The Sizewell C Project

The views expressed in this page do not represent those of the Planning Inspectorate. This page consists of content submitted to the Planning Inspectorate by the public and other interested parties, giving their views of this proposal.

The Sizewell C Project

Received 24 September 2020
From Farnham with Stratford St Andrew Parish Council

Representation

The parish council is not contesting the case for a new nuclear facility in principle but we do contest EDF’s transport proposals and in particular the route alignment for a bypass of Farnham and Stratford St Andrew villages. We strongly feel that further consideration should be given to marine and railway led provision for construction in order to relieve the already busy roads in this part of East Suffolk. The East Suffolk coast has always been a very popular tourist and second home destination and our local economy very much relies on this income. Our roads have become even busier this summer owing to the coronavirus pandemic with people holidaying in this country rather than going abroad. Increases to local traffic caused by the construction of Sizewell C may put people off travelling as well as causing serious delays for local traffic. The parish council welcomes the proposal to build a bypass around the two villages which is long overdue and absolutely necessary. Our principle objection is to the proposed alignment of the new road which we have highlighted in our previous responses to EDF’s public consultations but which have not been addressed. We are wholly dissatisfied with EDF’s intransigence in continuing to single-mindedly pursue a bypass route to the west of Foxburrow Wood, to the exclusion of a more easterly alignment which has the support of our residents, this parish council, our County Councillor and others. Natural England have recently removed the Ancient Woodland designation from the narrow band of trees connecting Foxburrow Wood and Palant's Grove, through which we have consistently maintained the bypass can and should be routed. This completely undermines EDF's argument that they must pass to the west of Foxburrow Wood in order to avoid destroying Ancient Woodland, which was one of their principle inputs for route selection and objection to an eastern alignment. In their documentation EDF mentions Farnham Hall as if it is one property. In fact it is ten separate properties. This means that the current road proposal will affect around twenty properties and not eleven. Nineteen residential properties (and three business properties) will see the A12 move closer to them, fourteen of these residences will be adversely affected by the new road’s proximity (including Grade II listed Farnham Manor and the five dwellings which fall within its curtilage), five of them will be significantly affected. Conversely, should the bypass go to the east of Foxburrow Wood then only three properties will be adversely affected (two of which will nonetheless be better off than with EDF’s proposal). Of these, only a single dwelling will be significantly affected (a bungalow in isolated countryside that is only occasionally occupied). In addition, an easterly alignment would enable the linking up of a future four village bypass which would greatly benefit Marlesford and Little Glemham. The latest proposal is for an increased speed limit of 60mph rather than 50mph which will cause more noise and pollution and which we object to. We also highlighted constructional and in-life benefits of an easterly route, as well as beneficial implications for vehicular access to properties and preservation of Public Rights of Way. None of these factors have been acknowledged by EDF.