Representation by Nick Wright
- Date submitted
- 16 March 2022
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
1/ during the consultation period the applicant avoid giving meaningful detail about the scheme. It has therefore been impossible to assess its impact. 2/ the lack of detail has continued into the DCO application which lacks detail throughout. 3/ the scheme is to large but its impact is further exacerbated by the strung out layout. Snaking round 10 villages industrialising the countryside 4/ The ALC assessment carried out by the applicant of the Site zoning it as 96% grade 3b and 4 is incorrect. An independent survey has to be taken. Every acre of the scheme is irrigated versatile vegetable growing land. A survey on neighbouring land showed 80% grade 2 and 3a. This land is too good to be under solar. 5/ The ALC has not been carried out in accordance with industry codes. This maybe why the conclusions are incorrect. ALC has to be fully investigated. 6/ The full carbon life cycle of the scheme shows it creates more carbon in its lifetime than it is capable of saving. A full interrogation of the predicted output of the scheme, the life span, and the embodied carbon needs to be carried out. We believe the conclusion will show the scheme hinders our pursuit of carbon zero by 2050 7/ Racing is a key employer and Newmarkets position as the number one training center in the world will be threatened with Sunnica as a neighour. The view from the Limekilns will be badly effected 8/ The Ickneld Way will be ruined by Sunnica. it will not be safe to ride through a path with solar panels on both sides. It will create a feeling of entrapment for the horse and if the horse becomes frightened it will be unable to escape. 9/ The BESS are dangerous and within 150 metres of houses and permanent caravans. 10/ if you have a good story you proudly tell it - if you have a bad story you don't. 11/ Sunnica at every level is a bad example of solar. if Sunnica is allowed a difficult precedent will have been set.