Mixed leisure development at Land To The South West Of The A470/A4102 Roundabut At Rhydycar West Merthyr Tydfil
Summary of planning committee decision
Decided by Merthyr Tydfil Planning, Regulatory and Licensing on 8 Jul 2026.
What was proposed
An outline application proposed a large leisure resort with a snow centre, water park, activity centre, hotels, lodges, parking and supporting infrastructure.
“An indoor snow centre (up to 39,200m²); • An indoor tropical waterpark (up to 7500m²); • An indoor activity centre (up to 9,000 m²); • External activity area; • Hotel accommodation (up to 418 bedrooms); • Woodland lodge accommodation (up to 30 units); • Car parking (up to 830 spaces); and…”
“The masterplan suggests that the main built development (including the snow centre, hotels, waterpark and activity centre) would be located in the northern part of the site, designed around a central piazza. The proposed outdoor adventure area and woodland lodge accommodation would be located in the southern part of the site. An ‘emergency’ access is shown which would be provided via the footpath/bridleway located in the south-eastern corner of the site.”
Officer report
The site and its history
The 30.4-hectare site is open countryside with former mining and ironstone workings, historic assets, ecological designations, woodland and public rights of way.
“The previous industrial uses ceased on site many years ago and the site has been naturally reclaimed with significant portions of the site being covered by dense woodland and other ecological features. Given the extent of the vegetation, the time that has elapsed since the previous industrial use and the ecological designations across the site, it cannot be considered that the site meets the definition of previously developed land as set out by Planning Policy Wales 12.”
“As stated above, the site is subject to a number of ecological designations, namely; The Cwmglo and Glyndyrus Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), the Rhydycar West Site of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINC), a portion of Ancient Woodland and the woodland in the west and south-west covered by a Tree Preservation Order (TPO) Number 15.”
Officer report
What officers recommended
Officers recommended refusal because the development would harm the SSSI, biodiversity and landscape, and the economic and social benefits would not outweigh that harm.
“The proposed development is large scale and would be a readily visible feature within a Special Landscape Area. It is considered that due to the scale, mass and changes to the landform, the development would fail to appropriately integrate with its surrounding context and would be unsympathetic to the historic environment resulting in an adverse visual impact that would be harmful to the character of the area.”
“On balance the potential economic and social benefits including employment creation, significant private investment, and enhanced leisure facilities would not outweigh the harm identified to the important ecological and landscape value of the site. Therefore, the following recommendation is made:”
Officer report
What consultees said
Planning policy and ecology officers objected, while highways, the Coal Authority, heritage consultees and others supported permission subject to conditions or mitigation.
“Head of Engineering and Highways: Considers the proposed scheme to be acceptable in principle subject to a number of conditions being attached to any permission granted, along with the successful completion of a Section 106 agreement relating to a travel plan.”
“Subject to the Local Planning Authority being satisfied that the applicant has justified the location of the development, they believe the package of mitigation, compensation and enhancements for long term management of the SSSI and compensatory land would be appropriate taking account of the step wise approach.”
Officer report
What people said
Twenty-three objections and 141 supporting letters were received, covering environmental and transport concerns alongside economic, employment, tourism and wellbeing benefits.
“As a result of the above publicity exercises, a total of 23 objections and 141 letters of support have been received. The following is a summary of the key points highlighted in the representations, which are material to the consideration of this application:”
“Economic benefits, • Wealth creation boosting the local economy, • Job creation and training opportunities…”
Officer report
Questions and committee discussion
Members asked about the detailed application, the biodiversity agreement, the conditions and possible legal challenges, receiving answers from officers.
“The applicant’s agents are actively working on the detailed application, but no date for submission has been indicated. Discussions have been ongoing since January, but officers will ask the agent for an indication of timescales, and the response will be shared with the committee members…”
“The number of conditions is normal for a development of this scale and have been agreed with the applicant. Removing any necessary conditions could expose the authority and applicant to legal challenges and they are there to protect both parties.”
Minutes
The committee’s decision
The committee resolved to approve the amended conditions outlined in the report, with the legal wording of the agreed obligations still being completed.
“The Section 106 agreement obligations are those set out in the report put to committee back in January. It relates to the land needed for biodiversity enhancements. The obligations have been agreed; only the technical legal wording remain.”
Minutes
The members' reasons
The minutes do not record the members' reasons for departing from the officers' recommendation.
Sources
- Merthyr Tydfil Planning, Regulatory and Licensing minutes, 8 July 2026
- Agenda and papers (council website)
Source: Plota analysis of Merthyr Tydfil's committee minutes and officer report. Quotations are the council's own words; headings and summaries are Plota's.
Committee decisions and nationwide planning applications, in one API
The Plota API returns planning applications from every council we cover, each with its decision, whether a committee or officers decided it, and the committee date. Build it into your own tools.
See the API →At the meeting
- Council
- Merthyr Tydfil
- Date
- Wednesday 8 July 2026
- Recommendation
- Officers recommended refusal
- Committee decided
- Approved, against officer advice
- Minutes
- The council's minutes
- Meeting
- Agenda and papers (council website)
- Application
- The application (council website)
- All decisions
- Merthyr Tydfil committee decisions →
This committee's year
17 decisions in the 12 months to this meeting, 5 against officer advice.
Source: Plota analysis of the committee's minutes.