NOVEMBER 11, 2015, was a sad day for Newport when the National Park reversed their previous vote to reject the housing development plan. There is little doubt that Newport needs further affordable houses for young people who are lucky enough to have work in the Newport area.

However, the selected site is without doubt the worst possible site in Newport for this development and all the rubbish that was spoken in its support at the meeting was entirely irrelevant. The prime reason for this is that the logistics for the construction of the houses appears to have been entirely overlooked, either intentionally, or more likely through lack of understanding by those responsible.

A few days before the meeting I sent an e-mail to Tegryn Jones, the Chief Executive of the Park, pointing out what it was imperative to do prior to any decision to proceed. This e-mail was acknowledged and I was advised that the details had been circulated to his staff. Not a single reference was made to what I had said, at the meeting, and Wyn Harries, who should have known better being the architect, concentrated on what a wonderful prospect it was for Newport. What nonsense!

Also, that the majority of Newport resident are in favour; they certainly are not.

Many are extremely angry!

The prime problem with the site is its accessibility. Feidr Bentink, the prime access road is in places only 9ft 6in wide for two-way heavy traffic and Feidr Eglwys is no better. They already suffer congestion which in the holiday months is particularly severe. With added heavy construction traffic and digging of the roadways for services, if and when approved, it would make South East Newport and Cilgwyn Road often impassable.

This means to normal traffic, residents, holidaymakers, cyclists (Newport is a major cycling centre), emergency services, fire, ambulance, doctor, meals on wheels, grocery deliveries, farm vehicles, pedestrians, invalid cars, to name a few.

I advised Tegryn Jones to look at these points carefully and to provide details of what alternative measures would be put in place should any of these measure fail. To the best of my knowledge all these matters have been ignored.

Elderly citizens have had no consideration whatsoever.

They have worked hard during their lives, many through the Second World War, and have come to Newport to live out their twilight years in peace and tranquility. Anything that interferes with this is totally abhorrent. I realise that under normal conditions the granting of a planning application does not take into account temporary inconvenience of local residents.

The inconvenience which will be caused by this development is certainly not temporary and must be taken into consideration. If it is not, it is a totally disgraceful and deplorable act. Should any misadventure occur to any one of them it could very well amount to a national scandal! Many, of these dear people who are still able to drive a car have to leave their cars on the roadways immediately outside their houses.

What is to happen to these?

Newport is already extremely badly off for off-road parking .

This development must seriously be rethought because in the ten to twelve years it would take to complete, assuming the selected contractor does not go bankrupt and the Park would have to clear up the mess at taxpayers’ expense, as in this time many people, residents and holidaymakers would move elsewhere and poor Newport would cease to be the delightful place that it now is and become a ghost town. This is as much in the developer’s interest as anyone else.

Finally, St Mary’s Church has a number of services each week and is at times full.

Most people have to come to church by car and many of these are elderly, so what are they expected to do if roadside car parking is curtailed?

JONATHAN HODGES CEng, MIMechE,

Consulting Engineer