We store cookies on your device to make sure we give you the best experience on this website. I'm fine with this - Turn cookies off
Switch to an accessible version of this website which is easier to read. (requires cookies)

Update on paddling pool campaign.

March 19, 2013 4:35 PM

A petition has been submitted to the Assembly asking the Welsh Government to give listed building consent to the paddling pool. There were 1212 signatures in total when it closed on 12th March.

The basis of the argument which was submitted in support of the petition is as follows:

  • The whole of Ynysangharad Park appears as listed on CADW website, and is part of the Pontypridd Conservation area.
  • The paddling pool predates the Lido, was part of the original Park, and is part of the history of Pontypridd. It has been used by generations of children, and as a centrepiece for countless (free) days out for families since the 1920s.
  • The Park belongs to the people. It was built largely with money from the Miners' Welfare Fund and door to door collections at a time when people had little money to spare. It is the town's War Memorial. The Council are merely the Trustees. Changes such as this should not take place without full and proper consultation and the agreement of the people of Pontypridd. The Council do not have the agreement of the people to remove the paddling pool.
  • CADW were positive at the beginning of this process that separate consent would be needed to remove the paddling pool as it was a listed building. The submission from Rhondda Cynon Taff Council appears to be flawed in that they are arguing the paddling pool is not part of the Lido curtilage and so does not need lbc.
  • Our argument is that the paddling pool is, we agree, separate to the Lido, and that therefore it should be listed separately and subject to a separate application for consent to removal. We think RCT Council make an adequate argument as to why the paddling pool is not a part of the Lido, but in doing so also provide the basis for arguing that it should be listed separately.

What we hope to achieve by this:

The application for listed building consent for the Lido renovation was poorly publicised and added on as an additional paper alongside the routine planning application. The public were largely unaware of it and certainly not aware of how they could comment / object.

A few weeks prior to the Council elections the then Leader of RCT Council announced that because of the obvious public feeling in favour of retaining the paddling pool the Cabinet had listened and decided it would be kept. Headlines to this effect appeared in the local press and the promise was repeated in the manifesto of the ruling group.

As a result of this many people were unaware that the plans, submitted on May 10th, included the removal of the pool. They did not see any need to object as they thought the pool was safe.

If listed building status were given to the paddling pool then a new application for consent to remove it would have to be submitted and considered. Raised public awareness of the issues since May we believe means that the reaction would be very different and at least the public would have the opportunity to have their say based on facts.