Climate change, net zero, flooding, energy, biodiversity, parks and green spaces.
What councils do
Every Welsh council has declared or responded to the climate emergency and has plans to cut its own emissions, from buildings, vehicles and the things it buys. Councils also manage flood risk on local rivers and streams.
Who decides
The Cabinet agrees climate plans; scrutiny committees check progress.
Having a say
Ask your councillors how the council is doing against its own targets, and respond to its consultations on plans.
Loading
By council, last 12 months
How many agenda items on this topic each council dealt with, and how many had a decision recorded.
RESOLVED: that
1) the proposed scheme for Pentwyn Leisure Centre be approved as illustrated by the design plans at Appendix 1 and the financial proposal at Confidential Appendix 3 and authority be delegated to the Director of Economic Development in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Culture, Parks and Events, the Section 151 Officer, and the Monitoring Officer to:
i. Undertake a public consultation on the proposals and consider potential changes as required within the limits of the approved budget set out at Confidential Appendix 3;
ii. Deal with all aspects of the procurement of a contractor(s) to undertake the works set out in this report subject to the financial envelope set out at Confidential Appendix 3;
iii. Conclude lease agreements with tenants on the terms set out at Confidential Appendices 3 and 4, subject to detailed due diligence and independent valuation to demonstrate best value.
2) the solar energy scheme as set out at Confidential Appendix 5 be approved.
3) Authority be delegated to the Director of Economic Development in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Culture, Parks and Events, the Section 151 Officer, and the Legal Officer to deal with all aspects of the procurement of a contractor(s) to deliver the solar energy scheme as set out in this report and at Confidential Appendix 5, subject to the financial envelope set out at Confidential Appendix 5.
RESOLVED: that
1) the proposed agreement with Tennis Wales as set out in this report be approved.
2) the three tennis court sites identified in this report be included in the agreement.
3) Authority be delegated to the Director of Economic Development in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Culture, Parks and Events and the Legal Officer to:
a. identify a further three tennis court sites to be included in the agreement subject to appropriate due diligence and governance relating to any Trust arrangements and/or restrictive covenants;
b. enter into Licence Agreements/Management Agreements as required for the sites included in the scheme.
4) It be noted that further reports will need to be presented back to Cabinet as Trustee to approve the inclusion of any sites subject to Charitable Trusts.
Vale of Glamorgan, Shared Regulatory Services Joint Committee,
AGREED: that the Chairperson, on behalf of the Committee, writes to the Cabinet Member conveying the observations of the Committee when discussing the way forward.
RESOLVED – That the following matters be dealt with as indicated:
(1)
Case 1
The Sub Committee were asked to consider a complaint received from a member of the public that a hackney carriage driver requested payment of the fare in advance of the journey and also refused to use the taxi meter.
The Sub Committee received representations from the driver. The driver stated that he had no recollection of the incident. He accepted that a photograph provided by the complainant was a photograph of his vehicle but he denied that was the driver involved in the incident. The driver confirmed that he was aware of the licensing conditions relating to use of the taxi meter.
The complainant addressed the Sub Committee. Members were advised that he approached the taxi and requested to be taken to Ely. The driver requested £20 in advance of the journey. The complainant agreed to this conditionally as long as the taxi meter was used. At that point the driver refused to use the meter. The complainant stated that he reminded the driver that he was obliged to use the meter for this journey and the driver stated that it was a busy night therefore he was refusing to use the meter. When the complainant stated that he would report the matter to the licensing authority the driver became agitated. The complainant then photographed the rear of the vehicle and proceeded to look for another taxi. He eventually booked an Uber vehicle, the fare was £13.50.
Responding to a question from the Sub Committee, the complainant stated that he could not be certain that the driver before him was the driver of the vehicle on the night in question. However, he was certain that the vehicle in the photograph was the vehicle involved. The Sub Committee was invited to view the digital date stamp of the photograph which confirmed that the photograph was taken at 0525 hours on the morning of 5 February 2023. The complaint also stated that he emailed the Licensing Authority with details of the incident immediately upon returning home.
The driver confirmed that he was the sole driver of the vehicle and nobody else used the vehicle.
RESOLVED – That the driver receives a written warning for refusal to use the taxi meter. The Sub Committee accepted that the photograph provided by the complainant was valid and the driver was the driver of the vehicle at the time.
(2)
Application 2
The Sub Committee were asked to consider a report received from Uber regarding the conduct of a hackney carriage / private hire driver licensed by the authority. The report indicated that the driver has had his Uber account permanently deactivated due to a series of complaints of a similar nature from customers on the platform. The complaints related to a number of inappropriate comments, advances and personal intimate questions made by the driver whilst transporting customers.
The driver addressed the Sub Committee. The driver stated that he was not made aware of all the incidents in question by Uber and that Uber had handled the complaints ‘unprofessionally’. It was alleged that Uber had questioned him about one of the incidents when he had passengers in his vehicle. Uber also corresponded with him but the correspondence addressed to the wrong name despite repeated attempts to correct this.
Members were advised that Uber had asked non-specific open-ended questions that the driver felt unable to answer. It was confirmed that he had received an email from Uber stating that he had broken their Code of Practice and he was no longer able to work for them.
The driver was asked to respond to each of the incidents set out in the report. The driver stated that he couldn’t remember the first incident from five years ago as it was not brought to his attention at the time. The second incident was discussed with Uber but there were passengers in his vehicle and he was unable to hear what was being said by Uber. He had no recollection of the third or the fourth incident. The fifth incident was discussed but he felt unable to answer the open-ended questioning put to him.
Members were advised that since the termination of his Uber account the driver had attempted to communicate with them but this was proving difficult. It was also alleged that Uber had acted illegally in reporting the matter to the Licensing Authority. The driver stated that he had been a licensed driver for 19 years and he had an excellent rating on the Uber platform.
RESOLVED – that the driver complete the SQA for Professional Drivers within 3 months. The Sub Committee has concerns about the driver’s pattern of behaviour across multiple incidents that amounted to unprofessional conduct.
(3)
Application 3
The Sub Committee were asked to consider an application for a hackney carriage / private hire licence. The applicant had a conviction under Section 5 for using threatening words and behaviour. The applicant was asked to outline the incident which led to the conviction.
Members were advised that the driver was involved with a collision with another driver. Both parties had pulled into a lay-by to exchange details. A third party individual approached and attempted to interject into the conversation. An argument ensued during which the applicant called the third party a racist.
Police attended the scene. Details were exchanged and the applicant left. Subsequently the driver was asked to attend a police station and he was charged. The allegations were denied and the matter proceeded to court. The applicant stated that in court the Duty Solicitor told him not to worry. He was unable to satisfactorily follow the proceedings due to a problem with his hearing aid. He was found guilty.
The driver stated that he has been a licensed driver in Newport for 9 years without incident.
RESOLVED – That the application for a hackney carriage / private hire drivers licence be approved.
RESOLVED –
(1) T H A T further to discussion of the matter at Planning Committee meetings
on 1st March, 2023 and 18th May, 2023 and the content of this report, the following
putative reasons for refusal be approved:
No.
(i) In the absence of an up to date preliminary ecological appraisal, the
proposed development fails to appraise the biodiversity interests at this
site. Therefore, the proposed development fails to incorporate,
conserve or enhance biodiversity interests, as those biodiversity
interests have not been quantified in the first instance. As a result, the
development is contrary to the requirements of Policies SP1 (Delivering
the Strategy), MD2 (Design of new development) Criterion 10, MD9
(Promoting Biodiversity) and MG19 (Sites and Species of European
importance) of the Vale of Glamorgan Local Development Plan 2011 –
2026, guidance within the Biodiversity and Development SPG; National
guidance contained within Planning Policy Wales (Edition 11, 2021),
Policy 9 of the Future Wales National Plan 2040 and the Sustainable
Development Principle No.2 of the Well-being of Future Generations
(Wales) Act 2015;
AND
(ii) The proposed development by virtue of its layout, scale and massing
would have a harmful impact on the setting of historic assets. The
benefits of the scheme are not considered to outweigh the identified
harm to the designated heritage assets. The proposed development is
therefore contrary to Policies SP10 (Built and Natural Environment) and
MD8 (Historic Environment) of the Vale of Glamorgan Local
Development Plan 2011 – 2026, guidance within the Porthkerry
Conservation Area Appraisal and Management Plan SPG, National
guidance contained within Planning Policy Wales (Edition 11, 2021)
and Technical advice note (TAN) 24 (the historic environment).
(2) T H A T the Head of Legal and Democratic Services / Operational Manager
Legal Services be authorised to appoint external consultants to conduct the appeal
on behalf of the Council.
Reasons for decisions
(1) Having regard to the contents of the report and discussions at the meeting.
(2) To provide for the appointment of external consultants to prepare the
Council’s defence to the non-determination appeal.
RESOLVED – T H A T in pursuance of the powers delegated to the Committee, the
following application be determined as indicated and any other necessary action be
taken.
2022/00602/RES Received on 12 May 2022
(P24)
APPLICANT: Wales and West Housing Association, c/o Agent,
AGENT: Gwen Thomas Unit 9, Oak Tree Court, Cardiff Gate Business Park, Cardiff,
CF23 8RS
Land at Heol y Pentir, Rhoose
Proposed Reserved Matters application for residential development and associated
works.
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.
RESOLVED – T H A T the applications as outlined within the report on pages 22 and
23, as determined by the Head of Sustainable Development under delegated
powers, be noted.
No.
RESOLVED –
(1) T H A T the Authority’s position, with regard to the Appeal for non-
determination of planning application for the Land at Model Farm, Port Road,
Rhoose (2019/00871/OUT) be defended at Appeal
(2) T H A T the Authority’s defence at Appeal be based on the following putative
reasons for refusal:
• Ecology;
• Heritage;
• Climate Emergency.
(3) T H A T a further report be submitted to the Committee in order to approve the
exact wording for the putative reasons for refusal as part of the Appeal.
Reasons for decisions
(1) To confirm that Committee wishes to defend the Non-Determination Appeal
(2) To confirm that had the Committee been able to do so it would have refused
the application due to the concerns raised around Ecology, Heritage and Climate
Emergency factors.
(3) To allow time for preparation of detailed wording in relation to the putative
reasons for refusal to be considered and approved by the Committee.
RESOLVED – The public be excluded for this part of the meeting as the Committee discuss information which is confidential and exempt from publication as contained in paragraph 14 of Part 4 and paragraph 21 of Part 5 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Action 1972. The public may be excluded from the meeting by resolution of the Committee pursuant to Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972 during discussion of this item.
The Chairperson then opened the debate on this item. Members were invited to comment, seek clarification or raise questions on the information received. Thiediscussions are summarised as follows:
· Officers were asked to comment on the age, emissions and general condition of the vehicles used for school transport. Officers stated that different quality standards depending on the classifications of the vehicles. Tendering companies are required to meet those standards in order to join the approve list of contractors. Vehicle age limits are specified and discussions are ongoing with contractors with a view to improving their vehicles to Euro 6 emission standards. Members were asked to note that there are a reduced number of contractors bidding for tenders and these are working at capacity in terms of the number of vehicles available. Furthermore, some school bus services are provided by public bus companies and these will fall outside of the procurement framework. Services that are procured via the framework will receive a higher score during the tendering process for better quality vehicles.
· Members asked whether officers were confident that the services can be provided in the future given the limited number of contractors tendering for contracts. Members were advised that the position is extremely challenging in Cardiff and across Wales. The impact of the Bus Emergency Scheme, where Councils across Wales may be looking to replace public bus services with contracted services, also needs to be factored in. Bus companies have a limited number of drivers available and they are struggling to cover their existing services. These concerns have been raised with Welsh Government.
· Members asked whether the new schools being built in the city were being built on established bus routes. Officers stated that consultation is undertaken with colleagues in Planning and Education to ensure that schools have good transport links, including bus services and walking and cycling networks.
· Members asked whether the costs of the contracts would reduce in coming years if budgetary pressures such as inflation and fuel costs come down. Members were advised that tendering is undertaken to provide a consistent cost. For example, ALN contracts are 3-year contracts in order to provide stability for the pupils. These include options for inflationary increases. However, it is difficult to reduce a contract price. Because of the dynamic nature of the service both contractors and the Council need to give 1 months notice to end the contract and contractors are able to withdraw from the contact.
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.
Swansea, Scrutiny Performance Panel - Climate Change and Nature,
RESOLVED – T H A T the enforcement recommendations as outlined within the
report on page 40 be agreed, and that officers write to PEDW as set out below.
(1) T H A T Planning and Environmental Decisions Wales (PEDW) be advised
No.
that the Council would agree to variations of the existing Enforcement Notice issued
under Section 172 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) as
follows:
(i) The breach of planning control alleged in the Enforcement Notice to
refer to the carrying out of operational development comprising the
construction of a wood fired renewable energy plant together with
associated structures not in accordance with the details and plans
approved under planning application 2015/00031/OUT (i.e. a breach of
condition(s) of that permission).
(ii) The requirements of the Enforcement Notice to include the carrying out
of the development in accordance with the details and plans approved
under planning application 2015/00031/OUT.
RESOLVED – T H A T the applications as outlined within the report on pages 26 and
27, as determined by the Head of Sustainable Development under delegated
powers, be noted.