Roads, potholes, parking, buses, cycling, walking and speed limits.
What councils do
Councils look after local roads and pavements, street lights, parking and road safety, and support bus services that wouldn't run otherwise. Motorways and trunk roads are the Welsh Government's.
Who decides
The Cabinet member for transport leads. Traffic orders, such as new speed limits or parking restrictions, are advertised before they're made.
Having a say
Report potholes and broken street lights to the council or through FixMyStreet. You can object to a proposed traffic order during its notice period.
In numbers
Welsh councils plan to spend £107 per person on this in 2026-27.
It ranges from £62 in Vale of Glamorgan to £166 in Anglesey.
People killed or seriously injured on the roads: 38 per 100,000 people across Wales (2025).
Decided: It granted 26/00507/FUL (temporary live events on part of Blackweir Fields, Cathays), 25/02030/FUL (a foot and cycle bridge at Central Quay), 25/01468/FUL (a foot and cycle bridge at the Marl and Hamadryad Park) and 26/00360/HSE (extensions at 23 Charlotte Square, Rhiwbina). It granted 25/02351/FUL (a co-living building on land bounded by Custom House Street, Bute Street and Hope Street, Cathays) subject to a Section 106 agreement. This is a legal agreement that sets out what the developer must provide or pay for.
RESOLVED – That the following matters be dealt with as indicated:
(1)
Application 1
The Sub Committee was asked to determine if a driver remained a fit and proper person to continue to hold a Hackney Carriage / Private Hire Driver’s License given that the driver had declared he had 9 points on his driving licence.
Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver apologised for the mistakes he had made and emphasised that he had been a responsible driver for nearly thirty years. He believed that he had briefly been distracted on a couple of occasions while chatting to passengers, which led to him not paying enough attention to the speed limit.
Responding to questions from the Sub Committee, the driver clarified that he had three convictions for speeding, one in a 30mph zone and two in 20mph zones. One was on Greenway Road in Rumney and another on Manor Way. He had not realised that he had to declare each offence to the licensing authority as soon as it happened.
RESOLVED – that the driver receive a written warning.
(2)
Application 2
The Sub Committee was asked to determine if a driver remained a fit and proper person to continue to hold a Hackney Carriage / Private Hire Driver’s License given that the driver had declared he had 9 points on his driving licence.
Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver’s friend explained that he had made several mistakes in the same spot within just over a week, in an area that he was unfamiliar with.
Responding to questions from the Sub Committee, the driver clarified that the offences had all happened in the CF72 area near Llantrisant. He normally worked in the city centre and didn’t know the area very well. He had been caught going 25mph on two occasions and 26mph on the other. He had reported the offences upon renewal, not being aware that he had to before then.
RESOLVED – that the driver receive a written warning.
(3)
Application 3
The Sub Committee was asked to determine if a driver remained a fit and proper person to continue to hold a Hackney Carriage / Private Hire Driver’s License given that the driver had a conviction for common assault which he failed to declare.
Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver explained that it had stemmed from a family argument, after which he was arrested for assault. He didn’t feel he had done anything wrong but had been to court and been convicted, having pleaded guilty on the advice of his solicitor. He needed his job to support his family.
Members queried the timeline of events and heard that the assault had occurred in 2021 and he was convicted in 2022. The driver had submitted his renewal application the day after going to court and had not declared the pending conviction, nor had he declared it in 2025 when he renewed his licence. The driver suggested that he had made a mistake and had not intended to hide it.
Members queried a further traffic offence declared on his latest application, and heard that he had been pulled over for going through a red light on Newport Road last year. The driver explained that he didn’t believe the light had been red at the time.
The driver’s representative emphasised that the driver had admitted to making mistakes and served his punishment.
RESOLVED – that the Hackney Carriage / Private Hire Driver’s License be revoked.
(4)
Application 4
The Sub Committee was asked to determine if a driver remained a fit and proper person to continue to hold a Hackney Carriage / Private Hire Driver’s License given that the driver had declared he was disqualified from driving for 6 months.
Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver explained that he was ashamed of himself for being there, and that he was a responsible member of the community in Cardiff who respected the city. He had been disqualified from driving due to totting up offences, having been caught speeding twice and failing to comply with a red light. The speeding offences had been for going 28mph in a 20 zone and 37mph in a 30.
Members asked when the disqualification had taken place, and heard that it lasted from July last year until January.
RESOLVED – that the driver receive a written warning.
(5)
Application 5
The Sub Committee was asked to determine if a driver remained a fit and proper person to continue to hold a Hackney Carriage / Private Hire Driver’s License given that the driver had 6 points on his driving licence.
Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver explained that a friend had been driving him back from Birmingham, but struggled to do the last leg of the journey due to back pain. He wanted to help his friend get home so he drove his car, believing that this was legal because he was fully insured on his own vehicle. He was pulled over for not having his lights on, and found out that he had committed an offence of driving without the correct insurance.
Responding to questions from the Sub Committee, the driver clarified that his friend’s car was a private vehicle rather than a taxi. He had been driving in the UK since 2019 and the offence had happened in 2024.
RESOLVED – that the driver receive a written warning.
Decided: The committee granted application 25/02667/FUL for the former civic amenity site on Wedal Road, Cathays, subject to an extra condition. The application is to re-use the site as a waste transfer facility, keep the existing storage shipping containers and site Bulk Carrier Units. The condition requires a scheme to inspect, repair, improve or replace the timber acoustic fence on the eastern boundary. The council must approve the scheme in writing before the site is first used. The works must be finished before first use, and the fence must be kept and maintained for the life of the development. The committee also granted application 26/00425/VAR for the Red Dragon Centre and County Hall, Atlantic Wharf, subject to a Section 106 agreement. This is a legal agreement between the council and a developer that sets out obligations linked to the permission. The application varies conditions 27 (Phasing Plan), 33 (Design Code), 35 (Maximum Height Parameter Plan) and 38 (Use Class Restrictions) of an existing permission. It amends the phasing plans, the land use and the green infrastructure parameters.
RESOLVED that the press and public be excluded from the hearing in accordance with paragraph 14 of the Licensing Act (Hearings) Regulations 2005, to enable the Sub-Committee to take legal advice.
(CLOSED SESSION)
Members discussed the issues relating to the application.
(OPEN SESSION)
The Lawyer advising the Sub-Committee gave a comprehensive overview of the legal advice tendered.
The Chair indicated that the Sub-Committee had considered the application and representation made and the needs and interests of all parties in terms of the Council’s Statements of Licensing Policy, statutory guidance and the requirements of the Licensing Act 2003.
The Sub‑Committee RESOLVED TO GRANT the application for a new premises licence as modified, subject to:
• Conditions consistent with the operating schedule (Appendix C),
• Mandatory conditions under the Licensing Act 2003, and
• The following modification:
Live Music
Friday & Saturday 1900- 2300
Recorded Music
Monday – Sunday 0900 - 2330
Supply of Alcohol
Monday - Sunday 1100 – 2330
1. No off sales are permitted at the premises.
2. An incident recording book, bound in numerical order, shall be maintained at the premises showing details of the date and time of all assaults, injuries, accidents or ejections, as well as details of the members of staff involved, the nature of the incident and the action/outcome. The book must be kept available for inspection by the Police and authorised officers of the Licensing Authority.
3. Comprehensive recordable CCTV system will be installed and maintained covering the trade areas whilst encompassing all ingress and egress to the premises. The system must continually record whilst the premises is open for licensable activities and during all times when customers remain at the premises. The system must be capable of providing pictures of evidential quality, in particular facial recognition. All recordings must be stored for a minimum period of 31 days with date and time. Recordings must be made available immediately upon the request of a Police or Authorised Officer.
4. The premises to keep up to date records of staff training and refresher training in respect of age-related sales including proxy sales to persons who are drunk and identifying and preventing drug misuse in written or electronic format available for inspection on request by an authorised officer.
5. The capacity of the premises will be calculated by way of fire risk assessment and staff to ensure capacity it adhered to at all times.
6. Emergency lighting and fire alarm testing to be recorded and maintained.
7. Structural safety of premises to be maintained.
8. External lighting around premises and in car park and to be maintained at all times.
9. Notices shall be clearly displayed in the premises to emphasise to customers the prohibition on providing sales of alcohol to persons under the age of eighteen years.
10. Notices shall predominantly displayed at all exists requesting patrons to respect the needs of local residents and leave the area quietly.
11. Notices shall be predominantly displayed in all areas used externally asking patrons to respect the needs of the local residents and use the area quietly.
12. No bottles, shall be moved, removed, or placed in outside areas between 0900 hours and 1800 hours.
13. Outside areas to be kept free of rubbish.
14. A Challenge 25 proof of age scheme shall be operated at the premises where the only acceptable forms of identification shall bear their photograph, date of birth and a holographic mark.
15. A log shall be kept detailing all refused sales of alcohol. The log should include the date and time of the refused sale and the name of the member of staff who refused the sale. The log shall always be available for inspection at the premises by the police or an authorised officer of the Council whilst the premises are open.
16. Key staff members to have undertaken safeguarding training and premises to have a designated safeguarding officer.
17. No adult entertainment is permitted at the premises.
Reasons for Decision
The Sub‑Committee carefully considered the application and operating schedule, the Officer’s report and agenda pack, the written and oral representations from other persons, the oral submissions made on behalf of the applicant, the Council’s Statement of Licensing Policy, and the Statutory Guidance issued under section 182 of the Licensing Act 2003.
The Sub‑Committee determined the application on its individual merits with a view to promoting the four licensing objectives.
The Sub‑Committee attached significant weight to the fact that no relevant representations were received from any Responsible Authority, including South Wales Police, licensing, Environmental Health and Trading Standards. Members considered this to be a strong indication that the application did not give rise to concerns of a regulatory nature in respect of the licensing objectives.
The Sub‑Committee carefully considered the written and oral representations from residents. These included concerns regarding noise nuisance, particularly from music and the use of the balcony area, late‑night bottling out, anti‑social behaviour, the potential change in the nature of the premises and increased use by the public, together with issues relating to traffic, parking and highway safety.
The Sub‑Committee recognised these concerns as genuinely held. However, Members noted that certain matters raised, including parking, traffic conditions and behaviour beyond the premises, are not licensable matters or are beyond the control of the premises licence holder and therefore cannot be determinative of the application. These matters were nevertheless considered insofar as they related to the licensing objectives.
The Sub‑Committee placed considerable weight on the evidence and assurances provided by the applicant. Members noted that the premises is a long‑established golf club and that the intention of the application is not to fundamentally alter the nature of the premises but to modernise its licensing arrangements and support its ongoing viability.
The Sub‑Committee noted that the applicant acknowledged the concerns raised by residents and had taken steps to address them, including agreeing to a voluntary modification to restrict bottling out to between 09:00 and 18:00 hours, and confirming that a clear point of contact would be available for local residents.
The Sub‑Committee further noted the measures in place to promote the licensing objectives, including the provision of comprehensive CCTV coverage, the operation of a Challenge 25 policy and staff training in relation to age‑restricted sales, safeguarding arrangements including designated safeguarding officers, a course marshal system, incident recording procedures and general responsible management practices.
Members were satisfied that these measures, together with the conditions attached to the licence and the agreed modification, were appropriate and proportionate to address the concerns raised.
In particular, the Sub‑Committee was satisfied that the prevention of crime and disorder would be promoted through the presence of CCTV, trained staff and established management practices. Public safety would be promoted through structured safety and safeguarding arrangements. The prevention of public nuisance would be addressed through the restriction on bottling out, together with conditions relating to noise control and the use of external areas; and the protection of children from harm would be ensured through the Challenge 25 policy, staff training and safeguarding measures.
Accordingly, the Sub‑Committee concluded that the concerns raised by residents could be appropriately mitigated by the conditions attached to the licence together with the agreed modification. Members were satisfied that those measures were necessary and proportionate to promote the licensing objectives.
In light of the absence of Responsible Authority objections, the applicant’s engagement and willingness to mitigate concerns, and the robustness of the proposed conditions and operating schedule, the Sub‑Committee determined that the grant of the premises licence, as modified, would promote the licensing objectives.
The Sub‑Committee therefore resolved to grant the application.
Right of Appeal
Any party to the decision has the right to appeal to the Magistrates’ Court within 21 days of receipt of the formal decision notice.
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 DEFERRED FOR A SITE VISIT:
5a. 25/02667/FUL – CATHAYS
Former Civic Amenity Site, Wedal Road
Re-use of former civic amenity site for waste transfer facility with retention of existing storage shipping containers and proposed siting of Bulk Carrier Units.
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 – That the following matters be dealt with as indicated:
(1)
Application 1
The Sub Committee was asked to determine if a driver remained a fit and proper person to continue to hold a Hackney Carriage / Private Hire Driver’s Licence given that a complaint had been received alleging that he failed to use the meter for a journey within the Cardiff boundary and overcharged a passenger.
Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver recalled that when the complainant had approached his taxi and asked to go to St Mellons, he told her it would likely cost more than usual as it was an event day. She said she normally paid around £20 to get to that area. Throughout the journey she was very quiet and eventually asked to be dropped off by the roundabout by Tesco, but he felt it wasn’t safe there. She paid £20 in total but no more.
Responding to questions from the Sub Committee, the driver estimated that the meter had read £25 or £26 when she got out. He was used to customers trying not to pay, especially when drunk, so he occasionally asked for a deposit, and his card machine wasn’t working at the time. He knew he had to provide that option but it had stopped working just before the journey.
Addressing the Sub Committee, the witness recalled that when she got in and asked to go to St Mellons, she told the driver she had £20 cash or could pay by card. He said it would be £30, and then immediately asked for the £20 cash. His meter wasn’t running, which he claimed was due to the event that day but she knew that wasn’t how it worked.
She added that the driver then insisted she pay another £5 by bank transfer. She tried to do this but her banking app wasn’t working, so he said he’d drive her to a cash machine to get the money. She didn’t feel safe doing that so she asked to get out. The driver asked for her name and address as she left, which she did not provide. She emphasised that whether or not she had been drinking was irrelevant.
Responding to questions from the Sub Committee, the driver suggested that he had asked for the extra money because the meter had gone above £25. The witness suggested that the meter had not been on at any time during the journey.
The second witness, who was a Licensing Enforcement officer for Cardiff Council, clarified that all journeys within the Cardiff boundary should be on the meter. He calculated the journey taken as being worth approximately £19.65, at most a couple of pounds more depending on stops and traffic lights. The £30 requested was significantly more than that in any case.
RESOLVED – that the Hackney Carriage / Private Hire Driver’s License be suspended for 28 days.
(2)
Application 2
This item was deferred to the next meeting.
(3)
Application 3
The Sub Committee was asked to determine if a driver remained a fit and proper person to continue to hold a Hackney Carriage / Private Hire Driver’s Licence given that he had been stopped by a Licensing Enforcement Officer carrying passengers within the Cardiff boundary failing to use the meter.
Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver stated that he had been waiting at the rank for a while as it was a quiet night. The customers had approached him and asked to go to Llanishen, which he said would cost £17-18 on the meter. They were happy with this so he didn’t turn the meter on, despite knowing it was a requirement.
The witness, who was a Licensing Enforcement officer for Cardiff Council, added that the vehicle had been pulled over during a licensing operation which found that the meter was either not on or not working. He spoke to the passengers, who confirmed that they were advised at the outset of the journey that it would be a cash fare of £17, and he cautioned the driver for failing to use the meter. He asked him to reset the meter afterwards, which he reluctantly accepted.
Members asked the driver if he had used the meter on his previous journeys that day, and heard that this was his first fare of the day. Members asked why the vehicle had been stopped in the first place, and heard that this was due to a defective numberplate light.
RESOLVED – that the Hackney Carriage / Private Hire Driver’s Licence be suspended for 14 days.
(4)
Application 4
This item was deferred to the next meeting.
(5)
Application 5
The Sub Committee was asked to determine if a driver remained a fit and proper person to continue to hold a Hackney Carriage / Private Hire Driver’s Licence given that a complaint had been received alleging that he failed to use the meter and charged a fare in excess of the legal tariff.
Addressing the Sub Committee, the driver stated that he didn’t remember the exact trip or the fare he charged, but if a customer felt they had been overcharged then he understood it was a serious issue. He knew he had to use the meter correctly and charge the approved fare, and he had reflected carefully since he learned of the complaint. He suggested that personal and financial pressure may had affected his judgement, and he took full responsibility and was willing to refund the customer if needed.
Members asked why the payment receipt had showed a different name to the driver, and heard that he had been temporarily using his daughter’s card reader because his was damaged. He understood that using someone else’s account was not allowed, but wanted to be able to continue working while his was broken.
Addressing the Sub Committee, the witness recalled that he had been visiting Cardiff from Glasgow last summer. He had arrived at the central railway station with a lot of bags and sought a taxi from the rank there to the Premier Inn on Pentwyn Road. He didn’t have any cash so asked the driver if he had a card reader before getting in. It had been a pleasant journey where he and the driver chatted a lot, but he was shocked when the driver told him the price was £34.50. He couldn’t see any meter to prove this was a fair price but didn’t feel he could walk away without paying, so he did so by card.
The witness added that he spoke to an Uber driver the next day who was appalled when he mentioned the cost. The other driver suggested that he make a complaint as it reflected very poorly on the city for visitors to be ripped off. The witness used several more taxis during his time in Cardiff and none of the fares were anywhere close to £34.50.
The second witness, who was a Licensing Enforcement officer for Cardiff Council, explained that he had investigated the complaint and initially found it difficult to identify the driver due to the different card reader and bank account. He had calculated the fare as having been worth approximately £19.30, and then interviewed the driver for potentially overcharging and failing to use a meter.
Responding to questions from the Sub Committee, the driver reiterated that he didn’t recall the journey in question but had learned a lesson from the complaint. The witness suggested that it was unlikely he didn’t remember it, as he had a distinctive Glaswegian accent and they had spoken in detail about the city and both of their family links there. He did not want to be refunded for the journey, only to ensure it didn’t happen to anyone else.
RESOLVED – that the Hackney Carriage / Private Hire Driver’s License be revoked.
(6)
Application 6
This item was deferred to the next meeting.
(7)
Application 7
The Sub Committee was asked to consider an application for the Grant of a Hackney Carriage / Private Hire Driver’s Licence given that the applicant had a criminal conviction and a motoring conviction contrary to the guidance.
Addressing the Sub Committee, the applicant explained that he was enthusiastic about driving and wanted it to be his livelihood. He had made mistakes in the past which had led to being disqualified, but felt he was a different person now and was fit and proper to drive taxis in Cardiff.
Members asked about his convictions and disqualification, which the applicant clarified had been for six months in 2022. He didn’t feel that his convictions had been correct decisions but he had accepted them. He had been accused of attempting to drive with a drug level above the specified limit, but emphasised that he had just been sitting in his car and not trying to drive it.
RESOLVED – that the application for the grant of a Hackney Carriage / Private Hire Driver’s Licence be refused.
(8)
Application 8
The Sub Committee was asked to consider an application for the Grant of a Hackney Carriage / Private Hire Driver’s Licence given that the applicant had motoring convictions contrary to the guidance.
Addressing the Sub Committee, the applicant stated that he wanted to contribute positively to the city. He had several convictions from 2024 but hoped he would be considered a fit and proper person. He wanted to work to support his family rather than being on benefits, and hoped he would be allowed to drive taxis as he liked driving and had a clean licence.
Members asked for more details about his convictions, which the applicant explained had been for threatening or disorderly behaviour, resisting arrest and criminal damage to a police vehicle. He accepted he had done something wrong and emphasised that he would not do it again, and had undertaken an unpaid work requirement and paid the fines. He felt that the offences had been based on a misunderstanding as he had been very new in the country at the time.
Members asked why he had not declared his convictions on his application, and heard that he had misunderstood the question as being about his driving licence rather than his personal life.
RESOLVED – that the application for the grant of a Hackney Carriage / Private Hire Driver’s Licence be refused.
(9)
Application 9
The Sub Committee was asked to consider an application for the Grant of a Hackney Carriage / Private Hire Driver’s Licence given that the applicant had motoring convictions and a previous criminal conviction contrary to the guidance.
Addressing the Sub Committee, the applicant explained that he his first conviction had been in 2018 for possession of cannabis, and he had plead guilty in court and took full responsibility for his actions. He had since been sent back to court four times for not completing a community order, but felt this was partly due to an administrative error and provided evidence that he had completed the necessary requirements.
He clarified that the other offence had involved driving a family member’s car while he didn’t have a licence. He had refused to provide a specimen following this, not realising at the time that this was a crime.
RESOLVED – that the application for the grant of a Hackney Carriage / Private Hire Driver’s Licence be refused.
(10)
Application 10
The Sub Committee was asked to consider an application for the Grant of a Hackney Carriage / Private Hire Driver’s Licence given that the applicant had motoring convictions contrary to the guidance.
Addressing the Sub Committee, the applicant explained that she had been disqualified from driving for six months in 2023 after totting up points on her licence. She hadn’t been in a good place and had been going through a difficult family time, but had overcome that now and felt she’d grown up, and the points had expired. She drove coaches for a living and was seeking a taxi licence to expand her options.
RESOLVED – that the application for the grant of a Hackney Carriage / Private Hire Driver’s Licence be approved.
RESOLVED –
(1) T H A T the reports and the feedback received in respect of observation visits
undertaken by Independent Members of the Standards Committee be noted.
(2) T H A T where matters following observation visits are highlighted by
Independent Members, as issues requiring further attention or further visits and / or
requests are made by the Monitoring Officer / Head of Legal and Democratic
Services for visits to be undertaken, these be arranged as and when required.
(3) T H A T the proposal for observations to be held within the 2026 – 27
Municipal Year, as presented within Appendix 1 of the report, be agreed.
Reasons for decisions
(1) Having regard to the observations undertaken and the role of the Standards
Committee.
(2) To maintain a watching brief having regard to the role of the Standards
Committee and the Monitoring Officer.
(3) To complete the two-year observation cycle, as previously agreed by the
Committee, having regard to the outcomes of the 2025 Boundary Commission for
Wales Community Review.
26-03-26 Minutes and DN (AR)
RESOLVED: Council AGREED:
1.
To delegate authority to the Corporate Director, Resources, in consultation with the Director of Governance & Legal Services and Monitoring Officer, to proceed with the public advertisement and convening of a Member Appointment Panel for the appointment of an Independent Non-Executive Director to fill the vacancy due to arise on the Board of Cardiff Bus;
2.
To approve the establishment of a Member Appointment Panel, comprised of three Labour; one Liberal Democrat and one Conservative Member, with delegated authority to interview suitable candidates and make an appointment to fill the vacant Independent Non-Executive Director position on the Board of Cardiff Bus.
RESOLVED: that
1. the consultation plan to undertake a statutory 12-week consultation on the Draft Active Travel Network Map be approved.
2. authority be delegated to the Director of Planning, Transport & Environment to consider the feedback to the consultation on the draft Active Travel Network Map and approve any amendments thereto that are considered appropriate
3. authority be delegated to the Director of Planning, Transport & Environment to submit the final version of the Active Travel Network Map to the Welsh Ministers for approval in accordance with the timetable set out by Welsh Government.
RESOLVED: that
1. Authority be delegated to the Director of Planning, Transport and Environment (in consultation with the Corporate Director for Resources and Cabinet Member for Climate Change, Strategic Planning & Transport) to finalise and award the Stage 2 Construction Contract to John Graham Construction Limited.
2. It be noted that this delegation is conditional upon the overall project cost remaining within the approved budget and the Project Team providing assurance to the Programme Board that the project funding is adequate.
3. authority be delegated to the Director of Planning, Transport and Environment (in consultation with the Corporate Director for Resources and Cabinet Member for Climate Change, Strategic Planning & Transport) to vary the Stage 1 ECI contract to cover all costs incurred to date, to approve any future Compensation Events under the NEC contract, and to enable defined packages of enabling works, utility diversions and site?set?up activities to proceed in advance of the Stage 2 Notice to Proceed.
4. the risks included within the report be noted.
5. It be noted that several elements associated with the award of this contract are commercially sensitive and are therefore provided within the confidential appendices. These include all information relating to cost, funding and programme. This information must remain confidential to protect the Council’s commercial position, and no Notice to Proceed will be issued until the conditions set out in this report and its appendices have been satisfied.
RESOLVED: that
1. the strategic approach detailed in this report to develop an additional Green Crematorium and Wake facility be agreed.
2. Authority be delegated to the Director of Planning, Transport & Environment, in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Waste, Street Scene & Environmental Services, the Corporate Director for Resources, and the Director of Governance and Legal Services to
· allocate funding to allow a formal pre-application enquiry for the development on the site of the Dutch Garden Centre
· develop a business case which will include extensive consultation with residents and stakeholders
· submit a full planning application for consideration by Planning Committee in early 2027.
3. It be noted that a further report will be brought to Cabinet in Spring/Summer 2027 which will include final details of design, layout and updated construction costs.
RESOLVED: that
1) the strategy set out in the report and at Confidential Appendix 1 for delivery of a permanent car park at the ISV site be approved and authority be delegated to the Director of Economic Development in consultation the Cabinet Member for Investment & Development, the Legal Officer and the Section 151 Officer to:
a. Deal with all aspects of the procurement of a contractor/energy developer to deliver the car park and any associated energy infrastructure.
b. Deal with all aspects of the disposal of the area of land set out at Confidential Appendix 1 in accordance with independent valuation advice to fund any financial contribution required by the Council following the procurement process set out at (a) above, with a further Cabinet decision required if the scale of Council contribution exceeds the value of this land.
2) a soft market exercise be approved as set out at Confidential Appendix 4 to consider the potential disposal of the Cardiff Ice Arena (CIA) and return to Cabinet to consider the market response.
3) a soft market exercise be approved as set out at Confidential Appendix 4 to consider the external operation and/or disposal of the Cardiff International White Water (CIWW) and return to Cabinet to consider the market response.
4) Subject to approval of the parking strategy at (1) above, the amendment to the Option Agreement with Cardiff Peninsula Consortium Limited to include the land indicated on the plan at Confidential Appendix 2 for the delivery of obligations set out at Confidential Appendix 1 be noted.
5) a disposal or long-term lease of the Toys R Us building to the current sub-tenant of the Cardiff Ice Arena be approved subject to independent valuation advice and in accordance with the draft Heads of Terms attached at Confidential Appendix 5.
6) Subject to the formal agreement of residents, the Council taking ownership of the boardwalk at the ISV site be approved, as illustrated by the plan attached at Appendix 6 and in line with the financial plan outlined at Confidential Appendix 1.