Casgliadau biniau, ailgylchu, safleoedd gwastraff y cartref, sbwriel a thipio anghyfreithlon.
Beth mae cynghorau'n ei wneud
Mae cynghorau'n casglu gwastraff ac ailgylchu o'r cartref, yn rhedeg canolfannau ailgylchu, yn cadw strydoedd yn lân ac yn delio â thipio anghyfreithlon.
Pwy sy'n penderfynu
Yr aelod Cabinet dros yr amgylchedd sy'n arwain. Mae newidiadau i gasgliadau fel arfer yn mynd i'r Cabinet.
Dweud eich dweud
Rhowch wybod i'r cyngor am gasgliadau a fethwyd a thipio anghyfreithlon. Yn aml, ymgynghorir ar newidiadau i wasanaethau casglu yn gyntaf.
Mewn rhifau
Mae cynghorau Cymru yn bwriadu gwario £172 y pen ar hyn yn 2026-27.
Mae'n amrywio o £114 yn Bro Morgannwg i £231 yn Merthyr Tudful.
RESOLVED: that
• the procurement of new recycling collection fleet over a three-year period with a value estimated at £9.7M be approved.
• the award of an initial contract (as set out in the report) be approved.
• Authority be delegated to the Director of Economic Development, subject to consultation with the Cabinet Member for Finance, Modernisation & Performance, Cabinet Member for Climate Change, s.151 Officer and Director of Governance & Legal Services and Monitoring Officer, to deal with the future award of contracts (and any ancillary agreements) as required in relation to this procurement.
RESOLVED: That the Chairperson writes to the Cabinet Member on behalf of the Committee to convey any comments, observations and recommendations made during the way forward.
RESOLVED – T H A T the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure (Cabinet Minute
No. C236, 27th February, 2023 (as set out in Section 15.14.2(ii) of the Council’s
Constitution) be noted.
Reason for decision
The reporting of the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure is a requirement of the
Council’s Constitution.
TREASURY MANAGEMENT AND INVESTMENT STRATEGY 2023/24 AND UPDATE 2022/23 (REF)
RESOLVED – T H A T the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure (Cabinet Minute
No. C237, 27th February, 2023 (as set out in Section 15.14.2(ii) of the Council’s
Constitution) be noted.
No.
Reason for decision
The reporting of the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure is a requirement of the
Council’s Constitution.
FINAL BUDGET 2023/24 AND MTFP 2023/24 TO 2028/29 (REF)
RESOLVED – T H A T the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure (Cabinet Minute
No. C238, 27th February, 2023 (as set out in Section 15.14.2(ii) of the Council’s
Constitution) be noted.
Reason for decision
The reporting of the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure is a requirement of the
Council’s Constitution.
HOUSEHOLD WASTE RECYCLING CENTRE CONTRACT AWARD 2023-26 (REF)
RESOLVED – T H A T the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure (Cabinet Minute
No. C260, 16th March, 2023 (as set out in Section 15.14.2(ii) of the Council’s
Constitution) be noted.
Reason for decision
The reporting of the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure is a requirement of the
Council’s Constitution.
THE VALE OF GLAMORGAN COUNCIL’S COMMUNITY BOUNDARY AREA REVIEW (REF)
RESOLVED – T H A T the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure (Cabinet Minute
No. C265, 30th March, 2023 (as set out in Section 15.14.2(ii) of the Council’s
Constitution) be noted.
Reason for decision
The reporting of the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure is a requirement of the
Council’s Constitution.
SERVICE LEVEL ACTIVITIES AND PERFORMANCE TARGETS TO DELIVER THE VALE OF GLAMORGAN COUNCIL’S ANNUAL DELIVERY PLAN 2023/2024 (REF)
RESOLVED – T H A T the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure (Cabinet Minute
No.
No. C267, 30th March, 2023 (as set out in Section 15.14.2(ii) of the Council’s
Constitution) be noted.
Reason for decision
The reporting of the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure is a requirement of the
Council’s Constitution.
VALE PUBLIC SERVICES BOARD DRAFT WELL-BEING PLAN 2023-28 (REF)
RESOLVED – T H A T the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure (Cabinet Minute
No. C285, 13th April, 2023 (as set out in Section 15.14.2(ii) of the Council’s
Constitution) be noted.
Reason for decision
The reporting of the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure is a requirement of the
Council’s Constitution.
RESPONSE TO THE WELSH GOVERNMENT CONSULTATION ON FURTHER AMENDMENTS TO “TECHNICAL ADVICE NOTE (TAN) 15: DEVELOPMENT, FLOODING AND COASTAL EROSION” (REF)
RESOLVED – T H A T the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure (Cabinet Minute
No. C287, 13th April, 2023 (as set out in Section 15.14.2(ii) of the Council’s
Constitution) be noted.
Reason for decision
The reporting of the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure is a requirement of the
Council’s Constitution.
AGREED – T H A T the update presentation provided to Committee in respect of a
Rural Vale Household Waste Recycling Centre (HWRC) be noted.
Reason for decision
Having regard to the content of the presentation on the Council’s current
considerations and next steps in relation to the establishment of a new Household
Waste Recycling Centre (HWRC) for the Western Vale.
RESOLVED: That the Chairperson writes to the Cabinet Member on behalf of the Committee to convey any comments, observations and recommendations made during the way forward.
RESOLVED – T H A T the Housing Revenue Account Business Plan 2023/53
attached to the report to Cabinet on 2nd February, 2023 (Min. No. C215) be
approved and submitted to Welsh Government.
Reason for decision
To enable the submission of the above Plan to Welsh Government by the
required deadline of 31st March, 2023.
COUNCIL TAX UNOCCUPIED DWELLINGS: 2023/24 (REF)
The Leader presented the reference, the purpose of which was to reaffirm the
previous decision not to grant any discount in Council Tax for empty properties
and furnished second homes for the 2023/24 financial year.
The report proposed that the Council consulted on the levying of a Council Tax
premium in 2023/24 in respect of long-term empty properties and in 2024/25 in
respect of second homes. This was in line with the Council’s objective to
increase the supply of housing in the Vale of Glamorgan. The headline annual
need for affordable housing in the Vale of Glamorgan from 2021 to 2026 was
1,205 dwellings.
The Leader outlined both proposals, the first being the charging of premiums on
long term empty properties (over 12 months) from 2023/24 financial year and
second homes from 2024/25 financial year. She also reminded Members that
the Council had published its Empty Homes Strategy in March 2020 the findings
indicating that quality rented homes were becoming increasingly difficult to find
coupled with increasing prices incentivising landlords to sell and the ever
widening gap between local housing allowance rents and market rents. This
created a shortage of housing and in terms of underlying need and there was an
obvious financial benefit to the Council in introducing premiums which in part
could contribute to greater engagement and enforcement work. She also
alluded to the 528 long term empty properties and 402 second homes in the
county. She considered that empty homes were a drain on the Council’s overall
resources and the exemptions meant that the properties affected will be lower
than 930 in total. She reminded Members that the Council had consulted on the
proposals and 385 responses had been received of around 56% were against
the proposals however, just over 40% were in favour of charging a premium at
some level.
Councillor Dr. Johnson referred to his comments made at previous Council
meetings in regard to the slowness of the Council to charge the premium and
was pleased to see it now being put forward. He considered there were obvious
benefits which would encourage bringing empty homes into useful use.
Referring to the proposals of Cabinet in terms of its recommendations,
Councillor Dr. Johnson sought clarification from the Leader as to how the
premiums would be agreed beyond the current fixed stepped increase beyond
the period set out in the report as he understood it from the legislation, this
would require an annual consultation on either or both of the premiums in future
years ahead. He also sought clarification as to whether the Chief Executive and
the Leader would be reviewing the premiums and setting these under the
delegated authority if granted.
Councillor Mahoney referring to the proposals shared concerns regarding empty
homes which he felt blighted communities. However, he considered the
proposals to be an infringement on civil rights and was of a concern to him as he
did not see it was the Council’s responsibility to dictate to individuals regarding
the use of their property. He was also concerned that the Council was again
ignoring the response of the public consultation exercise not for the first time
and he had significant reservations regarding this matter.
The Leader, referring to the comments made by Councillor Dr. Johnson,
indicated that the recommendations before Council were to provide a
reassurance to Members that any review of charges or to change premiums
would be brought back to Cabinet and Council for decision and this would also
allow the Council to be able to benchmark against other Councils to see how
well the initiative worked.
In terms of the comments made by Councillor Mahoney, the Leader indicated
that she had no problem with people owning two homes or more. However,
they had to be in productive use and if they were not they should be prepared to
pay an additional contribution and that was the purpose of establishing the
policy.
RESOLVED –
(1) T H A T the following Council Tax premiums be approved:
• A 100% Council Tax premium be levied in 2023/24 in respect of long-
term empty properties, a 150% premium in 2024/25 and a 200%
premium in 2025/26.
• A 100% Council Tax premium be levied in 2024/25 in respect of
second homes.
(2) T H A T delegated authority be granted to the Head of Finance to
implement the changes and to notify the owners of all affected properties.
(3) T H A T delegated authority be granted to the Head of Finance to
determine applications for an exception under the regulations as set out in
paragraph 5.5 of the report (see Cabinet report 16th February, 2023.)
(4) T H A T the Chief Executive and Leader review those premiums in future
years and bring changes to Cabinet and Council for approval as appropriate.
Reasons for decisions
(1) The Council was required to determine its policy on the introduction of
premiums in respect of second homes and long-term empty properties as
defined in Sections 12A and 12B of the Local Government Finance Act 1992, as
inserted by the Housing (Wales) Act 2014.
(2) To ensure that all customers impacted by the introduction of premiums
were aware of the changes.
(3) To ensure arrangements were put in place to consider exceptions.
(4) To ensure premiums levied were kept under review as appropriate.
(N.B. Councillors Buckley, Campbell, Charles, Driscoll and Haines
withdrew from the meeting during consideration of this item.)
DRAFT VALE OF GLAMORGAN COUNCIL ANNUAL DELIVERY PLAN 2023-24 (REF)
Cabinet had considered the report on 16th February, 2023 (Minute No. C226
refers) together with the reference from Corporate Performance and Resources
Scrutiny Committee, and had referred the same to Council for consideration and
approval.
The report set out how the draft Annual Delivery Plan (the Plan) 2023-24
(Appendix A to the report) had been developed, the outcome of the consultation
and the subsequent changes to the Plan, which detailed the activities that would
be undertaken in 2023-24 to deliver those objectives. The Plan also detailed
three critical challenges which would be a key focus for the organisation in
2023-24, these being cost of living, Project Zero and organisational resilience.
The Council’s four Well-being Objectives provided the framework for the Annual
Delivery Plan 2023-24.
The commitments within the Annual Delivery Plan would be reflected in Annual
Service Plans together with a suite of performance measures which would detail
how different Council services would contribute to the delivery of the Council’s
four Well-being Objectives.
Publishing the Council’s Well-being Objectives at the start of the financial year
would enable it to meet its statutory obligations under the performance duties of
the Local Government and Election (Wales) Act 2021 and the Well-being of
Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015, both of which placed specific duties on
the Council in relation to objective setting and reporting. Under the Well-being
of Future Generations (Wales) Act, the Council was required to publish its Well-
being Objectives by 31st March each year and to keep these under review.
RESOLVED – T H A T the Draft Vale of Glamorgan Council Annual Delivery
Plan 2023-24, as attached at Appendix A to the report to Cabinet on 16th
February, 2023 (Minute No. C226) be approved.
Reason for decision
Having regard to the contents of the report and discussions at the meeting.
CAPITAL STRATEGY 2023/24 AND FINAL CAPITAL PROGRAMME PROPOSALS 2023/24 TO 2027/28 (REF)
The Leader, in presenting the report advised that the report had been
considered by Cabinet at its meeting on 27th February, 2023 (Minute No. C236
refers) and provided the Council's Capital Strategy for 2023/24 at Appendix 1.
The Capital Strategy provided a framework which outlined how capital
expenditure, capital financing and treasury management activity contributed to
the provision of corporate objectives, along with an overview of how associated
risk was managed and the implications for future financial sustainability.
The report set out the Council’s proposed Final Capital Programme for the
period 2023/24 to 2027/28 at Appendix 2.
The Council was facing significant pressures in relation to price inflation and the
cost-of-living crisis which had seen increases in the costs of materials and
labour. This had had an impact on the current schemes within the Capital
Programme and the funding available to fund new schemes within the Capital
Programme. The total value of capital schemes over the next five years was
£345m. This included £41m for the Band B Sustainable Communities for
Learning Programme (excluding the pipeline schemes) and £167m for the
Housing Improvement Programme.
Since the Draft Capital Programme proposals reported in January, a number of
changes had been made including the re-profile of the Sustainable Learning
Communities schemes, inclusion of the School Maintenance Grant, the inclusion
of two pipeline schemes, (as referred to at Appendix 2 to this report, in relation
to St. Richard Gwyn Redevelopment and Cowbridge Primary Phase 2 and
worked on two Leisure Centre boilers at Llantwit Major and Cowbridge.
Councillor Franks indicated to Members that it was worth considering in the
financial year 2021/2022 there had been slippage in the amount of £11.5m and
in the current financial year there was a minimum of £8m and therefore he felt
that the Administration’s track record on fulfilling the Council’s Capital Budget
had not been good. He highlighted that of the £88.2m which was in the budget
for the current year only £42.7m would be spent by the end of January with the
£8m of slippage likely to grow further. He felt that these figures highlighted that
residents in the Vale of Glamorgan had been badly let down by the
Administration and was only one area where there had been a failure to invest
funding in social housing. He also referred to the fact that he had challenged a
statement that work had been continuing at the Hayes Road site and despite
promises that the matter would be investigated he had not received any further
information on progress of the site to date. He also touched on other schemes
which had underspent or either had slipped. He also felt that schools had been
badly let down as maintenance had not been carried out and he also highlighted
the condition of roads and pavements and queried why the Council had not
allocated additional funding to improve matters. In concluding, he felt that the
proposed budget was not credible and that the Administration was failing its
communities.
There being no further comments it was subsequently,
RESOLVED –
(1) T H A T the Capital Strategy 2023/24 as set out in Appendix 1 to the
report to Cabinet on 27th February, 2023, be approved.
(2) T H A T the final Capital Programme for the years 2023/24 to 2027/28 as
set out in Appendix 2 to the report to Cabinet on 27th February, 2023, be
approved.
(3) T H A T the Chief Executive and the Head of Finance, in consultation with
the Cabinet Member for Performance and Resources, be granted delegated
authority to make additions, deletions or transfers to or from the 2023/24 to
2027/28 Housing Improvement Programme as appropriate.
(4) T H A T the Chief Executive and the Head of Finance, in consultation with
the Cabinet Member for Performance and Resources, be granted delegated
authority to make additions, deletions or transfers to or from the 2023/24 to
2027/28 Asset Renewal budgets as appropriate.
(5) T H A T the Chief Executive and the Head of Finance, in consultation with
the Cabinet Member for Performance and Resources, be granted delegated
authority to make additions, deletions or transfers to S106 funded schemes
subject to Member consultation as required under the existing process.
(6) T H A T the Chief Executive and the Head of Finance, in consultation with
the Cabinet Member for Performance and Resources, be granted delegated
authority to make additions, deletions or transfers to or from Energy
Management Schemes.
(7) T H A T the Chief Executive and the Head of Finance, in consultation with
the Cabinet Member for Performance and Resources, be granted delegated
authority to make additions, deletions or transfers to or from the Building Strong
Communities Fund schemes.
(8) T H A T the Chief Executive and the Head of Finance, in consultation with
the Cabinet Member for Performance and Resources, be granted delegated
authority to make additions, deletions or transfers to or from the Sustainable
Communities for Learning Band B programme (Previously 21st Century Schools
schemes).
Reasons for decisions
(1) To approve the Capital Strategy for 2023/24.
(2) To set and approve future Capital Programmes to 2027/28.
(3) To enable the Housing Capital budget to be managed effectively.
(4) To enable the Asset Renewal budgets to be managed effectively.
(5) To enable S106 schemes to be managed effectively.
(6) To enable the Energy Management Schemes to be managed effectively.
(7) To enable the Building Stronger Communities Fund to be managed
effectively.
(8) To enable the Sustainable Communities for Learning Band B programme
to be managed effectively.
TREASURY MANAGEMENT AND INVESTMENT STRATEGY 2023/24 AND UPDATE 202223 (REF)
The report, which had been considered by Cabinet on 27th February, 2023
(Minute No. C237 refers) provided an update on the Council’s Treasury
Management operations for the period 1st April to 31st December, 2022. All
activities were in accordance with the Council’s approved strategy on Treasury
Management. Details of monies borrowed and repaid and those invested were
outlined in the report.
The report presented the proposed 2023/24 Treasury Management and
Investment Strategy at Appendix 1.
The Council needed to ensure that the Prudential Code was complied with,
which had been developed by CIPFA as a professional code of practice and
recently revised in December 2021. To demonstrate the Council had fulfilled
these objectives, the Code set out prudential indicators that should be used and
the factors that had to be considered. These were shown in Appendix 1 as part
of the Strategy.
The Council also had a legal requirement to comply with the Welsh Government
Guidance on Investments and had taken this into consideration when
developing the Strategy.
New Borrowing in the period was expected to be £127m for new Capital
Expenditure and a further £24m of borrowing to replace maturing loans and
reflected the Council’s reducing ability to internally borrow over the period.
Capital expenditure when financed by long term debt incurred two elements of
cost, interest and repayment of the principal sum borrowed. The resources the
Council must put aside in each year to repay the principal sum borrowed was
known as Minimum Revenue Provision (MRP) and the Council's policy for the
calculation was detailed in the report.
The Treasury Management Policy Statement for 2023/24 was attached at
Appendix 2 to the report.
The Council was required to keep its Treasury Management Practices (attached
at Appendix 3 to the report) up to date and these procedures for management of
Treasury Management processes were kept under regular review by the team.
The Leader confirmed that there were 12 management practices that the
Council was required to address and these were set out in the Appendix. The
Council’s Treasury Management Practices had been compiled in line with the
Treasury Management in the Public Services: Code of Practice and Cross-
Sectional Guidance Notes (2021 edition). These had been written in
conjunction with the Council’s Treasury Management Policy Statement (TMPS)
and Investment Strategy for 2023/24. The TMPS set out the way the Council
would seek to achieve its Treasury Management Policies and objectives and
how it would manage and control those activities. She reminded all Members
that the Financial Management Code was the collective responsibility of all
Elected Members.
Councillor Champion referred to a recent report that had been submitted to the
Welsh Church Act Estate Committee which had led to a request to officers to
investigate investing in green funds and to move away from fossil fuel
companies. He acknowledged that it may not get the best return by investing in
these companies, but the Council needed to demonstrate that it was moving
towards this.
Councillor Dr. Johnson referred to the recent and important training provided on
Treasury Management and acknowledged that the subject matter was not easy
to understand. He was pleased to see, for the first time since he had been a
Member of the Council, investment income being received as previously this
had been limited. Referring to Councillor Champion’s comments, it was his
understanding from the training that much of the Council’s income and
investments was linked to the Council’s risk appetite and therefore investments
were generally made to organisations that had high credit rating given that the
funds invested were tax payers’ money. He alluded to recent revenue forecast
reported where income was likely to be £75k in the next financial year, but the
most fundamental part of the Council’s Treasury Management Strategy was to
hold tax payers’ money safely and that it could be used when the Council
required it.
The Leader, in response, indicated that it was a matter of balancing the need to
get a return on investments against the likely risk to that investment. She was
glad to see that the Council was getting a return on its investments, but
acknowledged that she would like to see the Strategy be as ethical as possible.
She hoped that Members would become more engaged in how the Council
developed its Strategy on its investments, what the Council was doing with
those investments and how it would benefit local residents.
RESOLVED –
(1) T H A T the policy for making Minimum Revenue Provision in 2023/24 be
approved.
(2) T H A T the proposed 2023/24 Treasury Management and Investment
Strategy, including the following specific resolution (detailed in Appendix 1 to the
report), be approved:
• The Authorised Limit for External Debt be set at £225.439m for
2022/23, £247.141m for 2023/24, £276.773m for 2024/25 and
£305.927m for 2025/26
• The Operational Boundary for External Debt be set at £212.292m for
2022/23, £234.021m for 2023/24, £263.349m for 2024/25 and
£292.295m for 2025/26.
• The Section 151 Officer be given delegated authority within the total
Authorised Limit and Operational Boundary as estimated for
individual years to effect movement between the separately agreed
limits for borrowing and other long term liabilities.
• An upper limit of £10m for 2022/23, £10m for 2023/24, £10m in
2024/25 and £10m in 2025/26 is set for total principal sums invested
for over 364 days.
• The amount of projected borrowing that is fixed rate maturing in each
period as a percentage of total projected borrowing that is fixed rate
for 2023/24 be set as:
Upper Lower
Limit Limit
Under 12 months 20% 0%
12 months and within 24 months 20% 0%
24 months and within 5 years 30% 0%
5 years and within 10 years 40% 0%
10 years and above 100% 0%
• T H A T the Prudential Indicators set out in Appendix 1 to the report
to Cabinet on 27th February, 2023, be approved.
• T H A T the Treasury Management Policy Statement set out in
Appendix 2 to the report to Cabinet on 27th February, 2023, be
approved.
Reasons for decisions
(1) To agree the basis of the Minimum Revenue Provision calculation for
2023/24.
(2) The Treasury Management and Annual Investment Strategy is prepared
as required by the Local Government Act 2003.
FINAL BUDGET 2023/24 AND MEDIUM TERM FINANCIAL PLAN (MTFP) 2023/24 TO 2028/29 (REF)
The Council was facing significant demographic and inflationary pressures in
2023/24 and into the medium term. Cabinet had approved the Financial
Strategy and update of the Medium Term Financial Plan in October, at which
time there was a funding gap of £28m in 2023/24 and £50m across the Medium
Term.
Officers reviewed those pressures and funding assumptions in light of the
Chancellor’s Budget in November and the Welsh Government Settlement
announcement on Tuesday, 13th December, 2022. Pressures had been
managed downwards with few of the investment proposals from October 2022
taken forwards which then stood at £1.010m, but managing the inflationary
pressures down was more challenging and it was determined appropriate to
support the utility based pressures through the temporary use of reserves in the
expectation that prices did reduce over the longer term.
There was better than expected news in the Settlement. £227m was made
available across Wales over and above the 3.5% commitment in last year’s
settlement.
Consequently, the Council faced a reduced funding gap of £9.255m and
following the approval of Cabinet on 19th January, 2023 consulted on a savings
package of £6.055m after the one off use of reserves of £3.2m.
Pressures and funding had continued to be reviewed alongside comments from
the Scrutiny Committees and public and wider consultation. There had been
further grants received to support Homelessness alongside a recognition of the
need to make greater provision for pay awards.
There was a proposed increase in Council Tax of 4.9%. For a Band D property
this was the equivalent of £1.32 per week and maintained Council Tax at the
mean of Welsh Authorities.
There was a £7.378m savings and efficiencies programme for which Equality
Impact Assessments had been undertaken, tracking and management
arrangements had already been put in place to ensure delivery.
As part of the budget deliberations there had been a fundamental review of the
Council’s reserves. The reserves had been realigned with the Council’s overall
objectives and risks and had been streamlined to provide greater transparency
and ease of management.
The comments from the public consultation and scrutiny review of the January
Budget for consultation had been considered in formulating the final proposals.
The Section 151 Officer had assessed the robustness of estimates and
adequacy of reserves and was satisfied with both.
A supplementary report was presented to Council following the receipt of the
Final Settlement from Welsh Government published on 28th February, 2023.
The Vale of Glamorgan’s Final Settlement was £202.797, this was an increase
of £16.782m in the Aggregate External Finance (AEF), providing an additional
£0.178m compared to the Provisional Settlement announced on 14th December,
2022.
The overall impact was on the funding side of the budget only with a £0.178m
increase in the AEF and a £0.178m reduction in Council Tax through a revision
downwards of the income assumed from the premiums on Council Tax for long
term empty properties.
The Leader reminded Members that the Council was legally required to agree a
balanced budget and how that was achieved depended upon the outcome of the
debate on the budget. She reminded Members of the challenges detailed in the
report previously considered by the Cabinet and Scrutiny Committees and
reiterated that it had been a particularly difficult budget round, there had been a
huge amount of uncertainty given the challenging economic climate and it made
it difficult to financially plan especially, when taking into consideration the last
Autumn and setting a financial strategy during the chaos caused by the mini
fiscal event by the U.K. government. In all the Council was facing a £28m
funding gap. The Leader also reminded Members, that as reported in January,
the provisional settlement in December 2022 was much better than expected,
but there still remained a sizeable gap. It had been necessary to manage a
number of priorities to bring forward a balanced budget. This included notional
funding for social care and schools which were uplifted by 5.1% and 7.0%
respectively by Welsh Government. The Council was being totally transparent
with the level of pressures faced in these services and referred to, for example,
in relation to social care there was an additional £8m within the budget,
significantly over the Government uplift to ensure that the Council could
commission to necessary domiciliary care with the needs of the residential care
sector that was experiencing similar inflationary pressures to the Council. In
regard to schools an extra £10.4m, a rise of in excess of 9% had been included
in the budget recognising all of the inflationary costs being faced, but accepted
that there would still need to be some efficiencies. She also felt that it was also
important to have regard to the fact that the Council’s Council Tax level was
below the average for Wales and the 4.9% proposed increase would see that
position maintained, particularly given that some Welsh authorities were setting
increases of 2 or 3 points higher. There had also been a difficult choice to be
made in identifying a savings package of £4.6m, but the Council was taking the
right action. Fees and charges had to go up in line with rising costs and it was
therefore essential that the Council covered its own costs.
The Leader’s attention then turned to the question of the use of Council
reserves and highlighted that there had been a fundamental review of the
Council’s reserves. She felt it was important to note that these had been
reduced as a result of inflation impacting on the Council’s investments.
Pressures remained and therefore it was likely that reserves may have to be
used over the next financial year.
In concluding, she referred to the various appendices attached to the report,
Appendix D related to reserves, Appendix E included an appraisal of the Section
151 Officer of estimates and reserves, Appendix F referred to the budget
consultation outcome and Appendix G related to the Equality Impact
Assessment. She thanked all those Members who had contributed to the
budget consultation exercise and in particular thanked the Council’s finance
officers for preparing the reports.
The Leader moved the following Motion:
(1) That the Final Budget be updated in recognition that the Final Aggregate
External Finance figure had increased to £202.797m which was an increase of
£16.782m and an improvement on the £6.604m Provisional Settlement figure
contained in the report published on 28th February, 2023 as set out in the
Supplementary Report circulated prior to the meeting.
(2) That a Council Tax increase of 4.9% be approved.
(3) That the Budget for 2023/24 be approved.
This was duly seconded by the Deputy Leader.
Councillor Carroll indicated that the setting of the budget was the single most
important decision that the Authority would take in each year. Therefore, he
considered it outrageous that the meeting was being held remotely when the
meeting should be held in person discussing the matter in the Council Chamber.
He considered it a failure of leadership on the part of the Administration that he
was unable to do so. He did not consider the failure in leadership to be
contained to this matter. When looking at the budget there were a number of
other examples. He found it unacceptable that the Administration was
proposing an increase in Council Tax by 4.9%, but at the same time cutting
services. He cited examples such as black bag collections moving to a three
weekly cycle, fees to be introduced for garden waste collection service and
other examples of fees and charges increasing. He was particularly concerned
regarding the levels of reserves that the Council held referring to the Council’s
General Reserve being at £11m. Acknowledging that the Council required
reserves he was disputing the level of those reserves held when taking account
of levels of reserves held by neighbouring Authorities.
In the context of reserves held by the Council he considered that the proposed
Council Tax rise was not necessary and the Council could freeze Council Tax
for the forthcoming financial year with the cost being borne by the Council from
its General Reserves.
Councillor Carroll moved the following amendment:
That £4.239m be taken out of the Council’s General Reserve to freeze Council
Tax for 2023/24.
This was duly seconded by Councillor Charles.
Councillor Dr. Johnson responding to the amendment felt that it was fair that
nobody would take the Conservatives seriously on financial matters they put
forward. He was concerned that the proposed amendment had been costed
only in the sense that there was some money available, but did not inform
Members what would happen in the future and consequently not a particularly
sensible way of discussing the matter. He considered the amendment nothing
more than grandstanding. It was his view that the Conservatives were
particularly problematic given the fiscal event which crashed the economy in the
Autumn 2022 and beyond that the slow strangulation of public services which
had taken place over the last decade. Having been a Councillor elected to the
Council for 11 years he had seen in that time the hollowing out of public services
through underfunding as part of austerity, the uncertainty brought about by the
economic disaster or Brexit, all of which had fed into the current cost of living
crisis. Whilst the Conservative Party had been in power at Westminster, the
Labour Party had also been responsible, in his opinion, having spent two thirds
of his life with a Tory Government that Wales did not elect and a Labour Party
that propped up the Conservative Government by wedding themselves to the
constitutional system of unionism, this meant that the Conservative Party were
in charge more often than not. This had led to budgets being decreased and
underfunding leading to substandard services for ordinary people in Wales at
the same time the cost of local services had been transferred from central
Government to tax payers and this had resulted in above inflation Council Tax
increase over the past decade and were paying more for fewer services. The
proposed Council Tax rise was low within the context of inflation and in the
middle across Wales, but it was clear that most households would get less
services than in previous years. He was also concerned about proposals to
introduce charges for garden waste, Council house rents that had risen on
average by £300 and the intention to move to a three week black bag collection
service. He signalled that he could not support the amendment proposed by the
Conservatives as it was unfunded and unexplained.
Councillor John considered that the Conservative Group had been asleep since
last Autumn Budget which had left the U.K. in a mess. He thanked the Chief
Executive and officers for their efforts to reduce the likely impact of the
economic challenges faced by the Council as without their intervention the
Council could have been facing an increase similar to that of Conwy of 9.9%.
He also reminded Members that the Council was currently 15th out of 22
Authorities that would be setting its Council Tax at 4.9% and considered the
amendment to be disrespectful to the Council’s Management Team who had
brought the budget together with the Members on the Cabinet during a very
worrying time. He accepted that nobody liked to pay Council Tax, but it was the
only solution to allow the Council to set a balanced budget and he indicated that
he would not be supporting the amendment.
Councillor Haines referring to the previous comments felt that some Members
had not noticed how the Vale of Glamorgan had deteriorated in previous years
and felt that the Labour Administration had hit residents doubly by increasing
Council Tax but at the same time cutting services. He did not see any reason
why the Council held excessive reserves to a greater extent than similar
Authorities in Wales. The Council could reduce its reserves and protect the
residents particularly those worst off and this should be something the Council’s
Administration and its officers should consider. He was particularly concerned
with the proposals to extend black bag waste collections and the impact this
would have on residents with clinical health issues as they would have to store
waste products longer. He indicated that he would be supporting the
amendment.
Councillor Wilson expressed concern in regard to the proposed amendment
taking account of the challenges faced by the Council with it just emerging from
the Covid pandemic and now dealing with the implications of the Ukrainian war
and the ongoing implications of Brexit. He considered the Council’s approach to
reserves held as prudent and did not consider these to be huge amounts held in
its General Reserve given the challenges faced by the Council in its recent past
and present. He reminded all Members that reserves could only be spent once.
Councillor R. Thomas viewed the proposals as giving residents of the Vale a
double whammy in that Council Tax would be hiked and services cut. He
echoed the comments of his Group Leader in regard to proposed fees to be
introduced for garden waste collections and other fee increases, this at the
same time that the Council held £11m in its General Reserves which was not an
insignificant amount of money proportionately when compared to other
Authorities like Cardiff. He felt that reserves should be used to much better use
by bolstering services and keeping other charges as low as possible.
Councillor Ewan Goodjohn referred to the previous comments made by
Councillor Dr. Johnson in regard to the Conservatives being taken seriously on
matters such as finances and he considered that to be true. He considered that
the amendment put forward by the Leader of the Conservative Group as
remarkable. By their own figures put forward, the Council would have utilised its
reserves to fund similar cost pressures in three years. He could only conclude
that the Conservatives would either be proposing an alternative for the next year
which they had not yet set out or that they were proposing on top of the Council
Tax increase that would be needed next year whatever that may be, an extra
4.9% on that year which would mean that residents would face even higher
Council Tax bills over coming years. He considered the amendment to be
extremely irresponsible.
Councillor Brooks considered that the comments made by the Conservative
Members as reckless given the situation that the Council was facing. Alluding to
12 years of cuts from a Conservative U.K. Government which to a certain extent
in Wales, Councils had been protected by the Welsh Government, but when
looking over the border at the budgets set in England it was notable that some
Councils were facing bankruptcy. The Conservative Group demonstrated a lack
of understanding regarding the Council’s reserves and their use. A significant
amount of work had gone into planning to obtain a balanced budget and to
protect the most vulnerable residents within the Vale of Glamorgan. Statutory
services had to be at the forefront and she indicated that she would not be
supporting the amendment.
Councillor Charles considered that the proposed increase in Council Tax would
hit the most vulnerable residents. At the same time they were also facing other
financial challenges and she felt that during these difficult times the objective
was to save money on the unnecessary and referred to the appointment of
additional Directors to the Council. She was also concerned about the
proposals to introduce charges for garden waste collections and this would have
the biggest impact on people on low income and the most vulnerable and the
elderly who did not have vehicles to take their recycling to waste centres. She
was concerned that would see an increase in fly tipping. She also indicated that
she did not support the proposed increase of 67% in allotment rentals. She
indicated that she would be supporting the amendment.
Councillor Perry described the Council Tax as not being particularly fair and
acknowledged that the Council was in a difficult position, pointing out that
Councils in England were facing potential bankruptcy or financial difficulties,
some more challenging than the Council’s. He felt that the policies of the U.K.
Government over the last 13 years had contributed to the situation that the
Council was facing. If the Council did not increase Council Tax it was likely that
it would have implications elsewhere for example, the loss of jobs and
acknowledged that reserves could only be spent once. He had no doubt if the
Council agreed to freeze the Council Tax for the next financial year it was
almost certain that it would have to increase it by a larger amount in the
subsequent financial year. He considered that the proposed amendment was
short sighted and that the political groups should stop playing politics and
collaborate more for the benefit of the Vale’s communities.
Councillor Hennessy echoed the previous comments of Councillors Carroll and
Charles in regard to the appointment of additional Directors and the proposed
increase of 4.9% when the most vulnerable would find it difficult to find the funds
to pay for green waste collections. He indicated that he would be supporting the
amendment.
Councillor Fisher referred to the comments made by Councillor Dr. Johnson in
regard to the state of the economy at the current time and the impact upon
residents which he agreed with, but felt this was the reason why Members
needed to consider approving the amendment as it would help residents of the
Vale and he indicated that he would be supporting the amendment.
Councillor Perkes echoed the comments of Councillor Brooks in regard to the
implications of using further reserves and to the impact the previous 12 years of
austerity had on local authorities in Wales. She felt that the Conservative U.K.
Government had mismanaged the U.K. budget and economy and felt that the
Conservative Group were in no position to criticise the proposals and indicated
that she would not be supporting the amendment.
Councillor Penn considered that if the Conservatives were in charge they would
play fast and loose with the Council finances and he was pleased that they were
not. Referring to the proposed amendment he enquired as to how this would be
funded, which services would be cut and how Council Tax would increase in
future years to come. He considered the amendment short sighted with no view
to the future, a headline today and financially irresponsible. He indicated that he
would not be supporting the amendment.
Councillor Driscoll felt that it had been easy to criticise the Conservative Party
over the previous 12 years and acknowledged that they had not done
themselves any favours. However, he felt that those criticising the
Conservatives should look more closer at some of the mistakes that had been
made by the Welsh Government and referred to the £155m wasted on the M4
Relief Road. In real terms he considered that residents of the Vale of
Glamorgan were paying the third highest Council Tax in Wales. He indicated
that he would be supporting the amendment.
The Leader in summing up, referred to the amendment which had clearly not
been based upon any financial projections or any of the financial information
contained in the reports discussed over the previous six months. She drew
Members’ attention to Appendix E of the report and the Head of Finance/Section
151 Officer’s report on the robustness of estimates and the sufficiency of the
Council’s reserves. She also reminded Members that the Council’s policy on
General Reserves was to hold a minimum prudent level which was currently set
at £10m, the projected level of General Fund balance would be 3.91% of net
revenue budget at the beginning of 2023/24 dropping to 3.74% and it was
considered that this remained an appropriate level. She reminded the
Conservative Group that it was not a game and alluded to the fact that the
Group had imploded in 2019 due to the types of suggestions that the
amendment was proposing now. She also highlighted that the budget had gone
through Scrutiny Committees and not a single suggestion on the budget had
come forward that could be looked at. She signalled that she would be voting
against the amendment.
A Vote took place on Councillor Carroll’s amendment (as seconded by Councillor
Charles) to freeze Council Tax for 2023/24 and to take a further £4.239m out of
general reserves to support the budget.
The Amendment was not carried.
Councillor Dr. Johnson alluding to the earlier debate in relation to the
Conservative Group’s proposed amendment and their comments regarding the
impact of an increase in Council Tax and considered the comments made by
both the Conservative Group and Labour Group had not recognised the impact
the increase in Council house rents of roughly £300 would have on Council
tenants. The proposals to increase Council Tax was actually less than the
impact of rent rises on Council tenants. He indicated unlike the Conservative
Group he would set out how an increase of around 2% in Council Tax could be
achieved through the use of a smoothing motion of around £2m. He explained
that this was clearly affordable as the Council consistently over collected the
anticipated amount of Council Tax by circa £1.5m to £2m each year. Alluding to
a recent Revenue Monitoring report in relation to the current financial year this
reported that it was anticipated to over collect Council Tax by an amount
approximately £1.5m. In the previous financial year the Council had over
collected Council Tax by £2m. Whilst he could see the benefit for the Council of
having extra money he did not believe that it was right that the Council
deliberately each year over collected. He considered it unfair to take this bonus,
but then not include it in the Council’s normal financial systems. He also
touched upon the introduction of the Garden Waste collection service and the
intention for it to be a fee paying subscription. He did not necessarily support
the proposal as a service change. He had been concerned that there had been
no discussion in relation to biodiversity in the context of the Council’s Nature
Emergency Declaration and that a charge for the service could lead to large
amounts of uncollected garden waste. He also thought that the proposal, in his
view, also underestimated the amounts that would be collected from the service
and thought the uptake of the subscription service would be higher than the
estimated 20% as reported. If it was the case, that subscriptions would be
higher and the Council would benefit from increased income.
In concluding, he drew attention to the amount of investment income that the
Council was likely to receive alluding to some £150k of investment income in the
most recent forecast for the next financial year. Referring to the supplementary
report circulated to Members he made reference to the additional funding in the
amount of £178k received from the Welsh Government as part of the Council’s
final budget settlement. He had no doubt that this additional funding could also
be used to lower the proposed Council Tax increase.
Councillor Dr. Johnson moved the following Amendment:
That the Council Tax increase for 2023/24 be set at 2%. The amendment was
duly seconded by Councillor Hooper.
Councillor Dr. Johnson also requested that a Recorded Vote on the matter and
the requisite number of Members signalled their support for it.
Councillor Franks referring to the technical report put forward by officers in
consultation with the Cabinet considered the proposals being deliberated
ignored reality and alluded to his earlier comments made in reference to the
failures of the Cabinet and previous Administrations. He referred to the
proposed cuts to the education service of £2m and considered the Leader’s
earlier response to his question in terms of the implications of cuts to schools as
nebulous. The comments of the Leader were also at odds with other statements
made that they wished to protect statutory services. He considered that the
Vale of Glamorgan was in decline and that the Cabinet was failing to respond to
poor standards and whilst he agreed with the Leader’s comments that all
Members had a responsibility for finance he did not need to be lectured on it and
he had no faith in the proposed budget.
Councillor Ewan Goodjohn acknowledged that the proposed amendment was an
attempt to find the middle ground between the Cabinet’s proposed budget and
the Conservative’s failed amendment. Referring to Councillor Dr. Johnson’s
explanation in support of his amendment and in particular to the proposed
charge for garden waste collection, there was no guarantee that the uptake in
subscriptions would be greater than that reported to the Scrutiny Committee and
reminded Members that the Council required to be prudent and that there was
no guarantee that the Council would collect a greater amount of Council Tax in
future years. He further reminded Members that the proposals were already
using a smoothing mechanism by the use of reserves of approximately £4.5m,
any further use of reserves would be irresponsible and only a temporary solution
with it likely that Council Tax levels would need to be increased further in
subsequent years and he indicated that he would not be supporting the
amendment.
Both Councillors Carroll and Haines signalled that they would be supporting the
amendment as they would sooner see a rise of 2% rather than the proposed
increase of 4.9%.
Councillor Wilson referred to the budget process and the preparation of the
same which had been undertaken over a period of months and difficult decisions
had to be made particularly in regard to introducing charges for providing
Council services. In all reality, Members and the Council as a whole were facing
a £9m budget deficit. He considered this in part due to the fact that the
Westminster Government had reduced the Welsh Government’s budget which
had then impacted on local authorities in Wales and therefore the Council had
no luxury as it had to balance its budget. Failure to do so could lead to the
Council being surcharged and the U.K. Government Autumn Budget had not
helped. He also flagged the Section 151 Officer’s comments in regard to the
sustainability of Council reserves and also echoed the previous comments of
Councillor Ewan Goodjohn in regard to collecting Council Tax to the levels the
Council had previously done and an uptake in the garden waste subscription.
He considered that the proposed amendment relied on optimism, therefore, he
indicated that he would not be supporting the amendment.
Councillor Perry referring to the level of reserves that the Council had built up
over time. It appeared to him that the problem was that the Council sometimes
did not spend funding on delivering things that residents would like to see and
referred to the condition of road surfaces throughout the county which required
repair.
Councillor Hodges alluding to the fact that the budget reporting process had
been to various Committees it was clear to him that inflation had had a
significant impact on the Council and whilst the Council had reserves the value
of that was slowly decreasing. Whilst he acknowledged that these would only
spend it once, he felt that it was better to spend some of it. He considered that
the proposed amendment was prudent and suggested that it was time the
Council radically looked at how it operated services rather than adjusting the
budget every year. He felt that it was time that the Council decided how it
wanted to operate its services not only the services that were provided but how
these were paid for. He indicated that he would be supporting the amendment.
The Leader, in summing up referred to the comments regarding the use of
reserves as a smoothing mechanism and reminded Members that the proposed
budget was in fact using reserves to reduce the Council Tax increase by utilising
£2.8m of the General Reserve and also reminded Members that Council funding
had already been used to off-set existing budget pressures referring to
homelessness issues and energy price increases and therefore it was clear that
the Council was already taking action to assist and protect its services. She
acknowledged that there were earmarked reserves however, these would be
reduced in coming years as projects were delivered. She also reminded
Members that when Cabinet was undertaking the budget process it did look at
the possibility of using additional reserves as they were mindful of the pressures
residents within the Vale of Glamorgan were facing. However, those same
pressures were also impacting on the Council and the proposals put forward by
the Cabinet would see an increase in Council Tax less than half the rate of
inflation. She signalled that she would not be supporting the amendment.
A Recorded Vote took place on Councillor Dr. Johnson’s amendment Motion (as
seconded by Councillor Hooper) to increase Council Tax by 2% for 2023/24.
Members For Against Abstain
Anne Asbrey √
Julie Aviet √
Gareth Ball √
Rhiannon Birch √
Bronwen Brooks √
Gillian Bruce √
Ian Buckley √
Lis Burnett √
Samantha Campbell √
George Carroll √
Christine Cave √
Charles Champion √
Janice Charles √
Millie Collins √
Marianne Cowpe √
Pamela Drake √
Vincent Driscoll √
Anthony Ernest √
Robert Fisher √
Christopher Franks √
Wendy Gilligan √
Emma Goodjohn √
Ewan Goodjohn √
Stephen Haines √
Howard Hamilton √
Sally Hanks √
William Hennessy √
Nic Hodges √
Mark Hooper √
Catherine Iannucci √
Gwyn John √
Dr. Ian Johnson √
Susan Lloyd-Selby √
Belinda Loveluck-Edwards √
Julie Lynch-Wilson √
Kevin Mahoney √
Naomi Marshallsea √
Michael Morgan √
Jayne Norman √
Helen Payne √
Elliot Penn √
Sandra Perkes √
Ian Perry √
Joanna Protheroe √
Ruba Sivagnanam √
Carys Stallard √
Neil Thomas √
Rhys Thomas √
Steffan Wiliam √
Eddie Williams √
Mark Wilson √
Nicholas Wood √
TOTAL 22 30
The Amendment was not carried.
Councillor Hooper was disappointed that the amendment had not been
supported. He hoped that the wider budget process could be improved next
year as he believed that the process contained flaws when taking account of the
Council’s Corporate Plan and its associated priorities. It was his view that the
full cost recovery of Council services should be dealt with under the Corporate
Plan mechanism and the proposed increases contained in the proposed budget
should have been done over a longer period of time. The budget for next year
from his perspective would be largely set as a cost plus basis on the year’s
expected outturn and he considered this to be inefficient, maintained bottlenecks
and discouraged departmental innovation. He was also pleased to hear that
some moves had been made to budget from a zero base according to needs
and plans, but there was still insufficient resources available to undertake a full
zero based budget exercise across the Council which had been a point he had
made previously at Scrutiny Committees and at the Governance and Audit
Committees, but acknowledged that the Leader had responded to him on the
matter previously.
Councillor Ewan Goodjohn quoted inflation increases since 1997 based on
statistics in Wales and from the Office of National Statistics. Whilst he
acknowledged that certain Members wished to see the increase in Council Tax
to be lower, the fact of the matter was that Council Tax was an unfair tax as it
did not distinguish between those who rented a home or those who owned or
had a mortgage. The Council was in a difficult position as the Council Tax could
not be decreased if Welsh Government did not receive adequate funding from
the U.K. Government that did not reflect the increase in the Council’s costs. It
was his view that the proposed increase was one of the lowest in the Council’s
history, but to go lower would be irresponsible unless it could be properly
funded. The Council had to retain a realistic level of reserves to address future
challenges.
Councillor Cowpe was concerned that the Council was not listening to the
responses to the budget consultation nor to the responses of the Scrutiny
Committees and therefore nothing had changed with the budget remaining as
proposed. She asked that in future online consultations should provide for an
option for a response to be provided via email. She was also disappointed that
the Council had decided to go ahead and increase the cost of black storage
caddies which were used largely for nappies, hygiene waste. She was
concerned that there would be a reluctance to buy the hygiene caddies which
would lead to these type of waste products being disposed of in black bags and
this should be seen as unacceptable in a modern day Wales and likely to have
the biggest impact on vulnerable families and particularly single parent families
who were headed by a female. The proposals to charge would also
disproportionately impact on females as they were likely to be the main users
due to various health and wellbeing issues. She felt the proposed charge was
totally unacceptable and a tax on women and she sought clarification on what
equality impact assessment had been undertaken on the matter. She was also
concerned regarding the communication by the Council regarding the use of
purple bags and this needed to be addressed. She had been made aware that
residents were being discouraged to apply for additional purple bags which
meant that they were less inclined to recycle. She hoped that the Council would
address this by encouraging residents to register and apply for a purple bag so
that each household could be properly assessed based on their needs. She
was aware that officers did visit and advise households and she expressed her
thanks for this being done. However, she would like to see visits extended to
include existing households who were potentially abusing the system by placing
multiple purple bags out for kerbside collection.
Councillor Wilson in response to Councillor Cowpe' comments indicated that it
was the intention to encourage residents to recycle more and this was part of
the Council’s Strategy and not simply about raising funds, but more about
saving money by increasing participation and recycling rates. He acknowledged
that there were larger family units that required additional assistance who found
it difficult to recycle their waste. In terms of the Council’s purple bag service, a
balance had to be achieved in terms of encouraging residents to access the
service, but also not wishing it to be abused.
Councillor Dr. Johnson suggested that his amendment had not been taken on
board as Members had misinterpreted his rationale for a 2% increase as he had
provided an explanation how the Council could fund a 2% increase in Council
Tax. He reminded Members that the settlement received from Welsh
Government had seen an increase of approximately 9% which was the third
highest in Wales and approximately £10m more than anticipated. However, the
discussions in regard to the budget had not moved on from when it was
originally thought the Council was facing dire consequences and potential
massive cuts in services. The fact was the Council was not in great financial
difficulties and at the end of last financial year it held £128m in usable reserves.
He was also disappointed with the consultation on the budget and felt that
Councillors and the Scrutiny process had been disrespected. Some 773
responses by residents to the consultation in his view had been dismissed in
minutes when the Cabinet considered the final budget at its meeting in February
which he had attended.
Referring to changes in fees and charges, with the Council keen on full cost
recovery, it was important that the public needed to see that the Council was
using the additional income wisely. He was also concerned there had been a
lost opportunity to revisit many of the proposed small cuts to services given the
additional funding received in the final settlement and referred to the Warm
Space Libraries and cuts to provision of sand bags for residents who were
threatened by flooding. Instead, the decision had been made to bank the
money rather than use it for the benefit of residents or reduce the proposed
Council Tax rise. It was notable that 33 Equality Impact Assessments were still
awaited on proposed charges and increased charges for Council services,
reiterating the concern expressed by Councillor Cowpe in relation to the hygiene
caddies and the particular impact that increase would have on women and those
on low incomes. He hoped that the Cabinet and officers would revisit these
issues taking account of the Equality Impact Assessments once available and
reconsider proposed charges. He signalled that he would be voting against the
proposed budget.
Councillor Mahoney referred to the continual blame culture between the U.K.
Government and the Welsh Government in relation to provision of funding to
local government in Wales. As far as he was concerned both were as equally to
blame for the financial circumstances affecting the Council. He considered that
both the U.K. Conservative Government and Labour Welsh Government were
equally culpable of wasting public money when at the same time the residents
were unable to heat their own homes adequately. He also expressed concern
regarding the Council’s recycling targets. As he understood it, if the agreed
tonnage target in relation to black bag waste was not met the Council would be
penalised financially. He also did not believe in the creation of the new
Directors roles when at the same time the Council was making the case that it
had insufficient funding. He indicated that he would not be supporting the
budget.
Councillor Sivagnanam indicated that it was a simple choice for the Council in
that its budget intended to protect the most vulnerable residents and at the
same time to maintain statutory services. She acknowledged that the budget
was about a political choice and it was a choice that the Cabinet and the
Administration were prepared to make. She accepted the points made by
Councillor Cowpe in regard to the hygiene caddies and the purple bag waste
service. She gave Councillor Cowpe an assurance that this was something that
the Cabinet would be monitoring and hoped that would signal the Cabinet was
responsive particularly when it came to equality issues.
In summing up, Leader acknowledged that up to a point the Council could do
more, but she believed the next step moving forward would be to see greater
constructive discussion when the budget was being discussed at the Council’s
Scrutiny Committees in the future. There was very little at present. In regard to
Councillor Cowpe’s comment in relation to charging for hygiene caddies she
indicated that the Cabinet did look at the issue in some depth, but it was a
reasonable stance taken by the Council in an effort to cover its costs. She was
also mindful that households with lower incomes could potentially pay more and
she was open to a discussion about how residents could be supported further.
She acknowledged that it may be something that needed looking at in the future.
In terms of departmental innovation raised by Councillor Hooper, it was clear
that the Council was addressing this issue and referred to the Big Fresh
Catering Company. She hoped to see similar initiatives particularly under the
guise of the Reshaping Services agenda. She reiterated her previous points
relating to Council reserves.
Turning to Councillor Mahoney’s comment regarding Welsh Government
funding, there was evidence that local government in England was not being
afforded the same level of protection that was being provided in Wales to
Councils by the Welsh Government. She would not want to be in their position
and was very happy to be in Wales.
A Recorded Vote took place on the recommendations as contained within the
report and supplementary report, having been moved by the Leader and
seconded by Councillor Brooks.
Members For Against Abstain
Anne Asbrey √
Julie Aviet √
Gareth Ball √
Rhiannon Birch √
Bronwen Brooks √
Gillian Bruce √
Ian Buckley √
Lis Burnett √
Samantha Campbell √
George Carroll √
Christine Cave √
Charles Champion √
Janice Charles √
Millie Collins √
Marianne Cowpe √
Pamela Drake √
Vincent Driscoll √
Anthony Ernest √
Robert Fisher √
Christopher Franks √
Wendy Gilligan √
Emma Goodjohn √
Ewan Goodjohn √
Stephen Haines √
Howard Hamilton √
Sally Hanks √
William Hennessy √
Nic Hodges √
Mark Hooper √
Catherine Iannucci √
Gwyn John √
Dr. Ian Johnson √
Susan Lloyd-Selby √
Belinda Loveluck-Edwards √
Julie Lynch-Wilson √
Kevin Mahoney √
Naomi Marshallsea √
Michael Morgan √
Jayne Norman √
Helen Payne √
Elliot Penn √
Sandra Perkes √
Ian Perry √
Joanna Protheroe √
Ruba Sivagnanam √
Carys Stallard √
Neil Thomas √
Rhys Thomas √
Steffan Wiliam √
Eddie Williams √
Mark Wilson √
Nicholas Wood √
TOTAL 30 22
The Motion was carried with it subsequently being
RESOLVED –
(1) T H A T approval be given to update the Final Budget in recognition that
the final Aggregate External Finance figure had increased to £202.797m which
was an increase of £16.782m, and an improvement on the £16.604m
Provisional Settlement figure contained in the report published on 28th February,
2023 as detailed in the Supplementary Report circulated prior to the meeting.
(2) T H A T a Council Tax increase of 4.9% be approved.
(3) T H A T the Budget for 2023/24 be approved.
Reasons for decisions
(1) To update the Budget following the receipt of the Final Settlement from
Welsh Government published on 28th February, 2023.
(2) Setting the annual rate of Council Tax was a key policy decision for
Council.
(3) Setting a balanced budget was a statutory responsibility and decision for
Council.
PAY POLICY 2023/2024 (REF)
The Council had a statutory requirement under the Localism Act 2011 to
prepare a pay policy statement for the new financial year 2023/24. The
statement needed to be approved and published by 31st March, 2023. The
document provided a framework for ensuring that employees were rewarded
fairly and objectively, in accordance with the service needs of the Council and
that there was openness and transparency in relation to the process.
The Pay Policy had been incrementally developed since 2012 to incorporate the
following:
• Guidance from Welsh Government as contained in the document “Pay
Accountabilities in Local Government in Wales” as updated November
2021;
• Changes as prescribed by the Local Authorities Standing Orders (Wales)
(Amendment) Regulations 2014 which took effect from 1st July, 2014;
• Changes as prescribed by the Local Government (Wales) Act 2015 to
ensure that any proposed changes to the salary of Chief Officers (as
defined in the Localism Act 2011) were made following consultation with
the Independent Remuneration Panel for Wales;
• Local Government and Elections (Wales) Act 2021 had been taken into
account as part of the annual Pay Policy Statement;
• Necessary refinements as a result of changes to the Council’s senior
management structure over recent years;
• The effects of national and locally negotiated pay and associated benefit
awards along with the provisions of the National Living Wage.
The Leader referred to Section 12 of Appendix A which was attached to the
original report to Cabinet and drew Members’ attention to the differentials in pay
between the top and bottom grades of the organisation which was quite flat and
should be seen as a positive. She also drew Members’ attention to the progress
made in regard to the gender pay gap.
RESOLVED – T H A T the Council’s Pay Policy as attached at Appendix A to
the report to Cabinet on 2nd February, 2023 (Minute No C213) be approved.
Reason for decision
To respond to the legal requirement under the Localism Act 2011 and to provide
openness and accountability in relation to how the Council rewards its staff.
(N.B. Councillors Aviet, Bruce, Champion and Ernest declared an interest
in the above matter and withdrew from the meeting during consideration
of the item.)
CHIEF OFFICER APPRAISAL SCHEME – PROPOSED MODIFICATIONS (REF)
The Corporate Performance and Resources Scrutiny Committee had considered
the report at its meeting on 15th February, 2023 where there had been a detailed
discussion of the matter where some had supported more regular appraisals
and there had been discussion concerning peer reviews.
Cabinet at its meeting on 16th February, 2023 had endorsed the report and
referred it to Council for approval in order to introduce the new scheme from 1st
April, 2023.
The Leader reminded Members that the matter before Council had been initially
referred from the Corporate Performance and Resources Scrutiny Committee to
the Cabinet and was now being reported to Council for approval. Referring to
the proposed modifications she indicated that these were minor adjustments
and had been initially considered by the Council’s Strategic Leadership Team,
the relevant recognised Trade Unions and diversity networks who were briefed
in November 2022 in addition to Chief Officer Heads of Service who were
briefed on the proposed changed in January 2023. She indicated that the
modified scheme contained SMART objectives and targets reflected a
competency profile which included coaching discussions linked to strength
based improvements encompassing a rounded view of performance through
peer reviews and 360 degree feedback which she considered was a much more
constructive way of undertaking appraisals. She hoped that the proposed
modifications would be seen in a positive and constructive way. The objective
was to introduce the revised scheme by 1st April, 2023.
Councillor Haines supported the principles behind the modifications but
suggested the Council needed to have a clearer understanding of the definition
of productivity and the appropriate techniques to increase the same within the
work place. At present, as he understood it, productivity of an individual was
only measured on an annual review. However, the issue of productivity was an
ongoing matter and was the easiest way to save money and increase the
performance of officers and suggested that this should have been included as
part of the modifications to the existing scheme.
RESOLVED – T H A T the proposed modifications for Chief Officer Appraisals
as reported to Cabinet on 16th February, 2023 (Minute No C223) be approved in
order to introduce the new scheme from 1st April, 2023.
Reason for decision
Having regard to the contents of the report and discussions at the meeting.
(N.B. All Chief Officers withdrew from the meeting during consideration of
the Pay Policy 2023/2024 and Chief Officer Appraisal Scheme – Proposed
Modifications items with the exception of the Head of Human Resources
and Organisational Development who remained to provide advice and then
withdrew from the meeting prior to a final decision being made on these
items.)
RESOLVED – That the Chairperson writes to the Cabinet Member on behalf of the Committee to convey any comments, observations and recommendations made during the way forward.
RESOLVED: Pursuant to this Committee’s delegated powers the following development control applications be determined in accordance with the recommendation set out in the reports of the Director of Planning, Transport and Environment, subject to any further amendments as detailed below and notification be given of the decisions in accordance with Section 70 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 or Section 74 of the Planning (Listed Building & Conservation) Act 1990.
APPLICATIONS GRANTED
20/01882/MJR – LLANDAFF
WINDRUSH, 58 PWLLMELIN ROAD
Councillor Michael left the room for consideration of this item in accordance with his prejudicial interest.
Demolition of existing dwelling house and replacement with 23 self-contained residential apartments, contained within four separate blocks with landscaping, access, parking and associate infrastructure.
22/01717/MJR – GRANGETOWN
INTERNATIONAL SPORTS VILLAGE
Councillor Robson left the room for consideration of this item in accordance with his prejudicial interest.
Variation of Condition 2 of 21/02848/MJR to amend the list of approved plans to substitute with the amended plans.
21/02138/MJR – SPLOTT/RUMNEY
CARDIFF COASTAL FLOOD DEFENCES. THE SEVERN ESTUARY COASLINE AND EAST AND WEST BANKS OF THE RIVER RHYMNEY, CARDIFF
Councillor Michael left the room for consideration of this item in accordance with his prejudicial interest.
The Construction of a series of Fluvial and Coastal Flood Defences along the Severn Estuary Coastline and East and West banks of the River Rhymney, to include Rock Armour Revetments, Concrete Erosion Protection Mats, Earth Bunds a Double Flood Gate (at the Rhymney River Motor Boat Sail & Angling Club) and Sheet Piling.
Subject to the following amendments to Condition 5:
No development, including site clearance, shall commence until a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
The CEMP shall include details of:
• Construction methods: details of materials, sediment management measures (including if contaminated sediment present); how waste generated will be managed; linked to Construction Method Statement and Contaminated Sediment Sampling Plan or Strategy (subject to separate conditions)
• General Site Management: the construction programme including phasing of development, construction timetable, details of site clearance; details of site construction drainage, containments areas, appropriately sized buffer zones between storage areas (of spoil, oils, fuels, concrete mixing and washing areas) and any watercourse or surface drain, piling type and timings; vehicle access routes over sensitive habitats e.g. saltmarsh and associated protection measures; contaminated sediment plan and strategy.
• Biodiversity Management: details of piling restrictions to avoid disturbance to migratory fish and the fish assemblage; details of saltmarsh habitat protection; measures to avoid disturbance to overwintering and ground nesting birds; invasive species management including link to biosecurity risk assessment and management plan; measures to protect otter and badger during construction and avoidance measures for foraging and commuting bats; Precautionary Working Method Statement for amphibians and reptiles; other species and habitats protection, avoidance and mitigation measures (to include breeding birds, bats, dormouse, water vole and invertebrates). To be informed by update and pre-construction surveys as necessary.
• Soil and Sediment Management: details of topsoil strip, sediment removal, storage and amelioration for re-use. Link to contaminated sediment plan and strategy.
• Measures to ensure new bunds will naturally regenerate or if seeded, the use of locally sourced seeds.
• Control of Nuisances: details of restrictions to be applied during construction including timing, duration and frequency of works; details of measures to minimise noise and vibration including piling activities, for example acoustic barriers; details of dust control measures; measures to control light spill and the conservation of dark skies;
• Resource Management: details of fuel and chemical storage and containment; details of waste generation and its management; details of sediment management; details of water consumption, wastewater and energy use.
• Traffic Management: details of site deliveries, plant on site, wheel washing facilities; site hoardings, dedicated vehicle access routes, construction staff parking, traffic management and habitat protection measures;
• Pollution Prevention: demonstrate how relevant Guidelines for Pollution Prevention and best practice will be implemented, including details of emergency spill procedures and incident response plan; details of how contaminated sediments will be dealt with.
• Details of the persons and bodies responsible for activities associated with the CEMP and emergency contact details.
• Contact details of the Community Liaison Officer who will communicate and coordinate between the construction contractor and local residents.
• Landscape/ecological clerk of works to ensure construction compliance with approved plans and environmental regulations;
• NVC maps to inform construction access routes and compound locations so to avoid sensitive places.
The CEMP shall be implemented as approved during the site preparation and construction phases of the development.
Reason: In the interests of highway safety, protection of the environment and public amenity in accordance with Local Development Plan Policies T5 (Managing Transport Impacts), T6 (Impact on Transport Networks and Services), EN5 (Designated Sites), EN6 (Ecological Networks and Features of Importance for Biodiversity), EN7 (Priority Habitats and Species), EN10 (Water Sensitive Design), and EN13 (Air, Noise, Light Pollution and Land Contamination)”
APPLICATIONS REFUSED
22/011636/MNR – RHIWBINA
LAND TO THE REAR OF CANOLFAN GARDEN AND SHEDS BETWEEN 238 PANTBACH ROAD AND HEOL Y BONT.
Councillor Robson reaffirmed his prejudicial interest and confirmed he would be speaking as a Ward Councillor.
Retention of storage container for Snails Deli.
REASON:
1. The industrial appearance of the storage container, including its scale, form and materials and it’s siting forward of the building line to Heol Y Bont, are out of keeping with the residential character, quality and pattern of development in the surrounding area, resulting in an insensitive and obtrusive feature in the street scene which is detrimental to visual amenity and the character of the area, contrary to policy KP5 (i) of the Cardiff Local Development Plan.
2. The storage container, by virtue of its scale, form, material, siting forward of the building line to Heol Y Bont and projection above the adjacent boundary wall, is unneighbourly and detrimental to the amenities of residents of 1 Heol Y Bont in that it is unsightly and obtrusive when viewed from that property, contrary to policy KP5(x) of the Cardiff Local Development Plan.
3. That the Chief Legal and Democratic Services Officer be authorised to issue an Enforcement Notice under Section 172 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to secure the removal of the unauthorised storage container.
22/01707/MNR – SPLOTT
88 SPLOTT ROAD
Councillor Stubbs left the room for consideration of this item in accordance with his prejudicial interest. Councillor Irene Humphreys chaired this item.
Ground floor rear extension, dormer loft conversion, alterations and change of use to use to large SUI Generis house in multiple occupation.
Subject to the following:
Amendment to Condition 5 to read:
The development shall be carried in accordance with the following approved plans.
· CXB3/4/a/b/c/d – Proposed Ground Floor Plan
· CXB3/5/a – Proposed First and Second Floor Plan
· CXB3/6/a/b/c – Proposed Elevations
REASON: To ensure satisfactory completion of the development and for the avoidance of doubt in line with the aims of Planning Policy Wales to promote an efficient planning system.
REASON:
“By virtue of the alterations required to facilitate the use of the property as a house in Multiple Occupation the proposal will provide an insufficient amount of useable amenity space to serve the number of occupiers contrary to Policy KP5: Good Quality and Sustainable Design and Policy H5: Sub-Division or Conversion of Residential Properties of the Cardiff Local Development Plan and the advice contained within the House in Multiple Occupation Supplementary Planning Guidance 2016.
APPLICATIONS DEFERRED
2/01718/MJR - SPLOTT
Moorland road day centre, Moorland Road
RESOLVED –
(1) T H A T the Head of Legal and Democratic Services be authorised to issue
an Enforcement Notice under Section 172 of the Town and Country Planning Act
1990 (as amended) to require:
(i) The cessation of the use of the Land for the storage of containers,
vehicles, caravans, trailers, vehicle parts, waste building material,
windows, fence panels and posts and other items.
(ii) The removal of the containers, vehicles, caravans, trailers, vehicle
parts, building material, windows, fence panels and posts and other
stored items along with the associated structures and any resultant
debris from the Land in their entirety.
(2) T H A T in the event of non-compliance with the Notice, authorisation be
granted to take such legal proceedings as may be required.
Reasons for decisions
(1) It appears to the Council that the above breach of planning control
constituting the change of use of the land to the storage of construction items and
waste, plant/machinery, the siting of a pre-fabricated container and other associated
structures has commenced within the last 10 years and the construction of
unauthorised structures within the last 4 years.
(2) The use of the land for the open-air storage of containers, vehicles,
caravans, trailers, vehicle parts, waste building material, windows, fence panels and
posts and other miscellaneous items along with the construction of structures
associated with the unauthorised use is visually akin to an industrial site. Both the
use and appearance of the site does not reflect the countryside setting of the site’s
locality, fails to preserve or positively contribute to the character of the surrounding
area and are detrimental to the countryside location, resulting in an unacceptable
visual intrusion into the open countryside. Furthermore, the site is readily visible
from the adjoining neighbouring property and is therefore detrimental to the visual
amenities of that property. For these reasons, the development is considered to be
contrary to Policies MD1 and MD2 of the Vale of Glamorgan Local Development
Plan 2011-2026 and does not conform with the aims of PPW.
(3) The items stored on site, namely the boat, vehicles and vehicle components,
likely contain an array of substances, such as petrol, diesel, oil, grease, washer fluid
etc. Vehicle components, such engines, frames, wheels are stored in the open.
Many vehicles are missing external bodyworks, such as bonnets, or the bonnets are
left open. Therefore, many of the components that hold or utilise these substances
are open to the elements. It is therefore not unreasonable to expect that such
substances, especially during periods of wet weather, are incrementally washed
from the components and onto the ground. Furthermore, components which hold
such substances are likely to rust and leak such substances onto the ground. The
nature of which the items are stored is therefore considered likely to result in an
Minutes - MT
No.
unacceptable impact on the natural environment from land contamination and the
pollution of surface water.
(4) It is considered that the decision complies with the Council’s well-being
objectives and the sustainable development principle in accordance with the
requirements of the Well Being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015.
(ii) Land at Field Access to the West of Village Farm House, Colwinston -
The report sought authorisation to issue an Enforcement Notice under section 38 of
the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 (as amended)
(“the Act”) in respect of the unauthorised demolition of a wall and stile. The
principal issue was considered to be the effect of the works on the character and
appearance of the Colwinston Conservation Area.
The report recommended that an Enforcement Notice be issued requiring the
reinstatement of the wall and stile. Authorisation was also sought to pursue legal
proceedings in the event that the Enforcement Notice was not complied with.
RESOLVED – T H A T the Head of Legal and Democratic Services be authorised to
issue an Enforcement Notice under Section 38 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and
Conservation Areas) Act 1990 (as amended) to require:
(i) The reinstatement of the wall and stile to the field access to the same design
and dimensions and in the same materials as shown in photographs of the
site taken in May 2008.
Reasons for decision
(1) The demolition of the wall and stile fails to preserve or enhance the character
or appearance of the Colwinston Conservation Area. As such the works are in
conflict the Council’s duty under section 72 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and
Conservation Areas) Act 1990, Polices SP10 and MD8 of the Adopted Local
Development Plan 2011-2026, as well as with guidance contained within Planning
Policy Wales, TAN12 and TAN24.
(2) It is considered that the decision complies with the Council’s well-being
objectives and the sustainable development principle in accordance with the
requirements of the Well Being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015.
RESOLVED – That the Sub-Committee having considered all the information, and in accordance with the requirements of the Licensing Act 2003, the Section 182 Guidance and the Licensing Authority’s own Statement of Licensing Policy, REFUSED the application.
The Sub Committee heard from the applicant and listened to all the evidence and submissions and considered the written material. The Sub Committee also considered the Licensing Act 2003 the Section 182 Guidance, the Statement of Licensing Policy and Cumulative Impact Assessment policy.
Members also heard the representations made by South Wales Police and the Licensing Authority and considered all written representations made.
The premises is located in an area covered by a Cumulative Impact Policy that creates the rebuttable presumption that any new or full variation applications for Premises Licences will be refused or limited unless the applicant can successfully demonstrate that granting the application will not add to the cumulative impact in the area. The Sub Committee noted that this policy would apply to this application as it is within the area covered by the policy and proposal would be within the red category of the policy.
The Sub Committee accepted that the applicant offered to amend your application to add additional measures and to remove off-sales. In determining its decision, the Sub Committee considered these amendments and note that the application would still remain in the red category of the cumulative impact policy. The additional measures that offered prior to the meeting today are as follows:
1. Installation of CCTV in accordance with police requirements and training of staff to operate theequipment.
2. Challenge 25 policy for sale of alcohol and staff trained to implement thepolicy.
3. Implement and maintain appropriate record keeping for incidents, refusals and staff training.
4. Alcohol will only be supplied from 11.00 hours to 22.30 hours daily and only as ancillaryto food.It willbe lockedaway andconcealed after22.30 hours.Cans and bottles will be opened and poured into glasses. All glassware will be recyclable plastic. No alcohol will be included in a delivery (Foodonly. The application for the off sale of alcohol was withdrawn during the application.
5. Foodwill includeIndian dishes,Chinese dishesand Kebabs (madein house)
6. Pricing will be high.Minimum £12
7. Intention is to employ 15staff.
8. Two registered door staff will be on duty from 21.00 hours to closing time. During event days the hours of door staff would increase dependent upon starting and finishing times of the individualevents.
9. Food deliveries would be made finishing at closing time. No deliveries of alcohol with or without food. His own drivers would be used and vehicles parked in the car park. No vehicles for delivery would be parked outside the shop area.
10. The dining area inside the premises would be available for dining until closing time.
11. The outside area would be used for dining until 22.30 hours when tables and chairs would be removed and placed inside thepremises.
12. Litterbins wouldbe provided,and regularinspections carriedout toplace litterin the bins.
13. Noticeswould bedisplayed suchas CCTVin operation,times ofclosing andsale of alcoholtimings.
14. The application was for aa closing time of 05.00 the applicant would amend thisto 03.00 hours
Members gave consideration to the Police representations and the video and crime statistic evidence of crime and disorder and other anti-social behaviour within the area. The Sub Committee considered that the granting of this licence would cause additional crime and disorder.
It was not considered that the application had successfully shown that it would not undermine the Licensing Objectives and did not rebut the presumption within the cumulative impact policy. The Applicant did not shown that they would not effectively deal with the issues associated with the sale of alcohol.
The Sub Committee therefore resolved to refuse the application.
RESOLVED – T H A T in pursuance of the powers delegated to the Committee,
the following applications be determined as indicated and any other necessary
action be taken.
2021/00423/FUL Received on 6 December 2021
(p25)
APPLICANT: Transworld Real Estate Ltd
AGENT: Mr. Luke Grattarola Ceraint John Planning Ltd. Office 16 (House 1), The
Maltings, East Tyndall Street, Cardiff, CF24 5EA
Land at Bolston House, Bonvilston
Demolition of the existing dwelling and redevelopment of the site to accommodate
residential development and associated works
REFUSED
(1) By reason of the loss of a large proportion of a Significant Stone Wall, the
loss of substantial amounts of tree cover and the suburban and insensitively
designed/orientated internal site layout, the proposed development would fail to
have regard to and would fail to preserve the character of the Bonvilston
Conservation Area, contrary to policies SP10 - Built and Natural Environment,
MD2 - Design of New Development, MD5- Development within Settlement
Boundaries and MD8 – Historic Environment of the Vale of Glamorgan Local
Development Plan 2011 - 2026 and the Bonvilston Conservation Area Appraisal
and Management Plan and national guidance contained in Planning Policy Wales
(Edition 11) and Technical Advice Note 12 - Design.
(2) By reason of the size of the dwellings and plots, the proposed layout fails to
make necessary, efficient use of the land, contrary to policy MD5 - Development
within Settlement Boundaries & MD6 - Housing Densities of the Vale of
Glamorgan
Adopted Local Development Plan 2011-2026.
(3) By reason of the geometry and radii of the access, and the design of works
to the carriageway/footway, the proposal would result in a substandard form of
access into and out of the site, which would adversely impact upon highway
safety. The proposal is therefore considered contrary to Policies MD2 (Design Of
New Development) & MD5 (Development within Settlement Boundaries) of the
Vale of Glamorgan Adopted Local Development Plan 2011-2026.
(4) In the absence of a noise assessment that considers potential noise
nuisance from the Red Lion Inn and its garden, the proposal fails to provide
adequate information to assess the impact of noise or demonstrate that the
proposal would not be prejudicial to the amenity and living conditions of future
Minutes - MS
No.
residents at the site. In this respect the development is contrary to Policies MD2
(Design of Development) & MD7 (Environment Protection) of the Vale of
Glamorgan Local Development Plan 2011-2026.
(5) The proposal fails to satisfy the tests to justify a derogation for protected
species and would result in inadequately mitigated loss of trees that would harm
the biodiversity interests of the site. Therefore, the development is considered
contrary to Policies MD2- Design of New Developments & MD9-Promoting
Biodiversity of the Vale of Glamorgan Adopted Local Development Plan 2011-
2026, the guidance contained within the Councils Biodiversity and Development
Supplementary Planning Guidance.
(6) The proposal fails to provide any affordable housing or the infrastructure
necessary to mitigate the impacts of the development in respect of public open
space, education and sustainable transport. In this respect the development is
contrary to Policies MG4 and MD4 of the LDP and the Council’s SPG on
Affordable Housing and Planning Obligations, and Planning Policy Wales and
TAN 2- Planning and Affordable Housing.
Reasons for decisions
Having regard to the content of the report and discussions at the meeting.
2021/00424/CAC Received on 6 December 2021
(p59)
APPLICANT: Transworld Real Estate Ltd
AGENT: Mr Luke Grattarola, Geraint John Planning Ltd, Office 16 (House 1), The
Maltings, East Tyndall Street, Cardiff, CF24 5EA
Land at Bolston House, Bonvilston
Demolition of the existing dwelling and redevelopment of the site to accommodate
residential development and associated works
REFUSED
(1) The loss of part of the historical stone boundary wall would be damaging to
the intrinsic character of the site and the conservation area. The proposal would
therefore fail to preserve or enhance the character of the Conservation Area and
would be in conflict with Policies SP10 and MD8 of the Adopted Local
Development Plan, in addition to TANs 12 and 24, the aims and objectives of the
Bonvilston Conservation Area Appraisal Plan and Section 72(1) of the Town and
Country Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990.
Reason for decision
Minutes - MS
No.
That Members of the Planning Committee note the above conclusions and agree
that these form the basis of the Council’s case in the current non-determination
appeal for the reason set out below:
It is considered that the decision complies with the Council’s well-being objectives
and the sustainable development principle in accordance with the requirements of
the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015.
2021/01379/FUL Received on 23 September 2021
(p74)
APPLICANT: Mr. C. Holder, Earthmovers House, Llantrisant Business Park,
Llantrisant, CF72 8LF
AGENT: Mr. R. Hunt, 20a The Wharfage, Ironbridge, Telford, Swadlincote, TF8
7NH
The Quarries, Bonvilston
The winning and working of limestone, importation/recovery of inert waste and
restoration to agriculture/amenity.
REFUSED -
(1) By reason of the excessive unjustified infilling operation, which is not
fundamentally required to create an acceptable restored site, the proposal would
amount to (and would encourage) unjustified waste disposal that is contrary to the
principles of the waste hierarchy, would result in unnecessarily and harmful
perpetuated environmental impacts, and would fail to provide a beneficial,
sustainable, and high quality restoration and after care solution for the quarry, at
the earliest opportunity. The proposal is therefore contrary to the policy and
guidance relating to waste management contained in TAN 21 paragraph 4.23, and
criterion 2 of Policy MD20 of the LDP. In addition, the proposal is contrary to
planning policy and guidance relating to quarry restoration and after care
contained in PPW paragraphs 5.14.4, 5.14.50, and 5.14.54, MTAN1 paragraphs
94, 97, 100, 103, and 130, and criterion 7 of Policy MG25 of the LDP.
(2) It has not been demonstrated, through submission of a bat survey, that the
development would not be detrimental to the maintenance of the population of
bats - a European Protected Species. The development is therefore contrary to
Policies MG19 – Sites and Species of European Importance and Policy MD9-
Promoting Biodiversity, of the Local Development Plan, as well as national
guidance contained at paragraphs 6.3.6 & 6.3.7 of TAN 5 – Nature Conservation
and Planning and paragraph 6.4.22 of Planning Policy Wales. It is also contrary to
the provisions of the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010.
Reasons for decisions
The decision to refuse planning permission has been taken in accordance with
Section 38 of The Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, which requires
Minutes - MS
No.
that, in determining a planning application the determination must be in
accordance with the Development Plan unless material considerations indicate
otherwise. The Development Plan for the area comprises the Vale of Glamorgan
Adopted Local Development Plan 2011-2026 and Future Wales – the National
Plan 2040.
It is considered that the decision complies with the Council’s well-being objectives
and the sustainable development principle in accordance with the requirements of
the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015.
The appropriate marine policy documents have been considered in the
determination of this application in accordance with Section 59 of the Marine and
Coastal Access Act 2009.
In reaching the recommendation below, the content of the submitted
Environmental Impact Assessment has been taken into account, in accordance
with the requirements of The Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact
Assessment) (Wales) Regulations 2017.
2022/00397/RG3 Received on 28 March 2022
(p119)
APPLICANT: Mr. Andrew Freegard, Vale of Glamorgan Council, The Alps, Alps
Quarry Road, Wenvoe, CF5 6AA
AGENT: Miss Georgia Peters, Vale of Glamorgan Council, Dock Offices, Subway
Road, Barry, CF63 4RT
Land North of Holm View Leisure Centre, Barry
Phase Two of the residential development of 31 no. affordable housing units and
associated works
RESOLVED –
(1) T H A T subject to the interested person(s) first entering into a Section 106
legal agreement to include the following necessary planning obligations:
• To pay a sum of £37,652.50 to contribute towards the provision or
enhancement of educational facilities.
• To pay a sum of £39,100 to contribute towards the provision of sustainable
transport facilities in the vicinity of the site.
• The developer provides public art on the site to the value of 1% of the build
costs or otherwise pays a contribution to the same value to the Council
• To pay a sum a sum £21,420 to contribute towards the provision of new, or
enhancement of existing, community facilities in the area.
(2) T H A T in addition to a clause requiring the payment of a fee to monitor
and implement the legal agreement.
Minutes - MS
No.
Deemed planning consent be GRANTED subject to the condition(s) as contained
within the report.
Reason for decision
The decision to recommend planning permission has been taken in accordance
with
Section 38 of The Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, which requires
that, in determining a planning application the determination must be in
accordance with the Development Plan unless material considerations indicate
otherwise. The Development Plan for the area comprises the Vale of Glamorgan
Adopted Local Development Plan 2011-2026 and Future Wales – the National
Plan 2040.
Having regard to Policies SP1– Delivering the Strategy, SP3 – Residential
Requirement, SP4 – Affordable Housing Provision, MG1 – Housing Supply in the
Vale of Glamorgan, MG2 – Housing Allocations, MG4 – Affordable Housing, MD1
- Location of New Development, MD2 - Design of New Development, MD3 -
Provision for Open Space, MD4 – Community Infrastructure and Planning
Obligations, MD6 - Housing Densities, MD7 - Environmental Protection and MD9 -
Promoting Biodiversity of the Vale of Glamorgan Adopted Local Development Plan
2011-2026, Future Wales, National planning policy in the form of Planning Policy
Wales (Edition 11), Technical Advice Notes 2 – Affordable Housing, 12 - Design,
and the Council’s Supplementary Planning Guidance on Affordable Housing,
Barry Development Guidelines, Biodiversity and Development, Parking Standards,
Planning Obligations, Residential and Householder Development, and Trees,
Woodlands, Hedgerows and Development, the proposed development is
considered acceptable in principle and in respect of design, visual impact and
layout, residential amenity, parking, highway safety, amenity/open space,
drainage, and ecology.
It is considered that the decision complies with the Council’s well-being objectives
and the sustainable development principle in accordance with the requirements of
the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015.
The appropriate marine policy documents have been considered in the
determination of this application in accordance with Section 59 of the Marine and
Coastal Access Act 2009.
2022/00642/FUL Received on 19 May 2022
(p157)
APPLICANT: Mrs. Penny Knight, 8 Mountjoy Close, Penarth, CF64 2TA
AGENT: Susan Rosser, RIBA, 20 Duffryn Road, Cyncoed, Cardiff, CF23 6NP
8, Mountjoy Close, Penarth
Single storey side and rear extension with new porch and roof conversion
Minutes - MS
No.
REFUSED
Reasons for Recommendations
By reason of the design, form and siting, the proposed extensions and alterations
would be harmful to the appearance of the dwelling, the balance of the semi-
detached pair and the spacious and consistent character of the street. The
development is therefore contrary to policies MD2 and MD5 of the Vale of
Glamorgan Adopted Local Development Plan 2011-2026, The Council’s
Supplementary Planning Guidance on Residential and Householder Development
and TAN 12- Design.
Minutes - MS
RESOLVED: that
i. the results of public consultation on the draft Recycling Strategy 2022-25: ‘Greener and Cleaner’ attached as Appendix B be noted
ii. Approval be given to the Recycling Strategy 2022-25: ‘Greener and Cleaner’ attached as Appendix A.
iii. the outcomes of the segregated recycling pilot undertaken by 4,000 properties be noted
iv. Agreement in principle be given to the programme of change set out in the Recycling Strategy 2022-25: ‘Greener and Cleaner’ and this report and delegate authority to the Director of Economic Development in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Climate Change to roll-out the phased implementation of the programme including:
· The phased roll-out of segregated recycling as set out in this report across household properties in Cardiff.
· The phased roll-out of reduced residual waste collections as set out in this report to improve the level and quality of recycling across household properties in Cardiff.
· Undertake further pilot work in relation to Houses of Multiple Occupancy and Flats to improve recycling performance including the testing of communal segregated recycling bins.
· Review the expansion of kerbside collection services to cover items currently not collected at the kerbside.
· Enhance and strengthen education and enforcement to deliver improved recycling compliance across household properties in Cardiff.
· Develop the business case to move from a Material Recovery Facility to a Material Handling Facility required to manage segregated recycling.
· Improvements to the trade / business waste model to improve recycling and meet new legislative requirements.
· Identification of wider Council / service area change to value resources and minimise the Council’s impact on climate change.
v. the plans to enhance the cleansing service, including the move balanced resourcing and ‘same day cleanse’ following collections for inner wards be noted.
vi. the development of a business case for a future repair and re-use ‘superstore’ be noted. A further report will be brought regarding the business case.
RESOLVED: That the Chairperson writes to the Cabinet Member on behalf of the Committee to convey any comments, observations and recommendations made during the way forward.
RESOLVED – T H A T in pursuance of the powers delegated to the Committee, the
following applications be determined as indicated and any other necessary action be
taken.
2021/01405/FUL Received on 22 September 2021
(P.75)
APPLICANT: Mr Michael Murphy c/o Agent
AGENT: Mr Jeremy Peter 21, Britten Road, Penarth, CF64 3QJ
Sefton Quarry (former Scrapyard), Penmark
Change of use of land for the siting of storage containers
REFUSED AND AUTHORISE ENFORCEMENT ACTION
RESOLVED –
(1) T H A T the application for planning permission for the change of use of the
land be refused for the following reasons:
(i) The site is in a divorced, inefficient, and unsustainable rural location
without benefit of good access to local transport infrastructure, existing
services, and without justification for or necessity to be in the
countryside. The development is therefore considered to be
inappropriately located, having regard to the sustainability and location
requirements for waste management (and employment) facilities, and is
therefore contrary to LDP Policies SP8, criterion 1 and 2 of MD20 and
criterion 2 and 5 of MD1, as well as national guidance contained within
5.13.11 and 5.13.12 of PPW and paragraphs 1.10 and 3.27 of TAN21.
(ii) By reason of its urban appearance in contrast with the rural, verdant
and open character of the previously regenerated application site and
the surrounding land, the change of use has resulted in a demonstrably
harmful and unacceptable impact on the character of the countryside,
which is in conflict with the aims and criteria of Policies MD1 (criterion
1) and MD2 (criteria 1, 2, and 10) of the LDP, paragraphs 5.5 and 5.8.1
of TAN12 and having regard to the advice in paragraph 3.9, 3.14, 3.16,
3.38 of PPW (Edition 11).
(iii) The site has been locally designated a Site of Importance for Nature
Conservation for its potential as invertebrate and reptile habitat. In the
absence of ecological surveys or measures of biodiversity mitigation
and enhancement, and the lack of justification for the rural location, the
need for the development does not outweigh the likely nature
conservation value of the site. The development is therefore contrary
to Policies MG21 and MD9 of the LDP.
(2) T H A T the Head of Legal and Democratic Services be authorised to issue an
Enforcement Notice under Section 172 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990
(as amended) in respect of the land shown edged blue on the site location plan, to
require:
(i) The cessation of the unauthorised use of the land for storage,
(ii) The removal from the land of the shipping containers, portacabin,
portaloo, and any other structures, machinery or chattels associated
with the storage use.
(iii) The removal from the land of all items being stored on the land
including, but not limited to, any motor vehicles, caravans, trailers,
boats, the telephone kiosk, all building materials, other items such as
furniture, electrical goods, plastics, glass, metals, and all items of waste
on the site, including piles of rubble, and all rubble deposited on the
ground to form the new hardstanding,
(iv) The reinstatement of the land to its former condition prior to the
unauthorised change of use taking place.
(3) T H A T in the event of non-compliance with the Notice, authorisation be
granted to take such legal proceedings as may be required.
Reason for dual decision
(1) It appears to the Council that the above breach of planning control constituting
the change of use of the land has occurred within the last 10 years.
(2) The site is in a divorced, inefficient, and unsustainable rural location without
benefit of good access to local transport infrastructure, existing services, and without
justification for or necessity to be in the countryside. The development is therefore
considered to be inappropriately located, having regard to the sustainability and
location requirements for waste management (and employment) facilities, and is
therefore contrary to LDP Policies SP8, criterion 1 & 2 of MD20 and criterion 2 & 5 of
MD1, as well as national guidance contained within 5.13.11 & 5.13.12 of PPW and
paragraphs 1.10 and 3.27 of TAN21.
(3) By reason of its urban appearance in contrast with the rural, verdant and open
character of the previously regenerated application site and the surrounding land, the
change of use has resulted in a demonstrably harmful and unacceptable impact on
the character of the countryside, which is in conflict with the aims and criteria of
Policies MD1 (criterion 1) and MD2 (criteria 1, 2, and 10) of the LDP, paragraphs 5.5
and 5.8.1 of TAN12 and having regard to the advice in paragraph 3.9, 3.14, 3.16,
3.38 of PPW (Edition 11).
(4) The site has been locally designated a Site of Importance for Nature
Conservation for its potential as invertebrate and reptile habitat. In the absence of
ecological surveys or measures of biodiversity mitigation and enhancement, and the
lack of justification for the rural location, the need for the development does not
outweigh the likely nature conservation value of the site. The development is
therefore contrary to Policies MG21 and MD9 of the LDP.
(5) It is considered that the decision complies with the Council’s well-being
objectives and the sustainable development principle in accordance with the
requirements of the Well Being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015.
2022/00440/FUL Received on 25 August 2022
(P.98)
APPLICANT: Mr Bill O’Donoghue, Orchard Bungalow, Treguff, St. Mary Church.
CF71 7FS
AGENT: Mr Bill O’Donoghue, Orchard Bungalow, Treguff, St. Mary Church. CF71
7FS
Orchard Bungalow, St. Mary Church
Orchard Bungalow extended garden. Land acquired is currently agricultural. Use
required for residential to match that of existing property. Note we do not intend to
use the Land for commercial logging / metal fabrication / commercial usage or
anything associated/deemed industrial
REFUSED AND AUTHORISE ENFORCEMENT ACTION
RESOLVED –
(1) T H A T the application for planning permission for the change of use of the
land be refused for the following reason:
(i) By reason of its size, the rural/agricultural context, and the appearance
and open character of the application site and surrounding land, the
change of use of the land results in a demonstrably intrusive incursion
into the countryside which is harmful to its appearance and character. It
also results in an incremental and harmful urbanising effect on the
countryside, which is in conflict with the aims and criteria of Policies
MD1 (criterion 1) and MD2 (criteria 1 and 2) of the LDP, and Policy
DG13 of the Design in Landscape SPG, paragraphs 5.5 and 5.8.1 of
TAN12 and having regard to the advice in paragraph 3.9, 3.14, 3.16,
3.38 of PPW (Edition 11).
(2) T H A T the Head of Legal and Democratic Services be authorised to issue an
Enforcement Notice under Section 172 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990
(as amended) in respect of the land west and south of Orchard Bungalow, to require:
(i) The cessation of the residential use of the land,
(ii) The removal from the land of the metal shed, polytunnel, and domestic
paraphernalia including, but not limited to, goal posts and play
equipment.
(3) T H A T in the event of non-compliance with the Notice, authorisation be
granted to take such legal proceedings as may be required.
Reason for dual decision
(1) It appears to the Council that the above breach of planning control constituting
the change of use of the land from agriculture to residential use has commenced
within the last 10 years.
(2) The unauthorised change of use of the land by reason of its size, the
rural/agricultural context, and the appearance and open character of the application
site and surrounding land, has resulted in a demonstrably intrusive incursion into the
countryside which is harmful to its appearance and character. It has also resulted in
an incremental and harmful urbanising effect on the countryside, which is in conflict
with the aims and criteria of Policies MD1 (criterion 1) and MD2 (criteria 1 and 2) of
the LDP, and Policy DG13 of the Design in Landscape SPG, paragraphs 5.5 and
5.8.1 of TAN12 and having regard to the advice in paragraph 3.9, 3.14, 3.16, 3.38 of
PPW (Edition 11).
(3) It is considered that the decision complies with the Council’s well-being
objectives and the sustainable development principle in accordance with the
requirements of the Well Being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015.
RESOLVED: That the Sub-Committee having considered all the information, and in accordance with the requirements of the Licensing Act 2003, the Section 182 Guidance and the Licensing Authority’s own Statement of Licensing Policy, GRANTED the application subject to agreed conditions.
The Sub Committee heard from both the applicant and the objector and listened to all the evidence and submissions, as well as considering all written material. Members considered the Licensing Act 2003, the Section 182 Guidance, our own Statement of Licensing Policy and considered all written representations made.
The Sub Committee noted that prior to the meeting, number of additional conditions were agreed. The applicants also confirmed that an additional condition is proposed with regards to collections of waste at the premises and agreed to reduce the terminal hour proposed for licensable activity on a Sunday to Thursday.
Members gave regard to the representations received from a member of the public and were pleased to hear that discussions are ongoing between the applicant and the owners association for the apartments. The Sub Committee were of the opinion that the granting of this application would not undermine the licensing objectives. Where there is no evidence that a Premises Licence will undermine the licensing objectives, there is a presumption to the grant the application.
Members therefore resolved to grant the application, subject to the agreed conditions.
RESOLVED – T H A T in pursuance of the powers delegated to the Committee, the
following applications be determined as indicated and any other necessary action be
taken.
2021/00622/FUL Received on 18 May 2022
(P. 76)
APPLICANT: Kestral Construction and Hafod HA
Agent: Mr Liam Griffiths Asbri Planning Ltd., Unit 9, Oak Tree Court, Cardiff Gate
Business Park, Cardiff, CF23 8RS
81-85, Holton Road, Barry
Part demolition, extension and conversion of the upper floors of no. 81 – 85 Holton
Road to provide 25 no. residential flats, internal and external alterations and
associated works.
RESOLVED – T H A T subject to the applicant entering into a Section 106
agreement to secure the following:
EITHER
• The residential units are delivered by the Vale of Glamorgan Council, or by a
Housing Association Partner (Hafod Housing, Newydd Housing, United Welsh
Housing or Wales & West Housing) of the Vale of Glamorgan Council.
OR
• The developer pays £54,996 for the provision or enhancement of educational
facilities in schools serving the development for Secondary school children.
• The developer pays a contribution of £57,500 towards sustainable transport
facilities in the vicinity of the site.
• The developer provides public art on the site to the value of 1% of the build
costs or otherwise pays a contribution to the same value to the Council.
• The developer pays a contribution of £66,700 towards providing or enhancing
public open space in the vicinity of the site.
AND
• The units shall only be occupied as affordable housing that meets the definition
of affordable housing in Annex B of the Welsh Government Technical Advice
Note 2 on Affordable Housing, or any future guidance that replaces it.
• The developer pays the legal and implementation/monitoring fees for the S106
agreement.
APPROVED – Subject to the conditions as contained within the report.
Reason for decision
Having regard to the content of the report and discussions at the meeting.
2021/00764/FUL Received on 15 July 2022
(P. 104)
APPLICANT: Heritage Coast Campsite Monknash, Cowbridge, Vale of Glamorgan.,
CF71 7QQ
AGENT: r. Andrew Parker Andrew Parker Associates, The Old Farmhouse,
Trerhyngyll, Vale of Glamorgan, CF71 7TN
Heritage Coast Campsite, Monknash
Proposed 2 no. new tourist lodges, conversion of existing camp site facilities to form
2 no. tourist accommodation units. Proposed campervan site and tent area with
provision of new toilet shower block.
APPROVED – Subject to the conditions as contained within the report.
Reason for decision
Having regard to the content of the report and discussions at the meeting.
2021/01270/FUL Received on 1 September 2021
(P. 125)
APPLICANT: Mr. D Clarke Brooklands, Brook Lane, St. Nicholas. CF5 6TB
AGENT: Mr. Geraint John Office 16 (House 1, 2nd Floor), The Maltings, East
Tyndall Street, Cardiff, CF24 5EA
Brooklands, Brook Lane, St. Nicholas
Part retrospective application to regularise and seek the approval for the completion
of the 'as built' development for a new detached dwelling (through a barn conversion
and associated works of adaptation and extension).
RESOLVED -
(1) T H A T planning permission for the works as described in the application be
refused.
(2) T H A T the Head of Legal and Democratic Services be authorised to serve an
Enforcement Notice under Section 172 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990
(as amended) to require the following:
i. The removal of all unauthorised works that have taken place to Barn F,
including the doors and windows, blockwork walls, cladding and roof
covering, and the reinstatement of the barn to its previous appearance, as
shown in the approved plans and the photographs attached to planning
application file 2011/00898/FUL;
ii. The demolition of the brick link extension (referred to as building B in the
submitted planning application) that has been built between Barn F and
the adjacent building (Barn E);
iii. Making good the east elevation of Barn E (following the demolition of the
link extension) by bricking this up in matching brickwork.
(3) T H A T in the event of non-compliance with the Notice, authorisation is also
sought to take such legal proceedings as may be required.
Reasons for decisions
(1) The extent of works proposed and that have been carried out to the former
steel portal framed barn in the east of the site (Barn F), and the link extension
adjoining this to the adjacent brick and blockwork barn (Barn E) and as proposed,
amount to the substantial reconstruction and alteration of the building, to the extent
that these elements of the proposal would constitute the construction of a new
building in the countryside. By reason of the design and character of the
alterations/new building, relative to its former agricultural appearance, the works
have unacceptably harmed and fundamentally altered the character of the building.
The former overly agricultural portal barn now has a highly domesticated an
urbanised character, which is to the detriment of the group of buildings and the wider
character of the yard. This is contrary to Policies MD1 (Location of New
Development) and MD11 (Conversion and Renovation of Rural Buildings) of the Vale
of Glamorgan Adopted Local Development Plan 2011-2026, the Conversion and
Renovation of Rural Buildings Supplementary Planning Guidance (2018) and advice
in Technical Advice Note 12 (Design).
(2) The recommendation to refuse planning permission has been taken in
accordance with Section 38 of The Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004,
which requires that, in determining a planning application the determination must be
in accordance with the Development Plan unless material considerations indicate
otherwise. The Development Plan for the area comprises the Vale of Glamorgan
Adopted Local Development Plan 2011-2026 and Future Wales – the National Plan
2040.
(3) It is considered that the decision complies with the Council’s well-being
objectives and the sustainable development principle in accordance with the
requirements of the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015.
(4) The appropriate marine policy documents have been considered in the
determination of this application in accordance with Section 59 of the Marine and
Coastal Access Act 2009.
2021/01386/RG3 Received on 22 September 2021
(P. 158)
APPLICANT: Vale of Glamorgan Council, The Alps, Quarry Road, Cardiff, CF5 6AA
AGENT: Mr John Griffiths Blacksmiths Shop, The Forge, Cantref, Brecon, LD3 8LR
2, Dyffryn Close, St. Nicholas
Retrospective application for new roof covering.
APPROVED – Subject to the conditions as contained within the report.
Reason for decision
Having regard to the content of the report and discussions at the meeting.
2021/01387|/RG3 Received on 22 September 2021
(P. 169)
APPLICANT: Vale of Glamorgan Council, The Alps, Quarry Road, Cardiff, CF5 6AA
AGENT: Mr John Griffiths Blacksmiths Shop, The Forge, Cantref, Brecon, LD3 8LR
4, Dyffryn Close, St. Nicholas
Retrospective application for new roof covering.
APPROVED – Subject to the conditions as contained within the report.
Reason for decision
Having regard to the content of the report and discussions at the meeting.
2021/01388/RG3 Received on 22 September 2021
(P. 181)
APPLICANT: Vale of Glamorgan Council, The Alps, Quarry Road, Cardiff, CF5 6AA
AGENT: Mr John Griffiths Blacksmiths Shop, The Forge, Cantref, Brecon, LD3 8LR
13, Dyffryn Close, St. Nicholas
Retrospective planning application for change of roof covering.
APPROVED – Subject to the conditions as contained within the report.
Reason for decision
Having regard to the content of the report and discussions at the meeting.
2021/01809/FUL Received on 6 January 2022
(P. 192)
APPLICANT: Mr Eugene McKay c/o Agent, Unit D - Lunesdale, Upton Magna
Business Park, Shrewsbury, SY4 4TT
AGENT: Tim Williams Green Planning Studio Ltd, Unit D - Lunesdale, Upton Magna
Business Park, Shrewsbury, SY4 4TT
Barn (to the North of Howe Mill Farm), St Athan Road, St Mary Church
Change of use of a barn to dwelling to be used for holiday purposes.
WITHDRAWN by the applicant
RESOLVED –
(1) T H A T the Head of Legal and Democratic Services be authorised to serve an
Enforcement Notice under Section 172 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990
(as amended) to require:
(i) Reinstate the building to its original condition including undertaking the
following:
• Remove the render applied to the exterior of the building.
• Remove the windows and doors on the front and rear elevations.
• Remove the additional areas of new external blockwork in elevations.
• Remove the profiled tiled metal sheeting roof.
(ii) Remove all of the waste materials from the land resulting from the taking
of step (i) above.
(2) T H AT in the event of non-compliance with the Notice, authorisation is also
sought to take such legal proceedings as may be required.
Reasons for decisions
(1) It appears to the Council that the above breach of planning control constituting
operational development has occurred within the last four years.
(2) The works that have been undertaken to date have resulted in the substantial
alteration of the former rural brick building and are not sympathetic to the fabric of
the existing building and unacceptably affects the appearance and rural character of
the building and its wider rural setting. The development would, therefore, conflict
with Policies SP1 - Delivering the Strategy, MD1 - Location of New Development,
MD11 – Conversion and Renovation of Rural Buildings and MD13 - Tourism and
Leisure of the Vale of Glamorgan Adopted Local Development Plan 2011-2026 and
Conversion and Renovation of Rural Buildings (2018) Supplementary Planning
Guidance, as well as national policy identified within Planning Policy Wales (Edition
11, 2021), TAN12- Design and TAN 24 – The Historic Environment.
(3) It is considered that the decision complies with the Council’s well-being
objectives and the sustainable development principle in accordance with the
requirements of the Well Being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015.
2021/00571/FUL Received on 4 May 2022
(P. 222)
APPLICANT: Mr Jacob George, 122-124, Plymouth Road, The Waverley Care
Centre,
Penarth , Vale Of Glamorgan. CF64 5DN
AGENT: Mrs Kruti Gandhi, 58B, Clearwater Way, Lakeside, Cardiff. CF23 6DJ
The Waverley Care Centre, 122-124, Plymouth Road, Penarth
Retain boundary fence and gates as built replacing approved (2021/01186/FUL of
14/12/2021) brick wall with metal fencing due to structural instability.
APPROVED – Subject to the conditions as contained within the report.
Reason for decision
Having regard to the content of the report and discussions at the meeting.