Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

Cardiff cul-de-sac residents lose battle to stop house being demolished to make way for cycle path

Locals claimed link to planned affordable housing development one described as a “ghetto” would lead to increased crime

Residents of a cul-de-sac in Cardiff have lost a battle to prevent a house there from being demolished to make way for a cycle path providing a link to a new affordable housing development.

Paul and Janice Snelgrove agreed last year to sell the four-bedroom house they had bought 20 years earlier for £112,000 to developers of the new development for £400,000 – reportedly £80,000 above its then market value.

> Residents complain about plans to demolish house to make room for new cycle path

But neighbours in Clos Nant Glaswg in Pentprennau, north east Cardiff, while saying they respect the couple’s decision, have been fighting against plans to demolish the two-storey house to make way for what has been widely reported as a cycle path – although in reality, it is a shared-use path that will also allow people on foot to access local amenities.

This week, however, Cardiff City Council’s planning committee approved plans by the housing association United Welsh to knock down the house, bringing an end to the battle by some local residents to stop it happening, reports Wales Online.

The new development, which will provide 45 affordable homes, will be built on former farmland off an unlit country lane, and the shared-use path will link it to Clos Nant Glaswg.

Opposition to the plans centred around fears that the affordable housing scheme would “create a ghetto” and lead to increased crime and, as a result, impact property prices,

Emma Fortune, a planning agent who represents United Welsh, said the scheme would boost the provision of affordable homes in the Welsh capital and that the shared-use path would give an option other than driving to people living locally.

She rejected criticism that the scheme constituted “piecemeal premature development, or thatit had been “designed in isolation” to the wider strategy for the north east of the city.

“In fact, the site provides a direct link to the land to the north, as well as providing the shared cycle-footway to the south connecting into the wider Pontprennau estate.

“This footpath and cycleway will provide an important strategic active travel link for residents, providing access to shops, services and public transport links that will be developed within the strategic site itself, and allowing people to access services in Pontprennau.

“The link provides a safe and convenient alternative, so residents can walk or cycle, rather than use their cars. The proposed development of 45 carbon-neutral homes contributes to making up the shortfall in the delivery of affordable homes in Cardiff,” she added.

While local residents opposing the scheme have claimed they have nothing against the development itself and its provision of affordable housing, some of the comments made suggest otherwise, with one saying last year that it would “threaten our safety and security.”

Others objecting to the plan claiming it would “put the safety of the Pontprennau community at risk” as well as the footpath “creating a rat run” between the development and cul-de-sac.

Simon joined road.cc as news editor in 2009 and is now the site’s community editor, acting as a link between the team producing the content and our readers. A law and languages graduate, published translator and former retail analyst, he has reported on issues as diverse as cycling-related court cases, anti-doping investigations, the latest developments in the bike industry and the sport’s biggest races. Now back in London full-time after 15 years living in Oxford and Cambridge, he loves cycling along the Thames but misses having his former riding buddy, Elodie the miniature schnauzer, in the basket in front of him.

Add new comment

10 comments

Avatar
Rendel Harris | 1 year ago
1 like

It does seem the NIMBY-ism is strong in the residents of the close, but it also seems somewhat counter-intuitive to knock down a house to help build more houses. Glancing at the map and the satellite view there appear to be at least two spurs of the close that almost touch Ty-Draw Road, the "unlit country lane" where the new development will be, anyone local happen to know why they couldn't just knock through from the road there rather than demolish the house?

Avatar
Tom_77 replied to Rendel Harris | 1 year ago
3 likes

Rendel Harris wrote:

It does seem the NIMBY-ism is strong in the residents of the close, but it also seems somewhat counter-intuitive to knock down a house to help build more houses. Glancing at the map and the satellite view there appear to be at least two spurs of the close that almost touch Ty-Draw Road, the "unlit country lane" where the new development will be, anyone local happen to know why they couldn't just knock through from the road there rather than demolish the house?

The "spurs" (in red and blue) look like shared driveways. Probably each of the houses next to those driveways own a small part of it, and any one of them could refuse to sell that part of the driveway.

Avatar
Mungecrundle | 1 year ago
4 likes

I wish that provision for active travel, just some joined up thinking on footpaths would be a start, was far higher on the sign-off criteria for all the housing development going on in my home town.

Avatar
eburtthebike | 1 year ago
7 likes

"Others objecting to the plan claiming it would “put the safety of the Pontprennau community at risk” as well as the footpath “creating a rat run”........."

No, that would be a road.

NIMBYS of the Year Award goes to the residents of Clos Nant Glaswg for opposing something that will bring benefits to many and won't affect them at all, apart from plebs walking/cycling past their houses.

Avatar
Rich_cb | 1 year ago
7 likes

I can see both sides in this.

The cul de sac residents will undoubtedly have more footfall past their houses as a result of this new path and many of them will have moved to a cul de sac precisely to avoid that.

On the other hand if we don't build infrastructure like this to support new developments we just create more car dependency.

Ironically the wider area of pontprennau is incredibly car dependent so I'm not sure it's a good idea to be putting more houses there anyway.

Avatar
chrisonabike replied to Rich_cb | 1 year ago
3 likes

Yup.  As a user on here or two have shown some people who aspire to cul-de-sacs are leery of "change" especially changes to access.  Sometimes to the ironic extent of condemning LTNs!

Obviously land use and planning are very different in two different countries.  And in the UK one development situation won't be the same as the next!  However I think the general trends are clear.  NL - build the infra then the houses:

https://bicycledutch.wordpress.com/2018/09/11/a-new-bridge-in-a-resident...

As the Big Issue often points out for over the last 20 years we've had a new UK minister of state for housing almost every year on average.  That must be why we're so innovative.

Avatar
brooksby replied to Rich_cb | 1 year ago
4 likes

One article I read on it said that the developer actually bought the house a year ago, presumably when planning this development, and has been renting it out since then.

As well as the higher footfall issue, I suspect there's a bit of "We totally agree with building more social/affordable housing, we just don't want it here" going on...

Avatar
Rich_cb replied to brooksby | 1 year ago
5 likes

I'm sure the fact it's 'affordable/social' housing has increased the level of concern.

It's always better to build it 'somewhere else'!

Avatar
NOtotheEU | 1 year ago
11 likes

A cycle lane AND affordable homes? How dare they! 

Before long poor people will be cycling past our houses, AAAARRRRGGGGHHHH.

Avatar
Secret_squirrel | 1 year ago
13 likes

Sounds more like standard nimby-ism rather than anything anti-bike

Latest Comments