The website gives precious little information but the poster is popping up all over Llandaff. Is this fiction, rumour or truth? Does anyone have any info?

http://www.savellandaffmeadow.co.uk/

I am senior partner at Oxford law firm Savell and Affmeadow. We have taken advice, are taking action and have instructed our intellectual property brief as this website clearly diminishes our identity and infringes on our name.

See you in court.

Yawn. Not funny.

To be honest, I'd like to see Cardiff Met consolidate its campuses at Llandaff, close down Cyncoed and be absorbed into the University of South Wales in the not so distant future

I cant normally get excited by Nimbyism like this, but in this case it seems unneccesary development considering the huge amount of sport fields and facilities available just the other side of Western Avenue (and closer to the campus as well).

Careful, Charles. It may be a trick question!

I'm getting old - I can no longer differentiate between what is fact and what is fiction.

I thought this was a wind up but it's real if the link below is anything to go by!

http://www.cardiffcivicsociety.org/llandafffields.html

I think the two websites refer to different potential developments, one about a Cardiff Met expansion (meadow) and the other about a rugby club expansion (field). Both contain limited info though so I could be wrong.

I thought the meadow was above water level. I can't see how the river can drain upwards? definitely a troll

edit: the meadow is an old landfill site and not really a place of natural beauty. it is man made. the NIMBYs kept that quiet.

One would have to be very naive indeed not to think that UWIC (or as that fount of learning is now called, Cardiff Met) would like to get their hands on the meadow. And I suspect the playing fields idea is just a ruse anyway....propose something that’s perhaps not TOO shocking , i.e. keeps it vaguely green, but which longer term provides a foot in the door for ( some more crappy)buildings. I think this is about building, not playing fields. UWIC is on a tight site and is an expansionary bureaucracy.

The truly shocking thing is that I also suspect the Cathedral would connive in this if they were able to get a car park out of it. The Cathedral seems to think that the main reason why people do not turn up to worship in large numbers is because it’s difficult to park.

So there is a pincer movement between pretend academics and deluded clerics, presided over by a council with a provincial “amenity” mindset. So take it very seriously.

And can people here try to stop referring to Nimby- ism. It’s tedious, and a substitute for thought and debate on the merits/demerits of any proposal (including this one).

URBANO, you have been missed (ahem). Anyway, whilst I agree that "NIMBY" is sometimes thrown around as a thoughtless insult that closes down debate, and is sometimes a misnomer (sometimes people BANANAs), I think it is a useful way of understanding many peoples reactions to development, which is often driven by quite narrow self-interest. And people characterised as NIMBYs generally are the party less willing to engage in constructive debate about development, and its pros and cons.

And the old URBANO didn't believe in planning in any case, so would moan, but would have believed the landowner could sell it to UWIC and UWIC then do what it likes with the land. I always thought that seemed very strange juxtaposed next to strong criticisms of particular planning approvals, but alas, who am I to ask for a bit of consistency in arguments?

Thanks for that generous comment. Good of you. I always respected you as a person and a vigorous debater.I hope you are getting on well. I'm sure you are.

We all have a range of motives in espousing our views. But that does not (self evidently) justify characterising one's opponent's views as flawed because one(unilaterally)characterises them as motivated by "self interest" (whatever that means, exactly,). That's why the NIMBY reference is lazy and tedious.

The old ( and current) URBANO would say (and does say) that "planning" should ( in an ideal world)have nothing to do with the debate. Unfortunately, it will. And as I say we have a Council(which has the "planning" powers) with an embarrassingly provincial fixation on "amenity" ( a truly frightening word in this context)

When one then adds the motivation of the clowns on either side( i.e.UWIC and the Cathedral) it's really very difficult indeed to see anything good coming out of this.

Which was basically my point.

Its just a view. But at least I'm expressing one, and inviting a response, rather than calling everyone nimby haters.

Hi URBANO, welcome back.

Have you been lurking all the while ? It's been a while since you posted on here.

Thanks, Kyle and Jantra. Just lurking now and again. I've been tempted to defend Jantra on one or two occasions, but he's well capable of doing that himself!

Oh my God....Jantra is speechless! That is a bad sign....

I went for a walk with the family today and took in the Taff trail from hailey park to the bridge and back up to the cathedral. We had a little walk through the meadow (I'm assuming its the meadow next to the pitches). I can't see any reason to develop on this land. You'd never guess you were in a city, such peace and tranquility. Saying that the whole llandaff green / cathedral area is a little rural oasis in the urban city scape

Lets build on it!

Update:

The University claims that it is reinstating the meadow to its original use as a "playing field". This claim is spurious to say the least. There is no evidence (so far available anyway) that the area was ever used as playing fields. The evidence available on its history is as follows:

- it housed the medieval Archdeacon's Palace (now no more) but evidenced by John Speed's 1610 map and other documents.
- it was where the river Taff flowed until the 19th century when construction of the Weir shifted the route northward
- it was a floodplain/marshland
- during and for a few decades after World War II it was used as allotments
- it is home to several species of bat (investigated during 2013 by Cardiff Bat Group) as well as other wildlife
- it is believed that it was under the ownership of the local authority prior to its transfer to the university (then Cardiff Institute) in 1992 under the Further and Higher Education Act, possibly because prior to that it had been designated as "recreation ground".
- whatever the legal ins and outs of the action proposed, as Jantra says, it is an aesthetic rural setting for the Cathedral.

Here is the article in Wales Online: http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/local-news/row-over-plans-sports-ground-5839874

Take at look at the planning permission here

http://planning.cardiff.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=documents&keyVal=_CARDIFF_DCAPR_105554

Meadow they want to turn into a footy pitch is boggy as well so not drained at all

Note its not on/part of Hailey Park - the meadow there is in Llandaff North not Llandaff

No permission has been granted, but an application is sitting with Cardiff Council.

I repeat.....

"One would have to be very naive indeed not to think that UWIC (or as that fount of learning is now called, Cardiff Met) would like to get their hands on the meadow. And I suspect the playing fields idea is just a ruse anyway....propose something that’s perhaps not TOO shocking , i.e. keeps it vaguely green, but which longer term provides a foot in the door for ( some more crappy)buildings. I think this is about building, not playing fields. UWIC is on a tight site and is an expansionary bureaucracy.

The truly shocking thing is that I also suspect the Cathedral would connive in this if they were able to get a car park out of it. The Cathedral seems to think that the main reason why people do not turn up to worship in large numbers is because it’s difficult to park.

So there is a pincer movement between pretend academics and deluded clerics, presided over by a council with a provincial “amenity” mindset. So take it very seriously."

Is anyone in favour of this proposal(and ,crucially, its long term implications)? Is anyone against? In either case, why?

The complete lack of response here does tend to underline my point that many on this forum have become so trapped by their NIMBY mantra/reflex that they are now incapable of addressing the merits /demerits of certain proposals.

And it's not as if anyone can say this is a trivial issue, involving as it does development next to one of Britain's most ancient Christian sites, visited by lots of people from all over the world.

Dingo

Where do you think the increase in population should be housed?

I smell Troll!

Don't feed it.

There is now a Facebook site for the campaign to save it:

https://www.facebook.com/llandaffmeadow

Report on the campaign so far, goes before committee next month:

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/local-news/llandaff-meadow-football-pitch-row-6238068

I don't really see what the problem is with the proposal.

If/when this is rejected how quickly will they say let us have the development on Llandaff Fields then?

A letter in todays "Echo" with photograph from a Dr Marsden claims to prove that there were sports pitches on the meadow when Llandaff Tech opened in the 1950's. As I see it the photo merely shows the area where the existing rugby pitch is and not the meadow beyond the footpath.

This was up for consideration at the latest Planning Committee - does anyone know the outcome ?
Interestingly the Echo is now reporting that suggestions are being put forward for a footbridge across the taff on this site.