An architect’s watercolour depicting what the new modern box-like house would look like inserted in the middle of Paget Place’s classic row of  Victorian villas in Penarth’s Conservation Area.

The Leader of Penarth Town Council –  Cllr Mike Cuddy (Labour St Augustines) has applied to the  Vale of Glamorgan Council to renew permission to build a modernist box-shaped two-storey dwelling in the heart of the Penarth Conservation Area. 

The proposed new house -would be erected in the grounds of Cllr Cuddy’s classic Victorian villa in Paget Place and would be inserted into a row of similar properties.

The proposed box-like modernistic sdesign house it’s proposed to insert into Victorian Paget Place – in the grounds of the Leader of Penarth Town Council

The contemporary-style house was designed by local architect Chris Loyn former president of the Penarth Civic Society – who is well-known for his cutting-edge designs. [Mr Loyn is also responsible for the design of the ultra-modern 30-apartment “Northcliff Lodge” development – which it is proposed to build immediately across the road from Cllr Cuddy’s Victorian villa  in Paget Place]  

Cllr Cuddy has been Leader of the Labour-controlled Penarth Town Council since 2012, is deputy chairman of its planning committee and was Mayor of Penarth until May this year

Cllr Cuddy is the Leader of the Labour-controlled Penarth Town Council and is also deputy chairman of the Penarth Town Council planning committee – the body that makes recommendations to the Vale of Glamorgan Council on all planning applications made in the town.

Back in the year 2012, when Cllr Cuddy’s scheme was first submitted,  Penarth Town Council was (at that time) controlled by the Conservative Party  and its planning committee RECOMMENDED REFUSAL  of Cllr Cuddy’s plan.

Penarth Town Council’s planning committee told the Vale of Glamorgan Council in February 2012 that the building which Cllr Cuddy wanted to erect at Paget Place would be:-

  • out of keeping with the surrounds
  • an incongruous and overly dominant development” and would
  • “harm  the integrity and appearance of the street scene to the detriment of residential amenities as well as the character and appearance of the Conservation Area”

Cllr Cuddy’s plan also ran into  opposition from  Vale of Glamorgan Council’s Conservation Advisory Group – the body which advised the council on all conservation matters.

The Vale of Glamorgan Conservation Advisory Group ALSO RECOMMENDED REFUSAL  of the application. In a report to the Vale Council the advisory group said it said  the scheme :-

  • did not  “harmonise with the existing street scene”
  • was on the existing “building line” [ i.e. the modern building would be inserted within the existing line of Victorian frontages]  and… 
  • the design “represented an overly dominant form of development”.

Cllr Cuddy’s application was set to be decided upon by a “delegated” Vale Council planning officer  rather than being discussed at a full Vale Council planning committee.

In May 2012 he Labour Party came into power in both the Vale of Glamorgan Council and Penarth Town Council –  and Cllr Cuddy was ensconced as Leader of Penarth Town Council.

In June 2012 the now Labour-controlled Vale Council planning committee considered the Vale Conservation Committee’s Advisory Report [ which recommended rejection of Cllr Cuddy’s application]  and only noted it  – without taking any action.

The application was then formally APPROVED by the “delegated” Vale Planning officer  who over-rode  the opposition of the Vale Conservation Advisory Committee and of the old Conservative administration in Penarth Town Council  and allowed the development to go ahead,  the only caveat being that there should be “landscaping to soften the impact of the development.”

As with most planning applications, the standard condition was imposed, requiring that work should begin within 5 years of the granting of planning permission.

In the event however, that 5 year period has now expired – with no work having started  – and the  2012 planning permission has now expired.

For this reason Cllr Cuddy and his wife have now had to lodge a formal application to revive the lapsed and expired planning application and are requesting an EXTENSION OF THE PLANNING DEADLINE.

Despite the tangled history of this proposal – and the “incongruous” impact on the Penarth Conservation Area which Penarth Town Council said in 2012 that it would have – the matter is still due to be dealt with only by a “delegated” Vale Council planning officer and will not come before the full Vale of Glamorgan planning committee unless it is formally “called-in” by a local councillor.

….So far, no local councillor has made that move.



About NewsNet

Penarth Daily News email address . 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. Comments posted on the site by commentators reflect their opinions and are not necessarily shared, endorsed or supported by Penarth Daily News.
This entry was posted in Penarth Daily News. Bookmark the permalink.


  1. Jan Harding says:


  2. Philip Rapier says:

    One has some knowledge of a similarly intrusively structure in the Post Tardis neo Clingon- Martian like genre within my own peer group. One’s peers judge it an extra terrestrial intrusion beyond comprehension of the aesthetic desires of the most basically educated human being.
    Needless to say the said offending structure was afforded first prize design of the month by the Vale of Glamorgan Planning Dept.
    My associates and I are doomed to despise this spacecraft for the rest our lives

    • Philip Rapier says:

      Neither does one actually need a so called Architect as the Plans for “eco” box homes that may be purchased on line from numerous ” design solutions” peddling Web Architects. Online, “award winning” almost identical aesthetically vile, conservation area hating, eco box like home plans abound and may be bought very cheaply.
      The cheap bit is really the main motivation as these monstrosities may be knocked up for around £50,000. The construction cost per sq ft is so low that around 1000 per cent profit is easily achievable when “marketing” the “property” at ten times the cost price.
      Cash for decimating Penarth’s unique landscape must be very tempting.
      Pity the poorly trained Vale of Glamorgan Town Planners who probably obtained there degree in Architectural Vandalism on a cheap as chips day release course in Barry Library.(which they have tried several times to replace with a greenhouse effect structural abomination)

  3. Mark Foster says:

    Of course the Labour Party has lost all credibility when it has people like Mike Cuddy trying to make a few hundred thousand quid whilst simultaneously destroying Penarth’s Victorian heritage or Lis Burnett letting out her “cottage” in the Scottish Highlands.

    They need to honourably return to the philosophy of social justice and rights of British working people of great Brits like Aneurin Bevan.

  4. Frank Evans says:

    The whole of penarth labour town councillors should be in no way involved in this decision, major conflict of interests. Shocking hippocracy.
    Note Phil Rapier waxing lyrical but like Comrade Corbyn can bring himself to come off the fence.

  5. cogan nomen says:

    as far as I’m concerned , any building
    With off- road parking should be deemed acceptable .

  6. Anne Greagsby says:

    I have written to the VoG planning department yesterday re Application No. 2017/00548/FUL 9, Paget Place, Penarth
    Proposal : Variation to renew existing planning permission – varying Condition 1 of Planning Permission 2012/00075/FUL. To extend time period for commencement of development

    I object to renewal. In view of the substantial changes in policy, this should be treated as a new application. No notification for Conservation Area consent appears to have been displayed on-street**.
    1. In the Conservation Area, the previous permission was for detailed planning permission, not outline that would admit the substantial changes now proposed

    2. Policy has significantly changed, including the Local Development Plan superseding the UDP that is cited in the PAS.

    3. The new Welsh Guidance “Setting of historic assets in Wales” came into force on 31 May, prior to the application but ignored by it. “Decision-making authorities and their advisers should use this guidance…when considering individual applications for planning permission and … conservation area consent”.

    In view of this context, I submit that the application should not be considered under delegated powers, but referred to the full planning committee, to include officer analysis based on the new policy and completely different appearance.

  7. Papa Lazarou says:

    It looks like a buidlers portacabin amongst those beautiful properties

  8. Kevin Mahoney says:

    Fair play, that looks absolutely awful in that particular setting

  9. Big Davey says:

    Wy doesn’t Chris Lyons bog off to Milton Keynes where is lego child like architecture might be appreciated.

    He has done more to undermine the heritage of Penarth than anyone else in Penarth.

  10. Aled Thomas says:

    This is a dreadfully designed house! Chris Loyn should take his brutalist architecture elsewhere.

    • Daft o dul says:

      Yes just because it is covered in rolled galvanised tin doesn’t make it cutting edge.

      This is tomorrow’s regret.

    • snoggerdog says:

      he has outside barclays bank a snip at £1,800,i went to the vale of glam showground, there were some lovely sturdy benches for sale less than £700,even if the lone ranger & tonto rode into town & spotted it theyd say snoggerdog old son you may not have rustlers or bank robbers ,but i think we need a word with wadda those cowpokes call themselves,the momentum gang!

  11. penarthblog says:

    The actual design I like, it’s the scale of it that’s wrong.

  12. Vorvox says:

    How hideous!! Totally out of keeping with the conservation area.

    This sort of architecture needs to be half buried in the ground in a detached plot in the middle of the country so it’s not inflicted on anyone else’s sensibilities. Definitely not in a conservation area with a distinct character that is supposed to be being protected.

  13. Gray local says:

    He appears to have only one design idea … little hard edged boxes. Just take a look in the window of his new offices opposite the Albion. The Windows are filled with ” little boxes” not in keeping or appropriate for a conservation area.

  14. Frederick says:

    Talk about taking the mick.

  15. NickP says:


  16. Inigo Jones says:

    Is it 1st April?

  17. Penileaks says:

    Has anyone read the poetic gobbledygook that Mr Loyn & Co, have used in this re-application. What utter ‘tosh’ and clearly designed to hoodwink those at the planning department that the proposed structure is actually good for the area.
    Shame on Loyn & Co., and shame on Mr Cuddy who both obviously have no real interest in preserving any of Penarth’s beauty, only making money.

  18. Mark Foster says:

    I have no problem with the design. I think it might help to start to bring Penarth into the 21st century, architecturally speaking. Mike Cuddy should donate half of the profit to the impoverished British working class.

    • Peter Church says:

      Yes, just leave your own name and address and I’ll arrange to have a monstrosity placed next door to your house.

      Mike Cuddy. Shame on you.

      Penarth: The greedy garden sellers-by-the-sea

Comments are closed.