The Wharf Demolition and Redevelopment

Looks like the Wharf is going to be demolition and replaced with the attached.
http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/local ... d-11170607

I don't mind the proposed designs and I appreciate that the Wharf pub isn't an old building, but I think it would be a real shame to lose it. In my opinion, it was one of the few things done well around the East Dock and it adds a lot of character. The trouble is the cr*p around it which doesn't have any character at all (except the refurbs nearby), doesn't provide much in the way of facilities or community etc. The surrounding area is pretty much a maze of mediocre design!

Demolishing this buiding would give even less reason for people to hang around this area and just make their way into town. I think it would be a big mistake to lose this focal point.

Why not just build on the carpark? Oh, I know, greed! The developer can squeeze more rubbish on the site.

The thing is that Brains have decided to close the Wharf down. Its gone from being quite a busy community hub with live music.. to rather dead.

Now someone probably could have been found to take it on in some shape or form. But it occupied a lot of land at low density, so was never going to generate much of a return for an investor.

What you call greed, others would call good business sense. Replace a building that's only ever going to bring in a modest amount with a substantial development that will bring in retail and café use (providing a different sort of hub for the area?), as well as having a slew of flats to sell.

At best the car park site could have taken a development of perhaps 1/3 - 1/2 the size. And a viable re-use of the Wharf (which is really quite big) might have necessitated maintaining at least part of the car park, reducing the amount of development further.

I think the brick-based buildings look pretty good, and may actually help make the central park of the Bute East dock feel a bit more developed. (While I like the Wharf building, I do think there could be stronger frontages on to the Dock).

I think if it was the case of Brains selling off a much loved and well used local facility on the grounds of rapacious greed, you'd have a point. But it's not. The Wharf has been dying on it's arse for years because it's in an odd location for passing trade and the locals obviously don't use it enough.

The new development will bring some much needed density to Atlantic Wharf and the proposed coffee house and shop will, arguably, provide more needed community facilites than the Wharf did. I agree it's a nice building and I wish the Holiday Inn Express next door was the building facing the wrecking ball.

On a wider point I don't think the buildings in Atlantic Wharf are that bad with the exception of the Holiday Inn Express which is utter filth. They are of their time which is currently out of fashion but in 20 years I think they will be viewed as one of the better examples of late 80's/early 90's residential housing. History will be much kinder to them than the stuff on Lloyd George Avenue for example.

I think the problem is with density. The winding cul de sacs reminiscent of Thornhill were a mistake and there aren't many strong east-west routes (a common theme in the whole Bay area). And of course it's very lopsided in that Central Link is built on the east side of the dock which scuppers any development on that side.

Plus there is no activity there at all. What happened to the wakeboarding proposals? What about a sailing school for smaller craft etc

They already do sailing for smaller craft on the river Taff, a much safer place as its much shallower i would assume. I really like the Wharf building, but only go there about once a year as a change of scenery. I really like the look of the proposal but like said above would prefer the Express to go instead. There is a strong east west route through the southern block of apartments (nice little bridge the other side also) but it says residents only! (though in reality there is nothing stopping non residents).

I'm I alone in not understanding the aesthetic appeal of a waterfront opposite a steelworks?

I'm I alone in not understanding the aesthetic appeal of a waterfront opposite a steelworks?

Have you never heard of industrial chic?

I'm I alone in not understanding the aesthetic appeal of a waterfront opposite a steelworks?

No, you are not alone. In one of my posts regarding the Bay redevelopment I specifically highlighted the stupidity of building the road so close to the waterfront. It cuts off any development along that side of the Dock for the foreseeable future, it also takes away any reason why someone would really want to walk along that area. So rather than the preserved cranes being a curiosty/feature for tourists (like they are in Bristol, Glasgow, etc.) they just sit idle and add very little.

I think the issue is that while the steel-works remains in place, that side of the dock is/was never going to be suitable for anything other than a road, or perhaps a park (which I think would have been under-utilised and rather bleak in fact). You wouldn't want residential that close to the steelworks for instance (a view of a steelworks across a dock is better than being slap bang next to a steelworks).

So I agree that the backdrop of the Central Link and the Steelworks, and the fact it does not link to the bay, makes the Bute East Dock rather depressing in some respects. But I don't see that there was much else that could have been done unless they booted out the steelworks - which I'm not sure would have been in line with the idea of the bay being about jobs, as well as nice places for tourists and residents? (it certainly would have created a huge backlash that could have derailed the whole project).

Perhaps the only other thing, but this would have needed to have been done far earlier, would have been to fill in the Bute East Dock and to have left the narrower Bute West Dock as the main "water feature" of the area. You'd probably have wanted to leave the Oval Basin where it was too...

Now that probably have worked better. But that was filled in long before CBDC, way before dockside/bayside living was at all fashionable, and back when there were probably still hopes of a heavy industrial future (even if the docks weren't needed). We're asking for a lot of foresight there.. which is much much much more difficult than hindsight!

I think if it was the case of Brains selling off a much loved and well used local facility on the grounds of rapacious greed, you'd have a point. But it's not. The Wharf has been dying on it's arse for years because it's in an odd location for passing trade and the locals obviously don't use it enough...

I think the problem is with density.... The winding cul de sacs reminiscent of Thornhill were a mistake and there aren't many strong east-west routes (a common theme in the whole Bay area). And of course it's very lopsided in that Central Link is built on the east side of the dock which scuppers any development on that side.

Plus there is no activity there at all. What happened to the wakeboarding proposals? What about a sailing school for smaller craft etc

The point is, the Wharf was a great idea of a scheme that was scuppered largely by stupid planning! Hence, this comes back to my earlier criticism of the bay.

That whole area would be real estate gold if is was in somewhere like London. You've got some great old refurbished industrial buildings, a waterfront, old canals etc. with permission for some modern architecture. But what did they do? They built boring little houses around culdasacs that just created a maze of sh*t that no-one would really venture into unless they were stupid enough to buy there. That's why the Wharf did get any passing trade!

How much more trade would it have recieved if:
1. There were office buildings along Lloyd George Avenue, maybe a more mixed development?
2. They allowed Letton Rd to connected to Shooner Way? So that you could actually see the waterfront in the distance and not just walk around some dark maze at night.
3. It was built closer to Tyndall St, where there is some commercial activity?
4. There was development on the other side of the dock with a pedestrian bridge?
5. There was a rowing club?

What is there between Tyndall St and the Red Dragon Centre? Pretty much The Wharf and Martin McColls and that's it.

I think your argument is completely flawed by the fact
1. we are only just seeing offices being constructed around the main train terminus, let alone between the cities two main areas.
2. The whole area between the city center and the bay was not desirable due to being sandwiched between Bute town and Splot. Only since century wharf and Lloyd George ave has this changed.
3. There is no commercial activity at the bottom of the residential blocks just off Tyndal Street and actually facing the waterfront. Development switched to the inner harbour instead.
4. Already discussion above
5. Its too deep, there are rowing clubs on the much nicer Taff and the underutilized Ely.

I think they have done a good job around the canals and most of the buildings around Atlantic wharf are decent, its the infill to Lloyd Geroge ave thats poor.