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 251 to 300 of 309 representations, newest first.

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

  • Tracy Rolls

    Ruin environment Traffic pollution Wildlufe

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

  • Tristram Riley-Smith

    Introduction. I am a long-term resident of Fen Ditton (30 years). My home is closer to the existing Waste Recycling Centre (WRC) at Cowley Rd than the proposed site on Honey Hill. The prevailing wind... Read more

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

  • Ursula stubbings

    I am a frequent visitor to the proposed relocation site and the area is valued for its unspoilt nature. The relocation of the current sewage works to Honey Hill is completely unnecessary. The Milton... Read more

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

  • 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