Blyth Estuary Strategy Preferred Option Consultation September 2005 We Are the Environment Agency

Environment Agency Blyth floodBlyth risk management Blyth Estuary Strategy Preferred option consultation September 2005 We are the Environment Agency. It’s our job to look after your environment and make it a better place - foryou, and for future generations. Your environment is the airyou breathe, the wateryou drink and the ground you walk on. Workingwith business, Government and society as a whole, we are making your environment cleaner and healthier. The Environment Agency. Out there, making your environment a better place. Published by: Environment Agency Kingfisher House Goldhay Way, Orton Goldhay Peterborough PEI 2ZR Tel: 08708 506 506 Fax: 01733 231 840 Email: [email protected] www.environment-agency.gov.uk © Environment Agency All rights reserved. This document may be reproduced with prior permission of the Environment Agency. September 2005 Consultation contacts For this project and the whole Suffolk For the Southwold Coastal Frontage Scheme, Estuarine Strategies (SES), please contact: please contact: Nigel Pask, Project Manager Stuart Barbrook Environment Agency Environment Agency Kingfisher House Kingfisher House Goldhay Way Goldhay Way Orton Goldhay Orton Goldhay Peterborough PE2 5ZR Peterborough PE2 5ZR Telephone: 08708 506 506 Telephone: 08708 506 506 E-mail: [email protected] E-mail: [email protected] Mike Steen, SES Local Liaison Mr P Patterson Environment Agency Waveney District Council Cobham Road Town Hall Ipswich High Street Suffolk IP3 9JE Lowestoft Suffolk NR32 1HS Telephone: 08708 506 506 E-mail: [email protected] Telephone: 01502 562111 E-mail: [email protected] Or Matthew Clegg, Environmental Scientist Black & Veatch Ltd. Grosvenor House 69 London Road Redhill Surrey RH1 1LQ Telephone 01737 774 155 E-mail: [email protected] Environment Agency Blyth Estuary Strategy 1 7 Would you like to find out more about us, or about your environment? •» Then call us on 08708 506 506 (Mon-Fri 8-6) email | [email protected] or visit our website « w w w. e n v i r o n m e n t-a ge n cy. go v. u k incident hotline 0800 80 70 60 (24hrs) floodline 0845 988 1188 Environment first: This publication is printed on paper made from 100 per cent previously used waste. By-products from making the pulp and paper are used for composting and fertiliser, for making cement and for generating energy. GEANBJPL-E-P Introduction and background We are responsible for managing the flood risk arising from rivers and the sea, in many areas. There are several areas in Suffolk that are becoming increasingly susceptible to flooding. We are funding long-term strategies to manage the flood risk forthree of the Suffolk Estuaries: the Blyth, the Aide and Ore and the Deben. These are collectively known as the “ Suffolk Estuarine Strategies” . These flood risk management strategies are being changes in the risk of flooding is appropriate and developed on an estuary-by-estuary basis starting with sustainable. the Blyth, followed by the Deben, and the Aide and Ore. The production of a flood risk management strategy will The Blyth Estuary Strategy study area extends from the enable us to manage the potential impacts that future Harbour mouth to the tidal limit upstream at Blyford change will bring and also allow opportunities to be Bridge at Wenhaston (see Map 1). identified. Sea levels are expected to rise over the next 100 years. This consultation document sets out the Preferred Some areas of vulnerable land behind the current flood Option forthe Blyth Estuary Strategy. defences are already lower than the normal high water in the estuary. We need to ensure that the response to Wenhaston Map 1 - The Blyth Estuary ENVIRONMENT AGENCY Environment Agency Blyth Estuary Strategy 1 133819 What are the aims and objectives of this consultation document? This consultation document aims to: ■ Outline the framework within which our decisions ■ Describe the Preferred Option for the Strategy and have to be made; how it will be implemented; and ■ Show how we have chosen the Preferred Option from ■ Seek your views and concerns. the shortlisted options; How are flood risk management strategies prioritised for funding? Any flood risk management strategy would have to compete for funding with schemes for other towns and cities across England in order to receive a share of a limited Defra budget. This is done by calculating the Strategy's 'priority score' If it is higher, then the Strategy goes onto to the Project which is a standard mechanism by which Government Approval stage. prioritises assets for funding of capital and However, if the Strategy is deemed to be required to maintenance works. fulfil statutory duties under national legislation, such as The outcome for the Strategy depends on how its the Habitats Regulations, then the Strategy must go priority score compares to the current Government ahead. threshold. If it is lower, then the Strategy is either deferred or could be funded by the ‘Local Levy’. 2 Environment Agency Blyth Estuary Strategy The process so far A consultation document was issued in October 2004, The Blyth Estuary: Options Shortlisting Consultation Document, which outlined the shortlisted flood risk management options being considered for the Blyth Estuary. Following this, we received comments from a range of Government. These tests are further discussed in the consultees which were fed into our appraisal of those following sections. options. We carried out a detailed environmental, After this final consultation stage, we will submit the economic and technical appraisal considering local proposal to Defra (Department for the Environment, issues to determine the Preferred Option. In carrying Food and Rural Affairs) for approval. out this appraisal we used national tests set by the Figure 1 - The Strategy process to date Environment Agency Blyth Estuary Strategy How did we choose the Preferred Option? We chose the Preferred Option for the Strategy by looking in detail at the estuary and the way any changes, including the natural changes that are already occurring, would affect the estuary. We looked in detail at the environmental, social and Environmental economic effects of each shortlisted option, and at the consultation feedback on these options. The criteria we Early on in the study, we developed a range of used are listed below. The ‘No Active Intervention* objectives for the estuary, based on legislation, option was used as the baseline case that we measured regional and local plans and consultation on the local all the other options against for economics, whilst we requirements for the estuary. These objectives cover a used the existing situation to assess the environmental range of issues including risk to life, land use, and social effects. protected habitats, water quality and resources, navigation and recreational use. More detailed information on these assessments can be viewed on the website at We identified whether each shortlisted option met each www.suffolkestuaries.co.uk/Blyth/PreferredOption or of these objectives in the short and long term. We also a paper copy is available from the contacts on page 21. looked at each option and whether we could reduce any of the undesirable effects, and what consequence that Technical would have. Changes in one part of the estuary may affect the whole Timing estuary. We therefore used a computer model to predict the likely changes caused by each of the options. We The effects of natural changes in the estuary, in only selected options for our shortlist that either particular recent and predicted sea level rise, on the worked with natural processes, or did not affect them. existing flood defences have been used in the We also looked at how natural change, including sea assessment of each option. This helps us to work out level rise, would affect the estuary if we didn’t change the best time to make changes to the current way the how it was managed. estuary is managed. To work with natural change as much as we can, the strategy for managing the estuary Economic over the next 100 years might involve starting with one option, then as the rate of change increases, managing We used the central Government method to assess the the transition to another option. value of land and property. This estimated the economic benefits of each option, and the cost of constructing and maintaining each option over the next 100 years. We compared the costs and benefits of each option against the baseline scenario of ‘No Active Intervention’. We also looked at how natural change, including sea level rise, would affect the estuary if we did not change how it was managed. 4 Environment Agency Blyth Estuary Strategy Responses to the shortlisted options Consultation is a key aspect in the development of a flood risk management strategy. The comments received during consultation on the land and properties that would be under threat of proposed options were considered as part of the option flooding and the effect that this could have on the selection process. A summary is provided below. recreational use of the estuary, such as public footpaths, sailing and canoeing. Over 150 consultees have registered an interest in the Blyth Strategy. Overall the consultation process was found to be providing a clear insight into the Unacceptable Acceptable development of strategies and the consultees found it easy to comment on the study. The consultation process has uncovered two key issues. These are the protection

Load more