Agenda item

13.1 20C27D/2/CONS – Wylfa Power Station, Cemaes

13.2 34LPA982A/CC – The Stilts Building, Llangefni

13.3 38C185C – Maes Mawr, Llanfechell

13.1     20C27D/2/CONS – Consultation for the de-commissioning of Wylfa A

A report setting out a proposed response on behalf of the Authority on the Health and Safety Executive Consultation which makes observations on the current Nuclear Power Station at Wylfa was presented for the Committee’s consideration.

The Chief Planning Officer informed the Committee that the Office of Nuclear Regulation (ONR) an agency of the Health and Safety Executive and the enforcing authority on nuclear reactors is currently undertaking a formal consultation, and the Isle of Anglesey County Council as a consultee has been invited to comment on the application for decommissioning, and in particular on the Environmental Statement which contains the environmental impact assessment and mitigation measures to avoid or minimise significant impact on the environment.

Wylfa Nuclear Power Station obtained EIADR consent to decommission in March 2009 based on an Environmental Statement prepared in 2008 (the 2008 ES).The existing EIADR consent provided for the decommissioning project to commence within 5 years, but due to the extended generation Wylfa is not expected to shut down and begin decommissioning until 2015 by which time the current consent will have expired, and thus Wylfa is seeking a new consent.

As a consultee, the Council resolved in November 2008 to forward the comments as listed in the report to the Health and Safety Executive. The current consultation period began in May 2013 and the ONR requires comments by 9^th August, 2013. The report sets out in detail consultation responses and reviews changes to the updated ES (March, 2013) and other material changes in circumstances. It also makes recommendations on matters which the Council consider that ONR should take into account as part of the EIADR consent process. These are detailed in section 12 of the report.

The Officer referred Members to the site map for Wylfa to illustrate what the three main stages of

the decommissioning process will entail encompassing  Care and Maintenance preparations; Care and Maintenance and Final Site Clearance.

Councillor Kenneth Hughes pointed out that there will be an increase in traffic through the village of Llanfachraeth and he was disappointed that no bypass route for Llanfachraeth had been taken into consideration.

The Planning Officer said that the development of the proposed new nuclear power station which will be an application made to the Welsh Government and the decommissioning of the current nuclear power station need to be differentiated. If the new nuclear power station proceeds then discussions have commenced with regard to providing a bypass for Llanfachraeth. The Officer said that he would be happy to include the observation made in the comments it is proposed are forwarded to the ONR.

It was resolved to endorse the recommendations of the report as set out in section 12 with the addition of a comment in respect of consideration being given to the provision of a bypass route for the village of Llanfachraeth.

13.2  34LPA982A/CC – Prior notification for the demolition of a building at the Stilts Building, Llangefni                                                                  

The Planning Development Manager informed the Committee that it was determined that the prior approval of the Local Planning Authority was not required for the above development and that it constituted permitted development. The matter is reported for information purposes only.

It was resolved to note the report as information.

13.3  38C185C – Full application for the erection of one wind turbine with a maximum hub height of up to 24.6m, rotor diameter of up to 19.2m and a maximum upright vertical tip height of up to 34.2m on land at Maes Mawr, Llanfechell                        

Having declared an interest in the application, Councillor Kenneth Hughes withdrew from the meeting and did not take part in the discussion thereon.

The Planning Development Manager reminded Members that the site has now been visited by this Committee and that the Committee is asked to come to a resolution regarding the Authority’s position in relation to the appeal. At its June meeting the Committee cited a number of reasons for wanting to refuse planning permission and these are considered and addressed individually in the report. The Officer’s recommendation remains not to contest the appeal and, if the Planning Inspectorate is minded to approve the appeal, that it takes into consideration the conditions set out in the report. The appeal timetable has now been set and the Authority’s statement is required by the 21^st of the month; any comments received outside of that timeframe will not be accepted.

Councillor Victor Hughes said that whilst he did not object to smaller domestic wind turbines which provide renewable energy to farms he did not favour large scale wind turbines. He was however prepared to consider the current proposal on its own merits. He felt that the proposed development is fairly large and it is surrounded by dwellings. If he asked himself whether he would want to look at such a structure on a daily basis even though  others can be seen on the horizon, the answer would have to be no. He could not be sure that it would affect the lives of those around it when they are in the open air or in their car for example. He pointed out that TAN 8 provides guidance and suggests that wind turbines should not be permitted to extend across the countryside. He asked whether this is a consideration in this case and whether it is a fact that the majority of people on the Island feel that a saturation point has now been reached.

Councillor Ann Griffith said that having visited the site she felt that the nearest dwellings are very close to the proposed turbine and that the photomontage did not provide an accurate reflection of what she saw on the site visit. She believed that the development would have a significant impact on the visual amenities of the area’s residents. On that basis she opposed the application.

Councillor John Griffith as a Local Member said that the application site is within a distance of 500m to the nearest dwellings and that that should be taken into consideration as well as the current status of the SPG in relation to the size of the turbine and the separation distance from the nearest dwellings.

The issue of re-consulting on the SPG was raised. Councillor R.O.Jones believed it to be unfair to be considering applications for wind turbines without first having resolved the status of the SPG and specifically the provisions it makes with regard to separation distance between wind turbines and the nearest dwellings.

The Legal Services Manager explained that there would be implications for the Planning Policy section of re-consulting on elements of the SPG but given that six months have passed since the adoption of the SPG it is a matter on which the Council can make a further resolution. Whilst the SPG has been adopted by the County Council, the amendments made on the day of adoption have not been subject to public consultation and have therefore been accorded less weight by Planning Inspectors.

Following further discussion, the Chief Planning Officer said that he would discuss the matter of re-consultation with the Chief Executive and the Planning Policy Section. 

Councillor Ann Griffith proposed that the Authority contest the appeal on the basis that the Committee would have refused the application due to its effects on visual amenity and because it runs contrary to the requirements of the SPG by virtue of its proximity to nearby dwellings. Councillor Victor Hughes seconded the proposal.

Councillors Ann Griffith, Victor Hughes and Nicola Roberts voted in favour of contesting the appeal.

It was resolved to contest the appeal on the basis that the Committee would have refused the application due to its effects on visual amenity and because it is contrary to the requirements of the SPG by virtue of its proximity to nearby dwellings.

The Development Control Manager indicated that pursuant to the Rules, Councillors Ann Griffith and Victor Hughes would be the ones to defend the decision on appeal.

(Councillors Jeff Evans, Vaughan Hughes, Raymond Jones and Richard O. Jones did not vote on the matter as they had not been present on the site visit. Councillor John Griffith as a Local Member did not vote. Councillor W.T.Hughes did not vote on the matter for the reason that he owned a wind turbine)