Representation by Gary William Dew
- Date submitted
- 17 July 2023
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
• There is a lack of consideration given to keeping the plant where it is and making it state of the art and smell proof. Redesigning it with a smaller footprint would release land for building if this is, indeed, necessary. • There is no operational requirement to move the existing sewage works. This was confirmed by the applicant at a recent meeting with residents. The existing plant was upgraded (“future-proofed”) a few years ago at public expense. It would seem that the only motive for the proposed new plant is to free up the existing site for housing. This would mean a huge sum of public money being paid to the applicant and its investors. Indeed, they have been promoting the new housing development proposed for the existing sewage works site, as if it were a fait accompli. Should we be building vast numbers of new houses in the area when we already have a dwindling water supply? • Building a new sewage works on greenbelt agricultural land is unnecessary and contrary to national and local planning policy. The proposed site is within a conservation area. Furthermore, the loss of agricultural land is deplorable given the concerns with national food security. • Honey Hill should have been discounted as an option right from the start because it is above the principal chalk aquifer, making it impossible to sink the towers to an acceptable level. According to DEFRA, there is a high risk of the aquifer becoming contaminated. Some Horningsea residents still obtain their water from wells served by the aquifers. The design for new sewage works will make it very intrusive, since it will not be possible to sink the towers due to the presence of the aquifers. Trying to hide the site with a soil bund is ridiculous and will only make the situation worse. • The infrastructure required to connect the water treatment plant at Waterbeach will cut through a large area of farmland, and there has been no mention of how the waste water will be transferred to the new site. As the area is relatively flat there will either have to be trenches dug to provide a suitable fall or, a series of pumping stations. The latter would involve buildings and access roads. Since the proposed site will connect to the water treatment plant at Waterbeach and, presumably, to service the thousands of new properties there, would it not be better to build it there? • Many people use the area for recreation such as walking and cycling, and it is important for mental health and well-being. The proposed new footpaths around the site are unlikely to be an attractive replacement for those that have been lost during its construction. • The impact on wildlife and biodiversity will be immense. Not only will a large area of land be desecrated, but the noise, vehicle movements and light pollution will cause distress and disruption to the rich variety of species that currently inhabit the area. • The proposed plant is described as “carbon-neutral”. How is this possible when thousands of tons of concrete would be required for its construction? Concrete (cement) production requires huge amounts of energy and releases an enormous amount of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. • There will be years of disruption while the construction takes place and thousands of lorry movements across the Horningsea road causing hold-ups and delays for residents wishing to travel. Once the plant is operational, there will be a constant stream of sludge lorries going to and fro across the Horningsea road for many decades. • To decommission and decontaminate the existing site will result in further disruption, noise and pollution together with many tons of waste.