June 2018 Newsletter - Environment Agency...Lincolnshire County Council National Farmers Union...
Transcript of June 2018 Newsletter - Environment Agency...Lincolnshire County Council National Farmers Union...
Option selection to public consultation
Stakeholder workshops took place in 2016/17 where you helped us reduce a
long list of flood risk management options to six.
In February/March this year, we took these options to a public consultation.
We gave you and the public the chance to give your views online, by post or
at one of our six drop-in events that were held along the coast.
The following is a report to summarise the responses to the consultation questions.
Overview
The Environment Agency is reviewing how it manages coastal flood risk between
Saltfleet and Gibraltar Point over the next 100 years.
Hard and soft sea defences, along with annual sand nourishment provide a wide defence between
Saltfleet and Gibraltar Point. This helps manage the flood risk to around 20,000 residential homes; 1,700
businesses; 24,500 static caravans; 35,000 hectares of farmland and a bustling tourist industry.
Latest climate change guidance indicates that although beach nourishment is an effective method of
managing flood risk, it may not be enough in the future. We have been working in partnership to deliver a
strategy that will manage the risk of coastal flooding for the next 100 years.
Consultation questions – Summary of responses
1. Have you attended a consultation event?
71%
29%
0%
Yes No Not answered
0 5 10 15 20
Anderby
Sutton on Sea
Chapel
Embassy
Gibraltar Point
Attended/Post
Post
Saltfleet
Scrutiny Meeting
Internal (DEFRA)
% Audience
Event attendance/postal entries
June 2018 Newsletter
2. We would like to keep you informed of further developments regarding this strategy review.
Please choose how you would like to receive this information.
3. Are you responding as an individual?
4. Do you live in the strategy area?
94%
6%
Yes No
Organisations within 6% represented:
Caravan Park
Skegness Coastal Access for All
Golf Club
Time and Tide Bell
Sailing Club
Environment Agency
East Lindsey District Council
Historic England
Lincolnshire County Council
National Farmers Union
National Grid – Viking Link
North Kesteven District Council
Local parish/town council
Residents Association
80%
16%
4%
Yes No Not answered
Other interest in area:
5 x Caravan site owners
8 x councillors
1 x Family live in area
11 x general interest
6 x holiday home
2 x Run leisure businesses in
area
2 x Sail in area
12 x visit area regularly
19 x work in the area
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Address
Not answered
%
5. What is your opinion on Option 1 – Sand nourishment to manage flood risk on the
Lincolnshire coast
6. What is your opinion on Option 2 – The introduction of coarser sand, shingle or pebbles along
the coast to help manage coastal flood risk?
3% 8%
21%
25%
37%
6%
OPTION 2
Strongly like Like
Neutral Dislike
Strongly dislike Not answered
30%
26%
23%
8%
7%6%
OPTION 1
Strongly like Like
Neutral Dislike
Strongly dislike Not answered
Negative Comments Archaeological concerns
Beach amenity – negative
Cost
Appearance
Environmental impacts
Hard to walk on
Impact on residents
Noisy
Still moveable in surges
Impact on tourism
Bringing it to site
Once in place – hard to
remove
Positive Comments Coastal flora/fauna
benefits
Good in select locations
Good protection
Habitat creation
Less movement
Like pebbled beaches
Negative Comments Not likely to be
sustainable over 100
years
Sand moves around too
much
Costs too much
Concern for offshore
sand locations
Archaeological concerns
Annual disruption
Positive Comments Provides a natural looking
defence
Maintains the current
habitat
Open beach
Good for local
economy/tourism
We know it works
Good for families
Beach amenity – positive
Aesthetics – looks good
7. What is your opinion on Option3 – The introduction of rock groynes (plus sand nourishment)
along the coast to help manage coastal flood risk?
8. What is your opinion on Option 4 – The introduction of rock groynes and fishtails, plus sand nourishment,
along the coast to help manage coastal flood risk?
22%
37%
25%
7%
4% 5%
OPTION 3
Strongly like Like
Neutral Dislike
Strongly dislike Not answered
42%
30%
15%
4%5% 4%
OPTION 4
Strongly like Like
Neutral Dislike
Strongly dislike Not answered
Negative Comments Access for seawall
works?
Archaeological
concerns
Concerns regarding
public safety
Environmental
impacts
Expensive/initial
investment
Not good for leisure
Unattractive
Bad for
landscape/seascape
Positive Comments Opportunity for additional
features
Adds diversity/interest
Can be modified
Cheaper in the long run
Creates safe enclosed and
private areas
Encourages marine life
Good compromise
Good for tourism
Long lasting/more permanent
solution
Prevents erosion/sand
movement
Proven in other areas
Positive Comments Opportunity for additional
features
Adds character
Attractive
Benefits to coastal flora/fauna
Can be modified
Cheaper in the long run/value
for money
Adds diversity/interest/focal
points
Economic/tourism benefits
Encourage fishing
Good compromise
Good for shelter/privacy
Long lasting/more permanent
solution
Proven in other areas
Reduces sand movement
Negative Comments Access for seawall
works?
Bad for
landscape/seascape
May impact tourism
Concerns re public
safety
Environmental impacts
Expensive/initial
investment
Not good for leisure
Unattractive
9. What is your opinion on Option 5 – The introduction of rock groynes and fishtails with different
volumes of sand?
10. What is your opinion on Option 6 – The introduction of rock groynes and fishtails with different
frequencies of sand?
26%
26%25%
9%
6%8%
OPTION 5
Strongly like Like
Neutral Dislike
Strongly dislike Not answered
25%
23%28%
10%
7%7%
OPTION 6
Strongly like Like
Neutral Dislike
Strongly dislike Not answered
Positive Comments Opportunity for additional
features
Adds character
Attractive
Benefits to coastal flora/fauna
Can be modified
Cheaper in the long run/value
for money
Adds diversity/interest/focal
points
Economic/tourism benefits
Good compromise
Good for shelter/privacy
Less maintenance
Long lasting/more permanent
solution
Retains sandy beach
Reduces sand movement
Negative Comments Access concerns
Archaeological concerns
Access for seawall works?
Bad for
landscape/seascape
Concerns regarding public
safety
Could be influenced by
funding pressures
Environmental impacts
Expensive/initial investment
Not good for leisure
Unattractive
Varying protection -
negative
Positive Comments Opportunity for additional
features
Adds character
Attractive
Benefits to coastal flora/fauna
Cheaper in the long run/value
for money
Adds diversity/interest/focal
points
Creates bays
Economic/tourism benefits
Good compromise
Good for shelter/privacy
Less maintenance
Long lasting/more permanent
solution
Retains sandy beach
Reduces sand movement
Negative Comments Access concerns
Archaeological concerns
Access for seawall works?
Bad for
landscape/seascape
Concerns regarding public
safety
Could be influenced by
funding pressures
Environmental impacts
Expensive/initial investment
Not good for leisure
Unattractive
Varying protection -
negative
11. With additional investment from other sources (not flood defence grant in aid) there may be
opportunities to further enhance the coastline as a result. What additional features would you
like to see on the coast if funding were available?
273 suggested ideas around additionality
12. What can you tell us about your experience of this consultation?
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Very satisfied Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied Very dissatisfied Not applicable Not answered
Customer service overview
Information provided Helpfulness of staff Online consultation tool Overall consultation experience
05
101520253035
Additionality suggestions
*Other suggestions: Ban tractors/trawlers, business on groyne (café), car parks, dedicated ‘events’ beach, ferry rides to Hunstanton,
higher sea wall, make wind farm a marine reserve area, new flood plains, observatories, offshore airport, out of season attractions,
power plants, public toilets, realignment of frontage, remove RAF range, tidal power/lagoons.
%
%
13. Other comments:
Mentioned the need to use different options depending on area
Avoid works in summer holidays
Can’t predict the future
Complaint re cars on the defences
Concerns re access along the beach
Concerns regarding local fishing
Concerns regarding safety
Concerns regarding wildlife
Crown Estates – sand should be free!
We should adopt different approach depending
on the area
Documents were informative
I’d like to become an emergency volunteer
Happy about the environmental considerations
Information explained well
Good displays!
Great staff!
Government should increase funding
Greater effort to be made by the Government
I’d be happy to volunteer at events
Very helpful!
I liked the information on history
Suggestions for ways that we can improve:
Additional consultation points along the
stretch
Some venues a bit too small
Carbon footprint included for each
option
Consultation when ‘Lincshore’ in progress
– maximise interest
Didn’t know about the drop-ins
Further and continued community
communication
More info on cost/budget
Option to save responses on site (to print)
Postal campaign to whole stretch
Too much consultation not enough doing
Video footage
Reinstall sirens on the coast
Reinstall wooden groynes
Insufficient info to make an informed choice
Very interesting
We should adopt managed realignment
More info on cost/budget
More input should be made by businesses
More space on paper form for responses
Need better advertising to elderly
Need to improve protection to enable further
development of coast
Need to see SEA before commenting
Plant more marram grass
Positive overall
Request an event in Mablethorpe
Sand blowing off the beach past defences is major
problem
Suggest a presentation
Tax local businesses to help fund
Tide measuring pole
Viking Link should be considered in SEA
14. Your responses will be contained in the consultation report which will be published in the final
strategy later this year. Please confirm that you are happy to have your comments published in
this report.
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Yes
No
Not answered
%
To Summarise…
What’s next?
Your views, along with our own analysis, have helped us to shape the flood risk options.
These options now form part of the draft strategy document to help manage flood risk in the
area for the next 100 years.
We will be publishing the draft strategy document in September this year and we want to know
what you think.
To find out more visit:
https://consult.environment-agency.gov.uk/flood-and-coastal-risk-management/sgp
Check back soon to find out more details of future drop-in events or where you can view a
copy of the draft strategy.
Alternatively you can contact us:
External: 020 84749987
This table was taken from the
stakeholder responses indicating
the preferences around the six
options.
The responses around the six
options have been summarised in
this chart (right). This indicates the
preferred options from the public
consultation