Back to list The Sizewell C Project

Representation by The Arlidge Representation (The Arlidge Representation)

Date submitted
25 September 2020
Submitted by
Members of the public/businesses
  1. We, [Redacted]. It has been in our family for some 50 years. We wish to be registered as an interested party for the Sizewell C DCO. 2. We object specifically to EDF’s proposed alignment for a bypass for Farnham and Stratford St Andrew and we support the alignment put forward by the Parish Council for a more easterly route. It has been obvious for years that these villages should have a bypass but also so should Little Glemham and Marlesford. We appreciate the need to free up homes and businesses on the existing A12 but that should not be at the expense of imposing the burden on 20 other dwellings, when there is an alternative which does much less harm to the built and natural environment and will be cheaper and easier to build. It will also better enable an extension to the south for the benefit of the other two villages, if a Four Villages Bypass really cannot be achieved now. 3. The Farnham Hall residences are part of the village too. We are located in a historic setting to the oldest building, which at least dates back to at least 1602 and is Grade II* listed. There has long been a farm estate here and we own one of the agricultural buildings which was converted to residential use. More regard should have been paid to the heritage asset by EDF. Its alignment is being brought far too close to this part of the Farnham community and EDF’s own documents demonstrate just how devastating will be the impact on our property. Indeed EDF has failed to represent properly how many dwellings will be affected by its proposed alignment. 4. To date this has been a lovely area with delightful walks. That peace will be shattered and it is highly regrettable that the footpath network so close to the village should be disrupted. We object also to the proposed large bund, which is an intrusion into the landscape. Putting in a deep cutting is highly risky for the hydrology of the area; Foxburrow Wood is a prime natural asset and should not be put at risk, and nor should Pond Wood (also ancient woodland). 5. Even for its proposed alignment, EDF’s mitigation measures are woefully inadequate. Indeed, its environmental assessment work is incomplete and was poorly done. 6. EDF has demonstrated no good rationale for not accepting the more easterly alignment, which solves many of the problems. EDF should not be allowed to proceed with its Sizewell C project without moving the Two Villages alignment. 7. The public interest is not best served by EDF’s proposed alignment. The proper planning balance is clearly in favour of the more easterly alignment. 8. We therefore object to the Sizewell C DCO but reserve the right to amend, add to and expand on our objections during the DCO process