if
it's about Cardiff..
Sport, Entertainment, Transportation, Business,
Development Projects, Leisure, Eating, Drinking,
Nightlife, Shopping, Train Spotting! etc.. then we want it here!
A rather bland development of 60-odd townhouses and apartments behind the old Hamydryad Hospital in Butetown. They aren't very ambitious architecturally and would look right at place in Thornhill or Pontprennau or even parts of Pentrebane. A lot of dull pale and brown brick and render.
Nice to see St Davids hotel have replaced all the browning dividers between the balconies with crisp white ones. makes the building look much better and shows how dirty the old ones were allowed to get!
Bulldozers have moved in to the old Evan Williams car showroom on Cowbridge Road East (opposite Royal Mail sorting office)
I don't recall seeing any planning applications for this site, but it seems odd that they're demolishing it without somebody ready to develop the site...
Anyone know what is happening to the unit that until recently housed Graham Griffiths Estate Agents at the top of Cowbridge Road East, near Victoria Park.
The estate agents moved out last month and it appears they are changing it into something else.
I have just bought a house around the corner so am interested to find out what is going there.
Bulldozers have moved in to the old Evan Williams car showroom on Cowbridge Road East (opposite Royal Mail sorting office)
I don't recall seeing any planning applications for this site, but it seems odd that they're demolishing it without somebody ready to develop the site...
Its going to be a block of 9 flats with a shop, possibly Morrisons, on the ground floor. The planning application is 13/01576/DCO for this scheme although they initially planned for a car showroom rather than a shop.
Bulldozers have moved in to the old Evan Williams car showroom on Cowbridge Road East (opposite Royal Mail sorting office)
I don't recall seeing any planning applications for this site, but it seems odd that they're demolishing it without somebody ready to develop the site...
Its going to be a block of 9 flats with a shop, possibly Morrisons, on the ground floor. The planning application is 13/01576/DCO for this scheme although they initially planned for a car showroom rather than a shop.
It is a Morrisons Local - there's a licence application notice up nearby.
There seemed to be activity at the site when i walked past earlier. Any idea whats happening next to the new Pieminister? which incidentally was nice but felt like it was trying too hard to be trendy and less pie shop. Also the old Sony center unit seems to be having an extension put on the roof, looks very similar to the old blind institute ie crap.
Difference is the Sony building is already pig ugly. Thats the student accommodation though I think?
Would be interesting to know whats going next to Pieminister...and something was happening to the unit where Morrisions was going the other day, although I doubt it is them, now.
Do you think we'll start to see a growing demand in smaller chain type stores/cafes like Pieminister and similar to others in the David Morgan building, over larger, arguably dated, 'superstores'? For instance Jack Wills - huge company, small but great looking shop?
The last time that I walked past and looked in (about a month ago), I could see that the previous signs which had been covering the windows (ie the ones which declared that Morrisons M Local were coming) had been tuned inside out so that the adverts were facing in.
The store itself appeared to be potentially much larger than I had expected (although this may change if they lop bits off for storage). It appeared to cover both the corner Sports Store as well as the former Showhome for Redrow next door. Unless I'm mistaken it also looked as if there was more than one storey - although I'm probably wrong on that front.
If Morrisons pulled out because of licensing issues, then I'd have thought that the Co-op would have had similar reservations if subject to the same restrictions
If Morrisons pulled out because of licensing issues, then I'd have thought that the Co-op would have had similar reservations if subject to the same restrictions
It's the Co-op and Cardiff has a Labour run council. Strings will be pulled. It's happened before - it will happen again.
If Morrisons pulled out because of licensing issues, then I'd have thought that the Co-op would have had similar reservations if subject to the same restrictions
It's the Co-op and Cardiff has a Labour run council. Strings will be pulled. It's happened before - it will happen again.
So much this, initially the Co Op food attached the Texaco garage on Llantrisant Road opened without an alcohol licence (because it was refused) - now it sells alcohol... How many other petrol stations can you name that sell booze? (genuine question, none of the ones frequent sell it)
The Total (now may have changed) on Cathedral Road.
I think the Total on Clare Road does.
Most petrol stations on trunk roads (e.g. the BPs with Wild Bean Cafe style shop).
At least, unlike parts of Australia, we don't have drive-through off licenses.
That's not really quite right. It's the police who object to the granting of the licence on the basis of the dry zone. The previous administration tended to agree without question, this one seems, sensibly a little more flexible. It's ridiculous to suggest that they'd treat the Co-OP more favourably than Morrisons.
Take the Tesco on Churchill Way and how it generated the usual police objection, and eventually the council granted a limited licence until 8:00pm that would be reviewed. Similarly, I wouldn't be surprised that following a review this licence were also extended. It's not like you have to walk more than 100 yards in either direction anyway to find another store selling alcohol after 8:00pm - there's Sainsbury's on Queen Street and another Tesco a stone's throw away. The entire "dry zone" policy is ridiculous anyway. Especially for off-licences, and restaurants.
The development between the HSBC building and the pub in Mermaid Quay has been revealed, pretty shitty to be fair! Though i hear Gregs might be opening up in there so not all bad news ;)
That's not really quite right. It's the police who object to the granting of the licence on the basis of the dry zone. The previous administration tended to agree without question, this one seems, sensibly a little more flexible.
I would say it's less a question of being more sensible, and more a case of not having as much money to fight appeals etc.
Cheap (particularly when viewed from London) and looks a reasonable finish. But it does look pokey - that living/dining/kitchen can't be much more than 10 by 12. So unless I couldn't afford more and really wanted something so close to Cardiff, I wouldn't go for it. Size matters.
I was looking at this the other day and was thinking about where the stairs/lifts are as clearly the building is only as wide as the front room. Since this building is fairly long you can only assume that the stairwell is in the centre with flats either side of it (front and back). That makes them tiny, no more than a crash pad really.
Cheap (particularly when viewed from London) and looks a reasonable finish. But it does look pokey - that living/dining/kitchen can't be much more than 10 by 12. So unless I couldn't afford more and really wanted something so close to Cardiff, I wouldn't go for it. Size matters.
The inside looks nice to be honest. I can't work out whether I like the building or not, but I think I do.
In person this building is really shocking, jarring between the packet and HSBC with its cheap stone/concrete render. The apartments look very small with no distinction between living and kitchen areas, though as a place for a single person to spend an occasional business night its not too bad. The stairwell is on the right hand side next to HSBC with a separate entrance for the apartments and ground floor retail.
It seems a bit of a no-brainer to put the kitchen as an L shape at one end so the other part of the room can be defined as a lounge space. Balcony is very narrow too. Still, cheap at £99,950 (I do live in London so it may well not be!).
I'm guessing it's the sort of thing an AM might use as a crash pad during the part of the week they're required to be at the Senedd, which is walk to work. Otherwise you'd get much better bang for your buck in Grangetown or Splott.
Not more PFI, when will our politicians learn this is not a good use of taxpayers money. If you're going to invest, then borrow using gilts @ 2-3% rather than having to pay a private sector WACC of 10-12%. Whoever recommended this type of finance first (I think Lyndon suggested plaid) need a radical rethink and basic lessons in financial appraisal, whoever followed this example are equally inept. Who is the fool, the fool or the fool that follows him?
"In 1992 PFI was implemented for the first time in the UK by the Conservative government of John Major ... PFI expanded considerably in 1996 and then expanded much further under Labour, resulting in criticism from many trade unions, elements of the Labour Party, the Scottish National Party (SNP), and the Green Party ..."
Simplistically it's all an accounting ruse to keep the liabilities 'off balance sheet' and, er, have erm, fixed indexed linked payments from the Government for decades to come to pay off the relevant infrastructure project undertaken.
If it sounds like a loan and looks like a loan and walks along the very edge of the definition of being a loan then just remember that it is NOT a loan - it's off balance sheet - so don't call it a loan.
"In 1992 PFI was implemented for the first time in the UK by the Conservative government of John Major ... PFI expanded considerably in 1996 and then expanded much further under Labour, resulting in criticism from many trade unions, elements of the Labour Party, the Scottish National Party (SNP), and the Green Party ..."
Simplistically it's all an accounting ruse to keep the liabilities 'off balance sheet' and, er, have erm, fixed indexed linked payments from the Government for decades to come to pay off the relevant infrastructure project undertaken.
If it sounds like a loan and looks like a loan and walks along the very edge of the definition of being a loan then just remember that it is NOT a loan - it's off balance sheet - so don't call it a loan.
Rather more significantly, it's the only way the Welsh Government can borrow at the moment.
Besides it's not a PFI, it's a "non-profit distribution" deal of the type first used by the SNP in Scotland, where the costs to the government are fixed at the start of the contract, instead of the taxpayer being stung for new costs all the way through as in PFI.
Simplistically it's all an accounting ruse to keep the liabilities 'off balance sheet' and, er, have erm, fixed indexed linked payments from the Government for decades to come to pay off the relevant infrastructure project undertaken.
If it sounds like a loan and looks like a loan and walks along the very edge of the definition of being a loan then just remember that it is NOT a loan - it's off balance sheet - so don't call it a loan.
Rather more significantly, it's the only way the Welsh Government can borrow at the moment.
Besides it's not a PFI, it's a "non-profit distribution" deal of the type first used by the SNP in Scotland, where the costs to the government are fixed at the start of the contract, instead of the taxpayer being stung for new costs all the way through as in PFI.
Costs for services delivered are fixed at the start of pfi contracts. It pfi in all but name. Its bad value for the taxpayer. By all means borrow for infrastructure, but do it using the lowest cost of finance?
"In 1992 PFI was implemented for the first time in the UK by the Conservative government of John Major ... PFI expanded considerably in 1996 and then expanded much further under Labour, resulting in criticism from many trade unions, elements of the Labour Party, the Scottish National Party (SNP), and the Green Party ..."
"In 1992 PFI was implemented for the first time in the UK by the Conservative government of John Major ... PFI expanded considerably in 1996 and then expanded much further under Labour, resulting in criticism from many trade unions, elements of the Labour Party, the Scottish National Party (SNP), and the Green Party ..."
I have not been checking frequently, so I could be behind the times, but it looks like the council have a new planning portal under Beta testing. I seem to remember someone saying their website hadn't been updated recently? Maybe that's because they have a new one? I could be wrong...
Usefully, it has a section on decisions as well as applications, but I've not looked into it in detail.
This isn't really about General Developments - but this is the nearest we have to an open thread.
I'm getting really fed up of the piecemeal, incoherent traffic planning on James Street and Clarence Rd.
Following the instilation of a new crossing to serve Mount Stuart School there are now no fewer than six seperate pedestrian crossings in the space of a couple of hundred yards between Clarence Road bridge and Bute Street. That would be bad enough but instead of a series of co-ordinated controlled crossings - it's a random mix of contolled and uncontrolled (zebra) crossings that's causing confusuion, traffic snarl-ups and aggresive driving from frustrated motorists.
I agree with you Ash. James St is a particularly hostile road to either cycle or drive down.
On a typical day the cycle lanes ALWAYS have cars or delivery vans parked in them (especially by the bookies). There are invariably swivel eyed aggressive pedestrians walking out onto the road without looking and shouting at passing traffic.
In addition, I find that there often seems to be a serious waft of cannabis drifting around from behind the former Spar store.
While you may well be right about the number, and poor coordination, of the crossings around there, the new raised crossing linking the south of canal park to the path west of the primary school is a great addition from a cycling perspective. Previously it was the worst section of the route from the ISV to the city centre (via canal park), now the route is largely continuous with no awkward bits to deal with, although the Loudoun Sq section is still less than ideal.
To follow this up, the problem is now that the cycling provision is patchy at either end of the route, in both the ISV and the city centre. I look forward to improvements!
While you may well be right about the number, and poor coordination, of the crossings around there, the new raised crossing linking the south of canal park to the path west of the primary school is a great addition from a cycling perspective
Funily enough I think the location of new crossing is the most sensible and logical of the lot. At least one of the pelican crossings should have been removed though - there are three crossings in the space of around a hundred yards.
I have not been checking frequently, so I could be behind the times, but it looks like the council have a new planning portal under Beta testing. I seem to remember someone saying their website hadn't been updated recently? Maybe that's because they have a new one? I could be wrong...
Usefully, it has a section on decisions as well as applications, but I've not looked into it in detail.
No sooner do I criticise James St as a bad road to cycle down, that I see it has been entirely re-tarmaced and the cycle lanes have been widened to an almost obscenely generous size. Full marks to the Council!
If someone is reading this forum and acting on improvements tout-suite, might I next launch into a tirade about Cardiff Airport, the Coal Exchange, the lack of an Arena and the surface of the Oval Basin....
PS Is it just me or does anyone else have trouble with the security codes to post a message. It's like a bad day on Ticketmaster.
No sooner do I criticise James St as a bad road to cycle down, that I see it has been entirely re-tarmaced and the cycle lanes have been widened to an almost obscenely generous size. Full marks to the Council!
If someone is reading this forum and acting on improvements tout-suite, might I next launch into a tirade about Cardiff Airport, the Coal Exchange, the lack of an Arena and the surface of the Oval Basin....
PS Is it just me or does anyone else have trouble with the security codes to post a message. It's like a bad day on Ticketmaster.
I find I need to use the security codes about five times per post. I also find that a lot of my posts are blocked as 'spam' that's the bloody despot that is paul exercising his power.