Trelogan House in Bradford Place, Penarth as it is now.

A scheme to re-develop a traditional large vintage semi-detached house in Bradford Place Penarth – within the Penarth Conservation Area –  has been recommended for refusal by the planning committee of Penarth Town Council.

The house involved – Tregolan House – is next door to the classic shipowner’s mansion The Lindens  – and has in recent years been rented out as 4 flats .

The existing front facade of Tregolan House, Bradford Place would be retained – the big change would be at the side and at the rear

Now however a planning application has now been submitted on behalf of Oakleigh House Developments Ltd to redevelop the property, with the number of apartments increased from 4 to 6 – all with two bedrooms.

To create the extra accommodation,it’s proposed to add a large modern glazed 3-storey extension at the rear of the property.  Two of the flats would have balconies.

The massive three- storey glazed extension it’s proposed to build at the rear of Tregolan House in Bradford Place

Tregolan House – as seen from Bradford Place – would have a three-storey modern glazed extension added to the side of it which extends into the rear garden of the property.  The major change would be visible from the existing properties on either side of Tregolan House site.

The developers had already had pre-application discussions with the Vale of Glamorgan Council’s planning office prior to submitting the application….however the scheme was not well-received by Penarth Town Council’s planning committee.

The Town Clerk, Emma Boylan, reading out the proposal quoted the developers as saying that the front wall (of the front garden) was “in a dangerous condition and at risk of collapse”.    It would be rebuilt to match the existing wall or retained.  It was noted that a tree survey and arboricultural impact assessment would be required.

An aerial photograph in the development document which indicates the development site at Tregolan House

The Town Clerk said Penarth Town Council’s own consultant [Emma Langmaid of Prospero Consultancy – who vets all proposals coming before Penarth Council] – had recommended that the council’s planning committee should object to the scheme. She said the proposed extension had not been “sensitively designed”  .

Ms Langmaid said the side elevation of the extension “creates a large mass with a considerable amount of glazing” and appeared to be “unneighbourly” and would “lead to loss of privacy and overlooking” – factors which the Vale of Glamorgan Council had already pointed out in its response to the pre-application proposal . Ms Langmaid added that the development would also fail to preserve or enhance the character of the Penarth Conservation Area  .

Cllr Rhiannon Birch (Labour Cornerswell) Leader of Penarth Town Council

Cllr Rhiannon Birch (Labour Cornerswell) said the proposed extension “looked like an office block” . She said it was “overdevelopment of the site”. She pointed out that there was already other developments on Bradford Place “some of which are extremely ugly” and they should not be added to .

Cllr Gary Allman (Conservative St Augustines)

Cllr Gary Allman  (Conservative St Augustines)  was also against the proposal

Cllr Mike Cuddy (Labour St Augustines) said two letters of objection from local residents had been received including from the property next door “The Lindens” .

Cllr Nigel Humphrey (Labour St Augustines)

Chairing the meeting, Cllr Nigel Humphrey (Labour St Augustines) said the size of the extension at the  rear would mean neighbours “suffering considerable loss of light“. He said the Vale planning officer dealing with the application had already  gone back to the agents to repeat some of the concerns highlighted when the pre-application submission had been made.

Cllr Martin Turner, (Conservative Plymouth Ward)

The officer was expecting to receive “amendments”. If those amendments were sufficiently significant then the matter would be referred back to Penarth Town Council planning committee.

Cllr Martin Turner (Conservative Plymouth Ward) asked whether the Penarth Council would now be formally objecting to the development [ and would be informing the Vale of Glamorgan Council accordingly] .

It was confirmed that this was the case.









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. Christopher -David says:

    We all know this doesn’t mean a thing. There will be discussion and Goldsworthy will have his way.

  2. Lord of the Bay says:

    I’m going to go out on a limb here – I actually quite like this proposal. The back of the building currently appears to be a mish-mash of extensions, so the new build would be an improvement. From the front the new build is scarcely visible, so the general appearance of the street would be unaffected. I can understand the neighbours being concerned about overlooking, but there does seems to be a reasonably large stretch of back garden between the two properties.

    Whilst it is understandable and desirable that people want to maintain the overall character of the town, this does sometimes seem to spill over into an attitude of “if it don’t look Victorian, we don’t want it”.

  3. Peter Church says:

    Section 106 money, yes that will do nicely!

  4. Andrew Worsley says:

    Are you suggesting some form of corruption Christopher David? surely not , its almost as if your suggesting wheeling and dealing behind the scenes . Everybody know the wealthy and influential do not sink to those depths , they are honest upstanding members of society who never put a foot wrong . This application has been refused and that will be the end of it and no talk of brown envelopes or arm twisting or pleading will sway the Council or anyone else . We all know what a superb job!, the Council and associated bodies do for Penarth and the surrounding areas!!!. Car parks galore , CCTV around the town so no one goes in fear at night and no shops will be broken in to by taking advantage of the lack of cameras and the reduced street lighting , which would be silly . Yes now that this application has been turned down there will be no shenanigans behind closed doors , good honest , openness , we can be proud of .

  5. Jp says:

    It looks horrible.

  6. David Day says:

    I think it looks excellent. Fresh, interesting and an elegant marriage of modernity and Victorian styles.

  7. Someone who cares says:

    Am I the only one who thinks if a building is converted into flats it should be done in a way that means it can be turned back into a house if it sells in the future?????

Comments are closed.