






<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: [lang_en]More than 700 objections to new supermarket in Newcastle Emlyn[/lang_en][lang_cy]Mwy na 700 o lythyrau yn erbyn archfarchnad newydd yng nghanol Castellnewydd Emlyn [/lang_cy]</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.newcastle-emlyn.com/700-objections-to-new-supermarket/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.newcastle-emlyn.com/700-objections-to-new-supermarket</link>
	<description>Heart of the Teifi Valley / Calon Dyffryn Teifi</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 07 Nov 2011 10:09:26 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andy Unett</title>
		<link>http://www.newcastle-emlyn.com/700-objections-to-new-supermarket/comment-page-1#comment-411</link>
		<dc:creator>Andy Unett</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 29 Jan 2010 21:14:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.newcastle-emlyn.com/?p=750#comment-411</guid>
		<description>Richard, I am pleased to note that at least we can agree, and agree to disagree, on all these valid &amp; salient points! I can only express my best wishes for your obvious and much belated need for counselling!

I&#039;m afraid any of our well intended forays into the world of politics regarding the plans of &#039;the Council fat cats&#039; will fall on very stony ground (please excuse the wildly mixed metaphor!), but at least we can enjoy the democratic right of debate!

Kindest regards, Andy.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Richard, I am pleased to note that at least we can agree, and agree to disagree, on all these valid &amp; salient points! I can only express my best wishes for your obvious and much belated need for counselling!</p>
<p>I&#8217;m afraid any of our well intended forays into the world of politics regarding the plans of &#8216;the Council fat cats&#8217; will fall on very stony ground (please excuse the wildly mixed metaphor!), but at least we can enjoy the democratic right of debate!</p>
<p>Kindest regards, Andy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Richard Vale</title>
		<link>http://www.newcastle-emlyn.com/700-objections-to-new-supermarket/comment-page-1#comment-410</link>
		<dc:creator>Richard Vale</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 29 Jan 2010 13:04:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.newcastle-emlyn.com/?p=750#comment-410</guid>
		<description>One other approach might be for the County to hand control over to the Town Council so that any profits from the car parks would stay here and benefit local people and visitors instead of being siphoned off to keep our masters in County Hall on fat salaries and pensions.

But hell is more likely to freeze over first.

Meanwhile, I&#039;m off to counselling, as finding myself in agreement with Andy has been a profoundly disturbing experience.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>One other approach might be for the County to hand control over to the Town Council so that any profits from the car parks would stay here and benefit local people and visitors instead of being siphoned off to keep our masters in County Hall on fat salaries and pensions.</p>
<p>But hell is more likely to freeze over first.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, I&#8217;m off to counselling, as finding myself in agreement with Andy has been a profoundly disturbing experience.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andy Unett</title>
		<link>http://www.newcastle-emlyn.com/700-objections-to-new-supermarket/comment-page-1#comment-409</link>
		<dc:creator>Andy Unett</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 29 Jan 2010 07:33:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.newcastle-emlyn.com/?p=750#comment-409</guid>
		<description>One further point by way of reply Richard - surely there is nothing to stop you from parking for free in the proposed new site, and doing your shopping in a &#039;locally-owned business&#039;, is there?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>One further point by way of reply Richard &#8211; surely there is nothing to stop you from parking for free in the proposed new site, and doing your shopping in a &#8216;locally-owned business&#8217;, is there?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andy Unett</title>
		<link>http://www.newcastle-emlyn.com/700-objections-to-new-supermarket/comment-page-1#comment-408</link>
		<dc:creator>Andy Unett</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 29 Jan 2010 07:30:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.newcastle-emlyn.com/?p=750#comment-408</guid>
		<description>Richard, I heartily agree - the parking charges for residents are scandalous! A work colleague recently paid the 30p to nip into NCE in her lunch hour to pick up a few bits of shopping, got delayed in a queue at check-out, over-ran by 5 minutes, and fined £26!!! Her shopping was only £8!

Surely it&#039;s time that the Council allowed for the application of &#039;free parking passes&#039; for residents only, who after all are already paying around £700 to £1000 per year on average in Council Tax? I can fully understand that they need to levy further taxation to maintain the infrastructure, but the charges surely barely cover the wages costs of the enforcement? I am in favour of charges for visitors i.e. non-residents, but the current system is a disgrace.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Richard, I heartily agree &#8211; the parking charges for residents are scandalous! A work colleague recently paid the 30p to nip into NCE in her lunch hour to pick up a few bits of shopping, got delayed in a queue at check-out, over-ran by 5 minutes, and fined £26!!! Her shopping was only £8!</p>
<p>Surely it&#8217;s time that the Council allowed for the application of &#8216;free parking passes&#8217; for residents only, who after all are already paying around £700 to £1000 per year on average in Council Tax? I can fully understand that they need to levy further taxation to maintain the infrastructure, but the charges surely barely cover the wages costs of the enforcement? I am in favour of charges for visitors i.e. non-residents, but the current system is a disgrace.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Richard Vale</title>
		<link>http://www.newcastle-emlyn.com/700-objections-to-new-supermarket/comment-page-1#comment-406</link>
		<dc:creator>Richard Vale</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Jan 2010 14:21:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.newcastle-emlyn.com/?p=750#comment-406</guid>
		<description>Andy, there are currently 65 parking spaces, and the planning application says there would be 114 if the supermarket goes ahead. However, that total includes 9 staff parking spaces, so the net increase is 40 spaces. A long way off the applicant&#039;s claims in a letter to the Tivyside in November that he would &quot;double parking provision in the town&quot;.

The application says that parking would be free for up to 2 hours, so presumably everyone would try to park on the Cawdor site.

The scandal is that you now have to pay 30p to park for 20 minutes in the council car-parks. The result is that people will park anywhere else in preference, including on double yellow lines. If you want to nip into the newsagent to buy a paper, why pay 30p on top?

And if the Cawdor plan goes ahead, the Council will be responsible for a policy which is: free parking if you want to shop in a supermarket, pay if you want to shop in locally-owned businesses. Great.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Andy, there are currently 65 parking spaces, and the planning application says there would be 114 if the supermarket goes ahead. However, that total includes 9 staff parking spaces, so the net increase is 40 spaces. A long way off the applicant&#8217;s claims in a letter to the Tivyside in November that he would &#8220;double parking provision in the town&#8221;.</p>
<p>The application says that parking would be free for up to 2 hours, so presumably everyone would try to park on the Cawdor site.</p>
<p>The scandal is that you now have to pay 30p to park for 20 minutes in the council car-parks. The result is that people will park anywhere else in preference, including on double yellow lines. If you want to nip into the newsagent to buy a paper, why pay 30p on top?</p>
<p>And if the Cawdor plan goes ahead, the Council will be responsible for a policy which is: free parking if you want to shop in a supermarket, pay if you want to shop in locally-owned businesses. Great.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

