Nid safbwyntiau’r Arolygiaeth Gynllunio yw’r rhai a fynegir ar y dudalen hon. Yr hyn a ddangosir yma yw cynnwys a gyflwynwyd i’r Arolygiaeth Gynllunio gan y cyhoedd a phartïon eraill â buddiant, sy’n rhoi eu barn ynglŷn â’r cynnig hwn.
Cysylltiad Gogledd Cymru
Derbyniwyd 28/11/2018
Gan Michelle hughes
Gan Michelle hughes
Sylw
“There are numerous examples where NGET have not followed Government policy, as described in EN-1 and EN-5.
NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been made available consulted on.
Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.
Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will damage farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be negatively impact house value, which NGET have not considered.
National Grid are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. It is time for a much more up to date practical solution for the island other than Pylons
There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views. There are serious concerns, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. Better to adopt a safer solution other than pylons.
Unfair and undemocratic process, Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation, and no recognition to the hardship this installation will bring to to the existing industry sectors of Anglesey.
NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on.
The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options.”
NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been made available consulted on.
Pylons will be detrimental to views of unspoilt countryside, particularly views from within, and views of, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.
Pylons will be detrimental to the tourism industry through spoilt, and “industrialised”, countryside. Pylons will damage farming due to permanent land loss and restricted practices. Pylons will be negatively impact house value, which NGET have not considered.
National Grid are using the presence of one pylon line to justify a second. It is well known that the Secretary of State is discussing the possibility of further reactors at Wylfa in addition to Wylfa Newydd. If there is no change in Government policy, a second row will be used to justify and third and fourth line. It is time for a much more up to date practical solution for the island other than Pylons
There is a huge amount of scientific research into the health effects of pylons, and there are quite different views. There are serious concerns, about the health impacts on people and farm animals. Better to adopt a safer solution other than pylons.
Unfair and undemocratic process, Anglesey and Wales are self-sufficient in energy. The pylons will serve mainly to export power to the south east of England, against the wishes of Anglesey people and all levels of democratic representation, and no recognition to the hardship this installation will bring to to the existing industry sectors of Anglesey.
NGET and Horizon have not followed the guidance in The Planning Act 2008, and at no point has the genuine cumulative impact been assessed or consulted on.
The consultation was ineffective and not carried out in good faith, as NGET had already published their plans before it commenced, and the only statutory consultation did not consider any other options.”
