lincolnshire coastal study - east lindsey

Lincolnshire Coastal

Study

Summary Report

5080858/LCS-SummaryReport_Final

Lincolnshire Coastal Study

Summary Report

14 May 2010

Notice

This document and its contents have been prepared and are intended solely for Lincolnshire Coastal Study Steering Group’s information and use in relation to the Lincolnshire Coastal Study.

Atkins Limited assumes no responsibility to any other party in respect of or arising out of or in connection with this document and/or its contents.

© Crown Copyright 2009. The UK Climate Projections (UKCP09) have been made available by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) and the Department of Climate Change (DECC) under licence from the Met Office, UK Climate Impacts Programme, British Atmospheric Data Centre, Newcastle University, University of East Anglia, Environment Agency, Tyndall Centre and Proudman Oceanographic Laboratory. These organisations give no warranties, express or implied, as to the accuracy of the UKCP09 and do not accept any liability for loss or damage, which may arise from reliance upon the UKCP09 and any use of the UKCP09 is undertaken entirely at the users risk.

Document History

JOB NUMBER: 5080858 DOCUMENT REF: 5080858/75/DG/088

1 Draft NW GD GD GD 31/03/10

2 Final, approved by SG NW GD GD GD 14/05/10

Revision Purpose Description Originated Checked Reviewed Authorised Date

Summary Report

5080858/LCS-SummaryReport_Final 3

Glossary

Term Explanation

APE Annual Probability Event

CIL Community Infrastructure Levy

Defra Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

EiP Examination in Public

emda East Midlands Development Agency

EMRA East Midlands Regional Assembly

GOEM Government Office East Midlands

LDF Local Development Framework

PPS3 Planning Policy Statement 3: Housing (CLG, 2006)

RSS Regional Spatial Strategy

SA Sustainability Appraisal

SEA Strategic Environmental Assessment

SFRA Strategic Flood Risk Assessment

SMP Shoreline Management Plan

UKCP09 United Kingdom Climate Projections 2009

Summary Report


Introduction With large areas at or below sea level, the Lincolnshire coast is vulnerable to the impacts of climate change. The most vulnerable stretches of the coast are currently well protected from flooding (and have flood warning

systems). However, future rises in sea level mean that it is necessary for decision makers to understand the

current and possible future relationship between sea level rise and coastal flooding, economic regeneration,

planning and housing provision, agricultural production, tourism, social deprivation, the natural environment,

transport and health. Following the Examination in Public (EiP) of the last East Midlands Regional Spatial

Strategy (RSS) (which guides future development in the East Midlands), the Government asked for more

research in preparation for the next RSS review by 2011.

The Lincolnshire Coastal Study Group was consequently formed, consisting of Lincolnshire County Council,

the coastal local authorities (East Lindsey District Council, Boston Borough Council, South Holland District

Council), Government Office for the East Midlands (GOEM), East Midlands Development Agency (emda),

Environment Agency, Natural England, East Midlands Regional Assembly and the Internal Drainage Boards.

The Group commissioned the Lincolnshire Coastal Study to make a fresh assessment of the future needs of

the coastal area and to assist in providing a longer-term perspective for planning. For the purposes of the

Study the coastal area is defined as Boston Borough Council, South Holland District Council and East

Lindsey District Council (excluding the Wolds).

The Study addresses coastal flooding issues and puts forward a set of Principles and Options for spatial

development which would allow communities in the Study Area to develop and have a viable and prosperous

future.

The Lincolnshire Coastal Study, along with other evidence (e.g. on housing needs) informs draft policy 5

(and others as appropriate) in the review of the East Midlands RSS. As the Regional Plan Policy 5 notes

(GOEM, 2009):

A strategy will be agreed between the Regional Planning Body, the three Lincolnshire coastal districts (East

Lindsey, Boston and South Holland), Lincolnshire County Council, the Environment Agency and other

relevant regional organisations. This will consider primarily:

flood risk and flood defence works;

housing needs;

regeneration needs, including social and economic factors;

other infrastructure needs; and

the protection of the integrity of designated nature conservation sites of international

importance.

The strategy should consider how any infrastructure will be funded and the timing of such works. New

housing and other new development will need to be carefully phased in accordance with the provision of

necessary new infrastructure.

The agreed strategy will form part of the next RSS review and if agreed before the adoption of the next

review it will form a guide to the preparation of local development documents in the three districts until the

regional strategy is rolled forward.

Summary Report


Relationship of the Study to Shoreline Management Plans

The Study is set within the context of emerging Shoreline Management Plans (SMPs), which explicitly

develop policy on defence presence, position and standard of protection. The Study follows the current draft

SMP policies in relation to the line and standard of protection of coastal flood defences. The Study is

therefore concerned with residual flood risk i.e. how to manage spatial development behind defences which

could be breached or over-topped. Residual risk is more precisely defined in Section 4.2.

Adopting this relationship means that the Principles may require revision in future if the third or subsequent

round of SMPs lead to the adoption of a different defence line or standard of protection.

Project timeline

Phase 1 of the Lincolnshire Coastal Study commenced in 2008 with a Scoping Study to identify the main

issues facing the Lincolnshire coast as well as a literature review of over two hundred international, national,

regional and local plans, policies and other documents.

Phase 2 of the Study commenced in January 2009. The Study was broken down into five tasks as set out in

Table 1. The findings of the five tasks are summarised in the sections that follow.

Table 1 – Lincolnshire Coastal Study tasks

Task Description Timeline Output

Task 1 – Baseline Collation of an economic, environmental and social baseline for the Study Area. Development of a Sustainability Appraisal framework.

January - April 2009

Task 1 report

Task 2 – Scenarios Mapping of flood hazard scenarios and development of socio-economic scenarios for the Study Area.

April – July 2009

Task 2 report, including maps

Task 3 – Develop Principles and Options

Development of draft Principles and Options through workshops with technical stakeholders, elected members, private sector stakeholders and the project Technical and Steering Groups.

Tasks 3 and 4 ran concurrently between July and December 2009 and the Principles and Options were developed iteratively.

Task 3 and 4 report

Task 4 – Test and refine Principles and Options

Testing of the draft Principles and Options against sustainability criteria. Refinement of Principles with project Steering Group and technical stakeholders.

Task 5 – Delivery of Principles and Options

Collation of information on potential delivery mechanisms for the Principles and Options, including actors, investment requirements, funding sources, timing and possible barriers.

January – March 2010

Task 5 report

Summary Report


Task 1: Baseline In Task 1 the social, economic and environmental baseline of the Study Area was established and key

issues identified. This led to the development of a sustainability framework that was used later in the project

to evaluate the Principles and Options. The baseline describes the particular vulnerabilities of the Study

Area, reflecting flood hazard within the specific social, economic and environmental circumstances.

Environmental, social and economic issues in the Study Area were identified based on the Phase 1 Scoping

Study, a review of plans, policies and processes affecting the Study Area and a workshop attended by

Technical Stakeholders.

Baseline

The following environmental, social and economic issues were identified in the Study Area:

Environmental issues

Internationally, nationally and regionally significant biodiversity: the majority of the coastline in the Study

Area (excluding the stretch of coast between Skegness and Mablethorpe) is internationally designated.

Threatened coastal landscapes: the Countryside Quality Counts assessment of countryside change between

1999 and 2003 identified agriculture, development, sea level rise and coastal erosion as the main pressures

on landscape in the Study Area (Haines-Young 2007).

Importance of historic environment assets: there are a high number of Scheduled Ancient Monuments and

registered parks and gardens as well as listed buildings and Conservation Areas in the Study Area. In

addition to individual features, the undesignated historic environment also includes archaeology and semi-

natural historic landscapes. Heritage features are valuable and unique and they cannot be re-created if

destroyed. Therefore, they are particularly vulnerable to coastal flooding.

High risk of flooding and coastal erosion: the low-lying nature of the Lincolnshire coast makes it vulnerable to

flooding from the sea. Coastal erosion is also affecting the Lincolnshire coast, particularly between

Mablethorpe and Skegness.

Impacts of climate change on nationally important agricultural assets: Lincolnshire has extensive resources

of high quality agricultural land. Coastal flooding may lead to the loss of some of the best farmland in the

country with impacts on the local and national economy and national food security. Pressure on water

resources due to climate change and other socio-economic drivers may also constrain agriculture in the area

in future.

Pressure on water resources: the majority of Water Resource Management Units in the Study Area are

already deemed to be fully committed (Environment Agency 2004; 2006; 2007). Climate change and

development are likely to increase the pressure on water resources in the Study Area. A reduction in

summer rainfall and an increase in winter rainfall falling as intense bursts (Hulme et al. 2002) and saltwater

inundation intrusion into aquifers may reduce the availability of water.

Social issues

A likely mismatch of future housing needs and housing provision: projections show a significant increase in

housing need in the Study Area up to 2031. The demographic structure of the area means that there is

already a high proportion of retired and elderly residents and therefore a higher ratio of homes to jobs than

elsewhere in the region.

Lack of affordable housing provision: there is a serious lack of affordable housing in the Study Area.

Affordability problems are rooted in the increase in house prices over the last decade which has outstripped

increases in household income. In-migration from outside the three districts has also pushed house prices

beyond the means of many local residents. The recent fall in house prices is unlikely to improve the situation

given the lack of available credit and the deflationary affects on wages.

Summary Report


Demographic pressures: ageing of the population in the Study Area is a long term trend. Migration of people

of retirement age to the coast is a key driver of population growth in the Study Area, particularly in East

Lindsey. An aging population has implications for health and social services in the Study Area as well as the

labour market.

High levels of deprivation, particularly in coastal settlements: East Lindsey and Boston are in the top 25% of

the most deprived districts in the country. There are some severe pockets of deprivation in Boston town,

Sutton on Sea, Wainfleet All Saints, Mablethorpe and Skegness. Deprivation is driven by low incomes,

disability and poor access to services. Although unemployment is generally low, there are areas of high

unemployment in the coastal zone, particularly around Mablethorpe and Skegness.

Low levels of education and skills: the Study Area is characterised by a low skill, low wage equilibrium which

is driven by the economic structure of the area. Those with higher qualification and skill levels tend to

commute out of the area to pursue higher value employment.

General health issues and health inequalities: the Health and Disability domain of the Index of Multiple

Deprivation (IMD) identifies acute pockets of deprivation in Skegness and Mablethorpe and more inland

areas surrounding Spilsby. Health issues are not merely related to age but also mental and physical

disability.

Low level of accessibility to key services: poor accessibility to key services reflects the rural character and

remoteness of the Study Area. Transport infrastructure and public transport provision is poor.

Economic issues

Concentration of economic activity within a few low value, low skilled sectors: the Study Area is deeply

dependent on the agriculture and tourism sectors. The economy of the Study Area is good at maintaining low

unemployment levels and high employment rates but jobs are low value added and low skilled.

Seasonal unemployment: given the economic dependencies on the food and farming and tourism sector, the

area is susceptible to seasonal trends in employment. Unemployment in the Study Area is highly cyclical:

falling in the summer season and peaking in the winter.

Labour market constraints: one of the implications of an older population is that there is a smaller workforce

in all three districts. This is set to shrink further, since the population is forecasted to age. This implies that

the economy, unless in-commuting increases significantly, could encounter supply side constraints in terms

of labour market shortages. This will not be just in terms of numbers but also the particular skill sets that

those leaving the labour market take with them.

Sustainability framework

Sustainability Appraisal (SA), incorporating the requirements of the Strategic Environmental Assessment

(SEA) Directive, is formally required under the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 for Regional

Spatial Strategies and Local Development Frameworks only. Although there is no statutory requirement for

SA or SEA for the Lincolnshire Coastal Study, a decision was made by the Steering Group to incorporate

SA/SEA within the project in order to ensure compatibility with the RSS review.

A SA Framework was developed based on the identified key issues, the baseline data, indicators in the East

Midlands Sustainable Development Framework (ref) and stakeholder knowledge. The Study Framework

was used later in the Study to assess the possible effects of implementing the Principles and Options.

Specific objectives within the Study Framework have been worded so that they reflect a desired direction of

change. Guide questions provide a clarification of the intended interpretation of each Objective.

Summary Report


Task 2: Scenarios In Task 2, flood hazard scenarios were mapped and socio-economic scenarios were developed. The

scenarios describe potential changes in society and the economy of the Study Area over the twenty first

century, and potential changes in climate and tidal flood hazard. The socio-economic scenarios were

developed based on literature review, expert judgement and simple projection techniques. Future flood

hazard scenarios were developed independently to the Study using models that describe how floods form

and move over land. In Task 2, this information was mapped for the Study Area. Together, the scenarios

formed the main inputs to the development of Principles and Options in Task 3 and 4.

Socio-economic scenarios

Three socio-economic scenarios were developed for use in the Study: Conventional Development, National

Enterprise, and Green. The Conventional Development scenario is based on current trends; National

Enterprise is associated with a stronger role for central Government and the adoption of protectionist

policies; the Green scenario favours stronger environmental policies.

All three scenarios show, in different ways, the importance of agriculture and agricultural land in the Study

Area. Under the National Enterprise and Green scenarios, tourism may have an enhanced role. These two

scenarios also see greater economic growth, although current issues such as low wage and skill levels and

seasonal employment persist.

Changes to population, housing numbers and land requirements for housing have been quantified using

simple projection techniques. The numbers show ongoing in-migration to the Study Area, with potential

increases of population from a 2006 value of approximately 280,000 persons to 440,000 (Conventional

Development), 550,000 (National Enterprise) and 620,000 (Green). Without any (net) migration population

levels would fall.

The housing numbers under three socio-economic scenarios are not as different as their equivalent

population outputs because of assumptions made about the average number of people living in each house.

However, housing numbers would double under the Conventional Development and National Enterprise

scenarios, although with no net in-migration housing numbers would decline. The land requirements would

vary from 3,500 to 4,300 hectares under the three main scenarios and although these are small in terms of

the total Study Area land mass, they represent a very large increase in the total housing land required.

Climate change scenarios and impacts

Climate change is likely to present significant impacts for the Lincolnshire coastal communities, especially

with regards to sea level rise. The headline messages for the East Midlands region from the United

Kingdom Climate Projections 2009 (UKCP09) climate change projections for the final 30 years of the twenty-

first century are (Murphy et al. 2009):

Hotter summers: the central estimate of the increase in average daily summer temperature in

the 2080s is between 2.7°C and 4.4°C, depending on the emission scenario;

Warmer winters: the central estimate of the increase in average daily winter temperature in

the 2080s is between 2.6°C and 3.6°C, depending on the emission scenario;

Drier summers: the central estimate of the decrease in summer precipitation is between -13%

and -25%, depending on the emission scenario; and

Wetter winters: the central estimate of the increase in winter precipitation is between +15%

and +25%, depending on the emissions scenario.

For relative mean sea level rise along the Lincolnshire coast, the central estimate is 48cm and 58cm, for the

medium and high emission scenarios respectively, for 2100 (Lowe et al., 2009). However, there is

considerable uncertainty about the magnitude of mean sea level rise. Based on the scientific uncertainties

Summary Report


incorporated in the UKCP09 projections, mean relative sea level rise is unlikely to exceed 90cm by 2100.

Changes in storm surge height (separate to mean sea level rise) are also highly uncertain; the UKCP09

projections show a slight reduction, but the outputs of other international climate models show an increase.

The current Defra allowance for sea level rise for the Lincolnshire coast is 113cm.

Flood modelling and mapping

The flood modelling and mapping has been restricted to flooding from the sea and estuaries (tidal flooding)

and does not take into account other forms of flooding such as that from rivers. The potential impact and

consequences of a major tidal flood event (such as the tidal flooding that occurred in 1953) forms the largest

type of flood risk to human life, property and agricultural land in the Study Area.

The flood hazard data used in this Study was commissioned by the Environment Agency and produced by

independent consultants. The data was created using state of the art hydrodynamic 2D computer-based

modelling which was developed to simulate the impact of an extreme tidal storm event in the North Sea on

the coastal areas of Lincolnshire. The models enable us to gain a realistic understanding on how tidal flood

waters could behave in relation to defences and the land behind defences. These new datasets therefore

provide more information than the Environment Agency’s Flood Zones which only show the undefended

floodplain i.e. modelled without defences intact.

The modelling includes flooding due to overtopping and breaching of flood defences. During an overtopping

event the defence holds but water flows over the top. During a breach event, a section of the defence fails,

allowing the tidal flood waters to pass through a gap in the defence unimpeded. The crest (height) of the

defences used in all modelling scenarios was based on present levels, despite the draft SMP policy,

because the breach results would be similar whatever the defence standard of protection given the

assumption of a breach occurring (see below). Each breach was simulated individually. The width of the

breach was dependant on the type and location of the defence. It was assumed that 72 hours would lapse

before the breach could be sealed. To be able to assess the impact of a breach anywhere along the coastal

defences, breaches were simulated at regular intervals.

Risk is a function of the probability of an event occurring and the consequences of that event. Risk can

therefore be reduced by decreasing the probability of occurrence or decreasing the consequence. The

controllable element of the probability of a flood occurring landward of a defence depends largely on the

presence, position, and height of the defence (as well as its strength, which is particularly important for

breaches).

The probability of a breach event is difficult to determine, although overtopping will promote breaching. The

modelling therefore only assesses the consequence of breaches and no assessment of the probability of a

breach occurring has been included. This is a significant assumption, but is based on the precautionary

principle, in the absence of information regarding breach probability. The Environment Agency is

undertaking further work on this, and it is recommended that the findings of the Coastal Study are re-

evaluated in the light of this work when it is published.

Two return periods were modelled: the 1 in 200 and 1 in 1000 year events. This was undertaken for the

‘present’ day (2006 baseline) and 2115 (the year to which the final Defra sea level allowances relate). The

modelling commissioned by the Environment Agency for 2115 is based on a sea level rise of 113cm. Given

the uncertainties in sea level rise, two alternative rises in sea level (55 cm and 160cm) were modelled as

part of the Coastal Study using simple interpolation and extrapolation techniques.

The tidal flood maps illustrate the hazard due to flooding. The definition of flood hazard zones used in this

project follows the definition used by Defra and the Environment Agency. The classification is split into four

categories, defined by the depth and velocity of flood waters and the related ability of people to evacuate the

area once a flood occurs (Defra and Environment Agency, 2008). The ‘white’ zone (little or no hazard) has

been added for the purposes of this project. See Table 2 for a description of the flood hazard zones.

Summary Report


A single overall flood hazard map has been produced for the Study for reference with the Principles (see

Figure 1). This map only relates to breaching (which is generally more severe than overtopping) and is

supplemented by data from South Holland District Council’s Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (SFRA) in the

area of the tidal Welland.

Table 2 – Flood hazard classification used in the Lincolnshire Coastal Study

Degree of coastal flood hazard

Hazard Rating

Colour on mapping

Description of flood water

Description of hazard

None Little or no

hazard White

Outside of flood extent produced by model

Little or no hazard (from coastal flooding)

Low Low Hazard Green Shallow flowing or

deep standing water Caution, low risk to people

Moderate Danger to

some Yellow

Fast flowing or deep standing water

Risk to the vulnerable, such as children, the elderly and

the infirm

Significant Danger for

most Orange

Fast flowing and deep water with some debris

Risk to most, including the general public

Extreme Danger for all Red Fast flowing deep

water with significant debris

Extreme hazard, danger to all, including the

emergency services

Source: Defra and Environment Agency, 2008

Tasks 3 and 4: Principles and Options

In Tasks 3 and 4, a series of Principles to guide spatial development and Options for new development in the

Study Area, taking into account flood hazard, were developed and evaluated using the sustainability

framework developed in Task 1. Tasks 3 and 4 ran concurrently as development and refinement of the

Principles and Options was an iterative process.

The Principles and Options were generated through a series of workshops with the project Steering Group,

Technical Group, elected members and technical stakeholders. Participants were presented with baseline

socio-economic and environmental information (from Task 1) and the flood hazard maps (developed in Task

2) and asked to identify Principles and Options for sustainable spatial development of the Lincolnshire coast.

The output of the workshops was a long list of potential Principles and Options which have been refined

through discussion with the project Steering Group, technical stakeholders and sustainability appraisal.

Summary Report


Figure 1 – Residual coastal flood hazard map

Summary Report


Principles

The Principles provide a set of strategic aims for spatial development that apply across the Study Area (see

Box 1).

Principles 1 and 2 deal explicitly with two approaches to reducing the risks associated with flooding:

Managing the level of development in hazardous locations; and

Mitigating the consequences of flooding.

The Study is also concerned with the full range of sustainability issues, of which flood risk is one important

part. Therefore, Principle 3 is focussed on improving socio-economic and environmental conditions in the

Study Area through spatial planning.

There are a number of terms used in the Principles (those underlined in Box 1) which have the following

specific definitions:

Residual flood risk

Residual flood risk is based on the following assumptions:

Use of a 1 in 200 year return period event (0.5% annual probability event, APE);

Use of Defra’s guidance of October 2006 on sea level rise, which for the Lincolnshire Coast

is a 1.13m rise in mean relative sea level between 2006 and 2115;

Modelling based on breaches of defences occurring as indicated (i.e. 100% defence failure

probability at the 1 in 200 year water level). This takes a precautionary view; and

Use of modelling based on existing defences (despite the SMP policy, although the breach

results would be similar whatever the defence standard of protection because they assume

failure).

Flood hazard

The definition of flood hazard zones used in this project (see Figure 3.1), follows the definition used by Defra

and the Environment Agency, and is described above (see Table 2).

Major development

For the purpose of the Study, the definition of major development follows the Town & Country Planning

(General Development Procedure) Order 1995 (as amended).

Local housing needs

Local housing needs are those required to meet the housing needs of existing communities and should

include a mixture of open market and affordable housing (as defined by Annex B of PPS3).

Emergency planning

Emergency planning can be used to reduce the consequence of flooding. There are three phases to

emergency planning (UK Resilience):

Emergency preparedness

Emergency response - the decisions and actions taken to deal with the immediate effects of

an emergency

Recovery - the process of rebuilding, restoring and rehabilitating the community following an

emergency

Summary Report


Options

Six options for strategic spatial development in the Study Area have been identified and developed. In order

to be consistent with Principle 1, the delivery of the Options that involve large scale development would be

outside the red, orange and yellow flood hazard zones. The Options are:

Option 1 - New development in larger settlements

Option 2 - New settlement

Option 3 - Development in the smaller settlements

Option 4 - Network of inter related service centres

Option 5 - No development in the Study Area

Option 6 - Business as usual.

Sustainability assessment

The Principles and Options were evaluated based on the SA framework developed in Task 1.

The Principles are found to be broadly compatible with the sustainability objectives. However, there is still a

potential conflict involving Principle 1 as it will create restrictions on where housing can be located and the

Options for housing might not be ideal from a traditional housing needs perspective. Based on the draft

compatibility assessment, some alterations have been made to Principle 3 to state the need for focus on

deprived areas, and to reflect the importance of natural, cultural and historic assets.

An appraisal of the Options against the sustainability objectives has been undertaken. The assessment

results show that Option 1, which promotes development in larger settlements, is the most sustainable option

overall. Option 1 delivers significant positive effects across social, environmental and economic

Sustainability Appraisal objectives by allowing for a larger scale development that can deliver a range of

housing types, including affordable housing, in proximity to the key services and facilities and minimising the

potential greenfield land take compared to the other options. However, Option 1 would limit housing growth

in Mablethorpe, Skegness and Boston, towns in which such growth would be expected. This could

exacerbate existing issues, in terms of supporting current employment locations, economic diversification

and with regards to social exclusion and inequality. This is a particular issue for Boston given its sub-

regional status, and the distance between it and areas better suited to significant housing development.

Option 2 relating to a new settlement is the second most sustainable option overall although it is expected to

result in more significant negative effects against the environmental objectives. This option also presents

problems for existing communities especially as a single new settlement will be detached from most existing

communities given the size of the Study Area.

Options 3 and 4 do not perform so favourably in sustainability terms due to the more dispersed nature of

development across smaller settlements, involving greenfield land take, inefficiency of resource use and

locating people in places remote from key services and facilities. Although these options also present

problems for existing communities, they are potentially less significant if new growth could be located close

by.

As the location and type of the development under Option 5 is not known, there is a high level of uncertainty

associated with the scoring assigned for all the environmental objectives. However, significant negative

social effects can be expected under Option 5.

Option 6 is the least sustainable option overall as significant negative effects are predicted across most of

the objectives and even if some objectives (housing, social exclusion, use of resources) may see minor

positive effects under this option in the short term, this is likely to worsen in the medium to longer term, as

flood risk increases over time, potentially leading to severe consequences to both people and material

assets when flooding occurs.

Summary Report


Box 1 Lincolnshire Coastal Study Principles

The Study follows the current draft Shoreline Management Plan policies in relation to the line and standard of

protection of coastal flood defences. The Study is therefore concerned with residual flood risk.

The primary principle is to increase the safety of people by reducing the number of people at risk of flood

hazard in the Study Area.

Principle 1

Development will be guided by the level of flood hazard.

With respect to the red, orange and yellow zones:

Major development will be employment or business related only;

Exceptionally, development to meet local housing needs may continue subject to the mitigation of flood

risk through flood resilient design and emergency planning;

It will not be appropriate for housing development in the red, orange and yellow zones to contribute to

meeting the Region’s strategic housing requirements. Rather, any new housing development should be of

a level and type designed to keep the population in these zones broadly stable.

With respect to the green zone:

Exceptionally, major development may be possible so long as flood risk is mitigated through flood

resilient design and emergency planning.

With respect to all flood hazard zones:

New and replacement community buildings may be permitted subject to flood risk being mitigated through

flood resilient design and emergency planning;

New caravan sites or extensions to existing sites may be allowed for short-let tourist use between the

months of April and September subject to the mitigation of flood risk through flood resilient design and

emergency planning;

Development of buildings and infrastructure explicitly for use in emergencies may be permitted subject to

flood risk being mitigated through flood resilient design.

Principle 2

The consequence of flooding for people in all flood hazard zones will, over time, be reduced by:

The installation of flood resilience measures in domestic and public buildings, caravan sites and for

essential infrastructure;

Improving emergency planning and emergency response and evacuation arrangements;

Improving public awareness and understanding of flood risk and responses.

Principle 3

Development decisions will aim to improve social, economic and environmental conditions in existing and new

communities by:

Minimising the loss of high quality agricultural land;

Diversifying the tourism industry;

Improving green infrastructure;

Protecting and enhancing water infrastructure;

Protecting natural, cultural and historic assets;

Improving transport infrastructure and services;

Improving the quality of existing housing stock and access to jobs, training and services for local people.

There will be a particular focus on more deprived areas.

Summary Report


Task 5: Delivery In Task 5 delivery of the Principles and Options has been considered through a series of potential delivery

mechanisms. Detailed information about actors, timing, funding requirements, policy requirements and

potential barriers to delivery has been collated and presented for each of the Options and delivery

mechanisms.

Delivery of Principle 1

According to the Principle 1, major housing development will largely be delivered outside the red, orange and

yellow flood hazard zones through the choice of Option or combination of Options. Major housing

development may be permitted in the green zone, subject to flood resilient design and emergency planning.

Other types of development, including housing to meet local housing needs, employment and business

related development, community infrastructure and buildings for use in emergencies, may be permitted in the

red, orange and yellow zones, subject to mitigation of flood risk through resilient design and emergency

planning.

The key to delivery of buildings in the flood hazard zones is therefore the implementation of resilience and

emergency planning measures appropriate to the particular hazard zone and type of development. Some

guidance on flood resilient design and emergency planning in the different flood hazard zones is given in the

Task 5 report although it is recommended that more detailed Design Guidance for development on the

Lincolnshire coast is developed further to this project and that emergency plans are tailored to the flood

hazard zones.

The main actors likely to be responsible for delivering the Options are similar regardless of the choice of

Options. Local authorities, regional bodies and private sector companies are likely to be central to the

delivery of the Options, supported by national government in policy making and possible funding. Whilst

there are existing plans and policies in the Study Area concerned with new development, the review of the

RSS will start the Local Development Framework (LDF) process for the Local Planning Authorities and as

such existing policy for delivering the Options will need to be reviewed. In order to meet the timescales of the

LDFs and RSS the choice of Options would need to be delivered in the short term.

Delivery of Principles 2 and 3

Principle 2 is concerned with reducing risk to people in all flood hazard zones through emergency planning

and flood resilience measures. Potential delivery mechanisms for Principles 2 include:

Including local flood risk issues in the school curriculum;

Buy and rent back schemes;

Grants to enable homeowners in the red, orange and yellow zones to prepare for flood

emergencies;

Installing flood resilience and resistance measures in the green zone;

Including a policy to allow change of use of buildings to non-critical uses in the red, orange

and yellow zone in the RSS;

Introducing and enforcing occupancy criteria in holiday and caravan sites;

Including information about flood risk and emergency preparedness measures in HIPs and

other documents given to new home owners / tenants and asking people to sign a

declaration of understanding;

Including information on flood risk and emergency response procedures to tourists (e.g. in

hotel guest info packs, on the back of accommodation doors etc);

Summary Report


Undertaking risk assessments for critical infrastructure and fitting resilience measures or

making plans to relocate assets where appropriate;

Linking flood awareness raising to Cultural Strategies;

Setting up a 'flood friends' campaign; and

Using more visible communications methods e.g. roadshows.

Principle 3 is concerned with improving wider socio-economic conditions in the Study Area. Potential delivery

mechanisms for Principles 2 include:

Raising national awareness of strategic importance of agricultural land and food processing

in Lincolnshire;

Including a policy on minimising loss of high grade agricultural land in the RSS;

Using developer contributions to fund green infrastructure;

Marketing alternative tourist offering e.g. heritage based tourism, local food based tourism,

eco tourism etc;

Providing improved or new public transport services; and

Lobbying national government for increased funding for regeneration in the flood hazard

zone.

A wide range of potential actors in the delivery of Principles 2 and 3 have been identified including national

government and government agencies, regional government and organisations, local authorities and private

sector businesses. There may be a role for the Lincolnshire Pathfinder project in the delivery of a number of

Principle 2 mechanisms. Some of the proposed delivery mechanisms for Principle 2 and 3 are likely to

require significant new sources of funding but many involve relatively small amounts of investment and could

be delivered in the short term, e.g.

Including flood risk issues in school curriculum;

Linking flood awareness to Cultural Strategies;

Setting up a 'flood friends' campaign;

Using more visible communications methods;

Raising national awareness of strategic importance of agriculture in Lincolnshire;

Including policy on minimising loss of high grade agricultural land in RSS;

Marketing alternative tourist offering; and

Lobbying national government for increased funding for regeneration.

Existing plans and policies are able to deliver many of the Principle 2 and 3 delivery mechanisms, although

some may require updating. Gaps in national policy have been identified, in particular relating to situations

such as in Lincolnshire where there is likely to be significant changes in residual flood risk, rather than

physical changes to the shoreline. Local policy making is required to translate the final RSS policies into

LDFs and Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Charging Schedules need to be prepared.

A number of potential socio-economic and environmental impacts of the Principle 2 and 3 delivery

mechanisms are highlighted. At this stage, the delivery mechanisms have been described at a strategic level

and are not specific to places or contexts. Before implementing these mechanisms, it is recommended that

further work to assess and mitigate these impacts should be carried out.

Summary Report


Next steps The Lincolnshire Coastal Study forms part of the evidence base for the review of the East Midlands RSS.

The findings of the Study have been taken into account particularly in the development of draft Policy 5.

The East Midlands Regional Assembly (EMRA) submitted a Draft Revised Regional Plan to the Secretary of

State on 26 March 2010. The Plan will be subject to an Examination in Public (EiP) later in 2010.

Further work

A number of recommendations for further work have been made as a result of the Lincolnshire Coastal

Study, including:

More detailed design guidance for development on the Lincolnshire coast;

Emergency planning tailored to the different hazard zones; and

Further consideration of the socio-economic impacts of implementing some of the Principle 2

and 3 delivery mechanisms.

Some wider issues have also been identified through the Lincolnshire Coastal Study:

Dominant paradigms in spatial planning may not be appropriate in the Study Area e.g.

- Population growth is required to deliver regeneration;

- Prioritisation of brownfield land over greenfield; and

- Preference for mixed use developments where people live close to where they work;

How to deliver mechanisms in the flood hazard zones without new development to contribute

to funding;

The scale of national funding required for delivery of the mechanisms; and

The need for national planning policy that addresses residual tidal flood risk.

The organisations that comprised the Lincolnshire Coastal Study project Steering Group are likely to remain

as a group to take forward the findings of the Lincolnshire Coastal Study and investigate what further work is

required in the area. The membership and remit of this group are yet to be determined although some

organisations have already committed to further work in the Study Area.

Summary Report


References CLG 2006. Planning Policy Statement 3 (PPS3): Housing. CLG, London.

Defra and EA. 2008. Supplementary note on flood hazard ratings and thresholds for development planning

and control purpose – Clarification of the table 13.1 of FD2320/TR2 and Figure 3.2 of FD2321/TR1.,

Environment Agency and HR Wallingford.

Environment Agency 2004. River Witham Catchment Abstraction Management Strategy. Environment

Agency, Peterborough

Environment Agency 2006. The Grimsby, Ancholme and Louth Catchment Abstraction Management

Strategy. Environment Agency, Peterborough

Environment Agency 2007. The Welland Catchment Abstraction Management Strategy. Environment

Agency, Peterborough

GOEM, 2009 Government Office for the East Midlands, 2009. East Midlands Regional Plan. Norwich, The

Stationary Office.

Haines-Young, R.H. 2007. Tracking Change in the Character of the English Landscape 1999 – 2003. Natural

England, Peterborough

Hulme, M., Jenkins, G.J., Lu, X., Turnpenny, J.R., Mitchell, T.D., Jones, R.G., Lowe, J., Murphy, J.M.,

Hassell, D., Boorman, P., McDonald, R. and Hill, S. 2002. Climate change scenarios for the United Kingdom:

the UKCIP02 Scientific report, UKCIP, Oxford

Lowe, J. A., Howard, T., Pardaens, A., Tinker, J., Holt, J., Wakelin, S., Milne, G., Leake, J., Wolf, J.,

Horsburgh, K., Reeder, T., Jenkins, G., Ridley, J., Dye, S., Bradley, S. (2009), UK Climate Projections

science report: Marine and coastal projections. Met Office Hadley Centre, Exeter, UK

Murphy, J. M., Sexton, D. M. H., Jenkins, G. J., Booth, B. B. B., Brown, C. C., Clark, R. T., Collins, M.,

Harris, G. R., Kendon, E. J., Betts, R. A., Brown, S. J., Humphrey, K. A., McCarthy, M. P.,McDonald, R. E.,

Stephens, A., Wallace, C., Warren, R., Wilby, R. and Wood, R. A. 2009. UK Climate Projections Science

Report: Climate change projections. Met Office Hadley Centre, Exeter.

lincolnshire coastal study - east lindsey

Documents