Representation by Susan Roberts
- Date submitted
- 17 July 2023
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
• I object very strongly to the plan to move the CWWTP to Honey Hill. Fundamentally, I see no convincing reason for the move. The current works on Cowley Road are fully functioning, have capacity and have been future proofed for 50 years so why, in a climate crisis, move the works just 2km down the road to Green Belt land using a carbon heavy cement construction? Even though the applicant claims that, over its lifetime, the carbon footprint of the relocated treatment plant will not be huge, by its own admission, in its first 3 years, the carbon cost of construction, operation, and decommissioning activities will be immense. AW states that it is, ‘Committed to reaching net zero carbon emissions by 2030’. The decommissioning of the old site and the construction of the new one, as well as the running costs, should surely be factored in when assessing the applicant’s professed carbon neutral 2030 commitment. • It is regrettable that AW seems to have discounted keeping the plant where it is and upgrading it on its current site to make it carbon neutral. I am aware that AW’s plan to relocate the WWTP is in order to free up land for the development of North East Cambridge and am aware, too, that by artificially creating a brown field site for development, AW stands to make a lot of money from the sale! I think it rather misleading and devious that, in the 2018 Local Plan, there was no mention made of the fact that the NEC development is dependent upon moving the sewage works to Green Belt land and I feel that the people of Cambridge should be properly informed on this matter! • I have strong reservations about the NEC development plan anyhow. The proposals involve a lot of high-density, high-rise buildings with little green space and the developers seem to be more concerned to attract people from overseas and London than to provide for local people who probably will be unable to afford to live there. Plans for more office and retail space in the development would seem to be completely unnecessary when people are increasingly working from home and buying online. Currently, there are empty and underused offices in Cambridge and there are plans to turn existing shopping precincts into more science parks! The NEC development plans have yet to go to consultation and, with considerable opposition, there is no guarantee that the development will materialise so why relocate the CWWTP on the basis of plans that are flawed and uncertain?! • I am concerned that Honey Hill is a completely unsuitable site for an infrastructure project of this kind. The design of other state of the art WWTPs have sought to conceal structures by sinking them into the ground. Such a design would be more acceptable in this flat, fenland landscape but cannot be used on this site because of the presence of a Principle Chalk Aquifer. So, it seems, a rather poor design has been chosen with a 5 metre bund surrounding an exposed and sprawling mass of concrete structures, including, amongst others, 16m tall odour exhaust and vent stacks, 21.5 m tall digesters, and 15m tall tanks. This design will leave the industrial nature of the plant exposed and will look extremely intrusive in this otherwise unobstructed landscape. From a short distance the proposed bund will not hide this industrial development which will destroy the green belt approach to the historic city of Cambridge. The applicant asserts that their LERMP (Landscape Environment and Recreation Management Plan) would reduce the urbanising effect of the proposed WWTP, but I believe it will do little to disguise the industrial nature of the site. Besides, any trees planted will take a very long time to grow and mature. • In their literature, AW suggests that its ‘bund’ design for the plant is reminiscent of iron age hillforts, which may be the case, but there are no such hillforts in this flat, open agricultural region so such a design is completely inappropriate. • Furthermore, apart from the intrusive nature of the design, a WWTP here will mean that, according to DEFRA, the chalk aquifer is at high risk of groundwater contamination! • Of great concern is the fact that this huge infrastructure project is planned to be built on Green Belt land, contrary to national and local planning policy. I quote, ‘The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) states that the Government attaches great importance to Green Belts. “The fundamental aim of Green Belt policy is to prevent urban sprawl by keeping land permanently open; the essential characteristics of Green Belts are their openness and their permanence” ‘. The NPPF goes on to define 5 ‘purposes’ of the Green Belt, two of which are ‘to assist in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment’ and ‘to preserve the setting and special character of historic towns…’ It is feared, of course, that apart from defying government guidance, this infringement of the Green Belt will open the way for further development and urban sprawl, a concern to the residents of Horningsea and to the inhabitants of all the villages surrounding Cambridge and, indeed, to Cambridge residents who use the Green Belt area for health and relaxation purposes. • Furthermore, it is planned that the relocated WWTP sit at the end of the extended Wicken Fen (re the Wicken Fen Vision) and alongside Quy Fen, a site of Special Scientific Interest! I am very concerned about the impact of an industrial plant, and all the inevitable construction traffic dust and pollution, on the fragile and precious biodiversity and wildlife habitats in these areas. • The proposed plant also sits between the historic villages of Fen Ditton and Horningsea, both Conservation areas with many listed buildings and with venues popular and used a great deal by the local community and Cambridge residents alike. • Potential odour is, of course, of concern to all of us in the village of Horningsea. It will have a damaging effect on local venues, especially those venues that make much use of outdoor space such as the village pubs and the village hall. Horningsea is a very lively village with a lot going on throughout the year and many events take place outside. Our concern is that the possibility of odour from the WWTP will discourage people from visiting the village, businesses will suffer and local residents will dread the wind blowing from a certain direction (as they do in Milton). • Construction traffic in the years of building the plant will also be a problem for local residents and for children attending Fen Ditton Primary School and is quite probably also going to discourage people from visiting our pubs and restaurants. The C210, running through Horningsea is already a very over used road and the traffic gets worse year by year. In the next few years even more traffic, resulting from commuters from the new Waterbeach development, will coincide with the relocation of the WWTP, should it go ahead. Currently, any issue on this, the Horningsea Road, results in major tailbacks with traffic backing up into the village and the restructuring of the A14 Junction 34 and then the construction traffic in and out of the WWTP is bound to cause further congestion. Residents of Horningsea are already extremely concerned about the weight of traffic passing through the centre of our village on what is an entirely unsuitable ‘C’ road and fear that the construction of this major infrastructure development on our doorstep will exacerbate an already difficult and hazardous traffic situation. • People in the area overwhelmingly felt that, should the development go ahead, a dedicated junction on the A14 for construction and site traffic would be infinitely preferable to a junction on the C210 but, regrettably, this option was discounted. Although the applicant has been keen to convince us that, should the relocation go ahead, sludge lorries will be instructed not to come through the village, a dedicated access on the A14 would seem a better way of ensuring that they do not. • I am concerned, too, that HGV construction traffic working on the Waterbeach pipeline will inevitably come through the village adding further to our congestion and safety problems. • For all the reasons outlined I believe that relocating the CWWTP will have a negative effect on our village and on the quality of life of its inhabitants, on Cambridge people in general, on wildlife and on the local and global environment. It would seem to be an entirely misconceived project that will do irreparable harm on a number of levels.