Contents Amendment Record

Transcription

1

2 Appendix A SMP Development Contents Amendment Record This report has been issued and amended as follows: Issue Revision Description Date Approved by 1 0 Draft for CSG review 26 April 2010 M Phillips 1 1 Consultation Draft 30 July 2010 M Phillips Halcrow Group Limited Burderop Park Swindon Wiltshire SN4 0QD Tel +44 (0) Fax +44 (0) Halcrow Group Limited has prepared this report in accordance with the instructions of their client, Swansea and Carmarthen Bay Engineering Group, for their sole and specific use. Any other persons who use any information contained herein do so at their own risk. Halcrow Group Limited 2010

3 Shoreline Management Plan - Supporting Appendices Lavernock Point to St Ann s Head SMP2 Appendix A SMP Development This report is one of a series of appendices that provide supporting information to the Shoreline Management Plan (SMP2). This information has been provided to ensure that the rationale behind the decision-making process which leads to the preferred SMP2 policies is clear, transparent and auditable. The SMP2 appendices are as follows: A: SMP Development Provides an explanation of the SMP2 process, a description of the policy decision-making process and outlines the chronology of SMP2 development B: Stakeholder Engagement Presents the SMP2 stakeholder engagement process along with all relevant communication. This process is intended to build trust and understanding between all parties involved in the formation of an SMP, with the aim of being inclusive, transparent and appropriate in its methods and application C: Baseline Process Understanding Defines current understanding of how the coast functions, focussing on information that will inform decisions on future management of the coast over the SMP timescale to ensure that policy choices, in terms of coastal processes, are technically-sound and sustainable. This appendix includes the following: - Coastal Process and Shoreline Behaviour of Estuary Dominated Systems (prepared by Professor Ken Pye) - Assessment of SMP2 Boundaries - Defence Assessment - Marine Aggregates and Port Maintenance Annex - Marine Renewable Energy Proposals Annex - Integrated Coastal Zone Management Annex - No Active Intervention (NAI) and With Present Management (WPM) Baseline Assessments including NAI Figures (which define coastal erosion and flood risk) D: Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) Scoping Report E: Policy Development and Appraisal F: Preferred Policy Scenario Testing G: Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) Report Provides the environmental baseline conditions of the study area against which the effects of the SMP can be assessed during the SEA. This appendix includes the following: - SEA Environmental Baseline Report (Theme Review) - Issues and Objectives Table - Legislation pertinent to the SEA process - Sites of Conservation Importance - List of Consultees Presents the consideration of generic policy options for each frontage, identifying possible acceptable policies, and their combination into scenarios for testing. Also presents the appraisal of impacts upon shoreline evolution and the appraisal of objective achievement. Presents policy assessment and appraisal of objective achievement towards definition of the Preferred Plan, as presented in the Shoreline Management Plan document. To fulfil the requirements of the EU Council Directive 2001/42/EC (the Strategic Environmental Assessment Directive).

4 Appendix A SMP Development H: Habitats Regulations Assessment I: Water Framework Directive Assessment An assessment of the SMP2 in relation to the UK Habitats Regulations. This document provides Stage One of the Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA). An assessment of the potential impacts of the SMP2 with respect to the Water Framework Directive 2000/ 60/ EC which provides a framework for the protection of inland surface, transitional, coastal and ground waters J: Economic Appraisal Presents the economic analysis undertaken in support of the Preferred Plan. K: Policy Sensitivity Analysis A review of the sensitivity of the SMP2 policies with respect to a range of issues. L: Metadata and Bibliographic Database Provides references for all supporting information used to develop the SMP for future examination and retrieval.

5 Appendix A SMP Development The structure of the SMP2 documents, and how they relate to each other, is summarised in the flow chart below. SMP Development (Appendix A) Stakeholder Engagement (Appendix B) Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) Scoping Report (Appendix D) Baseline Process Understanding (Appendix C) Policy Development and Appraisal (Appendix E) Preferred Policy Scenario Testing (Appendix F) Economic Appraisal (Appendix J) SEA report (Appendix G) Habitats Regulations Assessment (Appendix H) WFD Assessment (Appendix I) Policy Sensitivity Analysis (Appendix K) Metadata and Bibliographic Database (Appendix L) Policy Statements (Main Document)

6 Appendix A SMP Development Table of Contents A.1 INTRODUCTION...1 A.2 PROJECT INFORMATION...3 A.2.1 SMP Background... 3 A.2.2 Client Steering Group (CSG)... 3 A.2.3 Consultant... 4 A.2.4 SMP2 Boundaries... 5 A.3 SMP PROGRAMME...6 A.4 STAGE 1: SCOPE SMP...7 A.4.1 Stakeholder Engagement Strategy... 7 A.4.2 Data Collection... 8 A.5 STAGE 2: ASSESSMENTS TO SUPPORT POLICY DEVELOPMENT...9 A.5.1 Baseline Process Understanding of Coastal and Estuarine Behaviour and Dynamics... 9 A.5.2 Baseline Scenarios...10 A.5.3 Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA)...11 A.5.4 Habitats Regulations Assessment...12 A.5.5 Water Framework Directive Assessment...12 A.5.6 Definition of Issues and Objectives...13 A.5.7 Assessment of Objectives...13 A.6 STAGE 3: POLICY DEVELOPMENT...14 A.6.1 Development of Policy Scenarios...14 A.6.2 Policy Scenario Assessment...15 A.6.3 Identification of Preferred Scenario...16 A.6.4 Confirm Preferred Scenario...16 A.6.5 Draft SMP2 Document Preparation...17 A.7 STAGE 4: PUBLIC EXAMINATION...18 A.8 STAGE 5: FINALISE PLAN...19 A.9 STAGE 6: PLAN DISSEMINATION...20

7 A.1 Introduction This Appendix provides a full explanation of the Shoreline Management Plan (SMP) process adopted, a description of the policy decision-making process and outlines the chronology of the SMP development. It also provides a route map for the supporting information used in the SMP development and included in appendices. These are as follows: A: SMP Development Provides an explanation of the SMP2 process, a description of the policy decision-making process and outlines the chronology of SMP2 development B: Stakeholder Engagement Presents the SMP2 stakeholder engagement process along with all relevant communication. This process is intended to build trust and understanding between all parties involved in the formation of an SMP, with the aim of being inclusive, transparent and appropriate in its methods and application C: Baseline Process Understanding Defines current understanding of how the coast functions, focussing on information that will inform decisions on future management of the coast over the SMP timescale to ensure that policy choices, in terms of coastal processes, are technically-sound and sustainable. This appendix includes the following: - Coastal Process and Shoreline Behaviour of Estuary Dominated Systems (prepared by Professor Ken Pye) - Assessment of SMP2 Boundaries - Defence Assessment - Marine Aggregates and Port Maintenance Annex - Marine Renewable Energy Proposals Annex - Integrated Coastal Zone Management Annex - No Active Intervention (NAI) and With Present Management (WPM) Baseline Assessments including NAI Figures (which define coastal erosion and flood risk) D: Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) Scoping Report E: Policy Development and Appraisal F: Preferred Policy Scenario Testing G: Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) Report Provides the environmental baseline conditions of the study area against which the effects of the SMP can be assessed during the SEA. This appendix includes the following: - SEA Environmental Baseline Report (Theme Review) - Issues and Objectives Table - Legislation pertinent to the SEA process - Sites of Conservation Importance - List of Consultees Presents the consideration of generic policy options for each frontage, identifying possible acceptable policies, and their combination into scenarios for testing. Also presents the appraisal of impacts upon shoreline evolution and the appraisal of objective achievement. Presents policy assessment and appraisal of objective achievement towards definition of the Preferred Plan, as presented in the Shoreline Management Plan document. To fulfil the requirements of the EU Council Directive 2001/42/EC (the Strategic Environmental Assessment Directive). A-1

8 H: Habitats Regulations Assessment I: Water Framework Directive Assessment An assessment of the SMP2 in relation to the UK Habitats Regulations. This document provides Stage One of the Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA). An assessment of the potential impacts of the SMP2 with respect to the Water Framework Directive 2000/ 60/ EC which provides a framework for the protection of inland surface, transitional, coastal and ground waters J: Economic Appraisal Presents the economic analysis undertaken in support of the Preferred Plan. K: Policy Sensitivity Analysis A review of the sensitivity of the SMP2 policies with respect to a range of issues. L: Metadata and Bibliographic Database Provides references for all supporting information used to develop the SMP for future examination and retrieval. A-2

9 A.2 Project Information A.2.1 SMP Background The Swansea and Carmarthen Bay Coastal Engineering Group commissioned Halcrow Group Limited (Halcrow) in January 2009 to develop this second generation Shoreline Management Plan (SMP2) in accordance with the latest guidance (Defra, 2006). The SMP2 has developed long term sustainable shoreline management policies for the coast and estuaries between Lavernock Point (Vale of Glamorgan) and St Ann s Head (Pembrokeshire). The SMP2 is an update of the first generation SMPs which were produced in 2000 and 2001: Worm s Head to Lavernock Point (Swansea Bay) SMP1; Worm s Head to St Govan s Head (Carmarthen Bay) SMP1; and the eastern part of the St Govan s Head to Teifi Estuary (Pembrokeshire) SMP1. A.2.2 Client Steering Group (CSG) The Swansea and Carmarthen Bay Coastal Engineering Group established the Client Steering Group (CSG) at the outset of the development of the SMP2 which comprised the following members: Name Organisation Phil Williams (Coastal Group Chairman) Christopher Perkins Paul Gay Stephen Edwards Susan Jones Steve Jones Owain Lewis Mike Sweeney Colin Alford Paul Meller Emyr Williams Bob Smith Sarah Middleton Natalie Newton Keri Thomas Nicola Rimington Ziggy Otto Ceri Seaton Clayton Lewis Peter Jones Kerry Keirle Observers Polly Groom Susan Hughes Carmarthenshire County Council (Lead Authority) Vale of Glamorgan Council Vale of Glamorgan Council (Planning Representative) Bridgend County Borough Council Bridgend County Borough Council (Planning Representative) Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council (Planning Representative) City and County of Swansea City and County of Swansea City and County of Swansea (Planning Representative) Pembrokeshire County Council Pembrokeshire County Council (Planning Representative) Pembrokeshire Coast National Park Authority (Planning Representative) Environment Agency Wales Environment Agency Wales Countryside Council for Wales Countryside Council for Wales Countryside Council for Wales Ministry of Defence (Qinetiq) Welsh Assembly Government Welsh Assembly Government Cadw Glamorgan Gwent Archaeological Trust A-3

10 Louise Austin Richard Ellis Technical Advisors Philip Barber Howard Blackwell Dyfed Archaeological Trust National Trust Shoreline Management Partnership CEDM Ltd The CSG included engineering and planning representatives from each of the maritime local authorities in addition to representatives from Environment Agency Wales, Welsh Assembly Government, Countryside Council for Wales, Ministry of Defence, Cadw, regional archaeological trusts and the National Trust. The group also included technical advisors from Shoreline Management Partnership and CEDM Limited. Carmarthenshire County Council was Lead Authority for the Swansea and Carmarthen Bay Coastal Engineering Group and was therefore responsible for the financial management of the project, including grant aid submission, and overall project administration. The CSG had overall responsibility for the delivery of the SMP and were involved throughout the life cycle of the SMP. As well as initiating the development process and defining the scope and extent of the SMP, the CSG were responsible for managing the development of the SMP through guidance and review of the work undertaken. The group will also oversee dissemination, adoption and implementation of the SMP. A.2.3 Consultant Halcrow was commissioned in January 2009 to produce the SMP on behalf of the Swansea and Carmarthen Bay Coastal Engineering Group. Halcrow undertook the majority of the tasks, although initial scoping of the SMP, stakeholder engagement, adoption and implementation of the SMP was led by the CSG. Key project team members included: Name Role Mark Glennerster Marcus Phillips Jenny McConkey Dr Helen Jay/ Sam Box Corinna Morgan Helen Jones Tim Wells Project Director Project Manager Assistant Project Manager and Coastal Scientist Technical Team Leader Senior Environmental Scientist Environmental Scientist Risk Management A-4

11 A.2.4 SMP2 Boundaries The Lavernock Point to St Ann s Head SMP2 relates to littoral sub-cells 8b, 8c and part of 8d, as defined by HR Wallingford (1993), and includes thirteen estuaries. Upstream boundaries within the estuaries were defined following consideration of the Schedule IV boundaries, CFMP boundaries and an analysis of the significance of estuary processes on the open coastline in accordance with the SMP2 guidance (Defra, 2006). For the initial appraisal of issues, objectives and coastal processes the extent of the SMP2 study area was defined as either: one kilometre inland from the shoreline; or the landward extent of a 1 in 1,000 year return period extreme flood event (which has a 0.1% chance of occurring each year), whichever was greater. The latter extent was obtained from Environment Agency Wales flood risk maps which define the area which is currently at risk of flooding, without existing defences. Further details on the SMP2 boundaries are provided in Appendix C Baseline Processes Understanding: Annex B Assessment of SMP Boundaries. Figure 1: Lavernock Point to St Ann s Head SMP2 Study Area A-5

12 A.3 SMP Programme The flowchart below illustrates the timetable of activities carried out as part of the SMP development, highlighted in italics are the activities that involved stakeholder engagement (further details are provided in Appendix B). Stage 1: Scope SMP SCBCEG meeting to decide SMP approach (May and Sept 2008) Initial Client Steering Group (CSG) Meeting (Feb 2009) Stakeholder Engagement documents issued (March and April 2009) Scoping Report completed (August 2008) Stakeholder feedback analysed and information collated (May 2009) Stage 2: Assessments to Support Policy Baseline Process Understanding of coastal and estuarine behaviour and dynamics developed (May 2009) Baseline Scenarios developed (Sept 2009) SEA Environmental Baseline (Theme Review) undertaken (May 2009) Development of Issues and Objectives Table (May 2009) Issue of Draft Issues and Objectives Table to CSG (May 2009) Stakeholder feedback incorporated (July 2009) Stage 3: Policy Development EMG/KSG events to develop policy ideas (Nov 2009) Testing of the policies defined at EMG/KSG events against processes and objectives (Nov 2009) Environmental Assessment of Alternative Policy Scenarios (Nov 2009) SDADCAG meeting to help steer Preferred Scenario (Dec 2009) Review of scenario testing to select Preferred Scenario (Dec 2009) Economic analysis (January 2010) Environmental appraisal of Preferred Scenario (February 2010) Members meeting to agree draft Plan (March 2010) SMP document & appendices produced, including Action Plan (June 2010) Stage 4: Public Examination CSG meetings to confirm consultation strategy (Dec 2009 and Jan 2010) Public Consultation (September 2010 to December 2010) Analysis of consultation responses (January 2010) Stage 5: Finalise SMP Finalise SMP (February 2011) Stage 6: SMP Dissemination Publicise SMP Implement SMP A-6

13 A.4 Stage 1: Scope SMP A.4.1 Stakeholder Engagement Strategy Stakeholder engagement in the development of the SMP2 involved the following three groups: 1. Client Steering Group (CSG); 2. Elected Members Group (EMG); and 3. Key Stakeholders Group (KSG). The CSG has overall responsibility for the delivery of the SMP, provided the lead on Stakeholder Engagement and was responsible for communicating directly with all stakeholders. The involvement of Elected Members in the development of the SMP2 reflects the Cabinet syle approach to decision making which operates in many local authorities. Politicians were in involved from the outset of the SMP2 to improve the likelihood that the shoreline management policies would be acceptable to the martime local authorities. The aim of the EMG was to act as a focal point for discussion and consultation throughout development of the SMP. The EMG was invited to a series of events throughout the development of the SMP to: introduce the SMP2 process; review issues and objectives and to review alternative SMP2 policies to test. In addition draft preferred SMP2 policies were presented to maritime local authority cabinets for review and comment in advance of public consultation. Following public consultation any proposed changes to the draft preferred SMP2 policies will be fed back by maritime local authority members of the CSG to their cabinets in advance of finalising the SMP2 document. Appendix B provides further information on EMG meetings and the stakeholder engagement process. The KSG were involved at key stages in the development of the SMP2 to: introduce the SMP2 process; review issues and objectives and review alternative SMP2 policies to test. Membership of the KSG was determined following discussion with the CSG and through consideration of consultees who were involved in the development of the first SMPs and organisations which had registered an interest in the SMP2 during initial consultation, undertaken in March and April The membership of the KSG provides representation of the primary interests within the plan frontage to ensure consideration of all interests during the review of issues and objectives. Representatives were invited from a range of local, regional and national interest groups to participate in the KSG meetings. A database of names, organisations and contact details was created, further details are provided in Appendix B. A-7

14 A.4.2 Data Collection Data was collected from a number of sources including stakeholders, literature searches and web-searches. Key resources included: First generation SMP1s (Shoreline Management Partnership, 2000; Shoreline Management Partnership 2001; Atkins, 2002); Futurecoast (Halcrow, 2002); Various studies and coastal monitoring data/ reports which have been produced prior to and since the completion of the first generation SMP1s, provided by the Swansea and Carmarthen Bay Coastal Engineering Group; Various data provided by Environment Agency Wales including: flood risk mapping, extreme water levels along the coast of South Wales, LIDAR data and Catchment Flood Management Plans (CFMPs); Environmental data obtained from Countryside Council for Wales; and Historic data provided by CADW and the Royal Commission on the Ancient and Historic Monuments of Wales, along with data provided by Glamorgan-Gwent Archaeological Trust and Dyfed Archaeological Trust; All the data and information gathered and used within the SMP development are referenced in Appendix L. Some of the data collected were reviewed as part of separate tasks, such as that completed for the Baseline Process Understanding of Coastal and Estuarine Behaviour and Dynamics (see Stage 2 below). A-8

15 A.5 Stage 2: Assessments to Support Policy Development A.5.1 Baseline Process Understanding of Coastal and Estuarine Behaviour and Dynamics (a) Assessment of coastal and estuarine processes and evolution An assessment of coastal and estuarine behaviour has been undertaken, using latest existing available information. Statements on interactions, shoreline movement and predictions of shoreline and estuary evolution at various temporal and spatial scales have been provided in Appendix C. The baseline processes understanding review has been used to inform the development of the baseline scenarios. During this assessment it was concluded that the most dynamic parts of this coastline have been studied and in places are subject to ongoing investigation. However there remain inherent uncertainties associated with coastal and estuarine behaviour which are discussed further in Appendix C and Appendix K. (b) Assessment of coastal defences The SMP guidance (Defra, 2006) suggests that the National Flood and Coastal Defence Database (NFCDD) should be used in the assessment of coastal defences. This data set was, however, found to be incomplete at the start of the SMP review. The Swansea and Carmarthen Bay Coastal Engineering Group commissioned In Halcrow in March 2009, to undertake an inspection of existing defences to define residual life (within the three SMP epochs: 0 to 20 years, 20 to 50 years and 50 to 100 years) along the SMP2 frontage (excluding Pembrokeshire County Council s frontage where this was being undertaken) to inform No Active Intervention (NAI) and With Present Management (WPM) baseline scenarios and to enable validation of the separate National Coastal Erosion Risk Mapping database (which was utilised in development of the SMP). A series of site visits were undertaken in March 2009 between Lavernock Point and the western boundary of Carmarthenshire County Council at the eastern end of Amroth. Defence information and photographs along Pembrokeshire County Council s frontage were extracted from PCC s CERIS and EROCIPS databases. The defence assessment report was developed based upon Coastal Survey Wales coast protection survey information (commissioned by the Welsh Assembly Government) which was extracted from the first generation Shoreline Management Plans for the Vale of Glamorgan, Swansea Bay and Carmarthen Bay. The defence assessment report includes photographs of existing defences, an estimate of defence residual life (based on the SMP2 epochs: 0 to 20 years, 20 to 50 years and 50 to 100 years) and defence crest levels (where this information was available). Coastal defence officers at each local authority were contacted to confirm the information in the defence assessment report and to provide information (such as cliff recession rates) to assist in validation of the National Coastal Erosion Risk Management (NCERM) database. The defence assessment report is included in Appendix C (Annex C) and has been reviewed by the CSG. A-9

16 A.5.2 Baseline Scenarios At the outset of policy development assessments of the following two baseline scenarios were undertaken, to provide an understanding of the influence of existing defences on coastal and estuarine behaviour and evolution. No Active Intervention (NAI) which assumes no further investment in coastal defences or operations. Where there are currently no defences, this policy means that the shoreline will continue to evolve naturally. However, where the shoreline is currently defended, any existing defences will not be maintained and will be allowed to fail. This means that areas inshore would be at increased risk of flooding and coastal erosion in the future. With Present Management (WPM) which assumes that present management practices will continue until technically impossible (for example, if existing defences fail), or when current practice becomes ineffective. It also identifies where maintenance or improvements may be required (for example to maintain the current standard of protection in response to rising sea levels). NAI/ WPM baseline scenario assessments were undertaken for each of the SMP2 epochs (0 to 20 years, 20 to 50 years and 50 to 100 years) and included consideration of future climate change. At this early stage it was not appropriate to define the extent of Policy Units; therefore the coast was divided according to the natural and/or defence characteristics of the coast (loosely based on the shoreline units classified by the Futurecoast study (Halcrow, 2002)) and is reported east to west, i.e. from Lavernock Point to St Ann s Head as required by SMP guidance (Defra, 2006) to ensure a consistent approach along coast of England and Wales. Under the two baseline scenarios, predictions of future shoreline change and erosion/ flooding risk have been made using information from the baseline understanding of coastal and estuarine behaviour and dynamics (see above) together with additional data on historical shoreline change from historical Ordnance Survey maps, Environment Agency Wales flood risk mapping, and future shoreline erosion risk from Futurecoast (Halcrow, 2002) and the NCERM database. Further details of information which was used are provided in Appendix C. The two baseline scenario assessments are included in Appendix C along with maps which show areas which are at risk from coastal erosion and flooding under the NAI baseline scenario. Due to the uncertainties with respect to the future extent of coastal erosion (typically a combination of an underlying low rate of coastal erosion along with a risk of localised cliff falls/ landslides) this information has been provided in text boxes. The baseline scenario assessment and maps have been reviewed by the CSG. A-10

17 A.5.3 Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) Conflicts between the natural, built and historic environment exist along any shoreline and the SMP has to consider these conflicts in terms of shoreline management. The first stage is to identify key features along the shoreline, including natural, landscape, human, historic and socio-economic assets, fully understand the relationships between these features and to understand how coastal erosion and flood risk management can alter coastal processes with potential impacts on the natural, built and historic environment. The SEA Scoping report (Appendix D) defines the environmental baseline conditions (including all environmental features and assets lying wholly, or partly, within the boundary of the SMP) against which the effects of the preferred SMP2 policies were assessed during the SEA. The SEA Scoping Report has used the most up-to-date data to identify key environmental features along the coast. Consultation has been undertaken to understand why these features are important to stakeholders and to enable a series of issues and objectives to be developed. The list of issues and objectives were used to develop alternative policy options and to assess their impacts and suitability. An overview of the coastline is provided, together with specific information relating to: Natural Environment Nature Conservation Earth Heritage Air and Climate Water Landscape and Visual Amenity Historic Environment (Cultural Heritage) Terrestrial Marine Land Use, Infrastructure and Material Assets Residential, Commercial and Industry Port and Harbour Activities Recreation, Tourism and Amenity Interests Agriculture Infrastructure Fisheries Mineral Extraction and Landfill Future Land Use/Planning Targets Other Proposed/Ongoing Developments Thematic maps have been produced to show the location of key features, which are included in Annex 1 of Appendix D. The SEA Report which provides further details on how the SMP complies with SEA Directive requirements is provided in Appendix G. A-11

18 A.5.4 Habitats Regulations Assessment In many locations along the South Wales coastline, between Lavernock Point and St Ann s Head, policies would be implemented within or adjacent to international conservation sites (European sites). A Habitats Regulations Assessment has therefore been undertaken in accordance with the requirements of the EC Habitats Directive (92/43/EEC) and the European Union Birds Directive (79/409/EEC) and their implementation in the UK under the Conservation (Natural Habitats &c.) Regulations 1994, under Regulation 48(1) ("Habitats Regulations"). Further details on the approach adopted and the conclusions of the Habitats Regulations Assessment are provided in Appendix H. A.5.5 Water Framework Directive Assessment A Water Framework Directive (WFD) assessment has been prepared and is provided in Appendix I. Ecological and water quality can be influenced by SMP2 Policy as changes in coastal management may result in different hydrological regimes and water body morphology. The WFD assessment takes into consideration the potential effects of SMP2 policy options on the ecological and water quality elements of the coastal and transitional (estuary) water bodies directly affected by the SMP2. It also incorporates an assessment of adjacent river water bodies, which may also experience some indirect effects due to SMP2 policies, such as shifting in the upper tidal limit in rivers. The potential effects on ecological quality elements are associated with changes in hydrological regimes and water body morphology, including such factors as changes in current velocities, sediment accretion/erosion, water quality (turbidity, salinity) and tidal inundation. A-12

19 A.5.6 Definition of Issues and Objectives The definition of issues and objectives is a key feature in the development of second generation SMPs. The definition of objectives fulfils three roles: to provide a focus for consensus amongst the SMP stakeholders on the various issues, sometimes conflicting, that are raised during the development of the SMP2; to inform the development of policy options; and to assess their impacts and suitability of alternative policy options. An objective defines a target or goal that the SMP aspires to achieve in delivering the plan. It is, however, important to understand that quite commonly there are conflicting objectives for a particular stretch of coast and that therefore it is likely that not all objectives will be achieved by the SMP. The aim of the SMP is to seek to provide a balanced plan, which considers the natural, built and historic environment, alongside people and socio-economic realities. Using the information contained within the SEA Scoping Report (Appendix D) issues and objectives were tabulated and subdivided into: Overall SMP2 Area (Lavernock Point to St Ann s Head; Lavernock Point to Ogmore River; Ogmore River to Worms Head; Worms Head to St Govans Head and St Govans Head to St Ann s Head. Using the SMP guidance (Defra, 2006) together with SEA guidelines, a list of SEA Objectives were developed for each feature using the issues identified. Within the environmental objectives, a distinction has been made between those that arise from legal obligations (shown in bold italics) and those that do not. Within this SMP no attempt has been made to weight or rank objectives, since previous experience on SMP2s has proven this technique to be biased towards certain policy drivers and is often too subjective. Instead the focus has been to provide a more qualitative and flexible means of developing and appraising sustainable policy options against technical, economic, environmental and social factors. We have found this method to be more appropriate when considering intangibles and areas where a single policy may have both positive and negative impacts. This approach has also allowed stakeholders views to be considered and included in the table of issues and objectives and subsequent policy appraisal. A.5.7 Assessment of Objectives Following the principles of Making Space for Water, the impact of the No Active Intervention baseline scenario on coastal and estuarine features and assets has been considered. This has drawn upon both the baseline process understanding (presented in Appendix C), which included an assessment of the impact of No Active Intervention on coastal and estuarine processes and the SEA Scoping Report (see Appendix D). It has therefore been possible to determine whether objectives have been met, focusing on how and why objectives were (or were not) met, rather than numbers of objectives met. A-13

20 A.6 Stage 3: Policy Development This Stage involved four key steps: Development of policy scenarios; Policy scenario assessment; Identification of a preferred scenario; and Confirmation of the preferred scenario. The sections below outline the main tasks undertaken to complete these steps. Further details on each of these steps, and results of any assessments, are included in Appendix E: Policy Development and Appraisal, Appendix F: Preferred Policy Scenario Testing, Appendix J: Economic Appraisal and Appendix K: Policy Sensitivity Analysis. A.6.1 Development of Policy Scenarios SMP2 guidance (Defra, 2006) advocates a policy scenario approach, where a string of policies is defined and appraised for discrete stretches of coastline; this approach ensures that the combined impact of policies is considered. The first stage of this assessment was to determine the main factors influencing policy decisions along the coast, i.e. key policy drivers, in order to give provide direction for the choice of appropriate policies. A key policy driver can be defined as a feature that has sufficient importance in terms of the benefits it provides that it potentially has an overriding influence upon policy selection at the wider SMP scale; this may be through either promoting a policy or discarding a policy for a particular location or locations. In identifying key policy drivers, the appropriateness of all four generic SMP2 policies was broadly considered for each location, i.e. Hold the Line, Advance the Line, Managed Realignment and No Active Intervention. Using these key policy drivers, an initial policy scenario was then developed (defined as Scenario A ), based upon balancing stakeholder objectives identified in Stage 2. Using the knowledge gained in Stage 2 of coastal response and impact on features of the baseline scenarios, together with inputs from the coastal group, possible variations on this scenario were identified to consider other policy drivers ( Scenarios B and C ). However, it was not always considered necessary to test more than one option in locations where alternative policies could be quickly dismissed as inappropriate. Prior to testing of the proposed alternative policy scenarios the CSG and KSG were consulted (see Appendix B). Feedback from this consultation was used to refine the policy scenarios further and these policy scenarios were then taken forward to the appraisal stage (see Appendix E). A-14

21 A.6.2 Policy Scenario Assessment This process involved two stages: assessment of shoreline interactions and response; and assessment of achievement of objectives. (a) Assessment of shoreline interactions and response All three scenarios (A, B and C) were assessed, using the methodology adopted for baseline scenario assessment, to determine their impact on coastal processes, shoreline evolution, potential estuary-open coast interactions. These assessments incorporated consideration of future climate change, in particular sea level rise. Assumptions were made regarding the implementation of the proposed policies. This is an important consideration since how the shoreline management policy is implementation has potential to change the impact on both the local environment and adjacent shorelines. For example, the downdrift consequences of a hold the line policy may differ if this is to be implemented through provision of a linear defence (e.g. a seawall), or if it is envisaged that this will be implemented through beach stabilisation (e.g. breakwaters or groynes, possibly including beach recharge/ recycling). This, therefore, required a broad assessment of the technical viability of the proposed policy considered. Further details are provided in Appendix E. (b) Assessment of achievement of objectives This involved appraising the impact of the policies on features along the coast and estuaries. The approach focused on qualitatively defining the benefits and dis-benefits using information contained within the SEA (Appendix G). At this stage opportunities, both for the environment and for people, were identified which could arise from implementing the proposed policies,. At this stage no quantification of losses or detailed socio-economic analysis had been undertaken. A-15

22 A.6.3 Identification of Preferred Scenario The results from the policy scenario assessment were used during an internal project team meeting in November 2009 to develop a preferred policy for each policy unit. This led to the development of a draft preferred scenario, i.e. a coastal-wide scenario that best achieves the defined shoreline management objectives in a sustainable manner, considering technical, environmental and economic factors. Further discussion on sustainability is provided in the Main Document. The Identification of Preferred Policy report was issued to the CSG on 4 December 2009 for review and comment. The report defined the preferred SMP2 policies along with the justification for their selection. Further information on the justification of the preferred SMP2 policies was provided in an updated version of the report which was issued to the CSG on 12 Jan The maritime local authority members of the CSG used these reports, between January 2010 and April 2010, to brief and obtain feedback from elected cabinet members on the draft preferred SMP2 policies in advance of public consultation. Feedback from the CSG and the conclusions from the scenario testing were used to develop preferred SMP2 policies. Only minor changes were made, although it was recognised that at many sites, management of coastal retreat would be necessary and that the document should identify the need for measures to be in place to manage the risk of coastal erosion and flooding to people, property, strategic infrastructure and property. Where changes were made, further assessments were undertaken. Once draft preferred policies/ scenarios had been defined, Policy Unit boundaries were finalised. In May 2010 draft preferred SMP2 policies were issued to the KSG for review and comment along with an invitation to the public exhibitions which are due to be held in September A.6.4 Confirm Preferred Scenario Once a draft preferred SMP2 scenario and policies had been developed, socio-economic analysis was carried out. Although economic considerations had been taken into account in the development of the scenarios, up to this stage no quantification had been undertaken. Appendix J provides further details on the appraisal which was undertaken. It should be noted that this assessment was not to establish the economic justification for a scheme, simply to make a broad assessment of the economic robustness of the preferred policies, i.e. whether the policy was: clearly economically viable; clearly not economically viable; or of marginal viability (and therefore in need of more detailed assessment at a later date, e.g. as part of a strategic plan). The number and approximate value of residential properties and non-residential properties within the EAW flood risk zone (1 in 1,000 year return period event) or at risk from coastal erosion over the 100 year SMP2 period was defined for each policy unit, along with the number of residents at risk, which is in line with WAG s New Approaches guidance. Other assets such as utilities, highways and strategic infrastructure which are potentially at risk from coastal erosion or flooding were identified but were not valued. The value of A-16

23 intangibles such as tourism, recreation and impacts upon the local economy or environment were noted but no values were assigned. This is in accordance with the 2006 SMP guidance (Defra, 2006). The cost of implementing the proposed policy has also been broadly calculated, assuming the implementation measures to be used. Appendix J provides further details on data used in the economic appraisal. Analysis of the sensitivity of preferred policies, with respect to a range of issues, was undertaken and is provided in Appendix K. A.6.5 Draft SMP2 Document Preparation A draft version of the SMP2 was produced to clearly present the Plan and the associated policies for review and consultation, which included: Details on the objectives of an SMP2 and its status; A non-technical explanation which gives background to development of the Plan and discusses concepts of sustainability; An overview of the Plan and its implications for the SMP coastline as a whole; Statements for each policy scenario area and policy unit outlining: o Details of the policies and their implementation; o Justification for the policies; o Implications for local objectives; o Action Plan for each policy scenario area. Supporting maps. Supporting information was in the Appendices to the SMP2 Main Document as discussed previously. A-17

24 A.7 Stage 4: Public Examination The SMP2 stakeholder engagement strategy was developed by the CSG who led and managed the engagement of stakeholders throughout the development of the SMP2, which included: Involving the Key Stakeholder Group; Involving the Elected Members Group; Engaging the public during the consultation period; Advertising public exhibitions; Placing public notices; Issuing consultation documents; Liaising directly with stakeholders (in line with Stakeholder Engagement Model); Maintaining a database of all responses received; Forward all communications onto Halcrow for action Halcrow assisted the CSG in the consultation process throughout the development of the SMP2 including: identifying and inviting suitable members of the KSG members, provided the CSG with digital copies of consultation materials and attended each of the consultation meetings and public exhibitions. The public consultation period was scheduled between September 2010 and December 2010 to avoid the main holiday period. The draft SMP2 document was available for public review on the SMP2 web-site ( from July In addition hard copies of the document will be made available at Council offices and local libraries. A consultation summary leaflet was produced and widely circulated. Public exhibitions will be held at the following ten venues, which were agreed by the CSG: Barry, Porthcawl, Aberavon, Swansea, Llanelli, Carmarthen, Pendine, Tenby, Pembroke and Milford Haven. One public exhibition will be held at each venue between 1200hrs and 2000hrs in September All responses received during the public consultation period were collated by the CSG and forwarded onto Halcrow. Each response received was logged, recorded and considered individually. Comments received and the responses to these comments will be included Appendix B: Stakeholder Engagement. A-18

25 A.8 Stage 5: Finalise Plan Following public consultation and consideration of all responses received, a number of additions / changes to the draft SMP document will be presented, discussed and agreed during a meeting with the Client Steering Group.. Following CSG agreement the changes will be presented, discussed and agreed during a meeting with the Elected Members Group. Any necessary changes will be made to the draft preferred SMP2 policies. Alterations and additions to other sections of the SMP will also be made, where necessary, in response to comments received.. Following consideration of comments raised, the SMP will be finalised and reviewed by the CSG and EMG in advance of dissemination. A-19

26 A.9 Stage 6: Plan Dissemination The CSG will be responsible for disseminating and implementing the SMP2 and for publicising its completion. The Action Plan is a working document which should be reviewed regularly and managed by the Swansea and Carmarthen Bay Coastal Engineering Group. The Action Plan will be retained on the agenda for all future Coastal Group meetings. It will be the responsibility of the Coastal Group to promote and monitor progress and to ensure that the action plan is progressed by the appropriate partners and where there are problems with delivery to seek to resolve issues through collaborative working. The Lavernock Point to St Ann s Head Shoreline Management Plan website ( southwalescoast.org) could be maintained to include updates on progress against the action plan. This could also include identification of the implications of any study outputs or wider developments for the relevant SMP2 policies. The updates would provide an important means of disseminating progress to stakeholders and, as such, the existence of this information should be reported during the final SMP2 dissemination process. The responsibility for maintaining the website will remain with the Swansea and Carmarthen Bay Coastal Engineering Group. It is not possible at this time to set a date for the next review of the SMP2. It is considered likely that a 5 to 10 year period may be appropriate. However, it is vital that changes in understanding or the shoreline management framework are monitored to establish if there comes a point (within the next 5 to 10 years) that the SMP2 policies become sufficiently out of date as to warrant a full review of the plan. This will be a judgment made by the Swansea and Carmarthen Bay Coastal Engineering Group. A-20