and drink and I hope that that will happen.
I think the application is, as you pointed out Mr Donald, well presented but also pointed
out that it's supported by our own licencing standards and police.
So I am also happy to grant and again wish you well and I think with that and not seeing anyone else
Coming in. I think we just move quickly to the to the roll call vote
Linda Gillie - Clerk - 1:31:23
This is the roll call vote for the major variation application from Dunglass pavilion
councillor Dugdale
Happy to support councillor Gilbert
grant
Gilbert, Neil - 1:31:40
John McMillan - Councillor - 1:31:47
I think also thanks to our licencing team as well for putting these papers together
which made our work and decision making very easy.
Thanks to you.
External Representative - 1:31:55
We're going to move on to our next business, please.
Thank you.

4. iii) Major Variation - Papple Steading, Haddington EH41 4QD

Clerk to the Licensing Board - 1:31:58
Item number five, which is major variation, Papelstetting, Haddington, we have Mr. Hazard
as agent for the applicants and I believe we've got Verity Sinclair, Harry McIntosh
and George McIntosh here for the applicants in person.
Sorry, apologies for interrupting but I think just to get you comfortable we might need
you to move two of you along to your right.
Otherwise you're sharing the mics.
Yeah, it's just to have a microphone each.
Just our ever efficient clerks want us to run smoothly so apologies for interrupting
But maybe if we're all sitting with microphones that will make life easier.
Thank you.
Carol, apologies.
No, thank you.
We also have three objectors.
One is not requested to speak.
And we have one in person and we have one online.
And we'll ask the applicant and the agent to come forward with support of their application
and then go to the objector as you said earlier then our LSOs and police respectively.
I'll just quickly say Mr Hazard did get in touch with myself earlier and me have a direction
that he wants to put forward before introducing the application proper.
External Representative - 1:33:37
Yes, thank you Mr Gurley.
Again I appear and for the record I'm appearing as agent again this time for Mr Burness Paul
who weren't able to make it today. George is on my right and his wife
Arie is on my extreme right and on my left is Verity Sinclair who's named as
the DPM on the licence. The preliminary matter that Mr. Gillie's referred to I
hope is one which won't vex you too much. It's a small amendment to the
application scope to simply include reference to the ability to host markets.
As Mr. Gillie and I discussed it's a bit of a technical amendment and it
comes about as a result of paragraph 40 of Your Honours'
statement of licencing policy, which
specifies that you would very much like any premises that
wishes to do markets and holds an alcohol
licence to have that noted.
It no way cuts across the requirement
to obtain a market operator's licence
under the Civic Government Scotland Act, which
is a completely separate process.
So in terms of this, I hope I'm not stretching it too far
to suggest it's a tidy up amendment as opposed
to substantive amendment.
because even if your honours reminded to grant the reference to markets which I
would suggest would go in q5f of the operating plan and mr. really and
colleagues within the council would still have to determine individual
market operators licences it just means that at with looking forward there is a
planned market for transparency at the end of September it means looking
forward we wouldn't end up in a rather unfortunate situation where there's a
potential conflict between the terms of the premises licence because it omits it
and then a licence which your Honours as Council would be asked to grant under the Civic Scotland Act.
So it was just to add that in and I hope as I say, given the comfort around the market operators licence application,
Clerk to the Licensing Board - 1:35:24
it isn't a big departure from what's been applied for.
Thank you.
As a comment following Mr Hazard, I've just confirmed that what he's put forward is correct.
I would consider there wouldn't be any formal prejudice to including this in notwithstanding had been included originally on the licence
primarily because the market operator licence sits under the civic government Scotland that in 1982
legislation and would have to be applied for separately and its own so any objectors would then get the opportunity to put forward comments that
on the market operation
itself and I would if members are reminded to include that I would ask if
that could be proposed and seconded and could be taken through at the end of
Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor - 1:36:17
this matter as a amendment to the policy.
Councillor Migno.
It was just for full transparency. What sort of level of
objectors or what level would consultation go out to to seek views?
because I wouldn't and it's for transparency I'm thinking if I was
looking online and I had perhaps had an objection I want to make sure that it's
not being skirted over I want to make sure that there's full consideration and
because this is new and hasn't been cited to them that they have that
Clerk to the Licensing Board - 1:36:47
opportunity. Yes in terms of in terms of the proposal put forward by Mr.
Hazard and there would be the inclusion of this on the operating plan as
something that could be provided on the premises.
However, the full consultation for the market operator,
if this temporary one is successful,
my understanding from conversations with Mr Hazard
is that the applicant may consider putting forward
a three year piece which would have to be fully consulted on
and considered in light of that process.
Thank you.
I think there is still that question.
John McMillan - Councillor - 1:37:30
Are we happy to note this and to include it in our vote at the end of this application?
I am happy to note this and we will go on that basis.
Thank you.
Back to you.
Clerk to the Licensing Board - 1:37:46
External Representative - 1:37:51
Mr Hazard, do you want to introduce your clients properly?
Yes indeed.
So as I say on my immediate right is George. Let's call him the inspiration
behind the venue. On my extreme right is Eri who is George's wife and also
oversees the wine side of the business and we'll touch on that in a bit and
then from a day -to -day operational point of view and a day -to -day supervision
point of view of Verity on my left. In terms of my submission I plan to give
you a little bit of an overview albeit I appreciate in some respects I may be
preaching to the congregation just to remind you of what the venue is all
about. Then to touch on the application and I'll probably knit that together
with comments on the objections at that point and then obviously offer any and
or answer any questions you may have. I'd also like for obvious reasons to let
George come in at one point and I'll bring him in so he can give you a little
bit of a flavour as to where things set you know very much from the coal face.
So the roots of papal steading are tied directly back into 19th century
agricultural improvement movement in Scotland and building
state back to the 1860s and the Grade B listed farmsteading was part of a
working estate. Papel was designed as a model farm which at the time was
state -of -the -art agriculture. It was engineered to pioneer and showcase
progressive farming techniques so it has a very significant history and it became
one of Britain's finest examples of its kind and really did drive forward
agricultural advancements. Sadly in the 20th century the complex fell out of
commercial agricultural use and was sitting derelict but for George's
inspiration it was there as a bit of an eyesore I think. It was neglected for
decades until it was purchased for conservation purposes. What Mr.
McIntosh has ultimately sought to do is what I would describe as a spectacular
It's a meticulous multi -million pound restoration. I had the benefit of a site visit and was
truly blown away by it. Taking buildings that were unlivable and converting them into very
high -end, partly self -catering holiday accommodation, but also then the steadying and the hospitality
spaces and the gallery and the library. And if you've had the opportunity to go, I think
you'll share my view that it has been done to an absolutely fantastic standard.
So in terms of the project and we'll get more of this from from George, I don't want to steal his thunder,
these historic farm buildings are really a multifaceted lifestyle, surrounding rural lifestyle, an arts destination,
George will touch on the gallery, etc. But as you walk through the stables, etc.
It has that authentic agricultural character that's there and it really is a glimpse into the past.
Very generally speaking we've got the granary and the farmhouse, they're the
luxury self catering accommodation, the cattle court which is now Eves Court
where I enjoyed a coffee and had a nice look around. It's a refined cafe
restaurant, all the products locally sourced, that's very central to what they
do and then you've got the stables which incorporates the element of history, the
library and everything else. Beyond that you've got 24 acre estate which again is
being revitalised and you've got wildflower meadows and ancient woodland
walks. I can't do the justice it requires so at this point I'm just going to ask
George just to sort of give you an update because members will have had, some
members will have had the submission back in 2024 with the provisional but
George will bring you bang up the speed. Over to you George.
External Representative - 1:41:24
Thank you very much. I'll be brief. You were alluding to what we call art and
agriculture, it's a mix of agricultural heritage and contemporary art, with comfortable accommodation,
good food locally sourced wherever possible, and wine. We'll come back to the wine.
I just want to just run through the sorts of activities that have been going on at PAPL
since we've become properly licenced premises. Just to run through these meetings of the
University of the Third Age. Wine tastings, a series of wine tastings actually with a
master of wine. East Lothian antiquarians have been frequent visitors and a very large
meeting with I think eight years old people recently. Shakespearean theatre, the Soil
Association and I might just mention in passing that the founder of the Soil Association,
A lady called Eve Balfour was brought up on the same estate.
We've had the Scottish Chamber Orchestra perform at Papelstedding.
We had our own grand opening with a number, as the Provost alluded to, of VIPs.
We've had various wellbeing retreats and then of course family reunions of all shapes and
sizes and generations.
We've also been very impressed and possibly even overwhelmed with the neighbourhood support.
There are few neighbours who haven't been and they've enjoyed coffees, they've enjoyed meals or private functions.
A man the other day who was a lorry driver, his father was a farm worker near MacMary,
He came in, he didn't even buy a cup of coffee, but he went to the library to read storeys
about agricultural history.
So that's a neighbourhood mention there, but our guests over the past few months have included
people from China, Sweden, as I speak actually there's a Swedish party, Papel, Australia,
the United States, around the UK, and as far away as Haddington are people who have come
and stayed, not just visited.
Also, we've had a number of accolades.
And these are quite independent accolades from food critics
and from travel journalists.
And you can find them online in The Scotsman,
describing Eves Court as certainly the best
new restaurant in East Lothian.
The Times, both from a food point of view,
a very critical and very positive review in the times.
And then we've even appeared on the Beech Grove Garden
as a place that might be recognised for what it's
doing in terms of biodiversity.
Along the way, and I'm talking specifically since January,
we've had no issues, no traffic problems,
no complaints certainly levelled to us about any activity.
I'll touch on one thing and now we'll come on and mention it.
Let's call it a need to include markets.
A few months ago I met with East Lothian Food and Drink
and the idea was hatched that we would find a place to celebrate,
not specifically as a sales market, but we'd find a place to celebrate this
county's food and drink products. At least two -thirds food, probably less than
one -third drink. We'd find a place. And I thought, no better place, slightly not
terribly independently thinking, but Papel would be that place. So we had, and
we build, it's on the website, so that again total transparency there, East Lothian's
Food and Drink Festival showcasing this county. I'm quite interested in food and drink as
a farmer's son myself, as somebody whose family are very active in food and drink in
other counties, and I think, dare I say, that we are underplaying our ability and it's
to be billed as Scotland's food and drink county but other places are working harder making more
noise so this was our gesture at no particular immediate gain to Papel to host this food and
drink festival showcasing East Lothian and indeed that festival we've already booked. I say we,
this is East Lothian food and drink, have already booked 20 of the available 25 stalls
and that includes people like Burrows and Chocolate Tree, Fidra Gin and so on. So the
names that we know are prominent in East Lothian have already booked. So I just wanted to touch on
that and give you a flavour of what we've been doing over the past six months. Thank you.
Thank you George, I hope that was insightful just to give members a flavour of what actually
has been going on at PAPL. If I may then just turn to the application and the objections
as I say I'm going to weave them together because I think some clarification around
the extent of the application would hopefully provide some comfort. So taking you back,
a provisional premises licence was granted by the board back in August 2024 and that
was because the premises was undergoing construction and conversion so it wasn't fully fledged.
The capacity was circa 200, I think it was 190, based on what was before the board at that stage.
And ultimately for full transparency it included areas which were now applying for again.
And the reason for that was, as again your clerk can confirm, the provisional premises licence is a licence not yet in effect.
In order to bring the licence into effect you need various certificates, building standards, environmental health etc.
and at the point that they wished to bring the licence into effect, some of it wasn't
quite finished. So what ultimately they had to do in order to begin and start the business
as licenced was to exclude certain parts that the board had already granted based on the
provisional that was undergoing construction and conversion to allow the licence to come
into effect. And if you look at the location plan you have in your papers, we've got the
farm steading. Basically it is a lot of the buildings on the right hand side of the farm
steady in the shed and so on and so forth. The library at that side of the
building was elements of the previous application that were removed at
confirmation and we're now seeking to bring back in. What that does in terms of
capacity is that at confirmation the capacity was reduced following the
removal of those areas to 135 and when we look at what the capacity would be
now with the inclusion of those areas we have an internal capacity at a
and I'll touch on this in a second, of 185 and that is 55 in the restaurant cafe.
The gallery, including the ducat, is 40, the stable is 20, the library,
beautiful as it is, only holds at 10 and the shed at a maximum of 60. And across
the two courtyards you have an external capacity of 110 and that's where you get
the number of 295 which is part of the application and as a stress that's
because now the full starting area is effectively fully signed off and ready to operate and
we're seeking to do that. But I think it's important from a transparency point of view,
it was the intention, it was just the timings of the completions of the different things
that meant that effectively we've ended up with a slightly, I think, smaller and perhaps
slightly misleading capacity at the point of confirmation at 135. Turning to the three
objections and very much taking the themes of those objections I think
there's a couple of bits that have been perhaps misinterpreted from the site
notice and because the objections are concerned about a change to the proposed
terminal hour no change to the terminal hours proposed the application is solely
about the reintroduction of these elements that were excluded so there's
no change to what the board granted there's no proposed change to the
conditions externally the terminal hour 10 p .m. the new amplified music and etc
all remains we're not trying to change any of that and as I say in terms of the
increasing of the capacity although it is a jump I hope it's explainable
because actually we're opening up and licencing more of the actual steadying
itself. In terms of the way in which the objections have come forward and I think
it's fair to say George and the team were a bit shocked to hear that there
concerns such as this Verity in her role attends the Dunpendare
Community Council meetings is there as a representative of Papal Stedding and any
concerns she would have hoped would have been communicated to her and as George
said in his introductory piece and his update on the operation thus far that
they don't have any live complaints they don't have any issues don't have any
historic complaints about the operation of the business and in terms of the
and Pender Community Council when I press Verity on this said Papal
occasionally comes up but it's nothing to do with the actual hospitality
operation you know can be discussed traffic and various other ancillary
things but nothing from from a licencing perspective and in terms of the sort of
suggestion that there is a significant and widespread concern within local
community that certainly doesn't register with George and Airey and
that they see the vast majority of the local community as enjoying what they've created
as customers, as people who come over and use the premises and they're very proud of
that.
Turning then I suppose to the character of the premises and these changes.
Ultimately for example you may be in a situation with, subject to the market operators licence
and your honours own vote at the end of this, where you would get a higher volume of people
coming for example for a one -off event like a market type operation.
However the fact that we're seeking to licence the areas and provide the
accurate capacities for them isn't to suggest that you're going to have 295
people at the premises every Friday and Saturday or Monday through Friday or
anything like that. It is simply a reflection of the actual licenced
capacities of this. It is highly unlikely that you would have a situation where
you're going to have the restaurant at full capacity
whilst you've got an event on in the gallery
whilst you've got people in this table
and 10 people sitting around the table at the library.
But ultimately, in terms of the legislation,
for any of the larger events,
we need to set the maximum capacity.
Interesting discussion had about a previous application
for a bowling club, but the way the legislation works,
there is no mechanism to come in
for any temporary uplift in capacity
for any one -off event once it's fixed.
So we have to seek that 295 if indeed there are the odd event throughout the
year that would come anywhere near that and for example those would be those
larger one -off and those events where there is a collaboration with the likes
of East Lothian food and drink. So ultimately I suppose I'll finish
because I think we've given you quite a significant overview of what it is but
with the sentiment that George and Erin and Verity have given me which is the
is very much open. If anyone has any concerns they want to hear about it.
They're heartened by the terms of the LSO report that there's no registered
complaints about the hospitality business. It pretty much accords with
their own views on this but with Verity attending the community council
meetings regularly, please if there is a problem let her know. But ultimately
they very much hope that with the reassurance and the explanation around
what the variation is about some comfort can be given to those that have
concerns. I'm happy to pause there, happy to answer any questions as of course is
George and perhaps you'll have some questions for us after you hear from the
objectors. Thank you.
Clerk to the Licensing Board - 1:54:09
Hi can we bring Alison Croft -Grove in as an objector?
Just went to the speaker. Is it just, yeah,
thank you. Thank you and welcome.
Presenting Officer - 1:54:27
Thank you chair.
My name is Alison Cosco and I'm the vice chair of Dunpenda community council.
You've already received a written submission from us and I would like to take
this opportunity to supplement that statement with a few more points that we
feel need to be made
In the original application that Papel Stedding submitted for a provisional premises licence, the application indicated that it was for 190 people.
There was no stated split between indoors and outdoors.
As far as we can see from that original application, the 190 covered all the intended areas, including those that had not at that time been completed.
At the August 2024 licencing board Verity Sinclair is recorded as saying the 190 was not for one specific area but would be spread over several areas.
And the drawings submitted at the time also suggest that was the case.
In this major variation application we note that Papelsteading is looking to add areas to the licence,
presumably because other areas are now complete and they're looking to have the description updated.
We note that there appears to be an overall increase in the numbers from 190 on sales quoted for a provisional licence
to 295 in this application, an increase of over 55%.
And we also note that this number has been split between internal at 185 and external at 110.
So of the 295, around 37 is for external areas. 37%, sorry.
This seems to more or less tally with the figures on the PAPL website itself.
The reason we want to bring these figures to the fore is that we feel an increase of 55 % is very significant
without there having been an explanation of why the numbers differ so much between the application for provisional and this application.
And we're concerned that 37 % of the new on -sales figure being for external areas raises again
potential issues over noise.
This was something we raised concerns about in August 2024.
And while some conditions were placed regarding alcohol being consumed in outdoor areas, we
feel this needs reassessment.
Let me be clear at this point that we are not suggesting that the clientele of PAPL would deliberately engage in antisocial behaviour.
Rather than 100 plus people, albeit spread across several external areas, may inadvertently cause noise that is a nuisance to local residents.
We do not see sufficient mitigation for this in the operating plan.
We note that as part of one of the planning applications a noise impact assessment was completed in August 2020 and much was made of the distance between Papel Stedding and nearby residents and how mitigations would be designed in to ensure that noise from within the internal areas of the building would be contained or reduced.
However, it appears that no such assessment was made of the potential noise that could emanate from the covered external areas.
The main reference said no more than that a low impact was anticipated for typical events in the courtyards.
And the reports from officers suggest also that the main concern was noise internally, with no real mention of external noise.
Also at the August 2024 licencing board meeting, Verity Sinkler stated in response to a question that there would only be a small number of tables and chairs in the courtyard at the entrance to the main cafe.
And so we ask if this is still the case or whether there is an intention to have more tables and chairs in external areas.
We also note that one of the outdoor covered areas to be licenced will house games machines.
In conclusion, our written submission sets out our various concerns that fall under licencing objectives
and why we think there need to be conditions set as part of this major variation if the board would seek to approve it.
In view of the significant increase in numbers with 37 percent of those being for outdoor areas
We would now like to see the following conditions
No alcohol to be permitted in external areas after 8 p .m.
And all external areas are closed by 10 p .m.
This would seem to meet with an earlier decision of the board today
If the board does not find that acceptable then we feel should be no alcohol permitted after 10 p .m
And all external areas are closed completely at 10 p .m
Any clearing of tables should be done after that?
Further should Papel Stedding apply for an occasional licence for an event or
Extended hours then the outdoor areas should not be included in any extension
i .e. the 8 p .m. or 10 p .m. condition should not be varied even for an
Fiona Constable - 2:00:17
occasional licence. Thank you. Thank you and can we also hear from Fiona
Constable who I believe is online as an objector and then members can raise questions.
Hi there. Thank you convener and members of the licencing board for hearing me today.
I'm speaking as a resident at five papa cottages and I live opposite the setting in a small group
of houses and I'm objecting to the application and I think it's worth reflecting on how we got here.
At the planning committee in March 2021 the applicant emphasised the heritage elements of
the development including an agricultural museum which would make up 50 percent of the site. The
The museum has not materialised and it is now a hospitality venue offering exclusive
use. The planning committee supported the museum but were very conscious of the sensitivity
of the rural location. Local members expressed concerns about various environmental impacts,
access roads and the scale of the development. Thumpender Community Council raised several
similar environmental concerns and described events in the outdoor courtyard as being a
major concern. The concerns resulted in 24 specific planning conditions, 14 of which
relate to mitigation for environmental impacts, thus stressing their importance. These impacts
are no longer hypothetical. This application to more than double the current capacity from
135 to 295 is likely to lead to a scaling up of the environmental impacts we have already
experienced since the restaurant opened to the public in January 26. Since then
residents have experienced public nuisance issues such as littering and
fly tipping, verges being cut against our wishes, outdoor noise from guests events
and alarms as well as loss of privacy. These issues have been raised with the
council and other public bodies but we have not heard any apology from the
Stedding. Light pollution is especially damaging in our rural location, yet our current experience
that both internal and the external lights are regularly left on throughout the night
is certainly out of step with the Gould Rural Tourism Award. This unwillingness to address
minor public issues raises questions about the Stedding's ability to manage the cumulative
effects of expansion. Without any public transport to the venue road traffic has
increased. Rural road safety is a council priority and the proposed major increase
to on -sales in addition to off -sales capacity will inevitably further
increase traffic on narrow unlit rural roads with no pavements. Residents
already experience safety issues when passing other vehicles, deteriorating
road surfaces and much degraded verges and speeding has resulted in an increase of wildlife
deaths which are priority species on access roads which is extremely disturbing. Walkers,
horse riders and cyclists are equally vulnerable. A travel plan was a condition of planning to manage
these issues but we have not seen any evidence that it is operational so can the expansion to
295 people coming and going potentially late at night be justified given current
levels of traffic management. The proposed external capacity of 110 people
is particularly concerning in a highly noise sensitive area. The additional
licenced areas could accommodate weddings and celebrations involving 110
people drinking and socialising outside in the courtyard which will create a
to protect against amplified sound in phase three as yet unbuilt auditorium but the additional
licence areas under consideration were not subject to the same conditions. Currently outdoor areas
close at 10 pm but this relates to sales and not the consumption of alcohol. The closing time
should include sufficient time to clear the external area by 10 and we would welcome an
earlier closing time to 8 p .m. in line with the
sensitive location.
Finally, I worry about how complaints and compliance will
be managed if the capacity increases from 135 to 295 people
and actions now are relevant.
When residents and others have raised concerns through due
process, as is our democratic right, the owner has responded
with unedifying and somewhat accusatory correspondence,
which I do find intimidating rather than demonstrating how underlying issues are to be managed.
The Board has the power to impose conditions to predict the licencing objectives and I
ask the Board to satisfy itself with evidence rather than assurances that the proposed capacity
can be properly managed. If those questions cannot be satisfactorily answered, I respectfully
ask the board to refuse the variation. On the late application residents should have
time to consider markets which will bring more transport and finally I did report to
the council last July on noise at 11pm through the council website and there was a visit
from the licencing officer to the premises. Thank you for listening and I appreciate all
John McMillan - Councillor - 2:06:11
good work. Thank you. I'm going to invite now questions first of all for the
applicant. We've had clear long presentation from them and then we'll
Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor - 2:06:31
move to questions for our objectors. So Councillor Migno, any comments or questions for the
applicant? Thank you and thank you very much for your presentation. I wanted to
touch on the sales and the alcohol sales and I know you've said it's a much
smaller part of the operation but I wasn't getting a sense from the
application of the amount that you're expecting of online sales and I'm saying
that I'm picking up from the objections transport is not a material
consideration for us but if we had an idea of how many vans or visitors were
expected then I think it gives us a balance that we're currently not getting.
External Representative - 2:07:12
I'll bring George in a second but certainly from my own site visit we're
talking about heavily curated and high -end selection of wines that are not
available elsewhere and in terms of price point they will apply to I would
imagine quite a small sliver of the demographic and in terms of anticipated
sales through the addition of the online which isn't live yet it's not but that
they're looking at something modest and the regional about 50 bottles per month
would be you know that the kind of anticipated through food because these
are very much as I say high end for the discerning clientele it is not many
stretch of the imagination going to be a high volume operation it is going to
open up access through the links that they have to specialist producers and
the clientele would want to do that but very much I'll throw over to you if you
Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor - 2:08:00
want to add anything about the that the seals but it's not a volume business
External Representative - 2:08:05
Thank you for your question. I am a wine expert and throughout our venture my main role is
to create the wine list, select the wines and we have a few lines, a few producers that
are only available to us in Scotland and in the UK, just us at PAPO. I have seen a demand
from friends, from customers, for online sales. We have a small selection of wine and as Neil
well said I'm not predicting more than 50 bottles a month, it's a small operation.
Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor - 2:08:44
Thank you.
External Representative - 2:08:52
I promise, thank you. We already have permission to operate a click and collect. We obviously
have not started online that's being applied for.
We do have people drive to us to buy a bottle of wine, so hypothetically there isn't necessarily
going to be much more traffic generated because of our online business.
The friends that we have in North Berwick who drive to buy the bottle of wine could
potentially place an order for two or three or four bottles of wine to have it delivered.
Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor - 2:09:25
Thanks, it was to get more of an idea of were you expecting an additional 100 vehicles a day,
in which case the impact is a definite matter. So we've got the frequency of there and as I've said
transport isn't a material consideration but we've heard through the objections that
the amount of vehicles that would come to the Stedding could be impactful and
not as a condition I will say but would the organisers consider using a
transport provider for pick up and drop -off to reduce that if that was a way
to rebuild relationships. If you have a market on and it's very
specific people that are coming to that market you mentioned the food and
drink then could that lessen the amount of transport that's using those roads?
External Representative - 2:10:23
Certainly again I'll bring George in in a second but ultimately the way in which
the car park operation is set up there is sufficient ability to do coaches and
that type of thing for those types of events or indeed where for example
corporate was going to bring rather than having lots of people bring individual
cars and there is bus parking there's the one -way system etc so all of that is
within scope and yes absolutely for those events where there are going to be
a significant number of people coming from the same destination. I don't see
Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor - 2:10:49
that being a problem at Aldridge. If I may add, thank you for your your comment
External Representative - 2:11:00
Councillor. We already operate mini busses so the wine tasting series with a
master of wines, that sounds all very posh but there's I think there's only
two masters of wine in the Hall of Scotland. The people coming to it were, I think, half
the number of guests came from Edinburgh and we run a shuttle bus from Waterloo Place to Edinburgh.
We've had large coaches on several occasions, so we are trying that. We do operate according to our
traffic management system, we've got lots of cyclists coming to us and they can safely park
their cycles in the setting. There is bus parking either from mini busses or large
busses. We shuttle, we collect people from either Dunbar or East Linton or even
from the bus station in Hannington. Unfortunately, and we would concede there
is no public transport within our immediate area, but we're doing whatever
we can. The traffic issue is probably not from the polite folks that come and
visit us, it's as always in rural areas, it's the level of
agricultural related traffic that causes some concerns, probably more
of more share of the potholes coming from those heavier vehicles than from
the people coming to paddle.
Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor - 2:12:21
And those are always going to happen in rural areas.
How many times are you open till 10 o 'clock in a week or a month where there would be people outside?
So not internal, but where there would be people outside?
Well, of course we haven't...
The online doesn't really change that at all, because we're not going to have pickups late at night obviously.
Well, as a matter of fact, it's on our website.
We're closed Monday, Tuesday. We're open for a light lunch on Wednesday and close at 4pm.
On Thursday we are open from 10 till 9. I think last dining orders are taken at 8. Friday
the same, Saturday the same. Sunday is from 10 till 4. All of that is on the website.
and there are occasions I can think of a group of people last week and
they left about 10 .30 and so that was only one of two or three a month.
And how far away is the nearest residential property to the hub and
again I'm saying this blind because I don't particularly know Pappalsteading
so you'll know where the hub of your customers are, your clients are,
what distance is the nearest residential property away?
External Representative - 2:13:52
Well we used Google to measure exactly that. So from the front door of the
Stedding, not the boundary but from the front door of the Stedding, to the
nearest residence it's about 250 metres.
Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor - 2:14:06
Okay thank you, thank you very much for that.
Thank you too.
John McMillan - Councillor - 2:14:10
Thank you. I'm not noting anyone online coming in. Can I just ask about the thinking about
an 8pm or a 10pm deadline? You've just mentioned that people, the latest you've had them staying
was till 1030 and if you were moving to events how would you feel about that 10
p .m. clearing up time that's being suggested by the objectors? So thank you
for the question and ultimately the licence already has that safeguard
External Representative - 2:14:51
built into it at 10 p .m. and in terms of having that flexibility and as your
Honours will well know, I just did it sorry, your Honours, as Councillors will well know
a lot of it's weather dependent, so it is really for those circumstances where there
is an event or a group booking and the weather is amenable to people wanting to remain outside,
having the flexibility for the 10pm and having that as an extant part of the licence is I
think an important degree of flexibility.
What you've heard from George however is that the nature of the operation isn't a 7 day
stroke 7 evening a week type operation, it would just allow them to have that flexibility
for when they have that group of Chinese golfers that are going to stay there for slightly
longer they get the benefit of the 10pm and then anything else finishes internally. Similarly
you could apply the same test to a lot of the actual core licenced hours, a lot of that
is there to provide them with flexibility, it's fully in line with your honours policy
and therefore that I think would be something that they would be keen to be able to have.
Again it becomes tricky in relation to fully licenced premises unlike members clubs to
do anything but have occasional licence, you can't double licence effectively areas.
As conditions go I'm not entirely sure there would be any mechanism to try and vary a condition
for a one off ad hoc event rather than a licence.
John McMillan - Councillor - 2:16:14
I think for flexibility purposes in short it would be useful to retain that.
Thank you.
I'm not sure if I can speak to the question, but I will.
If you don't mind noting that you may come in.
I'm going to continue with questions first.
Could I just ask about noise management and complaints in the operation since January
And your comments perhaps around the increase in numbers and how that would be managed,
the extra number of tables that Alison referred to.
So just that whole point about noise management, the type of customers that you have got and
the type of events you are organising and have organised and your experience of managing
that noise, departure.
and I have a question as well which I'm just gonna call traffic management how
you've you've adapted to the planning conditions travel conditions and
finding that visitors to this dating are complying and how you're managing the
car parking and it really really so and so multiple questions you know
apologise for that but the market if the market is taking up some of the parking
space how will you manage those visitors for the market so quite a lot in there
Fiona Constable - 2:17:48
that's a test. It's a test of my memory convener to try and remember all the
component parts so I think the first thing I'll say is if between us we miss
some of those component parts please don't think we're being evasive just
ask again if you may. So I think the first thing is when discussing the
application with the principal agents and then the benefit of the site visit
and certainly that they are from a client perspective unaware of any issues
and indeed complaints around the hospitality operation of the business to
date and I think it's difficult always whenever and this is meant with no
criticism but whenever you read that the written objections and they talk in
general terms that there isn't something you can go away and investigate there
isn't a way you can go back and look and say, well,
on this date, at this time, we had this group in.
It is sort of general concerns that are there.
And obviously, you allowed a degree of latitude
for the objectors to introduce some new things, which,
obviously, we didn't have the benefit
of discussing in advance.
So the principle and starting position
is the hospitality operation insofar as noise and customer
behaviours.
And again, if I'm misquoting it, I'm happy to stand corrected.
I think there was even acknowledgement from the objectors that you know we're not expecting
the types of people frequenting this to act in an unruly and anti -social behaviour way
and that very much ties in with the ambience and what they're trying to create.
The other thing in terms of noise management and it's something which I do think you have
to have regard to is there's letting accommodation on site.
So we have the guest accommodation which is to Councillor Mingus' point of view the
very nearest noise sensitive premises. Again I don't have the exact number of
where it is in your papers but in terms of the actual site map you'll see from
where the steading is and you've got the state office and then the farm
house and that's the letting accommodation and then down from where the gallery is
above it that there's a separate flat there which can be let out as well so
very much in the operators interest to ensure as we move into the evening that
there isn't any sort of noise for fear for want of a better phrase of upsetting
their own guests that are staying in those and really overlooking
accommodations. In terms of the the elements the traffic management and in
terms of how it will operate for a festival or these occasional larger
gatherings I think it's only right that I throw it back to George and Verity
because they'll have been thinking about this as they work through.
So George would you come in about the car parking and anything I've missed?
Yes I will and I'll hand across the Verity to talk about table management
which is very weather related in the outside area.
In terms of the market that we would like permission to be able to operate
and remember the particular event is more of a showcase than us running a
marketplace. We would make no money or secure no revenues at all
from the activities of bros or chocolate tree or even fidra gin on that
particular event, they're just there to showcase their products. We have some
experience. Indeed our grand opening we had 80 guests at the same day we had an
open house for people in the market to find destinations in Scotland. There were
another 20 or so people and at the same time Eve's Court was running more or
less at capacity. So that was well managed. We haven't heard any reports
that it wasn't and we used traffic marshals on that time. We also had, we've
done it twice, an open Scottish open garden event where we've had very large
numbers of people again with traffic marshals and again no problem at all.
That's a long way of answering. Meriti could you maybe touch on the tables? Yes, hello
everyone. So we have currently in one of our courtyards we have 10 tables, six of
which are outside to the elements, they're not covered at all and they all
seat four people and then we have four tables that are currently under a sort
of a covered area to the side of the courtyard that can potentially seat six
but I think we've got four chairs around them at the moment. There isn't any
thoughts at this moment in time to add any more tables to our outside offering
and those are used by people during the day during our normal operating hours.
Obviously it's very much weather permitting and they're not used a huge
amount but only when it's lovely and sunny and people want to sit outside and
enjoy it. And not for dinner. No that's true. Not in the evening. Not in the evening, no.
And in terms of the market and thinking of what I know of the location and the
car park, would the market if it brings in extra vehicles which I think
undoubtedly will would if it's granted, would you be parking elsewhere? Is the
market going to be in the courtyard or in the car park? Some of it would be in
the courtyard and then we were planning proposing to have some stores along the
front not in the car park at all we're not going to use that. And I'm just
John McMillan - Councillor - 2:23:41
going to confirm because I'm not sure if Fiona was in when this was said but the
granting of the market licence will be subject to process and consultation and
feedback by local residents who nearby who might be affected the police and our
licencing team will also comment on that and I think you actually quoted
legislation under which that application would you just like to confirm that yes
Clerk to the Licensing Board - 2:24:15
and it would be consulted on and taken through under the civic government
Scotland Act 1982 as a civic licence application and would be put to if it
was required in terms of our standing orders and it would be taken through to
John McMillan - Councillor - 2:24:38
the licencing subcommittee ultimately to determine. Thank you for that and can I
just you talked about table management and that leads me to think about
staffing and staff training and how are staff recruited, trained to maintain good order.
I think we're accepting that the kind of people who come are expected to be antisocial and
noisy but it happens and how are you recruiting and training staff because I know in the industry
that's often a problem that new providers in hospitality find. Any
thoughts on how your training staff to cope with that increasing noise levels
Fiona Constable - 2:25:23
External Representative - 2:25:26
were they to happen? Can I take this? We have in addition to Verity's presence
we've appointed a general manager who has 25 years experience in hospitality
management and so we're mindful of what we have to do in terms of training and
handling of alcohol. We're mindful of what we have to do in terms of traffic
management and speeding, control etc. In terms of staff, a good point, a
challenge it has to be said. I will confess that our head chef comes from
Edinburgh. He's not there every day, he's there maybe four days a week working a
day, but most of the waiting staff, which is the predominant number of people,
including housekeeping staff, come from actually no farther away than
Haddington. So Haddington, Dunbar, Gifford, and actually, and it's worth saying, our
neighbours. We have two people literally walking distance to Papel who come and
work there.
Fiona Constable - 2:26:37
Thank you.
John McMillan - Councillor - 2:26:45
So local recruitment, training, compliance with the alcohol management appointed people
there.
Can I just ask around some of the issues raised about the plan and the numbers and the comments
which I think relate to the conditions.
In terms of fulfilling those planning conditions
around the museum, what's your reaction to the criticism
that the original plan may not have been fulfilled?
External Representative - 2:27:17
If I can come in here.
Would I do one thing?
And we, I don't think, have ever talked about a museum.
We've talked about agricultural heritage.
Museum sets a frame of mind that expects things in glass cases and certain
labelling and things like that. We've never pretended to be a museum. We've
talked about agricultural heritage. It's been reported in the East Löfvenkurig Museum
that I spoke and the early plans about agricultural heritage. If you come and
have a look around, the place is packed with agricultural heritage councillors.
The whole building has been painfully and meticulously restored to its 1860 condition.
So it's a kind of living statement of how farming was.
Well, that's now getting on two centuries ago.
So I just want to make that point.
Of course, even in the library, the idea is that there might be a meeting
and there might be a glass of wine shared in the library,
hence the 10 extra spaces that we've, you know, that adds to the number of people.
Uh, it, um, in many ways, seeing is, is understanding, uh,
how we use the space and what, what sort of space it is.
And all I was going to say was I can perhaps bring a slightly fresh eye to it
having undertaken the site visit. And certainly when you go into the
hospitality space, it is a stunning modern hospitality space,
meticulously refurbished and could stand scrutiny against any space anywhere else
in the country. When you move across the courtyard and you go into the shed and
you go into the stables etc it's full of artefacts and tools and everything that
displays wall displays and there's you mentioned the Lloyd driver that came in
to read some of the historical records and books there's clothing you move then
into the stables and the stables are effectively returned to what they would
have been like so the uneven cobbled floors, the centuries -old ploughs, the
photographs of the ploughmen, the horses, the saddles that are made in Harrington
hanging on the walls. So from my perspective I can only give to the
board and to members what I observe myself but it absolutely is a space
that is oozing in that rural agricultural history artefacts and
certainly piqued my interest as I was being shown round by the team on my site
visit and I suppose for one of the better fears I can say what I saw and it
was very much as has been described by George but equally you could sit in the
John McMillan - Councillor - 2:30:06
library and have a cup of tea and have a meeting and you know that it's a
multifunction space. Thank you. I'm just going to ask colleagues if they
Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor - 2:30:17
any further questions either for the applicant or the objectors. Leanne
Council Member Yessie. So I have one question for LSO stroke police have we had any
complaints and there was none that I noted but just wondered if there was any.
Clerk to the Licensing Board - 2:30:33
Okay come in quickly Council Bensies. In terms of the process that we were
Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor - 2:30:40
running on this we've still not heard from police or at the LSOs so there'll be
an opportunity at that point. I've got one more for the presenter. So there was mention in one of the
objections about games machines, now what you've described it those two don't fit so is that being
a misunderstanding somewhere? I don't think we, I think we all sort of had a slightly sort of
palpable intake of breath we're not sure where that's come from. I mean I've not been in but
it doesn't sound like the kind of place where if I was running it as your business. No, no.
to do with playing table tennis and that sort of indoor game okay they're going
to be outdoors no doubt making a significant amount of noise okay well
External Representative - 2:31:30
that's good clarification so that's and I'd like to elaborate on that and and
Alison may I may I gently ask you have you been to battle okay have you seen
the table tennis. I have not. No indeed. The table tennis table was placed five years ago in what we called
phase one, it's not actually within the main steading, in an old cart shed and it's for the
Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor - 2:31:59
use of guests. Residential guests. Yes so that wouldn't be for us to consider them licenced in any way because it's
It's not part of the life.
Thank you for that.
Really important clarification.
I think it's important for the community to hear that.
John McMillan - Councillor - 2:32:14
Sorry, Leanne, I wasn't sure if you were going to come back in.
I wanted to ask a bit more detail on the click and collect process.
Has that begun?
And if not, how do you see it working?
External Representative - 2:32:35
I was going to say again my understanding is that the click and collect is extending
the licence.
I think the update is in relation to the online sales and delivery.
And I suppose that the starting point for that is there's a fairly comprehensive indeed
a very comprehensive management statement about how the addition will operate in relation
to the online delivery.
and as we've heard through Councillor Meghan's question, it is going to be very small volumes,
curated lists, et cetera. Just to further underline that and obviously to bring in the
area on her role within this, she's just recently completed and passed her own personal licence
training so as well as being a wine expert in terms of the actual liquid, she's also
now fully conversant with Licencing Scotland Act, progressing with her personal licence,
a provider certificate to the LSO and that again just underpins her role that will be
very much taking the lead on that element of the business.
But Eri I'll bring you in and you can supplement that but within your papers I hope you have
John McMillan - Councillor - 2:33:42
access to that statement, if not I can make that available.
Thank you.
Any Mrs McIntosh would you like to come in?
External Representative - 2:33:49
Neil has stated everything that I wanted to say, he clarified and if you have any further
John McMillan - Councillor - 2:33:57
question just thank you and I'm not seeing either Fiona or Neil looking to
come in and are there any questions for our objectors and Fiona and I made a
statement when I was appointed provost that I wanted everybody in who came into
this chamber to feel that they'd been heard and had an opportunity to talk and
and I always try and stand by that. I'm going to offer you the opportunity to come back in,
which I will also offer to the applicants. So if you wanted to come back in now or wait until you'd
heard from the LSO and the police, I'll leave that option to you. But I'm only going to allow you
Fiona Constable - 2:34:44
back in once because that's just our process. That's fair and thank you so much. I just wanted
say a wee bit about the noise management because Councilman's mentioned that she doesn't know the
area. Look, the topography of this is important because we are in a sort of shallow valley and
noise reverberates around it. The area of land around Pappalsteding is quite limited, in fact
it's surrounded by a papal farm fields in which there are livestock and I think that is something
that councillors should be aware of in terms of noise. It's not just people that are affected
potentially by noise from the courtyard and as yet I haven't heard anything. I heard a lot of
assurances but I haven't heard any sort of guarantees that we can't that we're not going
to be having weddings in the courtyard and 110 people drinking.
So I really just wanted to say that we are in a shared space and the space is
shared between residents, the farm and the steading and respect matters.
And what I'm really keen on is just hearing about policy managing those
No, it's not a assurance of like it's not going to happen like but rather how we're going to manage
it so that it does not happen so that we can all live peacefully in this really tranquil rural
area. My boundary is only 20 metres from the boundary of the Stedding. Thank you so much.
Thank you and can I just ask and go back to your statement. I think you were hinting that you'd
complained and the LSO had come out but in terms of noise had you referred the
complaint to our Environmental Health Protective Services people and had you
had a response on that because and you know both at Planning Committee when
these noise issues come up and in the past around licencing and particularly
around short -term legislation often that noise question is raised but
but it is through other means other than licencing that those complaints need to be followed up.
So I'm just wondering what your experience was of noise, if you have complained in the past,
either to the applicants or to environmental health, what the response has been?
Yeah, well last summer I did complain via the council website
on antisocial behaviour because there was a very busy weekend last July when there was
a number of activities going on at the setting and at 11pm there were still people shouting
and I could hear it clearly through my window. So I did contact the council through the antisocial
behaviour button and that prompted an email. I got an email back from licencing telling
me that they had got out to visit the site and spoken to Verity and what Verity told
them was that she had left the site at 7pm and that raised the issue of there not being
someone on site at that time and appreciate now they have someone on site, but last July they
didn't and the licencing officer pointed that out. Now the response from that was that we were
welcome to contact Verity and we were given her telephone number, but in my view that is not
a sufficient response because there should be a policy in place from the state about
how to manage their noise but also they should have a complaints policy so that everything
is in fact written down and we all know where we stand.
Thank you.
Often I have sat in this committee and residents and applicants have talked about that and
John McMillan - Councillor - 2:39:28
those kind of procedures of sharing phone numbers and how to contact people have resolved matters very amicably.
And I did say I would offer the applicants an opportunity to respond to that if you want.
But I just wanted to ask, would you classify it as noise or antisocial behaviour?
And I don't want to dance on pinheads here, but was it just noise or was it really antisocial?
Well, of course that's a matter of opinion, but in this quiet, I mean it's absolutely,
it's a super noise sensitive area and we all move here because we want to live in a quiet
triangle rural area and to have people shouting at 11 o 'clock at night outside is completely
unacceptable in my view. So I would call that antisocial behaviour.
Thank you. I want to be absolutely clear where the objection is coming from around that.
But I did see, I'm going to give the applicants the opportunity to respond around reactions,
solutions, anything.
External Representative - 2:40:28
Thank you, convener.
I'll come in.
I think there's probably a couple of things just to sort of take away.
I have felt quite sorry for Verity as she's been named several times without any sort
of advance notices to things she's allegedly said or contacts that she's allegedly had.
and none of this is in the paper so we've never had the opportunity to
discuss any of this. In terms of again the papers that we're privy to and the
complaints you know it would have been helpful to have had note of any
particular instances literally live as we're hearing about them now the team
are trying to recall when that could be in July and what that might have
associated with and at the minute we think that might have been the open
Garden event which was mentioned when discussing different things but quite
frankly we're at a bit of a loss to be able to respond to a specific
allegation which hasn't been given prior notice to us and you know the details of
which are fairly vague. In terms of the sort of management piece and various
other references I think if you've had the benefit of attending the Stedding I
think the first thing we're talking about is in relation to the physical
location of the external areas for those that haven't had the benefit of attending
clearly the external areas as described as a courtyard convey exactly what it is
which is they are enclosed by the buildings themselves so you've got the
the rural stone structures that basically go around the courtyard areas
courtyard one at the front of the hospitality space and courtyard two at
the shed so there's a natural facade there in terms of courtyard two there is
degree of weather proofing and covers that are there and in terms of courtyard
one but less so as was described by Verity. So these are not areas which are
exposed, they're not on the front of the premises, they're not directly up the
hill or as you often have to deal with directly abutting residential or being
overlooked by residential. Quite the contrary they are very much secluded
within the confines of the the steadying itself. So I think that's important. In
of environment they wish to create is consummate with an environment which you've just heard
described. So it is people being served at tables, it is guests seated and enjoying food and drink
and hospitality, it is a gallery opening where you may have people standing admiring the art etc
and having a glass of wine and some canopies. You know that is the type of environment and that is
managed in a way which creates an environment consummate with that. It is not the type of
environment where you've got people standing up shouting, guffawing and so on
and so forth that you know I don't make that there's anything wrong with this
but would be associated with a public house beer garden type environment so
that's the first thing. There's been a couple of other points made and I guess
that the clerk and indeed your honours will know this but we're kind of strained
largely into matters which relate to planning which are not germane to this
and you know for example the objective made reference to noise insofar as it
would affect animals and livestock and whilst I'm not seeking to downplay that
as an issue I don't think it's an issue which in any way relates to the Licencing
Scotland Act you know we're dealing with the prevention of public nuisance and
I'm not quite sure that we could extend that to cattle sheep or anything else so
I think there's a lot of issues that which arise from the local environment
on but what I would urge the board and I've no doubt the board will do is to
separate general issues, issues that may relate to planning from issues which
relate to the hospitality operation and what we're seeking to do here. The
final thing in relation to this is I did make the point of trying to provide the
breakdown of the numbers which I thought would be helpful to actually show this
and I understand the board you know hopefully will take some comfort from
the fact that we're being quite specific as to what those numbers will be in the
different spaces because it's not the case that we're talking about a mass of
295 people all congregated in a beer garden or anything like that. We're
talking about the operation of a cafe with 55 people seated at tables that
could be an event in the sheds, you know, a gallery type or an agricultural type
event with 60 people in it. These are very well curated, very well managed
premises and the objectors have asked us to talk about how we manage it and these
aren't just assurances these are statements of fact and as much as the
objectives are saying about lived experience that the lived experience
from what I can tell by the the clients and what they fed back to me is that
they're not deluged with complaints the way in which they put on the events has
been largely satisfactory we don't have issues from the police or the licencing
standard officer that we are aware of I would ask you to attach weight to that
this is not simply about assurances this is well there's no evidence that there
has been significant issues and the final thing I'll say, because I appreciate I can
rub it on slightly, the final thing I'll say is that my view, and the board may have their
own view, is it would be most helpful if anyone, neighbour, resident, community council, had
a concern that first and foremost put it on the radar of the venue because they will absolutely
endeavour to address that concern and then if they don't, by all means, escalate that
or do it in tandem with complaining to the council.
John McMillan - Councillor - 2:45:55
But it's very hard for us to do anything if we're not made aware that someone has a concern.
Thank you for that and don't apologise because as you saw in my own questioning I'm very
prone to rabbiting on.
But I do want this to be open and transparent and I am very mindful and I've written that
on my notes around planning and environmental health issues and we will need to decide this
around our licencing objectives.
In order to do that I will ask Carol to continue with our next stage in the process.
Can we hear from Police Scotland with any comments?
Police Representative - 2:46:28
No comments.
There are no complaints I am aware of.
Unlikely any complaints that come into the police wouldn't have been directed to me.
Clerk to the Licensing Board - 2:46:37
Thank you.
Licensing Standards Officer - 2:46:39
Our LSO?
Thank you.
So in completing this report for the major variation, I'm looking at the proposed changes
and this is not something to go through in terms of the current operations that's already
been granted under the licence.
So really in terms of this report, it's about what has been applied for on the major variation,
which is to add the online remote sales and activity, substitute the layout plans to increase
the off sales capacity and add in the areas that Mr Hazard has quite rightly pointed out
were taken away when the licence was confirmed but did form part of the original provisional
premises licence. In terms of the uplifting capacity I've looked at in terms of what building
standards has proposed for the internal capacity which I spoke to building standards and that
was correct and then to allow for an external capacity on top of that which then gave the
number that has been proposed. Having visited the premises several times I feel that that's
fitting with the premises in terms of how it's laid out and, you know, the area that
they have there. You have to bear in mind that this is not just the area of the courtyard,
but it includes the residential accommodation where the guests are and a wider area that
they can spread out to, including garden spaces. They've also applied to amend the description
of the premises, which is more in line and fitting with what their operations are. I
I have inspected the premises and I did that in February this year after confirmation of the licence
and guidance was given to rectify some minor issues with documentation which was completed quickly
and Verity got back in touch with me to say that that was done.
I've reviewed the online wine sales and delivery and age verification policy and I'm very pleased to see it.
It goes far and above what I see from other premises and it's extremely detailed.
My only recommendation in relation to that was for best practise that the person responsible for overseeing those online sales obtained a personal licence
Which is area and today mr. Hazards presented me with a certificate that she's passed the course and will be making application
I think Edinburgh board is to receive it. I
Would just it's not in my report
But I would just pull on the complaint that's been mentioned in relation to it was the open garden event where I received
communication about complaint and a private function that was
1890th birthday, something like that.
At the time, the area that applied to
was not licenced in terms of alcohol.
The premises licence wasn't confirmed.
In fact, it fell under a short -term LET licencing
arrangement, which has since changed
since the premises licence has been confirmed.
So that was dealt with in terms of other legislation.
I had communications with Verity and communications
with Fiona Constable in terms of that.
But as far as I was aware, there had
been communications between them on the day which was documented in emails and
nothing further was taken forward in terms of that. So it wasn't directly
linked in any way to the sale of alcohol for that one hence why there was no
further involvement from myself. I've received no other complaints in
relation to the sales of alcohol. I have recommended in my report a condition
which is in relation to the delivery of alcohol which is the standard condition
that the board have applied to lots of other premises in relation to that but I
have to say that the policy that they have produced actually puts more onerous conditions
on themselves in terms of what they were wanting to do to make that safe. So they've gone above
that so Mr Hazard can maybe confirm, I don't think it will be a burden for them to accept
that condition.
I've written it in my notes to say the condition is accepted, I've obviously not said it out
loud, the condition for the violence of the values accepted and again thank you for the
comments about the policy which again I'd say was fairly comprehensive and I think that
stands.
Thank you.
I won't try to summarise your report because I think it's very clear in terms of compliance,
John McMillan - Councillor - 2:50:34
in terms of visits, in terms of noise and incidents.
So colleagues, we've had a lengthy discussion and I wonder if we just need time to have
a short pause, adjournment, and before we decide...
Sorry, I didn't see anybody coming in for questions.
I should say, are there any questions for police or LSO?
Mine too.
Thank you.
directly to the vote as a review. Neil, Fiona would you be happy just do you want
to just move to comments? Yeah I'd be happy to move to comments. Right okay
thank you Neil I think we're just going to move to comments. Same, yeah same with that. Thank you.
Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor - 2:51:45
Would anyone like, Leanne, would you like to kick us off? Thank you.
I'll kick off, but I think it's important that as many of us have their comments heard
on this because it has been a very lengthy debate and I want to assure everybody that
their contribution has been vitally important because it's certainly given me a lot of
shape to papers that are very two -dimensional. You can pick up things that aren't really
an issue and other times you can miss things that are an issue and both of those have come
forward with the explanations today. Change is difficult. I want to start by acknowledging
that. Change is really difficult. It's really difficult in any community but in a small
community where there's suddenly a massive change such as the development of a steading
and all the associated businesses. It's really difficult. It sounds like you've managed it
really well so far and that's not going to be any welcome source of input for the
objectors and I absolutely understand that. But given the amount of change that you've
brought in and that you've been getting your business to bed in and what type of business
you wanted it to be, what type of clientele you wanted to invite and that relates to your
price point and who's put off and who's not by those and then your activities, it's a
massive change. It's a massive change for what was described as dilapidated unused building.
So huge amount of change for everybody to come forward with and I think it's quite clear
that not everybody has come forward at the same pace and hopefully there's a bit of relationship
building that can carry on with that and that everybody will get to that point. I think
I'm really, I'm heartened to see the type of businesses you're bringing in. I think
using East Lothian businesses. I've seen before that you have Company Bakery, one of my favourites,
at the Stedding and doing schools on bread making and things like that as well as the wines and things.
So I think the type of businesses you're trying to do, again, very welcome for the area.
However, I don't think it's going to be welcome by all.
I think it's quite clear that there are people for which the change is just going to be too much.
There was really important points that have come out so I think the previous noise disorder being
related to the holiday lets is clearly something you'll manage within that business and I'm sure
because you have your details you'll manage that well. It's not good for your business,
it's not good for any advertising to have that negative report in.
So I'm minded to grant this, but I want to give some cognizance to the complaints that have come
through in that I think we all fully understand the separation that legally we must take between
licencing, between planning and between environmental health. We can't sit here and take a decision
on something that Environmental Health must deal with otherwise the courts
would throw that out quite rightly so. We can only deal with the licencing and
in licencing we have to prevent crime and disorder, secure public safety, prevent
public nuisance, protect and improve public health and protect children and
young persons. Now we've heard from the LSO how your plans go further than she
would have wanted, no reports from the police so I'm happy that the last two
are well covered. Securing public safety, you're talking about bringing people in by
minibus so they're not driving or not tempted to drive and preventing
chronic disorder with no reports of it. So the preventing public nuisance is the
only one where I am conflicted and I think this is where we have to just draw
the balance. I agree actually that the impact on animals, humans and wildlife
are equally important but that's my personal opinion and it's not set out in law.
I also agree that people should be able to live peacefully and we have to try and balance
that with your rights, as their rights to live peacefully, your rights to run a business
and to do that.
So I am granted to, I am minded to grant this because I think on balance we have the correct
cheques and balances in place but I think we should all, all of us making the decisions
here today, provost, take cognizance that that is going to be impactful for those who
made complaints and perhaps that's something that the business can work on
to try and build that relationship and bring these people along with you
because as yet it's not happened so far and I think from someone from the
John McMillan - Councillor - 2:56:25
outside that's clear that's clear to us that that's just not happened. Thank you.
Thank you. Anyone else mind to comment? Fiona. Thanks very much and thanks to
and agent thanks to the applicants. I had some questions but because of the
detailed presentation and other questions anything I had was answered
and that one question I did have was about each space being at capacity
concurrently but you painted a really clear picture to me of how the
different spaces would be used and it was really reassuring to me as well that
there were no evidence of any significant issues although there was
one complaint but that did not relate to the licencing objectives. I would be
happy to support this application and thank everyone for the amount of effort
that's gone into answering questions and painting this picture which really does
Dugdale, Fiona - 2:57:24
John McMillan - Councillor - 2:57:26
help when we're sitting in the chamber and not at the venue. Thank you. Thank you.
Gilbert, Neil - 2:57:28
Neil, would you like to come in next? Yes, thank you. Although the debate and discussion has been lengthy,
I found it informative and very interesting and it certainly helped to make my mind up
and confirm my decision which is I will be supporting this application.
John McMillan - Councillor - 2:57:49
Thank you.
I've been visiting Papel, some people still refer to me as a wee boy but I have been visiting
since I was a wee boy and on my road to Africa just outside Garvald I've loved it and so
Fiona I'm very familiar with it and I value it and often I think there is a creative tension
around our decisions and Councillor Minkus and others have quite rightly pointed out
and indeed, Neil Hazard has as well, that we sometimes need to refer some issues to
planning and other issues to environmental health and protective service.
And Council Mínez very clearly laid out that we're looking at licencing.
When I've been chairing Council meetings recently, a phrase I've used is that we've learned to
disagree without being disagreeable.
and I hope that in the future we can make constructive complaints and build constructive relationships
and talk to each other.
I've seen that happen in Licencing Committee where neighbours and applicants have got together through the Licencing Committee
and there's a constructive relationship.
I was reminded in making my transparency statement that we are a quasi -judicial process
Neil, you've reminded us about that as well.
I think based on evidence, and there were some turning points, some key points for me,
the point that this does have residential accommodation and the reputation that you're
building up, it's not in the business's interest not to manage noise.
I urge that to continue.
I urge you to think about the impact.
I think though that we have seen in the process that you've come through with clear figures
about what you intend by way of numbers and where and why.
I think we've seen examples coming through of policies, procedures, processes being instituted
that are to use our LSO's phrase above and beyond. I think that given all of
that in this quasi judicial process the way of evidence to suggest that in
general the premises are well managed in general you are adding to our economic
and tourism offer. I think it's in your interest to protect the environment in
which you're operating. I think the enhancements that have been made, the
employment of local craftsmen, the market and I hope that market will be well
managed and promote a slowly and food and drink. So given the weight of all of
I too will support this application and I thank Fiona and Alison and Alison you and
I go back a fair way through other bodies and I think you presented the case very fairly
and I hope that you feel both of you that you've been heard and that you know should
there be concerns there are other means through which you can complain and engage and make
sure that the place at Papal becomes well known is integrated in the
community but you can take confidence I think from today that it will be well
managed so I'm going to move to the roll call vote thank you on the
Clerk to the Licensing Board - 3:02:01
recommendation with yeah yeah so I'll come in to just summarise em in terms of
the local votes and firstly ask just quickly if we've got a second a proposer
and seconder for the condition being proposed by our LSO and then just to
application before you with the change to the operating plan as was discussed
it feels quite some time ago now but with that change to the operating plan
to include operating market operators and to take on board the change to the
additional condition suggested by the LSO.
Linda Gillie - Clerk - 3:02:51
So this is the roll call vote for Papelsteaden as just described by the
clock to the licencing board. Councillor Dugdale. Happy to grant.
Councillor Gilbert. Yes Grant. Councillor McMillan. Grant and noting that the market process will be going through as
Gilbert, Neil - 3:03:14
explained by the clerk. And Councillor Menzies. Thank you that's unanimous.
Thank you.
We thank you, all of you.
John McMillan - Councillor - 3:03:24
I hope that this might be an opportunity for relationships in the community to be clearer,
to be constructive and again if there is anything that I think any of us on this board can do,
team and councillors would be happy to be involved but we thank you all for the way
which you have conducted yourselves today.
Thank you very much indeed.
We are going to adjourn for lunch.
Three hours is in my mind,
but I think we may take half an hour if that is okay.
Half an hour for lunch. Thank you all.
Thank you very much.

4. iii) Major Variation - Papple Steading, Haddington EH41 4QD

Good afternoon, everyone.
May I welcome you back to this 26th of August meeting
of the licencing board we're just resuming after lunch and we're going to
Clerk to the Licensing Board - 3:04:20
start with item 5C. Carl. Yeah I'll just introduce item 5C which is major
variation for Tesco Express unit 1 futures way Wollyford and understand
we've got the agent for Tesco online which is Audrey Jenner from Hill Brown

4. iv) major Variation - Tesco Express, Unit 1, Futures Way, Wallyford EH21 8FF

licencing and I will just ask Miss Juneur if she wants to say a few words about the
Audrey Junner - 3:04:49
application to the board.
Audrey, welcome, over to you.
Thanks very much convener.
I will keep it brief as I know you have had some lengthy applications on already today
and there aren't any objections to this application so on the face of it it does appear to be
Fairly straightforward, although obviously happy to answer any of your questions.
Um, this is the new store at Wollyford.
The licence was approved or granted a couple of years ago for this one.
Um, and we're now in the final stages of the development with the store
due to open, um, and a week or two, I think is the current, um, time scales here.
Um, as is quite often with these, um, projects that take some time, the
configuration of the store has changed during the development process.
and we have previously launched a minor variation which changed lots of the
elements of the store and this application is to reflect a modest
capacity increase which is for an area behind the counter which is their
standard layout and it wasn't incorporated in the earlier
application. So subject to any questions that you have I would ask you to
Clerk to the Licensing Board - 3:06:01
approve the application. Thank you.
Thank you, we just thank you Kim, hear from Police Scotland please.
Police Representative - 3:06:07
Clerk to the Licensing Board - 3:06:09
No comments or objections.
Thank you and are there any other questions?
Licensing Standards Officer - 3:06:15
Thank you, it's a very small increase in capacity so no concerns in relation to the increase.
Thank you all.
John McMillan - Councillor - 3:06:23
Colleagues, any questions?
Audrey I think for me it was very clear, I don't know if there's anyone with any questions.
Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor - 3:06:30
Leanne do you like to come in?
Yeah it was just a quick question as to, I take it this will be for the spirits and the higher value alcohol as it's behind the counter
and just asking was it forgotten in the first one or has it just been a change of the set out and now it's needed?
It is yes, it is for the spirits and the high value items, they are always behind the counter in the express stores so that they can be more carefully monitored
I didn't act in the original application but it was an unusual one in that it didn't have an area behind the counter at all
which for an express door is, I think you're right in your interpretation there that it was just forgotten
so yes it has been a case of correcting that error to get it there
because it is absolutely the standard format for Taysco workspace that they will have it behind the counter
John McMillan - Councillor - 3:07:27
Thank you
Thank you and that was a question I was going to go and lead on but I think I'm not seeing
anything else. Would anyone like to comment on this? I think it is a matter of tidying up
Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor - 3:07:47
and making it very clear and Audrey you've made that helpfully clear too. So Leanne would like to come in.
Yeah thanks Pithova. So I completely get that this is it's more or less an administration
that's been forgotten previously and it's now two bays of which it goes about three
metres in total. So it could be seen as administrative but what I would have liked to have seen from
Tesco is them losing the identical size bay which is still on the shop floor so that they
kept the capacity the same therefore I won't be supporting it and the reason I won't be
supporting it is I don't think as an authority that we can say that we are working towards
the better health of our population while allowing convenience stores to increase their
John McMillan - Councillor - 3:08:34
capacity of alcohol at all times. That is my reason for that. Thank you.
If there are no other comments, I will move on to the roll call vote.
Linda Gillie - Clerk - 3:08:49
This is the roll call vote for Tesco Express major variation.
Councillor Dugdale.
Happy to grant. Thank you.
Councillor Gilbert.
Grant.
Councillor McMillan.
Grant.
And Councillor Menzies.
Not grant.
Gilbert, Neil - 3:09:10
That has been approved three to one.
Thank you. Audrey, I think you just hold on and we'll just go through the process of announcing the next item which I think you're going to deal with as well.

5. Occasional Licence - OCC403/26 & 454/26 – Tesco Express, Unit 1, Futures Way, Wallyford EH21 8FF

John McMillan - Councillor - 3:09:24
This is item number six which is occasional licence for Tesco Express Unit 1, Futures Wave, Wollyford.
Audrey, I don't know if you've got anything you want to say in support of the occasional licence.
Thank you. The reason that the occasionals are on the agenda is actually more of a procedural
matter I believe because the occasionals are accompanied by the new layout plan which you
have just approved. So your clerk doesn't feel it was appropriate for them to approve
those occasionals without that matter coming before the board.
Now that that layout has been approved, I think it is a procedural matter and they can
now be approved. Just to explain the reason for the occasionals, as they're always said
as a fallback to allow these stores to launch while the administrative side of getting confirmation
is put in place. So the clerk's already been able to approve earlier occasionals on the
old layout and these are just the new occasionals on the new layout.
Thank you.
Clerk to the Licensing Board - 3:10:31
Any comments from Police Scotland?
No comments or objections.
Thank you.
Licensing Standards Officer - 3:10:40
John McMillan - Councillor - 3:10:42
I think Audrey has covered why the application is here so no further comments.
Thank you.
Colleagues, any questions?
I am not seeing any comments.
Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor - 3:10:53
Leanne, would you like to kick off again?
Yeah again just a very quick comment. I welcome the Tesco store to Wollaford, I welcome the jobs
that will bring and the opportunities that will bring for the community. I can't support this
because again it's got the increased capacity but that is the only reason not that I don't
John McMillan - Councillor - 3:11:13
welcome Tesco's or any business but that increased alcohol capacity doesn't sit with me. Thank you.
Thank you and I think that in my view where I hear and in some ways agree with your comments
think we would rely on Tesco's for that responsible management and leadership
and welcome it in the community. So again I'm just going to move directly to the
Linda Gillie - Clerk - 3:11:36
roll call vote on this. Thank you.
This is the roll call vote for Tesco Express occasional licences.
Councillor Dugdale.
Again happy to grant, thank you.
Councillor Gilbert.
Yes, grant.
Councillor McMillan.
Grant.
Audrey Junner - 3:11:59
Councilman Menzies. Not Graham. That was again approved with three to one. And Audrey thank you for noting the length of that previous one but thank you for the speed in which you've helped us carry these two through. Thank you very much. Thank you.
John McMillan - Councillor - 3:12:18
Clerk to the Licensing Board - 3:12:21
You've heard Councillor Minnis' comments and I think maybe take those back to Tesco's as well but we've granted and we thank you. I'm going to move to our next item.
Carla please item number seven which is personal licence for for Albert her end

6. Personal Licence - Albert Heredero Lopez, 57a Macbeth Moir Road, Musselburgh EH21 8DQ

arrow Lopez pronounced that correctly at 57 a Matt Beth Meyer Road muscle bra and
just for the board's information the applicant is not present for this and
their their agent who submitted was equally not attending this meeting it's
open for the board there and to consider whether they want to hear the
application or as the board have done previously continue just to see if the
John McMillan - Councillor - 3:13:01
applicant wishes to attend the next meeting. Colleagues I think it is a
normal practise to continue these kind of applications where people aren't
present to give them one final opportunity and so we have the choice to
I would like to ask the committee to either discuss this or to continue.
Any comments?
I am hearing your proposal to continue and I would second that.
Thank you.
There is a proposal to continue.
Neil Fiona?
I have no problem with that.
I would agree.
I would put my hand up to second that.
Thank you very much.
Do we need a formal vote to continue?
we will call the roll on continuation please
Linda Gillie - Clerk - 3:13:57
the roll call vote for the personal licence application for Albert Lopez for
continuation councillor Dugdale you need to continuation thank you
Councillor Gilbert. Yeah, I agree as well.
Councillor McMillan. Continue.
Councillor Menzies. I'd like to continue. Thank you.
John McMillan - Councillor - 3:14:19
Thank you for that. Um, and so we move on to our final item on the agenda.
Thank you. Um, chair,
just to confirm we'll just continue that to the next board in September. Um,
just for clarification for everyone. Um,

7. Review - 102 New Street, 102 New Street, Musselburgh EH21 6JQ

premises licence review for 102 New Street 102 New Street Musselburgh
eh21 6gq and this is a report that's been brought forward to the board by the
licenced standards officer and I'll invite the licence holders
representatives to to present as well and they are supported by mr. McDonald
As it's a review application we'll ask the LSO to cover off their report and any points
they wish to raise with the board and then we will ask Police Scotland if they've got
Clerk to the Licensing Board - 3:15:31
any questions and then go to the premises holder for comments and hear from them and
John McMillan - Councillor - 3:15:35
If that is OK.
Licensing Standards Officer - 3:15:37
Thank you.
In terms of this application bearing in mind that we have been here in this chamber for
quite a while, is it the board's preference that I go through the whole report or are
they happy with the content of the report and I point out some of the pertinent parts
of the report?
Absolutely.
I am seeing notes online as well.
I am aware that the licence holder and agent Mr McDonald has also seen a copy of the report.
This report is brought to you in terms of the ground specified in sections 36 3B and
36 3ZA of the Licencing Scotland Act 2005.
An application was made to the licencing board with the contents of this report.
So just a bit of background, premises had a provisional premises licence granted in
2020 and then that was confirmed in 2021 and at that time a premises manager named Rafik
Mohammed was appointed.
I had received complaints as of this year on the 25th of May and this was in relation
to noise, loud music, patrons outside with tables and chairs and drinking alcohol in
the street.
This then resulted in contact that was made with who was named as the premises manager
at the time who was Mr Rafique Mohamed and at that point he confirmed that he had left
the premises in that role in March 2022. A further complaint in June was then received
of the same thing happening, of patrons spilling out onto the grass verge, drinking alcohol
outside and noise going on past nine in the evening. Myself and PC Upton visited the
We made an unannounced visit to the premises to carry out an inspection.
When we arrived it was closed but we made contact with an apologies for my pronunciation
here Shrestha, Mr Shrestha, and he then came down to the premises.
We were slightly alarmed that there was a chef working there who said to us that it
was his first day and that he was on a trial.
However, it was concerning that he'd clearly opened a premises and was working alone.
But Mr Shrestha came down, we could see a fully stocked bar, tables and chairs, with drinks menus and wine glasses,
and there was also a delivery of wine sitting at the premises.
There was no signage displayed at all, there was no section 10, no challenge 25, no summary,
nothing to restrict children from 1 .5 metres from the bar.
We identified ourselves and we had a conversation with Mr Shrestha whilst we were there.
He said he'd been the manager there since July 2022 when he had taken over from Mr Afik.
We asked about all the things that we would routinely do at a premises licence visit
such as the premises licence, operating panel layout plan, staff training records
and he didn't seem to understand what we were asking for or be able to locate anything.
We also asked about staff training and through conversation it was established that there
was no training records and that no staff member had received any training of the mandatory
two hours by a personal licence holder.
We asked if there was a personal licence holder who worked on the premises and he said no.
He showed me a copy of a personal licence from Edinburgh and said it belonged to his
friend but confirmed he didn't work on the premises and had his own business in Edinburgh.
We asked about an age verification policy and he only answered that customers had to
be 18, he seemed unaware of the Challenge 25 scheme.
We also asked about signs and he replied that all he thought he had to do was pay the annual
fee when the letter came in and that was it.
So we informed him about the three complaints and he didn't really give a clear answer to
what had happened and again I explained that alcohol could only be drunk within the premises
and customers couldn't be outside drinking on the street. Due to the lack of premises
manager and the breaches of the premises licence we asked that alcohol sales should cease immediately
and he was instructed to clear the alcohol from the bar, cover the taps and remove the
drinks menus and then we left the premises. We then since had contact with the premises
licence holder who I think is here today and about the inspection and also gave a
detailed email which you'll have seen in your packs about the compliance issues
that found. So just to go through the conditions that were breached it was
condition four alcohols not to be sold in the premises anytime when there's no
premises manager. Condition five that every sale of alcohol on the premises
must be authorised generally or specifically by the premises manager or
another person who holds a personal licence and condition six that basically without reading
all staff members should be trained for the two hours mandatory time scale by a personal
licence holder or hold a personal licence and that the training record should be supplied
to the LSO on request and condition nine that there needs to be a suitable age verification
policy in that details the steps that we take if a customer looks under 25 years of age
and condition 11 is that there needs to be displayed a sign in relation to access to
the premises by those who are under the age of 18 and there was no sign.
I then sent out an inspection report and it was confirmed that that was received and we
basically identified that we were speaking to the premises licence holder.
So really a summary of the circumstances is that I feel that the premises licence holders
failed in their responsibilities and there was a lack of action which showed a disregard
for licencing law and licencing objectives and she failed to ensure that the premises
was run in accordance with the law by a suitable person with licencing knowledge and more importantly
a personal licence.
The application is presented to you following breaches of the condition as well as grounds
relative to the licencing objectives, in particular preventing crime and disorder,
preventing public nuisance and protecting children and young persons
from harm. And as a result I asked the board to consider if the premises
licence holder is a fit and proper person to hold a premises licence. So in
total a breach of five mandatory premises licence conditions along with
one local condition of the children being 1 .5 metres from the bar and
complaints about noise and sales of patrons consuming alcohol in an unlicensed
area. I think much of the failings could have been avoided if there'd been the
appointment of a suitable premises manager who held a personal licence with
the experience to manage the premises in March 2022 and again shows how crucial
this requirement is to uphold the licencing objectives and remain
compliant with premises licence conditions. This mismanagement of this
premises has occurred for over four years with the tenant believing that
all he had to do was pay the annual fee. Mr Shrestha displayed little or no
knowledge of the licencing legislation and this has gone completely unchecked
by the premises licence holder. So I asked the board to consider all the
information given in their deliberations and decision on the matter.
Police Representative - 3:22:59
Please Scotland, please. So this series of events has been broadly covered by the
So the police are supportive of this application.
I'll just add Mr. Schreffs and Mrs. Wong.
Both engaged well with police.
We, from reviewing the kind of evidence here,
it would appear what has come about has been due to a lack of knowledge
of the way the legislation works.
the police assess each case on its own individual circumstances.
And quite an unusual situation here in that there was essentially
a fully licenced bar has been operating with kinda no element of compliance,
other than a premises licence being in place, but
no other element of compliance to support that.
Therefore, police have submitted a report to appropriate a fiscal notifying them that the premises licence holder has been charged with a contravention of section 1 of the Licence in Scotland Act,
Namely selling alcohol not in accordance with the premises licence.
Due to the designated premises manager not being in place as well as all the other conditions
the LSOs mentioned there.
Clerk to the Licensing Board - 3:24:29
Thank you.
John McMillan - Councillor - 3:24:33
Colleagues have any pressing questions at this time?
Can we go back after or...
Yeah, no, if you'd like to ask questions now before we hear from the applicant or I'm happy
to take questions after we've heard from the applicant.
I'll do them now then.
Thank you.
Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor - 3:24:56
So it's just a wee one for the LSO and a wee one for the police.
So you mentioned that one of the people you spoke to showed you a friend's licence.
Did they qualify by showing you someone else's licence that had no relevance to him?
It was a photocopy of a personal licence and I think he said at some point he'd been his
Licensing Standards Officer - 3:25:15
business partner but that was a long time ago and that he confirmed that he hadn't really
worked on the premises and that he had his own business up in Edinburgh. He didn't really
give any other reason as to why there was a photocopy of somebody else's personal licence
Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor - 3:25:30
on the premises.
Thank you and a quick one for the police. Have the PF given any indication of whether
they're taking the charges forward? No, once someone is a reporter they can take a matter of months or over a year.
John McMillan - Councillor - 3:25:50
Clerk to the Licensing Board - 3:25:53
Thank you. Mr McDonald, do you and your client want to put forward representations?
External Representative - 3:26:04
Yes, this is the premises licence review for the restaurant premises at 102 New Street, Musselbrooke.
I'm with Mrs. Wong on the far side, Mrs. Sir Thay Wong, who is her and her husband own the
property and Mrs. Wong is the premises licence holder. To my immediate right is
is Huy Hoi Wong, sorry, sorry Helen,
who's happy to be called Helen.
So I will call her Helen, and I think
she would be happy for any questions
to be addressed to her as Helen as well.
And I think a lot of the correspondence
has been with the board and with the with Cardin
by Helen on her mother's behalf.
Mrs. Wong is a premises licence holder.
When she applied for the premises licence the rigid initially the provisional and then it was confirmed in in
2021 as Karen explained a property solicitor advisor to take it in her name
Rather than our tenant to hold it which is which would have been my recommendation as well
It is common now for the owners of a property the landlords to be the licence holder
So that they can keep abreast of the issue so that they're made aware of any problems
I think what the properties solicitor possibly didn't do was explain to Mrs Wong that that involved her in responsibilities and what these responsibilities were.
Now that is not an excuse, but I do not think that it was properly explained to Mrs Wong at the time what her responsibilities were.
Now, I brought along as well Ramesh Shrestha who is referred to in various reports.
Now, I have not brought Ramesh up here because the review is against the premises licence
and the premises licence holder.
But Ramesh is sitting there firstly so that he can see what is going on and secondly if
Your Honours wish to ask him any questions then we could bring him up.
So just to explain his involvement here.
He is a tenant.
He did have a business partner initially when the lease started.
I think it would be fair to say that the business partner was very much the admin man who dealt
with all the administration.
He had a personal licence and he was initially appointed as the personal licence holder.
So to start with, the operation, so far as I'm aware, so far as anyone is aware, complied.
There were no issues.
I'm not sure if it was ever visited by the police or the LSO, but there do not appear
to have been any issues.
As far as Mrs Wong was concerned, the place was running fine without any problems whatsoever.
The business partner then left, and someone else was employed to be the manager.
he had a personal licence and he could and should have been appointed as the
premises manager. Now why he wasn't I'm not too sure but nobody seemed to know
that that's what should have happened. Again we can't excuse that but we
actually had a personal licence holder there. Now that changed again earlier
this year when that person left and at that point there was no personal licence
holder there that's been explained by LSO and we are not making many any
excuse for that whatsoever there was no personal licence holder there for the
last few months I think the point that was raised by by
Councillor Mingi's is a very genuine one and I think Karen's explained but when I
When this was brought to my attention I was told by the person who referred Mrs Wong to me,
I was told I've got a friend who could perhaps be the manager until they get somebody else,
and that's who is referred to there.
I asked, is this person working in the place? I was told no. Does he know anything about it?
He said no, and I said well I'm having nothing to do with appointing him as manager whatsoever.
he should not be the manager.
So that did not go forward.
The premises manager is obviously the person in terms of the legislation that's responsible
for the day -to -day operation and compliance, but the premises licence holder does have
responsibilities too.
And unfortunately it is the case here that the tenant was not complying with the legislation,
but as a premises licence holder I think the reference has been made to
supervise and make sure that things are going okay and that didn't happen either.
I think the police commented about it being through lack of knowledge and I
think that is absolutely right. I don't think any of them appreciated the
seriousness of the situation. Just to go back to the start of the LSO report, the
how these premises came to the attention of the authorities was about, I think it was called parties, but two events.
I did ask Ramesh to explain the background of both of these.
The first one he explained was a birthday party or an anniversary where there were about 25 people that were having a meal
and I think at the end of it some of them went outside and I believe that
some of them may have taken their drinks with them that is contrary to the
legislation there's no permission in the licence to do that and there is of course
your bylaw in East Lothian that you're not allowed to drink in public so again
totally hangs up with regard to that situation. The second one there was a
second occasion mentioned and and Ramesh has explained that again it was an
Again, there was a birthday party or something similar.
They went outside to take photos
and so far as he's aware and concerned,
there was no alcohol taken out in that case.
In the first occasion, he was working as a chef inside
and didn't realise what was going on outside.
In the second case, he was.
And in both cases, when he was aware,
he went and brought them inside.
Well, I think I'm not going to repeat what Karen has mentioned, so I will cut out a bit
of my presentation.
There's no point in going over that again.
The visit on the 16th of July, there was a reference to the fact that there was a chef
there.
The chef had arrived in order to do prep.
The premises were not open to the public.
He was just there doing prep.
and I think Shreshia had been told the meeting was at four, I think
Kardon maybe arrived a little bit early so Ramesh hadn't arrived but he
did arrive shortly after that and they had their discussion. There is something
about the wine delivery, this was just an administrative point, there was a
different company referred to. Ramesh called himself the manager because as
As far as he was concerned, he was a manager, but of course he wasn't.
Your LSO and the police would have meant the premises manager, and he was not the premises manager because he didn't have a personal licence.
Since then, he has attended a personal licence training course, he has passed the exam, he has received his certificate, and his personal licence was applied for last week.
You apply to the licencing board where you live, not where you work, so where you live.
He lives in Edinburgh, we've applied to the Edinburgh Board for his personal licence.
Unfortunately, the Edinburgh Board are a lot less efficient than yourselves for processing personal licence applications,
and whereas you take maybe a week or so at the moment because of the festival, I think they're taking between six and eight weeks.
We're hoping that perhaps we get it by the end of next month.
He was told to stop selling alcohol and he did so immediately.
He was told to clear it off the shelves, which he did do immediately.
And when I got involved, I think it was 20th July that the first contact was made with
Mrs Wong, I was contacted the following day.
I got in touch with Ramesh and said you were told to stop selling alcohol. Have you? He assured me that he had.
I said you would advise to clear it from the shelves. Have you? And he assured me that he had.
I asked him if he was advised to remove the alcohol completely from the premises and
he said that he wasn't and I did cheque that and he wasn't so I said well that's fine
but if you are ever told to remove the alcohol from the premises, you must do so immediately.
I explained to him about personal licences, we booked him on to our next training course
and as I've explained, he has since attended and obtained his personal licence.
Obviously at this point the premises were not selling alcohol but we had correspondence
with him regarding his obligations, his lack of knowledge about the documentation.
We explained to him that as and when he was able to open again, we would provide all the documentation, we would provide the site notices for him, etc.
We've done it in other places in East Lothian and I hope your LSO and police would accept that we would be able to do that for him and provide all the necessary documentation.
We told them that there was no point in sending things like notices and so on at the moment
because as soon as you put a notice up people think you can sell alcohol.
So we didn't want to give any impression that the premises could sell alcohol.
With regard to the annual fee, yes, in the past Mrs Wong has received the invoice, she
sent it to Ramesh to pay, he's paid it.
But from now on I've explained to the Wongs that they must pay the annual fee promptly
and recuperate it from Ramesh and this year's has been paid.
The absent premises licence holder obviously until Mrs Wong was contacted on 20th July,
she had no knowledge of anything that went on in these premises.
Now that's a double -edged sword. Firstly she didn't know that these
contraventions were going on but then the question is, shoo -chieve. I think for
these events, the incidents in the parties, I don't think there's any way
really that that could have been brought to Mrs Wong's attention until
there was a complaint through either the LSOs or the police.
And as I say, I think her responsibility was to react
when she was made aware of it by the board, and she did within 24 hours.
So I think she has acted in the way that a responsible premises licence holder would do.
That is an explanation rather than an excuse because of course there is the situation with
regard to the premises manager, there is a situation with regard to the documentation
and I think that Mrs Wong should have been saying have you appointed a new personal licence
a premises manager, can you assure me that you've got all the documentation in place?
And she didn't do that.
But she obviously knows now that she has to do that.
I think Mrs Wong is a very responsible person.
I think, Your Honours, that if, I think most of my correspondence has been with Helen.
And I think that we have considered the possibility of instead of Mrs Wong being the premises
licence holder, Helen being the premises licence holder. Now I considered it was inappropriate
to change premises licence holder until the hearing here today. Because Mrs Wong was a
premises licence holder when these incidents took place. So what I would say is that there
is certainly an offer and I think probably a recommendation that Mrs Wong be replaced
by her daughter as a premises licence holder. Helen is an accountant and she has her own business.
So she's used to paperwork, used to time limits, used to regulations,
so I think she's a very capable person of doing that together with her own involvement.
I think the other reason that I brought Ramesh along is if your honours are kind enough to give
this these premises another chance that if there were any undertakings given
requests made by the board that he was aware of them because it will be him in
the first instance that would be implementing them but as I say mrs. Wong
and Helen are aware of the responsibilities that they have had
would have and can assure the board and apologise to the board for the
inconvenience to your LSO, to the police, to yourselves for the trouble
that they've given you. They obviously would like to retain this licence. They
now having spoken to Ramesh and I was pleased to hear the police indicate
that there'd been cooperation with Mrs Wong, with Helen presumably as well, and indeed
with Ramesh. So I think we can give you assurances that there will be a change of set up here,
a change of attitude, a change of knowledge, and that our clients, both premises licence
holder and premises manager would be very much more aware of their responsibilities,
aware of keeping in touch with ourselves, with each other as well. If there's any issues
Ramesh has got to know that he's got to advise the premises licence holder of these.
Certainly it's not so long as our involvement remains as well. Any of these issues could
be brought to our attention as well and hopefully as your LSOs and police know
we would proactively attempt to deal with these with any issues that there
might that there might be. Again what has happened there there are no excuses I'm
not here to make excuses for them. The purpose of a licencing board review Your
on is is not to punish as such that is not in the legislation you've heard the
police indicate that there has been a charge that may or may not go to court
that may or may not result in a punishment so the courts are involved in
punishment but it is more a case of going forward and whether you can
accept our explanation and whether you can accept that going forward this will
not happen again and we can give you assurances from the Wongs, we can give
you assurances of Shreshia as the tenant and hopefully the premises manager in
due course that it won't. I'll finish this now Your Honours but obviously
John McMillan - Councillor - 3:42:41
we're all more than willing to answer any questions that you may have.
Colleagues, any questions? I'm going to just lead off by asking initially Mrs Wong and
then Helen if they'd just like to give us a wee bit about their experience in the trade
of managing, of being involved in looking after licenced premises, just to paint a little
picture of your experience if you're happy Mrs Wong and then Helen.
External Representative - 3:43:16
Hello there, my name is Helen Wong and I'm Mrs Sow Tai Wong's daughter.
So my mum and dad have run a restaurant since I was a baby so they started their first restaurant
in 1989 and they've got, they've ran restaurants that sold alcohol and we've actually attended
these meetings before it was the Edinburgh Council for our own restaurant
which used to be in Edinburgh. My parents used to have a lawyer that did all this
for them and they retired about 12 years ago and now they're mainly just
landlords. This 102 New Street is their only commercial property that
they have. So yes we do have a good knowledge of the kind of licencing
requirements we've had restaurants before but with a mom and dad retiring and then their
lawyer subsequently retiring they used to rely heavily on their lawyer giving them advice on
what they need to do. Since my mom and dad have retired they spent a lot of their time in Hong
Kong hence why I'm like heavily involved in it now so not an excuse at all but just with the lawyer
that they use retiring I think their knowledge of it has not been as good of it since.
John McMillan - Councillor - 3:44:39
Thank you so I don't know if your mum wants to say anything but maybe just a
few questions. So this is the one now existing commercial premises that they
have since since when? So they retired in 2014 yes, the last restaurant they had.
12 years and then your experience of running in the licenced trade other than
the restaurant any at all? Myself or my mom? Your own if you? Yes I'm a chartered
accountant so I've run I've been an accountant since 2012 and I started my
own business in 2020 and I deal a lot with hospitality trade so I deal a lot of
restaurants, takeaways. I've actually helped clients attend some of these meetings before
External Representative - 3:45:37
myself, so I'm fully aware of the legislation requirements. But I guess my, not excuse,
but my explanation for the lack of kind of adherence to the laws for this particular
premises would be I thought my mum and dad dealt with it. I wasn't as involved before.
and
When the licence assigned to Ramesh, I think they and I assumed that it was all dealt with by the law at the time
I was focusing on my new business at the time. So probably just it slipped my mind a little bit
So nothing exclusive excuse at all
But since then I think what?
Alastair said like fully aware what requirements are and more than happy for myself to take over the licence to ensure
That this is run properly going forward
John McMillan - Councillor - 3:46:23
Thank you. And your mum doesn't want to say anything?
Probably not, her English isn't very good so she's petrified as it is.
Just wanted to offer the opportunity.
Colleagues, any other questions?
John McMillan - Councillor - 3:46:38
Yes, Amias, do you want to come in or want to move to comments?
Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor - 3:46:43
Yeah, I think, sorry, I think comments are probably best.
John McMillan - Councillor - 3:46:49
I have noticed a slightly different screen today but I will invite Fiona Dugdale.
Thank you.
It seems like there was also one of the factors that might have been changeover of different
staff, people leaving.
I just wondered how that would be managed in the future, changeover of different staff
different knowledge or different types of licences and also for Mr McDonald I just wondered whether
how much support is going to be given from your arrangement with this premises
and these you know the people who are there just now so I just wonder what support is going to be
offered because it feels like it's a bit light from what's happened so far not from you but
that the knowledge hasn't been there so I just wondered how we be reassured that
External Representative - 3:47:50
that could be maintained. Thank you councillor Dugdale. I think first of all
if I can take the first question your first question first and that's with
regard to change of staff etc I think before the first premises manager was a
co -business owner with Ramesh and he left. The second personal licence holder
who was there but was never appointed was an employee. I am always very keen
for the owner of the business to hold the personal licence because first of
all I don't think you should be depending on a member of staff to have
the knowledge that you get through a personal licence course because then
they can tell you what is required. I think the owner needs to have a personal
always needs to have a personal licence and that is the case he's the owner of
the business that operates from these premises. So I think that is that is one
of the important things. I have suggested to Ramesh and I would certainly be
recommending to him that he have a second personal licence holder so that
when he's away on holiday for instance that there is a second personal licence
holder there but I think the fact is that as a sole owner of this business
now then he will be involved unless he was to pass on the tenancy to to
somebody else so I hopefully that is of some comfort with regard to my own own
role, well, I mean, I think a major part of our role is dealing with issues. I mean, that's
what we do. I think as and when the premises reopens, then we would make sure that they
have a full set of paperwork. The licence, the notices that need to be up, make sure
that all the staff have been trained and that the documentation is in the premises. So I
hope that when the police and the LSO visit, if the premises reopen, that it
will be perfect and I will make sure that Ramesh knows how to keep it perfect
and what needs to be done in the future. If any new member of staff joins then
before they start working, before they start selling or serving alcohol, that
they need to receive the mandatory two hours training and make him very aware of that.
And I think just if there are issues, I think we have relationships with most LSOs in the
country, including your own, that if there are problems that they would tend to make
us aware of them.
Perhaps not in detail, just as simple as I think it would be a good idea if you got in
with your client because there is a problem or there is an issue going on and we will
phone and we will do our best to sort it out.
That is our role.
It wouldn't just be here, that is our role.
I think with regard to the previous lawyer that Helen mentioned, I'm not sure who that
was, I'm not sure if they were, we are a dedicated licencing firm, we don't do anything but licencing,
and so I'm not sure if that was the case with the previous lawyer but that's
that's what we do. So I can give an assurance that we would set the
premises up as it should be set up and I would certainly initially in particular
keep in touch with Cardan and the police to make sure that any visits that had
was satisfactory. Any concerns that they had were addressed. I hope that answers your question
John McMillan - Councillor - 3:51:55
but happy to elaborate. That's good. Thank you. That really is a
full answer. Thank you. Thank you. Before we go on, I'm just going
Clerk to the Licensing Board - 3:52:11
to ask Carlo just to summarise where we are and the options available to us.
Thank you chair, in terms of what's before you today, clearly the LSO report is setting
out concerns about the licence holders fit and proper status and for the members to consider
that. Should you consider the licence holders themselves to not be fit and proper then the
I would have to just double cheque is even if we did consider it not to be fit and proper I believe but
With a small adjournment we may have to just double cheque the position that there is some time for an application to come in to transfer
That licence to another person switch and in terms of what mr. McDonald is setting out would then be possible
I just need to double cheque and clarify that one point for clarity to the board.
But ultimately that's what you're sitting with.
Before you, I don't, I would have some concerns from a process perspective
in taking forward Mr McDonald's proposal that the substitution is done at the board itself
in terms of the actual licence holder and whilst I respect the position that
Mr. McDonald has put forward I think the board has been put into a difficult
position and in that consideration albeit had they substituted that person
we wouldn't have been able to take the application through because they
wouldn't have been the licence holder so there is a there is something there for
members so I think if members are looking at this and if they are minded
to do take on Mr. McDonald's suggestion of substituting it would be
unconventional and I'd have to look at the method and taking that forward but
equally members are really considering whether they're a fit and proper person
John McMillan - Councillor - 3:54:29
and therefore the consequence of my licence. Does anyone want to ask questions
there or happy to move with a summary on to comment?
Lee-Anne Menzies - Councillor - 3:54:39
Leanne, Councillor Mias. I was going to say I'm happy to kick off, I'm not happy to kick off.
This is not a happy conversation I'm going to have. I'm afraid having looked
at all, having looked at the report and everything else, I'm really struggling to
find where you would be considered a fit and proper person and I don't mean that in the
personal sense but strictly by the definitions that are set out within licencing. And I understand
and I've heard exactly and I can understand why you know if you've had a previous business
partner who had all the knowledge and when they left the knowledge went with them I can
understand. However there's no excuse for that within licencing law and those licence
holders have to have cognizance of the law.
And if you don't have cognizance of the law,
whether that's a lack of understanding through language
or through any other barrier, then we, as an authority,
have to find you not fit and proper,
because the law's quite binary on that,
about your understanding is closely tied with your ability
to be considered fit and proper within the legislation.
So if we take that aside, I just wanted an explanation,
because that not fitting proper can feel really personal and it's not a personal comment at
all it is purely in relation to the licencing. From March 2022 until now it's been unlicensed
premises, thousands and thousands of sales I'm not going to go through all of that, it's
four and a half years, it's a long time, it shouldn't have taken complaints to have been
discovered, it shouldn't have. There should have been cheques and balances in place that meant it
was discovered far sooner than it has been. And I completely understand that Ms Wong is
completely unaware of her responsibilities. That also leans in then, for me, that she's
not fitting proper to hold a licence. So we've got the understanding, or the lack of understanding
of responsibilities by several people who have been in this chain and I agree with you
Mr McDonald I don't think it comes down to one person or should, but that doesn't negate
from the fact that when our LSO turned up there was apparently no knowledge of the law,
there was certainly no understanding of how it was to be implemented, there were no notices
in place. All of that is quite clear for me that there has been a complete lack of recognition
of the importance of licencing and if we don't have that we cannot as a board say that we
are following the five licencing objectives. That puts us caught on a sugley peg because
we can't report saying we are holding those five objectives if an unlicensed premises
is only becoming apparent to us because of public complaints. So in order to support
ourselves and to be able to maintain our reputation, I think we must find that this cannot go ahead.
And I understand the police have supported them, I completely get why you would, but
I can't support the application that it transfers either. I think there has to be a separate
application for that in order to give detachment for this authority to say that we are upholding
those five objectives. And this section 195 of the Licence in Scotland Act, it states,
and I'm going to read it because I'm not ALS so I can't memorise any of these things, it
states that alcohol is not to be sold on any premises except under and in accordance with
a premises licence or occasional licence granted under this Act. This section does not apply
to the selling of alcohol under the exempt premises, though it's not exempt. So that's
of the founding considerations we must have. The updated law in 2010 takes out the word knowingly
from a lot of them so whether you knowingly did something wrong or not doesn't matter and for us
we have to stick to that part of the law so unfortunately I can't support the application
of the transfer and I think that we must find that it's not the person's not fit and proper
John McMillan - Councillor - 3:59:06
to hold the licence. Thank you. Thank you Leanne. Fiona, Councillor Dugdale. Thank you.
I was going to ask if we could have an adjournment as per Mr. Grilly's
comment about thinking through a couple of things so I don't know if that's the
thoughts of other members or not I just want to suggest that. I'm fairly clear
where I'm going on this but I think if you've got any doubt then we should adjourn and to
help clarify.
I think that would be in order.
Carlo?
Clerk to the Licensing Board - 3:59:42
I'm happy with if you want to adjourn for clarification.
John McMillan - Councillor - 3:59:49
Right.
we will go into our space and if you'll forgive us we'll take some time just to think through
External Representative - 4:00:05
what we're going to do. Thank you. Thank you Provost. Can I just confirm with regard to the
transfer that that is an undertaking that we would launch that immediately if the board,
if that was relevant to your discussion.

7. Review - 102 New Street, 102 New Street, Musselburgh EH21 6JQ

John McMillan - Councillor - 4:00:17
Thank you.
So we will adjourn.
Thank you for allowing us that time to reflect.
And on behalf of the board, following that short adjournment, I am going to say that
We all agree that mrs. Wong you are not a proper person under
the terms of the licencing law and
mr. McDonald if I may see so and
I've
Always respected the clarity and fairness with which you have represented your clients, but I think having heard the LSO
Read the police report and just reflecting back on some of your words
There is a seriousness to this. There is words that you used that nobody seemed to know.
There was an inclusion that we should have and that people had reacted.
But in fact I think that responsibility in terms of being fit and proper isn't about reacting, it's being proactive.
This is about managing the premises and I think the evidence before us about fit and
proper and being responsible and hearing that time is spent in Hong Kong and all of that
leads us all to believe that the licence should be revoked on those grounds.
However, I wanted to say that also in discussion and on advice that the subject of any future
application would be down to you and your clients and given your very kind comments
about how you slowly operate, if that were to be received quickly we would give it the
best consideration and deal with it in order to try and process that through.
But it would be subject to the board's consideration.
So I hope members will agree that I have expressed their opinions.
But I will offer anyone the opportunity to come in before we go to summarise that and
then go to the roll call vote.
Would anybody like to say anything else on this application?
This review rather?
No?
Clerk to the Licensing Board - 4:02:54
Carlo, I'll just ask you to summarise and then we'll go to the vote.
Thank you, Chair.
In terms of what's before the board today for this matter,
you have the choice of considering the person to be fit and proper,
not to be fit and proper and in that latter case that would result in revocation of the licence.
John McMillan - Councillor - 4:03:23
So if you want to go to the board to vote on.
Please could we take the roll call vote.
Linda Gillie - Clerk - 4:03:30
This is the roll call vote for the review of 102 New Street in Musselburgh
and if you could please indicate if you're going for not fit and proper or fit and proper.
Thank you. Councillor Dugdale. Not fit and proper, thank you.
Councillor Gilbert. Not fit and proper.
Councillor McMillan. Not fit and proper.
Councillor Menzies. Not fit and proper.
Gilbert, Neil - 4:04:01
OK, that is unanimous for the not fit and proper.
Thank you. We thank you for coming in.
That concludes our business and I hope it has been clear from our point of view, Ms
Macdonald, Helen, Mrs Wong, thank you.
I just have one query, Provost, and that is that we will apply again.
You may not be able to answer this straight away, but do you know what your attitude would
be to our clients, well in fact it would be Ramesh applying for occasional licences to
cover the looking at the timescale there the it may be another month before he
was to obtain his personal licence and it would be him that would be applying
for the occasionals and then you have a six -week period in general to obtain a
personal an occasional licence so we're looking at ten weeks so if we were to if
when he gets his personal licence we were to apply for occasional licences I
what the board's attitude would be tonight. To ask Mr. Bruely to reply. I think I don't think it's fair to ask that for the board to consider that right now and we can come back to you separately on that question Mr. McDonald directly once I've had a bit more of a discussion with the board. I suspect given the situation that the LSO may want to make a representation though and in terms of the
Delegated authority that would be there should they have a personal licence? It would come to the board for consideration and
from standing orders, but I'd want to have a
Let the members consider that further and come back to you. So you would have visited the occasional licences coming to the board
Yes, yes, yes. They were if they were presented
Thank you all for coming in.
I am going to thank colleagues for their patience.
I am going to wish PC Upton the very best on Monday when he has three stripes on his
arm and for the forthcoming family event and to Sam Bald, welcome her again and look forward
seeing her in the future. To my colleagues in the licencing team and our clerks and to
my colleagues, thank you very much and whatever is left of your afternoon, enjoy it. Thank
Webcast Finished - 4:06:32
you.