Sizewell C Consultation - Public Meeting response

SIZEWELL C PUBLIC MEETING

Following the meeting in St Peter’s Church, Theberton, on 26th January 2013, these are some of potential impacts of EDF’s proposals on our community, based on their 1st Stage Consultation documents for Sizewell C and discussed at that meeting. You may wish to incorporate some of them in your response to EDF before the 6th February.

 

  • Accommodation: EDF’s preferred option is to site 4-storey temporary housing for 3000 workers on the edge of Eastbridge. None of the 3 options is ideal. Points to consider: noise, light and air pollution, scale of the social impact on a community of barely 400 people,  design, and sustainability – should consideration be given to some permanent legacy housing adjoining existing communities in a wider area? Should EDF look at small units nearer the building site, where land could be available?
  • Land Use: There appear to be areas of land adjacent to the site, already owned by EDF, that are not being used. What is the reason?
  • Farmland: Some local farmland is under threat from the proposed development, with a loss of related livelihood.
  • Roads: under EDF’s proposals, all construction and operational traffic will use the B1122 road from the A12 at Yoxford, through Middleton Moor and Theberton, to reach a new access road through Upper Abbey Farm, and also to reach Lovers Lane.  In addition to day and night noise, light and air pollution, very heavy vibration could damage buildings near the road. Some feel that a new road direct from the A12 into the Sizewell site is a priority. It was proposed for Sizewell B, so why not for this twin reactor nuclear power station?
  • Safety and Security: in the event of an accident at either Sizewell A, B or C, the only route in or out to the A12 for emergency vehicles is on the B1122, which is already overloaded. Any road traffic accident would hinder evacuation. Is a new road needed?
  • New Road Access: all the traffic to and from Sizewell travelling from the north or south on the A12 will have to use the B1122. This will cause enormous problems for Yoxford, Middleton Moor, Theberton and Eastbridge. It is not fit for purpose to take the proposed heavy lorry movements, estimated at 1200 per day and night. A solution might be a new road with direct access from the A12 into the Sizewell site, and should be enforced by SCDC, SCC and the Government.
  • Construction Compound: the construction compound for Sizewell B was approximately 30 hectares. EDF propose a construction compound for Sizewell C of 140 hectares (346 acres), why more than four times bigger? The sheer scale of the footprint will destroy a huge area of landscape in this AONB.
  • New Road Access from B1122 to Sizewell C: EDF propose to cut a new road from the B1122 through Upper Abbey Farm through the edge of the forest into the Sizewell C site, with the last section raised up on a bridge. This will again mean 24/7 light and noise pollution for Eastbridge and Theberton. Such an access road would have less impact if moved further to the south, and perhaps link with Lover’s Lane.
  • Quality of life: The scale of the development and ensuing impacts threaten to destroy the quality of life we now enjoy and value. Quality of life cannot be quantified but that should not mean it should be given serious consideration. Many older residents are fearful that the building work will blight the rest of their lives.
  • Local services: Medical and other public services, already stretched, could be overloaded.
  • Design: From the limited information available in the documents, the overall design appears poor. The buildings will be raised up, within a sensitive low-lying landscape, an area of AONB. High quality design, even if more costly, should be a priority. The design of Sizewell B should be the benchmark.
  • Rail links: These should be maximised to alleviate pressure, noise, vibration and congestion on local roads. One suggestion is that the existing rail link from Saxmundham to Leiston should be extended directly into the site and be capable of carrying both freight and passengers.
  • Lack of information: EDF’s proposals lack detailed information, there are many gaps, the language is often vague, making it difficult to comment, yet it may not be possible to raise concerns when detail does become available.
  • Request for interim consultation: given the gaps in the Stage 1 documents, should we press for a second round of consultation, that would allow us to respond to more detailed plans, before EDF submit their final application?
  • Water: Water supplies may not cope with the increased demand from Sizewell C.
  • Surface water drainage large areas of land will be covered with impermeable materials. How will additional surface-water run-off be dealt with, as Minsmere Sluice is already overloaded.
  • Compensation: Since Saturday, the ‘generous’ Government compensation packages for those living near the proposed high-speed HS2 rail link have been highlighted. Should the government not make similar offers to residents affected by Sizewell C, given that this is a development to benefit national energy supplies.

 

  • NB It is important, when you respond to EDF, not to feel constrained by the particular options offered in their reply form, eg park and ride sites, campus sites etc. We are entitled to make alternative suggestions.

 

 

 

 

 

By Martin Clarke on February 17th, 2013