Representation by Emily Green
- Date submitted
- 16 July 2023
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
Dear Examining Authority, I am writing to stringently oppose the plans to move a fully-functioning sewage work. As you are aware, the current sewage work was made to last till at least 2050, and yet no consideration has been given to it staying where it is, or being upgraded to become even better with greater longevity where it is. I understand the need for more houses to be built, however, moving something that is operationally sound is not the solution and I shall outline why this should not go ahead. Environmentally this move is a disaster. The carbon cost of a cement heavy construction has not been accounted for, and claims of carbon offsetting do not cover either the construction of the new site, nor the demolition of the old site. There is an extortionate amount of greenwashing taking place in the propaganda for the move and for the plans to build houses on the site afterwards, with claims of carbon neutrality which cannot be backed up. Furthermore, the location is a Principle Chalk Aquifer, which DEFRA shows to have a high risk of groundwater contamination, which could then be incredibly damaging to the wildlife as well as those who use wells for their water. This site is unsuitable for this kind of building, especially when considering the fact that the structures need to be sunken in a place where hills don’t exist to naturally hide them. Around the area, we also have Quy Fen, a Site of Special Scientific Interest and Wicken Fen which is part of the Wicken Fen Vision – a plan to create a diverse landscape for wildlife and people and preserve a unique landscape with nearly 10,000 species recorded there. Having a sewage work moved to Honey Hill will negatively impact wildlife and biodiversity as well as risking damage to these two special areas. Now, if we set aside the environmental issues (which, let’s be honest, with climate change continuing to race forward, and habitat loss and decrease in biodiversity ever increasing, is tricky to do), there are also a plethora of other reasons why this proposed move should not be allowed to go ahead. We need to consider the safety and wellbeing of our children. Fen Ditton Primary school will be incredibly negatively affected by the construction and operational traffic (especially given the decision to not create a new junction off the A14 for this) and with Cambridge being a city that travels on foot or by bike, there are accidents waiting to happen with the increase in lorries. Many travel from Horningsea along the very road where the new road to the treatment plant will be. The new Marleigh Development’s Primary School will also be negatively impacted with lots travelling from Horningsea to there as well by bike, a route that will now be much more deadly. Apart from these dangers, the smell will negatively impact the children’s ability to play outside. Outdoor exploration is so important for healthy development, and yet children will be unable to do this. In their leaflets, Anglian Water put in statistics about the smell, however they did not make this clear what it would be like (e.g. does it equate to the smell of fish at 100 feet distance, or a tuna shoved up your nose?). Given the current issues with smell at Milton, one can only assume the same would happen at this new site. This will not only affect the children however, but all of us who find getting outside and being in nature so important for our mental health. With there being a national mental health crisis, we do need to consider how this will impact on people’s mental health if they are deprived of the ability to get outside without a dreadful smell and intrusive, industrial buildings. Of course, this is exacerbated by the loss of the Honey Hill as a recreational area as well. On top of all this, it is also destroying agricultural farmland, at a time when we are needing to produce more and more food in Great Britain due to challenges in purchasing food abroad. While this may not seem like much, after all, a loss of a few fields isn’t going to clear supermarket shelves, it does set a precedent that could prove catastrophic down the line. As you know, Green Belt land is meant to protect the countryside from urbanisation, as well as to help preserve wildlife. National and local planning policy are set against building on it, without good reason, and clearly there is no good reason. Add this to the fact that this particular bit of Green Belt land is between two conservation areas (Fen Ditton and Horningsea) and you can see how absurd it is to want to build a waste treatment plant there. Overall, I think it is clear to see that this planning application has been poorly thought out. Taxpayer money will be used at a time when money is tight for so many of us to move a site that is operational to an area that is entirely unsuitable for it. The environmental cost is too high, and if that were not enough, the damage to children’s wellbeing and adult’s mental health along with the deadly dangers the lorries pose, make allowing this planning permission to be granted an inexcusable choice. I know that you will consider all options (something Anglian Water has not done when making this application) and I am confident that you will not agree to something that is so damaging both to the environment and to people, solely benefiting corporate greed. Yours faithfully, Emily Green