Penarth Civic Society Will NOT protect our conservation areas

Chris Wyatt and Audrey Poole

Audrey Poole President of the CIVIC SOCIETY response to Northcliffe in Penarth Conservation area. architecture, like art,  is very much a personal preference. Perhaps its more the close relationship with Chris Loyn the brutalist architect who was the previous president . 

Audrey Poole with Chris Wyatt who does the civic society face-book page and posts what he likes and excludes members like Anne Greagsby from posting. 

Chair of the civic society is James Long who doesn't live in Penarth and bullies even members of the committee. 

 Could we continue to trust these people with the Penarth archive?

Audrey Poole <audrey733@btinternet.com>	7/11/17
to me

Dear Anne ,

The only issues I could question over this application  would be the stability of the actual site and the problem of increased traffic which would be a factor in any new development  and you don't mention those.  As far as the building is concerned,  architecture, like art,  is very much a personal preference and I would always prefer genuine creativity in design to pastiche. A town must be allowed to evolve and we can't keep Penarth in a time warp. If you are looking at impact on the environment the modern high apartment blocks that dominate the skyline in key areas of the town, which  seemed to appear almost overnight , really do have a negative impact and should have been opposed.

Regards

Audrey

Anne Greagsby <womensvoice@gmail.com>	7/11/17
to LONG, wyatt.partners, lindabantock, Geoff, Audrey, Andrew, Anne, jillianpenn, anne.evans21, Max

Northcliffe Lodge cliffside flats renewed application

This new application has another version of modern square blocks crammed in, but no regard to the historic importance.

The application documents are mainly a new "Heritage Impact Assessment" by some English company EDP.  They have the impudence to write they knew that new WG/Cadw Guidance was due out, but preferred the English 2011 guidance - they had objected to the draft Welsh guidance, so said they'd use the English one.

Nor did they follow what our Conservation Officer said he was bound by - the draft Setting of Historic Assets in Wales (but he followed it badly).  They include actual photos from the barrage, but crucially do not make a photo-montage with the new blocks imposed just above the Custom House roof.  Instead they provide a lot of text about the "setting" of the Barrage, Marina and Paget Rd houses having changed since the Custom House was built!

Publication of the new Welsh policy TAN 24 http://gov.wales/topics/planning/policy/tans/tan-24/?lang=en  catches the consultants out, being in force 31 May.  Likewise the Setting  document was published on 31 May, with some wording changes (eg. 'good practice' replaced by direct statement) from last year's draft. A copy is attached.  Also, likewise, the LDP is now adopted - so 

For listed and locally listed buildings, development proposals must preserve or

enhance the building, its setting... 

They make no argument for preserving the tree-covered cliffside setting of the Custom House and Marine Buildings. 

Perhaps the first target is to get the Vale to agree the Consultants' summary statement is false:

"S4 The assessment has been prepared in line with current best practice professional guidance issued by English Heritage in 2011 and endorsed by Cadw".

Why shouldn't the Vale reject the application on this account and save us the tedious trouble of going through it and pointing out the inadequacies re. the new documents?

Otherwise, as they quote the Conservation Officer, Peter Thomas's conclusion, we have to detail his inadequacies against the Setting of Historic Assets in Wales document - against its detailed staged assessment and use of photomontages that he skipped.

Another key point is whether the existing Lodge should be 'listed' on historical grounds.  It apparently copied the original smaller Lodge.  We said it had no architectural interest, but listing buildings includes also 

b. Historic interest: this includes buildings that illustrate important aspects of the nation’s social, economic, cultural, or military history.

c. Close historical associations: with people or events of importance to Wales.

A case could be made on the basis of its association with development of the Penarth Dock and Cardiff as a shipping port; with in particular John Batchelor (*'man of freedom") who wrenched Cardiff from the domination of the Bute's and Earl of Plymouth.

As mentioned, TAN24 is now published - link above. Has anyone seen an assessment of what that means in practical terms for Conservation Areas and Listed Buildings?   I think it fails to require Highways Authorities to pay any regard to Conservation Area and setting of listed buildings - don't we need a Resolution by the Vale Council to make our highwaymen comply?

Best wishes,

Anne