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 151 to 200 of 309 representations, newest first.

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

  • Florian Urmetzer

    I would like to object to the proposed construction of a sewage plant on the Honey Hill sites, for multiple reasons: 1) The site is greenbelt land, and building on green belt land is contrary to... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 16 July 2023

  • Luke Proctor

    I'm concerned about continued access to the right of way on Low Fen Drove Way (from High Ditch Road to Horningsea Road) which I use multiple times a week.

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 16 July 2023

  • Margaret Wilson

    In a time of economic depression why are we moving a perfectly functional sewage works less than two miles into green belt land along with inferstructure covering many miles of green belt including a... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 16 July 2023

  • Oana Stroe

    To whom it may concern, I am writing to you as a resident of Horningsea in Cambridgeshire to express my concerns regarding the relocation of the Cambridge Waste Water Treatment Plant from the current... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 16 July 2023

  • Quy Fen Trust (Quy Fen Trust)

    Please see attached

    Submitted by: Non-statutory organisations
    Date submitted: 16 July 2023
    Contains attachment(s)

  • Richard McMahon

    I should like to object to the proposed relocation on the following points, which are widely shared: - There appears to have been no serious attempt to consider alternative approaches particularly... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 16 July 2023

  • Stewart Holmes

    I am placing my objection to the relocation of the Cambridge Water treatment, sewage treatment center. I feel, there needs to be clearly outlined impact, which well be caused by this development.

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 16 July 2023

  • The Asplin Family (The Asplin Family) on behalf of The Asplin Family (The Asplin Family)

    Cambridge Waste Water Treatment Plant Relocation Planning Inspectorate Project Reference: WW010003 Relevant Representation: The Asplin Family objections 16th July 2023 1) The Anglian Water proposal... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 16 July 2023

  • Wai Ming Lee

    Solid solution to prevent odour, pollution and sewage overflows and also the impacts on traffic and sewage charge should be provided for public to consider and comment.

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 16 July 2023

  • Chris Carter-Chapman

    I strongly oppose the plans to demolish the existing sewage works and relocate it, less than a mile away from the current site, on green belt land. The arable farmland that will be lost is not... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 15 July 2023

  • Ian Harvey

    My principal objection is that this is building on the Green Belt around Cambridge. All the reasons for preserving a Green Belt apply here: - loss of arable land, especially in an age when 'food... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 15 July 2023

  • Sean Dixon

    I would like to register my objection to the relocation of the Cambridge Sewage works, and for that relocation to be to the Honey Hill site. I don’t believe that the sewage works needs to be relocated... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 15 July 2023

  • Anna Edge

    The proposed relocation of the sewage works to green belt land is in my opinion wrong. It is not operationally necessary to move the sewage works. And is disingenuous to imply that the proposed new... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 14 July 2023

  • Cara Griffith

    My parents live close to where Anglian Water want to relocate the sewage work. My objections are that it is unnecessary, and the cost of moving it could be spent on more vital projects required in and... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 14 July 2023

  • CWWTPR -GDPR001

    The construction will block my cycle route to school. [Redacted]. The digging of the pipeline will make this impossible. I'm concerned children in the village will loose their independence. It will be... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 14 July 2023

  • Gerald Edward Spraggs

    AW ‘About the Project’ states that storm sewer overflows and CSOs are ‘far less likely to occur’. What will be the new likelihood and risk? Where is the analysis to show minimisation of likelihood and... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 14 July 2023

  • Hugh Robinson

    I wish to object on the grounds that the project is solely to facilitate the development for housing of the existing site. It does not make financial or environmental sense to move a functioning... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 14 July 2023

  • Jack lambert

    Complete destruction of important wildlife habitat (greenbelt) already there's been a visible amount of disruption causing animals to flee towards the road and village this will only get worse and... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 14 July 2023

  • James Barry

    This application is essentially an abuse of process, seeking to obtain hundreds of millions of pounds of taxpayers’ money to fund the completely unnecessary relocation of a perfectly well-functioning... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 14 July 2023

  • John Cross

    Object to and request rejection of the proposed location of the site because: - Environmental consequences that will not manifest until after commencement of construction and long after completion of... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 14 July 2023

  • John wilson

    Re sighting in green belt Unnessary waste of money at a time of economic hard times on an unessary project

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 14 July 2023

  • Mrs J J Conroy

    RR 14-07-2023 Ref Anglian Water – Cambridge Waste Water Treatment Works Introduction The focus of this representation is on the Harm to Green Belt and Very Special Circumstances. The case is made that... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 14 July 2023
    Contains attachment(s)

  • Robert King

    I think the project will be a disaster for local wildlife and the effects of pollution will really affect my and my families well being

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 14 July 2023

  • Sphere25 (Sphere25) on behalf of Trinity College Cambridge (Trinity College Cambridge)

    Trinity College Cambridge ( TCC) is the principal owner and custodian of Cambridge Science Park (CSP) located to the west of the Milton Road Wastewater Treatment Works. TCC understands the need to... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 14 July 2023

  • UK Health Security Agency (UK Health Security Agency)

    Thank you for your consultation regarding the above development. The UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) welcomes the opportunity to comment on your proposals at this stage of the project. Please note... Read more

    Submitted by: Other statutory consultees
    Date submitted: 14 July 2023
    Contains attachment(s)

  • Bruce Marshall

    What a ridiculous waste of resources! There is a perfectly working sewage treatment plant at Milton which is fully working and was last upgraded in 2014. The scheme proposes to move the treatment... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 13 July 2023

  • Caroline Benstead

    I live within a mile of this site but within the city boundary, I am disturbed to see this proposal as it will create much destruction of my local green area. Currently I can walk out of my home and... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 13 July 2023

  • David John Adkin

    This proposal will be detrimental to the local Villages, Fens and wildlife.

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 13 July 2023

  • Jayne Neale

    I object to the relocation of the sewage farm in Cambridge. The new location and creation of infrastructure to support it will totally wreck the village of Horningsea. We live at the waterbeach end of... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 13 July 2023

  • John Benstead

    The proposed project to relocate the existing waste water and sewage treatment plant from Milton to a new green field site in Horningsea is completely unnecessary at the current time for the following... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 13 July 2023

  • Roger Lemon

    I object to the proposed relocation of the Cambridge Sewage Works to Honey Hill, between the conservation villages of Fen Ditton and Horningsea. • Moving the sewage works approximately one mile down... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 13 July 2023

  • Trevor Stanley Warnock

    Consultation on the move of the WWTP started with a Webinar. Having no idea what procedure would be followed, I simply followed the instructions. The first was to submit written questions. I submitted... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 13 July 2023
    Contains attachment(s)

  • Alan Alderson

    The 227 million pound proposed gift of tax payers money to a private company is ethically wrong. To move a fully functional sewage works that has sufficient capacity until 2050 does not make sense in... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 12 July 2023

  • Elizabeth Caller

    I am concerned about the industrialisation of a green space that provides space for walking and recreation. It is the closest accessible countryside for one of the more deprived wards of Cambridge... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 12 July 2023

  • Fenella Urmetzer

    I would like to object to the proposed construction of a sewage plant on the Honey Hill sites, for multiple reasons: 1) The site is greenbelt land, and building on green belt land is contrary to... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 12 July 2023

  • Laurice Suess

    * I object to the plans to relocate the sewage works to Honey Hill. Anglian Water have stated that there is no operational need to move from the current site, the proposed new plant is not... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 12 July 2023

  • Lindsay Jane Davies

    Representations in relation to the CWWT project I am writing as a resident of Horningsea. 1. I have made written submissions at each stage of the consultation process and attended a significant number... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 12 July 2023

  • Rev Canon Judith Egar

    There is no operational need for the sewage works to move; the current site was upgraded and future proofed back in 2015 at a cost of over £20 million. The present capacity is adequate to cope with... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 12 July 2023

  • Sandra Allen

    Building on Green Belt is contrary to national and local planning policies Construction and operational traffic between Horningsea and Fen Ditton Primary School will impact local traffic flow into and... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 12 July 2023

  • Sophie Hyde

    It is inappropriate to site the sewage works on a greenfield site when the existing site is still adequate.

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 12 July 2023

  • Angela Harper

    Building on Green Belt The daily impact the construction traffic will have on Grange Farm and the business working from there. Safety issues. The impact on the health of the residence of Grange Farm.... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 11 July 2023

  • bpha Limited (bpha Limited)

    I'd like to register bpha Limited's interest relating to this application. At this stage we’re showing an interest as a result of the letter received advising that we may have land or buildings... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 11 July 2023

  • Diana Johnson

    In my view this is looking to use using pristine Green Belt, which exists for the benefit of us all in Cambridge, as a convenient place to get the sewage works out of the way so that the existing site... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 11 July 2023

  • Hilary Bristow-Smith

    It is not appropriate to move urban works like a sewage works to a rural area on the greenbelt, which is situated within a flat view as the land is on the edge of the fens. The beauty of the area will... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 11 July 2023

  • Jennie Pratt

    I object fundamentally to the claim that this is an NSIP, to the proposed relocation of the Cambridge WWTP, and to the site selected between Horningsea and Fen Ditton. This is a land grab, effectively... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 11 July 2023

  • Kwok Wai Cheung

    Objection to the proposed relocation of the waste water treatment plant to Honey Hill I am a new resident of CB5, a district that will be severely and adversely affected by the proposed move. I object... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 11 July 2023

  • Mark Morris

    Objections to the relocation of Anglian Water’s WasteWater Treatment plant. The process has been flawed from the start. The initial screening process should have excluded the site because of building... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 11 July 2023

  • Jennie Pratt on behalf of Mary Fishpool (Mary Fishpool)

    I think it is mad to consider demolishing a sewage works which is perfectly good and spend all that money moving it to Honey Hill. Also there is a water aquifer under Honey Hill which it is mad to put... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 11 July 2023

  • Priya Kalia

    This will impact my day-to-day quality of life, living down the street from this development. I also swim in the Cam in Horningsea and fear this will destroy the water quality and make me ill. This... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 11 July 2023

  • The British Horse Society (The British Horse Society)

    On behalf of The British Horse Society, I wish to object to the proposals put forward for the rights of way and recreational routes. • The proposed new Bridleway from Low Fen Drove to the existing... Read more

    Submitted by: Non-statutory organisations
    Date submitted: 11 July 2023