Agenda, decisions and minutes

Councillor Christine Jones declared a personal and prejudicial interest in the following application because a family member was an undertaker and explained a dispensation had been granted by the Standards Committee:-

Agenda item 4.1 – Full application – Construction of a new crematorium, associated car park, access road and ancillary works, landscaping and gardens of remembrance on land at Kelsterton Lane/Oakenholt Lane, Near Northop (052334)

The Chairman allowed Members an opportunity to read the late observations which had been circulated at the meeting.

            (a)       That planning permission be refused; and

(b)       That a report detailing the reasons for refusal be submitted to the 25^th February 2015 meeting of the Planning & Development Control Committee for consideration by Members.  

The Committee considered the report of the Chief Officer (Planning and Environment) in respect of this application which had been the subject of a site visit earlier that day.  The usual consultations had been undertaken and the responses received detailed in the report.  Additional comments received since the preparation of the report, along with an addition to it, were circulated at the meeting. 

                        The officer detailed the background to the report and explained that a number of amendments had been made to the originally submitted application which were detailed in the report.  These included the removal of an area for natural burials and the proposal to increase the width of Oakenholt Lane to the site entrance to 4.8m without the requirement for translocating the existing established hedgerow.  He referred to the amendment to paragraph 7.29 of the report, and the remainder of the late observations. The officer also highlighted condition 22 which had been added since the draft conditions had been made available to Members.  He asked that Members consider this application on its own merits and not compare it with the Tyddyn Starkey application which had previously been refused by the Committee on 29 October 2014.  This application site was not in the green barrier and there was therefore no requirement for an alternative site assessment to be undertaken.  At the meeting on 29 October 2014, the Committee had agreed that there was a need for a crematorium in Flintshire and this was one of the main issues considered by the officer in preparation of his report with the recommendation of approval. 

                        Mrs. J. Hulme spoke against the application on behalf of local residents.  She felt that the site was not suitable for a crematorium and she raised concern at the address given for the site and suggested that this could be misleading.  The village and lane were not capable of taking traffic generated by the proposal as the road was a single track and was not wide enough to allow a funeral hearse and other traffic to pass each other.  Mrs. Hulme asked who would police the routes that the funeral vehicles took to ensure that they followed the proposed signage to be put in place as she felt that the signed routes would not be followed.  She referred to a planning application that she had submitted in 2001 which conditioned that traffic could not leave the proposal onto Oakenholt lane because of it being dangerous.  Mrs. Hulme felt that the difficult highway issues had not been taken into account in consideration of the application and referred to the rat run from the A548 to the A55 which was frequently used by students from Coleg Cambria.  She suggested that all lanes in the area were dangerous because they were so narrow and referred to the number of accidents that had occurred in the area.  She agreed that there was a need for a crematorium but that this was not the correct site and she referred to the number  ...  view the full minutes text for item 134.

                        There were 38 members of the public and 2 members of the press in attendance.