Cost of Living Support Icon



Minutes of a meeting held on 14th September, 2017.


Present:  Councillor V.J. Bailey (Chairman): Councillor M. Lloyd (Vice-Chairman); Councillors V.P. Driscoll, G. John, Mrs. A. Moore, Ms. S. Sivagnanam and S.T. Wiliam.


Also present: Councillors G.A. Cox (Cabinet Member) and L.O. Rowlands.



262     APOLOGIES –


These were received from Councillors Mrs. P. Drake, S.T. Edwards and A.R. Robertson.



263     MINUTES – 


RECOMMENDED – T H A T the minutes of the meeting held on 13th July, 2017 be approved as a correct record.





No declarations were received.





Following introductions the Chairman advised all present of the procedure to be followed in considering the report as below:- 

  • departmental Officer to present the report
  • representative from ARCADIS  Ms. Janice Hughes -  presentation on the Consultant’s report
  • three members of the public who had registered to speak
  • Elected Members of the Council not on the Committee 
  • Cabinet Member
  • Members of the Committee who would consider all evidence presented.  

The Principal Transport and Road Safety officer informed all present that the report had been referred to the Scrutiny Committee by Cabinet on 31st July, 2017 for consideration who had made the following:


(1)       T H A T the report be referred to the Scrutiny Committee (Environment and Regeneration) for consideration.


(2)       T H A T subject to resolution 1 above, the contents of the report and accompanying appendices be noted and agreed.


(3)       T H A T subject to resolution 1 above, a Stage 2 Welsh Transport Appraisal Guidance (WelTAG) Report be undertaken for Dinas Powys for the Stage 1 short listed options of Do-Minimum, Multi Modal and Bypass.


(4)       T H A T subject to resolution 1 above, the Stage 2 Welsh Transport Appraisal Guidance (WelTAG) Report, once completed, be presented to Cabinet and the Scrutiny Committee (Environment and Regeneration) for consideration in Spring 2018.


(5)       T H AT the Review Group established to guide the Welsh Transport Appraisal Guidance (WelTAG) process should include local business representatives, to be agreed by the Director of Environment and Housing and the Cabinet Member for Neighbourhood Services and Transport.


Cabinet had been requested to agree the Welsh Transport Appraisal Guidance (WelTAG) Stage 1 Report undertaken by Arcadis Consulting UK Limited (Arcadis) on Improving Strategic Transport for Dinas Powys.  Arcadis had been commissioned by the Council in early 2017 to develop and appraise potential options for improving the strategic transport network for Dinas Powys including transport corridors from Biglis roundabout, Barry, through Dinas Powys to Cardiff via Leckwith, Cogan and Penarth.  Appendix A to the report provided a map of the study area.  The appraisal options were in accordance with Welsh Government’s latest version (June 2016) of the WelTAG and the report highlighted that all transport schemes in Wales needed to go through the WelTAG process to be put forward for Welsh Government funding and accepted schemes for transport funding needed to demonstrate value for money.


The study had been required because of the high traffic flows experienced in the area with frequent traffic congestion causing delays and poor journey time reliability.  Furthermore, public transport in the area was at capacity during peak periods of travel and there were limited walking and cycling opportunities. 


Janice Hughes, representing Arcadis Design and Consultancy informed Committee that in undertaking the study, consultation had been undertaken with key stakeholders on Tuesday, 7th March, 2017 at the Parish Hall, Britway Road, Dinas Powys.  Stakeholders included key employers, public organisations, transport providers and the Local Authority.  At the consultation the concept was discussed and problems identified, together with opportunities and constraints and the setting of objectives being identified and potential transport options discussed.  A public meeting also took place on Monday, 13th March, 2017 again in the Parish Hall, with the public being afforded the opportunity to provide feedback on identified options, opportunities and constraints, as well as consideration and suggestions for the objectives and potential transport options.


Following the consultation 95 feedback forms had been received with the key issues raised being reported as: 

  • Need for a bypass (44%)
  • Larger trains with more capacity / frequency (43%)
  • Improve footpaths / cycle infrastructure (34%)
  • Improve rad safety for cyclists and pedestrians (21%)
  • More reliable / frequent bus services (19%). 

Ten problems were also identified:


Identification of Problems

  • Poor quality bus stops with limited facilities
  • Poor interchange facilities at railway stations (including poor parking opportunities)
  • Overcrowding on peak rail services
  • Overcrowding on peak bus services
  • Poor infrastructure and local connectivity by walking and cycling
  • A4055 creating severance within the community (e.g. access to schools and other facilities/ services)
  • High local traffic flows leading to congestion, capacity issues at junctions, environmental impacts (air quality and noise pollution) and unreliable journey times
  • High use of the car for local and regional trips (e.g. journeys to work)
  • Occurrence of accidents along key strategic routes, especially the A4055
  • Residential land use development within Vale of Glamorgan will compound existing traffic issues and increase pressure on public transport services. 

With regard to opportunities and constraints the following had been identified :-



  • Proximity to major employment and services means large volume of transport movements to and from Cardiff, from Dinas Powys and Barry and Vale
  • Significant facilities and services in close proximity with potential for access by sustainable modes
  • Dinas Powys has good potential accessibility by non-car means
  • Metro improvements, including more frequent rail services
  • Bus priority and service enhancements
  • Walking and cycling improvements
  • Highway junction / off-line capacity improvements
  • Road safety improvements
  • Interchange improvements in services and facilities
  • New Wales rail franchise
  • Park and Ride facilities
  • Promotion and marketing of all modes
  • Reduce the adverse environmental impacts of the transport system
  • New development to be accessible by sustainable modes. 


  • Traffic issues related to being on strategic corridor and difficult to solve alone from measures in Dinas Powys
  • Policy context (which was also an opportunity)
  • Potential need for third party land to deliver improvements
  • Funding availability
  • Location of existing services and facilities within Dinas Powys (which was also an opportunity). 

The strategic outline case document set out the strategic case for change and assessed each of the intervention options to examine how they would meet the objectives together with the identification of key risks, adverse impacts, constraints and dependencies.  The transport objectives for the study that were agreed were reported as follows: 

  • Objective 1 – Support sustainable connectivity in Cardiff City region
  • Objective 2 – Facilitate and support economic growth
  • Objective 3 – Improving health and wellbeing
  • Objective 4 – Improved safety and security
  • Objective 5 – Benefits and minimised impacts on the environment. 

As a result of the evidence seven options were assessed as follows: 

  • Do minimum
  • Enhanced rail services and interchange
  • Improved bus services and infrastructure
  • Enhanced walking and cycling connectivity
  • Online highway improvements
  • By-pass
  • Multi-modal option. 

Committee was informed that the options appraisal to assess the long list of options, included considering how the option tackled the identified problems, how the option met the objectives, assessment of risk, consideration of any adverse impacts, constraints and any dependencies. 


The report recommended three options to be taken forward to WelTAG Stage 2  : 

  • Do minimum
  • By-pass
  • Multi-modal option. 

The main impacts of “do minimum” were reported as: 

  • Adverse effect at meeting the objectives, due to the modest levels of funding currently able to be invested in transport infrastructure and public transport services.
  • Background increases in population and traffic growth exceed investment provision to mitigate increasing impacts and pressure on the existing transport network.
  • A negative impact on the environment is forecast as the traffic levels through Dinas Powys would continue to increase. 

The impacts in relation to the “by-pass” were: 

  • Could improve local journey times for drivers and public transport, depending on time savings on the route compared to existing. Given that route would still be subject to delays at key junctions to the east, this may not be significant.
  • Improved air quality and noise benefits for residents along Cardiff Road and potentially road safety benefits, depending on level of traffic that uses the new link.
  • Environmental impacts on landscape, ecology, heritage etc. of new link through countryside.
  • Very high cost and delivery issues.
  • Requires traffic analysis and further consideration of environmental issues. 

The main impacts for “multi-modal” were reported as : 

  • Potential to improve accessibility.
  • Improved road safety and journey time reliability.
  • Benefits for health and wellbeing of walking and cycling measures.
  • Neutral environmental impact.
  • Moderate to high cost and deliverability issues if need third party land.
  • Need for further analysis on options and impacts. 

In conclusion Ms. Hughes advised that the next steps were to undertake the Stage 2 study and to further consider the recommended options, which required additional evidence and consultation to support decision making. 


Following the above presentation the first registered public speaker was afforded the opportunity to make their representations to the Committee.  Mr. Rod Harrod commenced by advising that the Committee had three options for consideration and that some people may wonder why the multi-modal option did not include a by-pass.  He stated that this was because Arcadis, at page 19 of the report, stated that it would “combine to create a high cost option and may potentially detract from the rail investment elements of the package by improving car journey times”.  Mr. Harrod stated that without the by-pass this option would not improve journey times or reduce congestion for Dinas Powys and that in any case the extra passenger benefit from rail investment would be constrained by the Dinas Powys’ stations inadequate platform length and land available for car parking.  He stated that 78% of the commuters in Dinas Powys used a car, van or motor cycle to go to work with 22% combined use by bus, train, cycle or walking.  He stated that of course non-car travel options were desirable, but that did not mean they would magically work regardless of increasing traffic congestion.  A total of 4,000 homes at Barry Waterfront, 450 in Dinas Powys and over 1,500 properties in adjoining settlements without improving the highway infrastructure had meant something had to give and he further stated that by-passes had been built around every other settlement on the Vale’s strategic highway corridors except for Dinas Powys.  Mr. Harrod further stated that a by-pass would benefit residents throughout the Vale and it could easily include park and ride facilities, cycle paths and walkways but, in his view, the report did not examine these possibilities.  It could also improve access between communities along its path, but instead in his view individual options had been put together to form an ineffective multi-modal.  In referring again to page 19 of the report, he stated that this referred to a single route for the southern part of a by-pass although alternative routes were possible and may offer greater benefits if considered at the outset of Stage 2.  Information, he stated, that “do minimum” was not a solution, the multi-model would be ineffective unless traffic congestion was first reduced and that the by-pass could be improved by adding sustainable elements such as a park and ride facilities, cycle tracks and walkways. 


Mr. Roger Pattenden, in making his representations to the Committee, stated that he did not see how the three options shortlisted in the report could be compared as they were, in his view, unequal.  Again, in his view, only the by-pass would significantly reduce traffic congestion and improve vehicle journey times including the buses.  Without a by-pass there would be insufficient long term economic employment, social and environmental benefits.  In referring to the public consultation held on 13th March, he stressed that the majority of respondents had identified the need for a by-pass and requested weight and speed restrictions on the A4055 through Dinas Powys.  During that consultation they drew attention to the juggernauts and HGVs that polluted and endangered the lives of children at the local junior school on the road.  However, Arcadis he stated had noted that such restrictions were not possible while the road remained an A road, however a by-pass could become the A road turning the Cardiff Road through Dinas Powys into a B road with restrictions. 


The Arcadis report also referred to a review group created by officials to oversee and guide the study work.  Although a number of representatives were included, 78% of local communities who travelled by caravan were not yet represented on the group. 


It was accepted that any option must include increasing the capacity of the critical Merrie Harrier junction and Mr. Pattenden also hoped that another would be considered at Stage 2, being the safety improvements on the route through Dinas Powys Old Village along Pen-y-Turnpike to Leckwith as there had recently been a three car pile-up on this narrow road and the road itself had fast become a “rat run”.  He feared that the current short list for Stage 2 may not allow investigation of combinations for a by-pass with sustainable improvements and urged the Committee to consider asking Cabinet to review the scope of Stage 2 to cover investigation of the various proposals and combinations mentioned.


Mr. Edward Jenkins BEM referred to previous proposals for a by-pass in 2008 and the public consultation that had been held at that time including a major developer who had agreed to underwrite the by-pass and he advised that there was no element in the Arcadis report referring to these proposals from 2008 and hoped that the work that had been done previously would be shared with Arcadis.  In referring to the frequent reference to the A4055, he stressed that this certainly needed to be looked at together with traffic management throughout Dinas Powys. 


Councillor Robert Crowley, not a member of the Committee, was granted permission to speak and raised concern as to how the options had been short listed and scored.  The scores for the by-pass he stated appeared pessimistic and at odds with the statements quoted in the Arcadis report and that if buses were being stuck in traffic jams he could not see how the option was being rated as good and that the multi-modal option had received the highest score, but the by-pass had not.  In conclusion Councillor Crowley commented that it was important to consider the economic and environmental future of the Vale and that as a result, different options should be considered at Stage 2. 


Ms. Hughes, in response, advised that currently there was no evidence available and that proper traffic modelling needed to be done to assess the benefits.  Stage 2 was meant to look at more options to provide the evidence base to assist decision making.  The Principal Transport and Road Safety Officer advised that the Council did need to look at the by-pass as one option and that if there was a perceived then this could be addressed at Stage 3.  The officer also referred to page 20 of the report which advised the main impact of multi-modal main was to improve road safety and journey time.  It was important, she stated, that all options were looked at.


A Member of the Committee advised that he could see the reasons why the options needed to be separate, but it was more logical in his view that they be combined and that it was important that the multi-modal and by-pass be considered together. 


Following a further query as to clarity regarding where the by-pass would commence, the officer advised that the original by-pass investigated in 2008 commenced at the Biglis roundabout rather than the Merrie Harrier, although other options could be considered.  A local Member referred to a previous option known as the Northern Line and reminded Members of the potential for significant building development that could be undertaken which could also exacerbate the problem. The Managing Director advised if a by-pass came out as a favoured option, the Council could look at what had been suggested in the past and assess the relevance of that evidence for today.  As one of the key issues of the new road would be where it would start and end any work / evidence from the in the past would be relevant. The Managing Director further commented that paragraph 17 of the report made it clear that no route had yet been specified, although the Arcadis report assumed a line similar to the UDP.


The Cabinet Member, with permission to speak, advised that he had made the point to Cabinet recently that it was not just a by-pass for Dinas Powys, it would improve transport links in the south eastern part of the Vale. 


The Chairman advised that his concern was that the way the Arcadis report was written, the multi-modal option was so far ahead that the by-pass did not rank high enough to be pursued through to Stage 3.  Consideration of the by-pass with the multi-modal model was, in his view, the best option and suggested that rather than just considering them in isolation, could they both be added together at Stage 2 in order that aspects of the multi-modal could be considered with the by-pass suggestions. 


The Director of Arcadis advised that there was no reason that they could not be combined but that further evidential work needed to be undertaken at Stage 2 in order to make the recommendations to Stage 3.  It was however, important to note that the by-pass would need walking, cycling and bus service improvements as well.


The Managing Director advised that in any event notwithstanding what outcomes could be made at stage 2 there could in effect be a suite of measures recommended.


A Member of the Committee stated that they welcomed the report as an attempt to address the issues in a holistic approach. He believed that there was a major agreement for a by-pass and queried the hopes for funding as to whether it would be 50:50  Vale of Glamorgan and Welsh Government and also queried the details of the plans for bus and rail and cycle path timeframes. 


The Principal Officer advised that the Vale franchise was currently being considered at the moment but would not be known until March 2018.  The bus services had undertaken quite a few studies to look at the corridor and there were plans in place for the Merrie Harrier and Cogan areas with funding to undertake a study.  For walking and cycling, Biglis roundabout at Dinas Powys was the major route and there had been a number of studies completed in relation to this.  Currently the Council had funding for J34 and once all the studies were complete, they would be reported to Members for consideration. 


A Committee Member from Dinas Powys commented that more detail, he hoped, would come through the Stage 2 process, as he stated that he was not sure where the 44% figures referred to had arisen from and anticipated that the Stage 2 process would provide a cost benefit analysis on the impact on the economy of the congestion.  The Principal Officer advised that an analysis would be undertaken at that stage. 


In acknowledging that the report appeared to be weighted in favour of organisations such as the rail service and not road users and motorists the Chairman considered that there was a need for greater community representation and that an invitation should be extended to a representative to be nominated by the Community Council.


The Principal Officer advised that the Road Haulage Association and Freight Transport Association had recently been engaged as part of the group and that officers would have no objections to a representative nominated by the Community Council.




(1)       T H A T Cabinet be requested to consider the appointment of a representative by Dinas Powys Community Council of their choosing to sit on the review group.


(2)       T H A T Cabinet be requested to consider an additional fourth option to the three proposed of a “bypass and multi modal” at Stage 2 of the process as below: 

  • Do minimum
  • By-pass
  • Multi-modal option.
  • By-pass and Multi-modal  

Reasons for recommendations


(1)       To ensure that a local voice is represented on the review group.


(2)       To ensure that both models are considered together.





Prior to commencement of the presentation, the Chairman took the opportunity to thank the Operational Manager for Highways and Engineering and the Democratic and Scrutiny Services Officer for the arrangements made in respect of the site visits in and around the Vale of Glamorgan to various road surfaces that afternoon.  Members of the Committee had been requested to provide details of areas that they wished to consider and the site visit had been arranged to be undertaken prior to the presentation being made to the Committee. The purpose of the site visit he stated had been to discuss the merits of inclusions and the possibility of considering other roads for the plan.


The Operational Manager commenced by way of background advising that the Council had a statutory responsibility to maintain the highway and that   

  • The Local Highway Network was a significant Council Asset
  • Used by the public, business and visitors and vital to economic and transportation needs of the Vale
  • The Council had some 1,067km of road comprising A, B, C Class roads as well as unclassified roads 

The Highway Maintenance Responsibilities included:

  • A Statutory Function to maintain the highway
  • Reactive Maintenance involved regular inspections to identify defects
  • And the Planned Maintenance programme uses three year plan as a basis to prioritise works 

The Three Year Plan

  • Carriageway Surface Prioritisation Scoring System considered 8 criteria
  • The criteria allowed a weighted score out of 400
  • Assisted decision making to targets capital expenditure where it was most effective
  • Road surface condition was continually changing


Carriageway Resurfacing Prioritisation Scoring System




Data Factor

Maximum Score


Road classification

A Road





B Road





C Road





Unclassified / Rural









Scanner Survey Data




















Visual Assessment

V1 – No defects





V2 – Cracking





V3 – Defects present





V4 – Multiple defects





V5 - Unserviceable









Engineers Assessment

0 to 80









Third Party Claims

(last 3 years)











3 or more









ONE VALE complaints











3 or more









Bus Routes










Maintenance Costs

(over one year)

Under £1,000






£1,000 > £3,000





Over £3,000








Theorectional Maximum is 400


The Maintenance Methods used were

  • Resurfacing
  • Surface Dressing
  • Micro Asphalt 

The presentation which was also tabled at the meeting and would be uploaded to the Council website provide detail on covered each method together with slides of before and after resurfacing work that had been undertaken.


In referring to the scoring mechanism, the Operational Manager advised that this generally provided an objective assessment on key criteria.  He stated  that the main A Roads also had a scanner survey applied to them with visual inspection still remaining a key element which had a high weighting in the criteria.  This could provide a good indication of the conditions of the road.  Third party claims and bus routes were also considered to be a good evidence base when identifying roads for resurfacing.  The three year plan covered resurfacing, surface dressing and micro asphalt and these were generally assessed by engineering assessments.  The decision-making scoring system allowed the department to put together the three year plan, but this was of course also dependent on budget availability.  The annual status options report had advised that the Council should be spending over £2m a year but the budget for such a suggestion was just not available.


A Member referred to a recent Council meeting where in their view the Cabinet Member’s response had advised that a new scheme for resurfacing would be put in place. The Cabinet Member with permission to speak advise that at that time he was referring to the extra £500,000 that had been put into the budget to undertake resurfacing work. 


Councillor N. Moore, who was not present at the meeting, but had requested that some queries be tabled for Members’ consideration raised the issue that at the last meeting of the Committee when it was suggested that a presentation be made to the next meeting he had referred to the high scores in the surface dressing programme and asked officers to reconsider a better chart to identify how the scores were arrived at. The purpose for which he suggested for all to be able to understand as he considered the current system to be difficult for lay people to understand.  Councillor Moore had also produced a suggested scoring plan for road resurfacing for officers to consider. 


Councillor Moore further queried that if the scores were accurate how many other roads had a score of 370/400 or whether those shown were the only roads at that level. The appendix at the last meeting had also given a simple alphabetical list of roads and did not prioritise the programme in relation to the severity of the road or the order in which they would be dealt with. Lastly he queried if the tabled roads at the last meeting had actually been completed.


The Operational Manager reassured Members that all the work that was undertaken was to industry standards and that the three year plan was a good starting point. It allowed the Council to apply a prioritisation system and allowed officers a very good basis to understand the needs of the network.  It also allowed officers to identify roads and undertake further investigations, identify the scores and to a certain extent, the work was based on officers’ appraisal as outlined in the criteria.  As a Council it was important to rely on the technical judgement of officers to make the best judgments, deciding on the roads that needed treatment in order that the budgets could be placed appropriately. 


The Operational Manager stated that following the site visits that afternoon he would be happy to look at a number of the suggestions made and urged Members that if they had any concerns in relation to the three year plan, to contact him direct.  As a result of the site visits, he would also consider reviewing Vere Street and Dobbins Road.  He stressed that he was keen to provide the best highway network the Council could provide within the limited budgets available.  The Operational Manager further stressed that one of the reasons he was attending the meeting was to allow openness and transparency and frank discussion to take place aswell as to provide Members with a full appreciation of the Plan. He reiterated the importance for professional officers to apply scoring criteria as appropriate.  However, he advised that he would worry that Members took the scoring systems too literally as there needed to be flexibility.  At this point the Chairman reiterated that the assessments could be treated as a guide.


A Committee Member also took the opportunity to say that he had welcomed the visits that afternoon which he had found both informative and interesting and that with the presentation, all the issues that they would have queried had been covered.


Although acknowledging that Members did not need the data for every road, the Chairman asked if more significant detail could be provided.  The Operational Manager advised that the Plan was available on the Council’s website but that if Members wanted more detailed information this would take additional officer time. However, although he considered the scoring system was adequate, open and transparent that if any Member wished to receive further information on the scoring system, he would be happy to meet with them on an individual basis.


Having considered the report, it was subsequently


RECOMMENDED – T H A T the presentation and the responses provided by the officer at the meeting be noted and accepting that the Operational Manager had considered to review some road surfaces following the site visit undertaken by Members.


Reason for recommendation


Having considered the report, the officer’s response and following the Committee site visit undertaken that afternoon.





In presenting the report, the Managing Director advised that the performance report was structured as follows:


Page 2 provided an explanation of the performance terms used within the report.  The performance report used a traffic light system that is a Red, Amber or Green (RAG) status and Direction of Travel (DOT) indicator to aid performance analysis.


Section 1 covered Outcome Summary


Section 2 covered Performance Snapshot;


Section 3 highlighted the Key Achievements and Challenges to date;


Section 4 provided a Summary of the Key Issues relating to the use of resources and the impact on delivering improvement during the quarter;


Appendices 1, 2 and 3 referred to more service specific indicators.


An overall Amber RAG status had been attributed to Well-being Outcome 2: “An Environmentally Responsible and Prosperous Vale” reflecting the good progress made to date towards achieving improved outcomes for residents and customers.


In referring to the report, a Member queried the installation of the LED lighting system in residential areas of the Vale but queried  why Pencoedtre had been identified for the pilot as in their view, there were far more areas in the Vale which had more issues.  The Managing Director stated that it was highly likely that the area had been chosen as it was a good mix of urban and rural. 


The Managing Director referred to the indicator in relation to litter as being one of concern and although Members considered that this was a difficult area to sort, the Managing Director advised that it was important that the Council was clear on how it is measured and whether or not departments were doing themselves an injustice.  He was that other Local Authorities were reporting achievements of 100% but in his view this was nigh on impossible to undertake.  Further work on identifying how it was measured was therefore he felt necessary.


In referring to the Beach Huts Policy and whether this would be referred back to the Scrutiny Committee for further consideration, both the Managing Director and the Cabinet Member advised that this would be referred to the Scrutiny Committee for consideration at the appropriate time, over the coming months. 


RECOMMENDED – T H A T the Quarter 1 performance monitoring report and the remedial actions to be undertaken to address areas of underperformance and to tackle the key challenges identified be noted.


Reason for recommendation


Having assessed the performance in line with the requirement to secure continuous improvement outlined in the Local Government Measure (Wales) 2009 and reflecting the requirement of the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act that it maximise its contribution to achieving the well-being goals for Wales.





The purpose of the report was to provide Committee with an update report on issues discussed during the Business Breakfast on the topic of the Cardiff Capital Region City Deal held at the Vale of Glamorgan Agricultural Show on 9th August, 2017.  The delegate feedback report was attached at Appendix A to the report.


The Business Breakfast had been attended by representatives from Cardiff Capital Region Councils, business representatives as well as those presenting, further and higher education, the airport and Enterprise Zone.  The event had been hosted by the Council and included contributions from Councillor John Thomas, the Leader of the Council, Rob Thomas, the Managing Director, and the Rt. Hon. Alun Cairns MP, Secretary of State for Wales.


The Chairman welcomed the report and thanked the Managing Director for the opportunity afforded for the Business Breakfast to take place, acknowledging that on his table members of the public were present and a number of key issues as outlined on the last page of the document were discussed. These which included strategic transport, the need to resolve ongoing congestion around Newport and the Brynglas Tunnels, the need to secure local infrastructure improvements to support new housing development, the role of the region in providing sustainable green energy and improving skills and training. 




(1)       T H A T the success of the Council’s Business Breakfast be noted.


(2)       T H A T delegate feedback report on the Business Breakfast held on 9th August attached at Appendix A to the report be endorsed and issued to all delegates.


(3)       T H A T the recommendations of the Committee be referred to Cabinet for consideration.


Reasons for recommendations


(1)       To note the success of the event.


(2)       To allow feedback to delegates who attended the event.


(3)       In recognition of the success of the event and to seek Cabinet approval.





The Democratic and Scrutiny Services Officer, in presenting the report, advised that in accordance with Section 7.4.4 of the Council’s Constitution, Scrutiny Committees must report annually to Full Council on their workings and made recommendations for their future work programmes and amend their working methods if appropriate. 


The draft Annual Report, attached at Appendix A to the report, detailed the role of scrutiny, how scrutiny was undertaken in the Vale and highlighted key achievements from the work of each Scrutiny Committee, including significant events during the year and future working.  As a result of the Local Government elections and the changes to membership of Scrutiny Committees, the report had not been referred to the Scrutiny Committee Chairmen and Vice-Chairmen Group for consideration this year as that Group had also not met as of yet.


The Democratic and Scrutiny Services Team had drafted the report based on the work of the previous Committees and the officer referred in particular to the comments made by the Auditor on page 14 of the document in that “Overall, the changes the Council is in the process of implementing represented an opportunity to ensure scrutiny activity has maximum impact by 

  • Aligning forward work programmes to focus on key issues;
  • Freeing up agenda time to focus on a more limited number of items in-depth, thereby increasing efficiency as well as impact;
  • Improving the information scrutiny received by aligning financial and performance information with other important information, such as the citizen view, and increasing the focus on outcomes, and supporting consideration of value for money.” 

The Homes and Safe Communities Scrutiny Committee had also considered the report at a recent meeting and under “Public Engagement” on page 14 had requested further paragraphs be added to promote public engagement which were tabled at the meeting for the Scrutiny Committee’s consideration.


Public Engagement


A Member of the public may register to speak at any of the five Scrutiny Committees.  Registration can be completed online or by calling the Democratic and Scrutiny Services Section.  A Guide to Public Speaking at Scrutiny Meetings has been made available to members of the public via the Council’s website and can be found at:


Members of the public are also welcome to submit written representations to the Committee that can be included on the agenda for the forthcoming Committee meeting.


Matters can also be discussed with Scrutiny Committee Members by contacting them directly. 


Councillors are able to submit a “Request for Consideration” and / or “call-in” a decision made by the Cabinet that would result in the matter being considered by the appropriate Scrutiny Committee. 


Contact details for the Vale of Glamorgan Councillors can be found on the Vale of Glamorgan Council’s website at:


Having considered the report, it was subsequently


RECOMMENDED – T H A T the additions as recommended by the Homes and Safe Communities Scrutiny Committee to the public engagement section of the report be agreed and the draft Scrutiny Committees’ Annual Report be approved for submission to Full Council.


Reason for recommendation


In light of comments received from the Homes and Safe Communities Scrutiny Committee and to allow the report to be submitted to Full Council in September 2017.





The Democratic and Scrutiny Services Officer advised that the report provided details of progress in relation to the Scrutiny Committee’s recommendations for the 1st Quarter April to June 2017 which were attached at Appendix A to the report and detailed the updated Work Programme Schedule for 2017/18 at Appendix B.


In considering Appendix B, the Chairman asked whether the Vibrant and Viable Places report could be expedited to include the focus on Barry.  The Managing Director advised that the current thinking for the VVP2 by Welsh Government was that the grant was allocated on a regional basis and agreed that Barry could be considered for incorporating within that remit. Following a query as to whether the officers were currently looking at specific issues in relation to Barry, the Operational Manager advised that they had to be cautious at this stage. Some ideas had been considered but that it was important to hold those ideas close until applications were to be made.  The Managing Director advised that for the Council there were a number of large items that warranted further consideration for example Cardiff Airport and St. Athan as well as the regeneration of Barry Town and advised that with specific regard to the City Deal, all of the Local Authorities involved were currently working on the Business Plan on a regional basis.

The Chairman in conclusion referred to his request at the Agenda Conference for a report on public transport to be brought to the Committee to include the issue of the T9 and whether it was cost efficient and had requested that this report be brought for either the October or November meeting and that bus operators be invited to also attend the meeting. 


Having considered the report, it was subsequently




(1)       T H A T the actions listed in Appendix A to the report as completed be approved.


13 June 2017

Min. No. 40 – Introduction   to the Environment and Regeneration Scrutiny Committee – Recommended that the   officers be thanked for a comprehensive presentation and the presentation be   noted and uploaded to the website.

Presentation uploaded to   the Council’s website on 14th June, 2017.


Min. No. 41 – 4th   Quarter Scrutiny Decision Tracking of Recommendations and Proposed Work   Programme Schedule 2017/18 (MD) – Recommended

(2)   That the work programme be amended to   include the reports as outlined above and uploaded to the Council’s website.

[Report in relation to   broad band in rural areas to support the local economy; report on Vibrant and   Viable Places 2 (Nov); Business breakfast at Vale Show to consider issues on   the City Deal / feedback report following the Vale Show (Autumn); Dinas Powys   bypass; Reshaping Services iro Parks and Grounds Maintenance Services]

Work programme amended and   uploaded to the Council’s website.



(2)       T H A T the Work Programme Schedule be amended as outlined above to include the further reports requested and that the amended Work Programme Schedule be approved and uploaded to the Council’s website. 


Reasons for recommendations


(1)       To maintain effective tracking of the Committee’s recommendations.


(2)       Following consideration at the meeting.