I refer to Councillor Knoyle's reply to our request on 19/7/2021 for an
information update in relation to the planning application
P2021/0546 at the Heol y Glyn development . Councillor Knoyle
has implied that our letter contains misinformation, however if we refer to
the council website and we search for the planning application
reference P2021/0546, we will see that the information we
provided to the councillors is contained on the council's
website. The only addition we have made to this information is to add the
date 2020 in large font to distinguish the contamination to that
previously identified in 2008. Other information we have provided,
for example, information about how harmful the chemicals are
that can be currently found at the site, is taken from
scientific peer reviewed papers from leading educational and
government institutions on-line. If the councillors believe any
of this to be misinformation then you should specify what
information they believe to be untrue. The information
provided by us in our last communication which follows was
simple and to the point:
"According to the Neath-Port Talbot Council website, new plans have been put in by
Enzo and the land has been tested and found to be contaminated with 6 different
chemicals up to 9 times the safety guidelines.
The squares highlighted in red on the image show the instances of contamination.
Our group are concerned that the majority of contaminants seem to be in the top
layer of the soil which could potentially affect the residents close by."
Councillor Knoyle has not referred to this contamination in his reply which
is concerning. The information is available as can be seen on the
council's website and has been supplied by Enzo Homes. We are also concerned that Terra Firma, the
company who have submitted this information to Enzo have not included a
risk assessment for human health. for the contamination as they did in 2008. If
we refer to the Neath-Port Talbot Council's most recent
Contaminated Land Strategy in 2015 we will see that the
categorisation of the contamination at the site is required in
accordance with statutory guidance. We would urge both
councillors please to prioritise the provision of a risk
assessment in relation to the current contamination and to
provide a categorisation of the contamination. This is extremely important
as the main contaminant to found at the site is
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene, it is a mutagen and is reasonably anticipated to be a human
carcinogen as can be seen on the US National Library of Medicine
website.