Back to list The Sizewell C Project

Representation by Morgan Representation (Morgan Representation )

Date submitted
29 September 2020
Submitted by
Members of the public/businesses
  1. I, Sarah Morgan, [Redacted] Our title includes another residential property, [Redacted], which we rent out. We wish to be registered as an interested party for the Sizewell C DCO. I am Kew trained. 2. We object to EDF’s proposed for the Two Villages Bypass alignment and support the much better alignment put forward by the Parish Council, further to the east. 3. EDF’s consultations did not represent a proper assessment of the alternative alignment. Its reasons for rejecting it were and remain unsound. 4. EDF’s environmental appraisal is poor, with many errors. It has not identified habitats in nearby gardens, ponds and woods, having failed to ask for access. This area is on a deer migratory route and hares, hedgehogs, badgers and many bird species are seen regularly. EDF has not identified notable and veteran trees and historic double hedgerows which will be lost. It refers incorrectly to the relatively narrow connection between Palant’s Grove and Foxburrow Wood as ancient woodland; it is not. Both woods are embanked and were separated by a road (now reduced to a footpath). Pond Wood is not identified properly as ancient woodland. EDF have failed to assess properly wildlife corridors. 5. An eastern alignment: - would be less invasive, due to the topography. - would not require a deep cutting next to the already stressed Foxburrow Wood. EDF has not demonstrated that there will be no risk to that wood or other woodland, trees and animal habitats through the hydrological impact of the cutting. - would not sever a circular walk close to Farnham nor require a substantial intrusion into the landscape of large bunds with a 4 metre bridge close to dwellings. - would reduce noise and other pollution. The devastating nature of that is set out in EDF’s own documents. - would significantly reduce impact on the heritage assets of Farnham Manor (Grade II* listed) and its historic environs, as well as on a thriving tourism business. 6. EDF’s supposed mitigation is appallingly weak. Consultations with residents have been poor. 7. The four A12 villages should have bypass relief but EDF is failing to do so for Little Glemham and Marlesford. If they cannot be relieved, the future intent of the County Council to provide relief should not be prejudiced or constrained. The eastern alignment better suits an extension to the south. 8. EDF’s alignment is seriously detrimental to the built and natural environment. A more easterly alignment would be much less so. It would pass through the thin connecting strip between the two woods that is of low quality, and much self-sown, given that there was a road and no woodland originally in that 110 metres width. Wildlife passage would need to be maintained and there would be opportunities for further tree planting to enhance the landscape. 9. EDF’s proposal would destroy a quiet, beautiful and rural landscape and residential community to one of blight by traffic noise and pollution. 10. From a proper perspective on the planning balance, it is clear that the public good is best served by the more easterly alignment. 11. 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