Skip to main content
Find a National Infrastructure Project

Beta This is a beta service - your feedback will help us to improve it

Filter
Cambridge Waste Water Treatment Plant Relocation

Relevant representations (registration comments)

Search by the person or group making the submission or the content of the submission.

Showing 1 to 100 of 309 representations, newest first.

Results per page View 25 results per page | View 50 results per page | 100

  • Save Honey Hill Group (Save Honey Hill Group)

    See attached

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 26 July 2023
    Contains attachment(s)

  • Alison Mary Day

    I do not agree with the proposal to move the sewage treatment works to a new site at Honey Hill. Building on the Green belt is contrary to national and local planning policy. The area around Fen... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 19 July 2023

  • Anthony John Booth

    This is an anachronistic and unnecessary development for a number of reasons: 1. This is a dash to cash in with income from land value uplift and 227 millions of public finance, before water... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 19 July 2023

  • Baroness Janet Cohen of Pimlico

    I object to Anglian Water’s application for a new Waste Water Treatment Plant at Honey Hill and ask the Inspector to reject it on grounds set out below. Background Anglian Water’s proposal is not... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 19 July 2023

  • Cambridge City Council (Cambridge City Council)

    Relevant Representation of Cambridge City Council INTRODUCTION 1. The following relevant representation is made on behalf of Cambridge City Council only who hereafter are referred to as the City... Read more

    Submitted by: Local authorities
    Date submitted: 19 July 2023
    Contains attachment(s)

  • Cambridgeshire County Council (Cambridgeshire County Council)

    Cambridgeshire County Council Relevant Representations have been emailed to the case team. Topic areas include: Agricultural Land and Soils, Biodiversity, Carbon, Health, Historic Environment, Land... Read more

    Submitted by: Local authorities
    Date submitted: 19 July 2023
    Contains attachment(s)

  • Catherine Kassam

    I strongly object to the proposed relocation of Cambridge Waste Water Treatment , 1.5 km east of current Cowley/Milton Road location, to Honey Hill, with a tunnel under the Cam, for £227 million of... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 19 July 2023

  • Chris Lindley

    I am a resident of Horningsea, a parent, a parent governor [Redacted] and a member of the Save Honey Hill campaign group (although these comments are in a personal capacity). [Redacted]?I object most... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 19 July 2023

  • Chris Smith

    I am concerned about the information presented within Appendix 8.7:Bat Technical, in particular: 1. The low level of attempted survey effort for the transect surveys as only three repeats, given the... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 19 July 2023

  • Christopher Buchdahl

    There is now a real risk that global warming may run faster than projected. The old site is actually far better protected from the risk of flooding and contamination/pollution of nearby ditches, many... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 19 July 2023

  • Christopher John Levings

    The current treatment works at Milton have been poorly operated for the past 30 years, managed would be an incorrect use of the word The couldn't care less finger in the air attitude of the operator... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 19 July 2023

  • Claudia Goodbrand

    I don’t think the relocation of the sewage works is at all necessary. There is no operational need. The only reason for moving the sewage works is the proposed house development on the existing sewage... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 19 July 2023

  • David Jeffrey Seilly

    I object to the relocation of Cambridge Treatment Sewage works from Milton to the new location on arable farmland between Fen Ditton, Horningsea and Stow Cum Quy. There is no operational need to move... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 19 July 2023

  • Dodie Carter

    I am totally opposed to the proposed move of the sewage works from down the road in Milton to Honey Hill. It seems to me that the reasons are dubious to say the least and that there may well be a... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 19 July 2023

  • Dr Mark Geoffrey Harrison

    The proposed relocation of the Cambridge Waste Water Treatment Plant is not operationally necessary because the existing site at Cowley Road was recently upgraded to serve for at least another 25... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 19 July 2023

  • Emily McKaylin

    The proposed project to relocate a perfectly functional sewage works from its current site in Cambridge to the green belt raises several concerns regarding the impact on the local environment,... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 19 July 2023

  • Emma Russell

    I believe there are multiple compelling reasons for the sewage works not to be relocated. Firstly, building on green belt land is contrary to national and local planning policies. The current sewage... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 19 July 2023

  • Environment Agency (Environment Agency)

    Please find enclosed the Relevant Representation on behalf of the Environment Agency in relation to the above application for a Development Consent Order (DCO). The Environment Agency’s Role We are a... Read more

    Submitted by: Other statutory consultees
    Date submitted: 19 July 2023

  • Eva Dangerfield

    I object to the proposed relocation of the Cambridge Waste Water Treatment Plant for the reasons raised below: - There is no operational need to move the sewage works. Anglian Water have confirmed... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 19 July 2023

  • Fen Ditton Parish Council (Fen Ditton Parish Council)

    Fen Ditton Parish Council ('FDPC') wish to register with the Planning Inspectorate in relation to Anglian Water’s CWWTPR proposals. We oppose the selection of Site 3 at Honey Hill for a new AWS... Read more

    Submitted by: Parish councils
    Date submitted: 19 July 2023

  • Gareth Williamson

    The existing facilities are fit for purpose, having recently been upgraded thus there is no functional requirement that justifies the relocation project. The Honey Hill site is prime greenbelt, home... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 19 July 2023

  • Gemma Phillips

    • I am objecting to the proposal to relocate the sewage works to Honey Hill. • Living on the Farm we will be directly impacted by the sewage works relocating. • Building on Green Belt is contrary to... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 19 July 2023

  • Graham Cone

    I have concerns regarding the following: The new site location being greenbelt with the current site having no operational need to be relocated The cost of the move to the taxpayer through the housing... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 19 July 2023

  • Hélène Grislin

    -Firstly, the loss of Green Belt is shocking to me - especially when the existing sewage site is perfectly in working order and has been recently upgraded to be future proof. There is no acceptable... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 19 July 2023

  • Hester Tollit

    The construction of the sewage works poses considerable negative effects on the site, out weighing any presumed benefit that the project may suggest both socially and environmentally. Primarily,... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 19 July 2023

  • Historic England (Historic England)

    The impact of the project on the Historic Environment

    Submitted by: Other statutory consultees
    Date submitted: 19 July 2023
    Contains attachment(s)

  • James Edward Southwick

    Objections & comments on this proposed project: 1) This proposal involves building on Green Belt which goes against national and local planning policy. Policy which exists to prevent urban sprawl and... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 19 July 2023

  • James Lionel Cohen

    I object to Anglian Water’s application for a new Waste Water Treatment Plant at Honey Hill and ask the Inspector to reject it on grounds set out below. Background Anglian Water’s proposal is not... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 19 July 2023

  • Jane Duffy

    The construction of the waste water plant on Green Belt land will be detrimental to the amazing countryside and wildlife found there. Quy Fen is an area of special scientific interest and this... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 19 July 2023

  • Jane Williams

    I strongly object to Anglian Water's proposal to relocate the CWWTP from an industrial brownfield site to pristine farmland in the Cambridge Green Belt at Honey Hill. The current works have been... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 19 July 2023

  • Jennifer Parr

    • Why is Anglian Water moving the plant - the existing plant was future-proofed until at least 2050 and at great expense. •A sewerage plant should not be built on a principle aquifer, a source of... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 19 July 2023

  • Jessica Kitt

    It makes absolutely no financial, environmental or social sense to decommission a fully-functioning, recently upgraded sewage works, that is acknowledged to have capacity to serve this area for the... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 19 July 2023

  • Jonathan Michael Hayes

    I strongly object to this application based on the following: Building on Green Belt should not be permitted. Adverse effect on existing wildlife and biodiversity. Increase in (already busy) traffic... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 19 July 2023

  • Lynne Stubbings

    My objection to the proposal to move the existing CWWTP from the existing Cowley Rd site to Honey Hill and my reasons behind it. Rationale for the project is seemingly flawed In recent consultations... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 19 July 2023

  • Miriam Christensen

    The plans are for building on Green Belt which should be strongly protected, for an unnecessary massive carbon footprint in building and decommissioning the existing site at an unnecessary massive... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 19 July 2023

  • Miss Heather Peck

    The national plan is to not build houses on greenbelt but to redevelop brown field sites instead. It is incongruous to move a massive wastewater works to a greenbelt site in order to free up a... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 19 July 2023

  • National Highways (National Highways)

    This letter consists of National Highways’ Relevant Representation in respect of the Development Consent Order (DCO) application by Anglian Water Limited (the Applicant) for consent for the relocation... Read more

    Submitted by: Other statutory consultees
    Date submitted: 19 July 2023

  • National Trust (National Trust)

    The National Trust wishes to register as an interested party in respect of the application for a Development Consent Order (DCO) for the Cambridge Waste Water Treatment Plant Relocation (CWWTPR). The... Read more

    Submitted by: Non-statutory organisations
    Date submitted: 19 July 2023

  • Owen Phillips

    I object to the proposal to relocate the sewage works from the current site to the Honey Hill area. My objection is two-fold; the adverse personal impact it will have to me and my farming business, as... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 19 July 2023

  • Penelope Aldis

    Dear Planning Inspectors I wish to register my objections to the relocation of the sewage works from Milton to Honey Hill near Horningsea, Cambridge. I outline below the many reasons I believe the... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 19 July 2023

  • Rachel Elizabeth Barnett

    HONEY HILL If the building of the proposed Sewage Works goes ahead it will involve building on the Conservation areas around Fen Ditton and Horningsea. I believe that this goes against National and... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 19 July 2023

  • Rachel Thomas

    *Replacing a fully-functioning sewage works without good reason but with the associated carbon cost of a cement heavy construction. The arguments for this development, given that there is a recently... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 19 July 2023

  • Robert Izzard

    The proposed new sewage works at Honey Hill, near Cambridge, is a waste of public money and will cause massive destruction to the local environment. It is a clear stitch-up between politicians and... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 19 July 2023

  • Seb Dangerfield

    I object to the proposed relocation of the Cambridge Waste Water Treatment Plant for the following reasons: * The high carbon cost of replacing the existing sewage works. Whilst the operational carbon... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 19 July 2023

  • Serga Collett

    Honey Hill Fen Ditton proposed sewage farm: I believe that this will be an environmental and visual catastrophe. The proposal of moving a fully functioning sewage works to an area of green belt land... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 19 July 2023

  • Shuk Ting Linda Chu

    I object to the relocation of the waste water treatment plant in Cambridge for the following reasons: The existing plant is in use, it is fully operational and is not at full capacity. Relocating the... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 19 July 2023

  • South Cambridgeshire District Council (South Cambridgeshire District Council)

    Relevant Representation of South Cambridgeshire District Council INTRODUCTION 1. The following representation is made on behalf of South Cambridgeshire District Council only which hereafter is... Read more

    Submitted by: Local authorities
    Date submitted: 19 July 2023
    Contains attachment(s)

  • Susan Marie Larter

    Objection to Anglian Water’s DCO application to relocate the sewage works There is no need to spend 227m to relocate the sewage works when there is enough space to redevelop the existing site at a... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 19 July 2023

  • No name provided on behalf of The Griffith Family (The Griffith Family)

    1. The main reason I object is that the CWWTP does not need to move. The data collected by SHH showed that the majority of people who had completed the consultation survey saw no reason for it to be... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 19 July 2023

  • Bidwells (Bidwells) on behalf of The President and Fellows of the Queens College (The President and Fellows of the Queens College)

    We have not received any communications from Anglian Water or their agent's in respect of this scheme, we therefore reserve the right to make additional comments once more detail has been provided on... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 19 July 2023

  • Tinch Alison Suzanne Dewhurst Minter

    The main issues and impacts are on the general wellbeing of local residents, including wild life, and the huge disruption this project will cause to the area.

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 19 July 2023

  • Vistry Group (Vistry Group)

    In assessing the proposals, the Planning Inspectorate, and in turn the Secretary of State, must be satisfied that the impacts of the proposals have been adequately assessed and the weight attributed... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 19 July 2023

  • Boyer (Boyer) on behalf of Waterbeach Development Company LLP (Waterbeach Development Company LLP)

    Cambridge waste water treatment plant relocation DCO (ref: WW010003): Initial outline representations on behalf of: Waterbeach Development Company (WDC) as promoter and Joseph Martin, Kier Petherick... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 19 July 2023
    Contains attachment(s)

  • Waterbeach Parish Council (Waterbeach Parish Council)

    Waterbeach Parish Council (WPC) strongly object to Anglian Water's proposal to relocate Milton WWTP from an industrial brownfield site to Honey Hill in the Cambridge Green Belt. The Milton site has... Read more

    Submitted by: Parish councils
    Date submitted: 19 July 2023

  • William Neale

    - I don't deem this a national infrastructure project as the only reason the sewage plant is looking to relocate is because they have sold the land to allow a flat development. The current location... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 19 July 2023

  • Zoe Skelding

    I strongly object to this application; I consider the main issues and impacts to be: • Negative impact on the conservation areas of Fen Ditton and Horningsea • Building on Green Belt is contrary to... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 19 July 2023

  • Alan Duffy

    At over £200 million pounds, this is a disgraceful waste of taxpayers money on a project that does not need to happen. The existing waste water plant has been upgraded and will be suitable for many... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 18 July 2023

  • Deborah Balm

    The present sewerage works is more than adequate for the next 20 years. As residents we even paid a supplement after the list time the sewerage works was proposed to move to Honey Hill to improve the... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 18 July 2023

  • Dina Archer

    Under no circumstances should this project be relocated to Honey Hill. The destruction of wildlife can never be replaced. For what? To make way for housing. If it does have to be moved surely, the... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 18 July 2023

  • Dr Donald Fleet

    Since we have been told there is no technical need to re-build the swage works, I object to its relocation onto productive green-belt land over a chalk aquifer.

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 18 July 2023

  • EarthQuakers (EarthQuakers)

    Cambridge Waste Water Treatment Plant Relocation CWWTPR 17th July2023 Save Honey Hill EarthQuakers strongly object to the relocation 1.5 km east of current Cowley/Milton Road location, with tunnel... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 18 July 2023

  • Elizabeth Cotton

    Project: Cambridge Waste Water Treatment Plant Applicant: Anglian Water Services Limited Relevant Representation of Ms Elizabeth Cotton of [REDACTED] Dear Sir/Madam, My representation is in three... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 18 July 2023

  • Elizabeth Harrison

    The Cambridge Waste Water Treatment Plant Relocation: I strongly object to the proposed relocation of the sewage works to the Honey Hill green belt area. Our green belt is an invaluable asset that... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 18 July 2023

  • Emily Williams

    I object to the Anglian Water (AW) application for a Development Consent Order to relocate the Cambridge Waste Water Treatment Plant to the area between Horningsea, Fen Ditton and Stow Cum Quy, known... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 18 July 2023

  • Emma Hodson

    My main concerns relate to: 1) the destruction of green belt land and severe negative impact on sites of special scientific interest at Qui Fen and Wicken Fen, along with the ancient footpaths that... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 18 July 2023

  • Fiona Orme

    1. The carbon cost of building a new sewage works at Honey Hill and decommissioning the old is far too high and goes against government guidelines. I strongly object to relocation of sewage works... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 18 July 2023

  • Francesca Elizabeth Giove

    I am objecting to the proposed relocation of Cambridge’s Water Treatment Plant for the reasons stated below: I have concerns regarding the impact on the naturally occurring wildlife, including the... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 18 July 2023

  • Frederick William Hyde

    Dear Sirs I am writing to object to the proposed relocation of the Milton WWTP. I have family connections to the area. My father was raised in Barton, Cambridgeshire and my aunt lives at [Redacted]. I... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 18 July 2023

  • Bidwells (Bidwells) on behalf of Gonville & Caius (Gonville & Caius)

    Rep 1 – Scheme design Gonville & Caius College, Cambridge (‘The College’) is concerned by the design of the scheme and lack of detailed rationale for elements of its design. We believe the proposed... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 18 July 2023

  • Grant Otto

    There is no operational reason to build a new treatment works. Anglia water should instead focus on their regulatory, social and environmental responsibilities to halt all outflows and minimize... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 18 July 2023

  • Hazel Smith

    I am pleased to see the proposal before you for relocation of the Cambridge Waste Water Treatment Plant. Anglian Water have consulted widely in our parish and went through a rigorous site selection... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 18 July 2023

  • Hon Hill

    Key Points covering: * ‘Carbon calculations’ analysis * Environmental Aspects * Economic Aspects * Social Aspects * No need for this WTTP move: the ‘do nothing’ much better alternative

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 18 July 2023

  • Horningsea Parish Council (Horningsea Parish Council)

    Horningsea Parish Council (HPC) Registration as an Interested Party and initial Comments on the Cambridge Waste Water Treatment Plant Relocation HPC would like to register as an Interested Party and... Read more

    Submitted by: Parish councils
    Date submitted: 18 July 2023

  • Ian Gilder

    I am a long-standing resident of Clayhithe, Horningsea [Redacted]. From 1998 until July 2022, I was Head of Planning at ERM, a leading planning and environmental consultancy. I have had extensive... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 18 July 2023

  • Jen Nì Dèasunaìgh

    The relocation plan for arable land is unacceptable, they should not be allowed to build on green belt land. Especially with the rising population how do we feed ourselves? Without importing food that... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 18 July 2023

  • Joanne Timerick

    I object to the proposal to rebuild on Honey Hill

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 18 July 2023

  • John Andrew McMunn

    The relocation of Anglian Water's sewage works to Honey Hill would be a travesty. It would be a major building project on green belt land in contradiction of national and local planning policy. It... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 18 July 2023

  • John Rymell

    I am opposed to moving the sewage treatment works to a new site at Honey Hill. This will mean building on the Green belt, which is contrary to national and local planning policy. Since its creation... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 18 July 2023

  • Jonathan Ben Quash

    This proposal does not meet the essential criterion of being *necessary*. The existing sewage works are fit for purpose and could be operative for several decades to come. This plan proposes to... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 18 July 2023

  • Jonathan Buchanan

    1 – traffic: the number of HGVs especially and construction traffic between Horningsea and Fen Ditton and the A14 road bridge. Mr Buchanan is reliant on a bicycle for transport and feels it will be... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 18 July 2023

  • Julian Wolstan Francis (Julian Wolstan Francis) on behalf of Julian Wolstan Francis (Julian Wolstan Francis)

    Carter Jonas on behalf of the principal landowner of the site continue to be in negotiations with Anglian Water. These representations are submitted on behalf of Mr Julian Francis and are in addition... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 18 July 2023

  • Katherine Restif

    As a resident of Horningsea, I object to Anglian Water’s DCO application to relocate the sewage works to Honey Hill on the following grounds: • Substantial investment has already been made to upgrade... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 18 July 2023

  • Laura Mary Taylor

    There is no need to move the current water treatment plant. It will be a costly exercise for little to no gain. I will be personally hugely inconvenienced by the increase in traffic to Horningsea Road... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 18 July 2023

  • Madelaine Clark

    Anglia Water have no clear need to move or upgrade the sewage works. This is a project purely driven by a desire to develop and profit from the land it currently sits on. Building on green belt land... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 18 July 2023

  • Major Thomas Michael Daniel

    I wish to protest very strongly against the proposed removal of the sewage works from its present site to Honey Hill, Fen Ditton. As a Fellow of the Chartered Institute in Environmental Health I have... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 18 July 2023

  • Marc Ridyard

    I object to the Anglian Water (AW) application for a Development Consent Order to relocate the Cambridge Waste Water Treatment Plant to the area between Horningsea, Fen Ditton and Stow Cum Quy, known... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 18 July 2023

  • Marie Saumarez

    Loss of agricultural land Impact of increased traffic Water table and aquifers

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 18 July 2023

  • Matthew Alan Stancombe

    I am extremely concerned about a possible threat to a Principle Chalk Aquifer which according to DEFRA is at high risk of groundwater contamination. Honey Hill should have been discounted as an option... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 18 July 2023

  • Meyland Family (Meyland Family) on behalf of Meyland Family (Meyland Family)

    We live in Fen Ditton which will be directly affected by the Sewage Project. This is on green belt, some of which is used for arable farming and some privately owned meadows which have been cultivated... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 18 July 2023

  • Addleshaw Goddard LLP (Addleshaw Goddard LLP) on behalf of Network Rail Infrastructure Limited (Network Rail Infrastructure Limited)

    APPLICATION BY ANGLIAN WATER SERVICES LIMITED FOR THE CAMBRIDGE WASTE WATER TREATMENT PLANT RELOCATION PROJECT ORDER 202[X] PLANNING INSPECTORATE REFERENCE: WW010003 SECTION 56 PLANNING ACT 2008:... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 18 July 2023

  • Nick Moir

    I write as the incumbent (rector/vicar) of Fen Ditton, Horningsea and Teversham, as a resident of the new Marleigh development, a parish councillor in Fen Ditton, and as a long-time resident in... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 18 July 2023

  • P. X. Farms Ltd (P. X. Farms Ltd)

    P.X.Farms objects to the proposed location of the new waste water treatment plant. The works associated with the construction and ongoing operation of the site will impact PXF’s farming activity which... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 18 July 2023

  • Philip John Goodwin

    Dear Planning Inspectorate, Project: Cambridge Waste Water Treatment Plant Applicant: Anglian Water Services Limited Relevant Representation of Ms Elizabeth Cotton [Redacted] [Redacted]. The Property... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 18 July 2023

  • Richard Consoli

    Impact on the Conservation areas of Fen Ditton and Horningsea. Building on Green Belt is contrary to national and local planning policy. It is there to protect the setting of our historic city and... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 18 July 2023

  • Rowena Small

    The water treatment works were up-graded and 'future-proofed' relatively recently, so there is no pressing need to move them. This scheme is a waste of public money and will severely damage the green... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 18 July 2023

  • Sarah Ann Smart

    Objection to use of green belt

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 18 July 2023

  • Sharon Byrne

    I strongly objec to this proposal for a number of important reasons. It is proposed to build on green belt and this is contrary to both national and loca planning policy. There is also a high risk of... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 18 July 2023

  • Stow-cum-Quy Parish Council (Stow-cum-Quy Parish Council)

    I am providing comments on behalf of the Parish Council of Stow-cum Quy. First and foremost, we do not believe the current planning application sufficiently justifies relocating the water treatment... Read more

    Submitted by: Parish councils
    Date submitted: 18 July 2023

  • Suffolk County Council (Suffolk County Council)

    Thank you for notifying Suffolk County Council that the above application has been accepted by the Planning Inspectorate for examination. I am responding on behalf of Suffolk County Council to your... Read more

    Submitted by: Local authorities
    Date submitted: 18 July 2023

  • The Woodland Trust (The Woodland Trust)

    Thank you for the opportunity to register as an interested party on the following project. We hold concerns regarding two veteran trees which are likely to be affected by the proposed Waterbeach... Read more

    Submitted by: Non-statutory organisations
    Date submitted: 18 July 2023