Report on 1st part on enquiry...

PUBLIC INQUIRY ADJOURNED – THE STORY SO FAR

The public inquiry into the Appeal against refusal by Cardiff City Council to grant planning approval for the demolition of the Pantmawr Inn and construction of 34 dwellings on the site commenced at the early hour of 09.00 on 18th September. The first period was taken up with various housekeeping matters, deciding the order of play, attempting to assess how long it would take and making sure everyone involved had the necessary bits of paper.

The Inspector also set out the matters he was most interested in hearing about, namely the effect on the character of the area, the effect on the neighbourhood, the loss of a community facility and highway safety, traffic flows and adequacy of car parking. He pointed out he would give extra weight to matters of policy included in the Development Plans and Supplemetary Planning Guidance. He would also be interested in water supply and drainage matters and sustainability.

Then there were opening statements by the legal representatives for the Appellants (Mitchells and Butlers and Charles Church) and Cardiff Council Planning Department. The first witness was Ms J Howard for the Council. She was taken through her proof of evidence by the Council's legal representative. She was then cross examined by the Appellants legal representative and agreed that she wrote the Officer's report and that the report represented her professional opinion - that the application should have been granted at Planning Application stage. She stated that her opinion had not changed. However, the Planning Committee had rejected the application against her recommendation so she was putting the case for them in respect of the matters for which they had indicated the application should be rejected.

The Appellants first witness was Mr M R Stapleton, a specialist in "Hospitality", who argued that the Pantmawr Inn was not viable, based on the turnover for the years ending September 2003 to 2007. For the majority of this time the franchisee was Rosebud Inns Ltd. He was then cross examined by PAG's legal representative, Mr Charles Hopkins, who questioned him about whether the years of turnover that he had used were reasonable to take given the history of those years and whether the rental charged was a reasonable one given that Rosebud Inns were the only people willing to take on the franchise although others expressed an interest.

This took until about 4.45pm at which time the Inspector adjourned the Inquiry to undertake his formal site visit. The locations of the buildings had been set out by a surveyor employed by the Appellants at the request of the Inspector. PAG deployed three poles to indicate the ridge heights of some of the buildings. The Inspector visited the garden of No. 90 Caer Wenallt and had a look inside the Inn as well as examining how the buildings related to the boundaries of the site.

The Inquiry resumed at 09.00 on 19th September and after preliminaries, Mr R Williams of Asbri Planning (the planners employed by M & B and Charles Church) was taken through his evidence by the Appellant's legal representative. He argued that the buildings proposed were in character; that the Inn was out of character with its surroundings especially with tarpaulins over the roofs of the outbuildings and advertising banners; that the proposed buildings were not out of scale with the surroundings; that Pantmawr was not rural but more urban in nature being within the boundary of the City of Cardiff so this style of building was acceptable; that the estate naturally depended on Rhiwbina for its facilities so the loss of the Inn would not matter; that sewerage capacity and linking into the private sewer was no problem or Welsh Water would have come back to them; and that he had observed traffic exiting the Estate had no difficulty in getting into the queue on Pantmawr Road.

During this questioning the Inspector interrupted a number of times to clarify various matters. In particular he thought there was a error in a drawing produced to in response to PAG’s claim that the lowering of the roof levels of flats “A” to “D” would make those on the second floor potentially sell, and that an application might well be made to raise the roof level again should the appeal be successful. This drawing was withdrawn. He also queried the fact that there had been three different versions of the access arrangements, two showing different sight distances, in the last four weeks. Mr Williams said that the Landscape drawing represented the latest version. The telegraph pole would need to be relocated.

Mr Williams was then cross examined by the Council’s legal representative who questioned him on his evidence about the Character and Scale of the proposed development whether because an angle between buildings was only just 30^o (not greater) the 21m rule should still apply. She was concerned about the maintenance of the protected trees once the development was in place. He responded that that would be the responsibility of a management company in perpetuity. She also questioned him on whether there would be any light reaching the amenity area and windows nearest the Cedars and Tulip tree. He responded that the Cedars were “gappy” and that light would come through, while the Tulip tree was deciduous so there would be light in the winter.

In questions from the public, Cllr Robson asked where the telegraph pole would be relocated. Mr Williams suggested it could go just inside the entrance to the site in the verge. Mrs J Jones asked about the intended locations of the proposed bus-boarders – to be decided

PAG’s legal representative questioned the witness on the rural vs urban nature of the Pantmawr Estate, the witness still claiming it was more urban that rural. The witness was also questioned on the distance to the Deri, that being the nearest facility/amenity to the Estate and whether it was within comfortable walking distance, particularly for the Elderly and children, given the guidance in the Manual for Streets and the gradient of Rhiwbina Hill. There was discussion about the provision of contributions in respect of open space, community facilities and transport improvements and how and where they should be spent. He queried whether the fact that the Cedars trees were gappy would allow people in the buildings to overlook the properties in Tyla Teg. Mr Williams said they would a small amount. Mr Williams was also asked whether the trees proposed on the northern boundary of the site would cause overshadowing of gardens of nos 90-98 Caer Wenallt. He agreed there would be some. On being asked about the car parking provision Mr Williams said he did not believe there would be overspill onto Tyla Teg. The intention was to encourage the use of public transport. Asked his opinion of the public transport service in the area he replied it was adequate.

He was than re-examined by the Appellants legal representative on various matters to about his responses to the PAG legal representative, and repeated much of what he had said in earlier examination.

The Inspector then adjourned the Inquiry which will reconvene at 10.00 am on Monday 17^th November 2008. Please put this date in your diary and try to attend. PAG representatives will be giving their evidence and would welcome your support.

What happens at a public inquiry?

Here's some further info on the Planning Inspectorate:

"Our quality statement:
We aim to provide the following in the appeal process:
· clear, prompt and polite advice and information;
· quick and efficient handling of your appeal;
· an open exchange of views between the people involved in the appeal;
· fair and unbiased decisions by appropriately qualified people;
· clear, logical decisions and reports;
· a quick and thorough complaints procedure; and
· a service that gives the public confidence in us.

About the Planning Inspectorate:
We are part of the National Assembly for Wales and Office of the Deputy Prime Minister. We deal with planning appeals in Wales from our Cardiff office. The Inspectors, who judge the appeals, have a variety of backgrounds. These include town planning, surveying, engineering, architecture and law. We choose the Inspectors very carefully and train them thoroughly.

Guide to taking part in planning appeals:
The purpose of this guide:
Only the person who applies for the planning permission has a legal right to appeal against the LPA’s decision and we call this person ‘the appellant’. But, if you had an interest in an application, whether you were for or against it, you may also be interested in the outcome of the appeal. For example, you may live close to the area, or you may be a member of a residents’ association or a group with a special interest.

In Wales, appeals are made to the National Assembly for Wales. Appeals are judged by Inspectors, who are completely unbiased and professionally qualified in planning or a related area, like law or architecture. An Inspector will decide most appeals, but there are some appeals that the Assembly will decide (for example, proposals that will affect more than just the local area). In those cases, the Inspector will still assess the appeal, but he or she will send a report with his or her recommendation to the Assembly. The Assembly then considers whether to accept the Inspector’s recommendation, and issues a decision letter. Both the appellant and the LPA can have their case heard by an Inspector at a hearing or public inquiry, but very few appeals are dealt with in this way. With all the appeal procedures, the Inspector and the Assembly can only consider things which are relevant to planning. These things can cover a wide range of issues, but the LPA’s reasons for refusing a planning application will usually set out those issues that will apply. You can only raise planning issues about the application. The Inspector and the Assembly cannot consider any other matters. For example, they cannot normally consider how a development will affect property values in the area. Or, if a new building would affect the view from your property, this is also not likely to be a good
reason for you making an objection. You would have to show that the new building would affect your living conditions, for example, because it overlooks your home or you would lose your privacy. Only the person who made the planning application has the right of appeal. We must receive all their appeal papers within six months of the LPA’s decision notice, or within six months of the end of the decision period if the LPA hasn’t made a decision. If we don’t receive their appeal papers within the time limit, and there are no exceptional reasons for this delay, we won’t accept the appeal. If the appeal has been made in time, we will write to the appellant and the LPA telling them which of the following procedures we will use to decide the appeal. We will also give them the timetable for receiving their comments. How much publicity the appeal receives will depend on which procedure we follow.

Inquiry procedure.
There is usually more publicity about an appeal if there will be an inquiry. As with the other appeal procedures, if you have already written to the LPA, they should write to you. And, you can send more comments to us. The LPA should send you details of the inquiry arrangements once the date is agreed. The appellant must display details of the inquiry, like the time and place, on the site of the proposed development.

Any person wishing to speak at an inquiry in the Welsh language, may do so, but it would be helpful if you could inform The Planning Inspectorate beforehand so that arrangements can be made.

The inquiry procedure
This is the most formal of the appeal procedures, because it usually involves larger or more complicated appeals. These are often cases where expert evidence is presented, and witnesses are cross-examined. An inquiry may last for several days, or even weeks. It is not a court of law, but the proceedings will often seem to be quite similar and the appellant and the LPA usually have legal representatives. Inquiries are open to members of the public, and although you do not have a legal right to speak, the Inspector will normally allow you to do so. We encourage local people to take part in the inquiry process. Local knowledge and opinion can often be a valuable addition to the more formal evidence given by the appellant and the LPA. However, as with hearings, you do not have to go to the inquiry to make your views known. You can write to us. If you wrote to the LPA at application stage, they will send us a copy of your views. If you did not, or wish to add to those views, you can still write to us. But you must make sure we receive three copies of your comments within the time limit given in your letter from the LPA telling you about the appeal. This is within six weeks of us accepting the appeal — we call this ‘the starting
date’. If we do not receive your letter within the time limit, the Inspector will not normally take your comments into account and we will send them back to you. If we receive your comments in time, we will send a copy of your letter to the appellant, the LPA and the Inspector. Please tell us in your letter if you would like a copy of the appeal decision. We will not acknowledge your letter unless you ask us to. If we consider your letter contains racist or abusive comments, we will send it back to you before the Inspector sees it. If you take out the racist or abusive comments, you can send your letter back to us. But, we must receive this before the time limit ends. If you want to see what the appellant and the LPA have said, you should be able to see copies of their appeal documents and statements at the local council’s offices.

How you find out about the inquiry
We will agree a date for the inquiry with the appellant and LPA. We do not involve anyone else when we fix the date. The LPA will write to everyone they told about the appeal and give them details of the inquiry, like the time and place. The LPA may put a notice in a local paper and the appellant must put one on the appeal site, giving the same information.

Taking part in the inquiry
If you want to take part in an inquiry, you need to think about what you want to say and how you want to say it. Most people prefer to make, or read out, a brief statement giving their views. If there are several people with the same views, it is a good idea for one person to speak on behalf of the others. Repeating arguments at the inquiry does not help the Inspector, or make the point more relevant. If you want to take a leading role in the inquiry and call your own witnesses, you should contact us at the earliest possible stage. If we agree to this, we may ask you to provide a statement of your case and details of any documents you will produce at the inquiry. You will also be required to provide written statements of evidence 4 weeks before the start of the inquiry. If we ask for this information, and you provide it, we will send you copies of the appellant’s and LPA’s statements.

What happens at the inquiry
If you want to speak at the inquiry, it is important that you are there when it opens because this is when the Inspector will tell everyone about the timetable. At the inquiry opening, the Inspector will go through some routine matters, including asking who will be taking part in the inquiry. When the appellant and the LPA have given their details, the Inspector will ask if anyone else wants to speak. At this stage, you should only give your name and address, and say whether you are for or against the proposal. The Inspector will then usually give an outline of what will happen at the inquiry. The LPA will usually begin by making an opening statement. Their witnesses will then give their evidence and the appellant can cross-examine (question) them. The appellant will then call their witnesses, and the LPA can cross-examine them.

Giving your views
When each witness has been formally cross-examined, the Inspector will normally ask if anyone else who objects to the proposed development has any questions. This is your opportunity to ask questions, but you must make sure that your questions are relevant to the evidence the witnesses have given. You shouldn’t repeat questions that have already been asked. Do not use questions as an opportunity to state your views on the application; you will have the chance to do so later. This will normally be after the LPA’s and the appellant’s witnesses have been heard. At a long inquiry, we cannot predict when we will reach this stage. If you can’t stay at the inquiry all the time, tell the Inspector when the inquiry opens. The Inspector will understand and will try to help by hearing your comments at a different stage of the inquiry, if that is possible. The Inspector will usually ask if you are willing to answer questions about your evidence. You do not have to do this. If you object to the proposed development, the appellant’s representative will ask these questions. Do not feel intimidated. The Inspector will not let anyone ask you hostile or unfair questions. The inquiry ends with closing speeches by the LPA and the appellant. This is
normally followed by the Inspector visiting the appeal site. Because the inquiry is over, there can be no further discussion about the case during that visit. The arrangements are very similar to the visits that are made as part of the written procedure.

After the inquiry
The Inspector will write their decision or send their report to the Assembly. Where the
Inspector decides the appeal we will send a copy of their decision to:
· the appellant;
· the LPA;
· anyone who took part in the inquiry; and
· anyone else who wrote to ask us for a copy.
For inquiries which the Inspector decides, and which last for one or two days, we aim to issue the decision no later than seven weeks after the close of the inquiry. For inquiries which last longer, or where the Inspector has to write a report for the Assembly, the decision will usually take longer.