North West & North Wales Coastal Group North West England And
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
North West & North Wales Coastal Group North West England and North Wales Shoreline Management Plan SMP2 Annex B12 Public Consultation Location Specific Responses and Comments: Sub-cell 11c 1 Fleetwood and Wyre Estuary – 11c 1 Response Response SMP2 Team Comments Proposed Action from? Agreeto draft Policies? PCR_75 11c 1.5 Similar responses received from EA NW & Wyre BC, so Change to HTL, MR, MR to allow more proactive propose to revise the draft policy to HTL / MR / MR to allow managed change and revise Action Plan item 1.1. RSPB Stanah to Cartford Bridge (south bank) and Cartford Bridge to Shard Bridge (north bank) - MR flexibility in the approach to managing change. opportunities exist here. The current preferred policy of HTL then NAI takes a passive approach to seeking these opportunities. We would recommend MR for some sections of this Policy Unit. The Action Plan ref 1.1 in this section should highlight this specifically. 11c 1.6 Support for policy acknowledged. Rather than add to Action Add Action Plan item for 11c 1.6 Plan item 1.1, which is for the upper estuary, the review Shard Road (A588) to Golf Course - MR opportunities exist here. The current preferred policy of proposed in the draft SMP policy approach can be a separate HTL does reference need to review opportunities for MR, which we support. item. The Action Plan ref 1.1 in this section should highlight this specifically. PCR_11 If there was an incident on the Wyre Coastline similar to the recent problems in Cumbria would our Y The Cumbria problems in 2009 were related to very heavy No action proposed existing coast protection system have worked? rainfall, resulting in very exceptional river flows. The SMP has Councillor for not considered in detail the standard of protection provided by Wyre Borough New Housing schemes are being considered on flood plains all the time and up to now the the existing defences, but there is certainly a chance that they Council, Environment Agency have not objected. Should they not be insisting no further housing can take place could be overtopped under very exceptional tidal surge events. Garstang & on flood plains. This is adding to the problems which are severe at present Nateby Wards PCR_113 11c 1.5 Similar responses received from RSPB & Wyre BC, so propose Change to HTL, MR, MR to allow more proactive to revise the draft policy to HTL / MR / MR to allow flexibility managed change and revise Action Plan item 1.1. EA NW The headline ‘Hold the Line’ policy for the first epoch could restrict opportunities for promoting in the approach to managing change. The stated approach for habitat creation in this location. A policy of managed re-alignment or revised wording around the the first epoch allows for earlier implementation and will policy for the first epoch should be considered to provide some flexibility in providing BAP habitat at recognise potential for BAP habitat creation. the locations identified in the Wyre Habitat Management Study. However, we accept that further discussions and stakeholder engagement / agreement would be required before any change to headline policy. 2 Knott End to Glasson Dock – 11c 2 Response Response SMP2 Team Comments Proposed Action from? Agreeto draft Policies? PCR_18 11c 2.4 N Response noted. A number of similar responses have also been 11c 2.4 received. Individual, Re; Changes to sea wall; Knotts End to Glasson Dock. I would like to register my concerns regarding Revise headline policy in the 2 nd and 3 rd epochs to Thurnham the proposal to re-align the sea wall between Knotts End and Glasson dock. I live in a house on The Environment Agency and Local Authorities have permissive “Hold the Line OR Managed Realignment” and Thurnham Moss which is protected from flooding by the sea wall about Plover Scar. Your proposal is powers to undertake flood risk management activities but do not the approach to indicate “either maintain existing to realign the wall behind my house, resulting in my house being flooded; it would appear, in the next have a duty to do so. Unfortunately there is no right to flood defences OR seek opportunities for managed 25 years. protection or continuation of management of existing flood realignment”, depending on further consultation and defences, and provided adequate notice is given, no right to studies. I do not think you should do this realignment without considering the consequences of it. My house compensation in relation to withdrawal from maintenance of has been here since 1658. It was renovated in 2003 and has been our home since then. You have in Amend Action Plan to allow for ongoing consultation defences. However, a claim for compensation may arise, for the flash of a keyboard and proposal document made my property worthless. No one will purchase it with the Parish Council. example if the existing defence were to be deliberately breached from me with the realisation that in 25 years it will be inundated by the sea. or dismantled and this was to expose properties to increased risk Your proposal did not include any compensation or financial support for the properties put at risk. I of flooding. have leukaemia with a life expectancy of about 10 year if treatment continues to be successful. It will During the consultation period meetings have been undertaken be worse if treatment fails. How will my widow be able to live if you have taken away the only with the public and with Cockerham Parish Council at which significant resource we have left? local concerns have been raised and the issues discussed My preference is for you to review your proposal and continue to hold the line so protecting the regarding the difficulty of justifying long term affordability of the ancient monument of Cockersand Abbey, the acres of productive farm land and homes that exist on maintenance and improvements to the defences that would be Thurnham Moss. A clear statement has to be issue to that effect for the next 100 years. If you cannot required to hold the line that residents would prefer. do this then the very least is financial support in the form of market value of the properties and The draft SMP proposed that more detailed studies were compensation for having to move. I recognise the current policy regarding permissive loss. However required to determine the approach to management of this we moved here on the understanding of coastline protection as has been here for the last several frontage and this is still the case. hundred years. The Council did not withhold planning permission or offer advice regarding this change in policy. Realignment is not permissive. It is active. In recognition of the strong concerns raised at consultation and the need to consider alternative options for managing the existing In the meantime what do I do about my property? Please buy it off me, and compensate me for having defences into the medium term, whether or not the primary to move. defence is realigned, the headline SMP policy is now proposed to FEEDBACK FORM - property compensation. Managed realignment blights my property which I will change to “Hold the Line OR Managed Realignment” in the have to sell in 10 years (I got cancer) Who is going to buy it? 2nd and 3 rd epochs, The actual long term policy for this frontage and the approach will be developed during further consultation with local stakeholders and through studies proposed in the SMP Action Plan. PCR_29 (questionnaire response) No specific details of concerns provided. No action proposed Individual Identified an interest or concern with agricultural land. Cockerham PCR_46 (questionnaire response) N No specific details of concerns provided. No action proposed Individual, Cockerham Parish Council PCR_59 11c 2.4 N Response noted. A number of similar responses have also been 11c 2.4 received. Individuals, We strongly disagree with the long term plan to build a sea wall further back to where it is now. Revise headline policy in the 2 nd and 3 rd epochs to Cockerham See response to item PCR_18 above. “Hold the Line OR Managed Realignment” and We own a caravan park for 52 units, we own 2 houses here. We have 230 acres of prime agricultural the approach to indicate “either maintain existing land. We have a large dairy unit here with extensive buildings. The headline SMP policy is now proposed to change to “Hold defences OR seek opportunities for managed the Line OR Managed Realignment” in the 2 nd and 3 rd If the sea defence is not kept in good repair our whole life and business will be wiped out. 5 realignment”, depending on further consultation and epochs, The actual long term policy for this frontage and the generations of time and money invested into Bank End will be destroyed and then there will be studies. approach will be developed in further consultation and studies 3 Knott End to Glasson Dock – 11c 2 Response Response SMP2 Team Comments Proposed Action from? Agreeto draft Policies? nothing for the generations to follow. Bank End is a huge concern and I feel extensive thought should proposed in the SMP Action Plan. Amend Action Plan to allow for ongoing consultation be put into our investment and our future. with the Parish Council. PCR_63 11c 2.4 The weight that is given to farmland in flood and erosion risk 11c 2.4 management appraisals has increased very significantly over the Individual, Resident feels that the food security policy has changed over the last 12 months with Hilary Benn Revise headline policy in the 2 nd and 3 rd epochs to last few years.