Loading
There is no summary of this meeting yet. Summaries are written once the council publishes the minutes, which are its official record of what a meeting decided. They usually appear a few weeks after the meeting.
The Chair welcomed everyone to the meeting.
There were no declarations of interest received.
The minutes of the previous meeting were approved as a true and accurate record.
Members considered items from the Cabinet Forward Work Programme.
Members considered the report as circulated within the agenda pack. The Chair confirmed that the three place plans were linked at the end of the report and that the Urbanists would present all three plans before questions were taken. The Urbanists introduced the item and set out the overall context for the place plans. Each document follows the same structure and is based on place analysis and initial stakeholder engagement. The engagement undertaken to date provides only a snapshot and needs to continue through delivery. The plans set out a vision and ambitions for each town, supported by a high-level strategy identifying opportunities and projects. These are flexible tools that can respond to change. Liam emphasised that delivery work would refine the opportunities and projects and provide further scope for community engagement. The plans contain both physical and non-physical placemaking actions. Members were advised that the place plans are driven by Welsh Government Town Centre First principles and the Transforming Towns agenda, alongside wider regeneration funding requirements. Welsh Government expects a placemaking plan to be in place, or at least in preparation, to support investment into town centres. The plans are tied back to the Placemaking Wales Charter and align with national planning policy and local policy, including the corporate plan, the economic development plan, the local development plan, decarbonisation strategies, and heritage and culture strategies. He added that Welsh Government initially required a town-centre focus, although there is now some movement towards considering the wider settlement context. Members received the Neath place plan presentation first. It was advised that engagement had identified a strong wish to reaffirm Neath as a proud historic market town and to place it back at the centre of people’s lives, including its role for communities across the Neath Valley. Neath’s historic urban layout, the castle, Victoria Gardens, the indoor market, Gnoll Country Park, and the industrial legacy of the canals were highlighted. The Urbanists said the town’s local businesses should help drive renewed energy and identity, and that further engagement with businesses would be important in shaping this. Officers from the Urbanists also referred to the clear street hierarchy, relatively limited vehicle dominance, good road and rail links, and the need to improve the sense of arrival. Members were advised of the four place ambitions for Neath. These were connecting the assets, supporting thriving local business, building a renewed leisure and cultural offer, and creating spaces for streets and people. The Urbanists highlighted opportunities to strengthen links between the railway station and bus station, and between the town centre and locations such as Gnoll Country Park and the canals. Members were referred to business support, skills, training, property advice, events programming, improved management of the indoor market, stronger cultural use of the castle and surrounding heritage assets, improvements around Gwynn Hall and Victoria Gardens, and greener, more comfortable town centre spaces with biodiversity gains, climate resilience and shelter. Th key strategy areas in Neath were outlined. At the railway station the Urbanists identified opportunities to green the entrance, improve business space, consider relocation of the sorting office, open up the original post office building, and look again at the large Milland Road car park for a more meaningful use and improved pick-up and drop-off arrangements. He also referred to the need for investment by Network Rail in the station itself. Around Neath Castle he referred to the setting of the castle and opportunities linked to Moose Hall and the Friends Meeting House, including mixed use and shared spaces around the castle as an events and performance venue. Along Queen Street and around Neath Market he referred to the key link between the train and bus stations, interventions to poorer quality properties, the challenge but importance of the Marks and Spencer building, and the possibility of demolition in some locations to create greener public space, improve the castle setting and strengthen links towards Gwynn Hall. The Urbanists also highlighted west to east connections between the town centre, waterfront, canal, river and Gnoll Country Park, and the opportunity to promote Neath as a day destination combining landscape, active travel, heritage and culture. Members were then presented with the Pontardawe place plan. The Urbanists said Pontardawe benefits from strong natural assets including the nature reserve, multiple rivers and the canal, which are distinctive in a Welsh context and need to be better capitalised on. He referred to St Peter’s Church and its prominent spire, the Arts Centre, and the town’s historic structures and cultural identity. He said a SWOT analysis had identified a concentration of challenges and opportunities in the western part of the town, along High Street and the western half of Herbert Street, where recent investment had not been as evident as elsewhere. The Urbanists explained that the main challenges identified were poor quality public realm around the Cross junction and High Street, the need to improve street user hierarchy in favour of pedestrians, support for local businesses, and physical barriers caused by the A474, High Street and the Cross junction, which separate the town centre from assets such as the nature reserve. Members were given a summary of the engagement feedback. Local participants wanted more visitor accommodation in the town and had referred to the Cross Building as a possible location. There was support for further investment around the recreation grounds and leisure centre to deal with conflict between different sporting groups, and an aspiration to make the area more suitable for larger scale events, particularly musical events which have a strong history in Pontardawe. There was also discussion about the bypass car park next to the Upper Clydach River and the possibility of giving part of that site an active use to reduce some parking but provide a more reliable income stream and animate an important route over the river and canal. The Urbanists then summarised the vision for Pontardawe as a better-connected town that celebrates and weaves in its cultural heritage. Key themes were stronger access to and celebration of the River Tawe, Swansea Canal, King George Park and the nature reserve, not only for recreation and wellbeing but also biodiversity; building on earlier regeneration work by reclaiming the western town centre from over-engineered vehicle infrastructure; and reinforcing the town’s identity and industrial past to strengthen local pride. Members were advised of proposed interventions. Around the Cross and High Street these would reduce turning radius, encourage slower vehicle speeds, reclaim road space for pedestrians and businesses, improve crossings, and use distinctive materials or public art as a wayfinding tool. Other proposals would narrow the carriageway, widen pavements, create more greening and street tree opportunities, provide short-stay parking, and install sustainable drainage features such as rain gardens. The Cross itself would be redesigned as a more comfortable civic space with seating and an interactive sensory garden. The Urbanists provided information on the western end of Herbert Street and referred to proposals to turn the canal bridge into a scenic viewpoint and place for people to dwell, with distinctive surface materials, mobile planters, heritage-focused wayfinding and information boards, and architectural lighting to highlight the canal, chapel and bridge. He said the location is a key junction between primary routes. The proposals were described as a one-way traffic system moving east to west, which would release space for wider pavements, business spill-out, outdoor dining and greater pedestrian priority while helping to tackle pavement parking and provide short-stay loading and delivery bays. Members then received the Port Talbot place plan. The Urbanists explained that the town centre’s proximity to the River Afan is a major opportunity, linking the centre to the Afan Valley and to Aberavon Bay and seafront. It was advised that those three parts could work better together, with Port Talbot in the middle. The Urbanists referred to a wish from engagement participants to move beyond a perception of Port Talbot defined only by the steelworks and highway infrastructure and instead better reflect a longer history. Harbourside was referred to as a strategic regeneration location close to the town centre, and the importance of linking any future development there, including the proposed college, back into the town centre so that spending is retained locally. The Urbanists advised that Port Talbot is well connected by the Swansea to London main line and the M4. They referred to recent investment including the southern plaza area, the interchange, the new public square, current work around the Princess Royal Theatre and the civic space outside the Council’s offices, all of which provide a platform for further investment. Members were told that engagement had identified poor quality buildings and spaces, with Bethany Chapel featuring strongly because of the recent fire. It was added that arts and culture came through strongly, linked to the Town of Culture opportunity and to local performing arts and creative industries. The Urbanists summarised the vision for Port Talbot as a well-connected riverside destination with stronger links to the Afan Valley and Aberavon Bay, and as a place where creative energy can shape a new economic future. The Urbanists explained that future investment at Harbourside should benefit the town centre and that connections between those areas needed attention. He set out four strategic ambitions. These were life by the water, connecting Port Talbot, a streetscape of culture, and bringing buildings back to life. He referred to the need to open the town to the river, focus on the area where Station Road and Forge Road meet, improve the bus station and underpasses, strengthen the southern end of Station Road and the interchange area, use the public realm as a platform for arts and culture, and make targeted interventions to buildings in key parts of the town. Members were advised of identified strategic areas in Port Talbot. These were the southern gateway into the town at the lower end of Station Road and Grove Place, the town centre riverside development area around upper Station Road and Forge Road, and Harbourside. The Urbanists said Harbourside already has a strategic masterplan and offers opportunities in employment, education and residential development, while the place plan seeks to ensure better physical connections to the town centre. He also referred to improvements already under way or planned around the Civic Square, Northern Gateway, Princess Royal Theatre, Aberafan Shopping Centre, the underpass next to the shopping centre, and the bus station. The upper end of Station Road and Forge Road were highlighted as a major strategic opportunity where a wider intervention could transform the riverside space, build on current town centre investment and potentially integrate the remains of Bethany Chapel into a significant public realm enhancement at a historic crossroads within the town. Simon Brennan Head of Property and Regeneration, explained that the three place plans are the first tranche and that work is progressing on the next three for Briton Ferry, Pontardawe and the development of a seventh plan for Skewen also being considered. Members were reminded that the regeneration funding available across Wales is limited to around £40 million across 22 local authorities. Members were advised that this explains why interventions are restricted and why Welsh Government originally framed the work around interventions of £250,000 and now a maximum of £300,000, unless more strategic funding opportunities can be secured. Members then asked about the large public space outside the leisure centre in Neath, alongside the multi-storey car park, civic buildings and shops. He said it is an asset but currently functions mainly as a thoroughfare, and he wanted reassurance that it is being considered for better use such as fairs, markets, farmers’ markets, musical events and concerts. He also criticised the planters outside the leisure centre and said they were unattractive, poorly maintained and a significant contrast with Victoria Gardens. Simon Brennan advised that the original intention had been to focus first on filling the adjacent shops, and that this had now largely been achieved with the final deal close to completion. Members were advised that earlier design stages had considered pop-up units in the piazza but that this had been held back until the shops were let. It was confirmed that the area has power connections and the flexibility for wider use, and that this would now be looked at. On the planters, it was explained that concerns had been recognised for around 18 months. The planters had been installed as rain gardens using a specified planting type but had not worked well. Alternatives are now being explored, including possible changes to the underlying structure, and staff in Victoria Gardens are being involved to develop different proposals and possibly maintain them in future. Officers advised that trees had been considered but underground services meant technical staff had been reluctant to support that option. Members welcomed that response, repeated his view that the planters were in a very poor condition, and again urged better use of the public space in Neath. Members asked whether the place plans had been aligned with active travel work, particularly in Aberavon, to avoid duplication or spending twice on the same infrastructure. The Urbanists replied that the plans had been aligned through the Council officers leading both pieces of work. they explained that nothing in the place plan contradicted the seafront proposals and that better connections between the town centre and seafront remained a key ambition. Members then referred to Burrows Yard and said that Aldi and Starbucks were due to open there within weeks. Simon Brennan explained that this had been a long-running and complex scheme and welcomed the fact that it was now close to opening. He said it is a major step forward on a troublesome site. Members were advised that officers are developing layered plans for town centres, beginning with Port Talbot, to show completed schemes, live projects, future projects, active travel schemes and heritage work together on a single map, potentially through GIS or layered PDF documents. These would come first to the relevant board and then to scrutiny as working documents. Members asked about Harbourside and the presence of an existing recycling business, questioning whether development would be built around it. Simon Brennan explained that housing would not be pursued on Harbourside. He said the Council sees Harbourside as an innovation district, building on Harbour Court, the SWITCH building (South Wales Integrated Transport Carbon Hub), the Advanced Manufacturing Production Facility, TWI, the proposed college site, and remediation work and possible units on the Lozenge site. He said this would create a zone focused on technology and future-proofing industry in Port Talbot. He added that the Council is working with the recycling business, which has had issues in recent months and also has its own expansion proposals. Members then referred to St Mary’s Church and said it was disappointing that it was not more clearly reflected in the plan. They felt that it is a significant building in a key location next to the bus station and could be repurposed as a visitor, arts or cultural centre. The Urbanists replied that the building is identified on the strategy plan as a historic asset where investment would be welcomed, but accepted that it should also be referenced directly in the text around the bus station and southern Aberafan Shopping Centre area because it represents a clear opportunity. The Chair then asked about the Harbourside strategy more generally. He referred to the age of previous masterplans and the sensitivity of the site next to the river, housing, green space and active travel links. Simon Brennan explained that a refresh of the strategy had been due to start eight or nine months earlier, but it had quickly become clear that flood strategy work needed to come first. He said consultants had been working for the past six or seven months on a more strategic outline business case for Port Talbot and that this would take another three, four or five months to complete. The purpose is to look at how existing residential and commercial properties can be taken out of flood risk where possible and how development on available land can be made easier. He said this is critical groundwork before the strategy itself can be advanced. The Chair then asked how the place plans would be progressed once approved, whether a formal review date would be attached, and how the more detailed prioritisation of projects would be taken forward. Officers explained that the process had taken a long time to reach this stage but that refreshing the documents later should be easier unless Welsh Government changes direction significantly, which they did not expect given its continuing Town Centre First approach. Members were advised that officers did not envisage a full refresh for around five years because of workload, and much of the content would remain relevant because it is based on the towns’ history and strategic opportunities. Officers explained that a further document is now needed to identify interventions over the next five years. Some elements can be brought forward publicly while others may remain commercially sensitive for a period. The Chair said it would be important for Members to see how regeneration schemes link back to the strategy. Officers explained that the layered mapping approach should help with that and show dependencies between projects, including preliminary work such as the flood outline business case. The Chair felt that the heritage narrative in the Port Talbot place plan did not yet come together strongly enough for him compared with Neath and Pontardawe. He said Port Talbot has fewer historic assets left and that this makes the remaining assets more important rather than less. He argued that the upper end of Station Road needs to be recognised as one project involving facades, vegetation removal, brickwork cleaning and shop front improvement, rather than simply as a set of individual key buildings. He warned against ending up with a poorer townscape made up of badly modernised historic buildings. The Urbanists accepted that this was fair feedback and advised that the plan had focused more strongly on landscape integration and culture and that this may have come at the expense of being sufficiently explicit about safeguarding heritage assets. The Urbanists agreed that upper Station Road is a key project and said the importance of buildings such as St Mary’s Church and the former Bethany Chapel could be made more explicit. Simon Brennan added that the Council has a clear commitment to heritage. He referred to Harbour Court and The Plaza as examples of good quality, sympathetic refurbishment which have brought important buildings back into use and, in the case of The Plaza, back into public use. He also supported the principle of targeted conservation and public realm interventions in compact areas, although delivery can be difficult where multiple private owners and branded retailers are involved. The Chair then asked about the more detailed indicative designs that had been shown during consultation events, and whether those had been handed over to the Council as working material. Simon Brennan replied that those designs were still at an embryonic stage and the Council had to be careful about displaying ideas that might not be deliverable or supported by Members. He said they had served their purpose in engagement but would be brought back in a later tranche of work. The Urbanists explained that the visuals had been produced to show the art of the possible and were not underpinned by technical work. They explained that officers had already started testing some of those ideas through feasibility work and these would come forward through formal approval routes in due course. Members asked about the former Dyfed Road swimming pool site in Neath, which they had expected to come forward for development after demolition of the baths. Simon Brennan advised that the Council is still considering the site. He referred to current users including rugby, cricket, bowls, tennis and the health centre. He said the Council currently sees it as a leisure-based site that can attract more sporting events into Neath town centre. The health centre building is also ageing and is in discussion with the Council, although nothing has been agreed. Glamorgan Cricket and Neath Cricket are also considering replacement of outdated facilities and there is some potential development activity there. Members commented that earlier private proposals had included shops and that the site is now becoming an eyesore. Officers explained that the earlier retail-led ideas came from parties associated with Neath Rugby rather than the Council and did not progress and would not now fit with the Council’s preference to keep the town centre more compact rather than spread retail uses that far out. Members thanked the Urbanists for a professional presentation and said the plans for Neath were ambitious. Members felt that whichever route is used to enter the town, by road, train, bus, bicycle or on foot, the arrival experience remains poor, including at Victoria Gardens and the railway station. Members also referred to drink and drug problems, to anti-social behaviour around a bench outside Specsavers, and to closed shops and parcels in the town centre. Members asked whether anything could be done to put pressure on owners, whether public, town council or private, to make vacant properties more attractive and usable. Officers explained that anti-social behaviour is an issue affecting many town centres across Wales and the wider United Kingdom, and that other services within the Council are working to tackle it. Members were advised that property and regeneration services do what they can in environmental terms to discourage such activity. On vacant units, officers said all Council-owned units in the town centre are currently occupied. The Council can support landlords and incoming businesses through advice and grant support, but private owners remain free to make their own decisions, and the Council cannot compel lettings. Members then asked specifically about the former Marks and Spencer building in Neath and said its closure had been devastating for the town. Simon Brennan explained that the building came onto the market four or five months earlier, but its condition had been complicated by anti-social behaviour and damage which initially made valuation difficult. The Council had put in a great deal of work and submitted a bid to acquire the building but had been unsuccessful. The Council will now have to work with the new owner and see what proposals they intend to bring forward. He added that the Council can act where valuations support it, but cannot outbid other purchasers. The Chair asked if the place plans were prompting a fresh look at the Council’s capacity and approach to building acquisition, including use of capital funding, particularly where vacant and problematic properties align with strategic needs identified in the plans. Officers explained that the Council works with Welsh Government to identify buildings where public acquisition can make a meaningful difference. Officers advised that the Council would never be in a position to acquire large swathes of a town centre but has acquired a significant number of properties over time where there is a strong public interest case, such as Zoar’s Chapel and Moose Hall in Neath. Officers referred to the Plaza in Port Talbot, which the Council held for a long period before a workable scheme emerged. Members were advised that the Council does not want simply to become a retail landlord, but where the private sector cannot deliver and the Council can add value, it will continue to intervene. Councillor J.Hurley Cabinet Member supported that response and said that most of the funding for Zoar’s Chapel had come from Welsh Government, that the building is currently being looked after by permitted users to safeguard it, and that discussions are also under way on Moose Hall, the Quakers building and other buildings around Neath. He said ownership and probate issues can make some long-derelict buildings impossible to acquire despite officer efforts. Members suggested that they might benefit from an annual meeting with the estates team, similar to highway surgeries, so that ward issues and direction of travel on buildings and sites could be discussed directly. Simon Brennan said that suggestion could be considered and discussed further with Cabinet Members. Councillor J.Hurley Cabinet Member added that during the Shared Prosperity Fund period support had also extended beyond the town centres, including to wider communities and valley areas. He gave the example of a long-derelict property at the bottom end of Skewen which had been converted into accommodation. In relation to Pontardawe the chair asked about the former Foundry Road site, which is shown in the place plan as a potential housing site even though planning permission has been granted for industrial units. Officers replied that the site is privately owned and the owners are working with the planning department. Residential development has proved difficult there for a number of reasons, and attention has probably shifted to what is deliverable, namely industrial uses. The Chair said that suggested the place plan may need a revision to reflect the current position. Officers explained that this reinforced the earlier point that the plans are live and iterative documents. Members asked whether they could receive a breakdown of businesses occupying Council-owned premises in Neath town centre, including whether they are charity shops or vape shops. Officers explained that the Council’s direct ownership in the town centre is actually quite limited, mainly the new units and the freehold of the Boots building, while much of the rest is in private ownership or owned by Neath Town Council, including the town hall area and buildings near the former Next premises. Members asked about stall occupancy levels and rent levels in Neath Market, and whether enough is being done to support existing and prospective traders. Simon Brennan explained that rents in the market have remained fairly static over the years. He said a meeting had been held around three or four months earlier, possibly a little longer, with stallholders, Councillor J.Hurley as Cabinet Member, and the Leader, to discuss the long-term future of the market and possible improvements. He said any future works would need to be planned with stallholders because of disruption, and that Welsh Government support would be explored if investment is needed. Cabinet Member Councillor J.Hurley added that at least one trader now in the market had previously completed one of the Council’s eight-week entrepreneur business support programmes and had gone on to open a stall. He said more of that was needed and that viable and sometimes hybrid business models are necessary if town centre and market businesses are to survive and increase footfall. Following scrutiny, the recommendation was supported to Cabinet.
There were no public items selected from the Scrutiny Forward Work Programme.
There were no performance monitoring items selected.
The Forward Work Programme was noted.
There were no urgent items.
Resolved to exclude the public for the following item(s) pursuant to Section 100A(4) and (5) of the Local Government Act 1972 and paragraph (14) of Part 4 of Schedule 12A to the above Act.
Members scrutinised the private item from the scrutiny forward work programme item.
Councillors must say when they have a personal link to something being discussed, such as a job, a property or a family member. A prejudicial interest is one strong enough that the councillor usually leaves the room and takes no part.
Declarations are read from the minutes once they are published.
Lists the council's current councillors only. Co-opted members, officers and former councillors aren't shown.