Loading
The decisions as the council's minutes record them. A plain-language summary follows once it has been written.
AGREED: that the Chair, on behalf of the Committee, writes to the Cabinet Member conveying the observations of the Committee when discussing the way forward.
Cllr Molik was elected Chair of the Joint Committee.
Apologies were received from Cllrs Bridgeman, Davies, Gibson, Lent, Lewis, Melbourne and Moultrie. Tegan Griffiths and Martha Lewis (Youth Council) also sent apologies.
There were none.
Decision as recorded
AGREED: that the Chair, on behalf of the Committee, writes to the Cabinet Member conveying the observations of the Committee when discussing the way forward.
Members were advised that this item provided them with the opportunity to consider the report titled ‘Land at Pengam Green – Masterplan Proposal’ prior to its consideration by Cabinet on 10th July. For this item, the Chair welcomed: Cllr Lynda Thorne Cabinet Member for Housing & Communities Cllr Dan De’Ath Cabinet Member for Climate Change, Strategic Planning & Transport Cllr Russell Goodway Cabinet Member for Investment & Development Sarah McGill Corporate Director, People & Communities Matt Evans OM Specialist Accommodation and Support Barry Leavy OM Major Projects David Jaques Assistant Director, Development & Regeneration Andrew Gregory Director of Planning, Transport and Environment The Cabinet Members were invited to make opening statements. The Cabinet Member for Climate Change, Strategic Planning & Transport explained that the report sought approval to commission a masterplan for the Pengam Green site and develop a temporary gypsy and traveller (G&T) site to alleviate overcrowding at Rover Way. A large brownfield area, formerly an airfield and manufacturing site, had been identified in the RLDP as a potential place for development. There were a variety of planning considerations, such as flood risk, and development of a comprehensive phase masterplan would enable them to develop a sustainable gateway into the city and expand G&T accommodation. The Cabinet Member for Housing & Communities added that the masterplan would be a significant step towards resolving several challenging issues. The central focus was the opportunity the land transfer presented to address longstanding concerns about overcrowding at the Rover Way site. The community there had consistently expressed a strong desire to remain in the local area, but there was clear unmet demand, with 117 extra pitches forecasted to be needed by 2036. The temporary site was opposite the current location and would provide additional capacity. The broader masterplanning work included a preferred option for the permanent site depending on highway realignment, which was another major project. She anticipated that the temporary provision would be in place for around 10 years, and was pleased they were able to take this step now. Officers gave a presentation outlining the process to date, explaining that the acquisition of land at Pengam Green from the Welsh government using the land transfer protocol had been approved in March 2024, and the site acquired in June 2025. It was a significant area for the east of Cardiff, being a gateway into the bay and the south of the city centre. There were current light and heavy industrial uses and considerable undeveloped ex-industrial land. It included the land directly opposite the Rover Way site, which the council owned, and in total covered 54 acres. The site was identified as a Site of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINC), adjacent to the Severn Estuary Special Protection Area and a Ramsar wildlife site of international importance, and specialist surveys would be undertaken to ensure full compliance for any future proposals. Rover Way was strategically significant as a key point of access to the city, but it was currently poorly configured and did not align with active travel and pedestrian accessibility requirements. The current Rover Way site only had 21 pitches for 33 families, and there were a range of issues in addition to this overcrowding including poor access to facilities, with only one option for water and heating, and the heavily trafficked road that constrained the site. Environmental and health & safety concerns had been identified for some time, and there was a need to relocate the families currently residing there. Extensive consultation had been undertaken over a long period of time, and residents wanted to remain within the area. The potential temporary site had been subject to a high-level flood risk assessment which showed provision could be managed to acceptable levels, but a detailed flood consequence assessment would be required to bring proposals forward. The delivery of the G&T site was considered critically important to ensuring that the Replacement Local Development Plan (RLDP) development framework was sound, and failure to adopt the RLDP would result in unplanned development and reduced S106 funding. The latest Gypsy Traveller Accommodation Assessment (GTAA) approved by the Welsh government in April 2024 showed an unmet need for 117 additional pitches by 2036 and an urgent unmet need for the provision of 73 pitches by 2026. This formed part of the evidence base for the RLDP, which was required to allocate sites to meet this need. The 6.8 hectare Pengam Green site had been identified as having the potential to deliver up to 70 pitches on a temporary basis for a minimum of ten years. Officers emphasised that it was a major opportunity to improve connectivity, active travel, and economic and environmental regeneration options through Cardiff’s eastern gateway. Commissioning a comprehensive phased masterplan would enable them to identify where future development could best be located, incorporating placemaking principles; access and wider connectivity; a mix of land uses; good design; and the delivery of blue and green infrastructure. Phase 1 of the masterplan would consider the requirements for the temporary G&T site, before phase 2 would provide a conceptual plan for the wider area. Key challenges would include flood protection, environmental constraints, supporting existing provision and highway issues, and detailed statutory environmental and planning assessments would be required. Finally, officers explained that producing a masterplan for the site would cost £375k-£440k over a three year period, including the detailed assessment required to bring forward a proposal for a temporary G&T site. The capital cost of delivering the G&T site was being scoped, but the Welsh government had indicated positive potential grant support for the delivery of such provision. Study and design work on the Eastern Bay Link was estimated to cost £400k-£500k in the medium term, with grant support also needed there. This Cabinet report requested approval to commission the masterplan and for the development of proposals for the temporary G&T site, with a requirement to bring such a proposal back to Cabinet for consideration. Members were invited to ask questions and make comments; the discussion is summarised below. Members agreed that the existing road on Rover Way was not fit for purpose in its current form, with heavy traffic and no safe walking or cycling route. They emphasised that in order for the area to be properly developed, suitable roads had to be in place first, and were reassured by officers that active and sustainable travel requirements would be key to the road design, enabling effective access to local centres and schools from the G&T site, as well as for pedestrians on the coast path. Members advocated ensuring sufficient separation between Rover Way and the coast path. Members noted that the Welsh government had agreed to the new road on the condition it didn’t increase car capacity, but suggested that new roads tended to attract more cars through induced demand. Officers responded that they saw the road as part of a wider network enhancement which would take vehicles out of central residential areas like Newport Road, Adamsdown and Splott, benefitting active travel. The report was not seeking agreement for the realignment of the Eastern Bay Link, but rather moving forward with the masterplan and the G&T site, and there would be extensive assessment of transport and environmental implications down the line. Members noted that the proposed temporary site would not fully meet the urgent need for 73 pitches by 2026. Officers acknowledged this and explained that it was not yet entirely certain what the site would deliver. The development and regeneration team were assessing buildability, and the urgency of G&T relocation across the road was clear. A company involved in the recent work at Shirenewton were providing assistance, and they were confident that the site could fit 70 pitches with comfortable space for leisure and turning circles. A full assessment would be undertaken, but they could look at adjacent areas if needed. Members noted recurring complaints from residents about horses being left on the grass, and heard that this would be taken into account during the planning phase. They worked closely with those in Shared Regulatory Services, which included a dedicated horses officer, and would respond to each case individually. Members queried why the site had been identified as a SINC, given it was an ex-industrial area with seemingly low conservation value and potential for contamination, though they suggested that it could be due to the Severn Estuary, the foreshores and coastal path. Officers agreed to look into this and provide further information on how it had been given this status. The Committee explored the consultation with the G&T community and heard that this had been ongoing since around 2013, including with Gypsy Traveller Wales. The Cabinet Member explained that while the community generally wanted to move to a more suitable site close to the current one, many of them were also cross about how long it had taken, and didn’t believe it was going to happen. Officers added that the current overcrowding was very severe and brought risks to physical and mental wellbeing as well health and safety concerns and environmental problems. They emphasised the importance of not going in with undeliverable promises, and engaging constantly with the community as plans developed. More targeted on-site consultation could be undertaken where there were clearer proposals to consult on, but they had already offered 1:1 sessions to every agreement holder to hear their concerns. While there was general consensus that the current site wasn’t fit for purpose, views differed within the community about what to do about it. People’s lives were rooted there, so family requirements had to be taken into account in the design. Members noted that the flood risk was considered manageable to acceptable levels, and asked how this would be done. Officers explained that while a high-level risk assessment had showed that the site was not impacted, they needed more granular detail in order to bring a proposal forward, as required by law. A variety of assessments would need to be undertaken, some of which had to be done at particular times of the year, but they could put together assumed timelines and hone them as they went. Members queried whether those currently in Rover Way would get priority in moving to the new site, and if those at Shirenewton or out of area would be able to move in too. Officers confirmed that Rover Way was the first priority, though there was further need to be addressed, with 50 people on the waiting list for a pitch, and the community was relatively transient. They were developing a policy for G&T allocations, which would set out the process for assessing people who came to the council for culturally appropriate housing. Members asked about the specifics of land usage in the future and were told that no judgement had been made at this point. It was a complex site, both environmentally and economically as a gateway to the city, and there would be residential and industrial demands which were not always compatible. The area would be subject to detailed analysis, particularly environmental, and Members would be kept informed as this developed. Members asked about play facilities on the temporary site and heard that officers were putting together an indicative layout with a multi-use games area (MUGA) in the middle. They were also considering putting a modular unit in the centre as a focal point, enabling council staff to work out there as well as health colleagues and other services, similar to at Shirenewton where there was a community hall and sizeable staff office. This was in line with Welsh government guidance, and would make early help and other support easier to provide. Members highlighted the importance of safe access to schools, in particular noting the relocation of Willows, and heard that this was central to their planning. Suitable pedestrian infrastructure would be a key part of mitigating risks to residents, and the current site was considered high-risk on this front. Members asked about the budget for the masterplan and heard that this was coming from the empty homes and housing needs reserve, as the key priority was the housing needs of a particular community. However, it was a complex project involving many different strands, which the masterplan would need to take into account. Officers were confident that the Welsh government were supportive of the proposal, and there was a relatively large pot available for projects like this, but confirmation would be needed before they could enter into any contracts. Members highlighted the high rates of young travellers not being in education, employment or training, and the associated risk of exploitation. Officers were confident that delivering a fit for purpose G&T site would create and strengthen opportunities for the community, and make on-site services easier to provide. Having a multi-purpose building on the temporary site would enable community groups and other organisations to come in and engage with the community, which the current site didn’t allow, and they would make use of referral mechanisms to address exploitation. Members asked whether extra school spaces or resources would be needed to ensure that young travellers had access to education, and heard that officers would engage with education colleagues throughout. The move to the temporary site would not cause issues in terms of education for those already there, as it was so close by, but it was possible that the provision of additional pitches would bring more families and young children in, and they would plan for this accordingly. AGREED: that the Chair, on behalf of the Committee, writes to the Cabinet Member conveying the observations of the Committee when discussing the way forward.
There were none.
The next meeting of the Environmental Scrutiny Committee was scheduled for 11th September, and the next meeting of the Community & Adult Services Scrutiny Committee was scheduled for 15th September.
Councillors must say when they have a personal link to something being discussed, such as a job, a property or a family member. A prejudicial interest is one strong enough that the councillor usually leaves the room and takes no part.
Declarations are read from the minutes once they are published.
Lists the council's current councillors only. Co-opted members, officers and former councillors aren't shown.