Development geeks want to be looking at the 152 page Core Area (South) Development Plan on that link. Lots of things to debate, lots of things that may never happen, lots of interesting titbits.
For example, according to one of the maps, the old warehouse on Callaghan Sq that has been knocked down recently is to be replaced by a buiding that is part of the 'Lloyd George Development spine' that looks to run from Craft in the Bay up to hat plot, quite possible replacing the train line, and making lloyd George avenue a two sided street. (page 17)
As I said, lots of things that may never happen...
A couple of interesting things, lots of emphasis on possibility of Canal Park to be a nice parkalnd north/south route from bay to city centre. Also comment on Trade Street. I only recently realised Trade Stret had some nice old buildings on it, nice to see they are being recognised:
Reconnect adjacent communities
of Butetown and Dumballs Road
to Canal Park with new pedestrian
connection across the river and
Improve perceptions of safety
and increase viability of land
adjacent to the park by opening
up development frontage
overlooking Canal Park;
Preserve and enhance the setting
of good quality heritage buildings
along Trade Street as a unique
and distinctive quarter within
Retain and utilise Brains heritage
buildings and chimney as a
city wide attraction and iconic
Introduce new development
frontage to screen existing backs
and define western edge of Roald
Reconfiguration of Red Dragon
facility to create more outward
looking retail and capitalize on
land occupied by surface car
Havana Quay looks like a cut and paste from the Havannah Quay development that was proposed for the same area a few years ago.
The framework proposes key
alterations to the current vehicular and
pedestrian movement and circulation
which will dramatically alter the
setting of buildings along Tresillian
Way. A new street is proposed south
of Tresillian Way to accommodate
vehicular traffic which is restricted
through a redefined Callaghan Square
as the heart of a new pedestrian
oriented business cluster. Stevenson
Drive is connected to a new north
south connection one development
block east of the river as the main
vehicular thoroughfare through a
new urban quarter, allowing Dumballs
Road to be redefined as a ‘high
street’ for the neighbourhood with an
emphasis on public transport, cyclists
and prime commercial addresses.
This is from page 32. You'd need to see the map on p33 to work out what it is all about. I think it means a new road in front of the Huggard Centre (if they still think that will be there) that meets Bute Steet, around a new pedestrianised Callaghan Sq. The new plots identified do not fit with where the new southside build NAW are meant to be funding, so I dont know whats going on with all that... The maps quite messy. Quite a headfk when you first look at it.
The p33 map also mixes together the GN site and some of the bus station as one development opportunity, I guess this assumes the council succeed in buying it.
er, map is on page 35 in adobe page numbers but 33 in the numbers embedded within the document.
skyscraper geeks will be interested in the map on page 41 in adoobe numbers that shows the 'potential height clusters', meaning builds above 5 stories.
Interesting idea on how to organise north/south route under railway line in city centre:
Define a specific role and function
for the three routes crossing the
railway line to prioritise public
transport modes and reduce
conflicts between general traffic
• Lower St. Marys Street -
pedestrian and cycle only;
• Penarth Road - Pedestrian/cycle
with priority for tram / electric bus;
• Bute Street - car
I wonder if this imagines that these tram/electric buses will take the Penarth road route, into central square, and up westgate street, to allow the longer term north/south link suggested.
(this all seems so hypothetical right now...)
Consolidation of existing national
rail surface car park provision on
both sides of the station into one
multi level facility integrated with
a public transport interchange on
the south side of the station only
also theme is to reduce amount of parking. I notice n the maps the westgate and pellet street car parks are not listed where as SD2 and Capitol are. Maybe they do not feature in the plans...?
Adobe page 63, the GN site is split between 'transport', 'residential' and 'offices'. The only other site on that map listed as 'transport' is the new car park south of the station. Could this mean the bus station (or bus drop off as part of the bus box) is thought to go there? It is hard to tell, but i think this bit overlaps with the existing carpark just north of the station by the water tower, which gives very close proximity to the train station.
The residential bit is closest to the river and is in one of the tall building clusters, so could still be a taller block of flats.
Also looks like hotels are planned for the train station south car park and where the millennium plaza currently is.
Taking into account already committed
projects, the proposed timing of
delivery will be as follows:
Atlantic Wharf (north), Callaghan
Square (north), Mt Stuart Square,
Cardiff Waterside, Capital Quarter;
Roath Basin, Havana Quay, Heritage
Quarter, Callaghan Square (south),
Station Gateway, Lloyd George
Brewery Quarter, Atlantic Wharf
(south), St. David’s Square
The phases will also include key open
spaces. Canal Park will be upgraded
in Phase 1, River frontage through
phases 2 and 3, and railway line is
expected to be removed in phase 3
Phase 1 includes several priority
projects for the city.
Phase 2 will deliver needed
improvements around the station
and predominantly housing areas in
the southern part and along the River.
In phase 3, the Red Dragon Centre
could be replaced by new retail and
leisure development that will allow
for a better pedestrian connection
between the ICC and key buildings in
the bay area. This phase also includes
redevelopment of Brains brewery and
redevelopment around the current CIA
site (St. David’s Square).
ok, on page 85 the bus station is shown in two places, most of it basically on the Pellet St car park, and a smaller amount on the south side of the train station where the brewery quarter is.
This map also shows a massive amount of central square, and the new square on the south side, having a canopy over the concourse. it really seems to be drifting into dream world.
On Trade Street:
Immediately adjacent to the west of
Callaghan Square south of Penarth
Road is the Heritage Quarter. While
all the buildings in this location are
not of outstanding heritage quality
particularly along the frontage of
Penarth Road, there are a number of
‘gems’ along Trade Street. The vision
is to retain these good quality buildings
and reflect the characteristics of tight
lanes, discovered courtyards and
warehouse style architecture similar
to projects like Butlers Wharf in
London and the Custard Factory in
Infill development should also reflect
these characteristics employing
similar materiality, architectural
character and building scale,
albeit in a contemporary style. The
intricacies of lanes, courtyards and
overarching warehouse character
are the underlying elements that will
contribute to the sense of place for this
neighbourhood. The semi industrial
character will easily lends itself for
live work accommodation alongside
small professional offices, residential
apartments, studio space, community
uses (day care/nursery) interspersed
with local cafes and convenience
I like the sound of the heritage quarter - but wonder if they are over doing trade street's credentials. It does have a couple of nice warehouses and that courtyard but i don't think it's got enough to be the focus of a district based on heritage, although taken with the brains brewery if that was opened up, it could be an interesting area.
It's funny that those warehouses are 'gems' but the warehouse the otherside of Callaghan square was not deemed worthy of keeping. Oh well
Has any one been in the brewery. There is obviously the chimney and the substantial associated building alongside it, which once stripped of modern industrial additions could be a great building, but is there any other perhaps more peripheral buildings that are of note, as it is difficult to see from just passing by.
Try google map on zoom
The original offices of Brains - formerly Hancocks and then Welsh Brewers - are some interest and are definitely well worth listing - The name of Wm Hancock & Co Ltd is actually made of brick similar to the Pier Head Building. It's many years since I have been there but I don't consider any other buildings are of real architectural interest.
I always feel to keep unadorned cheap (at the time) industrial building are really not worth saving. The only trouble is they will be replaced with some even cheaper and badly designed buildings built for profit rather than to please the eye.
As wish lists go it probably accords with pretty much what we've all called for on here over the years - get rid of the RDC and start again, public squares north and south of Central Station, open up the riverbank and create a funky little area around Brains brewery, re-configure CS and make it more built up, high density Scandanavian style housing off Dumballs Rd, turn Canal Park into a green route between the Bay and city centre, build on the western side of LGA, etc etc etc.
Unfortunately it has about as much detail as the stuff we write on here when giving flight to our daydreams when we should be working. Not a word, as far as I can see, about costing. Not even on one project. Is there money from WAG? Do the council have a war chest? S106 monies? Do the council have any levers to encourage development? Any council owned land that can be freed up for development? Council borrowing powers? WG lobbying? Nothing as far as I can see.
As a vision I like it. But with enough time and access to a consultant town planner I'm sure that most of us could have come up with something similar. I would have liked more information on the things that are achievable in the short term. The document is called re-building momentum but to get momentum you have to start moving in the first place don't you?
What are the priorities and how can they realistically be achieved. If the convention centre is a priority then lets have something to get our teeth into. If moving the council offices makes economic sense and allows development lets have the figures. If I was a potential inward investor I think I would be more impressed with solid plans to kick start one important project that may act as a catalyst rather than a comprehensive document that sets out what Russell Goodway wants Cardiff to look like in the year 2040.
The way the paper mentions the Eastern Distributor Road sort of sums it up for me. Confirmation that it's crucial to open up the Bay for business, tourists etc and then absolutely nothing about how it's going to be achieved - not even an oblique reference to lobbying the WG or seeking borrowing powers.
Hopefully this will be followed by a paper outlining how it can all be achieved, but until then it's mostly piss and wind I'm afraid.
it may not have been in the paper but it was certainly in the Echo article. Goodway stated clearly that the council has no money to fund this and all the funding is going to have to come from the private sector. So the council has to convince the private sector that (i) Cardiff is a place to do business and (ii) they can turn a profit by investing here.
I refer back to the quasi mothballed Capital Quarter...
Some rambling thoughts:-
As a masterplan, there's plenty to agree with in the document.
I was originally sceptical about Atlantic Wharf for a convention centre, but the masterplan's improvements to that part of the Bay area seem to make sense to me (notwithstanding what happens to the Council services currently in situ at County Hall?). Would be hugely beneficial to improve the public realm of the Red Dragon Centre whilst at it.
Efforts to make Canal Park more attractive and usable are to be welcomed, as I think are the (obvious) improvements to LGA.
The Callaghan Square/Trade Street ideas seem sensible, although quite how feasible they are in terms of the road layout and the previously published plans I'm not sure.
Havana Quay and the river side area is pretty straightforward really - though I'd prefer more family-style accomodation ( continental style in blocks rather than our traditional style) rather than nearly all apartments.
Central Square/Station Gateway - just get on with it!
Transport - seem reasonable enough to me, though not sure what purpose a Park and Ride at the southern end of Central Link would serve.
Brewery Quarter - perhaps the most surprising element of the masterplan to me, will obviously depend on what happens to Brains. I do like having a brewery in the middle of the city, though I recognise it is a prime development location.
I was surprised quite how prescriptive it is - although of course everything can change and no doubt a lot will...
If this is to be taken forward, there really ought to have been some discussion over the costs involved what the next steps potentially could be, what landownership constraints there are, plus the likelihood of things falling in to place to enable this to happen. Without it, it does seem rather pie in the sky, rather than something that can be used not only for strategic planning and development management, but also for economic planning etc. Do the Council even know what their next steps could be?
Potential and real problems such as overly-reliant on public sector, the various public sector bodies all involved, the absence of a clear public-private steering board and the shitpit of an airport were mentioned in the green paper, but no solutions really offered or discussed - perhaps hard to tie the masterplan to the wider economic/social context.
I also would have liked to see at least acknowledgement of other things happening that may influence the ability for this to happen - LDP situation, City-Region agenda, electrification/Metro network, the WG legislative agenda.
Other omissions/shortcomings - not enough recognition that there's an existing, somewhat deprived, community slap bang in the middle of the masterplan area. A bit more about how they envisage Mt Stuart Square/Coal Exchange/ other historic buildings in the bay area being bought into better use and being integrated into the plan would have been useful as well.
As a masterplan of what Cardiff could be in 25 years time - 9/10
As a tool for achieving things - 3/10
At this stage it is still a consultation document, which might be why it is not so detailed on many issues. This also means we can send in our own thoughts if we want. I think we have six weeks...
I tend to think the document might get some resistance because it is seen as anti-car.
That's a good point but it's difficult to comment on things in anything other than an esoteric way when its nothing more than a wishlist. I don't think it's good enough to say here's our vision, we just need someone to pay for it.
Didn't we read that the Council had 43m in its war chest just a few weeks ago? Haven't we heard that the WG have bought a portion of CS ready to develop? That represents a start doesn't it? I'd like to see the Council's vision of how they intend to use that money to create the conditions to unlock further development. No-one is expecting them to have all of the developers signed up and ready to send in the diggers. But perhaps a description of what the Council can do at the moment rather than descriptions of everything that they can't would have given us something concrete to comment on.
There's mention of regeneration of the Coal Exchange, but shouldn't the streets surrounding, i.e. Merchant Place be just as important?
Also, no mention in the plans but to me, Louisa Place is really blocking development of the Coal Exchange area, its a barrier to Mermaid Quay and quite a grim development. Are these council owned? I wouldn't mind seeing these redeveloped/moved to encourage development on James St.
My daughter's best friend lives in Louisa Place. I'm sure she finds being a "blocking development" and a "barrier to Mermaid Quay" a constant burden.
I'm not attacking the people who live there, I'm looking at the development and how it fits in with the rest of the Bay.
I always wondered what that area was called, it definately blights the area archtiecturaly wise. I think this area i crying out to be much more developed than detached and semi detached homes. My ideal would be a small shopping area kind of like Brighton Lanes, with plenty of family apartments and some town houses, extending the street patern of the exchange quarter across the road to connect it up more with Mermaid Quay and the waterfront (surely a small M&S or Next could survive down there?). My absolute ideal would be to move Batlic house across the road and open up views to the coal exchange creating a large public space to apreciate the caol exchanges architecture (post refurb!)
What's that semi-built building right by there on James St? There any news on this?
CARDIFFWALESMAP - FORUM