COUNCILLORS decided that an inert waste processing plant was the lesser of two evils compared to a working quarry on Tuesday (Feb 16).
However, restrictions were placed on the use of machinery on Saturdays to protect local residents from the noise.
Proposals were put before the Planning Committee for the construction of an inert waste recycling facility at Cerrigyrwyn Quarry, Llangynog.
Introducing the plans, planning officer Hugh Towns said that the quarry had planning permission until 2014, and a reserve of stone of around 1.9 million tonnes.
“It can restart at any point up to 2042, subject to an application for modern working conditions being submitted and approved,” he added.
Under the terms of the application, 20,000 tonnes of inert materials would be recycled on the site each year, and residual materials would be used to reform the bottom area of the quarry, with a view to restoring it to agricultural pasture.
Mr Towns said that there would be on average 18 vehicle movements per day, with a maximum of 32 permitted, and that highways had raised no objection, subject to the creation of two extra passing bays.
The hours for screening and crushing the inert waste were set out as between 9am and 5pm on Monday-Friday, and between 9am and 12pm on Saturday.
Mr Towns pointed out that concerns had been raised by Llangynog Community Council about the noise and dust, and the impact on a public right of way across the site.
However, he said that the noise and dust emissions were felt to fall within ‘acceptable levels,’ and that dust management measures, including wheel washing on site, would be put in place.
Objecting to the plans, Patrick Norris said that there had been 26 local objections, and the Community Council had raised ‘substantial concerns’ which he claimed had not been addressed.
These included the revised transport plan, with 32 HGV movements per day. “ I’m quite sure that no one here wants 32 HGV going past their door,” he added.
He suggested that extra HGV s would damage roads in the area, leading to residents paying for car repairs, and the council paying for more road repairs.
Mr Norris also claimed that the proposals would cause an ‘unacceptable reduction in quality of life’ for residents. “Life in the village would be blighted by this proposal,” he added.
The agent for the applicant, Richard Bowen, said that the application ‘conforms with the spirit of local and national planning policy,’ and suggested that there was a need for facilities such as this in Carmarthenshire.
Councillor Peter Cooper raised concerns about the increased traffic, pointing out that on their site visit, the minibus had met a HGV and ‘only just managed to pass.’
He also queried the claim that there would be 40 days crushing per year. “How will you monitor the crushing days?” he asked.
Councillor Terry Davies pointed out that the committee would have difficulty objecting to a quarry on the site, and suggested that 40 days of crushing a year would be better for residents than a working quarry.
Councillor Kevin Madge said that he had ‘some sympathy’ for the residents, and asked why residents would have to put up with crushing on Saturdays. “I think personally it is one day too many,” he added.
Councillor Ken Howell and Cllr Davies also agreed that crushing should not take place on Saturdays.
Responding, Mr Towns said that the tonnage for crushing had been estimated at 500 tonnes per day. He pointed out that modern crushers were ‘not like those 15 years ago.
“They need an environmental permit and a spray washer – they are designed to meet pretty rigorous standards,” he added.
Mr Towns also said that there was a need for facilities like the one proposed in south west Wales, and cited a 2012 NRW study which showed that 39% of inert waste was going to landfill, against a 2020 target of 10%.
Cllr Cooper responded by claiming that the council was ‘more interested in targets than the health and wellbeing of residents.’
The plans – with the added stipulation that there would be no crushing on Saturdays – were approved by 10-1, with one abstention.
Add Comment