Representation by Rachel
- Date submitted
- 11 January 2019
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
As a farmer and stakeholder in the Stonehenge World Heritage Site (WHS) I interpret my role as being a landowner guardian - a steward and curator for present and future generations. The farm includes prestigious scheduled monuments, namely Lake and Normanton barrow groups and the Wilsford Shaft. RSPB Normanton Down reserve is also under my ownership, providing a landscape that compliments and upholds the values of the WHS, the habitat restoration protects monuments, features and wildlife. The proposed location for the western portal and 1km cutting of the A303 scheme is on my land and I am very much opposed to the threats this poses to the WHS, wildlife, the landscape and my business.
Representations:
Overall scheme Poor economic value. Wilful misinterpretation of scheme advocates re Outstanding Universal Value. Time scale preventing meaningful engagement with stakeholders. Work not befitting WHS standards.
Cultural Heritage
My lifetime experience as a landowner occupier over a significant part of the southern WHS has been overlooked.
Engagement could have prevented damage of scheduled monuments, property and disturbance of breeding bird seasons.
Unrealistic timescale leading to lack of care taken over archaeological surveys.
Likelihood UNESCO withdraw WHS status if this scheme goes ahead with potential implications to tourism and economy.
Consultation process Booklet and maps misleading to general public: private land ownership unclear, open land access implied and encouraged. Decisions prior to consultation despite being in the consultation literature. Minor scheme details taking preference over key aspects: tunnel or surface route. Scheme presented for DCO process without decisions re extent of landscaping areas and subsequent responsibility. Inappropriate and premature use of S172 powers instead of providing answers to questions.
Groundwater Lacking meaningful stakeholder engagement over groundwater and private boreholes. Concern that farm boreholes will be compromised for quality and quantity during tunnel construction and on completion. Unwilling to agree an alternative supply should water be compromised. Requests for various groundwater data and meetings to assess the water impact scheme claims yet to be honoured.
RSPB Reserve Endangering Normanton Reserve rather than building upon its existing contributions to landscape, protecting archaeology, understanding cultural heritage, wildlife, Stone-curlew population, Great Bustards and flagship status of biodiversity focus.
Farming operations Unnecessary and expensive permanent land acquisition around the tunnel instead of remaining under farm ownership and farmed to deliver legacy benefits.
Reducing the farm environmental focus. Questionable viability of pig enterprise as result of the scheme, knock-on effects on farm rotation and profits. Incomplete information on monitoring and protection of soil stockpiles during the construction process.
Byways Additional byways and promotion of existing BOATS within the scheme will impact negatively on WHS and our business. Increase in antisocial behaviours: property damage, illegal camping etc. RSPB Normanton Reserve under increased pressure of disturbance.
Green bridge 4
Creates small obscure land pockets complicating land management.
Introduction of new byway adds pressure on animal welfare with potential dog attacks, biosecurity of pig enterprise and trespass into woods and farm.
Negative impact on countryside pursuits.
Optimum visual interplay between monuments questionable due to topography.