Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: Save Penrhos Contact Point  (Read 5003 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Che Guevaras Flip Flops

  • Tatw Pum Munud
  • *
  • Posts: 1827
  • www.savepenrhos.co.uk
Save Penrhos Contact Point
« on: Thursday 19 September 2013, 1047 »
http://savepenrhos.co.uk/

https://www.facebook.com/groups/SavePenrhosNaturePark/

Please keep in touch and if you haven't lodged a letter of objection yet please do.

Hundreds and hundreds of letters of objection from locals have been submitted and thousands have signed various petitions.    Conversely letters for the development number less than 20 and a petition for the development was equally laughably unsupported.

Offline Porty

  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 9341
Re: Save Penrhos Contact Point
« Reply #1 on: Wednesday 02 October 2013, 1702 »
I see from the news that Anglesey County Council have turned the application down in today's meeting.

Offline action

  • Sos coch
  • *
  • Posts: 9
Re: Save Penrhos Contact Point
« Reply #2 on: Wednesday 02 October 2013, 2224 »
Terrible group, I posted my support for the development and debated it coherently without any bad language, and have been blocked by them. Funny that. They were harping on about it being a democratic success for Anglesey that the proposal has been declined, then have banned anyone commenting an opposing opinion. Halfwit whoever it is.

Offline Carnedyr

  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 6837
    • Caergybi FC
Re: Save Penrhos Contact Point
« Reply #3 on: Wednesday 02 October 2013, 2250 »
a great victory for Holyhead, some still believe the hype of 600 jobs lol
while we have time let us do good

Offline action

  • Sos coch
  • *
  • Posts: 9
Re: Save Penrhos Contact Point
« Reply #4 on: Wednesday 02 October 2013, 2334 »
I for one didn't believe that there would be any more than a handful of jobs once the construction phase was over, but still I'm of the opinion that it will be a good thing for the area. I say will because I believe it still has a fighting chance as the hitachi new nuclear build will need a housing area for the workforce and I can't see the govt pulling the plug on that

Offline Nooks

  • Bear faced cheek!
  • Other
  • *
  • Posts: 4899
Re: Save Penrhos Contact Point
« Reply #5 on: Thursday 03 October 2013, 0946 »
I don't understand why the construction workers accommodation should be so far away from where they are operating. It's going to be a 30 mile round trip per day. Why not build the houses around Cemaes/Almwch?

I also think that if they had separated the proposed builds at Kingsland and/or Cae Glas from the planned destruction of Penrhos Park, they may have found a bit more support. As has been mentioned before, affordable housing would be very much welcomed.
It's just the bear necessities of life!

Offline Che Guevaras Flip Flops

  • Tatw Pum Munud
  • *
  • Posts: 1827
  • www.savepenrhos.co.uk
Re: Save Penrhos Contact Point
« Reply #6 on: Thursday 03 October 2013, 1250 »
I don't understand why the construction workers accommodation should be so far away from where they are operating. It's going to be a 30 mile round trip per day. Why not build the houses around Cemaes/Almwch?

I also think that if they had separated the proposed builds at Kingsland and/or Cae Glas from the planned destruction of Penrhos Park, they may have found a bit more support. As has been mentioned before, affordable housing would be very much welcomed.

That's part of the objection Nook.   The assumptions are flawed.    Horizon have already said they have no intention of housing their workers in one place - that they intend to disperse them around the island and immediately adjoining mainland.    The reasons they state - that their experience shows concentrating them in one place leads to 'social problems', overwhelms local services etc etc are all valid.   In addition they know that part of the route from Penrhos to Wylfa has the highest level of RTA fatalities on the island.

And what if Wylfa doesn't go ahaead?  There's no guarentee it will - the Secretary of State for Energy goes to China next week to see if they will provide the money and they in turn are already making their thoughts known - only if they provide the workforce, Chinese built reactors and turbines are used and once built it's run by their management and technicians.

Offline Shell

  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 24908
Re: Save Penrhos Contact Point
« Reply #7 on: Thursday 03 October 2013, 1258 »
Why don't we just blow up the cob so nobody can come in or get out any more? All I've been hearing is immigrant workers will get all the jobs.  Sure, they'll get some, but so will locals. If immigrants are brave enough to enter the land that time forgot then good on them.
Penrhos is lovely when you can overt your eyes from the masses of dog muck you have to dodge. If Land & Lakes can develop the land while still keeping parts available for the public to enjoy then fantastic.
How many people who opposed it actually live here? I live and breath Holyhead and I can tell you it's not the same place I grew up in. Nostalgia won't put food on the table or clothes on your back.  Move forward for future generations, for goodness sake.

Offline Che Guevaras Flip Flops

  • Tatw Pum Munud
  • *
  • Posts: 1827
  • www.savepenrhos.co.uk
Re: Save Penrhos Contact Point
« Reply #8 on: Thursday 03 October 2013, 1307 »
This also explains much of the reason it failed and why it will be Called-In by Cardiff:-

Firstly let me put a few of you straight..'We in opposition on OUR 'save Penrhos page' are NOT against the development.... just the use of Penrhos Nature Reserve that attracts 100,000 visitors per year who DO spend in the local economy Penrhos also ranks as the 3rd highest tourist attraction on Anglesey. (Welsh Government figures and Anglesey Aluminium figures) It is highly protected landscape in an (AONB) with Beddmanarch bay an (SSSI) and has (UKRIGGS) protection. Many of the trees have TPO's. Land & Lakes want to fell 28.27 ACRES of some of the oldest most Ancient trees here on the Island. Penrhos is 200 Acres we will be left with 32....

We have a committee up and running and ready to run Penrhos with the same grants that Anglesey Aluminium have had for many years..(I have them in black & white)....Is it beyond your thinking that The community of Holyhead can run this Reserve? Run by the people for the people and keep this a free amenity for ALL...

Bring Land & Lakes here ...we welcome you with open arms, although the highly exaggerated jobs of 600ft equivalent... (somehow quoted today as 1,000 in the Chronicle, a little P.R. by L&L no doubt) is highly disproportionate broken down it can be well below 40 jobs.... Local can be as far as Mersyside.....(EU POLICY (European commission 2013)- According to estimates, well over 100, 000 non-EU seasonal workers come to the EU each year (this includes irregular migrants). EU economies face a structural need for seasonal work for 50 percent labour from within the EU. These measures now passed cover the conditions of entry and residence for certain categories of immigrants such as highly qualified workers, seasonal workers and intra-corporate transferees, as well as the establishment of a single work and residence permit.) SO you can expect at least half of these jobs to go to immigrant who will live on site.

The plans had anyone bothered to go to the Chambers failed to pass on the departures from planning guidance..Policies that have been set in stone by the UK and Welsh government. (to name but a few):
1) settlement boundary of the proposals mao of the Ynys Mon Local Plan for Holyhead.
2) A departure from the provisions of the Ynys Mon and Gwynedd Structure Plans.
3) Project is outside the boundary of the 'Stopped Unitary development Plan'
4) Policy FF11
5)Planning Policy Wales (paragraph 5.8.2.)
6)Planning Policy Wales (paragraph 5.5.6.)
7)Planning Policy Wales (paragraph 11.1.11)
THESE ARE BUT A FEW!!!!

The welsh government can-not go against their own guidance policies....The County Councillors are not 'fuddy duudy's' by law this application was failed from the start on just these policies alone!! By law they could NOT consider this application.

There is also NO signed contract for the 3,500 Wylfa B construction workers.... Horizon/Hitachi Nuclear Power's preferred method is to use housing stock throughout the Isle of Anglesey, for the economic benefit of the WHOLE Island! (another major problem and failure for L&L)

The boards and people in opposition or who have serious concerns because of all the above Guidelines are:

1) The 5571 opposition emails, letters and signatures.
2) County Councillor Raymond Jones
3) County Councillor Robert Llewellyn
4) County Councillor c. Dafydd Rhys Thomas
5) The 5 County Councillors who voted against...
6) Every school on Anglesey.
7) Llanfachraeth Community council
8.) Treaddur-Bay Community council
9) Valley Community Isle of Anglesey County Council
10) Rhoscolyn community Council
11) NRW.... concerns
12) ALL Emergency Services...... concerns
13) Lifelong Learning dept
14) Environmental services
15) Emergency Planning
16) Footpaths Office
17) Gwynedd Archeological planning Services.
18) Leisure Department
19)The Georgian Group
20) Built Environments
21) Conservation officer
22) Tree Officer
23) Landscape Officer
24) AONB Office
25) Ecological Environmental Advisor
26) NWWT
27) Society for the protection of Ancient Buildings
28) Network Rail
29) RSPB
30) Red Squirrel Society.
40) DRAINAGE Section Welsh Water.
41) Welsh Language Society.
42) Rural Housing Enabler.
43) Ramblers Association.
44) Betsi Cadwalader Health Board.
45) Freinds of the Earth
« Last Edit: Thursday 03 October 2013, 1810 by Che Guevaras Flip Flops »

Offline Che Guevaras Flip Flops

  • Tatw Pum Munud
  • *
  • Posts: 1827
  • www.savepenrhos.co.uk
Re: Save Penrhos Contact Point
« Reply #9 on: Thursday 03 October 2013, 1415 »
In addition, during the meeting yesterday the cost of cleaning the toxicity on parts of the Cae Glas section - the AA dumpsite - (toxic dump is the wrong description to use) came up (that has to be sorted out before the application can go ahead).   This has to be paid for by either the current owner (Anglesey Aluminium) or the future owner (Land & Lakes) if everyone is happy to do it that way.   Believe it or not,  L&L were unaware as late as yesterday how much the figure was.  When it was mentioned during the meeting they visibly baulked.

Sidi also stated that the Leisure Park would not be ready for at least 10-12 years AFTER the last Wylfa worker had left. (so you are looking at least 15-20 years if work starts on Wylfa tomorrow).    They are also not happy that Horizon/Hitachi aren't interested in housing the workforce there.
« Last Edit: Saturday 05 October 2013, 1143 by Che Guevaras Flip Flops »

Offline Trefignath

  • Dignified Elderly and Venerated Oldie
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 17147
  • Back Again.
Re: Save Penrhos Contact Point
« Reply #10 on: Friday 04 October 2013, 1429 »
Is the toxic dump dangerous enough to put the kybosh on Penrhos as a nature reserve?
Not waiting for the others.

Offline action

  • Sos coch
  • *
  • Posts: 9
Re: Save Penrhos Contact Point
« Reply #11 on: Friday 04 October 2013, 1600 »
I don't see why the majority of the groups above would object, I mean what have the schools got to fear? With the amount of schools on the verge of closure I'm sure they'd be grateful of the numbers.  How can the leisure dept be against a leisure  development? Doesn't make sense to me

Offline Che Guevaras Flip Flops

  • Tatw Pum Munud
  • *
  • Posts: 1827
  • www.savepenrhos.co.uk
Re: Save Penrhos Contact Point
« Reply #12 on: Friday 04 October 2013, 1835 »
I don't see why the majority of the groups above would object, I mean what have the schools got to fear? With the amount of schools on the verge of closure I'm sure they'd be grateful of the numbers.  How can the leisure dept be against a leisure  development? Doesn't make sense to me

The development is - by the Welsh Governments own guidelines - to big to be decided by the council and in to sensitive an area.    This was always going to have to go to Cardiff to be decided - all this has done is delay it a couple of weeks or so.   It would have stood a better chance as two separate applications - Kingsland (Housing) & Penrhos/Cae Glas (Leisure).   Possibly even three separate applications with Penrhos and Cae Glas being dealt with separately.  I wouldn't be surprised if that is what actually happens.

Secondary impacts affect a lot of things.      A large and sudden influx of children from outside the area would struggle with the Cymraeg aspect (it is anticipated that initially most of the families in the housing will be from outside Wales, possibly even from outside the UK).  The schools also use the Penrhos woodland for nature studies and would lose that.  Welsh Water, Railtrack etc want to know who is going to pay for the work that needs to be done to alter their infrastructure,  Betws Cadwaldr Health want to know where the extra Doctors, community nurses, surgeries, 999 ambulance cover etc is supposed to come from and who is going to pay for it when they have actually got to cut their budget - likewise the fire brigade and police.    Local holiday parks also objected on the grounds that there is already an over-capacity of similar things in North Wales and to build even more will drive many out of business (that's where the Leisure department comes in).   

All of these issues should have been answered by the developer by now but they haven't been.

Probably one of the things that put doubt in the council's minds was Sidi's response to the Wylfa workers living there where he said it would not cause a problem in the local area because they would be in a self-contained compound with it's own integral retail and leisure facilities.  That basically means very little money would trickle into the local economy or local businesses.
« Last Edit: Saturday 05 October 2013, 1146 by Che Guevaras Flip Flops »

Offline monkeyworld

  • Curry Sauce
  • *
  • Posts: 36
Re: Save Penrhos Contact Point
« Reply #13 on: Sunday 06 October 2013, 2236 »
I am fed up with people who object to everything in Holyhead/Anglesey.  No wonder South Wales has everything.  They obviously do not have people who are short sighted and selfish.  Most of these people who object have moved onto the Island and have been employed or are still in employment.  What chance do our youngsters have of that.  The youngsters are having to move away to find employment.  What would have happened if AAM was objected to when it first came here.  How many people have been employed by AAM and have done very well out of it?!  I hope that AAM turn round and close the gate on Penrhos Nature Reserve (after all it is their land) and where would people take their dogs then to do their business!


Offline Che Guevaras Flip Flops

  • Tatw Pum Munud
  • *
  • Posts: 1827
  • www.savepenrhos.co.uk
Re: Save Penrhos Contact Point
« Reply #14 on: Monday 07 October 2013, 0855 »
I am fed up with people who object to everything in Holyhead/Anglesey.  No wonder South Wales has everything.  They obviously do not have people who are short sighted and selfish.  Most of these people who object have moved onto the Island and have been employed or are still in employment.  What chance do our youngsters have of that.  The youngsters are having to move away to find employment.  What would have happened if AAM was objected to when it first came here.  How many people have been employed by AAM and have done very well out of it?!  I hope that AAM turn round and close the gate on Penrhos Nature Reserve (after all it is their land) and where would people take their dogs then to do their business!

The objection of the protesters isn't to the development as a whole - just the part based on Penrhos.    The plans breach guidelines that were specifically put in place to protect AONBs etc making developers use brownfield sites where available - there are nearby brownfield sites available - or justifying why they can't or won't.    Large parts of it also breach other national guidelines.   Whether it passes or not by council is utterly irrelevant.  This will ultimately be called in by Cardiff precisely because of the guidlines it breaches and they will either allow it, block it or demand changes.

This should be 2 or even 3 separate applications. 

Offline action

  • Sos coch
  • *
  • Posts: 9
Re: Save Penrhos Contact Point
« Reply #15 on: Wednesday 09 October 2013, 1025 »
Some very valid points there Che, plenty to chew over for the officials presiding over the case. I'm still of the opinion that the proposal will go through in one form or another. It's an old trick for development companies to massively overstate their initial proposals with exaggerated plans and figures. It will be interesting, and not at all surprising to see that their real intentions are a somewhat smaller development that will be seen as a compromise by the unknwing majority, when in reality a well-played political trick. Maybe my cynical mind but i've seen it before.

Offline Che Guevaras Flip Flops

  • Tatw Pum Munud
  • *
  • Posts: 1827
  • www.savepenrhos.co.uk
Re: Save Penrhos Contact Point
« Reply #16 on: Wednesday 09 October 2013, 1930 »
Some very valid points there Che, plenty to chew over for the officials presiding over the case. I'm still of the opinion that the proposal will go through in one form or another. It's an old trick for development companies to massively overstate their initial proposals with exaggerated plans and figures. It will be interesting, and not at all surprising to see that their real intentions are a somewhat smaller development that will be seen as a compromise by the unknwing majority, when in reality a well-played political trick. Maybe my cynical mind but i've seen it before.

I have heard whispers of 'horse trading' going on behind the scenes between Plaid, Labour and the developer. If one yields here the other will yield over something elsewhere.