Back to list Cambridge Waste Water Treatment Plant Relocation

Representation by Catherine Helen Martin

Date submitted
10 July 2023
Submitted by
Members of the public/businesses
  1. Inappropriate development on Green Belt – the Proposed Development (PD) would cause permanent harm to the Cambridge Green Belt. The Green Belt here has an important role: it preserves the openness of the landscape, separates the city from the conservation villages, controls urban sprawl and it also acts as a buffer between the very new developments of Marleigh and Waterbeach New Town. The proximity of Honey Hill to the SSSI at Quy Fen, the Wicken Fen Vision, conservation areas, (the PD is right in the middle of 4 conservation areas), important PRoWs and listed buildings has been undervalued by the Applicant. An industrial development at this site would also have a wider detrimental impact; on the setting of the City of Cambridge and on the eastern approach to the city. 2) Inappropriate design in this open landscape. Introducing a huge alien feature on a raised area – it would be a round earthwork with an assortment of industrial structures sticking out from the top. No amount of tree planting would ever hide this. 3) Principal mitigation is tree planting – after 15 years the PD would still be highly visible from many viewpoints. The majority of the trees cannot be planted until the end stage of the development. Trees will need a lot of care and irrigation to thrive in this open site and particularly on top of the bund. I fear that the developer will not monitor and irrigate effectively and there will be a need for replanting year after year. We will be left with views of the building site and the factory scale development for years to come. 4) Inappropriate site chosen – the structures cannot be buried because they are above the aquifer. The Applicant has acknowledged that development at this site would cause most harm to the Green Belt and has also stated that the structures cannot be buried because there could be contamination of groundwater. 5) Planning Issues- The adopted Local Plan does not refer to the relocation of the Waste Water Treatment Plant (WWTP) to a Green Belt site. The argument for the relocation of the WWTP to Green Belt has not been properly consulted upon by the Planning Authority. The whole purpose of brownfield is to avoid development on Green Belt, but the reverse is being pushed through here without the public being fully aware of it. The Proposed Development (PD) is contrary to National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) and local planning policy in the area of protection of landscape character and protection of the Green Belt and heritage assets. 6) Faulty site selection process - I do not have any confidence in the site selection process. The choice was primarily made on affordability criteria and the desire for the shortest tunnel option. Sites outside the Green Belt were not fully evaluated and Green Belt sites were undervalued. The site selection process should definitely be revisited. 7) Inadequate consideration of alternatives – the Planning Authority has not properly considered consolidation of the WWTP at the current site, and adjusting the mix of residential and commercial units. We have not seen detailed feasibility studies on the alternative options for the site. 8) No need to move – we have been repeatedly told by the Applicant that there is no operational need to move the WWTP. The Planning Authorities have also said that relocation of the WWTP is not a requirement for the development of the NECAAP. The PD is not a significant technological advance from the current plant that was upgraded recently 2015/16. 9) Promotion of Hartree - I find it very objectionable that the Applicant is currently promoting the Hartree development to the public in literature and at recent Cambridge fairs and online. This makes the relocation look inevitable and a ‘done deal’. The North East Cambridge Area Action Plan (NECAAP) has only reached the draft stage of consultation and formal consultation has been halted until after the DCO. 10) Water scarcity - East Anglia is an area that suffers prolonged periods of drought and this is going to get worse as the climate changes. We should be considering this when planning very high density developments in Cambridge. What happened to levelling up? 11) Carbon footprint – it concerns me that a perfectly adequate working WWTP is being demolished and rebuilt a couple of kilometres away. It is disingenuous to then claim that the housing development on the site is sustainable. The justification, created at the last minute by Savills, is extremely speculative, claiming that the dwellings on the core site could only be built in very unsustainable locations. It is also claiming in effect, that what they are doing is really bad, but what might happen could be worse. Construction of an 8k pipeline from Waterbeach New Town to Cowley Road adds to the carbon footprint. This would become redundant if the PD is given consent. The massive scale of this unnecessary development is absolutely shocking. The amount of concrete, steel, plastic, soil, vehicle movements, miles of tunnel, and waste is horrific. A perfectly good WWTP already exists in the perfect site for it – screened, next to the A14, partly buried, with room to consolidate. The scale of this waste is absolutely reprehensible. 12) Best Most Valuable agricultural land – we should be valuing this land because we need to feed ourselves and not be dependent on imports. 13) Light pollution - Introduction of light in a largely unlit landscape – impact on conservation areas and wildlife. 14) Traffic - during construction and operation is a big issue. Any hold up on Horningsea Road causes big tail backs. In a recent case in May this year, there was some work on the road near the A14 junction and the traffic was backed up to Ditton Walk, about 3 miles away. Heavy vehicles will have to queue on the bridge to turn right onto the A14 slip road. There is no option to widen the road here to give a queuing lane. If the HGVs then need to travel in an easterly direction, they would have to turn off the A14 at J33 and go round the roundabout to enter the A14 east. 15) Odour – concern about increasing hot weather and drought conditions. Concern that the setting up of a new plant would cause more odour problems with settling tanks and ‘seeding’ of processes. Low confidence in the Applicants modelling because the current plant does smell, on occasion, outside the contours presented by the Applicant. 16) Offices – I really object to building offices for 60 workers who are not directly involved in the operation of the sewage plant 17) Sludge imports – why are we trucking in sludge from far afield? Surely this is not very sustainable. 18) Costs - The £227million was given by the taxpayer to a private company to relocate under the long tunnel option. The Applicant subsequently chose the cheapest, short tunnel option but since the decision to give the HIF grant, we have had inflation and conflict. We don’t know how much money has already been spent on experts and lawyers and I don’t feel confident that the project will be of a high quality, especially in view of the water sector’s debt issues that have been made public recently. I have made a Freedom of Information request to Homes England asking for more information about the conditions attached to the HIF grant, but I have not had an answer, even though the time required to reply has expired and I have chased twice. 19) Stress and distress - The Application has had a profound impact on [Redacted] and on the health of others in my community. We fear 4 years of heavy construction traffic and disruption, odour, dust impact on asthmatics and we also fear the operational stage with the regular deliveries of sludge lorries, odour potential, light pollution, blighted views and the association of the village with a massive industrial eyesore. We are concerned about the impact on children at the local school only about 750 meters away. There is also the cumulative impact of this development alongside Waterbeach pipeline construction, relocation of Waterbeach Station. My [Redacted] has been affected by the stress of spending hours trying to read a succession of very lengthy documents. There has also been the difficulty of consultation during COVID. The potential impact on businesses in the area should also be considered – 2 pubs with open air dining and accommodation, several Air B & B’s, farms with accommodation, Quy Mill Hotel. The village hall is very popular venue for weddings and events throughout the year, because the village green is so pleasant. There is also the detrimental impact on one of the most deprived areas of Cambridge – Abbey Ward. This should also be considered. 20) Feeling of helplessness - amongst the community and feeling that we have not been listened to at all. The initial non statutory consultation was a competitive exercise with the affected villages voting against other, but even then only 20% of respondents thought the WWTP should be relocated anywhere. Once the site was chosen, the community, with the backing of our MP and district councillors, unanimously voted for direct access from the A14, but this was rejected. We asked for a more sympathetic design, with buried structures, but this was rejected. The only request that was approved was removal of a tall metal fence on the top of the bund. 21) Consultation Process - I feel that the consultation process was very unsatisfactory – it was held during COVID by technology new to many (Zoom) and which does not encourage interaction. Few face to face events, and not enough notice when events were held. Questions not answered or answered in a batch right at the last minute so they could not be used to shape your response. 22) Wildlife – the area is home to wildlife; deer, hares, badgers, foxes, voles, hedgehogs and bats, as well as birds, reptiles and invertebrates. How will they survive this disturbance? I also feel very concerned about the disturbance to the river bank during construction of the enormous outfall structure. There are otters, voles and kingfishers in this area, to name but a few. They are all very sensitive to noise, vibration and light. I think that this is so harmful and so totally unnecessary.