Controversial Varteg mine plan set for new bid
8:17am Thursday 3rd April 2014 in News
TORFAEN'S AM promised an energy company "the fight of their lives" over controversial plans to mine 256,000 tonnes of coal in the Varteg which could be going back before Torfaen council.
Following the news that Glamorgan Power Company Ltd, has informed the council that it is considering submitting a new planning application, just four months after the previous plan was refused by Welsh minister Carl Sargeant, a meeting was held to update people about the pre-planning application enquiry.
A seminar was called on Monday to update councillors, concerned residents and representatives of the school, Ysgol Bryn Onnen, who packed into the public gallery.
Leading the seminar was chief planning and public protection officer at Torfaen council, Duncan Smith.
He said that this type of enquiry was common practice, but said that “as it's on a controversial application, we thought it only right to let you know.”
Torfaen AM, Lynne Neagle, said: “Local residents have spent years in a state of limbo with the threat of this development hanging over their heads – it is just not acceptable.
“Of course we’ll have to await the detail, but what I do know, is that overwhelmingly people in Varteg simply don’t want this on their doorstep.
“ Working with local residents and campaigners, I will do everything I can to see these latest proposals defeated - Glamorgan Power are facing the fight of their lives.”
Mr Smith told the seminar that the council refused the application in 2011 due to its proximity to houses, this led to an inquiry in 2012, and the then minister John Griffiths sent a letter stating he was minded to allow it.
In November 2013, the minister for housing and regeneration, Mr Sargeant, refused to grant outline planning permission for the land reclamation and coal recovery scheme at Varteg Hill.
In January this year, the company approached the council advising that it is considering a new planning application and they want to work with the council to identify feasible options.
Mr Smith explained that the minister thought the application was ‘environmentally acceptable’, despite school children being taught only 120 metres from the proposed mine and houses being within 500 metres.
The minister, however, did not accept that the benefits of the scheme justified working within 500m of the settlement, and since no evaluation of alternative options had been carried out, it could not be concluded that the proposed development was the most effective solution.
Another reason for refusal was in regard to the unilateral undertaking, and the minister remained concerned that there was insufficient detail to satisfy him that funding would be available to complete the restoration should the developer fail to do so.
So the company is now seeking to address these points, but Mr Smith said there has not been an application received yet.
Comments are closed on this article.