Agenda and minutes

(1)       Members of the Regulation Committee had visited the application site prior to the previous Panel meeting on 6 February 2009.

(2)       A petition from “Hands off Our Tennis Courts” (HOOT) was submitted to the Panel.  It requested approval for the Montefiore Village Green application and was signed by 1514 members of the public.

(3)       The Panel noted that the land was known locally as “the Old Putting Green” rather than as the “Old Bowling Green.”  The Panel later also accepted Mrs Fenner’s evidence that the site had been acquired by Ramsgate Borough Council in 1948 and that ownership had transferred to Thanet DC in 1973. 

(4)       The Public Rights of Way Officer introduced her report. She explained that it had previously been considered by the Panel on 6 February 2009 where it had been resolved to submit it for examination by a Non-Statutory Public Inquiry.   The Inspector had submitted a 150 page report which had concluded that the application should be rejected on three grounds: the use of the application site had not been “as of right” for the whole of the twenty year period; use of the site had not been by a significant number of the residents of the locality; and in relation to the triangular piece of land adjacent to the tennis courts, use had not consisted of lawful sports and pastimes.

(5)       Mr M Matthews, the applicant addressed the Panel in support of the application. He provided the Panel with a number of photographs of the site in support of the points made by him and by supporters of the application.   He said that he had lived opposite the site from 1978 to 2008.   He wished to make a number of points concerning the operation of the Non-Statutory Public Inquiry.

(6)       Mr Matthews said that much of the case had involved interpretation of evidence.  Most of the Objectors’ witnesses had been Officers from Thanet DC, who had not been able to provide documentary evidence in support of their assertions.  Witnesses for the applicants had all been lay people (some of them very elderly) who had been unaware of the precise nature of the English language used by Thanet DC’s Barrister.  Two witnesses had decided that they would rather not face questioning by a Barrister.  Those who had given evidence had later said that they would never do so again.

(7)       Mr Matthews said that there were improvements that could be made to the evidence gathering stage of Non-Statutory Public Inquiries.  For example, the adversarial nature of the proceedings could have been mitigated if the Inspector had collected statements from people in their homes.

(8)                           Mr Matthews then said that he disagreed with the Inspector’s view that there had not been a significant number of residents within the locality using the site.  In order to comply with the need to identify a recognised administrative division, he had chosen the Ecclesiastical Parish of Holy Trinity in Ramsgate.  However, since the border of this parish ran  ...  view the full minutes text for item 15.