if
it's about Cardiff..
Sport, Entertainment, Transportation, Business,
Development Projects, Leisure, Eating, Drinking,
Nightlife, Shopping, Train Spotting! etc.. then we want it here!
It builds from last year's Preferred Strategy. I've only skimmed through the documents so far, but the main news seems to be the proposed designation of the ridges more or less from Creigau to the eastern boundary (excluding Pentrych and the Taff gap) as a formal Green Belt.
I suspect this is to soften the political impact of the proposed greenfield developments.
I'm no fan of Green Belts in principle and would argue the valued landscapes north of Cardiff would be protected by other means anyway.
However there is plenty of development proposed (as known already) and as I read through the documents hopefully some juicy ideas will come to light.
Ha! For all those who poo-pooed my idea of duelling Rover Way I reckon that's what will happen, albeit with probably a 40mph speed limit. Also loving the rapid transport route ploughing through Malthouse Farm!
That article shows around 14,500 houses. I thought Cardiff needed 45,000 houses. That's quite a shortfall
perhaps the graphic is misleading:
"The LDP designates land for 41,100 homes, including 14,000 on green spaces west of Pentrebane (5,000 homes), either side of Pontprennau (5,800) and south of Creigiau (2,650)."
That article shows around 14,500 houses. I thought Cardiff needed 45,000 houses. That's quite a shortfall
perhaps the graphic is misleading:
"The LDP designates land for 41,100 homes, including 14,000 on green spaces west of Pentrebane (5,000 homes), either side of Pontprennau (5,800) and south of Creigiau (2,650)."
I believe the often quoted "45,400 new homes" includes schemes that have already been granted planning permissions, such as the Ely Mill and ISV developments, aswell as a whole host of other smaller developments dotted around the city.
Even then I don't think we reach anywhere near 30,000 - let alone 45,400!
According to the LDP:
11,265 have been built since 2006
1,056 are u/c
5,721 have planning permission
3,546 are awaiting legal agreement being signed
Assumes that 606 dwellings will be demolished or converted to other uses
Assumes that 842 new dwellings will come from residential conversions (e.g. sub-division into flats)
Assumes that 4,346 dwellings will be built on large 'windfall sites' (i.e. 10+ per site)
Assumes that 863 dwellings will be built on small 'windfall sites' (i.e. fewer than 10 dwellings per site)
Assumes that 1,594 dwellings will come from changes of use from other uses
Assumes that 1,853 dwellings within the existing landbank above won't be built for whatever reasons
Allocates 13,950 dwellings on six strategic sites
Allocates 548 dwellings on non-strategic sites
That should add up to 41,273 dwellings
A further 4,000 are considered as "10% flexibility allowance" on three of the largest strategic sites
Nothing much will change, there will be too many competing for their share of the prize. Politicians generally don't do things that benefit the wider population but only what gets them re-elected. In my opinion this will slow things down. Wales under welsh labour doesn't have a great track record on economic development and adding yet another later of bureaucracy with competing interests isn't going to change that.
I suppose it means we can have more bureaucracy, more paperwork, leas results and probably more public sector workers to support this extra layer of bureaucracy which should satisfy the socialists and make us even more reliant on English funding to sustain our jobs base
Nothing much will change, there will be too many competing for their share of the prize. Politicians generally don't do things that benefit the wider population but only what gets them re-elected. In my opinion this will slow things down. Wales under welsh labour doesn't have a great track record on economic development and adding yet another later of bureaucracy with competing interests isn't going to change that.
I suppose it means we can have more bureaucracy, more paperwork, leas results and probably more public sector workers to support this extra layer of bureaucracy which should satisfy the socialists and make us even more reliant on English funding to sustain our jobs base
Is jantra suffering from the after effects of some horrendous pavlovian experiment where he's now compelled to drone on about bureaucracy whenever anyone mentions any level of government in Wales?
Nothing much will change, there will be too many competing for their share of the prize. Politicians generally don't do things that benefit the wider population but only what gets them re-elected. In my opinion this will slow things down. Wales under welsh labour doesn't have a great track record on economic development and adding yet another later of bureaucracy with competing interests isn't going to change that.
I suppose it means we can have more bureaucracy, more paperwork, leas results and probably more public sector workers to support this extra layer of bureaucracy which should satisfy the socialists and make us even more reliant on English funding to sustain our jobs base
Is jantra suffering from the after effects of some horrendous pavlovian experiment where he's now compelled to drone on about bureaucracy whenever anyone mentions any level of government in Wales?
how can adding another layer of decision making make things better? how is this experiment new council going to be financed? will they be given a remit by WG and then have to report back to WG or can they just plough on and get things done? Will they have to report back to the individual councils? how will those councils feel if they have to give up budget with no representation on the directorate? You could have torfaen giving budget to fund development in Cardiff - can you see that as a good thing?
If you're going to have a city region then go for it and remove the next layer of government.
Nothing much will change, there will be too many competing for their share of the prize. Politicians generally don't do things that benefit the wider population but only what gets them re-elected. In my opinion this will slow things down. Wales under welsh labour doesn't have a great track record on economic development and adding yet another later of bureaucracy with competing interests isn't going to change that.
I suppose it means we can have more bureaucracy, more paperwork, leas results and probably more public sector workers to support this extra layer of bureaucracy which should satisfy the socialists and make us even more reliant on English funding to sustain our jobs base
Is jantra suffering from the after effects of some horrendous pavlovian experiment where he's now compelled to drone on about bureaucracy whenever anyone mentions any level of government in Wales?
how can adding another layer of decision making make things better? how is this experiment new council going to be financed? will they be given a remit by WG and then have to report back to WG or can they just plough on and get things done? Will they have to report back to the individual councils? how will those councils feel if they have to give up budget with no representation on the directorate? You could have torfaen giving budget to fund development in Cardiff - can you see that as a good thing?
If you're going to have a city region then go for it and remove the next layer of government.
Well they have a City Region in your beloved Manchester and it seems to be working well. Why don't you write to them and complain?
Nothing much will change, there will be too many competing for their share of the prize. Politicians generally don't do things that benefit the wider population but only what gets them re-elected. In my opinion this will slow things down. Wales under welsh labour doesn't have a great track record on economic development and adding yet another later of bureaucracy with competing interests isn't going to change that.
I suppose it means we can have more bureaucracy, more paperwork, leas results and probably more public sector workers to support this extra layer of bureaucracy which should satisfy the socialists and make us even more reliant on English funding to sustain our jobs base
Is jantra suffering from the after effects of some horrendous pavlovian experiment where he's now compelled to drone on about bureaucracy whenever anyone mentions any level of government in Wales?
how can adding another layer of decision making make things better? how is this experiment new council going to be financed? will they be given a remit by WG and then have to report back to WG or can they just plough on and get things done? Will they have to report back to the individual councils? how will those councils feel if they have to give up budget with no representation on the directorate? You could have torfaen giving budget to fund development in Cardiff - can you see that as a good thing?
If you're going to have a city region then go for it and remove the next layer of government.
Well they have a City Region in your beloved Manchester and it seems to be working well. Why don't you write to them and complain?
As the article suggests, GMC is able to make decisions and act on those decisions and they are binding on the 12 local authorities. The Cardiff city region council will have no such power. It will be a place for ideas but nothing else
Nothing much will change, there will be too many competing for their share of the prize. Politicians generally don't do things that benefit the wider population but only what gets them re-elected. In my opinion this will slow things down. Wales under welsh labour doesn't have a great track record on economic development and adding yet another later of bureaucracy with competing interests isn't going to change that.
I suppose it means we can have more bureaucracy, more paperwork, leas results and probably more public sector workers to support this extra layer of bureaucracy which should satisfy the socialists and make us even more reliant on English funding to sustain our jobs base
Is jantra suffering from the after effects of some horrendous pavlovian experiment where he's now compelled to drone on about bureaucracy whenever anyone mentions any level of government in Wales?
how can adding another layer of decision making make things better? how is this experiment new council going to be financed? will they be given a remit by WG and then have to report back to WG or can they just plough on and get things done? Will they have to report back to the individual councils? how will those councils feel if they have to give up budget with no representation on the directorate? You could have torfaen giving budget to fund development in Cardiff - can you see that as a good thing?
If you're going to have a city region then go for it and remove the next layer of government.
Well they have a City Region in your beloved Manchester and it seems to be working well. Why don't you write to them and complain?
As the article suggests, GMC is able to make decisions and act on those decisions and they are binding on the 12 local authorities. The Cardiff city region council will have no such power. It will be a place for ideas but nothing else
Wow you are displaying the symptoms of your mental illness in glorious black and white. Manchester still has an extra layer of bureaucracy. I'd imagine a City Region with statutory powers is a lot more expensive to administer than one that doesn't have those powers.
Hoist on your own petard. What ho!
Don't tell me, an extra layer of bureaucracy in Manc land is a good thing but in Wales it is bad?
You really are the biggest troll that I've ever come across.
Get a life you sad, intellectually-challenged excuse for a debater.
Wow you are displaying the symptoms of your mental illness in glorious black and white. Manchester still has an extra layer of bureaucracy. I'd imagine a City Region with statutory powers is a lot more expensive to administer than one that doesn't have those powers.
Hoist on your own petard. What ho!
Don't tell me, an extra layer of bureaucracy in Manc land is a good thing but in Wales it is bad?
You really are the biggest troll that I've ever come across.
Get a life you sad, intellectually-challenged excuse for a debater.
I have no idea what you are on about. All I said was that GMC was able to make decisions on its own and act on those decisions whilst binding the councils below it to those decisions. All you need to do is show me where I said any of it of what you have attributed to me.
it would appear that you're attempting to have an argument when none is to be had. GMC is different from CCRC (if I can call it that) in that it can make decisions. perhaps you can explain how you have interpreted that to mean I support one model over another?
people really should just bypass the comments as if not thre
So everyone else is allowed an opinion except me? I've asked some questions and yet others can't take it upon themselves to respond in the way the question was asked. That's not my problem
people really should just bypass the comments as if not thre
So everyone else is allowed an opinion except me? I've asked some questions and yet others can't take it upon themselves to respond in the way the question was asked. That's not my problem
people really should just bypass the comments as if not thre
So everyone else is allowed an opinion except me? I've asked some questions and yet others can't take it upon themselves to respond in the way the question was asked. That's not my problem
I'm listening. See Cae Llandaf thread.
I know ash, I see you're suffering with it as well. Haters just got to hate I suppose.
Consultation has started on the LDP (until 26th November) - there are a lot more documents online that I don't think were available before. There are quite a few relating to transport and the options that are being investigated for NE Cardiff, NW Cardiff, Callaghan Square, cycling, etc that will keep some of us occupied for a few hours!
Consultation has started on the LDP (until 26th November) - there are a lot more documents online that I don't think were available before. There are quite a few relating to transport and the options that are being investigated for NE Cardiff, NW Cardiff, Callaghan Square, cycling, etc that will keep some of us occupied for a few hours!
That ARUP map showing a new BRT (I'm assuming Bus Rapid Transit?) route is worrying.
It shows putting a new bus-only route on the old oft-mentioned railway line running through Pentrebane up to the junction with Waterhall Road, then adding a bus lane all the way down the hill into Fairwater (which would be horrendous as this road is already a nightmare!) all the way along St Fagans road (quite wide and not terribly busy, should be fairly easy) and then a right turn on to the A48 to Ely Bridge (absolute nightmare!) and then down Cowbridge Road East utilising the existing bus lanes.
I can't help but feel they'd have more joy running it along the considerably quieter Pencisely Road rather than adding Bus Lanes to the already heavily congested A48.
That ARUP map showing a new BRT (I'm assuming Bus Rapid Transit?) route is worrying.
It shows putting a new bus-only route on the old oft-mentioned railway line running through Pentrebane up to the junction with Waterhall Road, then adding a bus lane all the way down the hill into Fairwater (which would be horrendous as this road is already a nightmare!) all the way along St Fagans road (quite wide and not terribly busy, should be fairly easy) and then a right turn on to the A48 to Ely Bridge (absolute nightmare!) and then down Cowbridge Road East utilising the existing bus lanes.
I can't help but feel they'd have more joy running it along the considerably quieter Pencisely Road rather than adding Bus Lanes to the already heavily congested A48.
I interpreted that (if it's the same one I read, there's bloody thousands of documents!) as preferred option for BRT but that BRT is only one option alongside rail and tram/train? It would make Cowbridge Road East one-way (inbound) for cars from Victoria Park to St David's Hospital.
The Waterhall Road and St Fagans Road stretch described as
"One bus lane with two traffic lanes, with the bus lane in
the centre of the road, with direction determined
according to local needs and junction congestion.
Generally, bus lanes would be provided on the
approach to junctions."
That ARUP map showing a new BRT (Bus Rapid Transit) route would make Cowbridge Road East one-way (inbound) for cars from Victoria Park to St David's Hospital.
Yes: "Victoria Park to St David’s Hospital v. Cowbridge Road East
On-street 1,850m
_ Reallocation of roadspace to give 2 x BRT lanes and 1 Traffic Lane to operate one-way eastbound. All on-street parking into specific intermittent laybys".
... removing all parking from one side (and more) plus diverting all west-bound vehicles (cyclists ignored) so as to run 2-way fast buses (stops 700m apart), darting fast the normal buses, thru a multi-use shopping street.... Is this what we pay consultants for??
YOU CAN FIND Appendix D - NW Corridor Study Report id=27309
on the Deposit Plan page
cardiff.gov.uk/content.asp?nav=2870,3139,5845,6822&parent_directory_id=2865
It's comedy gold and what I discussed with the planning officers in spring 2013 at a drop-in session at the National Museum. They looked scared at the time. I predicted Lansdowne rd being an urban clearway and bus lane nightmare.
I was wrong.
St Fagans rd to be an urban clearway with no/little residents or shoppers parking and two bus lanes. God help them on the stretch of the A48 to Ely roundabout.
Cowbridge rd East to Vic park to be much like St Fagans rd.
Then Cowbridge rd East from Vic park to the hospital to be 1-way (eastbound) for cars with two bus lanes!
Way to improve the city Russell! A super-duper express bus system just like they've got in somewhere like Rangoon or Ouagadougou! Roll on the Metro!
The Waterhall Road and St Fagans Road stretch described as
"One bus lane with two traffic lanes, with the bus lane in
the centre of the road, with direction determined
according to local needs and junction congestion.
Generally, bus lanes would be provided on the
approach to junctions."
I drove up Waterhall Road last night and I can only assume ARUP have drawn up these plans without doing the same - there is absolutely no way you could squeeze two lanes of traffic AND a bus lane down there, far too many well-established (probably TPO-carrying) trees along that stretch of road.
It's comedy gold and what I discussed with the planning officers in spring 2013 at a drop-in session at the National Museum. They looked scared at the time.
... Way to improve the city Russell! A super-duper express bus system just like they've got in somewhere like Rangoon or Ouagadougou! Roll on the Metro!
All the proposals map shows of the NW corridor is a Metro line peeling off north of Fairwater on the disused rail route. All public transport eggs in the metro basket! But what of the many other trips for durables shopping, hospital and secondary/tertiary education and non-central workplaces - what fraction by 'active travel' modes?
It's comedy gold and what I discussed with the planning officers in spring 2013 at a drop-in session at the National Museum. They looked scared at the time.
... Way to improve the city Russell! A super-duper express bus system just like they've got in somewhere like Rangoon or Ouagadougou! Roll on the Metro!
All the proposals map shows of the NW corridor is a Metro line peeling off north of Fairwater on the disused rail route. All public transport eggs in the metro basket! But what of the many other trips for durables shopping, hospital and secondary/tertiary education and non-central workplaces - what fraction by 'active travel' modes?
Have you read the section on the above cardiff.gov link titled 'Background Technical Papers and Assessments'? Especially Appendices 2-4? If you haven't, I suggest that you do so.
Appendix 2 Urban Capacity Study and 4 Economic are hardly relevant.
Appx 5 Transportation with Appendix C on Rapid Transit is only an outline - but discounts the Bus RT solution for the NW on performance criteria. So why include the latter in the LDP when it's also unfeasible? To bulk it out and divert people into irrelevances?
Appendix 2 Urban Capacity Study and 4 Economic are hardly relevant.
Appx 5 Transportation with Appendix C on Rapid Transit is only an outline - but discounts the Bus RT solution for the NW on performance criteria. So why include the latter in the LDP when it's also unfeasible? To bulk it out and divert people into irrelevances?
My mistake. I meant appendices B-D not 2-4. Appendix D, NW corridor study is indicative of what they may choose. Another 'bus' study is due out imminently.
Plaid leaflet in Faiwater advertising the LDP public meeting at Plasmawr School on 12 November makes no mention of need to book a place. Will be interesting to see if people are turned away at the door.
Plaid leaflet in Faiwater advertising the LDP public meeting at Plasmawr School on 12 November makes no mention of need to book a place. Will be interesting to see if people are turned away at the door.
It's a drop-in session, supposedly no need to book
Tempted to go along myself
