Jump to content

Bethan

Members
  • Content Count

    81
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Bethan

  1. Our prediction was spot on! A Variation on Clause 3 of the granting permission to have a temporary mast erected has been sent to the Shropshire Planning. Permission was granted in January on the condition that the mast would be decommissioned by 12th October. The installers now want this extending to 17th December!! I read in the documents with the original application that the Installers would remove the mast by the 12th October regardless of whether there was a fibre connection or not, so why do they need the extend the date to 17th December? So far I read that there is one objector to the extension and one 'neutral' who now suggests that a 'repeater station' be erected on top of the mast so that the mobile network could be improved. With the right mobile operator the reception in Rhos y Gadfa has improved, so why should we give the developers any excuse not to decommission this hideous eyesore on time
  2. Have you seen the latest!! BT (openreach) - regarding providing a broadband connection to the site, are "looking at having the work complete by no later than 30/06/2017. We will provide you with progress updates as the job progresses." No-one will bet on this happening! Based on their performance to date! Nick Willians (Berry's) now says that " the mast and related foundations will be removed from the site prior to 12th October 2017 regardless of whether a fiber connection is on site or not.." It, therefore, begs the question why put it up in the first place??? Why did they seem so dependent on BT providing a connection in the first place???
  3. Solar Farm Public Meeting held Tuesday 17th January 2017 Many attended a lively debate chaired by the Parish Council Chairman. Comments were made regarding lack of notification, poor communication and shortness of time of the new planning application. The installation site will now contain 18,800 solar panels (previously 20,000) changing the layout from the original application drawings to ensure maximum light reaching the panels. There are many questions left unanswered and it was regrettable that the chairman curtailed the meeting when he did. Many lorries delivering to the site are not following the route agreed by the Shropshire Planning resulting in serious road and property damage. Questions asked included: What was done inform hauliers of the route to the site? Were drivers of delivery vehicles made aware of the route, maps, written instructions etc.? What will be done to prevent future occurrences? The agreed route to site requires vehicles to go to the Gledrid roundabout and head for St. Martins. Major road works is about to start there which will take 6 months. Have the hauliers been informed of this, given assurances and that it must not affect the agreed route to the site? Why were no signs put up to help avoid large vehicles travelling down very narrow lanes? Who is responsible for repairing the damaged caused and sweeping the roads? It was announced that BT will install an underground fiber optic connection to the site within 6 months and that they had been paid a very substantial sum in advance to encourage this, suggesting that the 65 ft mast could be removed during 2017. This will obviate the need for the three year period requested in the planning application. This provoked a lot of scepticism, and it was considered that this announcement, at the 11th hour, was only made to appease the audience. Many questions were left unanswered which include: What has been agreed with BT? Is the delivery time of 6 months from the time BT start the contract? If so, what is the start date? What has been negotiated with BT regarding the end date? As payment to BT has already been made, are there compensation clauses in the contract for failure to complete on time? Have BT secured a planning agreement with all concerned for the fiber optic route (reported as being 3 Km long!)? If not, how long is this likely to be? Like in other areas, can the laying of cables etc. be subcontracted so that BT need only be only involved in the connection? What is the effect of the emissions from the mast on mobile phone reception, which is already very poor? Will these emissions have an adverse effect on wild life? If permission is granted to erect the mast, what incentive will there be for it to be dismantled in 2017 even if BT provide the connection? The impression given was that the mast would only be needed for a matter of a few months. This being the case, is it not possible to negotiate an extension to the 31st March, for the ROC to be allocated? Clarification of the above is crucial in securing the shortest possible time should a mast be the only option. There was considerable concern that if/when the mast is erected, and bearing in mind BT’s poor performances in complying with their promises, it will be visible for many years even after the fiber connection is made. OBJECTIONS MUST BE MADE ON GRANTING PLANNING PERMISSION UNTIL ALL QUESTIONS HAVE BEEN ANSWERED IN WRITING
  4. Article in The Advertiser today : Solar Farm : We need to put up a 20-metre mast A CONTROVERSIAL solar farm near Gobowen could become “unviable” unless further planning permission is granted. Elgin Energy received the go-ahead for 20,000-panel green energy scheme at Rhosygadfa 12 months ago. But it is now looking for further approval of a 20-metre telecoms mast to provide an internet connection to transfer data from the solar farm to the substation at Ifton. And it is against the clock as the site must be commissioned before March 31. Agents Berrys said that after that date a “notable fall” in the Renewable Obligation Certificate (ROCs) will “render the project unviable”. They continued: “The connection will allow SP Energy Networks to shut down the solar farm in the event of a fault. The applicant has explored all avenues to avoid the requirement for a telecoms mast at the site, however, BT have confirmed a fibre connection won’t be installed before March 31 and Scottish Power have confirmed a satellite broadband option is not reliable enough and, as such, is not a viable option. “In the short term, the only viable option is the installation of a temporary mast.” The mast will only be temporary as BT is expected to provide fibre broadband to the site in the next six to 18 months. voicing concerns that it could impact the aesthetics of the area and damage tourism.The solar farm has caused unrest in Rhosygadfa and Gobowen with many residents and Councillors It was submitted and granted following the refusal of a 40,000 solar panel installation on the site. I understand the application was submitted on the 16th December and the ref is 16/05607/FUL
  5. Now they want to erect a 20-METER MAST to enable SP Energy to shut down the Solar Farm in the event of a fault!!! Supposed to be temporary until broadband option becomes reliable ! What a laugh!! Why don't Elgin install a fibre-optic connection direct underground to the 'Green' box at the Rhewl!! These 'Temporary' solutions' ALWAYS end up being permanent!-
  6. Just read the GREAT NEWS! Lets hope that this second refusal will stick and that the appalling saga is now closed. If Elgin wish to continue they must either find a way of making it more economically viable or withdraw.
  7. The documents for the appeal include a letter from the Inspectorate to Shropshire Council regarding a site visit. It reads as follows : "I am writing to inform you that the Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State to determine the above appeal(s) is L Crosby MA MRTPI The Inspector will visit the appeal site at 09:30 on 14 April 2016. It is important that you make immediate arrangements for the Inspector to be met at the site to enable the inspection to be made. If you cannot attend, you should arrange for someone else to attend in your place. If this is not possible, you must let me know immediately. The Inspector will expect to be accompanied by representatives of both parties. If one of the parties fails to arrive, the Inspector will determine the most suitable course of action, which could mean that they will conduct the visit unaccompanied. In other circumstances, the visit might have to be aborted. At the commencement of the site inspection the Inspector will make it clear that the purpose of the visit is not to discuss the merits of the appeal(s) or to listen to arguments from any of the parties. The Inspector may ask the parties to draw attention to any physical features on the site and in its vicinity. In turn the Inspector may wish to confirm particular features referred to by interested parties in their written representations." Lets hope it will be a nice day to draw as many people as possible to line the route with placards!!
  8. Bethan

    Community Online should it continue?

    Most definitely it should continue. Advertising will certainly help. Anyone wishing to know more, and uncertain about accessing the site on a computer, I'm sure can get all the help they need by dropping in to the Pavilion (Gobowen Playing Fields) on a Thursday mornings (10 til 12). Everyone is very helpful, enthusiastic, and very willing to assist - (AND IT'S FREE!!!)
  9. Please note fundamental error in last line of para 2!
  10. For those who don't have The Advertizer, the following article is published in tonight's edition :
  11. You're ABSOLUTELY RIGHT, Gardner - Thank you for putting out. PLEASE NOTE EVERYBODY - THE COUNCIL MEETING IS AT SELATTYN SCHOOL ON WED. 9TH MARCH - 7.00 PM Sorry about the misleading info earlier
  12. DON'T FORGET EVERYONE THE PARISH COUNCIL MEETING IS ON WEDNESDAY, 9TH MARCH AT 7.00 PM IN THE PAVILION. AMOUNGST OTHER THINGS, THERE WILL BE A DISCUSSION TO FINALISE THE OBJECTION TO THE APPEAL AGAINST THE SOLAR FARM PLEASE TRY AND GET THERE TO ENSURE THAT THE POINTS MADE AT THE LAST MEETING (1ST MARCH) ARE COVERED!
  13. Reading the agenda for tomorrow's Council Meeting , the chairman is only allowing 15 mins. for Public participation!! Shame really,This project that will have such a detrimental effect on our precious countryside. Surely it would be courteous to allow the public more that 15 minutes to voice their opinion!
  14. Extracts from an article published 9 months ago by CPRE When you look at the economics, the reality is that most renewables just don’t work, by Mike Greene, businessman, philanthropist and campaigner I’m not against renewable energy. As a matter of fact, I have solar panels on the roof of my house. But when you look at the economics, the reality is that most renewables just don’t work – and are unlikely to ever work – if you take away the subsidies that come with setting them up Many local councils are keen to invest in solar energy because it’s seen as an easy win. They are not driving these plans forward because of any green credentials; by slapping down solar panels they can gain access to Government funding and low-interest loans. The subsidies involved are huge, because solar and wind energy still aren’t viable without them. One of the key arguments for renewables is the increasing cost of energy. The thing that seems to be ignored is that food prices are predicted to grow at a much higher rate than energy prices. At the moment, our supermarkets are in a strong negotiating position and can dictate cheap prices. But as consumption increases in China, India and Africa, the countries we import so much of our food from will increasingly be able to sell all their produce at home. We’re in a better position to grow crops than many countries, but if we haven’t kept our farmland, we’re going to be even shorter of food. Our prime, or even secondary, agricultural land is the last place we should be looking to build solar or wind farms. All the projected profits of the schemes are based on the optimistic, or naive, assumption that the solar panels will last 25 years with hardly any degradation in efficiency. With set-up costs being so high, profit could easily turn into a loss. Meanwhile, tenant farmers whose families have been working this land for five generations are being given notice to leave to make way for energy parks. They’ve sunk their life savings into their farms, and would receive minimal compensation. If you’re going to have solar, put it on top of buildings, not in the countryside. If we’re going to subsidise things, let’s subsidise roof tiles that work as solar panels, and look at whether solar could be built into the planning of all new housing. That’s not going to impact visually on the beautiful countryside, or harm farming, but it could help to generate energy for individual properties and feed something back to the National Grid. DON'T FORGET - SPECIAL MEETING TOMORROW TO DISCUSS APPEAL. AT THE PAVILION, GOBOWEN - 7.00 PM
  15. It is regrettable that the 5MW application, approved last December, does not also include an agricultural plan. One of the reasons in the statement made by the Secretary of State,made when dismissing an appeal against the refusal of planning permission at Parkham Old Hall reads : The Secretary of State also found the 25 years’ loss of agricultural land (there were no definitive plans for agricultural use alongside the development) “counts against the proposal”.
  16. Extracts from an article published 9 months ago by CPRE When you look at the economics, the reality is that most renewables just don’t work, by Mike Greene, businessman, philanthropist and campaigner I’m not against renewable energy. As a matter of fact, I have solar panels on the roof of my house. But when you look at the economics, the reality is that most renewables just don’t work – and are unlikely to ever work – if you take away the subsidies that come with setting them up Many local councils are keen to invest in solar energy because it’s seen as an easy win. They are not driving these plans forward because of any green credentials; by slapping down solar panels they can gain access to Government funding and low-interest loans. The subsidies involved are huge, because solar and wind energy still aren’t viable without them. One of the key arguments for renewables is the increasing cost of energy. The thing that seems to be ignored is that food prices are predicted to grow at a much higher rate than energy prices. At the moment, our supermarkets are in a strong negotiating position and can dictate cheap prices. But as consumption increases in China, India and Africa, the countries we import so much of our food from will increasingly be able to sell all their produce at home. We’re in a better position to grow crops than many countries, but if we haven’t kept our farmland, we’re going to be even shorter of food. Our prime, or even secondary, agricultural land is the last place we should be looking to build solar or wind farms. All the projected profits of the schemes are based on the optimistic, or naive, assumption that the solar panels will last 25 years with hardly any degradation in efficiency. With set-up costs being so high, profit could easily turn into a loss. Meanwhile, tenant farmers whose families have been working this land for five generations are being given notice to leave to make way for energy parks. They’ve sunk their life savings into their farms, and would receive minimal compensation. If you’re going to have solar, put it on top of buildings, not in the countryside. If we’re going to subsidise things, let’s subsidise roof tiles that work as solar panels, and look at whether solar could be built into the planning of all new housing. That’s not going to impact visually on the beautiful countryside, or harm farming, but it could help to generate energy for individual properties and feed something back to the National Grid.
  17. A quick walk (or ride) will reveal that the hedges near the Solar Farm site have now been "slashed" at a level about 1 meter above last year's trim. Is this the start? Or is the decision of the appeal being anticipated?
  18. I understand that the Special Meeting is going to be held in Gobowen on 1st March at 7.00 pm at the Pavilion. I hope many readers will read the 'activity' page on this website, and be encouraged to support the campaign to stop the further industrialisation of good quality agricultural land and retain local amenities for future generations. It is vital that as many residents as possible voice/write their views to reflect the passion we have to protecting our beautiful Shropshire countryside. Solar Energy should be generated on Roofs not in Fields
  19. Bethan

    Council Meeting Agenda

    Well, Lee, at least WR has responded!!
  20. What's happened to the publications of the Parish Council Agendas and Minutes? Non seem to have been put on this website since last September!
  21. That's right ROBMIT. If anyone wants to make representations to the Inspectorate directly, they can do it online using the following address : acp.planninginspectorate.gov.uk/caseSearch.aspx The case number is : 3142392 It's not too difficult, but worth the effort. The more people who use it will reflect the depth of resistance/objections there is to the deprivation of our lovely Shropshire countryside.
  22. Everyone please note! There will be a Council Meeting TOMORROW - WEDNESDAY 10th FEBRUARY at the Pavillion starting 7pm Please get as many as possible to make every effort to attend.The least we can do is request yet another Special Meeting to lodge our strongest possible objection
  23. SO YOU THINK IT'S ALL OVER!! Well, unbelievably, an appeal has been made on the decision made last JULY! The application at that point was refused. A new application was submitted for a reduced sized Solar Farm (5MW), and despite many objections, it was approved last December. NOW an appeal has been published on the 4th February on the JULY decision!! To view this, the following procedure may help: 1) Viewing Planning Application - Shropshire Council 2) Select 'Viewing Planning Register' 3) Enter in 'Keyword, Reference No. etc' : 14/03946/FUL and 'click' on 'SEARCH' 4) Select 'Case Related (2)' and 'click' on blue text in 'Planning Appeals(1)' 5) Access 'Documents ( 6)' to view published documents If you wish to continue objecting (as I do!), one can contact the Inspectorate in writing or e-mail The contact details can be found in the 'START LETTER' in documents It's also worth reading the 'Appellant's Case Statement' in documents, in particular page 5, para 2.5 below the new maps. Basically, Elgin want to double the approved project, which was for a 5 MW scheme The Inspectorate has given very little time to respond, (few days only!) , so PLEASE put pen to paper urgently
  24. Application Approved 6 votes to 3 in favour (including chairman of committee)
  25. A certain Mrs. Angela Roberts (WHO LIVES IN BUCKINGHAMSHIRE) has submitted her support for the project. She needs to be made aware of the fact that 100’s of new houses are being built in the area and none have been planned to have a single Solar Panel fitted. It should be a condition ALL Planning Applications that these be included. This would bring direct benefits to new home buyers and would not use a square meter of good agricultural land. It would also allow the beautiful Shropshire Rural (and other areas of the country) free for everyone to enjoy. Rambling in between 3 mtr high hedges is not only unsightly, but dangerous!
×