Sir,

Alarm bells are ringing over opening times of St. Catherine's 'Tenby Island' project.

When this subject was first mooted, I was prepared to be sympathetic. After all, a nice man who had loved Tenby in his youth came from Scotland with plans and funds to tidy up the island and the fort and to make a nice interpretation centre where kiddies could fire plastic cannon balls and thus be educated before they enjoyed a nature walk, then had a bun and drink with their parents.

The new name of Tenby Island was used. There was no mention of St. Catherine or of the chapel named after her in medieval times and which still existed until the fort was built. This seemed rather inconsistent with a history-based attraction.

A bridge was mentioned, and to many this didn't seem to add up financially. Even now, strangely, planning permission for this has yet to be requested. But alarm bells started to ring with me when opening hours of 8 am to midnight were requested. I wonder what the developer/developers has/have in mind for such hours? Usually, only runners and dog walkers use Castle Beach before 10 am and I can't envisage many kiddies interpreting at 11.30 pm. Admittedly a star-gazing platform had been mentioned, but the request for specific lighting seems to negate this possible use. Could it be that this project is really for some other open-all-hours cash-cow?

Does anyone know which named projects the developer/s has/have been associated with in the past? If we knew, then we could anticipate the intended nature and calibre of the project.

A visiting friend recently remarked that Tenby is 'usually like a building site'. Indeed, peaceful Castle Hill has certainly had more than its fair share of activity in recent years. The paths are narrow and now that the bandstand is in place there is little space for a bridge entrance. Older visitors do not descend to the beach to sit on deckchairs, but they sit on the side of the hill enjoying the glorious peaceful view. Imagine sitting next to generators and trucks for the building of a bridge while viewing an island building site with all the noise that this would create.

I looked at the documents at PCNP's office and I was horrified to see that impact on neighbouring properties has been deemed negligible. The proposed hours and the inevitable light and noise pollution make this judgement nonsensical. I am not just being a NIMBY. I talk for people who visit, or hire flats, in order to enjoy the glorious unspoilt nature of Tenby, the stunning scenery and the sound of the sea and seabirds.

Not all tourism is beneficial. If this project is in fact designed to attract a new clientele, it would probably lose Tenby its existing one. Hopefully we can rely on PCNP and the county council to resist any attempted rape of Tenby.

Marion Hutton,

Tenby.