DOCSLIB.ORG

Isle of Wight Shoreline Management Plan 2 Appendix C: Baseline

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Isle of Wight Shoreline Management Plan 2 Appendix C: Baseline Directorate of Economy & Environment Director Stuart Love Isle of Wight Shoreline Management Plan 2 Appendix C: Baseline Process Understanding C3: Baseline Scenarios (of future shoreline change) • No Active Intervention scenario • With Present Management scenario December 2010 Coastal Management; Directorate of Economy & Environment, Isle of Wight Council iwight.com Appendix C3: Page 1 www.coastalwight.gov.uk/smp iwight.com Appendix C3: Page 2 www.coastalwight.gov.uk/smp Appendix C: Baseline Process Understanding C3: Baseline Scenarios (of future shoreline change) • No Active Intervention (NAI) scenario • With Present Management (WPM) scenario Contents Page no. C3.1 Introduction and Methodology 3 1. Context 2. Aim and introduction 3. Geographical units (including a map of the units used in the tables) 4. Introduction to the Baseline Scenarios 5. Sea level rise 6. Methodology 6.1 Developing the ‘No Active Intervention’ and ‘With Present Management’ Scenarios 6.2 Future erosion risk -Allowing for sea level rise in the future predictions of coastal erosion rates 6.3 Future flood risk 6.4 Mapping of predicted shoreline change under the ‘No Active Intervention’ and ‘With Present Management’ Scenarios -Assumptions for mapping erosion zones in the Baseline Scenarios 7. Overall Conclusions 7.1 No Active Intervention 7.2 With Present Management 8. Key sources of reference used in the development of the Baseline Scenarios & Maps. C3.2 Table: North-east coast 21 C3.3 Table: Sandown & Undercliff coast 68 C3.4 Table: West Wight coast 114 C3.5 Maps: NAI & WPM erosion and flood mapping iwight.com Appendix C3: Page 3 www.coastalwight.gov.uk/smp iwight.com Appendix C3: Page 4 www.coastalwight.gov.uk/smp 1. Context This task follows the guidance published by Defra (2006) on the development of Shoreline Management Plans (including Volume 1, Volume 2 and Appendix D –Shoreline Interactions and Response), to provide an understanding of shoreline interactions and responses for two baseline scenario assessments: ‘no active intervention’ and ‘with present management’ (Task 2.2). 2. Aim and Introduction The aim of this task is to provide an understanding of how the shoreline is likely to evolve in the future and the influence that coastal management or intervention is likely to have on that behaviour. This provides the basis by which flood and coastal erosion risks are determined, to define the zone of assets within which features and issues are at risk over the next 100 years. This analysis is used by the SMP to develop and appraise the consequences of setting different shoreline management policies. This task delivers four outputs: • a description of the shoreline response to a scenario of ‘No Active Intervention’ (NAI). This assumes that defences are no longer maintained and will fail over time. • a description of the shoreline response to a scenario of continuing ‘With Present Management’ (WPM). This assumes that all defences are maintained to provide a similar level of protection to that provided at present. • maps illustrating predicted shoreline change if ‘No Active Intervention’ (NAI) occurs. • maps illustrating predicted shoreline change if continuing ‘With Present Management’ (WPM) techniques. The maps and scenarios describe coastal evolution over three future epochs or time periods: 1) 0-20 years (approx. 2025); 2) 20-50 years (approx 2055); 3) 50-100 years (approx. 2105). These three epochs reveal short, medium and long-term change and are examined by all SMPs in England & Wales. 3. Geographical units To describe the variation around the Isle of Wight coast, the coastline has been divided into 58 frontages, from 260m to 18km in length. These frontages characterise likely future patterns of change, based on geomorphological units, a change in the scale of active or potential cliff retreat, areas of flood risk and development patterns. This report also assesses the longshore interactions between these frontages, for example their reliance on one another for supply of beach sediments. iwight.com Appendix C3: Page 5 www.coastalwight.gov.uk/smp Erosion at Horestone Point, February 2009 Flooding surrounding Newport Harbour, March 2008 iwight.com Appendix C3: Page 6 www.coastalwight.gov.uk/smp Map showing the location of the ‘IW’ units (in purple) used in the tables throughout Appendix C. Nb. the map also shows the location of the new SMP2 Policy Units ‘PU1A.1’ (in blue) developed after the completion of Appendices C, D and E and used in the Main Report. iwight.com Appendix C3: Page 7 www.coastalwight.gov.uk/smp 4. Introduction to the Baseline Scenarios An understanding of shoreline interactions and response forms an integral part of the SMP. The Baseline Scenarios develop an understanding of how the shoreline is behaving and the influence that coastal management has upon this behaviour. This allows areas at risk from future flooding and erosion to be identified and the potential consequences of coastal management policies and structures to be understood, to inform the setting of future shoreline management policies. Assessments are required for two scenarios: a) No Active Intervention’ (NAI). This scenario assumes that defences are not maintained and will fail over time. The effectiveness of the defences will change across each time period as some fail sooner than others, depending on the residual life, for example a concrete sea wall will probably last longer than a timber revetment currently in a similar condition. This scenario takes account of the dates of defence failure defined in the Defence Appraisal (Appendix C2 of this SMP2). Residual life of current defences can also be affected by changes in beach morphology, e.g. accretion or erosion. Shoreline change following ‘defence failure is assessed over the next 100 years. b) ‘With Present Management’ (WPM). This scenario assumes that all defences are maintained to provide a similar level of protection to that provided at present, to identify when current practices will no longer be effective over the next 100 years (as sea level rises and coastal processes change, for example). For the purposes of this SMP Appendix C3, this has been defined as the standard of the defence structure being maintained but not improved –i.e. a seawall may become affected by overtopping in future epochs. c) Mapping of predicted shoreline change accompanies both scenarios described above (NAI maps & WPM maps). The short, medium and long-term evolution of the coastline is examined, using three epochs (0-20 years; 20-50 years; 50-100 years). A large-scale and long-term understanding of shoreline response is necessary to assess the sustainability of management options and to take into account any long-term trends or drivers of coastal change, which may vary from short-term and local observations. Appendix C1 –Assessment of Shoreline Dynamics- is a fundamental input to the Baseline Scenarios. As an understanding of coastal behaviour and dynamics both historically and present day, it identifies key linkages and interactions along the coast and past shoreline movement. The Baseline Scenarios take this work forward to predict the response of the coast to the failure or maintenance of coastal defences, to changes in forcing factors (waves, tides, exposure, etc.), to changes in sediment supply and storage, and it identifies erosion rates to determine the future shoreline position. The analysis of each stretch of coast in the ‘baseline scenarios’ must continually consider each of the following: • what is there? (i.e. features, geomorphology, sedimentology etc.); • how is it reacting to circumstances around it? (i.e. long-term trends; reactivation; typical response and response to extreme events); • why is it reacting in this manner? (e.g. is the reaction controlled by factors such as sediment supply, geological/geomorphological controls); • where will the shoreline be? (position); • what are the consequences elsewhere of this reaction? (e.g. features updrift and downdrift). iwight.com Appendix C3: Page 8 www.coastalwight.gov.uk/smp Under the ‘No Active Intervention’ (NAI) policy scenario, there is no expenditure on maintaining or improving existing coastal and flood defences, therefore defences will fail at a time dependent upon their residual life and the condition of the fronting beaches and inter-tidal areas. Under the ‘With Present Management’ (WPM) policy scenario, all existing defences and management practices are continued. Defences are maintained to provide a similar level of protection over the next 100 years to that provided at present, i.e. maintaining their current height. In some cases this will require considerable investment to existing defences to maintain their integrity and effectiveness. For this assessment it is the function of the defence ‘practice’ that is be considered rather than specifics of the structure itself. The assessment should also identify if a practice becomes technically impossible in the future, for example due to rising sea levels, or when the current practice (e.g. beach recharge at the current rate) becomes ineffective. It is important to highlight the reducing standards of service offered by these defences over time. When assessing the effects of continuing ‘with present management’, the standard of the defence structure is maintained but not improved –i.e. a seawall may become affected by overtopping in future epochs. Presently redundant structures are not maintained and do not form part of this analysis. The consequences of maintaining the defences and management practices are assessed in terms of how the coastline will change, for example, narrowing and steepening of beaches in front of a seawall through coastal squeeze, leaving high vertical structures with no useable beach, or exposing the toe of the seawall. There are standard assumptions for each defence type (e.g. seawall or timber revetment) under the WPM scenario, listed in figure 1 below. Defence Example Assumptions type Structure Linear Seawall • Continues to prevent cliff line retreat stoppers • Stops (reduces) sediment input • Structural integrity remains and the wall is rebuilt at a similar standard of effectiveness • Exposure may change, i.e.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Isle of Wight Coast Path Guided Trail Holiday
    The Isle of Wight Coast Path Guided Trail Holiday Tour Style: Guided Trails Destinations: Isle of Wight & England Trip code: FWLIC Trip Walking Grade: 3 HOLIDAY OVERVIEW The Isle of Wight Coast Path circuits the island in an anti-clockwise direction and provides a wonderful opportunity to view the island’s beautiful and varied coastline, including the chalk headlands of the Needles and Culver Cliff. The trail is interspersed with pretty coastal villages and Victorian resorts such as Ventnor. It includes some inland walking around Queen Victoria’s Osborne Estate, Cowes and Newtown Harbour National Nature Reserve. WHAT'S INCLUDED • High quality en-suite accommodation in our country house • Full board from dinner upon arrival to breakfast on departure day • The services of an HF Holidays' walks leader • All transport on walking days www.hfholidays.co.uk PAGE 1 [email protected] Tel: +44(0) 20 3974 8865 HOLIDAYS HIGHLIGHTS • A circuit of the Isle of Wight coast • The dramatic chalk headlands of the Needles and Culver Cliff • Stay at Freshwater Bay House TRIP SUITABILITY This Guided Walking/Hiking Trail is graded 3 which involves walks/hikes on generally good paths, but with some long walking days. There may be some sections over rough or steep terrain and will require a good level of fitness as you will be walking every day. It is your responsibility to ensure you have the relevant fitness required to join this holiday. Fitness We want you to be confident that you can meet the demands of each walking day and get the most out of your holiday.
    [Show full text]
  • Historic Environment Action Plan the Undercliff
    Directorate of Community Services Director Sarah Mitchell Historic Environment Action Plan The Undercliff Isle of Wight County Archaeology and Historic Environment Service October 2008 01983 823810 archaeology @iow.gov.uk Iwight.com HEAP for the Undercliff. INTRODUCTION This HEAP Area has been defined on the basis of geology, topography, land use and settlement patterns which differentiate it from other HEAP areas. This document identifies essential characteristics of the Undercliff as its geomorphology and rugged landslip areas, its archaeological potential, its 19 th century cottages ornés /marine villas and their grounds, and the Victorian seaside resort character of Ventnor. The Area has a highly distinctive character with an inner cliff towering above a landscape (now partly wooded) demarcated by stone boundary walls. The most significant features of this historic landscape, the most important forces for change and key management issues are considered. Actions particularly relevant to this Area are identified from those listed in the Isle of Wight HEAP Aims, Objectives and Actions. ANALYSIS AND ASSESSMENT Location, Geology and Topography • The Undercliff is identified as a discrete Landscape Character Type in the Isle of Wight AONB Management Plan (2004, 132). • The Area lies to the south of the South Wight Downland , from which it is separated by vertical cliffs forming a geological succession from Ferrugunious Sands through Sandrock, Carstone, Gault Clay, Upper Greensand, Chert Beds and Lower Chalk (Hutchinson 1987, Fig. 6). o The zone between the inner cliff and coastal cliff is a landslip area o This landslip is caused by groundwater lubrication of slip planes within the Gault Clays and Sandrock Beds.
    [Show full text]
  • The First Record of a Mammal from the Insect Limestone Is a Left Lower Incisor of the Rodent Isoptychus (NHMUK.PV.M45566) (Fig.3B)
    Vertebrate remains from the Insect Limestone (latest Eocene), Isle of Wight, UK Hooker, J. J., Department of Earth Sciences, Natural History Museum, Cromwell Road, London, SW7 5BD, UK (corresponding author) Evans, S. E., Department of Cell and Developmental Biology, University College London, Anatomy Building, Gower Street, London, WC1E 6BT, UK Davis, P. G., c/o J. J. Hooker Running head: Insect Limestone vertebrates 1 Abstract A small fauna of vertebrates is recorded from the Insect Limestone, Bembridge Marls Member, Bouldnor Formation, late Priabonian, latest Eocene, of the Isle of Wight, UK. The taxa represented are teleost fishes, lizards including a scincoid, unidentified birds and the theridomyid rodent Isoptychus. The scincoid represents the youngest record of the group in the UK. Of particular note is the taphonomic interpretation based on the preservation of anatomical parts of land-based tetrapods that would have been most likely transported to the site of deposition by wind, namely bird feathers and pieces of shed lizard skin. These comprise the majority of the specimens and suggest that the dominant transport mechanism was wind. Keywords: Bembridge Marls – bird – feather – fish – lizard – mammal – rodent – Scincoidea – skin – Squamata – taphonomic – Theridomyidae 2 The Insect Limestone is a discrete bed of fine-grained, hard, muddy, freshwater to hypersaline limestone near the base of the Bembridge Marls Member of the Bouldnor Formation (Munt 2014; Ross & Self 2014). Its age is late Priabonian, thus latest Eocene (Hooker et al. 2009). Insect and plant remains are relatively common, whilst vertebrate remains are exceptionally rare and are limited to fragmentary skeletal elements of fish, lizard, bird and mammal, bird feathers and pieces of shed lizard skin.
    [Show full text]
  • 461 I. Introduction. and Cardita Deltoidea +
    Downloaded from http://jgslegacy.lyellcollection.org/ at University of Oregon on June 23, 2016 ON THE F~0CENE AI~D 0LI60OENE OF THE HAMPSHIRE BASIN. 461 45. On the RELATIONS of the EocEnE and OLIa0CEN~ STRATA in the HA~trSHIR~. BASlI~. By Prof. JoH~ W. JuDD, F.R.S., See. G.S. (Read April 26, 1882.) I. Introduction. SI~cx the publication of my paper "On the Oligocene Strata of the Hampshire Basin" *, I have been favoured with many valuable suggestions and criticisms from geologists, both in this and other countries ; and the time has now perhaps arrived when some of the interesting c!uestions thus raised may be discussed with advantage. The great object of my former memoir was to determine the age and relations of a series of marine beds which contain a highly interesting fauna--a fauna presenting the closest affinities with that of a well-defined system of strata very widely distributed in Central Europe. In framing his classification of the Hampshire Tertiaries, the late Prof. Edward Forbes gave no pIace t~ this important series of beds--a fact which does not seam t~ Iiave bt~ea Strfiiciently considered by those among my critics who h~ve ~mm'rea.r ~ay proposed modifi- cation of Forbes's classification as tmaecessary-ahd, therefore, un- warrantable. The history of the discovery of this i~tevestiug marine series does not appear to be generally known. The late Sir Charles Lycll spent his earliest years in the New Forest, residing at Bartley Lodge near Lyndhurst. At that time shelly marls appear to have been in great request among agriculturists, being employed by them as a manure on some of the poorer soils, like the similar materials of the French Fahluns and our own Crags.
    [Show full text]
  • Seaview Conservation Area Character Appraisal
    Directorate of Regeneration Interim Director Bernadette Marjoram Seaview Conservation Area Appraisal Adopted 3 September 2007 Conservation & Design Planning Services 01983 823552 [email protected] www.iwight.com/conservation Contents Introduction 1 Seaview Conservation Area Revision Appraisal Area 1 ’The Historic Core’ 2 - 6 Area 2 ‘The Outskirts’ 7 – 9 Area 3 ‘Residential’ 10 - 12 www.iwight.com/conservation Adopted 3 September 2007 Seaview Conservation Area Appraisal Introduction Local Planning Authorities have a duty under The Planning (Listed Buildings & Conservation Areas) Act 1990 to designate as conservation areas any areas considered to be of special architectural or historic interest, the character or appearance of which it is desirable to protect or enhance. The Character Area boundaries are inevitably subjective in complex environments, and are based not only on architectural, land-use or historic attributes, but on the dynamic experience of walking or driving through an area. Map based boundaries are taken into consideration, but sensational qualities such as the awareness of enclosure or openness and degrees of noise and activity are also important in defining edges to Character Areas and the Conservation Area. In coastal areas, the boundaries may follow the line of the mean low water mark which is the extent of the jurisdiction of the Council and so is used for consistency. The legislation also makes provision for schemes to enhance the area, so the inclusion of areas of potential allows for schemes to be put forward which will improve the Area in keeping with its own individual character, and to the same high standard. Designation does not mean that development cannot take place within the proposed Conservation Area or within its setting.
    [Show full text]
  • Ryde and the North-East Coastline (PDZ2)
    Isle of Wight Shoreline Management Plan 2: Main Report –Chapter 4 Isle of Wight Council & Royal Haskoning December 2010 4.3 Policy Development Zone 2 - Ryde and the North-east Coastline (PDZ2) Left to right: Seagrove Bay; Ryde Sands iwight.com - 109 - www.coastalwight.gov.uk/smp iwight.com - 110 - www.coastalwight.gov.uk/smp 4.3 Policy Development Zone 2 - Ryde and the North-east Coastline (PDZ2) Contents Page 4.3 Policy Development Zone 2 - Ryde and the North-east Coastline (PDZ2) 109 1. Overview and Description 113 2. Baseline management scenarios 122 3. Discussion and detailed policy development 136 4. Management Area Statements 139 Key facts: Policy Development Zone 2: includes the communities of Wootton, Fishbourne, Woodside, Ryde, Seaview, and Nettlestone. PDZ2 frontage = approx. 22km in length PDZ2 boundaries = From Old Castle Point (East Cowes) to Horestone Point (Nettlestone). As listed in SMP2 Appendices: areas IW2 to IW12 Old policies from SMP1 in 1997, reviewed in this chapter: Unit Location Length Policy RYD1 Old Castle Point to West 6091m Do nothing Woodside or Retreat the existing defence line RYD2 West Woodside to 1156m Retreat the existing defence line Chapelcorner Copse RYD3 Wootton Creek 4135m Hold the existing line RYD4 Fishbourne to Pelhamfield 2730m Retreat the existing defence line RYD5 Pelhamfiled to Puckpool 4180m Hold the existing defence line Hill RYD6 Puckpool Hill to Salterns 980m Hold the existing defence line Road, Seaview RYD7 Salterns Road to Pier 858m Hold the existing defence line Road Seaview RYD Pier Road Seaview to 740m Hold the existing defence line 7 Horestone Point iwight.com - 111 - www.coastalwight.gov.uk/smp iwight.com - 112 - www.coastalwight.gov.uk/smp 1.
    [Show full text]
  • DMMO Appn Register
    Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 Isle of Wight Council Register of Definitive Map Modification Order Applications (register of applications determined after 29 th February 2000 being the relevant date of the current Isle of Wight Definitive Map 2000) (For further information including requests for copy applications, plans, decisions and orders please contact [email protected] ) Date of Approximate Location Application Type IWC Decision SoS Appeal Order Application (including grid reference & path (effect upon the Definitive Map if (Decision & date or NA) (Decision & date or NA) (confirmed date or NA) number if applicable) successful) 21/10/1997 Public Footpath V129: Old To add a Public Footpath To make an order Dismissed 18/07/2002 railway line, St Lawrence. 25/08/1999 18/07/2002 SZ 54291 77070 N/A ( Council Public Bridleway V34a: Cooks To add a Public Bridleway To make an order Not applicable 29/08/2003 Investigation Castle Farm, Wroxall, Ventnor. 13/03/2003 1999/2000) SZ 55559 80408 08/03/2001 Public Footpath SS38a: To add a Public Footpath To make an order Not applicable 11/11/2004 Mortonbrook, Sandown. 16/07/2004 SZ 59607 85307 09/07/2001 Bembridge Point, Bembridge. To add Public Footpaths Application rejected Not applicable Not applicable SZ 64261 88776 20/08/2004 16/09/2002 Public Footpaths F74 & F75: To add Public Footpaths To make an order Not applicable 13/01/2005 Afton Marsh, Freshwater. 15/10/2004 SZ 34379 86579 16/04/2004 London Heath to Three Gates To add a Public Footpath Application rejected Not applicable Not applicable Farm, Calbourne.
    [Show full text]
  • Coastal Processes Review
    Water and Environment Management Framework Lot 3 – Engineering and Related Services West Wight Coastal Flood and Erosion Risk Management Strategy Appendix C - Coastal Processes and Geotechnics Summary August 2015 Document overview Capita | AECOM was commissioned by the Isle of Wight Council in October 2014 to undertake a Coastal Flood and Erosion Risk Management Strategy. As part of this commission, a brief review of coastal processes and geotechnics has been undertaken to inform the option development phase of the Strategy. Document history Version Status Issue date Prepared by Reviewed by Approved by George Batt – Assistant Coastal Jonathan Short Engineer Tara-Leigh Draft for – 1 30th March 2015 Jason McVey – comment Senior Coastal Drummond – Associate Specialist Principal Flood and Coastal Specialist George Batt – Assistant Coastal Updated Jonathan Short Engineer Tara-Leigh following – 2 4th August 2015 Jason McVey – client Senior Coastal Drummond – Associate comments Specialist Principal Flood and Coastal Specialist Scott House, Alencon Link, Basingstoke, Hampshire, RG21 7PP. i Limitations Capita Property and Infrastructure Ltd (“Capita”) | URS Infrastructure & Environment UK Limited (“AECOM”) has prepared this Report for the sole use of the Isle of Wight Council in accordance with the Agreement under which our services were performed. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the professional advice included in this Report or any other services provided by Capita | AECOM. This Report is confidential and may not be disclosed by the Client nor relied upon by any other party without the prior and express written agreement of Capita | AECOM. The conclusions and recommendations contained in this Report are based upon information provided by others and upon the assumption that all relevant information has been provided by those parties from whom it has been requested and that such information is accurate.
    [Show full text]
  • WALKING EXPERIENCES: TOP of the WIGHT Experience Sustainable Transport
    BE A WALKING EXPERIENCES: TOP OF THE WIGHT Experience sustainable transport Portsmouth To Southampton s y s rr Southsea Fe y Cowe rr Cowe Fe East on - ssenger on - Pa / e assenger l ampt P c h hi Southampt Ve out S THE EGYPT POINT OLD CASTLE POINT e ft SOLENT yd R GURNARD BAY Cowes e 5 East Cowes y Gurnard 3 3 2 rr tsmouth - B OSBORNE BAY ishbournFe de r Lymington F enger Hovercra Ry y s nger Po rr as sse Fe P rtsmouth/Pa - Po e hicl Ve rtsmouth - ssenger Po Rew Street Pa T THORNESS AS BAY CO RIVE E RYDE AG K R E PIER HEAD ERIT M E Whippingham E H RYDE DINA N C R Ve L Northwood O ESPLANADE A 3 0 2 1 ymington - TT PUCKPOOL hic NEWTOWN BAY OO POINT W Fishbourne l Marks A 3 e /P Corner T 0 DODNOR a 2 0 A 3 0 5 4 Ryde ssenger AS CREEK & DICKSONS Binstead Ya CO Quarr Hill RYDE COPSE ST JOHN’S ROAD rmouth Wootton Spring Vale G E R CLA ME RK I N Bridge TA IVE HERSEY RESERVE, Fe R Seaview LAKE WOOTTON SEAVIEW DUVER rr ERI Porcheld FIRESTONE y H SEAGR OVE BAY OWN Wootton COPSE Hamstead PARKHURST Common WT FOREST NE Newtown Parkhurst Nettlestone P SMALLBROOK B 4 3 3 JUNCTION PRIORY BAY NINGWOOD 0 SCONCE BRIDDLESFORD Havenstreet COMMON P COPSES POINT SWANPOND N ODE’S POINT BOULDNOR Cranmore Newtown deserted HAVENSTREET COPSE P COPSE Medieval village P P A 3 0 5 4 Norton Bouldnor Ashey A St Helens P Yarmouth Shaleet 3 BEMBRIDGE Cli End 0 Ningwood Newport IL 5 A 5 POINT R TR LL B 3 3 3 0 YA ASHEY E A 3 0 5 4Norton W Thorley Thorley Street Carisbrooke SHIDE N Green MILL COPSE NU CHALK PIT B 3 3 9 COL WELL BAY FRES R Bembridge B 3 4 0 R I V E R 0 1
    [Show full text]
  • (Public Pack)Agenda Document for Policy and Scrutiny Committee
    Public Document Pack Monitoring Officer Christopher Potter County Hall, Newport, Isle of Wight PO30 1UD Telephone (01983) 821000 Name of meeting POLICY AND SCRUTINY COMMITTEE FOR NEIGHBOURHOODS AND REGENERATION Date THURSDAY 7 JANUARY 2021 Time 5.00 PM Venue VIRTUAL (MS TEAMS) Members of the Cllrs M Beston (Chairman), V Churchman, J Jones- committee Evans, J Medland, T Outlaw, C Quirk and S Smart Democratic Services Officer: Sarah MacDonald [email protected] 1. Minutes (Pages 5 - 10) To confirm as a true record the Minutes of the meeting held on 1 October 2020. 2. Declarations of Interest To invite Members to declare any interest they might have in the matters on the agenda. To observe the meeting as a member of the public/press please use the link provided. This link will be made available 24 hours prior to start of the meeting. Please ensure you access the meeting in good time. Guidance on how to access the public meeting can be found HERE. Committee members and pre-arranged attendees will be contacted by Democratic Services to supply the appropriate link to participate in the meeting. Details of this and other Council committee meetings can be viewed on the Isle of Wight Council’s Committee website. This information may be available in alternative formats on request. Page 1 3. Public Question Time - 15 Minutes Maximum Questions must be delivered in writing or by electronic mail to Democratic Services ([email protected]) no later than 5 pm on Tuesday, 5 January 2021. Each question must give the name and address of the questioner.
    [Show full text]
  • The Undercliff of the Isle of Wight
    cover.qxp 13/08/2007 11:40 Page 1 The Undercliff of the Isle of Wight Aguide to managing ground instability managing ground instablity part 1.qxp 13/08/2007 10:39 Page 1 The Undercliff of the Isle of Wight Aguide to managing ground instability Dr Robin McInnes, OBE Centre for the Coastal Environment Isle of Wight Council United Kingdom managing ground instablity part 1.qxp 13/08/2007 10:39 Page 2 Acknowledgements About this guide This guide has been prepared by the Isle of Wight Council's Centre for the Coastal Environment to promote sustainable management of ground instability problems within the Undercliff of the Isle of Wight. This guidance has been developed following a series of studies and investigations undertaken since 1987. The work of the following individuals, who have contributed to our current knowledge on this subject, is gratefully acknowledged: Professor E Bromhead, Dr D Brook OBE, Professor D Brunsden OBE, Dr M Chandler, Dr A R Clark, Dr J Doornkamp, Professor J N Hutchinson, Dr E M Lee, Dr B Marker OBE and Dr R Moore. The assistance of Halcrow with the preparation of this publication is gratefully acknowledged. Photo credits Elaine David Studio: 40; High-Point Rendel: 48; IW Centre for the Coastal Environment: 14 top, 19, 20 top, 23, 31 bottom, 41, 42, 47, 50, 51, 55, 56, 62, 67; Dr R McInnes: 14 bottom, 16, 17, 37; Wight Light Gallery, Ventnor: covers and title pages, 4, 6, 16/17 (background), 30, 31, 32, 43. Copyright © Centre for the Coastal Environment, Isle of Wight Council, August 2007.
    [Show full text]
  • Isle of Wight
    5/9/2018 Local Government Boundary Commission for England Consultation Portal Isle of Wight Personal Details: Name: Linda Allen E-mail: Postcode: Organisation Name: these are my own personal comments Comment text: I live in the Bembridge, St Helens and Brading Ward, and at present there are two councillors who represent the three areas. This works very well with each councillor covering certain aspects of local government responsibilities, rather than area, and when one is away, the other covers, liaising with each other and the three Town and Parish Councils. I think the ward boundary should remain the same, with two ward councillors, as there are no large development proposals in the near future (as far as I am aware) which would compromise electoral equality. The three areas - Bembridge, St Helens and Brading, form a natural physical boundary, with the parish boundaries reflecting the perimeter of the Ward boundary. Uploaded Documents: None Uploaded https://consultation.lgbce.org.uk/node/print/informed-representation/12739 1/1 5/9/2018 Local Government Boundary Commission for England Consultation Portal Isle of Wight Personal Details: Name: Kevin Barclay-jay E-mail: Postcode: Organisation Name: Comment text: Combine Sandown Lake and Shanklin into the Bay Area and reduce councillors to 12 Uploaded Documents: None Uploaded https://consultation.lgbce.org.uk/node/print/informed-representation/12806 1/1 5/9/2018 Local Government Boundary Commission for England Consultation Portal Isle of Wight Personal Details: Name: Rosemary Cantwell E-mail: Postcode: Organisation Name: Comment text: I think the Wards are perfectly all right without any changes. It is good to have two Councillors for Brading, St Helens and Bembridge as it gives local residents opportunity to vote for two people who might have complementary strengths so that it helps the whole community.
    [Show full text]