Green key copy of letter of objection (long 4p of MSword equivalent)
pdro...@cix.compulink.co.uk
Green Key Proposals Formal notification of Objection to proposed strategy
Having considered in detail the proposals contained in the consultation
document I find myself with no choice other than to object to a document I
consider to be both fatally flawed and an inappropriate use of public
money. Can I also express my concern that while you placed the
consultation on the internet to facilitiate public access you provide no
internet access to the key documents referenced by the consultation
document. This to my mind substantially reduces the scope for informed
criticism of the underlying assumptions on which the document is based.
The reasons for my objection and an indication of areas I find I have a
common interest are broken down as follows
Section 1
This section lays down the fundamental basis for the remainder of the
document. To my view it is neither contentious not warranting further
comment
Section two
This section marks out the grounds upon which the strategy is to be based.
I would however contend that many of the assumptions are based on a catch
all definition of tourism. This seems to define a tourist to mean any
person from outside the area that is entering the park. It makes no
differentiation between different types of visitor e.g. mountain
walker/climber, coach tripper, non walking visitor, sightseer. This
failure to recognise the different types of user entering the area under
consideration is to my mind the underlying strategic weakness of the whole
document and one that leaves it fatally flawed.
Taking the key points in turn
The juxtaposition of 2.2 and 2.3 suggest a cause and effect relationship
with the cure being force people out of their cars within the towns and
you will get greater spend. The comparison is them made with Lakeland
towns and villages. No consideration is give to the possibility that the
attractions offered by Lakeland towns are substantially greater than most
towns/villages in the control area. They hence attract a greater number of
coach parties and non walking visitors to them. This is likely to account
for why they have a greater spend. 2.3 also identifies the reduction in
length of stay. This almost certainly can be attributed to the improved
access to Snowdonia afforded by the A55 making the venue viable as a day
out from Merseyside. This means the area has a new type of visitor that
needs to be attracted to the area
Point 2.4 marks out a seemingly frightening figure of traffic growth, but
taken over the timeframe is relatively insubstantial The simple action of
banning lorries from using the core area except for access to support
local services would take a large chunk of this traffic out of the
equation. A large percentage of the remainder could be removed by cutting
down on town based tourist and local movement by car between villages and
attractions.
Points 2.6 and 7 are largely irrelevant to this proposal except in that
any proposals being delivered must not make the existing situation worse.
I would disagree that the statements made make the situation "neither
environmentally or economically sustainable." All that they illustrate it
that the area is failing to provide sufficient reasons to encourage
visitors to either stay or spend money in the area and is not providing a
public transport service that meets the needs of local residents.
Proposal Details Section 3 onwards
The goal set out in 3.1 is both laudable and achievable and the idea of
establishing a set of towns as gateways to Snowdonia (3.2.3) with improved
tourism facilities is something I would wholeheartedly endorse. Likewise
the enhancement of the cycling network 3.2.4 is to be applauded and the
failure to integrate a cycle route with the redevelopment of the Welsh
Highland Railway is a missed opportunity. They remain the only parts of
these sections with which I find myself in any agreement.
The basic premise surrounding these proposals are that people visiting
Snowdonia both want to visit the towns and if we get (force) them there
they will spend money. Can I on behalf of the majority of the walking
community let you into a little secret. With the exception of the walking
shops for gear, food shops for the chocolate bar we forgot and the pubs
for a meal or a drink before going home/back to the tent/hut/hostel the
towns and villages of Snowdonia hold little attraction for us.
We come to Snowdonia for the open countryside, the long walks and rock
faces. We seek to get away from the throng of the city resorting only to
the villages when the weather is too bad to safely walk or we want a rest
in the course of an extended expedition. Herding us into the towns before
we start our walks will not make us more likely to spend money in central
Snowdonia. All we will do is drive through the area on our way further
south to walk or climb in the Rhinogau, Moelwyns and Arans instead.
Assuming of course we don’t turn our backs on North Wales altogether in
favour of the welcome we receive in the Beacons, the Peak or the Lakes. In
short far from encouraging us to spend more in the Central area you will
drive us away from it.
So what specific problems are there with this section of the proposals as
they stand
On a fundamental level the idea of drawing tourist into honeypot towns has
its attractions. It allows organisations to focus the provision of related
services in a specific area. The idea of expanding the public transport
network to link those towns and reduce the amount of road traffic between
those towns is also highly appropriate. This should reduce traffic as the
town visitor can carefully control their visit to fit to a timetable.
Integrating this in with cycle touring allowing a drop off and cycle back
approach is also likely to generate income. However the proposal as they
stand show little understanding of the needs of the hill-walking /
climbing community and attempts to pigeon hole them in with other
attraction visiting tourists.
The first problem is the assumption that there are only a finite number of
points from which walkers wish to commence their day and end it (Penypass,
Idwal, Capel Curig, Beddgelert, Rhyd Ddu). Looking over my personal
journals I can identify 26 locations from which I have started a walk
within the control area over the past 5 years. Of these fewer than half
are on the proposed network of Sherpa routes and most have only a handful
of people using them on any given day all starting and finishing at
different times.
How many buses each day will you run to Gwernydd or must I walk an extra 3
miles from the A5 in Bethesda, from Llwyn Eigau or must I add 7miles onto
the walk and start in Talybont.
These proposals therefore mean that walkers are being forced into a
decreased number of start points limiting choice, increasing erosional
pressures on those areas and greatly reducing the enjoyment of the area
due to the increased human presence. As such they run counter to the CROW
act and interfere with my civil liberties.
The next problem is in the frequency of buses. Nowhere is this exactly
spelt out other than at least every half an hour. If on a cold wet October
day when I am soaked to the skin I arrive at Idwal at 8pm in the evening
having missed the bus by a minute how long will I have to wait 1minute, 5
minutes, 10 minutes, 30 minutes an houror have I even missed the last bus.
If while waiting, instead of immediately changing into the dry clothes
that await me at my car, I shiver away and am subsequently taken ill or
worse exhibit signs of hypothermia will the authority compensate me for
loss of income for any days I take off work?
If I am walking late into the evening what time will the last bus run and
in converse if I finish my walk what guarantee will I have that I will not
be stranded waiting as one full bus after another passes me by meaning I
arrive home too late for something I had planned to do in the evening.
Figure 1 gives no indication at all of these.
Next what happens if I stay in the area. I’m most likely to camp or use a
climbing hut but am unlikely to walk from the base. Since many of these
are in the central area but remote from the bus routes are you seriously
suggesting I drive past the point from which I intend to walk to a gateway
town in order to catch a bus back. On the surface that is what the logic
of the proposals suggest. If this is the case will you compensate the
owners of these remote facilities whose value has now significantly
declined?
Then your proposals for parking and their charging structure are counter
productive. The average hill walker/climber will drive into the area at an
economical 50mph, where road conditions allow, park the car disappear for
between 4 and 10 hours then repeat the journey in the other direction. For
a car park that houses 50 vehicles in the course of one 12 hour day about
100 journeys will be made to it. If you reduce the time allowed to 2 hours
you change the user from walker to sightseer. The journey speed will drop
as they absorb the view, as will that of every other user behind them,
reducing fuel efficiency and increasing environmental damage. At the same
time assuming maximum stays are used that same car park will now generate
300 journeys all of which could have been better made from a bus.
Finally there are the assumptions of economic benefit. The initial work
identifies a benefit of 107 jobs for an investment of £65k each. Assuming
the 107 is correct these are the only new jobs that are guaranteed. The
income projected from the scheme as a whole assumes existing users will
continue to frequent the area and new users are attracted. However having
made all those statements in the main document we come to the admission in
the strategic aim 1.1 that the "needs and expectations of the wide range
of people that "use" Northern Snowdonia" are not known as there is a
target to "complete an appraisal of visitor and local needs and/or
expectations." Since these are unknown on what basis are the projections
of £3m, £9m and £27m and their consequent job based. To illustrate an
alternative impact let me consider my most recent trip to the area.
"I left home about 7am driving up to Ogwen and started walking about
10.30. I finished about 4.30 and dropped down into Capel where I looked
around the walking shops, finding nothing I needed I picked up a mars bar
and traveled on to Betws y Coed. There I picked up the first aid kit I had
been looking for for £15 and a few additional items I had not planned for
a total spend about £25. I drove home stopping for fuel outside Dolgellau
where I purchased some more chocolate arriving home about 7.30." Net spend
in central area £26
Under these proposals I could see the following scenario happening. Stop
at Betws (£4 to council) and picked up a bus, the wait and drive meant I
wasn’t walking til 11and a further half hour was lost at the end of the
walk. Pressed for time I didn’t want to risk a further long wait in Capel
so missed the shops there. Short on time and needing to get back home I
went into the first shop in Betws and picked up the first aid kit not
stopping to look round the store (£15) Arriving back home later than
planned at 8.15 I missed helping put my children to bed Net spend in
central area £19.
In this instance the area would have lost at least £7 spend with the food
shop in Capel receiving no income. Further the bus adds in a factor that
is outside my control so had I needed to guarantee being home by 8pm the
additional uncertainty of the bus journeys would without question resulted
in me changing my plans and walking in southern Snowdonia. A net loss of
£26 to the area.
In this case far from increasing spend in the park the proposal would lead
to a fall off in expenditure with the village in the core being worst hit.
Conclusions
So in summary I welcome the decision to review the traffic management
regime in the central area of the park. However, based on personal
experience, I believe your basic assumptions and hence your proposals are
fatally flawed.
In particular;
1. They interfere with the basic concept of the National Park and open
access legislation by forcing walkers into a number of honeyspot
locations.
2. They place the health and safety of walkers at risk in inclement
weather as walkers either rush to meet a bus or wait long periods having
just missed one.
3. They increase the number of potential car journeys by encouraging short
term parking thereby increasing throughput at sites within the core area
4. They reduce the likelihood of casual visits to shops at villages by
introducing parking charges or additional waits for buses
5. They reduce the likelihood of casual visits to shops by walkers in all
towns by increasing the time taken to travel from doorstep to start of
walk.
6. They increase the money spent on parking (government) and thereby
reduce the disposable income available to spend in shops (private)
7. They reduce the attraction of Snowdonia in the autumn and winter months
by cutting down further the available daylight time by increasing journey
times.
8. They assume that the proposals when enacted will have no detrimental
effect on walking visitor numbers. Yet the proposals very first strategic
target recognises that the needs of users are currently unknown by calling
for an appraisal.
9. They assume that cyclists will be attracted to the area by the prospect
of using paths that are little more than an extension of the carriageway
while failing to improve safety by removing any lorries from the road that
ajoins them.
Yours
Peter Roberts
Peter Roberts
personal mail to : pdro...@cix.compulink.co.uk
business mail to : pet...@powys.gov.uk
The Reids
> would without question resulted
>in me changing my plans and walking in southern Snowdonia. A net loss of
>£26 to the area.
I suggest every response should contain the "if you do it i'm off"
point?
--
Mike Reid
Photos and description of recent trip to the strange "Las Bardenas" area of Spain
"http://www.fell-walker.co.uk/page67.htm"
r.na...@btclick.com
<pdro...@cix.compulink.co.uk> wrote in message
news:a321t1$5fg$1...@thorium.cix.co.uk...
> > the following text went to gwynedd by email this evening
Wow, Peter, I thought my letter was detailed, but yours beats it by miles.
well put...I hope that they read and digest it!
Rob
Paul Rooney
<cleve...@fellwalk.co.uk> wrote:
>Following up to pdro...@cix.compulink.co.uk
>
>> would without question resulted
>>in me changing my plans and walking in southern Snowdonia. A net loss of
>>£26 to the area.
>
>I suggest every response should contain the "if you do it i'm off"
>point?
Exactly what my response was.
Paul
pete bland
pdro...@cix.compulink.co.uk wrote:
>> the following text went to gwynedd by email this evening
[snip]
That was a tour de force Peter. If they get a lot of objections like
that, they must surely sit up and take notice. Er... you won't mind if
we steal some of your points will you?
May I also say thanks for the updates on FMD restrictions you have
posted here re Powys.
--
Pete Bland
(email address spam-trapped)
Steve Pardoe
My draft response (as per previous post in another thread|) is at
http://www.pardoes.com/climbing/snowconia.htm . By all means
plagiarise/comment before I send it in.
Steve
<pdro...@cix.compulink.co.uk> wrote in message
news:a321t1$5fg$1...@thorium.cix.co.uk...
> > the following text went to gwynedd by email this evening
>
> Green Key Proposals Formal notification of Objection to proposed strategy
<mega snip>
Neal Milne
response in I'd have plagarised yours mercilessly.
Neal
pdro...@cix.compulink.co.uk
cutting and pasting whole sections.
As many of you may have guessed from the FMD data I work within a planning
department though not specifically with planning issues.
one key thing with this type of consultation is to avoid lots of duplicate
letters they tend to be grouped as a petition and so onely get counted
once if TBTB are anti the content.
That said my rather flowery style lends itself perfectly to plagarising
and adapting by those of you who want to raise objections but didn't have
the couple of hours spare that came about from abandoning any plans for a
walk due to the weather
PEter
Ps hope to have some more good news re FMD in the Beacons this week but no
promises tests on the cull sites were being completed over the last couple
of working days