Local Porty bar/restaurant lacks extract ventilation

[Denise Muir]

LOCAL RESTAURANT IGNORES DISTRESS CAUSED TO NEIGHBOURS / ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH FAILS TO PROTECT PUBLIC HEALTH

While the Espy, 62-64 Bath Street, Portobello has become a favourite haunt for locals and visitors alike to the Promenade, it has unfortunately become a nuisance to its neighbours.
The Espy management is aware of this situation.
The Espy management is not doing everything possible to minimize the nuisance.

Fact:

- The Espy has a kitchen operating approx.14 hours a day, 7 days a week.
- The Espy does not have direct extract ventilation.
- The point of discharge of their extract outlet duct not does meet statutory recommendations
- The Espy discharges odours and fumes at ground level into the street as staff are opening external doors and windows to cover for inadequate extract ventilation.
- The Espy discharges fumes into a courtyard well and partially enclosed area.
- The Espy discharges fumes through the fabric of the building to properties in separate occupancy.
- Objective evidence has been obtained (Env.Health) that cooking odours and smoke are travelling directly through breaks in the walls and ceiling into the property above.
- The Espy management has ignored all communication informing of the distress being caused to a young family, and has not responded to attempts to reach a neighbourly compromise.
- The Espy management is continuing to run and generate profit from a business that is detrimental and distressing to its (young) neighbours.


Fact:
- An application for planning permission has been submitted to install a rear extraction flue.
- In the meantime no other steps have been taken to:
1. Minimize the nuisance.
2. To prevent the migration of cooking smells.
3. To install some form of odour control (activated charcoal filters, air dilution, odour neutralisation).
4. To make good and seal breaks in walls and ceilings where pipes, ducts and wires pass through.
5. To reassure the building occupants that the problem is being dealt with.
6. To refund the building occupants for material costs being incurred.


What to do?
Denise

[seanie]

If the planning application is successful, is the new flue likely to resolve things?

[Porty]

What to do?
Denise

I take it you're not a Fan?

[Makaveli]

^^^^^

But seriously I don't know what you can do - maybe try the PCC?

[Lima]

I am a fan of the Espy on some fronts but against it on others. I like the food they serve, Portobello does not have many restaurants and requires places like the Espy to attract people to the area. But at the same time, I am annoyed by the lack of general cleanliness within the bar, what really annoys me is in the gents they have removed the hot water taps to save money. I know quite a few members of staff who have worked there and they are all in agreement the lady running the place is out to make every penny she can (which is understandable) and cuts costs at every corner, but to remove the hot water tap is absurd. With this in mind I think the installation of a flue will be the minimum effort to satisfy the regulations and not the surrounding residents.

[Maria]

the lady running the place is out to make every penny she can (which is understandable) and cuts costs at every corner

Isn't 'The Espy' leased from Punch Taverns? If that is the case, the leaseholder will be tied to buying their beer, spirits etc from them and there will be little scope for much profit on that. Profit will have to come from food and savings on other areas such as heating .

[Pal of Porty]

It's a tough gig starting up a business in Portobello and when the Espy opened you 'let them off' with things such as really poor toilets because you were pleased to have such a great place on your door step and understand that the owner/franchisee/tenant would not have unlimited money in a new start-up business. They are however, now well established and their 'honeymoon' period is over. I think they should be be spending a bit more cash to build on their success to date and take them on to the next phase of their development to keep the business healthy. I think money spent on say the toilets and also investing in equipment to build better neighbourly relations (and meet regulations) would be well spent and benefit them in the longer term. Custom can be be very fickle in the restaurant/pub game and it is an industry where you cannot rest on your laurels or it could fall apart in as little as 6 months.

With regard to Punch Taverns - it would be easier to negotiate with a group of terrorists.

[Lima]

I think the owner now sees the Espy as established, she has another pub, the Guilty Lily (at Bonnington Road) which she regards as established and is now looking for new ventures so will be unlikely to be spending money or time on the Espy.

[Porty]

It seems to me that the Espy have applied for planning permisson to address the issues highlighted by Denise. They are doing something about it, something that will likely cost thousands of pounds. It might not be happening quickly enough for you Denise but they are least showing willing.

[Puerto bella]

Wonder when they'll also comply with their Road Scotland Act enforcement order on their bins in the 'keep clear' area? They don't give a monkey's about 'the community' as long as they're getting their dosh.

[Denise Muir]

It is my understanding that The Espy is basing possible actions on someone else (co?) financing them, i.e. Punch Taverns. This applies to the long term solution (rear flue) which should have been in place BEFORE they ever started cooking on a such a large scale, and also to an interim solution that I and Env. Health have requested (repair flooring and deadening between the two spaces).
Both actions have been referred to as "cooperation" but note that both of them involve someone else footing some (or all?) of the bill. The owner of this flat, through no fault of his own, is going to have to co-finance a project that wouldn't have been necessary had the Espy had fully functioning and adequate ventilation in the first place.
In the meantime (a rear flue is several months away, as is an agreement with the management company), Amanda's kitchen continues to spew out night and day, every day of the week, the odours and smoke from every single thing they prepare. And my daughter and I get to breath them in day in day out. It is slowly destroying our family life. And our health. And our mental wellbeing. And contact with our friends (no one wants to come here anymore).
From Amanda's manner and actions, it would appear that she is not interested in the slightest in this, has asked not to be contacted in any way, and will carry on cooking and running her business in the face of neighbourly relations (at least 3 other neighbours have the same infiltration) and the health of a 5 year-old. Not to mention my own business - being a work at home mum who can no longer work from home. Eyes start to sting by 10am and it just gets worse as the day goes on, accompanied by headaches, nausea and bouts of anger /depression. Not to mention when the sun comes out and the place is busy.
At no time has Amanda ever apologized, seemed interested, or even visited my house to smell for herself the extent of the problem.
Environmental Health visited, confirmed the nuisance, but seem to be doing nothing to urge a solution,and have communicated that it is acceptable that the Espy pollutes my home in the long term.
Her business partner / cleaner husband offered compensation for having to continually launder large and small items and clothes (everything smells) but this never got past Amanda who has subsequently ignored or refused every polite attempt I have made to discuss it. She has showed no willingness to compromise or reassure me whilst a solution is being sought. This is quite clearly in contempt of the goodwill and health of her neighbours.
No, I personally am not a fan. Of the person, not the restaurant, which I originally felt was a nice outlet for the community.
On a personal basis, I am actually quite nauseated with the disgregard.
But the smells are making me so sick anyway, it actually makes no difference.
Denise

[Denise Muir]

^^^^^

But seriously I don't know what you can do - maybe try the PCC?

What's PCC?

[Denise Muir]

It seems to me that the Espy have applied for planning permisson to address the issues highlighted by Denise. They are doing something about it, something that will likely cost thousands of pounds. It might not be happening quickly enough for you Denise but they are least showing willing.

Beg to differ. Willing would be making sure something was done ASAP to abate distress (health issues/children involved) to direct neighbours, then sort out all the details. Or perhaps even just engaging with me to find a compromise. Continuing to churn out meals 14 hours a day, every day, and refusing to discuss it is a whole different set of priorities.
Denise

[Denise Muir]

It's a tough gig starting up a business in Portobello and when the Espy opened you 'let them off' with things such as really poor toilets because you were pleased to have such a great place on your door step and understand that the owner/franchisee/tenant would not have unlimited money in a new start-up business. They are however, now well established and their 'honeymoon' period is over. I think they should be be spending a bit more cash to build on their success to date and take them on to the next phase of their development to keep the business healthy. I think money spent on say the toilets and also investing in equipment to build better neighbourly relations (and meet regulations) would be well spent and benefit them in the longer term. Custom can be be very fickle in the restaurant/pub game and it is an industry where you cannot rest on your laurels or it could fall apart in as little as 6 months.

With regard to Punch Taverns - it would be easier to negotiate with a group of terrorists.

Have you had experience with them??

[seanie]

The Portobello Community Council. It exists to represent the views of the community to the Council but it's probably not best suited to situations such as this. Local Councillors may be better.

[Porty]

With regard to Punch Taverns -
Have you had experience with them??

He's not but there has been quite a bit of discussion about Punch, Espy and other Portobello pubs.

I don't know Amanda but there is a dsitinct possibility that she is also a victim. As a tenant she leased a building that ought to have been fit for purpose. It has been an eaterie for quite a number of years and she will be paying a big rent. Obvioulsy we don't know what the lease says and she may or may not be responsible for the fabric and infrastructure. i think probably not. She will have responsibility for insuring and repairing but that liability would not apply to new installations such as the external vent, insulation etc. She may be ignoring you because its not within her influence to deliver a solution. She's just getting on with business, which is totally understandable. I don't know if when she took it over she made major alterations to the kitchen/cooking facilities. If not, then building control would have had no input on suitable ventilation.

It sounds like you ae having a terrible time of it and I hope you get things resolved soon.

[Denise Muir]

Just a quick update to all.
Extraction problem now solved thanks to my insistence, and a more competent ventilation engineer who found a serious (of illegal construction and potentially lethal) problem previously overlooked by first ventilation engineer called in almost 2 months ago.
Normal living has been restored, with still not a word unfortunately from the Espy management to excuse the distress and hell we have been forced to live with for the past months.
Neighbours are obviously not a number one priority in this establishment's books, even though said neighbours were / are / could be trade and a good calling card for her business now and in the future.
Env.Health continue to recommend structural work to Espy ceilings - I await to see if this now be brushed under the carpet in an attempt to avoid the cost, against to the detriment of neighbour relations??
Many thanks for everyone's concern and comments, it was very useful to maintain a rational and objective approach to what was a very upsetting and distressing personal situation.
Denise

[Makaveli]

Good to hear you got a satisfactory outcome.

[Porty]

Yes indeed, its a breath of fresh air.

[Denise Muir]

Oh dear, I fear I spoke too soon.
Smells are back - never really stayed away that long - probably just for the duration of the Env. Health visit and time they had to stop cooking to let the ventilation engineer in.
Methinks I have been hoodwinked.
The battle recommences.
Denise

[Porty]

hoodstinked?

[Denise Muir]

hoodstinked?

LOL!!!!

[loopylou]

LOCAL RESTAURANT IGNORES DISTRESS CAUSED TO NEIGHBOURS / ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH FAILS TO PROTECT PUBLIC HEALTH

While the Espy, 62-64 Bath Street, Portobello has become a favourite haunt for locals and visitors alike to the Promenade, it has unfortunately become a nuisance to its neighbours.
The Espy management is aware of this situation.
The Espy management is not doing everything possible to minimize the nuisance.

Fact:

- The Espy has a kitchen operating approx.14 hours a day, 7 days a week.
- The Espy does not have direct extract ventilation.
- The point of discharge of their extract outlet duct not does meet statutory recommendations
- The Espy discharges odours and fumes at ground level into the street as staff are opening external doors and windows to cover for inadequate extract ventilation.
- The Espy discharges fumes into a courtyard well and partially enclosed area.
- The Espy discharges fumes through the fabric of the building to properties in separate occupancy.
- Objective evidence has been obtained (Env.Health) that cooking odours and smoke are travelling directly through breaks in the walls and ceiling into the property above.
- The Espy management has ignored all communication informing of the distress being caused to a young family, and has not responded to attempts to reach a neighbourly compromise.
- The Espy management is continuing to run and generate profit from a business that is detrimental and distressing to its (young) neighbours.


Fact:
- An application for planning permission has been submitted to install a rear extraction flue.
- In the meantime no other steps have been taken to:
1. Minimize the nuisance.
2. To prevent the migration of cooking smells.
3. To install some form of odour control (activated charcoal filters, air dilution, odour neutralisation).
4. To make good and seal breaks in walls and ceilings where pipes, ducts and wires pass through.
5. To reassure the building occupants that the problem is being dealt with.
6. To refund the building occupants for material costs being incurred.


What to do?
Denise

Ms Muir i read your post with great interest - being a huge fan of the espy (and indeed the roseleaf, previously managed by the current Aussie owner Amanda) and as someone who works in the hospitality industry i felt compelled to research your 'facts' further and as a result, post this response.

Firstly i find it very interesting that The Espy has been in operation for just over three years now - and as far as i am aware, from my investigations this appears to be the first complaint of this nature made about the establishment - might i ask how long you have occupied the flat above so as to ascertain some understanding on when these problems first occurred? Clearly these fumes have either been a recent unfortunate occurance or previous occupants felt they were so insignificant that they did not warrant reporting to environmental health?

My experiences of Amanda, the owner, and her establishments have been nothing but positive - this is reflected by regular positive independent reviews, awards and her reputation within the industry as a responsible, passionate publican. The Espy embodies her values and she has,i feel, provided portobello with a fun, unique bar with nice clientelle and good food. As pointed out by a previous post rented bars often require their tennants to buy directly from their own brewery - this can be a very costly exercise and as such serving food is the only way that these bars can turn enough profit in order to survive. Not offering food puts pressure on publicans to make their money through drink resulting in promotions and a relaxed approach to clientelle which in turn can lead to anti social behaviour.

Coming to the problem at hand - you have not actually stated how long this situation has been going on for. You are attempting to gain support for your cause without giving anyone any idea as to the time frame involved - to have environmental health inspect and assess, engineers visit to carry out work, order parts for said work and then have environmental health re-assess the situation is not going to happen overnight. Whilst i appreciate your apparent distress at the situation you also have to be aware that the pub is in fact a listed building in portobello and as such planning permission also requires to be sought for any work done (and speaking from my own experience this is a costly process - even applying for works on a listed bulding can cost up to £1,500 with no gaurantee of acceptance - hardly the steps taken by someone who is not willing to spend money!!).As such you must allow time for these works to be carried out. With regards to your comment about discharging odours at ground level - many bars and restaurants operate an open door policy so as to attract customers - not necessarily to replace ventilation. It is
summer after all and the bar is situated on the esplanade - the perfect place for walk-in punters.

I also felt it appropriate to comment on the fact that you rent your flat. You make reference to your landlord and yet you speak as though your plight is a situation you cannot remove yourself from. You refer to the smoke/fumes entering your house as potentially lethal and yet yourself and your child continue to occupy the premises. Forgive me, but if i were as concerned a parent as yourself i would be removing my child immediately and seeking legal advice for damages with regards to the health problems encountered and to recover costs for alternative accomodation. What i would not be doing is spending my time posting about my woes on a community forum.
I would also like to note that as a tennant you are not responsible for the costs of any work carried out on your property with regards to this issue. As such renumeration for any 'material costs' is not in fact due to yourselves, the occupants, but to your landlord. I also assume that yourlandlord is the one who is communicating with said publican, Amanda, as clearly you are very angry at the situation and any correspondance from yourself similar to those comments you have posted on this forum may in fact be construed as openly hostile - i certainly wouldn't wish to work in co-operation with someone who is actively slandering my business' reputation and making defamatory comments by insinuating my actions are in some way malicious or that i operate my business in an unsafe manner so that i might profit from not carrying out necessary works (at this stage i would like to point out that your comments have been made over a public forum. They are defamatory in nature and your behaviour is no more legal than having unfit ventilation in an establishment with a working kitchen.)

It is also a sad fact that the employment of a number of people who work in the espy relies on their kitchen. Both kitchen staff (chefs and porters) and waiting staff would be made redundant were the kitchen to face closure or even have to reduce its hours of operation.

Finally it is interesting to note that my uncle has been a chef for 30 years now - working in confined cooking space in restaurants around edinburgh over the years and has never experienced any health problems related in inhalation/exposure to fumes/smoke in the kitchen. Can you elaborate on the health issues faced by yourself and your child? And also if the espy is not currently operating a system according to statutory requirements why is it that Environmental Health have not already revoked their license pending further investigation?


I look forward to a response clarifying some of the points ive raised and providing more information so as to portray a more accurate sequence of events.

Lou.

[Lima]

Loppylou - Are you and Amanda, one and the same person, by the way the post reads it would appear you are, apologies if you are not.
My reason for this is some of your claims are overstated , such as the reputation within the industry - she does have a reputation but from what I have heard it is not a good one, also what awards has she one?

[Denise Muir]

1. If in doubt of the "distress" I face, please feel free to call round any evening, especially on a weekend. It won't take long - people only usually last a few minutes before their eyes start to hurt and they feel uncomfortable and want to leave. If you want to stay any longer, that's not a problem, just remember to bring some fabric freshener because clothes usually start to smell after a few hours too. Best not to stay overnight though, as after a few hours of breathing in fumes in your sleep, you'll start to cough a lot. Night after night, this actually gets quite uncomfortable and unless you're good at using asthmatic medication and inhalers too like we've had to, then probably better to go home to your nice, fresh air family home.
ps. If you do start to feel unwell though, or if you get blocked ducts in your eyes from over-tearing and a nasty great abcess in your eye, then better have an extra £500 set aside for a Bupa Health check to get someone to put pen to paper and make a connection between what you've experienced in my house and the symptoms you are experiencing.

2. Let's stick to facts.
Due to insufficient powers, Env.Health are able to confirm the severe unpleasantness and discomfort of this situation, but are unable to force the kitchen to close. They have asked for action to be taken.
Everyone who has visited or lives in this property realizes that it is old ("listed" as you state) and it was never built to house a commercial kitchen cooking such long hours every day.
You are free to make the same phone calls I did to find out how this is possible. Unfortunately it has been allowed to happen.
But it is blatantly obvious from my very complaints that the extraction system they have in place can't cope.
So, what to do?
Take responsibility for this and suspend operations until an appropriate solution can be put in place, maintain good relations with the community, safeguard the health and safety of direct neighbours and demonstrate these "values" that Amanda has?
Unfortunately no.
In this case the answer seems to be, keep cooking, don't scale back the menu, ignore said neighbours (even perceiving them to be "hostile" although it would be hard to imagine anyone not getting overanxious living in this situation), forget to interact with said neighbours to whom your restaurant is causing so much distress, and expect the very people who are bearing the brunt of your inadequate ventilation to keep waiting until decisions are taken about the work involved. Which could easily have been started by now. This was first officially reported on 2/5 although personal notifications had been given to the Espy for many months prior to this that the situation was deteriorating.

3. "I must wait for these works to be carried out" you state. It would have been nice to have been asked. Amanda has never been near my home. I am the tenant, yes, the landlord is light years away from the reality of this situation. But most importantly, I am the person directly affected.
Hence expecting me to wait without actually ever coming near me to ask, explain, reassure, talk, could to some people be construed as a bit rude. As is enforcing the continuation of your livelihood, however it is generated (drink,food whatever) over the health and wellbeing of your neighbours. The livelihood of these neighbours may also depend on that same smoke and smell-filled flat. Is that any less important?

4. My personal reasons for being in this flat are not open to discussion or comment on this forum and it is entirely inappropriate to bring them into question. Let's keep this to facts. I currently lease a property that is not habitable due to the discharge caused by the restaurant downstairs. The restaurant downstairs is not implementing or taking immediate action to mitigate this and is forcing the individuals concerned to live with it in the meantime. Fact. While they continue as if nothing was wrong in the meantime. Fact.

5. Interesting the story about your uncle.
Did he also sleep, eat, socialize, study, dress, wash, dry laundry, have visitors etc. in that kitchen or did he have a home to go to do all that? I don't. I live here. All the time.
Did your uncle knowingly sign up to work in a kitchen or did he think he was getting something else and just end up hoodwinked with a kitchen?
Did he pay money for this kitchen he worked in, or did they pay him for being there?
I know I signed up for a nice family home, I know I am paying for a nice family home. But what did I get? A kitchen. And no ones paying me for being here.

Denise

[Porty]

Flats over pubs and catering outlets, especially fast food ,are widely recognised as being at the lower end of the property market, whether leased or purchased. Many mortgage lenders will not lend on such property and those that do will generally severley restrict the loan to value. Lenders view flats, like yours Denise, as high risk due to poor demand. Similarly, landlords cannot expect to achieve full market rental. Not justification for the issues you seem to be experiencing but it is a common and widespread problem.

[raab]

by Lima » 26/06/2011 19:12

Loppylou - Are you and Amanda, one and the same person, by the way the post reads it would appear you are, apologies if you are not.
My reason for this is some of your claims are overstated , such as the reputation within the industry - she does have a reputation but from what I have heard it is not a good one, also what awards has she one?

I know Amanda and I can absolutely guarantee that there is no way she wrote the post you refer to Lima. I also know that she takes her relationship with her neighbours, and the wider community, very seriously and has in the past done everything in her power to resolve any issues that have been raised. It sounds to me, from what has been said here, that she is again doing just that, unfortunately these things take time. Especially, as has already been mentioned, when you are dealing with a listed building.

For me, what is most significant in Loopylou's post is the fact that The Espy has been trading for 3 years and yet no one has previously complained about the problem described by Ms Muir. If the problem is so severe that no one wants to even visit her flat anymore then I find it very hard to believe that the previous tenants would not have mentioned it. This suggests to me that the problem is nowhere near as bad as Ms Muir is making out. Her motives for this can only be guessed at.

I used to live above a Chinese takeaway and guess what? Sometimes my flat smelled of Chinese food. Guess what else? I knew that would be the case before I moved in because there was a Chinese takeaway beneath the flat... I now live on Portobello High Street and guess what? It can be quite noisy. Guess what else? I knew that before I moved in because the flat is on Portobello High Street. What I have not done is petitioned Edinburgh Council to reroute the buses down Bath Street and along Straiton Place so that I can hear my TV properly. Or maybe they could just cancel the whole bus service altogether, I don't use it and it is annoying me...

Ms Muir displays an incredible level of naivety in suggesting that The Espy should cease trading until the problem (if there actually is one that is..) is resolved. The cost of that would be ruinous to a small business such as this. It is well documented that it is very difficult to make money from a pub these days, even a busy one. That is why so many are for sale. Anyone who imagines that any pub landlord is making a mint simply does not know what they are talking about. The only people making big money in the drinks trade are the big breweries (and even some of them are in big trouble) and the supermarkets.

The Espy is the only decent place to go in Portobello and it has been a long time coming. It really annoys me that someone has moved here to Portobello and now wants to shut down a place that is at the heart of our community because they are, at best, over-sensitive to smells. How selfish is that? Amanda has done a great job where all (and there have been a few) have failed before and is certainly an asset to the area. I am surprised at the lack of support for her on these pages. Am I the only one who remembers what that place was like before she came along?

[Maria]

Am I the only one who remembers what that place was like before she came along?

What was so wrong with "The Old Pier"? I liked it!

[Porty]

4. My personal reasons for being in this flat are not open to discussion or comment on this forum and it is entirely inappropriate to bring them into question. Let's keep this to facts. I currently lease a property that is not habitable due to the discharge caused by the restaurant downstairs.

I agree with Raab,it is totally unreasonable to suggest the Espy cease or cut back their menu. They may as well close down if that was the case. I don't want to take sides either but it seems to me Denise is directing her complaints to the wrong party. If what she is claiming is true, then she is leasing a flat that is unfit for purpose and therefore would be perfectly entitled to withhold rent (put the money in an account with her solicitor ) until such time as the flat meets standards. Denise would have to demonstrate to her landlord that the issues are as severe as she is depicting. And assuming the landlord is reasonable, he or she will hold their hands up and say this needs sorted. (maybe Denise has tried this route already?)

let the landlords sort it out. A landlord being denied their rent would be a more effective force. Ideally Amanda could also stop paying her rent until the issue is resolved, but the implications of doing so may have the same effect as stopping cooking!!

There is no obligation whatsoever for Amanda to engage with Denise or any of the other tenants. It is nice to be neighbourly but any issue is between the owners of the properties, not Denise or Amanda, who are tenants.

The restaurant downstairs is not implementing or taking immediate action to mitigate this and is forcing the individuals concerned to live with it in the meantime.

Denise noone is forcing you to live with anything, you chose to live there and you can choose to leave. Should you choose to stay you are solely responsible for that choice.

[Denise Muir]

Quick reply to the points raised:

1. I am not talking about smells every now and then - to be expected when you live near a food outlet. I have strong odours every day, smoke on occasion, and often both all day on the weekend. So strong that they penetrate clothes, bedding, and make your eyes sting. So strong that you physically can't and don't want to be in the room. More than you could be expected to tolerate even knowingly choosing to live above a restaurant.
I challenge anyone to react differently to me in this situation.

2. I have lived here for more than 2 years and have been willing to deal with minor odours and other "issues" to be expected when you live over a restaurant. I have also never complained about noise (others have), and only ever complained over these 2 years when smoke entered the flat. Not pleasant and a possible danger by anyone's standards and beyond what someone could be prepared to expect living above a restaurant.

3. The situation probably started to deteriorate with the increase in Amanda's business over the past 12 months or so. It only reached "breaking point" for me when I returned after a 4-week absence in April and something seemed to have changed drastically. No longer were they manageable odours but serious infiltration and ventilation breakdown. Read my previous posts and you will see that there was in fact a serious pipe fault - repaired which has mildly improved the situation. But in the ventilation engineer's own words "the current lined pipe/chimney being used in that kitchen simply can't cope". The building fabric simply can't cope. Both are resolvable issues. But in a long time scale.
My only issue then, and I hope this is clear, is WHAT TO DO IN THE MEANTIME? How do I live in the meantime? I do not want to close down the Espy. And I may not actually want to move. But that is my business, not anyone elses. And I also feel that while there are options which could be taken, I shouldn't be forced to move. If I could survive it in the meantime I would, but I honestly can't. It's too much, too unpleasant and not nice.

4. The fact that I am "free" to go should not be an issue. Whether this is possible/viable/feasible for me is a personal issue which I will not discuss on this forum.
The fact remains that a commercial kitchen has gone beyond what can be considered the tollerance levels of its residential neighbours. House owners in this same building are also being inconvenienced. I am merely their voice because I am the most affected.

The Espy has a ventilation problem. It needs to be solved. It is operating to a limit that the structure of this listed building and their current ventilation cannot sustain. There is also a structural issue between the two buildings, which needs to be solved. There are many other "stopgap" solutions that could be put in place in the meantime while we await the long-term one. If the situation was at all supportable, I would willingly try to deal with it while awaiting the definitive fix. I am neither naive or hostile. I am simply unable to go on living/sleeping/ washing/doing everything in a kitchen, hence my sense of urgency and need for some air till it can all be fixed.

5. Never at any time have I asked for the Espy to be shut down. I have made numerous suggestions about how to limit the odours, have researched solutions, (have introduced some in my own home), I have forwarded them to all parties concerned in the hope the Espy could try some of them out. Obviously the ultimate quick fix would be for them to modify or scale back their cooking in the meantime. While I can appreciate this may be drastic for the Espy if income comes from food, why should this take priority over the interests (income in my case too) of the residents of 26 Promenade?? Only because it is truly unlivable in this apartment at times. But as I know a long-term fix is at least 3-4 months away, I hold out hope that this black cloud I am under will eventually blow over before the end of the year (let's face it, it won't be quick - planning permission / building standards / construction).

6. Final point- I understand enough about business to realize that by taking on a restaurant in a listed residential building without sufficient ventilation, Amanda herself should have made provision for the business risk involved - whether this was in her initial business plan, costing, pricing etc. to account for the potential costs/loss of business which she must've known may have been incurred.
Obviously as you all state, I had to be aware of the risks involved in taking on a flat over a restaurant when I signed the lease, being prepared to put up with them (to a reasonable degree however). Doesn't this hold for both parties?

Denise

[Pal of Porty]

.......I am surprised at the lack of support for her on these pages. Am I the only one who remembers what that place was like before she came along?

I am in the Espy at at least once a week. I am sure that is the kind of support Amanda would rather have.

[Porty]

. While I can appreciate this may be drastic for the Espy if income comes from food, why should this take priority over the interests (income in my case too) of the residents of 26 Promenade??

Bottom line is; you are renting an unhabitable flat. Your first and last point of call is your landlord. The Espy have no contract or obligation to you and are quite within their rights to sling you a deafie.

[Denise Muir]

[/quote]

Bottom line is; you are renting an unhabitable flat. Your first and last point of call is your landlord. The Espy have no contract or obligation to you and are quite within their rights to sling you a deafie.[/quote]

Why would a community pub and a friendly publican want to do that? Wouldn't it be better to try and cooperate with local residents and neighbours? Wouldn't there be a greater overall payback from that kind of attitude, because obviously the one being adopted at the moment has the potential to force people to take sides and split potential future and current punters down the middle. Whereas if they were perceived by ALL (those on the business side and more directly aware of the issues the Espy may be facing + all those who see directly what a state I and my home are in) to be cooperating and helping, then there would be no reason for anyone to take a stance against the Espy.
Or maybe in that respect I am naive.

However, many thanks for your suggestions about the landlord thing etc, I had originally perceived him as a victim in this too, but maybe I should be pushing more in that direction. This is the kind of useful information that I hoped to gain by posting on this forum. Other people's points of view, whichever side they tend to take, are always constructive in building a better understanding of the situation.

Denise

[Denise Muir]

ps. How do you do that nice quote in a box thing????

[wangi]

ps. How do you do that nice quote in a box thing????

Hi Denise, see: http://forum.talkporty.org/faq.php?mode=bbcode#f2r0

L/