The Pantmawr Action Group (PAG) held an open meeting at the Pantmawr Inn on Friday evening for local people to come along, find out more about the plans, and have their questions answered.
Councillors Jayne Cowan, Adrian Robson and Gareth Neale were in attendance as well as Jon Bassett, who is the current operator of the Pantmawr Inn. Jonathan Edwards MEP sent his apologies.
PAG Chair Hugh Payne addressed the meeting, and urged those in attendance to write and post their objection letters as soon as possible. Hugh explained the plans using copies of the plans submitted by the developer Charles Church. He showed people the enormous L shaped block of flats which, if the plans get approved, will stand on the site of the historic Pantmawr Inn. Hugh explained that the amended plans are very similar to the original application with a mixture of 2 and 3 storey buildings. Hugh highlighted the fact that whilst the number of dwellings has been reduced by 2, the number of bedrooms remains the same – 60. The amended plans submitted by the developer are shown on a horizontal level – PAG is assuming that during the development, the uneven land will be levelled off.
Hugh covered a number of points which people objecting may wish to include in their objection letters, including the scale of the development, the height and mass of the development, the density of dwellings, parking, and the ‘type’ of dwellings – which are completely out of character of the existing estate. The amended plans also exclude facilities for the disabled and elderly, with the entrance to one section of flats straight off a section of grass. Under the submitted plans, a significant number of existing properties will be overlooked.
Questions were also raised over the ‘tunnels’ on the plans. Cars can fit through, however vans were certainly struggle, and this also raises questions of access for the emergency services, as well as rubbish collection. The tunnels on the plans are 7’6” high.
Hugh explained that he looked up the word ‘amenity’ in the dictionary, and it carried the definition – ‘pleasurable and useful feature’. If the Pantmawr Inn is not a ‘pleasurable and useful feature’ then we are at a loss to what is. In
Cardiff County Council’s planning guidelines, there’s a recommendation that a public amenity should be provided. It seems that Charles Church believe that several small patches of grass will suffice.
Currently, children are welcome in the Pantmawr Inn, however, under the new proposals, there are no facilities for children at all.
Hugh urged those present to get their objection letters to the Council by 10th January at the latest. Whilst it was noted that this is very short notice, it was also noted that Charles Church did not submit the amended plans until 18/12/07, meaning that PAG was extremely lucky to get hold of a copy of the new plans before the City Hall closed for the Christmas period.
Councillor Gareth Neale reminded residents to primarily focus their objection letters on planning objections as opposed to the ‘softer’ aspects.
A member present at the meeting also raised the traffic issue, arguing that if the Pantmawr Inn is closed, Pantmawr residents will be forced to use their cars to access other local community facilities. The fact that The Deri Inn may be in walking distance for a small number of residents, The Deri does not allow children on its premises. At the other end of the age scale, some elderly residents will find it very challenging to walk to The Deri, and as Cllr Jayne Cowan pointed out, the Rhiwbina area has the oldest population in Cardiff.
