Controversial 300-home Hawarden development approved despite fierce opposition

By Alec Doyle – Local Democracy Reporter

A controversial planning application for 300 homes on farmland in Hawarden has been granted by Flintshire councillors.

There were angry scenes and cries of ‘shame’ from the public gallery after the authority’s planning committee voted 6-4 in favour of Castle Green’s plans to build 300 homes – including 105 affordable homes managed by ClwydAlyn Housing – on land between Gladstone Way and Ash Lane on the border between Hawarden and Mancot.

The land in question is included as development land within the current Local Development Plan (LDP).

The plans have been subject to sustained local opposition for a number of years – around 700 formal responses were lodged with the council opposing the scheme – and there was a heated debate within Ty Dewi Sant on Wednesday afternoon.

Flintshire People’s Voice councillor Sam Swash has been one of the leading supporters of the campaign against the development and told the committee the additional pressure on local services would be too great.

“Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board themselves say that it works to a best practice ration of one GP per 2,500 patients.

“The current ratio at the Stables Medical Practice in Hawarden is one GP per 5,143 patients. No-one is claiming that planning can solve deficiencies in healthcare, but it should not make them worse.

“The board goes on to say ‘concerns are shared across practices in the wider north east Flintshire cluster area who anticipate overstretched capacity to cater for new patients.

“That is a clear warning from our own health board. Despite that this council is asking you to ignore your eyes and ears and make an already dire situation worse.

“At every stage the message from our community has been loud, consistent and clear. You must judge this application on its own merits – or lack of them.

“This is not nimbyism. The 2,500 plus people who signed the petition, the many people who have emailed you and who are in this chamber today do not all live next to the site but all have one thing in common. They rely on you to act in their best interests.”

Local resident and chartered civil engineer David Rowlinson also spoke out against the proposal.

“Our community’s deepest fear is the loss of identity between Hawarden and Mancot. These are distinct villages with their own character.

“Hawarden already merges with Ewloe and Aston. What we are looking at doesn’t even provide the bare minimum – a clear boundary between the settlements.

“We are village communities with gardens for our children to play in, off-road parking and space. Since the LDP stage this design has been pushed beyond the limit squeezing more houses into less space.

“Why? Because the original design wasn’t commercially viable after paying for flood mitigation, drainage upgrades and coal mining remediation.”

Flooding downstream for Mancot, Sandycroft and Pentre was a core focus for the opponents of the scheme at committee.

Hawarden Community Council’s representative, Cllr Ant Turton, focused on the risk of flooding:  “I have personally helped residents during floods – clearing drains, moving soaked belongings, trying to minimise the damage.

“This is not hypothetical. Some of my residents have been forced out of their homes on more than one occasion.”

Cllr Turton added: “Any decision to allow 300 more homes with a hard surface and drainage downhill is a kick in the teeth for those who have been flooded time and time again.

“Castle Green’s assertion that their design will make the situation no worse  is indicative of their attitude to the problems faced by our community.

“We deserve better than not making things worse. My community deserves better.  Reject, or at the very least, demand better than this.”

Cllr Turton also accused the contribution of around £1.5m to Hawarden Village and Hawarden High Schools of being ‘woeful’.

“Neither is viable for expansion and what about Sandycroft CP School, ” he said. “Not a single penny is proposed for them.”

Cllr Adele Davies-Cooke cited the land’s rating as 3a and 3b agricultural land – a food-grade of land that the Welsh Government has said should be protected.

“Humans need to eat,” she said. “This isn’t just any parcel of land. It’s among the best most versatile farmland in Wales. You can’t replace it. This will jeopardise local fuel security.

“It deserves preservation, not permanent destruction.”

Committee members Cllr Carol Ellis and Cllr Mike Peers added they too found it difficult to see the justification for such a large development effectively conjoining two villages.

Cllr Chris Bithell however said that the council’s hands were tied.

“We could oppose this and all go home patting ourselves on the back but it would be a pyrrhic victory,” he said.

“In a matter of weeks the applicant would appeal and the matter would be decided by a planning inspector. As the land is allocated for development in the LDP the application would be approved regardless.”

Original report published shortly after the vote: 

Flintshire County Council has approved plans to build 300 homes on agricultural land at Ash Lane off Gladstone Way in Hawarden, following a heated planning meeting at Ty Dewi Sant, Ewloe.

The council’s Planning Committee voted by six votes to four, with one abstention, to grant planning permission for the development, which has faced fierce opposition since it was first proposed in 2019.

During the planning consultation, 684 out of 697 local residents formally objected to the plans.

Hawarden Community Council and Queensferry Community Council also raised concerns, alongside the Clwyd Badger Group, who warned about the impact on local wildlife.

Campaigners have fought the scheme for six years, arguing it will increase flood risk, place unsustainable pressure on GP and dental services, and result in the permanent loss of valuable agricultural land.

Despite this, planning officers recommended approval, highlighting that the site is allocated in Flintshire’s Local Development Plan (LDP).

The approval is subject to a Section 106 agreement, under which:

• Hawarden Village School will receive just over £625,000 to help accommodate new pupils.
• Hawarden High School will receive almost £950,000.

Representing the developer, Castle Green Homes, planning and design director Stuart Andrew, told councillors the application was “entirely policy compliant” and the result of a year-long process with council officers.

He said the scheme would provide 105 affordable homes and seven acres of public open space, and that issues such as highways, flooding and ecology had been carefully considered with no outstanding objections from council officers.

“We would therefore ask you to consider it appropriate to approve this planning application,” he said.

Speaking at the meeting, Cllr Sam Swash, who represents the Hawarden Mancot ward, said:

“This is the most unpopular planning proposal in Flintshire’s history.

“More than seven years of opposition. The largest petition this council has ever received. Hundreds of placards. The highest number of planning objections in recent memory.

“At every stage that message has been ignored. But today, that changes. This is your final opportunity to do right by the people you represent.”

He urged councillors to reject a “reckless plan” that would “stretch our services past breaking point and deliver negligible infrastructure improvements.”

One of the central concerns raised during the meeting was the risk of coalescence — that the new development would effectively merge the two distinct communities of Hawarden and Mancot.

Cllr Mike Peers [Buckley,Pentrobin] said: “The proposed development will join the two communities together via coalescence. Hawarden and Mancot will become one large community.”

Cllr Gillian Brockley [Hawarden: Aston] said: “This site is being enabled by extracting a technical loophole… to justify the irreversible merging of two distinct communities.”

However, Cllr Chris Bithell [Mold East], speaking in support of the officer’s recommendation, warned that refusing the application would likely lead to a planning appeal.

“It would be very easy today to walk this down,” he said. “But that will not be the end of the story. Within a few months, there will be a planning appeal and I would expect it to be upheld.

We have a role and a duty to play as a local planning authority. That duty is to provide housing for this generation and future generations. That’s what we are trying to do.”

After more than an hour of debate, the committee approved the application, with several members expressing concern but acknowledging that the legal planning position left little room to refuse it.