Representation by Julia Smitherman
- Date submitted
- 17 July 2023
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
I oppose Anglian Water’s application to develop a new sewage treatment plant on the site of Honey Hill, Cambridge, and plan to decommission the current plant at Milton for no operational reason other than to vacate the land for housing. The plan, fails to have regard for the harmful impact the development will have on a conservation area and heritage assets. If approved, it would be a licence to concrete over precious countryside. Of equal concern is the fairness of this process, in that £227 million has been allocated to pay for this relocation, to Anglian Water and Cambridge City Council, who in turn with South Cambridgeshire have plans already drawn for the district of ‘Hartree’ consisting of 8,350 homes. ‘Hartee’ was openly promoted at this years Strawberry Fair in Cambridge. Is this already a done deal? Are current tax paying Cambridge residents views being ridden over rough shod? How open and robust has Anglian Waters process been in determining Honey Hill as a fit site to develop on? If this project is approved it will compromise the balance of the environment and negatively affect future generations. This green belt area not only has a clear purpose by law to prevent urban sprawl from the city and control building, but perhaps more importantly it serves as a ‘Green Lung’ . As a society we are now realising our behaviour must quickly change and the importance of our green environment, its bio diversity and function as a carbon sink. One of Honey Hill’s assets is that it absorbs more carbon than it emits. We need our green areas to mitigate urban heat and the effects of pollution. The benefits of this construction will not outweigh the negative effects on nature and its functions, the ecology, the loss of wildlife and habitats. As we see with rapid climate change, once we effect the balance of nature it is hard to redress. Therefore we must protect our environment. The current Anglian Water Treatment Plant is well established, future proofed by £20 million a few years ago, why not leave it where it is? Decommissioning for no operational reason is signing a warrant to contaminate green land unnecessarily. The proposed concrete bund and associated sewage works has the potential to contaminate the principal chalk aquifer on Honey Hill and impact on the ground water flow paths, that then change water levels and ultimately impact on flow to the river (in our case River Cam and a series brooks). East Anglia is one of the driest regions in Britain and therefore we cannot afford to damage any further what precious resource nature has given. We cannot continue to keep endlessly building, or moving industrial plants that have no operational need to be moved without doing serious damage to the environment in both building destruction and construction. Cambridge is a City already at risk of over development, Cambridge City Airfield is earmarked for housing development when Marshalls relocate and therefore begs the question why does the Water Treatment Plant need to be relocated for housing (Hartree) Is there an element of ‘Green Washing’ in this application? promoting carbon zero practices and using vague ‘eco’ language that makes no sense? It is imperative locally, nationally and globally to urgently reduce the carbon footprint. How can this project possibly be viable? Taking into account the emissions associated with construction, the required materials, construction processes and infrastructure throughout the whole building lifecycle and multiply this by two to take account of the current operational plant and its decommissioning. It just does not add up - at least if the current site continued to be used the carbon footprint would be much smaller, and there would still be capacity to bring in eco practices, retrofit and expand where needed. The proposed site of Honey Hill and surrounding villages of Fen Ditton and Horningsea, are defined as Conservation Areas - areas of ‘special architectural or historic interest, the character or appearance of which it is desirable to preserve or enhance,.’ The villages are surrounded by Fen land, that is good working agricultural land and a ‘green lung.’ Honey Hill has pathways that lead to and border Quy Fen a Site of Special Scientific Interest, High Dyke that is part of Fleam Dyke and Wicked Fen that all have their own unique ecology. From a holistic perspective damage to one may impact the others. Fen Ditton and Horningsea lie between 2 and 4 miles respectively north east of Cambridge City. The nature of the villages are narrow roads and lanes with speed restrictions, pedestrian lanes and bikeways. A main road connects the two villages on which Fen Ditton Primary School stands. Neither the villages or their roads are designed to withstand the inevitable heavy vehicle construction traffic or indeed longterm operational heavy traffic usage should this application be approved. It has potential to create a dangerous, unhealthy and unpleasant environment, risking both the primary school childrens health from traffic emissions, risk of road accidents and destroying the very fabric of the villages, ‘conservation areas’ that are meant to be preserved. This application is happening in a time when the government is pushing for reduced carbon emissions and councils are introducing congestion charges to reduce emissions. The traffic rate through and around these villages will far exceed current level and be unacceptable effecting the fabric of the highway, village buildings, dust, dirt, emissions and noise. Undoubtedly if this plan is approved it will impact and change the life of the villagers and their environment forever. It is very difficult to find any positives or benefits that may come from this unnecessary development, especially for the ones it will effect most of all. If there is any nod at all from Anglian Water to a circular economy, they may want to consider how might the villagers benefit from this plant? How might they mitigate their presence? Bio gas supply? Reduced water rates? If Anglian Water is so confident that its neighbours will not be impacted by odours or operations, is there a clear compensation scheme? In the application Anglian Water cite offering green spaces and cycleway by way of compensation for scourging Honey Hill and placing a large cement bund on it. The villagers already have these areas in abundance and can use them unfettered. By contrast this application will restrict villagers, walkers, cyclists. Green spaces such as Honey Hill are precious and valued for physical and emotional health. They are not dead spaces to pile on concrete but are alive and used and part of the fabric of these villages. I respectfully request you reject Anglian Water’s application and leave Honey Hill with its unique ecology undisturbed.