PENARTH COUNCIL OPPOSES PLAN TO KNOCK DOWN AN ALREADY-DEMOLISHED HOUSE

An application has now been made to demolish a house which has already been flattened.

Penarth Council is opposing an application to demolish No 14 Clinton Road – even though the house has already been razed to the ground.

Penarth Town Council’s  planning committee has been discussing retrospective application from Dr Sid Gautam to demolish a house on Clinton Road Penarth (No 14) which has – in fact –  already disappeared from the landscape.

Cllr Clive Williams (Conservative Plymouth Ward)

Cllr Clive Williams (Conservative Plymouth Ward)

Cllr Clive Williams (Conservative Plymouth Ward) told Penarth planning committee that he found it “absurd” that Dr Gautam was asking for planning permission to demolish a building  had – in fact – already been demolished. He asked “What happens if we say ‘no – you can’t demolish it’? ”   

Cllr Williams said that even though the rear of the house had collapsed, the front of it was supposed to have remained standing – and had not been “at risk in any way “.

 

The rear of the house had collapsed during excavation work in June bringing down  - half its roof, the rear walls and  west wing

The rear of the house had collapsed during excavation work in June- bringing down half its roof, the rear walls and west wing

Cllr Neil Thomas (Labour Cornerswell) declared an interest and left the meeting

Cllr Neil Thomas (Labour Cornerswell)

Planning chairman Cllr Neil Thomas (Labour Cornerswell) said the proposed replacement “new-build” house on the same plot would be enormous. “It is huge and it is also four storeys”  he said .

Cllr Gwyn Roberts (Labour St Augustines)

Cllr Gwyn Roberts (Labour St Augustines)

Cllr Gwyn Roberts (Labour St Augustines) said  “I saw this building. I’m no building control inspector but it looked really unstable”. He asked whether the Vale of Glamorgan Council’s building control officers had declared the structure unstable. Cllr Roberts said that at first glance it had looked as if there was more of the building left standing than there actually had been.

Cllr Thomas said he understood the building had been “fairly undermined by the work that had gone on previously – which caused the building to collapse in the first place”.

Cllr Roberts opined that the front section of the house, which had remained standing, had probably had to be demolished on safety grounds .

The proposed front and rear of the entirely new No 14 Clinton Road . There will be a subterrenean basement

The proposed front and rear of the entirely new replacement No 14 Clinton Road . There will also be a subterranean basement

Cllr Thomas said it was not necessary to comment on that aspect. He – as chair – and the  vice chair of Penarth planning committee (Cllr Mike Cuddy) had recommended [during the summer recess] that Dr Gautam’s application be opposed because “the proposed new build appears disproportionately large given the scale of other properties on that side of the street” . The planning committee is also telling the Vale Council that  “The design is out of character for the Conservation Area and this council would prefer to see a fully worked up design and access statement before further consideration is given to the application”  

Cllr Ian Courtney (Labour Cornerswell)

Cllr Ian Courtney (Labour Cornerswell)

Cllr Ian Courtney (Labour Cornerswell) asked whether there was any proposal for “change of use” within the planning application.

Cllr Thomas replied that there was not – but he noted that the proposed new build would be “effectively four storeys” as it was proposed to extend into the attic and “put a load of stuff underground . I don’t know whether it’s a nuclear bunker or what”.

Cllr Mike Cuddy Leader of Penarth Town Council

Cllr Mike Cuddy Leader of Penarth Town Council

Cllr Mike Cuddy (Labour St Augustines) pointed out that the site was not within the Penarth Conservation Area but nevertheless thought it should be noted that the proposed development would impact on other adjacent properties.

Cllr Williams said Health and Safety Executive Officers had been in attendance at the Clinton Road site up until 21:00 on the day of the collapse and they had “knocked all the parts of the building down which were a hazard”. Cllr Williams said the Health and Safety officers had seen fit to leave the front of the building standing . He said it was two days later that the frontage of the house had been demolished.

A demolition team stopped short at knocking down the fornt of the house - but flattened it two days later.

A demolition team stopped short at knocking down the fornt of the house – but flattened it two days later.

In the chair, Cllr Thomas said the question [of whether it had been necessary to demolish the front of the house] would come up when the Vale of Glamorgan Council’s planning committee came to consider the application.

 

 

About NewsNet

Penarth Daily News email address dmj@newsnet.uk . Penarth Daily News is an independent free on-line fair and balanced news service published by NewsNet Ltd covering the town of Penarth in the Vale of Glamorgan, Wales, UK. All our news items are based on the information we receive or discover at the time of publication and are published on the basis that they are accurate to the best of our knowledge and belief at that time.
This entry was posted in Penarth Daily News. Bookmark the permalink.

15 Responses to PENARTH COUNCIL OPPOSES PLAN TO KNOCK DOWN AN ALREADY-DEMOLISHED HOUSE

  1. Christopher David says:

    Good question Mr Courtney- looking behind the façade so to speak.Collapsing supporting walls have a history in Penarth. All those underground streams eh! Should be coined Pencrashism. Anyway as unfortunate as all this is for the good Doctor, I’m sure he has insurance and in my view he should be made to rebuild it just as it was. Twas a lovely house and I’m sure he won’t mind.

    • George Smith says:

      Exactly, re build as it was completely then apply for planning to build the new one, then know it down and build it again. I think the original plan was always to have a new build and it accidently fell down. The new plan is to big ….. reject😉

  2. Ivor Bagman says:

    To be honest
    It was past
    Tits
    Sell by date .

  3. The Tax payer says:

    It’s a complete joke from start to finish. Only in Penarth and depends on who you know !!!

  4. Anonymous says:

    Looks like, for once, being rich doesn’t always give you free reign to do as you please and ignore the objections of the local community. Hopefully this decision will be upheld by the VoG.

    Good to see a bit of karma kicking in finally…

  5. Georgie says:

    Think this chap thought he could and has made us look like “fools” he knew exactly what he was doing from start to finish, come on VOG for once just for once stand up for thr good folk of Penarth and make him RESTORE it
    Surprised Clinton Road not in Conservation Area?

  6. Christopher David says:

    Penchrahism George- inexplicable. Been around along time but yes it should be rebuilt to original design and a clear signal given out.

    • Woowoo Wizzywoo says:

      “Pencrahism” IS inexplicable. Surely, if you are going to start coining words you might: a) offer a meaning; and b) spell them the same on the two occasions you do use them?

    • Doctor David says:

      Google wants to know if you meant ‘panchronism’?

  7. Christopher David says:

    Excellent DD, I had to look it up. Woowoo Witlesswoo you’re right, as its just a bit light hearted I didn’t spot the mistake until after. But to explain as I’ve lost patience with your thick arse jibes, which if were funny I’d welcome, but you bore me. So….one has Rackmanism. One has Pen (arth) crash (as in walls fall down|) ism (you may get that latter bit). I’m sure with your razor wit and owl like 150 IQ you can do better. Demonlishism? Oh I struggle and am resisting the use of some famous associated Penarth names- do help WooWit To-Woo.

    • Woowoo Wizzywoo says:

      Why do you have to invent a word to describe what you mean, only to have to explain what that new word is supposed to mean?
      Why don’t you just say what you mean?
      A neologism usually serves to decrease the amount of verbiage, not to increase it.
      There is a word to describe what you do, though. The polite version is ‘waffle’.
      By the way, 150 is insultingly low. Guess again.

  8. Denzil says:

    VoG refused it.

  9. Christopher David says:

    Good. Now follow up with blocking Berni’s Inn demolition. Ruddy Philly- Stine’s.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s