Cambridgeshire Green Infrastructure Strategy

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Cambridgeshire Green Infrastructure Strategy Cambridgeshire Green Infrastructure Strategy Page 1 of 176 June 2011 Contributors The Strategy has been shaped and informed by many partners including: The Green Infrastructure Forum Anglian Water Cambridge City Council Cambridge Past, Present and Future (formerly Cambridge Preservation Society) Cambridge Sports Lake Trust Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Biodiversity Partnership Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Environmental Record Centre Cambridgeshire County Council Cambridgeshire Horizons East Cambridgeshire District Council East of England Development Agency (EEDA) English Heritage The Environment Agency Fenland District Council Forestry Commission Farming and Wildlife Advisory Group GO-East Huntingdonshire District Council Natural England NHS Cambridgeshire Peterborough Environment City Trust Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) South Cambridgeshire District Council The National Trust The Wildlife Trust for Bedfordshire, Cambridgeshire, Northamptonshire & Peterborough The Woodland Trust Project Group To manage the review and report to the Green Infrastructure Forum. Cambridge City Council Cambridgeshire County Council Cambridgeshire Horizons East Cambridgeshire District Council Environment Agency Fenland District Council Huntingdonshire District Council Natural England South Cambridgeshire District Council The Wildlife Trust Consultants: LDA Design Page 2 of 176 Contents 1 Executive Summary ................................................................................11 2 Background and Purpose.........................................................................15 2.1 What is Green Infrastructure? .........................................................15 2.2 Background to the Green Infrastructure Strategy...........................16 2.3 Why is Green Infrastructure important for Cambridgeshire? ..........17 2.4 Why review the 2006 Green Infrastructure Strategy? .....................20 2.5 Purpose of the Green Infrastructure Strategy.................................22 2.6 Guide to the document ...................................................................23 3 Developing the Cambridgeshire Green Infrastructure Strategy .............26 3.1 How the Strategy fits together........................................................26 3.2 Objectives of the Strategy ..............................................................29 3.3 Green Infrastructure Themes ..........................................................30 3.4 Overarching factors that influence Green Infrastructure ...............30 3.5 Data analysis and spatial data analysis for the themes and other issues 31 3.6 Biodiversity......................................................................................32 3.7 Climate Change ...............................................................................33 3.8 Green Infrastructure gateways........................................................34 3.9 Heritage...........................................................................................35 3.10 Landscape........................................................................................36 3.11 Publicly accessible open space........................................................37 3.12 Rights of Way...................................................................................38 3.13 Other influencing factors ................................................................40 3.13.1 Economic Development ............................................................40 3.13.2 Health.......................................................................................41 Page 3 of 176 3.13.3 Water and Land Management...................................................42 3.14 Developing the Strategic Network...................................................44 3.14.1 Strategic areas .........................................................................47 3.14.2 Target areas .............................................................................49 3.14.3 Projects ....................................................................................49 3.15 Assessing the Strategic Network against the Strategy’s objectives 51 3.16 Identifying Delivery Mechanisms .....................................................54 4 The Strategic Network............................................................................57 4.1 Strategic areas Overview.................................................................57 4.2 Strategic Area 1: River Nene ...........................................................60 4.2.1 Description ...............................................................................60 4.2.2 Strategic area projects (see Appendix 15 for further details).63 4.2.3 How do the target areas deliver strategy objectives? .............63 4.2.4 Target Area 1.1: Wisbech.........................................................65 4.2.5 Target Area 1.2: Whittlesey.....................................................66 4.2.6 Target Area 1.3: March ............................................................68 4.2.7 Target Area 1.4: Nene Washes and River Nene (Old Course)...70 4.3 Strategic Area 2: Huntingdonshire Fens and Woods........................72 4.3.1 Description ...............................................................................72 4.3.2 Strategic area projects (see Appendix 15 for further details).74 4.3.3 How do target areas deliver strategy objectives?....................74 4.3.4 Target Area 2.1: Great Fen ......................................................75 4.3.5 Target Area 2.2: Ramsey..........................................................77 4.3.6 Target Area 2.3: Huntingdonshire Ancient Woodlands ............78 4.4 Strategic Area 3: Great Ouse...........................................................80 4.4.1 Description ...............................................................................80 4.4.2 Strategic area projects (see Appendix 15 for further details).82 Page 4 of 176 4.4.3 How do target areas deliver strategy objectives?....................83 4.4.4 Target Area 3.1: Grafham Water .............................................85 4.4.5 Target Area 3.2: St Neots.........................................................86 4.4.6 Target Area 3.3: Ouse Valley/Paxton Pits................................87 4.4.7 Target Area 3.4: Huntingdon....................................................89 4.4.8 Target Area 3.5: St Ives............................................................90 4.4.9 Target Area 3.6: Fen Drayton...................................................91 4.4.10 Target Area 3.7: Needingworth................................................92 4.4.11 Target Area 3.8: Earith ............................................................93 4.4.12 Target Area 3.9: Chatteris .......................................................94 4.4.13 Target Area 3.10: Block Fen.....................................................96 4.4.14 Target Area 3.11: Ouse Washes................................................97 4.5 Strategic Area 4: Eastern Fens and Towns ......................................99 4.5.1 Description ...............................................................................99 4.5.2 Strategic area projects (see Appendix 15 for further details) 101 4.5.3 How do target areas deliver strategy objectives?..................101 4.5.4 Target Area 4.1: Littleport.....................................................103 4.5.5 Target Area 4.2: Ely ...............................................................104 4.5.6 Target Area 4.3: Soham .........................................................105 4.5.7 Target Area 4.4: Ely Ouse ......................................................106 4.6 Strategic Area 5: Chippenham Fen................................................108 4.6.1 Description .............................................................................108 4.6.2 How do target areas deliver strategy objectives?..................110 4.6.3 Target Area 5.1: Chippenham Fen .........................................110 4.7 Strategic Area 6: Cambridge and surrounding areas .....................112 4.7.1 Description .............................................................................112 Page 5 of 176 4.7.2 Strategic area projects (see Appendix 15 for further details) 116 4.7.3 How do target areas deliver strategy objectives?..................116 4.7.4 Target Area 6.1: Northstowe..................................................118 4.7.5 Target Area 6.2: Wicken Fen and Anglesey Abbey.................120 4.7.6 Target Area 6.3: Cambridge...................................................122 4.7.7 Target Area 6.4: Cambourne..................................................130 4.7.8 Target Area 6.5: Wimpole ......................................................132 4.7.9 Target Area 6.6: West Cambridgeshire Woodlands................133 5 Local Authority Issues and Green Infrastructure Priorities ..................137 5.1 Introduction...................................................................................137 5.2 Cambridge .....................................................................................137 5.2.1 Key issues for Cambridge .......................................................137 5.2.2 Green Infrastructure priorities for Cambridge.......................138 5.3 Cambridge Fringe Sites..................................................................138 5.4 South Cambridgeshire....................................................................138
Recommended publications
  • Cambridge Nature Network Final Report
    Cambridge Nature Network Final Report FOREWORD I’m delighted to introduce this important report. For years, now, we have known we need to ensure nature’s recovery, and for years that has been an all-too-elusive ambition. In fact, we are still overseeing nature’s decline. It’s a ship that simply must be turned around. Now we have a clear way forward. This report, building on the ambition to double nature in Cambridgeshire, tells us precisely how and where we can do it. Working from the ground up, looking at real places and the actual state of nature, it offers for the first time a tangible plan for the revitalisation of nature in the 10km around the city of Cambridge, based on what is already there and how it can be brought back to life. And there’s more. Fully integrated with the vision for nature recovery is one for the enhancement and creation of green spaces for public recreation and refreshment – vital needs, as we have come to understand fully during the covid-19 crisis. The risk with nature recovery is that in our enthusiasm we may do the wrong thing in the wrong place: plant trees on peat or valuable grassland, or put hedgerows in where the landscape should be open. This report will ensure we do the right thing in the right place. It provides a place-based analysis of where existing nature sites can be enhanced, what kind of nature-friendly farming to encourage, how to create stepping-stones to create new, linked nature networks, and how, overall, the ambition for doubling nature can be met.
    [Show full text]
  • Draft Recommendations for East Cambridgeshire District Council
    Contents Summary 1 1 Introduction 2 2 Analysis and draft recommendations 4 Submissions received 4 Electorate figures 5 Council size 5 Warding patterns 5 Draft recommendations 6 North 7 Central 9 South 10 Conclusions 12 Parish electoral arrangements 12 3 Have your say 14 Appendices A Table A1: Draft recommendations for East Cambridgeshire 16 District Council B Submissions received 18 C Glossary and abbreviations 19 Summary Who we are The Local Government Boundary Commission for England (LGBCE) is an independent body set up by Parliament. We are not part of government or any political party. We are accountable to Parliament through a committee of MPs chaired by the Speaker of the House of Commons. Our main role is to carry out electoral reviews of local authorities throughout England. Electoral review An electoral review examines and proposes new electoral arrangements for a local authority. A local authority’s electoral arrangements decide: How many councillors are needed How many wards or electoral divisions should there be, where are their boundaries and what should they be called How many councillors should represent each ward or division Why East Cambridgeshire? We are conducting an electoral review of East Cambridgeshire District Council following a request by the Council in order to consider a reduction in council size. Our proposals for East Cambridgeshire East Cambridgeshire District Council currently has 39 councillors. Based on the evidence we received during previous phases of the review, we consider that a council size of 28 members – a reduction of 11 – will ensure that the Council can perform its roles and responsibilities effectively.
    [Show full text]
  • Peterborough's Green Infrastructure & Biodiversity Supplementary
    Peterborough’s Green Infrastructure & Biodiversity Supplementary Planning Document Positive Planning for the Natural Environment Consultation Draft January 2018 297 Preface How to make comments on this Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) We welcome your comments and views on the content of this draft SPD. It is being made available for a xxxx week public consultation. The consultation starts at on XX 2018 and closes on XX xxx 2018. The SPD can be viewed at www.peterborough.gov.uk/LocalPlan.There are several ways that you can comment on the SPD. Comments can be made by email to: planningpolicy@peterborough.gov.uk or by post to: Peterborough Green Infrastructure and Biodiversity Draft SPD Consultation Sustainable Growth Strategy Peterborough City Council Town Hall Bridge Street Peterborough PE1 1HF All responses must be received by XX xxxx 2018. All comments received will be taken into consideration by the council before a final SPD is adopted later in 2018. 2 298 Contents 1 Introduction 4 Purpose, Status, Structure and Content of the SPD 4 Collaborative working 4 Definitions 5 Benefits of GI 5 Who should think about GI & Biodiversity 7 2 Setting the Scene 8 Background to developing the SPD 8 Policy and Legislation 8 3 Peterborough's Approach to Green Infrastructure and Biodiversity 11 Current Situation 11 Vision 12 Key GI Focus Areas 14 4 Making It Happen - GI Delivery 23 Priority GI Projects 23 Governance 23 Funding 23 5 Integrating GI and Biodiversity with Sustainable Development 24 Recommended Approach to Biodiversity for all Planning
    [Show full text]
  • Consultation Technical Report
    Making Meaningful Connections Consultation Technical Report East West Rail Consultation: 31 March – 9 June 2021 This document contains the full Consultation Technical Report, without the Appendices. To access the Appendices, please visit www.eastwestrail.co.uk 01. Introduction 18 - 26 07. Project Section B: Bletchley and the Marston Vale Line 100 - 229 1.1. Chapter Summary 18 7.1. Chapter Summary 101 1.2. East West Rail 19 7.2. Introduction 104 1.3. The Project 19 7.3. Service Concepts 109 1.4. Consultation 23 7.4. Bletchley Station 141 1.5. Technical Report 26 7.5. Fenny Stratford Additional Track 144 02. The Case for East West Rail 27 - 31 7.6. Level Crossings on the Marston Vale Line 146 2.1. Chapter Summary 27 7.7. Marston Vale Line Infrastructure Upgrade 228 2.2. The overall case for East West Rail 28 08. Project Section C: Bedford 230 - 299 2.3. Benefits of railways over road improvements 31 8.1. Chapter Summary 230 03. Project Objectives 32 - 42 8.2. Introduction 234 3.1. Chapter Summary 32 8.3. Bedford St Johns 238 3.2. Introduction 33 8.4. Bedford Station 250 3.3. Safety 34 8.5. North Bedford 268 3.4. Environment 34 8.6. Conclusion 297 3.5. EWR Services 34 09. Project Section D: Clapham Green to The Eversdens 300 - 371 3.6. Connectivity 36 9.1. Chapter Summary 301 3.7. Customer Experience and Stations 37 9.2. Introduction 303 3.8. Powering EWR Services 38 9.3. Option Development 306 3.9.
    [Show full text]
  • Landscape Character Assessment
    OUSE WASHES Landscape Character Assessment Kite aerial photography by Bill Blake Heritage Documentation THE OUSE WASHES CONTENTS 04 Introduction Annexes 05 Context Landscape character areas mapping at 06 Study area 1:25,000 08 Structure of the report Note: this is provided as a separate document 09 ‘Fen islands’ and roddons Evolution of the landscape adjacent to the Ouse Washes 010 Physical influences 020 Human influences 033 Biodiversity 035 Landscape change 040 Guidance for managing landscape change 047 Landscape character The pattern of arable fields, 048 Overview of landscape character types shelterbelts and dykes has a and landscape character areas striking geometry 052 Landscape character areas 053 i Denver 059 ii Nordelph to 10 Mile Bank 067 iii Old Croft River 076 iv. Pymoor 082 v Manea to Langwood Fen 089 vi Fen Isles 098 vii Meadland to Lower Delphs Reeds, wet meadows and wetlands at the Welney 105 viii Ouse Valley Wetlands Wildlife Trust Reserve 116 ix Ouse Washes 03 THE OUSE WASHES INTRODUCTION Introduction Context Sets the scene Objectives Purpose of the study Study area Rationale for the Landscape Partnership area boundary A unique archaeological landscape Structure of the report Kite aerial photography by Bill Blake Heritage Documentation THE OUSE WASHES INTRODUCTION Introduction Contains Ordnance Survey data © Crown copyright and database right 2013 Context Ouse Washes LP boundary Wisbech County boundary This landscape character assessment (LCA) was District boundary A Road commissioned in 2013 by Cambridgeshire ACRE Downham as part of the suite of documents required for B Road Market a Landscape Partnership (LP) Heritage Lottery Railway Nordelph Fund bid entitled ‘Ouse Washes: The Heart of River Denver the Fens.’ However, it is intended to be a stand- Water bodies alone report which describes the distinctive March Hilgay character of this part of the Fen Basin that Lincolnshire Whittlesea contains the Ouse Washes and supports the South Holland District Welney positive management of the area.
    [Show full text]
  • A Demographic & Socio-Economic Review of Hemingford Grey Parish
    Cambridgeshire ACRE A Demographic & Socio-Economic Review of Hemingford Grey Parish March 2020 About Cambridgeshire ACRE Cambridgeshire ACRE is an independent charity established in 1924. We are part of a network of 38 Rural Community Councils across England and are a member of ACRE (the national umbrella for RCCs). We are proud to support local communities in Cambridgeshire and Peterborough, and nearby where appropriate. We put a lot of effort into getting to know our customers so we can understand what they need from us. This ensures we focus on providing products and services that really make a difference to local people as they work in their own communities. As part of our work we provide a Neighbourhood Planning service for local communities. We have developed this service by building on our skills, knowledge and competencies gained in other project areas such as rural affordable housing and community-led planning and by working with local planning consultants to broaden our capacity. Our current partners are: You can find out more about our team and our work from our Neighbourhood Planning Information Leaflet at https://wordpress.com/view/cambsacrenpservice.wordpress.com Page 2 of 28 CONTENTS PAGE A DEMOGRAPHIC AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC REVIEW OF HEMINGFORD GREY PARISH .......... 4 Key points .................................................................................................................................. 4 Introduction .............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • T1)E Bedford,1)Ire Naturaii,T 45
    T1)e Bedford,1)ire NaturaIi,t 45 Journal for the year 1990 Bedfordshire Natural History Society 1991 'ISSN 0951 8959 I BEDFORDSHffiE NATURAL HISTORY SOCIETY 1991 Chairman: Mr D. Anderson, 88 Eastmoor Park, Harpenden, Herts ALS 1BP Honorary Secretary: Mr M.C. Williams, 2 Ive! Close, Barton-le-Clay, Bedford MK4S 4NT Honorary Treasurer: MrJ.D. Burchmore, 91 Sundon Road, Harlington, Dunstable, Beds LUS 6LW Honorary Editor (Bedfordshire Naturalist): Mr C.R. Boon, 7 Duck End Lane, Maulden, Bedford MK4S 2DL Honorary Membership Secretary: Mrs M.]. Sheridan, 28 Chestnut Hill, Linslade, Leighton Buzzard, Beds LU7 7TR Honorary Scientific Committee Secretary: Miss R.A. Brind, 46 Mallard Hill, Bedford MK41 7QS Council (in addition to the above): Dr A. Aldhous MrS. Cham DrP. Hyman DrD. Allen MsJ. Childs Dr P. Madgett MrC. Baker Mr W. Drayton MrP. Soper Honorary Editor (Muntjac): Ms C. Aldridge, 9 Cowper Court, Markyate, Herts AL3 8HR Committees appointed by Council: Finance: Mr]. Burchmore (Sec.), MrD. Anderson, Miss R. Brind, Mrs M. Sheridan, Mr P. Wilkinson, Mr M. Williams. Scientific: Miss R. Brind (Sec.), Mr C. Boon, Dr G. Bellamy, Mr S. Cham, Miss A. Day, DrP. Hyman, MrJ. Knowles, MrD. Kramer, DrB. Nau, MrE. Newman, Mr A. Outen, MrP. Trodd. Development: Mrs A. Adams (Sec.), MrJ. Adams (Chairman), Ms C. Aldridge (Deputy Chairman), Mrs B. Chandler, Mr M. Chandler, Ms]. Childs, Mr A. Dickens, MrsJ. Dickens, Mr P. Soper. Programme: MrJ. Adams, Mr C. Baker, MrD. Green, MrD. Rands, Mrs M. Sheridan. Trustees (appointed under Rule 13): Mr M. Chandler, Mr D. Green, Mrs B.
    [Show full text]
  • Cambridgeshire Tydd St
    C D To Long Sutton To Sutton Bridge 55 Cambridgeshire Tydd St. Mary 24 24 50 50 Foul Anchor 55 Tydd Passenger Transport Map 2011 Tydd St. Giles Gote 24 50 Newton 1 55 1 24 50 To Kings Lynn Fitton End 55 To Kings Lynn 46 Gorefield 24 010 LINCOLNSHIRE 63 308.X1 24 WHF To Holbeach Drove 390 24 390 Leverington WHF See separate map WHF WHF for service detail in this area Throckenholt 24 Wisbech Parson 24 390.WHF Drove 24 46 WHF 24 390 Bellamys Bridge 24 46 Wisbech 3 64 To Terrington 390 24. St. Mary A B Elm Emneth E 390 Murrow 3 24 308 010 60 X1 56 64 7 Friday Bridge 65 Thorney 46 380 308 X1 To Grantham X1 NORFOLK and the North 390 308 Outwell 308 Thorney X1 7 Toll Guyhirn Coldham Upwell For details of bus services To in this area see Peterborough City Council Ring’s End 60 Stamford and 7 publicity or call: 01733 747474 60 2 46 3 64 Leicester Eye www.travelchoice.org 010 2 X1 65 390 56 60.64 3.15.24.31.33.46 To 308 7 380 Three Holes Stamford 203.205.206.390.405 33 46 407.415.701.X1.X4 Chainbridge To Downham Market 33 65 65 181 X4 Peterborough 206 701 24 Lot’s Bridge Wansford 308 350 Coates See separate map Iron Bridge To Leicester for service detail Whittlesey 33 701 in this area X4 Eastrea March Christchurch 65 181 206 701 33 24 15 31 46 Tips End 203 65 F Chesterton Hampton 205 Farcet X4 350 9 405 3 31 35 010 Welney 115 To Elton 24 206 X4 407 56 Kings Lynn 430 415 7 56 Gold Hill Haddon 203.205 X8 X4 350.405 Black Horse 24.181 407.430 Yaxley 3.7.430 Wimblington Boots Drove To Oundle 430 Pondersbridge 206.X4 Morborne Bridge 129 430 56 Doddington Hundred Foot Bank 15 115 203 56 46.
    [Show full text]
  • Bedfordshire. Eaton Socon
    DIRECTORY.] BEDFORDSHIRE. EATON SOCON. 93 Henderson Edward, beer retailer Roberts Arthur Richard, farmer & Thorn Jabez, butcher Henley William, duck breeder, High street carting contractor Thorn Richard, harness maker Heys Thomas, White Horse P.H RoIlings Wm. beer retailer, Bower lane Thorn William, harness maker Holme.s David, baker & fruit grower Ruffett Louis, farmer Tompkins Amos, straw piait delle!", Holmes Frederick, mealman, Moor end Sanders J ames, chimney sweeper, High st Moor end Rorton James Frederic, butcher Sanders James, egg merchant, Moor end Tompkins Ezra, duck breeder Rorton WaIter, farmer, Comp farm Scott George, carrier, Moor end Turner Ann (Mrs.), shopkeeper Jackson William, farmer, The Rye Scott John, beer retailer Turner John, insurance agent Knight James, shopkeeper, Bower lane Seaton Charles, Plough P.H Tooley Frederick, miller Mead Arthur, butcher, Summerlays Sharratt Jeffery & Sons, builder & farmer Vardon Percy C. W. (clerk to the Council Neville Richard, tailor, Northall road Tearle Alfred, boot & shoe maker & assistant overseer) Newman Charles, baker, Summerlays Tearle Frederick, egg mer. Vine cottage Varney Henry, duck breeder, School lane Pearson Charles, shopkeeper, Moor end Tearle William, straw plait dealer & Wallace William Edmund, nurseryman, .Pratt Frederick Geo. farmer, Poplar farm carrier, Church end florist & fruit grower Pratt George, beer retailer, Bower lane Thorn Alfred, draper, grocer & flour & Wildman David, bricklayer Pratt Jeffery, carter, Moor end corn merchant Wood James, farmer PuddehotGeorge, carter, The Rye Thorn Charles, butcher 'Nood John, hay & straw merchant Puddefoot Rebecca (Mrs.), farmer EATON SOCON is an extensive parish, on the borders This parish contains 20 miles of road. The population in 1901 of Huntingdonshire, and the Great North road which passes was, including 10 officers and 99 inmates in St.
    [Show full text]
  • Fen Drayton Villa Investigations
    Fen Drayton Villa Investigations Excavation Report No. 2 CAMBRIDGE ARCHAEOLOGICAL UNIT OUSE WASHLAND ARCHAEOLOGY Fen Drayton Villa Investigations (Excavation Report No. 2) Leanne Robinson Zeki, MPhil With contributions by Emma Beadsmoore, Chris Boulton, Vicki Herring, Andrew Hall, Francesca Mazzilli, Vida Rajkovaca, Val Fryer, Simon Timberlake Illustrations by Jon Moller and Andy Hall Principal photography by Dave Webb ©CAMBRIDGE ARCHAEOLOGICAL UNIT UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE March 2016/ Report No. 1333 HER Event Number: ECB4702 PROJECT SUMMARY An archaeological excavation was undertaken by volunteers and the Cambridge Archaeological Unit as a part of the Ouse Washes Landscape Partnership at the site of a possible Roman Villa at the RSPB’s Fen Drayton Lakes reserve, near Cambridge. The fieldwork comprised two 5m x 10m trenches, which were targeted to expose the northern extent of the proposed Roman Villa and southern extent of a potential bathhouse. Excavations revealed additional evidence of Roman occupation, indications of small industry and high-status artefacts. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The project was funded by the Ouse Washes Landscape Partnership Project via the Heritage Lottery Fund, for which particular thanks are conveyed to Mark Nokkert of Cambridge Acre. Permission to excavate on the land was provided by the land owner, the RSPB, which was principally overseen by Robin Standring, and the tenant farmer, Chris Wissen. The volunteering was coordinated by Rachael Brown of Cambridgeshire Acre with Grahame Appleby of the CAU. Dr Keith Haylock, University of Aberystwyth undertook the pXRF measurements. Figure 3’s photographs were produced by Emma Harper. Christopher Evans (CAU) was the Project Manager and work on site was completed by volunteers supervised by Jonathan Tabor, Leanne Robinson Zeki and Francesca Mazzilli of the CAU.
    [Show full text]
  • The Wildlife Trust for Bedfordshire, Cambridgeshire and Northamptonshire
    The Wildlife Trust for Bedfordshire, Cambridgeshire and Northamptonshire Draft Minutes of the twenty-fourth Annual General Meeting at 12.00 hours on 12 October 2019 at the Clay Farm Centre, Trumpington, Cambridge, CB2 9FN Present: Baroness Barbara Young (President), Sir Graham Fry (Chairman), Dr Jenna Bishop (Vice Chairman). Mr James Fanshawe (Honorary Treasurer), Mr Paul Solon (Honorary Secretary), Dr Matt Walpole (Chairman Conservation, Education and Community Committee), Trustees Dr Sharon Erzinçlioğlu, Ms Rebecca Jarrett, Ms Jenny Neild, Ms Rebecca Stock, Prof William Stephens and 127 members. 1. Introduction. The President welcomed members to the AGM, her last one after 14 years. A sad day, but she had enjoyed her tenure. The President reminded the room that only members were eligible to vote. Proposers and seconders of votes were asked to state their names clearly for the minutes. 2. Apologies for Absence: Trustees Hannah Bartram, Chris Lewis and Ed Turner and 13 members. 3. Minutes of the Meeting on 13 October 2018 Draft minutes had been posted to the website and were in the packs issued. The members who had attended last year’s meeting were asked to approve the minutes of the meeting as a true record. There were no matters arising which were not on the agenda. Proposed by Marion Hession, seconded by Bill Block and approved nem. con. Questions would be invited on both the Annual Report and the Accounts following presentations from the Chairman and Hon Treasurer. 4. Presentation and adoption of the Annual Report The Chairman presented the Annual Report. Copies of the Annual Report had been posted to the website and a shorter, more readable version of the Report was in the attendee pack.
    [Show full text]
  • Beyond the Compact City: a London Case Study – Spatial Impacts, Social Polarisation, Sustainable 1 Development and Social Justice
    University of Westminster Duncan Bowie January 2017 Reflections, Issue 19 BEYOND THE COMPACT CITY: A LONDON CASE STUDY – SPATIAL IMPACTS, SOCIAL POLARISATION, SUSTAINABLE 1 DEVELOPMENT AND SOCIAL JUSTICE Duncan Bowie Senior Lecturer, Department of Planning and Transport, University of Westminster d.bowie@westminster.ac.uk Abstract: Many urbanists argue that the compact city approach to development of megacities is preferable to urban growth based on spatial expansion at low densities, which is generally given the negative description of ‘urban sprawl’. The argument is often pursued on economic grounds, supported by theories of agglomeration economics, and on environmental grounds, based on assumptions as to efficient land use, countryside preservation and reductions in transport costs, congestion and emissions. Using London as a case study, this paper critiques the continuing focus on higher density and hyper-density residential development in the city, and argues that development options beyond its core should be given more consideration. It critiques the compact city assumptions incorporated in strategic planning in London from the first London Plan of 2004, and examines how the both the plan and its implementation have failed to deliver the housing needed by Londoners and has led to the displacement of lower income households and an increase in spatial social polarisation. It reviews the alternative development options and argues that the social implications of alternative forms of growth and the role of planning in delivering spatial social justice need to be given much fuller consideration, in both planning policy and the delivery of development, if growth is to be sustainable in social terms and further spatial polarisation is to be avoided.
    [Show full text]