Representation by Max Hosier (Max Hosier)
- Date submitted
- 11 January 2019
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
My family bought this farm in 1953 and in 1961 I took over running the traditional mixed farm which spans the area of the western portal and approach road. The role of custodian and guardian of the farm is something I have instilled into my daughter who runs the business now that I’m retired. This guardianship extends not only to the farmland but also the archaeology and my lifelong passion for wildlife, which is illustrated by the creation of the RSPB Reserve. The farm is my legacy and as such the most important thing to me is to see everything within it protected and nurtured for future generations, I therefore oppose the presented scheme.
My issues are:
Scheme overview
Poor return on investment
Work not to World Heritage Site (WHS) standard
Misinterpretation of Outstanding Universal Value throughout the scheme.
Scheme deadlines seeming to take priority over quality standards.
Lacking appropriate engagement.
Data on scheme monitoring at baseline, during construction and once completed is incomplete.
At consultation Errors in consultation data at all 3 consultations with no corrections. Lacking choice between tunnel or surface scheme. Unsatisfactory stakeholder engagement. DCO underway prior to decisions for land management within the scheme. Use of S172 powers instead of stakeholder engagement. To date, no negotiation for scheme land and rights
Farm business Expensive acquisition of land beyond that required for the western portal approach instead of entering into a land management agreement. Substantial impact on economics of pig enterprise with implications on farming business. Soil protection concerns for weeds and contamination during construction.
Groundwater Concern that farm boreholes will be compromised for supply and quality during scheme construction and on completion, devaluing farm and viability of business. Lack of stakeholder engagement in respect of provision of reports and hydrogeology meetings. Unwillingness to agree an alternative supply should water be compromised.
Byways Negative legacy benefits to WHS and farm from promotion of new and existing byways around the scheme. Normanton Reserve at risks from numerous undesirable behaviours, eg trespass, illegal camping. Erosion of scheduled monuments on byways
Cultural Heritage Uncertainty over whether UNESCO will remove WHS status if this scheme goes ahead. Scheme deadlines taking priority over standard of surveys, leading to property and scheduled monument damage.
RSPB NORMANTON DOWN Inaccurate wording in consultation literature suggests whole of WHS will be available for exploration post scheme. Increased pressure from trespass and disturbance to wildlife including legally protected Stone Curlews, Great Bustards and Eurasian Curlews. Negative Impact on the flagship status of biodiversity which protects archaeology and the understanding of our cultural heritage within the WHS.
Green Bridge 4 Questionable benefits of position to provide optimum visual interplay between monuments. Position over complicates land management due to small irregular land parcels. New byway places another hitherto undamaged scheduled monument in danger of erosion, adds pressure on animal welfare with potential dog attacks, increases biosecurity risks for pig enterprise and pressure of trespass into woodland and farm. Negative impact on countryside pursuits.