Planning applications, the local development plan and what can be built where.
What councils do
Councils decide planning applications for new buildings, extensions and changes of use, and write the local development plan that says where new homes and jobs can go. National parks decide applications inside their boundaries.
Who decides
Planning officers decide most applications. Larger or disputed ones go to the planning committee of councillors, which meets in public.
Having a say
Anyone can comment on an application while it's open, usually for 21 days. Stick to planning matters such as traffic, design, noise and overlooking.
In numbers
Welsh councils plan to spend £40 per person on this in 2026-27.
It ranges from £13 in Pembrokeshire to £152 in Neath Port Talbot.
Planning applications decided within eight weeks: 41% across Wales.
RESOLVED –
(1) T H A T the content of the report at Agenda Item 9(b) – Budget 2026/27 and
MTFP 2026/27 to 2030/31 Supplemental Report – providing additional details
regarding updated Standard Spending Assessment Figures Assessment as
supplemental information to Agenda Item 9(a) – Draft Budget 2026/27 and Medium
Term Financial Plan 2026/27 to 2030/31 – be noted.
(2) T H A T a Council Tax increase of 6.5% be approved.
(3) T H A T the budget for 2026/27 be approved.
Reasons for decisions
(1) Having regard to the contents of the report with the most up to date figures as
part of its final budget deliberations and for the avoidance of doubt and to ensure
that all relevant matters were considered as necessary.
(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 Full
Council.
CAPITAL STRATEGY 2026/27 AND FINAL CAPITAL PROGRAMME PROPOSALS 2026/27 TO 2030/31 (REF)
The Leader presented the report which outlined the Council’s approach to capital
finance for the forthcoming years and highlighted a range of schemes to undertaken
in the medium and longer term, to the value of approximately £0.5billion. They
outlined that where possible there would best endeavours to ensure minimal
slippage and that the proposals included schemes such as schools, housing and
wider infrastructure alongside decarbonisation activity, and the Western Vale
Gateway. They further noted that the emerging conflict in the Middle East would
have an impact due to oil and gas prices, but budgets included contingency
arrangements.
Councillor Franks queried how the Council would manage potential slippage and
sought assurance for how deliverable this strategy would be.
Councillor Dr. Johnson raised concerns over year-on-year slippage and the
completion of plans, citing Western Vale Gateway as an example, and further raised
the lack of a second Welsh medium secondary school in a rural area within the
Strategy.
The Leader responded that there would inevitably be slippage as elements outside
of the Council’s control such as school holidays, but the Council was building
resilience in its Project Management capacity. They noted that Western Vale
Gateway scheme had taken a number of years as it had required negotiations with
the Health Board as site owners, but they would be moving forward imminently, and
that information around a new Welsh Medium secondary school would be provided
when available.
RESOLVED –
(1) T H A T the Capital Strategy 2026/27 as set out in Appendix 1 to the report be
approved.
(2) T H A T the final Capital Programme for the years 2026/27 to 2030/31 as set
out in Appendix 2 to the report be approved.
(3) T H A T officers be granted delegated authority to vire £10k or below between
schemes that were already approved within the five year Capital Programme.
(4) T H A T the Chief Executive and the Head of Finance/Section 151 Officer, in
consultation with the Executive Leader and Cabinet Member for Performance and
Resources, be granted delegated authority to make additions, deletions or transfers
to or from the:
i. 2026/27 to 2030/31 Housing Improvement Programme as appropriate.
ii. 2026/27 to 2030/31 Asset Renewal budgets as appropriate.
iii. S106 funded schemes subject to Member consultation as required under the
existing process.
iv. Decarbonisation Schemes
v. Sustainable Communities for Learning programme.
vi. Discretionary Adaption Grant Schemes.
vii. Pride in Place Impact fund
viii. Plan for Neighbourhood
ix. Transforming Towns
x. Local Growth fund.
Reasons for decisions
(1) To approve the Capital Strategy for 2026/27.
(2) To set and approve future Capital Programmes to 2030/31.
(3) To enable officers to progress schemes more quickly where low value
virements below £10k were required.
(4) To enable the Housing Capital budget, Asset Renewal budgets, S106
schemes, Decarbonisation Schemes, Sustainable Communities for Learning
programme, Discretionary Adaption Grant Schemes, Pride in Place Impact fund,
Plan for Neighbourhood, Transforming Towns and Local Growth Fund to be
managed effectively.
TREASURY MANAGEMENT AND INVESTMENT STRATEGY 2026/27 AND UPDATE FOR 2025/26 (REF)
The Leader provided an overview of the report, which demonstrated how the Council
managed it finances prudently, and thanked attendees of a recent briefing session
surrounding treasury management. They highlighted Appendix 1, containing an
update to the review strategy and updated prudential indicators and Appendix 2
which included areas such as the investment strategy and CIPFA reporting
framework.
RESOLVED –
(1) T H A T the proposed 2026/27 Treasury Management and Investment
Strategy including the following specific resolutions (detailed in Appendix 2 to the
report) be approved:
• The Authorised Limit for External Debt be set at £265.800m for 2025/26,
£308.472m for 2026/27, £370.857m for 2027/28 and £435.486m for 2028/29.
• The Operational Boundary for External Debt be set at £237.168m for 2025/26,
£278.201m for 2026/27, £339.237m for 2027/28 and £402.998m for 2028/29.
• The Section 151 Officer be granted 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 £0m for 2025/26, £10m in 2026/27, £10m in 2027/28 and
£10m in 2028/29 be 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 be set as shown
below and further detailed in Appendix 1.
Table 1 – Upper and lower Limits for fixed rate borrowing
Upper Limit Lower Limit
Under 12 months 20% 0%
12 months and within 24 months 40% 0%
24 months and within 5 years 40% 0%
5 years and within 10 years 40% 0%
10 years and above 100% 0%
• Any breaches of the Prudential Indicators will be reported through to the next
meeting of Cabinet, with the exception of the Authorised Limit for External
Debt which would require prior Council approval.
(2) T H A T delegated authority be granted to the Head of Finance/Section 151
Officer to approve the Treasury Management Policy Statement and Treasury
Management Practices.
(3) T H A T delegated authority be granted as set out in paragraph 2.34 of the
report, to enable the assigned officers to place investments with the Debt
Management Account Deposit Facility (DMADF) in line with the daily cash flow
projections.
Reasons for decisions
(1) In order for the Treasury Management and Annual Investment Strategy as
prepared be approved as required by the Local Government Act 2003.
(2) In order for the Treasury Management Policy Statement and Treasury
Management Practices to be approved.
(3) In order for smooth running of daily cash flow.
BIGLIS TO DINAS POWYS ACTIVE TRAVEL ROUTE (REF)
The Deputy Leader presented the report, noting that this work had been underway
for several years, but that this would allow the Council to move into construction on
both phases in line with regulations. They indicated that they were seeking to utilise
8 pieces of land owned by 4 landowners, with the preferred approach being
negotiation ahead of Compulsory Purchase Order. They noted that this active travel
route was essential in supporting people’s health, providing an alternative form of
transport and improving safety on a particular route.
Councillor Dr. Johnson said that this route was long awaited, with initial plans for this
to be delivered in 2020, and that this would be considered by Planning Committee in
the future. They highlighted the twin track approach outlined by Welsh Government,
with the emphasis being upon discussions, which could take several years.
Councillor Ernest indicated that this this could be an opportunity to revive the Dinas
Powys bypass project and provide better links for road users.
Councillor Penn stated that many people were put off cycling to Barry due to safety
concerns and welcomed anything that could be done to facilitate active travel.
The Deputy Leader emphasised that negotiations were due to get underway as
quickly as possible, and that the scheme had significant preparation work over many
years, and they hoped it would help the aim of reducing car users and improving
safety.
RESOLVED – T H A T the use of delegated powers regarding the use of
Compulsory Purchase Orders be approved.
Reason for decision
To comply with governance requirements, as Cabinet does not hold delegated
powers to authorise the use of Compulsory Purchase Orders and in order to
maintain legal and constitutional integrity.
PAY POLICY 2026/27 (REF)
The Leader presented the report, noting that the median and mean pay gap had
reduced significantly from 2019 to 2025 to 1.6% and 2.3%, respectively. ONS had
reported that the average UK figure for the previous year had been 7% and so
reflected a positive position for the Council as a position of parity was worked
towards.
RESOLVED – T H A T the Council’s Pay Policy, as attached at Appendix A to the
report to Cabinet on 8th January, 2026 (Minute No. C180), 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. All Chief Officers, save for two Democratic and Scrutiny Services Officers
servicing the meeting and the Head of Human Resources and Organisational
Development, left the meeting when this item was considered. The Head of
Human Resources and Organisational Development remained in the meeting,
until the matter was to be voted upon, in order to provide any clarification
required by Elected Members.
RESOLVED: Pursuant to this Committee’s delegated powers the following development management 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.
APPLICATION GRANTED SUBJECT TO S106 AGREEMENT:
5a. 25/01022/FUL – BUTETOWN
51-59 Penarth Road, Butetown
Demolition of existing buildings and construction of co-living accommodation units in a single building of up to nine storeys, commercial floorspace on the ground floor and the provision of indoor and outdoor amenity space, cycle parking and associated works.
APPLICATION GRANTED SUBJECT TO S106 AGREEMENT AND REVISED CONDITIONS:
5b. 25/01220/FUL – FAIRWATER
Former Fairwater Social & Athletic Club, Plasmawr Road, Fairwater
Demolition of the former Fairwater Social Club and construction of affordable houses together with access, landscaping, drainage, engineering, and the associated works.
AGREED – T H A T the Head of Sustainable Development be thanked for their time
and presentation.
Reason for decision
In response to the Request for Consideration submitted by Cowbridge with
Llanblethian Town Council on Information regarding the Vale of Glamorgan Council
Local Development Plan.
RESOLVED: Pursuant to this Committee’s delegated powers the following development management 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:
5a. 25/02048/FUL – PENTWYN
St Teilos High School, Circle Way East, Llanedeyrn
Proposed construction of 3G pitch, floodlighting, changing rooms and associated works.
RESOLVED –
(1) T H A T the Replacement Local Development Plan revised Delivery
Agreement be approved and submitted to Welsh Government for their formal
approval.
(2) T H A T the Deposit Replacement Local Development Plan and supporting
documents, including the draft Green Infrastructure Strategy and draft Healthy
Placemaking Supplementary Planning Guidance, be approved for public
consultation.
Reason for decisions
(1&2) To approve the revisions to the Council’s revised Delivery Agreement and to
enable public consultation of the Deposit in accordance with Regulation 17 of the
Town and Country Planning (Local Development Plan) (Wales) Regulations 2005 (as
amended).
January Special 6.45pm (JLT)
RESOLVED: Pursuant to this Committee’s delegated powers the following development management 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:
5a. 25/02085/VAR – RHIWBINA
6-8 Beulah Road, Rhiwbina, Cardiff, CF14 6LX
Removal of Condition 2 of planning permission 07/02357/W to allow the mixed shop/restaurant/gallery use (sui generis) to extend throughout the ground floor of 6-8 Beulah Road.
Variation of conditions 3 and 4 of planning permission 07/02357/W:
Condition 3 – to extend the opening hours from 7:30 am to 11pm Monday to Saturday (to be closed on Sundays).
Condition 4 – to allow outside dining within the area to the rear of Beulah Road shown on drawing no a-p-s001. (09/00363/W - Approved 19 October 2009 as modified by 10/01583/DCO -Approved 19 November 2010):
Section 73 application to vary Conditions 3 (Operating Hours), 4 (External Dining Area) and 16 (External Dining Area Doors) of 09/00363W as modified by 10/01583/DCO to amend the approved scheme as follows: 1) Vary the operating hours to allow the premises to operate on a Sunday between 07:30am – 09:00pm.
5b. 25/02406/FUL - BUTETOWN
Former Ibis Budget, Tyndall Street, Cardiff
Change of Use from 157 bedroom hotel (Class C1) to a Hostel (Sui Generis Use Class) providing supported accommodation for homeless persons (98 bedrooms with communal kitchen, dining and lounge facilities) for a period of up to three years.
(Cllr Gunter left her seat as a member of the Committee during this item in accordance with her prejudicial interest).
RESOLVED – T H A T the Statement of Licensing Principles for 2025- 2028, as
detailed be approved.
Reason for decision
Having regard to there having been no consultation responses received, and to
ensure that the Council fulfilled its statutory duty as a Licensing Authority.
FINAL DRAFT VALE OF GLAMORGAN ANNUAL SELF-ASSESSMENT REPORT 2024/25 (REF)
The Leader presented the report, and highlighted that Members would be aware of
this as it had been shared in draft in a number of areas including a joint Scrutiny
session in July, where recommendations were made, and Governance and Audit
Committee, which recommended the evidence and insight assessment changed
from “Good” to “Fair”, and that it was the role of Council to approve the final report.
Councillor Carroll reflected that considerable improvement needed to be made within
the Council as demonstrated by the change in approach to car parking, and the
change in decision based upon its impact which had generated media attention,
alongside an impact to residents. He believed this was not an isolated incident and
that there needed to be more honesty over performance and believed the report did
not reflect residents’ experiences.
Councillor Dr. Johnson noted that the process had been different this year due to
changes in Scrutiny arrangements, which would need longer to consider its impact,
but reflected that during the Joint Scrutiny session, it was difficult to get into the
detail of approximately 500 RAG ratings. He also shared that during the session, he
had questioned the methodology and moderation, as the achievement was exactly
the same as the target for “Good”, and that despite several indicators being Red, the
assessment remained the same, which supported the feeling of this report being the
Council marking its own homework. He felt that external statistics, such as Welsh
Index of Multiple Deprivation, proved the impact of working, and noted an increased
in the number of LSOAs in the most deprived areas.
A recorded vote was undertaken as below:
Member 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 √
Amelia Collins √
Marianne Cowpe √
Pamela Drake √
Vincent Driscoll √
Anthony Ernest √
Robert Fisher
Christopher Franks √
Wendy Gilligan √
Russell Godfrey √
Emma Goodjohn √
Member For Against Abstain
Ewan Goodjohn √
Stephen Haines √
Sally Hanks √
William Hennessy √
Nic Hodges √
Mark Hooper √
Catherine Iannucci-Williams √
Gwyn John √
Ian Johnson √
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 √
Member For Against Abstain
Rhys Thomas √
Steffan Wiliam √
Margaret Wilkinson √
Eddie Williams √
Mark Wilson √
Nicholas Wood √
Total 29 20 1
RESOLVED – T H A T the Final Draft Vale of Glamorgan Annual Self-Assessment
2024/25 be approved.
Reason for decision
Having regard to the contents of the reference and discussions at the meeting.
VALE OF GLAMORGAN REPLACEMENT LOCAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN (RLDP) 2021-2026 – HOUSING GROWTH IN BARRY CONSULTATION REPORT (REF)
Councillor Sivagnanam presented the report and noted this was a critical stage in
ensuring there was an up-to-date planning framework which met the needs of
communities. She advised that Members would be aware that the strategy for the
Replacement Local Development Plan was agreed by Full Council in September last
year, and that due to concerns around deliverability, sites at Northwest Barry, land at
Neptune Road and Hayes Lane were being consulted upon. She shared that there
had been 159 individuals and organisations who had made representations, less
than the number when consulting upon Northeast Barry, but still valid concerns.
She reflected that at Place Scrutiny previously residents made powerful and relevant
objections about these sites, and that she recognised concerns surrounding
infrastructure, with specific concerns around increased traffic at Weycock Cross, but
that developers would be required to fund highways improvements to deal with traffic
issues, and that this would be part of the planning process moving forward. She also
noted that there would need to be an increase in school places, and access to health
care, which they were working on the Health Board to explore.
She noted that Barry was the largest and most sustainable settlement in the Vale,
identified as a key settlement in in the RLDP hierarchy and that it was a national
growth area, alongside the need for affordable housing was critical, as there were
around 7,000 households on the Council's housing register with 4,000 expressing a
preference to live in Barry alongside nearly 900 people living in inappropriate
housing in Barry.
Councillor Dr. Johnson indicated that they were not present during the Scrutiny
meeting, but upon review, agreed with Councillor Hooper’s assessments during the
meeting, in supporting the scheme for Neptune Road and noting the lack of facilities
and public transport in the Bendricks. He reflected upon the Weycock Cross
proposal, which he believed to be the most controversial, and shared that the
Conservative Party had previously built around 700 houses into the prospective
Local Development Plan in this area in 2012, and that the Labour Group opposed
this in local media and sought to redistribute this across the Vale. He shared that the
Plaid Cymru Group had concerns about the site for a number of reasons, including
the loss of the green belt, traffic problems, the lack of public transport and likely over-
reliance on cars, so would propose an amendment to remove this scheme from the
proposals. He further noted that the number of people on the housing list was not a
core evidence basis, queried how this would address the 900 individuals in
unsuitable housing in Barry, and why other areas where planning already existed
such as the college site on Colcot Road or Western Gateway were not part of this
proposed scheme.
Councillor Collins shared that they acknowledged the need for housing, there was a
concern over the lack of community facilities, such as shops, doctors and dentists as
a remote part of Barry which was not as well connected, with no buses on a Sunday
or between 7.30am and 4.30pm, meaning people would need to use cars.
Councillor Campbell noted the Cabinet Member’s comments around developers
funding infrastructure improvement, and how Section 106 monies as part of the
development of Golwg Y Mor in Rhoose had been put forward for infrastructure
improvements had been used but were not enough and the Council needed to also
do more to improve this moving forward. She further expressed that Council needed
to take a role in improving active travel and public transport, particularly in the
Western Vale area, as there needed to be consideration as to how these proposals
would impact upon these residents.
Councillor Carroll agreed that the proposed development at Weycock Cross was
problematic and would have an impact upon traffic, which was at capacity, busy all
day and worsened by increasing the number of dwellings. He commented that of 129
representations, all bar 3 signalled opposition to the plan, which he felt they were
right to do so as it was clearly unsuitable for development, and that despite being
less than other sites representations, this still represented a considerable number of
people who the Council should listen to.
Councillor Franks shared that he felt this was being considered due to the failure to
properly assess the Northeast Barry proposal, which included 900 houses, which
failed and had to be withdrawn. He noted that the Labour Party had previously
opposed this site, whilst the Conservative Party had supported it, and believed this
reflected chaos by Cabinet, and that the proposal should be withdrawn.
Councillor Perry raised that at Place Scrutiny Committee, a resident raised concern
about flood water at Weycock Cross and expressed doubt over the robustness of
modelling in terms of flood risk assessment and drainage, and that he felt the
planning system was flawed if the building of more houses resulted in increased
flooding. He further reflected that there would be the need to own cars, and that
there was a need to reduce the dependence on cars to support the climate
emergency and that active travel needed to be properly considered. He finally
commented that increasing developments were seeing more delays and congestion
and that current approaches to mitigation do not work.
Councillor Goodjohn emphasised the need to consider future generations who would
need affordable housing. He reflected that this proposal did not address the need in
the best way possible and that the original proposal did, but this was reduced based
upon representations. He agreed around the need to increase active travel and
public transport but reflected the plan could not address everything right now and
that there was a desperate need for housing in Barry.
Councillor Wilson stated the belief that no-one wanted new homes next to them, and
that a lot of other homes in the area were modern, but that the Council need to
evolve as households and their needs changed. He reflected upon changing
attitudes to transport, including increased usage of electric cars and active travel,
both of which needed to be considered. He shared that the Vale of Glamorgan was a
popular place to live, with demand exceeding supply, and house prices increasing at
rates greater than inflation, and that there was increasing deprivation, and a need to
supply affordable housing. He felt that no viable alternatives had been proposed, so
would support inclusion of this site.
Councillor Sivagnanam responded that this proposal was about the delivery of
affordable homes, with mitigations identified in the report and considered as part of
the ongoing planning process. She reflected that there was a need to balance
housing with the needs of the environment and transport, and felt this proposal
achieved the right balance. She indicated that previous opposition from the Labour
Party was due to the deliverability of the proposal, which she felt to be addressed in
the report, and that whilst there had been representations, there would still be
numerous in Barry who had not been heard who would support the development.
A Recorded Vote was taken to consider the removal of the Weycock Cross site from
the proposals as below:
Member For Against Abstain
Anne Asbrey √
Julie Aviet √
Gareth Ball √
Rhiannon Birch √
Bronwen Brooks √
Member For Against Abstain
Gillian Bruce √
Ian Buckley √
Lis Burnett √
Samantha Campbell √
George Carroll √
Christine Cave √
Charles Champion √
Amelia Collins √
Marianne Cowpe √
Pamela Drake √
Vincent Driscoll √
Anthony Ernest √
Robert Fisher
Christopher Franks √
Wendy Gilligan √
Russell Godfrey √
Emma Goodjohn √
Ewan Goodjohn √
Stephen Haines √
Sally Hanks √
William Hennessy √
Nic Hodges √
Mark Hooper √
Member For Against Abstain
Catherine Iannucci-Williams √
Gwyn John √
Ian Johnson √
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 √
Margaret Wilkinson √
Eddie Williams √
Mark Wilson √
Nicholas Wood √
Member For Against Abstain
Total 23 24 2
The amendment was not carried and the debate returned to discussing the original
proposals.
Councillor Mahoney acknowledged the need for housing but felt that building
housing in high density areas with no access to services such as Doctors and
Schools, which had not increased in recent times. He shared that he had lived in the
Bendricks area for 13 years, there were no facilities excluding a café, and a bus
service subsidised by Section 106 monies and that Sully School had not been
upgraded in several years, despite recently losing a significant part of its budget. He
noted that the Bendricks area was cut off from the rest of the area and without
transport apart from walking, which did not suit all situations and urged the Council to
stop building housing in concentrated places without enough services and
infrastructure.
Councillor Ernest stated that very little had changed in Sully in a number of years
apart from increased housing and noted that the development of Sully Hospital had
been beneficial in providing several new homes, but that there was limited public
transport, which tended to run infrequently. He added that building more housing on
Hayes Road would not lead to the services needed such as medical facilities,
doctors and shops, and that if residents did not own a car, they would struggle with
everyday tasks.
The Leader acknowledged that in relation to infrastructure, there were things that the
Council was responsible for and things it was not responsible for, and that the role of
Council was to often lobby and negotiate on behalf of people, as demonstrated by
the Health hub at Western Gate and the lobbying of the health board for Eagleswell
in Llantwit Major. She also noted that whilst the Council had limited funding for bus
services, there were two services which covered the Bendricks (88 and 94), and that
when she used the bus, residents often commented positively on the Council
housing which had been built in the area. She further stated that the area did not
have an abundance of green fields to be built upon, so sites were invited to be
considered as part of the LDP, with the Council considering most appropriate based
upon the agreed strategy. The Leader emphasised that today’s proposals were
about supporting people into the right accommodation, supporting people in looking
towards their futures, and made no apologies in allocating these sites as they
supported people with affordable housing.
Councillor Perkes shared that they felt the Bendricks was becoming more of a
community, with a development planned in partnership with Cardiff Council and
Lovell Homes, containing affordable homes which were built to Welsh Housing
Quality Standards. She noted concerns around lack of services but shared that
services would grow as the population grew.
Councillor Perry noted that increasing house prices were global issue, with housing
becoming an investment which profited few people, and that the problem was not
about the supply of housing, but the financing of housing. He reflected that building
costs had increased alongside labour so there was inflation built into the system
impacting upon their affordability. He sought clarification as to what was meant by
inappropriate housing as he felt no definition was provided and would welcome
similar detail surrounding the housing waiting list. He also challenged Members to
further consider the environmental impacts upon the increased housing, as climate
risks were increasing, and re-emphasised the point to invest in the transport network
and subsidise public transport to be accessible and reduce the dependent on cars.
Councillor Wilson stated that the Replacement Local Development Plan went
through a detailed process with planning professionals, with sites tested upon their
viability. He reflected that Transport for Wales were spending approximately £1
billion on electrification and new stations in Wales, and that the Council were bidding
for stations. He noted that he felt the area was a great place to live, an amazing
destination, and that he was a product of Council housing. He shared that the
Council needed a legal basis to defend things which were outside of the RLDP, and
that when it came to looking at the viability for these sites, it was essential that
facilities were considered.
Councillor John acknowledged the need for housing, particularly in the Western
Vale, and welcomed the Leader’s work in lobbying the Health Board to improve
medical services in the area which were oversubscribed, but suggested Welsh
Government needed to intervene to push the development of health care provision,
as the Council needed to consider facilities when trying to develop and build
communities.
Councillor Hodges indicated that the Weycock Cross development was not about
social housing, but a commercial venture, and that when considering the Bendricks
area, he did not believe the view that facilities would follow housing as services were
reducing generally. He reflected on the Waterfront development, which was
previously proposed as a potential hotel, and believed this to be a failure of the
Council to promote Barry as a tourist destination, which would have a broader
economic benefit. He also noted that he believed that developers had shafted the
Council for a number of years and that it needed to be better in standing up to big
business.
Councillor Sivagnanam responded that the Housing Development team were holding
pre-application consultations and invited Members and residents to participate in
these moving forward to make their views clear. She emphasised that this was
national growth area and there was a need for housing, particularly affordable homes
in Barry, and failure to agree could leave the Council vulnerable to speculative
applications.
A further Recorded Vote took place on all three of the original recommendations as
presented within the report:
Member 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 √
Amelia Collins √
Marianne Cowpe √
Pamela Drake √
Vincent Driscoll √
Anthony Ernest √
Robert Fisher
Christopher Franks √
Wendy Gilligan √
Russell Godfrey √
Emma Goodjohn √
Ewan Goodjohn √
Member For Against Abstain
Stephen Haines √
Sally Hanks √
William Hennessy √
Nic Hodges √
Mark Hooper √
Catherine Iannucci-Williams √
Gwyn John √
Ian Johnson √
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
Member For Against Abstain
Steffan Wiliam √
Margaret Wilkinson √
Eddie Williams √
Mark Wilson √
Nicholas Wood √
Total 26 22 1
RESOLVED –
(1) T H A T the contents of the report be noted.
(2) T H A T the actions set out in the Consultation Report be endorsed.
(3) T H A T the inclusion of the three potential housing sites as allocations in the
Deposit Replacement Local Development Plan (RLDP) be approved.
Reasons for decisions
(1&2) To outline to Members the issues raised during the public consultation
exercise on Housing Growth in Barry.
(3 ) To allow officers to progress with the preparation of the Deposit RLDP.
TREASURY MANAGEMENT MID-YEAR REPORT 2025/26 (REF)
The Leader presented the regular update of the Council’s Treasury Management
approach and highlighted that the report noted economic factors driving the UK
economy alongside forecasts, and that there were no policy changes as of 30th
September, 2025. She further noted the Council’s capital expenditure and prudential
indicators were included in Appendix A, and that the investment portfolio listed the
investments as £51.775 million as of 30th September, 2025, up from £17.19 million in
April 2025. She shared that there was an average interest rate of 4.22% this year,
which meant there was approximately £1.19 million interest accrued that the new
external borrowing was at £6 million at an average rate of 4.56%, and that this was
borrowed at shorter terms of up to 7 years, so it could be reborrowed if rates were to
decrease. She further noted that the Council were prudent in terms of borrowing and
investments and had not considered any debt rescheduling opportunities this year to
date due to current interest rates.
RESOLVED – T H A T the Treasury Management Annual Report for the period
2025/26 be approved
Reason for decision
To update Council surrounding the Council’s approach to Treasury Management.
REVIEW OF THE VALE OF GLAMORGAN COUNCIL’S PETITION SCHEME (REF)
The Leader presented the report and advised that the previous Petition Scheme had
been considered by Council in 2022, and that this was a requirement under the Local
Government and Elections (Wales) Act 2021 to produce a scheme which considered
how a petition could be submitted, who could submit a petition, how and by when the
Council acknowledged receipt and how the Council responded.
Councillor Dr. Johnson stated that he felt the petitions process was quite difficult for
ordinary members of the public to use, and that awareness needed to be raised as
only 3 petitions had been submitted in 3 years, with only 1 reaching the threshold,
and shared how it had worked positively when looking at School crossings. He noted
that the Council needed to ensure that that there was an need to promoted
awareness of this process to the public as to how they could get involved, to which
the Leader responded that there was a need to ensure Vale residents were
signatories, and as outlined within the report, the platform for this was being
reviewed to be more user friendly as it was important to engage more effectively and
through the most appropriate means.
RESOLVED – T H A T the revised Vale of Glamorgan Council’s Petition Scheme be
approved.
Reason for decision
To update the Council’s approach to fulfilling statutory legislation relating to petitions
from the public.
VALE OF GLAMORGAN REPLACEMENT LOCAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN (RLDP) 2021-2026 – HOUSING GROWTH IN BARRY CONSULTATION REPORT (REF)
RESOLVED – T H A T the use of the Urgent Decision Procedure (Cabinet Minute
No. C69, 17th July, 2025 (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.
RESOLVED: Council AGREED:
1.
To delegate authority to the Council’s Director of Planning, Transport and Environment, Head of Planning, Operational Manager for Major Development and Placemaking and the Group Leader for Planning Policy to permit effective dialogue between the independent Inspector and Council representatives subject to consultation with the Cabinet Member for Climate Change, Strategic Planning as detailed in paragraph 14 of this report, in accordance with Welsh Government guidance and in order to facilitate the efficient operation of the examination process.
AGREED: that the Chairperson, on behalf of the Committee, writes to the Cabinet Member conveying the observations and recommendations of the Committee when discussing the way forward.
RESOLVED: Pursuant to this Committee’s delegated powers the following development management 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 SUBJECT TO S106 AGREEMENT:
5a. 24/02961/FUL – CATHAYS
Howells of Cardiff, Trinity Street, Cathays, CF10 1TT
Proposed redevelopment (Phases 4 and 5) of part of the former Howells department store, including partial demolition, to deliver apartments and studio apartments (Use Class C3), a hotel (Use Class C1) and flexible commercial floorspace (Use Classes A1, A2, A3, B1, D1 and D2) including a new residential block (up to 11 storeys), re-instatement of dormer windows to St Mary Street frontage, upward extension (additional storeys) to the Wharton Street/Trinity Street corner building and an upward extension (additional storeys) to the Trinity Street buildings; new public realm; potential for future link to Cardiff Market; related infrastructure and engineering works.
The application was granted subject to S106 agreement and amendment of condition 23 regarding external finishing materials.
5b. 24/02962/LBC – CATHAYS
Howells of Cardiff, Trinity Street, Cathays, CF10 1TT
Proposed redevelopment (Phases 4 and 5) of part of the former Howells department store, including partial demolition, to deliver apartments and studio apartments (Use Class C3), a hotel (Use Class C1) and flexible commercial floorspace (Use Classes A1, A2, A3, B1, D1 and D2) including a new residential block (up to 11 storeys), re-instatement of dormer windows to St Mary Street frontage, upward extension (additional storeys) to the Wharton Street/Trinity Street corner building and an upward extension (additional storeys) to the Trinity Street buildings; new public realm; potential for future link to Cardiff Market; related infrastructure and engineering works.
The application was granted subject to the completion of a legal agreement, the conditions in section 13 and referral to Cadw, with an amendment to condition 16 regarding external finishing materials.
5c. 25/00437/FUL – PLASNEWYDD
195-197 City Road, Roath, CF24 3JB
Demolition of the existing 'Gaiety' building. Redevelopment for Housing Association apartments and ground floor commercial units. Associated front and back-of-house spaces, service spaces, external private resident amenity space and secure cycle storage (72 cycles).
(Cllr Wong left his seat as a member of the Committee during this item in accordance with his prejudicial interest).
The application was granted subject to S106 agreement.
5d. 25/00727/FUL – CATHAYS
125-139 Queen Street, Cathays, CF10 2BJ
Remodelling and change of use of part of the existing building, with a new 3-storey extension plus roof-top pavilion (restaurant and sky-bar), comprising a hotel, enhancements to the external elevations of the building including renewed facade, new fenestration, external lighting; new hotel entrance; and ancillary facilities.
The application was granted subject to S106 agreement.
APPLICATIONS APPROVED:
5e. Section 116 Stopping Up Highway at John Street
A small area of adopted highway required a retrospective stopping up to reflect what had been constructed as part of the approved planning application 19/01065/MJR.
The application for Legal Services to process the Legal Order was approved.
5f. Diversion of Public Footpath Lisvane No. 14
The joint application had been submitted by Bellway and Redrow to realign the Public Footpath through the new housing developments to accommodate the new route. Substantial development had already been completed across the two housing sites, therefore this was considered a retrospective stopping up and diversion of the Footpath. This application was considered necessary to bring the Definitive Map up to date and reflect what had been approved through the planning process.
The application for Legal Services to process the Legal Order was approved.
5g. Section 116 Braunton Crescent Stopping Up
Development had been substantially completed to demolish the Llanrumney
Play Centre and construct new residential dwellings along with a new play
centre. A section of adopted highway had been made redundant as part of
the scheme and required stopping up. To alter the highway record to reflect what was constructed and built in accordance to the approved planning, a stopping up of the adopted highway was deemed necessary.
The application for Legal Services to process the Legal Order was approved.
RESOLVED: That the Chairperson writes to the Cabinet Member on behalf of the Committee expressing their comments and observations captured during the way forward.
RESOLVED: Pursuant to this Committee’s delegated powers the following development management 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 SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS:
25/01110/FUL – LLANRUMNEY
30 Countisbury Avenue, CF3 5SJ
Change of use of the ground floor of 30 Countisbury Avenue from Use Class A1 to Sui Generis (betting office) and external alterations including new shop front, and 2 no air conditioning units and 2 no satellite dishes to the rear.
Cllrs Pocknell and Bridgeman spoke in opposition to the application as Ward Members.
The application was granted subject to conditions.
APPLICATIONS GRANTED SUBJECT TO ENTERING INTO A BINDING SECTION 106 AGREEMENT
24/02946/FUL – CATHAYS
Harlech Court, Bute Terrace, CF10 2FE
New residential tower (up to 30 storeys) with commercial ground and first floor uses, internal and external resident amenity areas, and a public square.
The application was granted subject to the relevant parties entering into a binding legal agreement under the provisions of Section of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 within 6 months of the date of this Resolution, unless otherwise agreed by the Council in writing, in respect of matters detailed in section 9 of this report, and the conditions listed,
It was also resolved that delegated authority be given to the Head of Planning and/or Operational Manager: Strategic Development & Placemaking, to make changes to the conditions and/or Heads of Terms of the required legal agreement, subject to consultation with the Chair of Planning, up to the point where the legal agreement is signed and planning permission issued.
APPLICATIONS GRANTED:
SECTION 257 DIVERSION OF CAPEL LLANILTERNE NO.18 FOOTPATH – PENTYRCH AND ST FAGANS
Persimmon have outline planning consent for the housing development to the North of Junction 33 (Planning Reference 14/00852/DCO). The proposed development is a mixed-use housing development which will provide an improved path network across the site and connectivity to amenities. The Public Footpath, Capel Llanilterne No.18, is deemed necessary to divert as it currently is a dead-end to the M4 boundary and will directly be affected by the proposed development. The realignment of the footpath requires consent by Planning Committee for Legal Services to process the Section 257 Diversion Legal Order.
The Committee approved the application to instruct Legal Services to make the order.