Loading
The decisions as the council's minutes record them. A plain-language summary follows once it has been written.
RESOLVED: that subject to the above, the minutes from the meeting held on the 11 March be received and approved as a true and correct record of the proceedings.
RESOLVED: the application be DEFERRED to a future Planning Committee meeting.
RESOLVED: that the application be DEFERRED to a future Planning Committee meeting.
RESOLVED: that the application be GRANTED in accordance with officer recommendation. Appeal Update – The Development Manager provided an update to members regarding an appeal that had been submitted against the Planning Committees decision to refuse an application for a Homeless Hostel on Nant Hall Road in Prestatyn in October 2025. The appeal was validated by Planning and Environment Decisions Wales (PEDW) on the 30 March 2026 with the deadline for the Committee to submit a statement of evidence and reasons for refusal by the 20 April 2026. The Development Manager was working closely with local member Councillor Andrea Tomlin to complete and submit the appeal statement. The public had also been made aware that an appeal had been made. The Chair stated that the appeal process was not in the control of the Planning Committee however, as the decision to refuse the application was against officer recommendation, he sought clarity that officers continued to offer guidance and support to members throughout the appeal process. The Development Manager confirmed that guidance and support with the appeal would be given to all members. The decision was member led, and it was important that the views of the committee were made clear to the Planning Inspectorate. Meeting concluded at 10.08am
Apologies were received from Councillors Gwyneth Ellis, Chris Evans, Raj Metri, Elfed Williams and Cheryl Williams.
None.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED: that subject to the above, the minutes from the meeting held on the 11 March be received and approved as a true and correct record of the proceedings.
The minutes from the Planning Committee meeting held on the 11 March were submitted for consideration. No matters of accuracy were raised. Matters arising – Page 14 – it was raised that the incorrect road was noted, the minutes should read A547 and not A457. RESOLVED: that subject to the above, the minutes from the meeting held on the 11 March be received and approved as a true and correct record of the proceedings.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED: the application be DEFERRED to a future Planning Committee meeting.
An application was submitted for the change of use from Bookmakers (Use Class Sui Generis) to a Salad Bar/Sandwich Shop (Use class A3) (retrospective application) Councillor Karen Edwards (local member) highlighted that this was a retrospective application following enforcement action. Expressing dissatisfaction with the planning merits of the proposed use, she proposed a deferral due to uncertainty regarding the definitions of Class A1 and Class A3. Additionally, she stated that a site visit was necessary. Officers were also asked to secure a response from the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) team, noting disappointment over the lack of initial feedback. Proposal - Councillor Karen Edwards proposed the application be deferred to a future Planning Committee meeting, SECONDED by Councillor Andrea Tomlin. Vote – For – 14 Against – 2 Abstain – 0 RESOLVED: the application be DEFERRED to a future Planning Committee meeting.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED: that the application be DEFERRED to a future Planning Committee meeting.
An application was submitted for the variation of condition no. 2 of planning permission code no. 24/2025/0149/PS to allow a change of dwelling design/layout. Councillor Merfyn Parry (local member) proposed that the application be deferred due to several changes submitted in the late representation sheets that required clarification. There were also noted alterations to the scale and an increase in height, which needed to be properly assessed, along with a site visit. Proposal - Councillor Merfyn Parry proposed the application be deferred to a future Planning Committee meeting, SECONDED by Councillor Delyth Jones. Vote – For – 16 Against – 0 Abstain - 0 RESOLVED: that the application be DEFERRED to a future Planning Committee meeting.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED: that the application be GRANTED in accordance with officer recommendation. Appeal Update – The Development Manager provided an update to members regarding an appeal that had been submitted against the Planning Committees decision to refuse an application for a Homeless Hostel on Nant Hall Road in Prestatyn in October 2025. The appeal was validated by Planning and Environment Decisions Wales (PEDW) on the 30 March 2026 with the deadline for the Committee to submit a statement of evidence and reasons for refusal by the 20 April 2026. The Development Manager was working closely with local member Councillor Andrea Tomlin to complete and submit the appeal statement. The public had also been made aware that an appeal had been made. The Chair stated that the appeal process was not in the control of the Planning Committee however, as the decision to refuse the application was against officer recommendation, he sought clarity that officers continued to offer guidance and support to members throughout the appeal process. The Development Manager confirmed that guidance and support with the appeal would be given to all members. The decision was member led, and it was important that the views of the committee were made clear to the Planning Inspectorate. Meeting concluded at 10.08am
An application was submitted for the restoration and conversion of engine house and erection of extension within footprint of former boiler house to form 1 no. dwelling and associated work; including new access track. Public Speaker – Stephen Scott (Applicant) (For) – The applicant had moved to the area with his family 39 years ago when he purchased the property, which comprised of 24 acres of land and the engine house, a listed building. It quickly became apparent how significant the engine house was to the local community. He stated that such an important historic structure should not be allowed to fall into disrepair. Despite several attempts to work with historic building trusts and charities, sufficient funding to renovate and maintain the building could not be secured. After 15 years, the family relocated to Ruthin and sold the farm, while retaining ownership of the engine house and approximately 2 acres of land. Around 10 years ago, an application was made for planning permission to convert the engine house for residential use, which brought the proposal before the Planning Committee today. Mr Scott highlighted that without a sustainable and economically viable solution, the engine house would be lost permanently. The current proposal offered a means of preserving the building while securing its long-term future through commercial value. He thanked the Committee for their consideration. General Debate – Councillor Terry Mendies (Local Member) advised that the application had been ongoing for nine years. He outlined the historical importance of the engine house, which formed part of a lead mine dating back to 1841. Following its closure in the 1970s, the structure had been left to deteriorate, as evidenced by photographs submitted with the application (previously circulated). Councillor Mendies described the proposal as an ambitious project and noted that throughout the lengthy application process, the applicant had completed all studies requested by officers. He asked officers to clarify the environmental constraints associated with the application. He further stated that some of the objections were based on historical concerns from nine years ago, which had since been addressed and resolved.He confirmed that he had consulted the Community Council on two occasions, both times receiving their support for the application. Nearby residents had also expressed support, with no objections raised. Regarding concerns about timescales and potential disruption, Councillor Mendies reported that the applicant had confirmed a Project Manager would be appointed once all approvals were in place to oversee the delivery of the development and suggested that an hours of operation condition could be attached to the permission if required. He concluded by emphasising the long-standing connection of the family to the area and the importance of securing the future of the Grade II listed building. He proposed that the application be granted in accordance with the officer recommendation. The Principal Planning Officer explained that the biggest concern on the site was ecology, the site was partially located within a designated wildlife site and these impacts needed to be given consideration. The building itself was an at risk structure and therefore conducting a bat survey on the structure was very difficult however, this had now been completed. A bat license was required on the structure, and Natural Resources Wales (NRW) did not raise any objections to this being obtained should the application be approved. There were many conditions on the application which dealt with landscaping including visual amenity and the setting of a listed building within the landscape. The application also offered the ability to improve the wildlife site, therefore it was not just the building that was going to benefit but the surrounding wildlife site would too. The structure was approximately 22m away from the neighbouring property at the rear of the structure however, the proposed structure was considerably higher than the existing building. The design details stated that the rear elevation did not feature any habitable room windows which could not be obscure glazed. Therefore, in terms of privacy there was no change. The Chair requested more details on the recruitment of a Project Manager should the application be granted. The Principal Planning Officer stated that an additional condition could be added to the proposal to secure a construction manager and management plan which would cover hours of operation and deliveries. Councillor Terry Mendies stated that he would not like a timescale for the completion of the development on the proposal, particularly in the current economic climate, but was happy for a condition to be added in relation to operational hours. Councillor Merfyn Parry welcomed the development and admired the applicant for taking on such a substantial development. He questioned if a listed building planning application also needed to be secured prior to the commencement of any work as in previous years. The Principal Planning Officer stated that the site already had a listed planning application alongside this planning application. This was not presented to the Planning Committee at this stage due to there being many concerns previously regarding ecology. If planning permission was granted the applicant would then need to apply for a listed planning consent approval, which would include further detailed drawings and investment from the applicant himself. Councillor Delyth Jones stated that she was very supportive of the application which was very sympathetic in its design and questioned the archaeology steps which needed to be followed on the site. Councillor Jones also questioned public safety with regards to the public footpath that went through the site and how this would remain open and be maintained. The Principal Planning Officer stated that officers had consulted with archaeology consultant, CPAT who were impressed with the scheme however, requested that there needed to be a recording of the building prior to any works being undertaken to it. There was an archaeology planning condition stated within the application. With regards to the public footpath, under separate legislation, this would need to be kept open and passable at all times, if this did not remain open and passable, action could be taken through the Public Rights of Way Team. However, it was important to note, before any work was carried out negotiation and consultations with the applicant and the Public Rights of Way Team would continue to establish how the public footpath could be improved. Proposal – Councillor Terry Mendies proposed the application be granted in accordance with officer recommendation SECONDED by Councillor Merfyn Parry. Vote – For – 16 Against – 0 Abstain – 0 RESOLVED: that the application be GRANTED in accordance with officer recommendation. Appeal Update – The Development Manager provided an update to members regarding an appeal that had been submitted against the Planning Committees decision to refuse an application for a Homeless Hostel on Nant Hall Road in Prestatyn in October 2025. The appeal was validated by Planning and Environment Decisions Wales (PEDW) on the 30 March 2026 with the deadline for the Committee to submit a statement of evidence and reasons for refusal by the 20 April 2026. The Development Manager was working closely with local member Councillor Andrea Tomlin to complete and submit the appeal statement. The public had also been made aware that an appeal had been made. The Chair stated that the appeal process was not in the control of the Planning Committee however, as the decision to refuse the application was against officer recommendation, he sought clarity that officers continued to offer guidance and support to members throughout the appeal process. The Development Manager confirmed that guidance and support with the appeal would be given to all members. The decision was member led, and it was important that the views of the committee were made clear to the Planning Inspectorate. Meeting concluded at 10.08am
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.