Shepreth Spitfires are looking for one more coach who would be interested in coaching the younger football teams. Enquiries to Lucy Smith 07510175370.
Let’s S.C.R.A.P. Fly-tipping
Fly-tipping is the illegal disposal of waste. It can be anything from a bag of waste to a truckload. We all have seen abandoned items in the countryside, villages and towns. But leaving items by HRCs, charity shops or by bins are all fly-tipping too.
Around two thirds of fly-tips come from households, so it is crucially important that you understand your Duty of Care to avoid £400 fixed penalty notice or an unlimited fine.
Together with other partners in the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Waste Partnership (RECAP) we have launched the S.C.R.A.P Fly-tipping campaign to help residents to understand their responsibilities. Follow the S.C.R.A.P. code below to make the right choices when asking someone to remove your waste.
To help us deal with fly-tipping incidents efficiently, please report them to us.
Here is how:
By phone: 03450 450 063
If you witness fly-tipping, call 999 to report crime in action. Please do not put yourself in harms way.
When reporting fly-tipping, please note as many details as possible
– the exact location
– the size of the fly-tip
– the type of waste dumped
– the date and time you spotted or witnessed the fly-tip
– photos of the fly-tip and fly-tippers if you have witnessed it
– the vehicle registration number and details
– the description of people involved
– the direction they were travelling
The Consultation Process
Shepreth Parish Council were concerned that the timescale of the non-statutory consultation allowed very little time for Parish Councils to organise Public Meetings in order to fully inform our parishioners about East West Rail Co, the Bedford to Cambridge route options on the proposed Oxford to Cambridge rail central Section and for our parishioners to make fully informed responses to the consultation.
In order to make a fully informed decision we, the Parish Council and parishioners of Shepreth, need to have all the information necessary to make that decision. We do not feel we have had the necessary information.
Lack of Clarity
Technical Report. Maps of the 5 proposed routes show crossed hatched areas on a background that shows existing rail lines, major towns and cities. The position of villages that would or could be affected by the route is not shown. It is virtually impossible to see which roads, major and minor, could or would be affected by the routes. What effect the policy of no new level crossings on the essential local road connectivity between neighbouring villages is also unknown. p.14 EWR Consultation Document states – ‘The number and locations of stations are indicative at this stage’
National Infrastructure Commission
EWR Consultation Document states that the NIC report of 2017 ‘’outlines that the economic success of the Oxford -Cambridge Arc has led to demand for homes exceeding supply. The undersupply of new homes has contributed to high house prices and low affordability for home ownership and future housing needs.’’
Although new homes continue to be built in the area of Route A, there is no noticeable reduction in house prices owing to the area being in easy commuting distance of London. In the unlikely event that Bassingbourn Barracks were developed, it is very likely that such a development would also be attractive to London Commuters who would be more likely to use Royston Station (2 1⁄2 miles). However, as Royston Station is already at capacity, it is possible that they will drive a little further to Meldreth or Shepreth Stations and exacerbating commuter parking problems around these stations. Commuters from Trumpington already use Shepreth Station as it is quicker, easier and cheaper than driving into Cambridge.
The northern routes B & E via Cambourne would give rail access to fast growing areas of more affordable housing north of Cambridge especially if more stations were built to serve new developments such as Northstowe.
EWR Co. Strategic Objectives
EW Rail Technical Report.2.7. In response to the NIC report, the strategic objectives for EWR have been revised to take account of the stronger focus on supporting growth by providing better connectivity for short distance journeys between towns and cities across the Arc and areas that could provide opportunities for new homes.
2.8. The strategic objectives set by the DfT for the EWR central section are now as follows:
Improve east-west public transport connectivity by providing rail links between key urban areas (current and anticipated) in the Oxford -Cambridge Arc;
Stimulate economic growth, housing and employment through the provision of new, reliable and attractive inter-urban passenger train services in the Oxford-Cambridge Arc;
Meet initial forecast passenger demand;
Consider and plan for future passenger demand, making provision where it is affordable;
Contribute to improved journey times and inter-regional passenger connectivity by connecting with north-south routes and routes beyond Oxford and Cambridge;
Maintain current capacity for rail freight and make appropriate provision for anticipated future growth; and
Provide a sustainable and value for money transport solution to support economic growth in the area.
The northern routes B & E are closer in achieving these objectives.
Multi Modal Corridors
The Autumn budget of 2017 said ‘’ Develop the Oxford-Cambridge Expressway along the same broad corridor as East-West Rail – creating a multi-modal transport spine.’’
Heidi Allen, MP for South Cambridgeshire, stated that ‘’ East West Rail and the Expressway are well and truly on Government’s ‘’ To-Do’’ List. At every opportunity I get, I reinforce the National Infrastructure Commission’s recommendation that their corridors must be aligned so that they serve existing and emerging communities.’’
None of the EWR routes meet the NIC recommendations to align Road and Rail corridors to provide a Multi Modal Corridor.
At their meeting held on March 14th 2019 Shepreth Parish Council considered the proposed route options for the Cambridge to Bedford section of the proposed Oxford Cambridge Railway as well as the alternative route proposed by Cambedrailroad.
Following our Public Meeting in February it was evident that the majority of Shepreth parishioners do not support routes A, C and D. There is limited support for routes B and E through Cambourne but almost unanimous support for the CBRR route through Cambourne. The CBRR route meets both the EWR Strategic objectives and the NIC recommendation for a Multi Modal Corridor.
We fully endorse the responses from Bassingbourn cum Kneesworth Parish Council, Meldreth Parish Council, the Meldreth, Shepreth and Foxton Community Rail Partnership and Councillor Susan van de Ven, County Councillor for Bassingbourn, Whaddon, Meldreth and Melbourn and we fully support the proposal from Bassingbourn cum Kneesworth Parish Council and Meldreth, Shepreth and Foxton Community Rail Partnership that the CBRR route be ‘properly re-examined’ and ‘brought to public consultation.’