Loading
The decisions as the council's minutes record them. A plain-language summary follows once it has been written.
RESOLVED: that the minutes of the meeting held on the 18 June 2025 be received and approved as a true and correct record of the proceedings.
RESOLVED- that the application be REFUSED contrary to officer recommendation for the reason as stated above being the unacceptable affect on the tranquillity of the AONB.
RESOLVED- that the application be GRANTED in accordance with Officer recommendations.
Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Delyth Jones and Councillor Julie Matthews.
There were no declarations of a personal or predudicial nature raised.
None.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED: that the minutes of the meeting held on the 18 June 2025 be received and approved as a true and correct record of the proceedings.
The minutes of the Planning Committee meeting held on the 18 June 2025 were submitted. Matters of accuracy – None Matters arising – None RESOLVED: that the minutes of the meeting held on the 18 June 2025 be received and approved as a true and correct record of the proceedings.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED- that the application be REFUSED contrary to officer recommendation for the reason as stated above being the unacceptable affect on the tranquillity of the AONB.
An application was submitted (previously circulated) to consider a Section 73 application to continue the development at Burley Hill Quarry at Pant Du Eryrys, Mold. Public speaker – Tiffany Cox (Applicant) (FOR) – The application did not propose any changes to the permitted quarry boundaries, nor did it seek to extract any additional mineral reserves. The application was an extension of time to extract the limestone, which were already permitted reserves and included in the Count’s landbank. . It was stressed minerals could only be worked from where they are found and were essential to aid development of roads, houses and other infrastructure. Minerals are a finite resource which need to be managed responsibly and sustainably. For that reason, landbanks are used to understand the region’s need for aggregate and inform planning application decisions. The limestone at Burley Hill Quarry already formed part of the landbank, if the application was refused the landbank would need to be replenished by extensions of other sites or through the approval of entirely new greenfield quarries. The speaker for the application highlighted the need to find a balance whilst avoiding or mitigating potential impacts whilst enabling benefits of development. The applicant was aware if the quarry was to reopen it would require careful management to avoid the impacts. All the necessary assessments required by the authority had been completed and understandings of conditions had been agreed including the hours of work and number of blasts per annum. The applicant was aware of the concerns around working the site, situated within an area of outstanding natural beauty and the potential impacts on tranquillity. The concerns had been assessed, the site was a long-term feature of the landscape and had been operational 35 years before the area became designated in 1985. Impacts would be limited and once the quarrying was completed the land would be restored to nature. Members heard there was one property close to the site. The property was sold to the current owners by Tarmac subject to conditions limiting the properties use to a dwelling house and not a guest house and that the owners would not compromise or object to any aspect of future quarrying. The environmental assessment along with the officer’s report concluded that the impacts could be moderated to within acceptable limits and regulated by planning conditions. Public speaker – Councillor Allan Morgans (Llanferres Community Council) (AGAINST) – He started by informing the committee he was the Chair of the Llanferres Community Council. He stated MTAN1, section 51 noted mineral development should not take place in Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) save in exceptional circumstances. Also in section 52 it stated the potential aggregate resources that was available in Wales, and the need to minimise primary extraction, there is no need to permit proposals in an AONB which should take into account the need to protect the AONB from extraction and find other areas to meet the commitment. Exceptional circumstances requirement, the application stated that restoration need was the exceptional circumstance. Restoration was already a requirement, and the need was not demonstrated by the Regional Aggregate Working Party. Therefore, not demonstrating exceptional circumstances. The need – demand for crushed rock in Wales was decreasing. The Regional Working Party review 2022 assessed crushed rock reserves in Denbighshire at 13 million tonnes and Flintshire at just under 58 million tonnes. The 3 year average sales in Denbighshire was 0.34 million tonnes which equated to a 50 year land bank. In Flintshire sales were million 2.99 million tonnes equating to a 23 year landbank. MTAN1 and Planning Policy Wales require a minimum of 10 years reserve, therefor what was present was more than adequate. The extension application in 2003 had been refused due to significant weight being given to protecting the AONB. There had been 26 years of crushed rock in landbank in Denbighshire and 33 years in North East Wales further extensions to limestone quarries were difficult to justify based only on the need given to the quantities in landbanks. Demand for crushed rock in Denbighshire and North Wales was decreasing. Planning Policy Wales (edition 12) stated that extensions to sites should be treated in the same manner as new extraction sites, therefore the reasons for refusal of the planning application in 2003 were still valid. Weight should be given to protect the AONB. Preserving natural beauty and tranquillity was outlined in Denbighshire’s current Local Development Plan (LDP). The tranquillity assessment confirmed that the area experiences high to extremely high tranquillity levels which would be severely disrupted if the site is reopened. Reopening the quarry would impact new businesses along with owners livelihoods. It was stressed the application had received numerous objections. Public speaker – Councillor David Coggins Cogan (Flintshire County Council Councillor) (AGAINST)- Stated the exceptional circumstance test had not been met, Planning Policy Wales stated that material development should not occur in AONB unless there are exceptional circumstances. The regional need for aggregate could be met elsewhere. The report detailed sites in the region which could fulfil Burley Hill Quarry’s contribution. The quarry would adversely impact local tourism. Since the quarry ceased to work in 2005 the area had a developing tourism economy including B&B, holiday lets, and outdoor recreation is growing. Loss of tranquillity, blasts, dust and quarry traffic would drive tourists away. The application was inconsistent with Welsh Government guidance, Welsh policy required the elimination of future primarily mineral extraction from dormant quarries. Burley Hill was technically labelled as an inactive quarry, in practice the site had been idle for two decades. There was a legal duty to conserve and enhance the AONB. The AONB and NRW had both objected to the extension, they had both concluded that the reactivation of the quarry would significantly harm the AONB’s special qualities including tranquillity in a way that could not be mitigated. General debate – The Minerals and Waste Planning Manager provided further information stating the application was a section 73 application to extend the life of Burley Hill Quarry. It would allow the extraction of 3.8 million tonnes of unextracted mineral to be worked and exported. The mineral was within the landbank. It was stressed that Section 73 was a mechanism through the Town and Country Planning Act to not comply with a condition. There were a number of conditions subject to time limits with regards to working of minerals and restoration. The application was presented to extend the time limits for a further 15 years. The proposal was for 5 phases including a phased method for restoration. This would allow an average rate of 300,000 tonnes to be extracted annually. The legislation allowed for a review of all the conditions attached to the 2002 permission. In total there was 52 proposed conditions. The operation proposed a campaign basis of blasting and crushing. It was proposed to be limited to 6 blasts per year. Part of the crushing campaign would involve bringing in mobile equipment to crush and screen. There was no material change to the originally approved working development scheme with no soil stripping. There was no proposal for importation of waste to restore the site. It was confirmed there was a dwelling close to the site which was approximately 200 meters from the operation area. It was stressed to Members there was a sub-regional need for the mineral, not a Denbighshire need. As a County an agreement had been made to approach mineral development in a sub-regional way. Members were guided to the information that had been provided as part of the late representation papers. The access route to the site was a byway, which did not impact the recommendation. Officers were aware of an online petition with over 400 signatures, which had been submitted to the Planning Department but did not raise any additional material planning conditions. The quarry had been inactive for 20 years, but it was not a dormant quarry. There were no material changes proposed to the approved quarry and should permission be granted, officers from the Minerals and Waste Shared Service would monitor the conditions to ensure it was being operated as proposed. Members were informed that if planning permission was granted, Welsh Government would be informed under the Notification Direction to determine if the application warranted a call-in for further consideration. Should planning permission be refused the operator would be duty bound to restore the site after submitting a revised restoration scheme. Local Member – Councillor Terry Mendies stated he could not support the application as the community was not in support. He stated several local Community Councils covering a large geographical area were not in favour of the application. He felt that as the quarry had been inactive for 20 years it was in essence dormant. He stressed the main concern was the ecological impact on the AONB. Members stressed the need to protect the area give that the site was situated within the AONB. Councillor Chris Evans informed members that the site was known to him. Access roads were not built for the current size of HGV’s and would have a negative impact on the area. In response the Development Projects Engineer - Highway Development Control confirmed the proposed output rate was proposed at 300,000 tonnes per annum the current rate restricts output at 800,000 tonnes which represented a 62.5% reduction per annum therefore a reduction in vehicle movement. Both Denbighshire County Council and Flintshire County Council Highways officers had no objection to the application. Proposal – Councillor Alan James informed the committee that he had visited the site. He was content with conditions and provisions imposed alongside the application to control, restrict and work with Tarmac. He was of the opinion to grant the application in line with officer recommendation. The report was thorough, and every element of the proposal had been reviewed. The Chair requested that officers provided further information on the meaning of the proposed “campaign” working. The Minerals and Waste Planning Manager confirmed that should planning permission be granted to work minerals, several conditions would be imposed to ensure significant controls were in place. The determinative control on the previous consent was 800,000 tonnes output per annum. The operator had proposed to work the quarry on a campaign basis, meaning mobile equipment employed to the site with up to 6 blasts per year for the mineral to be worked and stockpiled. Without the campaign basis the site would be open and be able to operate 5.5 days a week with unlimited blasts per year. The restriction in the number of blasts would try to mitigate the impact on the tranquillity of the area. Each mineral planning authority should ensure that it makes an appropriate contribution to meeting local, regional and UK needs for primary minerals. It was important to stress minerals could only be worked where they are found. The proposal was to work mineral already in the landbank. Councillor Ellie Chard stated she was in favour of the proposal and understood the need for the mineral and the stockpile. Councillor Ellie Chard SECONDED, Councillor Alan James to grant planning permission in accordance with officer recommendation. Members were very grateful for the thoughts and opinions of the residents and thanked them for their time attending the meeting. Weight was given to the significant statutory consultations and responses received in objection. The Development Manager stated he was duty bound to stress any material planning considerations could be measured to determine the weight given to each consideration when making a decision. The officers had taken a professional perspective on the sub regional need for the mineral. It was emphasised there was only the need for one reason to refuse an application, that refusal had to be clear, and evidence based. Proposal – Councillor Terry Mendies thanked officers for the detailed responses to Members concerns. In his opinion, even with the conditions imposed the impact on the area and tranquillity still outweighed the need. He proposed that the application be REFUSED against officer recommendation. The reason for refusal based on comments made NRW having concerns on the unacceptable impact on the tranquillity of the AONB. Councillor Gwyneth Ellis asked if the application was refused, the current operative would have to reinstate the site back to its natural state. The ecological impact would be greater as was being compared to what should be there and a working quarry. Officers stated that the site would have to be restored to its original state if refused. An agreement on an appropriate restoration scheme would have to be made. NRW had not objected on the ecological aspect of the proposal it was purely on the landscape and impact on the AONB. The Legal Advisor suggested the unacceptable impact on the AONB and the tranquillity of the AONB would be a more subjective reason to refuse and more of a matter of judgement as opposed to a factual and evidential reason for refusal. Councillor Peter Scott supported the refusal and SECONDED councillor Terry Mendies’ reasons for refusal. It was confirmed if the application was granted a decision notice could not be issued until Welsh Government were informed under the notification direction and 21 days of which they had time to call the decision in for further discussion. If the application was refused the applicant had the ability to appeal. The Development Manager outlined the vote and how the responses would be recorded. The vote would be a straightforward vote either for approval (in accordance with the proposal of Councillor James) or against approval (and for refusal in accordance with the proposal from Councillor Mendies). Vote – For – 3 Against – 15 Abstain – 0 RESOLVED- that the application be REFUSED contrary to officer recommendation for the reason as stated above being the unacceptable affect on the tranquillity of the AONB.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED- that the application be GRANTED in accordance with Officer recommendations.
An application was submitted (previously circulated) detailing objections to Tree Preservation Order (TPO) No. 7 (2025) at land opposite the White Waters Hotel, Llangollen. Local Member Councillor Karen Edwards proposed the TPO be confirmed for the reasons provided by the tree officer detailed in the report. The trees were of considerable amenity value. She stated there was a potential impact to the trees if the site is developed and the site has been included as a proposed candidate site within the Local Development Plan (LDP). It was stressed it was not uncommon for trees to become vulnerable and damaged as a direct result of development, therefor it was imperative they were protected. Proposal – Councillor Karen Edwards proposed that the application be granted in accordance with officer recommendation, to confirm the Tree Preservation Order be imposed seconded by Councillor Andrea Tomlin. Vote – For – 18 Against – 0 Abstain – 0 RESOLVED- that the application be GRANTED in accordance with Officer recommendations.
Councillors must say when they have a personal link to something being discussed, such as a job, a property or a family member. A prejudicial interest is one strong enough that the councillor usually leaves the room and takes no part.
Declarations are read from the minutes once they are published.
The council hasn't recorded attendance for this meeting.
Lists the council's current councillors only. Co-opted members, officers and former councillors aren't shown.