|
20200405a-EM-RICD-NPTC-enzo-mp01
Dai Richards
Sun, 5 Apr, 21:25
to Steve, Del, Nicola, Simon, haulwenjones, christina.rees.mp, cllr.r.g.jones
Dear Councillor Morgan & planning department
I refer to your facebook post about the removal of soils etc from the Enzo development and how you were going to...
"make sure everything is checked to be absolutely appropriate prior to the building of any houses"
So that we can gauge the quality of your work as a councillor in combination with the planning department please can you both provide evidence of how you worked together to ensure the removal of the land identified as contamined in 2008 from the same area. I note you were a councillor in 2008 when the Cuddy Group owned the land on which the attached survey was made .
The land is shown as contaminated and a danger to local residents. The planning department has received an email from one resident who is a former co-worker whose parents also live next to the site and both of whom have cancer. This resident has a perpetual problem with contaminated dust in dry spells and is fearful for the health of her family. I look forward to receiving this information from you Councillor Morgan together with the planning departments contribution.
Further to the planning departments refusal to answer pertinent questions last week, I'm offering you 14 working days to complete your reply then as well as cancelling the council tax on my properties in Neath Port Talbot, I will sending out a press release containing the relevant information to local and national newspapers.
This email is copied to:
Christina Rees MP (FAO Ciaran - for observation purposes)
Cllr Rob Jones, Council Leader (for information purposes)
Cllr Knoyle (for obseravtion and duty of care to the people of Glynneath)
Councillor Haulwen Jones for observation and reporting to the Glynneath Town Council.
Steve Ball, Nicola Lake - NPTC Planning Department for action purposes in laiason with Councillor Morgan
Attachments -
20200401a-LE-LNEZ-to-NPTC-enzo.pdf - letter from local resident objecting to site
(not linked for privacy to the individual concerned)
20080599a-DO-TRIR-geo.rpt.cuddy.pdf - Geo Technical and Geo-Environmental report 2008
contamination.jpg - extracts from report
regards - Dai Richards - www.dai-richards.wales
|
|
20200412a-EM-RICD-MPUK-enzo-mp03
Hi Ciaran - thanks for the reply, the reason I copied Christina to the email was for observation but I believe that there are definitely health issues
involved here so we would welcome Christina's support with this case.
I am undertaking an investigation on behalf of a group of around 20 households/residents (out of approx 100 bordering the site) in my area but the NPT Council refuse to cough up the relevant information to help me in understanding the planning process etc. Four years ago we had exactly the same happen and I wanted to understand why it came back again. Its not detailed info I'm after, just process information, regulations etc, stuff that should be readily available to the public so that I can compare the available information with the information held on the planning website.
The key issues with this case are:
· The council has identified land as ordinary land suitable for housing development when it has been either a council refuse tip or industrial landfill site for the last 90 years.
· The land has been tested and shown to be contaminated with nearly three times the safe level of known carcinogens but there is no record of anything having been done about it.
· The remaining land is an inland flood plain which they want to build over thereby increasing the risk of localised flooding.
I didn't think there was a lot you could do, however as you said Christina would be interested in health issues, I believe there could potentially be health issues on the scale of Erin Brockevich, so perhaps Christina would like to get in early on this one.
RESIDENTS INFORMATION SUPPLIED TO NPTC
The following information has been volunteered by residents and submitted to NPTC as part of their planning application process. I think it is relevant to Christina because of the potential issues which I have highlighted in red. If you want their phone numbers or addresses to verify this information, I'm happy to supply them…….
June and Glen Wehko have been living in Brynhyfryd for 50 years. June is 87 years old with limited use of her arms and Glen is 92 and suffering with dementia. Their one joy in life is sitting out in the garden when the weather is nice, they have specially fitted handrails to allow them to access the garden, Glen's movement is restricted and June has a problem with both arms. During the years when Cuddy was tipping on the land and the planning department/council failed to enforce the condition that required Cuddy was required to only tip for 12 months, Glen and June on hot days used to sit indoors in the front room of the house with the radio turned up so that they could drown out the sound of Cuddy's machines with music. (Physical and Mental health issues)
Ron Rees has lived on the inter-valley (Banwen Road) for longer than he cares to remember, he built the bungalow Verona in which he lives. Previously to that he lived in the bungalow next door which he also built. He is a builder by trade and used to sub-contract to the Cuddy Group. He indicated that while he worked for the Cuddy Group they regularly cut corners and broke regulations. He has known the Cuddy family all his life and firmly believes that the Cuddy Group has tipped asbestos in the site. (Both Ron and his wife has cancer, Ron's daughter also living next to the site volunteered this info not Ron - if you speak to him please don't lead with this information) (Physical heath issues)
Nigel Taylor's house overlooks the Enzo Development, his house is at the highest point in Brynhyfryd and he has a clear view over the 'tip' as he calls it. Nigel has been retired 18 years, he is a keen walker and is also inquisitive. I have videotaped the following evidence of deliberate tipping of industrial waste by the Cuddy Group onto the proposed development site. The following is a summary (not verbatim) of Nigel's testimony (the original testimony as previously stated has been digitally recorded and is on file, I have no reason to doubt his testimony having conversed with Nigel regularly for the last 5-8 years. There are certain elements of Nigel's testimony which I can corroborate, see below.
(Nigel Taylor statement) "I've been retired 18 years; the back of the house including my garden overlooks the tip as I am on top of Bryhyfryd Hill. I get up several times in the night to use the toilet. I have seen a number of lorries dumping in the pitch dark, also at one time with Cuddy and company they kept a machine over there, by day the Cuddy worker would turn up and unbury everything [meaning they would dig up the top of the previous day's hole just above what they had dumped the previous day]
I (Dai Richards am also witness to this type of activity, I cycle regularly down the Banwen Rd and I used to stop and watch the Cuddy' vehicles at work].
If we look at the following google satellite images from 2014 which are all the same image but with additional indicators added we will see the following.
1 - Image one shows the Cuddy machine busy at work.
2 - Image two shows recently disturbed ground in two isolated spots in the tipped area.
3. Image three shows machine tracks to these isolated locations.
(I can supply these images if you want) (Possible physical health issues for everyone local to the site)
NATURAL RESOURCES WALES
In view of the last statement by Nigel Taylor, I have already reported this to NRW (Lisa Harris is the case officer). There are other eyewitness reports of asbestos being tipped. The Cuddy Group at one time were the 12th largest demolition company in the world and the core of their business according to the group themselves was demolition and asbestos removal.
CONTAMINATED LAND - CARCINOGENS
I've attached evidence of contaminated land from a 2008 survey (20080100e-IM-MKLI-CUDD-contamination) that proves the land was a danger to the residents of neighbouring properties, none of this has been taken away, it has just been dumped over. One of the contaminants is Arsenic. According to Wikipedia the United States Environmental Protection Agency rank Arsenic as number 1 in its priority list of hazardous substances. The 2008 survey shows nearly three times the acceptable level of this chemical. Another of the contaminents Benzo[a]pyrene is listed as a group 1 carcinogen by the International Agency for Research on Cancer.
CONTAMINATED SLURRY
The area of the site that was unsuitable for tipping on is traditionally wetlands and peat bog, this is directly behind my house. It is a flood plain where two streams and excess surface water from the site converge. They want to build up a 5 metre high bank of contaminated soil on this spot, thereby moving the flood plain to inside my house and the adjoining neighbours' properties. The overspill will then travel down to the properties in Aberdare Road that have already been flooded twice this year. We will all become hosts to flood water and contaminated slurry in heavy rain.
COUNCIL NEGLIGENCE & DECEPTION
A survey on the land in 2008 said that "it was assumed" no-one would build on the 'wetlands' area, meaning only an idiot would put houses there. Cue Neath Port Talbot Council who had previously given planning permission to build houses on this spot in 2003, these plans have continuously rolled over since then and are still currently approved (with conditions) despite the recommendations of the 2008 survey. The council planning department rather than admit their previous negligence in not referring the 2008 survey to their 2003 approved plans are attempting to push a new set of plans by the developer Enzo Homes through the planning process in the guise of a new traffic management system for the road leading into the site.
ATTACHED IMAGES & NOTES
20000327e-IM-THOS-ENZO-chem-anlys - this is a chemical analysis of recent testing of the land completed by my son Simon and submitted as part of an objection to NPTC. He is just about to complete his chemistry PhD, having already completed a BSc with honours and MSc (Chemistry), he is qualified to make this analysis on that basis. His sister Victoria Richards PhD who is the chief editor of a well respected scientific journal that specialises in Chemistry (Nature Communications Chemistry) is in agreement with it. The 2008 chemical soil analysis only went down to 1.4 metres. In 2010, according to another survey, the industrial landfill went down to 9.75 metres and it had 6 years of dumping on after that. There's about 20 metres of made up (possibly contaminated) ground there now, all tipped on by the asbestos removal specialists, the Cuddy Group.
20080100e-IM-MKLI-CUDD-contamination - evidence of land contamination in 2008. The contamination is shown to be a danger to neighbouring properties and it is still there.
On a lighter note you will be pleased or probably displeased to learn that in the last 30 years of dealing with the following organisations, DWP, HMRC, Welsh Government and UK Government and others, your office is the only one I've ever dealt with that has 'integrity'. Thanks again for your concern and understanding; I'll leave you with a quote from Abraham H Maslow, a psychologist famous for his 'Hierarchy of Needs'
"He who belies his talent, the born painter who sells stockings instead, the intelligent man who lives a stupid life , the man who sees the truth and keeps his mouth shut, the coward who gives up his manliness, all these people perceive in a deep way that they have done wrong to themselves and despise themselves for it."
Cheers - Dai
|
|
20200428a-EM-RICD-MPUK-enzo-mp04
Hi Ciaran,
CONTAMINATED LAND
Further to my previous email about the contamination. We have yet to establish that the council recorded this information 2008 when it was submitted to the planning department. The information was contained in a geo-technical survey and at the time it should have been passed on to the contaminated land team, however the application which contained this information was withdrawn, most likely due to the fact that it contained a long list of remediation actions that would have cost the Cuddy Group a lot of money. 14 months later the plans were then passed and included the provision of a future geo-technical survey This survey was eventually submitted in 2016, it was completed by a different company. and did not contain any chemical testing.
There is no evidence that Cuddy tried to build houses in the 13 years the plans were in force and an inside source within the company told us in 2016 that the development was just a cover for their demolition and asbestos removal operation. The rates I'm told are about £30.00 a ton to take and dump industrial landfill which equates to £300 a lorry and Cuddy was tipping at the site non-stop for years. The Cuddy Group were the 12th largest demolition company in the world at one time. Their actions at the site confirm that the purpose of the site was landfill not a housing development.
We are attempting to establish whether or not the contamination was reported to the Contaminated Land Team which it should have been but are experiencing the usual avoidance of questions, buck passing and refusal to reply emails from the NPTC council including the council leader. Its highly unlikely that the contaminated land info was ever passed to the contaminated land team. This is why I've copied you to an email to the council leader who has also refused to answer questions, avoided the issues and passed the buck.
HEALTH ISSUES
I'm making a start on recording the health issues of people around the site and have not yet specifically asked health questions of the residents but this is what I have from knowledge picked up from converstions and volunteered information from those I'm representing.
Attached you will find an image of 3 parts
1 - Image 1 (top) is evidence of the contamination in 2008.
2 - The locations on the site that test as contaminated (there were 6 tests, 4 of which proved contamination was present in the soil. Two of the chemical contaminants are classified grade 1 carcinogens. Of the other 2 tests, 1 was in a bog area and the other one on tipped ground included concrete and wire. These were the only samples sent for testing so this would suggest that at least 80% of the land was contaminated in 2008, 40% of which contained grade 1 carcinogens.
3 A side profile of the site showing the flow of underground contamination (towards the houses) in Woodland Park and Brynhyfryd, in some instances the contaminated groundwater flows into the stream, in others, like behind my house, the perched groundwater at a lower level flows under the stream and rises to the surface when it hits the fault line that roughly follows the line of the stream. You will see from the potential receptors that neighbouring residents will be amongst those affected. My neighbour has vegetables growing right next to where the contaminated water rises to the surface. His daughter (see TP5 below) died of cancer in her 20s. It is possible that anyone growing their own fruit or veg in the lower parts of our street are ingesting carcinogens when eating home grown food.
Notes on the testing in 2008
TP3 - the nearest houses are less than 50 metres away and the occupants of one of the houses (I haven't talked to the other house) 2 out of 3 have cancer, the other one has asthma. The identified poison at this location is Benzo[a]pyrene classified as a grade 1 carcinogen.
TP5 - the nearest house about 25 metres away - two of the occupants have died in the last 3 years, one with a degenerative condition. Next door's daughter died of cancer in her 20s as did another youngster of cancer in his 20s, in the same cul-de-sac of 10 houses, this boy also used to play on the site as a child. I'm not sure about the daughter yet, tricky subject to broach with the parents of course.
My house is about 40 metres from this spot and my granddaughter was born two years ago with an unexplained mutation (my son and his partner both lived here not long before she was conceived.
That's the end of the contamination, there is a saying "In for a penny, in for a pound" so I'm going to introduce you to a really interesting case that I've been working on since I started to write my 2nd book in 2018.
HEALTH AND SAFETY EXECUTIVE
The UK Government's Health and Safety Executive have taken ill advice from a self generated group called the Play Safety Forum which only serves to support the personal interests of its hierarchy. These are a playground/equipment manufacturer and playworkers (playwork is an ideology based on personal opinions). This is a HSE document which allows children to die in play situations, see section 8 (link below).
https://www.hse.gov.uk/entertainment/childrens-play-july-2012.pdf
This 'death at play' can be traced back to a scientific misrepresentation that says it's good to place kids in life threatening situations. You'll find more about it on the page below. If you scroll down on this page to 2012 and trace the timeline back up, you'll see what I mean. Both the HSE and the Play Safety Forum are UK wide organisations so I would hope that Christina would be able to get her teeth into this one because it my opinion there are some serious issues here especially with the Play Safety Forum. They are quite easily identifiable too.
https://www.a-better.wales/pages/2020/03-2020/97-20200308a-WB-ABWA-accountability-chart.htm
I'm not complaining to you about this at present, I'm just providing you with the information because it will have a negative impact on the future of the country as a whole and I'm thinking about my grand children too. My lead into it was that I took a children's play course funded by the Welsh Government in 2018 in Swansea that taught managed child abuse, my wife took the course with me and we were both traumatised by its content. If you want to take this further or need more info I can point you in the right directions.
regards - Dai
(no reply by 15/5/2020 so requested confirmation
and Ciaran responded that he had received it same day) |
|
Dear Dai,
Thank you for your patience. I have taken the last couple of days to read through everything you have sent since the end of April.
Having looked at it all it would seem the most natural step next would be to take the case to the public services ombudsman. Normally the ombudsman requires a deadlock/final letter, where the organisation you are corresponding with states they have reached the conclusion of their correspondence with an individual and recommends you contact the ombudsman. NPT CBC have presented you with one of these letters so it would seem like this is the best step to take next. We know from previous experience that the Public Services Ombudsman in Wales is a completely independent body, who carries out thorough and impartial investigations into any cases raised with them. I think you would not only get the answers you are looking for regarding any potential contamination of the land, but also some resolution to the issues with process and procedure that you have highlighted.
Having thought it through for a few days, I am not sure there is anything Christina can do to assist you at this stage if I’m honest. The council’s officers, leader and legal department have set out their position and provided you with the answers they appear to be willing to give to your questions. Christina has no power over the council so she is not in a position to influence their handling of your case. The stage you are at, in my opinion given previous experience, is to take up the option of raising the case with the Ombudsman.
If they have broken the law, i.e. the Environment Protection Act, this would be a case for the police I would have thought, but I believe the first port of call would be the Ombudsman.
I’m sorry we can’t assist you any further, but as I say above Christina doesn’t have any jurisdiction over the Council, but hopefully the options available at this stage in the process will help.
Yours sincerely - Ciaran Kearney - Senior Caseworker - Office of Christina Rees MP
- Member of Parliament for Neath
|
