Policy 4b: Water quality and demand

Object

Representation ID: 51847

Received: 31/07/2020

Respondent: Mrs Rachel King

The river Cam's flow rates are already lower than a river needs to be considered healthy. The Cambridge area is one that has been highlighted to be at risk of running out of water in the very near future. Building this many new homes in an arid area is wrong. Moving the sewage works from a brownfield site to a greenfield site is also wrong and will cause a devastating loss of biodiversity that is not even mentioned here. You may be creating a small linear park but the area you are ruining close by is many times greater.

Support

Representation ID: 53717

Received: 04/10/2020

Respondent: Ms Clara Todd

Related - the north cambridge development contains the seage works also? How will that be redeveloped to cope with 8000 new homes, and many offices and businesses?

How will it be possible to contain the *ahem* considerable smell that may hang over the area at certain times of the week and year?

Comment

Representation ID: 53959

Received: 04/10/2020

Respondent: Mrs Tamsin Beevor

It is unclear whether the water supply to Cambridge is sufficient for the existing level of development, the source of water to this proposal is not explained. It is therefore difficult to see how any level of efficiency will enable a sustainable development.

Comment

Representation ID: 54716

Received: 05/10/2020

Respondent: Cam & Ely Ouse Catchment Partnership

The Cam and Ely Ouse Catchment Partnership supports the requirement for suitable reassurance to be given prior to development granting that no resulting deterioration in water quality will occur post development, as outlined in Policy 4b. Where possible we determine the aspiration should be for any development to support improvements to existing water quality where schemes allow.

Object

Representation ID: 55666

Received: 02/10/2020

Respondent: St John's College

Agent: Savills

The draft policy states that “Proposals for non-residential development must achieve 5 BREEAM credits for water use (Wat 01), unless it can be demonstrated that such provision in not technically or economically viable”.

Current applications 20/03523/FUL (South Cambs) and 20/03524/FUL (Cambridge City) for Phase 1 at the St John’s Innovation Park will achieve 4 of the 5. The reason that 5 credits are not being targeted at this stage is due to the limitations of roof area available for rainwater harvesting on building 1 plus the additional sanitaryware fittings that would be included in the transport hub. As such the required flow rates to achieve a 55% reduction could be prohibitive from a performance perspective”.

It is agreed that a more ambitious target than the existing Local Plan target of 2 of the 5 should be included, but to enable balancing of different considerations, 4 out of 5 should be the minimum.

Comment

Representation ID: 55748

Received: 05/10/2020

Respondent: Brookgate

Agent: Bidwells

Neutral:
Policies 4a, b and c set standards and expectations for development across all
water related issues.
Brookgate broadly support these policies from a climate change resilience and in-combination
climate change impacts perspective. However, Policy 4c needs to be
aligned with Environment Agency guidance on climate change allowance:
(https://www.gov.uk/guidance/flood-risk-assessments-climate-change-allowances).

Comment

Representation ID: 55953

Received: 05/10/2020

Respondent: Natural England

The Cambridge water environment is under significant pressure from the demands of the existing
population. Groundwater abstraction to supply drinking water combined with surface and
wastewater discharges are impacting on groundwater levels, river flows and water quality; this is
already having an adverse effect on the natural environment, including several statutorily
designated nature conservation sites. Given the severity of the existing situation any new
development, including through NECAAP, will need to demonstrate, as a minimum, that water
supply and surface and waste water disposal demands can be met without further detriment to
groundwater levels, river flows and water quality. As a minimum development should seek to
achieve no further deterioration, however, the aim of any further development should be to reduce
these impacts and, as far as possible, deliver improvements in groundwater levels, river flows and
water quality. Proposed development will also need to ensure and demonstrate sustainable
drainage and flood risk management. These complex issues and deliverable solutions will need to
be addressed through the Integrated Water Management Study / Water Cycle Study (IWMS /
WCS) being undertaken to inform the Greater Cambridge Local Plan.
Whilst targets and requirements outlined in policies 4a -c are welcomed these policies should be
informed by the findings and recommendations of the IWMS/WCS. Any measures to mitigate
adverse environmental impact will need to be detailed and their viability assured, through the AAP.
Their delivery will need to be secured through robust policy requirements.