<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3c.org/TR/1999/REC-html401-19991224/loose.dtd">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2722" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff">
<DIV><SPAN class=703040519-15102009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>The
decision by Stoke-on-Trent City Council is disappointing but it's a matter of
interpreting PPG15 (and whatever it says in the policy set out in
the Staffordshire & Stoke-on-Trent Structure Plan 1996-2011, which I haven't
looked through) rather than conflicting with it. PPG15 contains no hard
and fast advice about leaving church bells and organs in redundant
churches.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=703040519-15102009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=703040519-15102009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>I
think something which will have weighed heavily here with the planning
officer is the War Memorial argument. The number of letters arguing for
and against the application isn't the main consideration; it's what they
say. </FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=703040519-15102009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=703040519-15102009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>Yes,
the applicant can appeal, and the obvious grounds would be that the local
planning authority have reached the wrong decision in that the bells will no
longer contribute anything to the building once its new use has commenced.
Para 3.8 of PPG15 says that "Generally the best way of securing the future of
historic buildings and areas is to keep them in active use..." There is no
obvious reason why this shouldn't apply to artefacts as well. Obviously it
would be prudent to try to negotiate with the local planning authority before
putting in an appeal but it sounds as if the Conservation Officer has already
reached his own conclusions.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=703040519-15102009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=703040519-15102009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>For
those who haven't been involved in planning appeals before, it's worth
pointing out that the costs needn't be very great. It depends which
of three routes is taken through the system:</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=703040519-15102009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=703040519-15102009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>1.
Written representations - this is how the vast majority of planning (and
most listed building) appeals are dealt with. The appellant puts in a
statement saying why permission should have been granted, and the local planning
authority puts in one saying why it was refused. Third parties can also
put in further representations. A Planning Inspector, who in this case
would be somebody with a historic buildings as well as a planning background,
will read these and all the material considered with the original
application. The Inspector will then come and have a look
at the site, accompanied by somebody from each side so that they can
point out all the things they have referred to in their statements. They
are not allowed to conduct an argument on site; the inspection is for that
purpose alone. The Inspector will then go away and reach a decision.
This procedure is cheap and relatively quick, but it doesn't allow an
opportunity for you to argue with each other's expert
witnesses.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=703040519-15102009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=703040519-15102009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>2. A
Hearing - this procedure is often used where there are a number of members of
the public and representatives of other bodies want to give evidence. It
takes the form of a discussion led by the Inspector, who having read each side's
evidence will prepare his own agenda setting out what he believes to be the key
issues to be decided. It is not a court of law, or anything like
it; you do not take along legal representation. At the end of
the hearing the Inspector will conduct a site visit, on exactly the same basis
as for a written reps case.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=703040519-15102009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=703040519-15102009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>3. A
Public Inquiry - used for only a small number of planning appeals, but as they
usually involve high profile cases - supermarkets, airport extensions,
gypsy sites - this is the version that people tend to have heard of. This
is the expensive option, as it involves using barristers
and it functions much like a court of law. Frankly I would
regard it as over the top for an appeal involving something of this
nature. Either side can demand a public inquiry but it is unlikely that
the local authority would. Public inquiries take up a lot of the
planning officer's time, and barristers don't come
cheap.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=703040519-15102009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=703040519-15102009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2>Generally speaking both sides are expected to bear their own costs.
If one side or the other behaves unreasonably (failing to provide any evidence
in support of their arguments, or putting in extra evidence at the last minute)
it is possible for their opponents to put in a claim for costs; but this doesn't
happen in the majority of cases.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=703040519-15102009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=703040519-15102009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>It
should be added that the Inspector's decision is final - unless you believe that
it's flawed because it has misinterpreted a point of law. Getting involved
in legal challenges is expensive, and is not recommended!</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=703040519-15102009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=703040519-15102009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>I hope
this is some help.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=703040519-15102009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=703040519-15102009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>Peter
Rivet</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=703040519-15102009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Tahoma
size=2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B>
bellhistorians@yahoogroups.com [mailto:bellhistorians@yahoogroups.com]<B>On
Behalf Of </B>John H Allen<BR><B>Sent:</B> 15 October 2009 14:48<BR><B>To:</B>
bellhistorians@yahoogroups.com<BR><B>Subject:</B> RE: [Bell Historians] Hanley
Stoke on Trent<BR><BR></FONT></DIV><SPAN style="DISPLAY: none"> </SPAN>
<DIV id=ygrp-text>
<P>
<DIV class=Section1>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=black size=3><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; COLOR: black; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">This is my take on
the situation:-<O></O></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=black size=3><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; COLOR: black; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><O></O></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=black size=3><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; COLOR: black; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">The question has
been asked whether the LB Application was adequately prepared. Look on the
Stoke CC link and click on the Documents tab and make up your own
mind.<O></O></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=black size=3><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; COLOR: black; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><O></O></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=black size=3><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; COLOR: black; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">Can an Appeal be
lodged? The answer is yes but only by the Applicant (Under Section 20 of the
Planning (Listed Building and Conservation Areas) Act 1990, only the applicant
can appeal a decision). What would be the Grounds for Appeal? The Applicant
would have to meet all costs. Would the Planning Inspector go against advice
contained in PPG 15?<O></O></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=black size=3><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; COLOR: black; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><O></O></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=black size=3><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; COLOR: black; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">Robert Lewis asks
what happens next. On the assumption that no Appeal is lodged and won, the
bells will stay in the church and will pass with the ownership of the church.
Any future removal would be subject to Listed Building Consent (unlikely) and
subject to the Directions of the Bishop of Lichfield. The bells will be
entombed in the church, rather like the situation at Christ Church Oldbury
where the installation of a concrete reinforced floor under the bells, under
which is air conditioning plant, means that the only realistic method of
removal is through the tower roof or through the louvres. All this would be
subject to the necessary consents.<O></O></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=black size=3><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; COLOR: black; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><O></O></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=black size=3><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; COLOR: black; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">John<O></O></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=black size=3><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; COLOR: black; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><O></O></SPAN></FONT></P>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=black size=3><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; COLOR: black"></SPAN></FONT><O></O></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: center" align=center><FONT
face="Times New Roman" size=3><SPAN lang=EN-US style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">
<HR tabIndex=-1 align=center width="100%" SIZE=2>
</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><B><FONT face=Tahoma size=2><SPAN lang=EN-US
style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma">From:</SPAN></FONT></B><FONT
face=Tahoma size=2><SPAN lang=EN-US
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma">
<ST1>bellhistorians@<WBR>yahoogroups.<WBR>com</ST1>
[mailto:<ST1>bellhistorians@<WBR>yahoogroups.<WBR>com</ST1>] <B><SPAN
style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">On Behalf Of </SPAN></B>Robert Lewis<BR><B><SPAN
style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Sent:</SPAN></B> Wednesday 14 October 2009
23:18<BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">To:</SPAN></B>
<ST1>bellhistorians@<WBR>yahoogroups.<WBR>com</ST1><BR><B><SPAN
style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Subject:</SPAN></B> Re: [<ST1>Bell</ST1> Historians]
Hanley Stoke on <ST1><ST1>Trent</ST1></ST1></SPAN></FONT><SPAN
lang=EN-US><O></O></SPAN></P></DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt"><O></O></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt"> <O></O></SPAN></FONT></P>
<DIV id=ygrp-mlmsg>
<DIV id=ygrp-msg>
<DIV id=ygrp-text>
<P><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">At 22:38
14/10/2009, John wrote:<BR><BR><O></O></SPAN></FONT></P>
<BLOCKQUOTE cite="" type="cite">
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">Earlier today, Stoke on Trent City Council refused
Listed Building Consent to remove the 10 G & J bells as the first step
towards a transfer to Stone Staffs.<O></O></SPAN></FONT></P></BLOCKQUOTE>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt"><BR>That is an unfortunate set-back. What is the
plan now?<BR><BR>RAL <O></O></SPAN></FONT></P></DIV><!--End group email -->
<P><FONT face=Arial size=2>No virus found in this incoming message.<BR>Checked
by AVG - www.avg.com<BR>Version: 8.5.421 / Virus Database: 270.14.17/2436 -
Release Date: 10/14/09 18:32:00<BR></FONT></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
<P></P></DIV><!--End group email --></BODY></HTML>