water framework directive screening report 1 wfd... · section 1 cell 1 wfd screening report_final...

C E L L 1 S M P 2 A C T I O N P L A N S S E A A N D W F D

Water Framework Directive Screening Report

Prepared for

Scarborough Borough Council

August 2015

Park House Headingley Office Park 8 Victoria Road Leeds LS6 1PF

LEFT HEADER

II CELL 1 WFD SCREENING REPORT_FINAL

Document History This document has been issued and amended as follows:

Version Date Description Created by Verified by Approved by

1.0 August 2015

Draft for client comment Caroline Frost Corinna Morgan Andy Parsons

1.1 August 2015

Final draft for client sign off Caroline Frost Caroline Frost Andy Parsons

1.2 August 2015

Final for consultation Caroline Frost Caroline Frost David Robinson (SBC)

Notice: This report was prepared by Halcrow Group Ltd, a CH2M company, in accordance with the scope and instructions of Scarborough Borough Council for their sole and specific use. Any other persons or organisations who use any information contained herein do so at their own risk. In producing this report, CH2M has relied upon information provided by others. The completeness or accuracy of this information is not guaranteed by CH2M.

CELL 1 WFD SCREENING REPORT_FINAL HALCROW GROUP LTD III

Contents Section Page

Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 1‐1 1.1 Strategic Background ....................................................................................................... 1‐1 1.2 Aims of this report ........................................................................................................... 1‐1 1.3 How to Comment on this Report ..................................................................................... 1‐2

SMP2 Action Plans ........................................................................................................................... 2‐1 2.1 Shoreline Management Plans .......................................................................................... 2‐1 2.2 SMP2 Action Plans ........................................................................................................... 2‐1 2.3 Approach to Assessment ................................................................................................. 2‐2 2.4 Categorisation of Actions ................................................................................................. 2‐2

2.4.1 Asset Management and Maintenance Actions ................................................... 2‐2 2.4.2 Development Planning and Adaptation Actions ................................................. 2‐2 2.4.3 Monitoring Actions ............................................................................................. 2‐3 2.4.4 Scheme Actions ................................................................................................... 2‐3 2.4.5 Study and Investigation Actions ......................................................................... 2‐3

2.5 Screening of Actions ........................................................................................................ 2‐4

Water Framework Directive ............................................................................................................. 3‐1 3.1 Background ...................................................................................................................... 3‐1

3.1.1 Water Body Status .............................................................................................. 3‐1 3.1.2 Heavily Modified Water Bodies .......................................................................... 3‐1

3.2 WFD Objectives ................................................................................................................ 3‐2

WFD Assessment Methodology ........................................................................................................ 4‐1 4.1 Step 1 – Identify Water Bodies ........................................................................................ 4‐1 4.2 Step 2 – Define WFD Features and Issues ....................................................................... 4‐1 4.3 Step 3 ‐ Assessment against WFD Environmental Objectives ......................................... 4‐1 4.4 Step 4 – WFD Summary Statements ................................................................................ 4‐2

Baseline Data Collection ................................................................................................................... 5‐1 5.1 Identification of Water Bodies ......................................................................................... 5‐1

5.1.1 Freshwater .......................................................................................................... 5‐1 5.1.2 Groundwater ....................................................................................................... 5‐1

5.2 Scoping of water bodies................................................................................................... 5‐1

Summary of SMP2 WFD Assessments ............................................................................................... 6‐1 6.1 Northumberland to North Tyneside SMP2 WFD Assessment ......................................... 6‐1 6.2 River Tyne to Flamborough Head SMP2 WFD Assessment ............................................. 6‐1 6.3 Summary of WFD Conflicts .............................................................................................. 6‐2 6.4 WFD Mitigation Measures ............................................................................................... 6‐3 6.5 WFD Opportunities .......................................................................................................... 6‐6

Next Steps........................................................................................................................................ 7‐1

Appendices

Appendix A Figures

CONTENTS

Section Page

IV HALCROW GROUP LTD CELL 1 WFD SCREENING REPORT_FINAL

Appendix B Actions Plan Tables

Appendix C WFD Water bodies within Cell 1

Appendix D Assessment Table 1

CONTENTS

Section Page

CELL 1 WFD SCREENING REPORT_FINAL HALCROW GROUP LTD V

SECTION 1

CELL 1 WFD SCREENING REPORT_FINAL HALCROW GROUP LTD 1‐1

Introduction

1.1 Strategic Background Environmental assessment was integrated into the process of setting out policies in both the Northumberland and North Tyneside SMP2 and the River Tyne to Flamborough Head SMP2.

The River Tyne to Flamborough Head SMP2 (February 2007) was the first of the SMP reviews to have a Water Framework Directive (WFD) assessment undertaken in line with guidance prepared by the Environment Agency. However, as the policy options had already been set for this SMP2, the assessment of the policies in relation to the WFD was retrospective. It was therefore not practicable to influence the SMP2 policy development or consider opportunities for delivering mitigation measures from the RBMP, which is a statutory document. Given the above, the retrospective WFD assessment noted that the SMP2 policy options could be challenged and may need further assessment against the WFD. A summary of the River Tyne to Flamborough Head SMP2 WFD assessment is presented in Section 6.1.

Consequently, it was proposed that a WFD assessment should be undertaken on the Action Plans identified by the two SMP2s. This strategic WFD assessment across Cell 1 will enable an integrated assessment of the potential effects of implementing the Action Plans on the status of relevant water‐bodies within Cell 1. Considering effects on a cell‐wide basis provides the opportunity to identify potential adverse and beneficial cumulative effects across Cell 1. This could feed back into modifying a particular action to minimise potential adverse effects or maximise environmental or economic benefits. In addition the project will aim to identify whether additional actions or modifications to existing actions can contribute to RBMP measures.

A WFD assessment was undertaken of the Northumberland and North Tyneside SMP2 in 2009. A summary of this WFD assessment is presented in Section 6.1.

It is acknowledged that further WFD assessment will remain a requirement when undertaking actions in the Action Plans such as a strategic study or project level assessment given that further detail of proposed measures would be available at that stage. However, this study enables a high level consideration of the potential effects of the implementation of actions defined in the Action Plans at the scale of the water‐body with the aim of reaching agreement in principle regarding overall implications of coastal management actions under the WFD. This should facilitate undertaking WFD assessment for a strategic study or project recommended in the Action Plans, in that the assessment can be undertaken within the hierarchy of strategic level WFD assessment.

1.2 Aims of this report This initial WFD screening assessment aims to set out the requirements of the WFD, identify the relevant objectives, environmental baseline and Programme of Measures within the Northumbria District RBMP, the Humber RBMP and Solway Tweed RBMP that are relevant to Cell 1. The screening exercise will also identify those waterbodies where there is a risk of legal challenge in terms of meeting the requirements of the WFD, should the actions in the Action Plans be implemented.

The screening assessment is presented in this WFD screening report, identifying WFD water‐bodies that have the potential to be affected by the Action Plans and setting out the approach to the WFD assessment. This screening report has been issued to the Environment Agency and Natural England for consultation.

SECTION 1 – INTRODUCTION

1‐2 HALCROW GROUP LTD CELL 1 WFD SCREENING REPORT_FINAL

1.3 How to Comment on this Report We welcome your views on the content of this WFD screening report.

Any responses should be submitted by Friday 2nd October 2015 to Mr. David Robinson, Scarborough Borough Council, Town Hall, St. Nicholas Street, Scarborough, North Yorkshire. YO11 2HG.

Or emailed to: [email protected]

SECTION 2


SMP2 Action Plans

2.1 Shoreline Management Plans Shoreline Management Plans (SMP) divide the 6,000 mile shoreline of England & Wales into eleven coastal cells and sub cells defined by coastal type and processes such as the movement of beach and seabed sediment (sand, shingle, etc.) within and between them. The north east coast of England lies within Cell 1 and includes the coastline from the Scottish Border to Flamborough Head, which covers approximately 300km.

This stretch of coastline is covered by two SMPs;

Northumberland and North Tyneside SMP2 (May 2009)

River Tyne to Flamborough Head SMP2 (February 2007)

Each SMP area is divided into Policy Development Zones (PDZ), which in turn are divided into Policy Units (PU). The PU’s have a generic coastal management policy assigned to them based upon the generic policies set by Defra. These generic policies are:

No active intervention (NAI): a decision not to invest in providing or maintaining defences.

Hold the line (HTL): maintain or change the level of protection provided by defences. This would include work or operations carried out in front of the existing defences or where, while maintaining existing defences, policies involve operations to the back of defences (such as secondary flood defences) as an essential part of maintaining the current defence system.

Advance the line (ATL): build new defences seaward of the existing defence line where significant land reclamation is considered.

Managed realignment (MR): by allowing the shoreline to move backwards or forwards with management to limit or control change.

The preferred policy identified for each PU describes how that section of coast should be managed over the life time of the SMP. However, as there may be dependencies between Policy Units (to justify a policy of retreat in one area may be on the assumption that an adjacent section of coast is held) it is equally important to group policy units where there is this dependency. Such groups of policy units are defined as Management Areas (MA). Figure 1.1 in Appendix A presents the PDZs and MAs for the Cell 1 frontage.

SMPs consider objectives, policy setting and management requirements for 3 main epochs; from the present day, medium‐term and long‐term, corresponding broadly to time periods of 0 to 20 years, 20 to 50 years and 50 to 100 years respectively (i.e. from now to 2025 (short term), from 2025 to 2055 (medium term) and from 2055 to 2105 (long term)). It should be noted that as strategies and the SMP policies are subject to review at least every ten years, so the current policies selected in the SMPs are not ‘fixed’ for the next 100 years.

2.2 SMP2 Action Plans Action Plans for Cell 1 have been produced and are presented in each of the two SMP2 documents. The Action Plans summarise the actions that are required to implement the policies of the SMP2 within each Management Area.

SECTION 2 – SMP2 ACTION PLANS


2.3 Approach to Assessment Given the uncertainty in implementation of the actions in the Northumberland to North Tyneside SMP2 and the Tyneside to Flamborough Head SMP2 in future epochs, as they are likely to be less well formulated, subject to funding constraints and have more uncertainty surrounding them, the actions to be undertaken beyond 2020/21 have been screened out of requiring assessment at the present time. This approach avoids the risk of considering those actions, which may be removed or slightly changed as part of any potential future SMP2 review process. It also ensures that when the effects of the actions on the water bodies are assessed, the assessments are based upon the most recent data and current understanding of coastal processes rather than data which could be out of date by the time the action is implemented.

As the actions in the SMPs include the production of strategies, appraisals, plans and schemes, which will each have their own associated WFD assessments at an appropriate level of detail, it is intended that this WFD screening assessment focuses on a high‐level assessment of the Action Plans, with emphasis on the recommendations to inform future Flood and Coastal Erosion Risk Management (FCERM) activities.

2.4 Categorisation of Actions A review of the SMP2 Action Plans has been undertaken to understand the type, location and proposed year of implementation of the actions. To assist in the screening and assessment of the actions, they have been categorised as follows:

Asset Management and Maintenance

Development Planning and Adaptation

Monitoring

Scheme

Study and Investigation

Tables are presented in Appendix B for each type of action.

2.4.1 Asset Management and Maintenance Actions In many locations along the Cell 1 coastline, there are structures that contribute to providing flood and coastal erosion risk management. We have used the term asset for these FCERM structures. The actions in this category relate to existing assets that require maintaining or sustaining for coastal protection purposes and take the form of refurbishment or repairs to the structures. Due to climate change, some defence assets require improvement works to ensure the current level of protection offered is sustained over time as a result of rising sea levels. Maintenance of existing assets is often ongoing throughout the lifetime of the SMP.

2.4.2 Development Planning and Adaptation Actions This category of non‐structural actions includes the production and review of strategies, plans and appraisals. This can range from strategies for structural coastal defences to management plans for conserving natural habitats (including dune and beach management plans).

Land use planning is included in this category, which can form an important aspect of adaptation to coastal processes for communities along the coastline. Also included in this category are those actions which in future epochs of the SMP will become schemes; this typically includes planning for future MR



schemes and the relocation of other built assets (e.g.caravan parks, golf courses, access steps, car parks, footpaths, roads and buildings) that are at risk of coastal erosion.

Not all of the actions categorised as “Development Planning and Adaptation” will be considered in the WFD assessment because either their timeframe extends beyond 2020 and/or due to the nature of the action, they are not anticipated to cause environmental impacts. This includes actions related to governance (i.e. ensuring that schemes are included in the relevant budgets and communicating the SMP to communities).

2.4.3 Monitoring Actions Those actions categorised as monitoring generally apply to more than one MA. Monitoring is an important part of bettering our understanding of coastal process and future trends and therefore it is imperative that they are included in the SMP2 action plans. However, as the actions relating to monitoring are typically non‐intrusive and do not leave permanent impacts (or at least over any geographical area that would be considered significant) this category of actions has been screened out of requiring WFD assessment.

2.4.4 Scheme Actions The actions in this category have the greatest likelihood of causing environmental impacts as they typically involve flood and coastal defence schemes, which by their nature, have the potential to affect water bodies. Schemes will often be the result of outcomes from existing strategies and thus are typically to be implemented (i.e. constructed) within the timeframe of the current SMP2 (i.e. within the first 10 years).

Following the identification of the status of the actions, those schemes that have already been constructed or are currently under construction (i.e. for which a WFD assessment has already been produced if required) will be screened out of further assessment.

2.4.5 Study and Investigation Actions As with actions related to monitoring, studies and investigations are generally considered to be non‐intrusive and by their nature do not have any permanent or direct environment impacts. The studies usually involve the gathering of baseline information and the investigations are typically to determine how something will be achieved.

However, there are several locations within the Tyneside to Flamborough Head SMP2 area where the actions under this category include investigations of contamination at several locations along the coast. To summarise these include:

Marsden Bay (MA04)

Harbour Quarry (MA05)

Halliwell Banks (MA08)

Dawdon beach (MA09)

Whilst investigations into contaminated land may be intrusive and have the potential to pose a risk to the water environment depending upon the nature and location of the investigations, it is considered that through implementation of best practice measures any potential risks to the water environment can be managed appropriately and these actions have also been screened out.

The investigations in these locations are necessary as these areas are at flood or coastal erosion risk, which has the potential to cause pollution. The risk may be realised where the SMP2 policy in these



locations is NAI (or MR). The environmental impacts of this risk has been considered as part of the SEA of the SMP2 and is not considered further in this assessment.

2.5 Screening of Actions Table 2.1 summarises the actions by type that have been scoped into (shaded in green) and out (shaded orange) of the WFD assessment.

Through further consultation the status of the actions will be determined and those completed actions will not be considered further in the WFD Assessment. As discussed in Section 2.3, those actions due to be undertaken beyond 2020/21 have been screened out of requiring assessment at the present time.

Table 2.1. Summary of Actions from Action Plans.

Category Northumberland and North Tyneside SMP2

River Tyne to Flamborough Head

Asset Management and Maintenance

Actions not yet undertaken andscheduled to start by 2020/2021 screened in

Actions not yet undertaken and scheduled to start by 2020/2021 screened in

Development Planning and Adaptation



Monitoring All actions screened out All actions screened out

Schemes Actions not yet undertaken and scheduled to start by 2020/2021 screened in


Study and Investigation All actions screened out All actions screened out

SECTION 3


Water Framework Directive

3.1 Background The EU WFD was transposed into law in England by the Water Environment (Water Framework Directive) (England and Wales) Regulations 2003. The WFD (2000) needs to be taken into account in the planning of all new activities in the water environment and applies to all water bodies, such as lakes, ground water, rivers, estuaries (transitional) and coastal water bodies. Therefore, the Environment Agency (the competent authority in England responsible for delivering the WFD) has recommended that decisions setting policy, including large‐scale plans such as SMPs, take account of the requirements of the Directive.

For coastal water bodies the sea from the mean low water mark up to 1 nautical mile from shore is protected under the WFD, which requires that a licensed project or activity does not ‘cause deterioration in a water body’. For licence applications in this zone, the Marine Management Organisation (MMO) must make sure that the marine licence decision is compatible with the WFD and any RBMP. For all other waterbodies in England the Environment Agency is responsible for ensuring any environmental permits are compatible with the WFD. In Scotland this role is undertaken by the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA).

The framework for delivering the WFD in England is presented in a River Basin Management Plan (RBMP) produced for each River Basin District (RBD). The majority of the Cell 1 area is located within the Northumbrian RBD and the Humber RBD with a small area north of the Berwick‐upon Tweed being located within the Solway Tweed RBD (the majority of which is located within Scotland). The classification of water bodies along with environmental objectives, specific actions (mitigation measures) necessary to enable each water body to meet these objectives, are set out in the Northumbria, the Humber and the Solway Tweed RBMPs.

3.1.1 Water Body Status WFD introduced a new system for monitoring and classifying the quality of surface and ground waters. The process involves establishing the existing status of all designated groundwater and surface waters, setting environmental objectives and devising programmes of measures to meet those objectives. For each water body, three different status objectives are identified. These are the overall status objective, the ecological status or potential objective and the chemical status objective.

The WFD sets a target of aiming to achieve at least “good status” in all waters. Ecological status is measured on the scale: high, good, moderate, poor and bad. Chemical status is recorded as good or fail. For a surface water body to be in overall “good” status or potential, both its ecological and chemical status must be at least “good”.

The ecological status of a water body is determined through analysis of its constituent biological quality elements (BQE) (which for coastal water bodies includes fish, phytoplankton, macrophytes, and benthic invertebrates). These elements are in turn supported by a series of physico‐chemical and hydromorphological quality elements. The overall ecological status is determined by the lowest element status.

3.1.2 Heavily Modified Water Bodies Whilst good ecological status (GES) is defined as a slight variation from undisturbed natural conditions in natural water bodies, water bodies that are designated in the RBMP as Heavily Modified Water Bodies

SECTION 3 – WATER FRAMEWORK DIRECTIVE


(HMWB) may be prevented from reaching good ecological status by the physical modifications for which they are designated (e.g. navigation, flood defence, urbanisation). Instead, they have a target to achieve good ecological potential (GEP), through implementation of a series of mitigation measures outlined in the applicable RBMP.

These mitigation measures are necessary to reduce the existing hydromorphological impacts on the water body and all measures need to be in place in order for the water body to achieve GEP.

3.2 WFD Objectives For all water bodies, the Directive sets default environmental objectives as summarised in Table 3.1. In order to achieve these environmental objectives where not already met in a water body, appropriate mitigation measures are identified in the RBMP, aimed at returning the water body to at least good status (or at least good potential if the water body has been identified as an artificial or heavily modified water body (AWB, HMWB).

Table 3.1 Environmental Objectives of the WFD

Objectives (taken from Article 4 of the Directive) Reference Article

Implement the necessary measures to prevent deterioration of the status of all bodies of surface water.

4.1(a)(i)

Protect, enhance and restore all bodies of surface water, subject to the application of subparagraph (iii) for artificial and heavily modified bodies of water, with the aim of achieving good surface water status by 2015.

4.1(a)(ii)

Protect and enhance all artificial and heavily modified bodies of water, with the aim of achieving good ecological potential and good surface water chemical status by 2015.

4.1(a)(iii)

Progressively reduce pollution from priority substances and cease or phase out emissions, discharges and losses of priority hazardous substances.

4.1(a)(iv)

Prevent ‘deterioration in status’ and prevent or limit input of pollutants to groundwater.

4.1(b)(i)

New activities and actions that affect the water environment have the potential to adversely impact biological conditions either directly or indirectly by changing the supporting hydromorphological, physico‐chemical and/or chemical ‘quality elements’, which might lead to the deterioration in water body status or potential. They may also obstruct other improvement measures such that the water body cannot meet its WFD objective of good ecological status/ potential.

Where there are water‐dependent sites protected under other EU legislation, such as the Birds, Habitats or Bathing Water Directives, the WFD terms these “protected areas” and requires compliance with any relevant standards or objectives from those Directives. Therefore, if a designation requires more stringent quality standards than are required to achieve good ecological status/potential under the WFD, those more stringent standards must also be met.

SECTION 4


WFD Assessment Methodology The methodology for WFD assessment of SMPs is provided in the Environment Agency Guidance, Water Framework Directive: step by step process for assessing Shoreline Management Plans, 82_09 (March 2009). This methodology has been produced for assessing the impacts of SMP policies upon water bodies which has already been undertaken for both SMPs. Whilst this methodology may not be strictly applicable to assessing the Action Plans of the SMP2 it has been used as a framework for the approach to the assessment.

4.1 Step 1 – Identify Water Bodies This step involves identifying the waterbodies that could potentially be affected and identifying any boundary issues. Issues related to the SMP Management Area (MA) and Policy Unit (PU) boundaries and water body boundaries have been documented in the two SMP2 documents.

An initial data collation exercise has been undertaken for this screening assessment to identify the transitional and coastal (TraC) water bodies relevant to the Cell 1 frontage, as well as river water bodies discharging into them and any groundwater bodies underlying the coastal zone. The waterbodies are presented in Appendix C and described further in Section 6. Non‐TraC water bodies are relevant if the SMP2 Action Plans include actions that might impact on their hydromorphological features or ecological features, e.g. new shoreline defences may alter the interactions between a coastal water body and the lower part of a river water body that discharges into it. Further data on the screened in water bodies will be presented in the WFD assessment.

4.2 Step 2 – Define WFD Features and Issues For all water bodies that have been identified as relevant in Step 1, the hydromorphological factors that could be affected, leading to an impact on the WFD BQEs are then identified. This was undertaken as part of the SMP2 WFD assessments and presented in “Assessment Table 1” in accordance with Environment Agency guidance. These tables have been reproduced in the Tables in Appendix D.

The information presented in Assessment Table 1 is then expanded upon and presented in Assessment Table 2 in accordance with Environment Agency guidance. This has been undertaken for both SMP2 and thus has not been repeated here and the Assessment Table 2 for both SMP2s can be found within the respective WFD Assessments.

4.3 Step 3 ‐ Assessment against WFD Environmental Objectives

The WFD Assessment which will be undertaken at the next stage of the project will consider the potential changes in physical and hydromorphological processes and impacts upon the BQEs that could result from the actions in the Action Plans. This will assess the impacts against the specific WFD environmental objectives that are provided in the Environment Agency’s guidance Water Framework Directive: overview for assessing Shoreline Management Plans, 81_09 (2009);

WFD1 No changes affecting high status sites;

WFD2 No changes that will cause failure to meet surface water Good Ecological Status/Potential or result in a deterioration of surface water Ecological Status/Potential;

SECTION 4 – WFD ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY


WFD3 No changes which will permanently prevent or compromise the environmental objectives being met in other water bodies;

WFD4 No changes that will cause failure to meet good groundwater status or result in a deterioration of groundwater status.

For each Management Area, the potential changes in relevant physical and hydromorphological processes that could occur as a result of the actions within the management area will be identified and recorded in the WFD Assessment. An assessment of the cumulative effects of all the actions plans for each water body will also be undertaken.

Consideration will also be made of the potential effects on groundwater bodies screened in due to the potential for the actions to exacerbate any risk of saline intrusion into the water body.

This step will be presented in tabular format based upon Assessment Table 3 and Assessment Table 4 provided in the Environment Agency’s Guidance Water Framework Directive: step by step process for assessing Shoreline Management Plans, 82_09 (March 2009).

4.4 Step 4 – WFD Summary Statements Where it is concluded under Step 3 that any action presents a significant risk of failure to meet any of the four WFD environmental objectives, a WFD Summary Statement will be completed and presented in the WFD Assessment. This will summarise the considerations of the action that are pertinent to Article 4.7 of the WFD, specifically to:

Assess whether all appropriate mitigation measures have been included and considered;

Present evidence that the action is being promoted for reasons of over‐riding public interest;

Present evidence that no action would present an environmentally better, affordable, option for the desired outcome of the action;

Demonstrate that the effect on water bodies outside the SMP study area have been considered and that the associated WFD objective 3 would not be compromised;

Highlight any other overriding issues that should be considered.

Where environmental objectives are not met in or within close proximity to a Special Area of Conservation (SAC) or Special Protection Area (SPA), reference should be made to the potential impact of the action, recommended preventative measures and implications for the integrity of the site as recorded in the Habitats Regulations Appraisal (HRA).

SECTION 5


Baseline Data Collection

5.1 Identification of Water Bodies As part of Step 1 surface and ground water bodies have been identified from the Environment Agency’s What’s in your Backyard website http://apps.environment‐agency.gov.uk/wiyby/default.aspx and are listed in Table C1 and C2 in Appendix C. The Environment Agency published catchment classification data in the RBMPs (2009) and also provide more recent data on their Catchment Data Explorer website (http://environment.data.gov.uk/catchment‐planning/). Data is presented for each year of each WFD six yearly cycle. Cycle 1 of the RBMP runs from 2009 to 2015 and cycle 2 runs from 2015 to 2012.

5.1.1 Freshwater As identified by the WFD Assessments of the two SMP2’s (Section 6.1 and 6.2) the majority of landward freshwater bodies can be scoped out of the assessment, as the coastline is predominantly cliffed with relatively (to the sea level) steeply sloping river channels meeting the sea at a point. Thus these freshwater bodies have very little potential floodplain and most have no control structure at their lower limit. Landward recession of the mouths of these freshwater rivers (i.e. through natural processes) is not likely to impact them as water bodies in terms of the WFD. These waterbodies are listed in Table C2 in Appendix C.

Only the Northumberland to North Tyneside WFD Assessment identified a total of seven landward freshwater bodies that could be affected by SMP2 and therefore these fresh water bodies have been screened into this assessment (see Figure 5.1). These waterbodies are listed in Table C1 in Appendix C‐

5.1.2 Groundwater Groundwater bodies along the Cell 1 frontage have been identified (see Figure 5.1) and are listed in Tables C1 and C2 in Appendix C. WFD consideration of risks of saline intrusion of groundwater bodies relates in particular to the impact on water abstractions. The assessment of the actions upon the WFD groundwater objective is particularly important for those groundwater bodies which have an existing pressure of saline intrusion resulting from abstraction, which could be exacerbated by the SMP2 policy. These waterbodies are listed in Table C1 in Appendix C.

5.2 Scoping of water bodies The WFD coastal, estuarine (transitional), fresh water and groundwater bodies that are screened into the assessment are presented on Figure 5.1 in Appendix A and listed in Table C1 in Appendix C. Table C2 presents the river water bodies and groundwater bodies within the Cell 1 frontage that have been screened out.

SECTION 6


Summary of SMP2 WFD Assessments

6.1 Northumberland to North Tyneside SMP2 WFD Assessment

The assessment, undertaken in 2009 identified six coastal water bodies and six transitional water bodies. Of the transitional water bodies, all are designated as HMWB except for the Aln and the Tweed.

Six landward freshwater bodies that could be affected by SMP2 policies were identified (plus an additional tributary resulting in seven being considered). Other freshwater bodies were scoped out as the coastline is predominantly cliffed with relatively (to the sea level) steeply sloping river channels meeting the sea at a point. Thus these fresh water bodies have very little potential floodplain and most have no control structure at their lower limit.

Four groundwater bodies (GWBs) were identified, of which only one (the Northumberland Carboniferous Limestone and Coal Measures groundwater body) is assigned as being at ‘Moderate’ risk.

There is one High Status water body in the Northumberland SMP2: the Farne Islands to Newton Haven water body, which includes the stretch of coastline between Seahouses and Low Newton. Environmental Objective WFD1 states that there should be no changes affecting high status sites.

The WFD assessment concluded that for most of the Management Areas, it is considered unlikely that the policies within the Northumberland SMP2 will affect the current or target Ecological Status or Potential of water bodies and, hence, the policies meet the Environmental Objectives. The Environmental Objective WFD4 (no deterioration of groundwater status) will be met by all the water bodies within the SMP2 area. However, there are some Management Areas, where the SMP2 policies have the potential to contribute to failure of Environmental Objectives WFD1, WFD2 and WFD3.

The assessment identified that the most significant potential failure of Environmental Objectives is that required to meet Environmental Objective WFD1 (no changes affecting high status sites). There are four Management Areas (MA06, MA08, MA07 and MA09) within the SMP2, which are within the Farne Islands to Newton Haven water body. The SMP2 policy of HTL for the defence of property and assets of Beadnell village (MA08) could result in the loss of highly valuable rocky outcrop and sand foreshores.

The assessment also recommended a need for topographic surveys of Holy Island (MA04) on an annual basis and monitoring of erosion rates of the coastline around the outfall of Meggie’s Burn (MA23). Investigations were also recommended into the management options for the mouth of the Wansbeck estuary (MA21), particularly with reference to the ecological impacts of the option of removing the weir.

6.2 River Tyne to Flamborough Head SMP2 WFD Assessment

The WFD assessment of the River Tyne to Flamborough Head SMP2 provides a retrospective assessment of the policies defined under the SMP. As the assessment was retrospective it was not practicable to influence the SMP2 policy development or consider opportunities for delivering mitigation measures from the RBMP.

The scoping stage of the assessment identified four transitional and two Coastal water bodies within the SMP2 area. Groundwater bodies that could be potentially affected by SMP2 policies were identified and

SECTION 6 – SUMMARY OF SMP2 WFD ASSESSMENTS


of these those “at risk”, “probably at risk” and of “Poor Status” were identified, which resulted in three groundwater bodies being considered further.

Fresh water bodies were scoped out as there were no expected linkages between the SMP2 policies and potential consequences for landward fresh water bodies. These were mainly ruled out as the coastline is predominantly cliffed with relatively (to the sea level) steeply sloping river channels meeting the sea at a point. Thus these fresh water bodies have very little potential floodplain and most have no control structure at their lower limit. Landward recession of the mouths of these freshwater rivers is not likely to impact them as water bodies.

The WFD assessment identified that there are no High Status Water Bodies within the River Tyne to Flamborough Head SMP2 area. Hence, the WFD Objective (WFD1) of No changes affecting high status sites did not need to be considered further.

The four Biological Quality Elements (BQEs) were considered and this includes macroalgae, angiosperms, benthic/macro invertebrates and fish. Hydromorphological parameters associated with each BQE were identified and the effect of the SMP Policies upon these parameters and the BQEs established.

The WFD assessment concluded that for most Management Areas, it is considered unlikely that the policies within the River Tyne to Flamborough Head SMP2 will affect the current or target Ecological Status or Potential of water bodies and, hence, the policies meet the Environmental Objectives. There are, however, several Management Areas where the SMP2 policies have the potential to contribute to failure of Environmental Objectives.

The assessment of potential deterioration with respect to the Directive highlighted three Management Areas which provide an opportunity to reconsider the SMP2 policy in the future, these are;

At Tees Bay (MA13), where further investigation is required into the potential impacts of the SMP2 policy on the groundwater.

At Cowbar Cottages (MA19) where a policy of NAI could be considered to avoid disrupting existing ecological interests.

At Port Mulgrave (MA20) where the preferred policy needs further investigation with regards to the maintenance of the old harbour walls.

The WFD assessment also identified a need for monitoring of potential contamination and erosion rates of the coastline within MA05, MA08, MA09, and MA10 to avoid potential deterioration in Ecological Status within these units and to inform the next round of Shoreline Management Planning. Monitoring of the potential for coastal erosion to result in saline intrusion into the Wear Magnesian Limestone GWB at MA05 was also recommended.

6.3 Summary of WFD Conflicts Table 6.1 identifies, based upon the two SMP2 WFD assessments, those waterbodies where conflicts against WFD environmental objectives are likely to occur as a result of implementing the preferred SMP2 policies.

For these waterbodies a WFD Summary Statement was produced to justify the preferred policy in terms of the requirements of the Directive.

Table 6.1 WFD Objectives failures as determined by the SMP2 WFD Assessments

Waterbody identified in

SMP2 Area WFD Objectives with potential for failure

(and MAs where policy may cause failure)



SMP2 WFD assessment as being potentially affected by SMP2 policies

WFD1 WFD2 WFD3 WFD4

Farne Islands to Newton Haven (Coastal)

Northumberland to North Tyneside

Yes

MA08

Yes

MA06 & MA08

Yes

MA07 & MA08

No

Northumberland South (Coastal)


N/A Yes

MA10

Yes

MA09

No

Tyne and Wear (Coastal)


N/A Yes

MA23, MA24, MA25 & MA26

No No


N/A Yes

MA6, MA8, MA9 & MA11

No No

Aln

(Transitional)


N/A Yes

MA13

Yes

MA13

No

Coquet (Transitional)


N/A Yes

MA15

No No

Tyne (Transitional)


N/A Yes

MA27

No No

Yorkshire North (Coastal)


N/A MA12, MA14, MA19, MA20, MA22, MA23, MA25, MA27, MA28, MA31 and MA33.

No Yes

MA13

Tees (Transitional)


N/A No No Unclear. Further investigation required. MA13

Esk River Tyne to Flamborough Head

N/A MA23 No No

The water bodies identified in the SMP2s as having potential to be impacted, are therefore screened in for further assessment.

6.4 WFD Mitigation Measures Where a waterbody is not currently at its target status (i.e. GES or GEP by 2015) the RBMP, where appropriate, identifies mitigation measures which if implemented will assist in the waterbody achieving its target status. There is the opportunity for the actions in the SMP2 Action plans to contribute to implementing the WFD mitigation measures.



Table 6.2 below identifies the mitigation measures for those waterbodies where it was identified (in Table 6.1) that the preferred SMP2 policy may cause failure of the WFD environmental objectives.

Table 6.2. WFD mitigation measures for waterbodies that may potentially be affected by the preferred SMP2 policies (shown in Table 6.1).

Waterbody identified in SMP2 WFD assessment as being potentially affected by SMP2 policies

Mitigation Measures

(From Annex B of RBMP, 2009)

Status of mitigation measure

Farne Islands to Newton Haven (Coastal)

No mitigation measures proposed as water body is currently at Good Status.

Northumberland South (Coastal)

No mitigation measures proposed as water body is currently at Good Status.

Tyne and Wear (Coastal) No mitigation measures proposed as water body is currently at Good Status.

Aln (Transitional) Waterbody is currently of Moderate status with a target status of Good by 2027. No mitigation measures are presented in the RBMP as achieving good status by 2015 is considered to be disproportionately expensive and technically infeasible.

Coquet (Transitional) Waterbody is currently of Moderate status with a target status of Good by 2027. Mitigation measures listed in RBMP include:

Site selection (dredged material disposal) (e.g. avoid sensitive sites)

In Place

Avoid the need to dredge (e.g. minimise under‐keel clearance; use fluid mud navigation; flow manipulation or training works)

In Place

Flow manipulation In Place

Modify channel In Place

Indirect / offsite mitigation (offsetting measures) Not In Place

Remove obsolete structure Not In Place

Tyne (Transitional) Waterbody is currently of Moderate status with a target status of Good by 2027. Mitigation measures listed in RBMP include:

Alter timing of dredging / disposal In Place

Reduce sediment resuspension In Place

Reduce impact of dredging In Place

Prepare a dredging / disposal strategy In Place

Avoid the need to dredge (e.g. minimise under‐keel clearance; use fluid mud navigation; flow manipulation or training works)

In Place

Flow manipulation In Place

Modify structure or reclamation In Place

Retain marginal aquatic and riparian habitats (channel alteration) Not In Place

Manage disturbance Not In Place


Not In Place




Mitigation Measures



Sediment management Not In Place

Preserve and where possible enhance ecological value of marginal aquatic habitat, banks and riparian zone

Not In Place

Managed realignment of flood defence Not In Place

Bank rehabilitation / reprofiling Not In Place

Removal of hard bank reinforcement / revetment, or replacement with soft engineering solution

Not In Place

Yorkshire North (Coastal) No mitigation measures proposed as water body is currently at Good Status.

Tees(Transitional) Waterbody is currently of Moderate status with a target status of Good by 2027. Achieving good status by 2015 is considered to be disproportionately expensive and technically infeasible.

Reduce impact of dredging In Place

Managed realignment of flood defence In Place

Structures or other mechanisms in place and managed to enable fish to access waters upstream and downstream of the impounding works.

In Place

Modify channel In Place

Prepare a dredging / disposal strategy In Place

Vessel Management In Place

Reduce sediment resuspension In Place

Alter timing of dredging / disposal In Place

Sediment management Not In Place


Not In Place

Preserve and where possible enhance ecological value of marginal aquatic habitat, banks and riparian zone

Not In Place

Manage disturbance Not In Place

Retain marginal aquatic and riparian habitats (channel alteration) Not In Place

Bank rehabilitation / reprofiling Not In Place

Removal of hard bank reinforcement / revetment, or replacement with soft engineering solution

Not In Place

Operational and structural changes to locks, sluices, weirs, beach control, etc

Not In Place

Esk Waterbody is currently of Moderate status with a target status of Good by 2027. No mitigation measures are presented in the RBMP as achieving good status by 2015 is considered to be




Mitigation Measures



disproportionately expensive.

6.5 WFD Opportunities The WFD assessment will seek to identify further opportunities where actions may be proposed, implemented or adapted in order to contribute to achieving WFD targets (i.e. through implementing any mitigation measures identified in the RBMPs that are currently described in Table 6.2 as ‘not in place’).

SECTION 7


Next Steps This WFD screening report will be used to inform key partners, and seek their views on, data gathered to date, the WFD assessment process and potential WFD opportunities.

Comments are invited on this report over a period of five weeks by Friday 2nd October 2015 and should be provided as indicated in Section 1.3.

The WFD Assessment Report will be the next output in the process and it will document the assessment of the Action Plans against the WFD environmental objectives based upon the approach described within this report and identify where actions can be implemented or modified in order to contribute to WFD mitigation measures.

Appendix A Figures

Appendix B Actions Plan Tables

Appendix D‐ SMP2 Action Plan Tables (by Category).

Table D1. Asset Management and Maintenance Actions

MA Number

MA Name Action Date Responsible Authority

Northumberland to North Tyneside SMP2 Actions

All MAs Ensure that maintenance of existing defences is regularly undertaken

Northumberland County Council North Tyneside Council

MA01 North of Berwick Berwick Breakwater ‐ urgent repairs. 2009 Berwick BC

MA01 North of Berwick Berwick Breakwater – refurbishment. 2012 Berwick BC

MA01 North of Berwick Maintenance of other defence assets. Ongoing Berwick BC

MA02 Tweed Estuary Modify defences around Sandstell Point subject to study and development plans.

2015 Berwick BC

MA02 Tweed Estuary Maintenance of existing defence assets recommended Ongoing Berwick BC

MA03 Scremerston Cliffs Relocate car parks as necessary to avoid structural intervention. 2030 ‐2055 Nature Reserve

MA03 Scremerston Cliffs No new coast protection schemes proposed, but maintenance of existing defence assets recommended.

Ongoing Berwick BC

MA04 Holy Island Hinterland Maintenance of existing defence assets recommended. Ongoing Berwick BC

MA05 Holy Island North and East No new coast protection schemes proposed, but maintenance of existing defence assets recommended.

Ongoing Berwick BC

MA06 Budle Bay to Seahouses Maintenance of existing defence assets recommended Ongoing Berwick BC

MA07 Seahouses to Beadnell No new coast protection schemes proposed, but maintenance of existing defence assets recommended.

Ongoing Berwick BC

MA09 Embleton Bay Maintenance of existing defence assets recommended. Ongoing Alnwick DC

MA10 Castle Rock to Boulmer No new coast protection schemes proposed, but maintenance of existing defence assets recommended.

Ongoing Alnwick DC

MA11 Boulmer to Seaton Point Maintenance of existing defence assets recommended. Ongoing Alnwick DC

MA12 Foxton Bay Maintenance of existing defence assets recommended. Ongoing Alnwick DC

MA13 Alnmouth Bay Maintenance of existing defence assets recommended. Ongoing Alnwick DC

MA14 Birling Links Locally encourage build up of sediment adjacent to North Breakwater to prevent breaching t root.

2055 Alnwick DC

MA14 Birling Links Maintenance of existing defence assets recommended. Ongoing Alnwick DC

MA15 Amble Improvement works to North Breakwater. 2025 Alnwick DC

MA15 Amble Improvement works to seawalls in Little Shore Wave Basin. 2011 Alnwick DC

MA15 Amble Maintenance of existing defence assets recommended. Ongoing Alnwick DC

MA Number


MA16 South Amble Maintenance of existing defence assets recommended. Ongoing Alnwick DC

MA17 Beacon Hill to Creswell Maintenance of existing defence assets recommended. Ongoing Alnwick DC/Castle Morpeth DC

MA18 Snab Point Maintenance of existing defence assets recommended. Ongoing Castle Morpeth BC

MA19 Lynemouth Bay No coast protection schemes presently proposed, but dependent on longer‐term land use plan. Maintenance of existing defence assets recommended.

Ongoing Castle Morpeth BC / Wansbeck DC/Alcan

MA20 Newbiggin Maintenance of existing defence assets recommended. Ongoing Wansbeck DC

MA21 Spital Point to Blyth East Pier Maintenance of existing defence assets recommended Ongoing Wansbeck DC

MA22 Blyth Harbour No coast protection schemes proposed against erosion. Ongoing investigations may reveal need for flood defence improvements within the harbour against tidal and/or river flooding to the town.

Ongoing Port of Blyth/Environment Agency

MA23 Blyth West Pier to Seaton Sluice Maintenance of existing defence assets recommended Ongoing Blyth Valley DC

MA24 Seaton Sluice to Curry’s Point Maintenance of existing defence assets recommended Ongoing North Tyneside

MA25 Curry’s Point to Brown’s Point Maintenance of existing defence assets recommended Ongoing North Tyneside

MA26 Brown’s Point to Tynemouth North Pier

Port of Tyne – maintenance of harbour structures Ongoing Port of Tyne


Maintenance of existing defence assets recommended Ongoing North Tyneside

MA27 Tynemouth North Pier to Fish Quay

Maintenance of existing defence assets recommended Ongoing North Tyneside

River Tyne to Flamborough Head SMP2 Actions

MA06 Souter Point to Sunderland Harbour

Refurbishment of defences to North Sunderland 2012 Sunderland City Council

MA07 Sunderland Harbour Continued refurbishment of harbour piers.In addition to their function to port activities, the piers provide an important coast protection function.

2012 Sunderland City Council

MA10 Chourdon Point to to Blackhall Rocks

Local management (in line with objectives of the Durham Coastal Strategy ‐ i.e. within the policy of NAI there is scope for local management of access and management of natural heritage in that minor works adapting use and interest of the shoreline will not impact on the overall coastal processes)

ongoing Durham Heritage Coast

MA25 Saltwick Nab to Hundale Point (Robin Hoods Bay)

Robin Hoods Bay ‐ Preventative maintenance as recommended by strategy

2010 Scarborough BC

Table D2. Development Planning and Adaptation Actions

MA

Number



All MAs Links with Land Use Planning Northumberland County Council North Tyneside Council

All MAs ‘Lite‐touch’ review of emerging information Northumberland County Council North Tyneside Council

All MAs Review of SMP2 2018 Northumberland County Council North Tyneside Council

All MAs Use launch of SMP2 to raise awareness of flood and erosion risk and its management

2009 Northumberland County Council North Tyneside Council

All MAs Feed SMP2 information into future reviews of Contingency Plans Northumberland County Council North Tyneside Council

All MAs Ensure that proposed Strategies, studies and investigations for each Management Area are included as appropriate within Medium Term Planning (MTP)


All MAs Ensure that proposed schemes for each Management Area are included as appropriate within Medium Term Planning (MTP)


All MAs Ensure that business cases and funding applications for proposed schemes for each Management Area are undertaken in line with sanctioned MTPs.


All MAs Active participation in the development of the Environment Agency’s Flood and Coastal Erosion Risk Management North East Regional Habitat Creation Plan. (The SMP2 has identified that there will be net loss of rocky foreshore habitat as a result of the policies of the SMP2)


All MAs Escalate the issue of loss of rocky foreshore habitat to UK government via Natural England and Environment Agency


All MAs Communicate SMP outputs to those affected by policy changes 2009 Northumberland County Council North Tyneside Council

All MAs NI189 reporting on implementation of the SMP2 Action Plan. Northumberland County Council North Tyneside Council

MA

Number


MA01 North of Berwick Improve access to areas of interest and to the foreshore. 2050 Berwick BC

MA01 North of Berwick Adapt land use to accommodate coastal change. 2050 Golf Club & Holiday Park

MA02 Tweed Estuary Recognise sea level rise in development plans for the area. Ongoing Developers / Master Planners / Berwick BC Planners

MA03 Scremerston Cliffs Possible slope stabilisation works to protect property and railway line.

2055 National Rail

MA04 Holy Island Hinterland Discussions with landowners as part of Northumberland 4shores Project involving MR

Ongoing Environment Agency

MA04 Holy Island Hinterland New defence to the road at Waren Mill 2055 Environment Agency

MA04 Holy Island Hinterland Possible need for causeway works at Shell Road on Holy Island. 2025 Berwick BC

MA06 Budle Bay to Seahouses Planning for longer‐term realignment of the road south of Bamburgh Moor. Incorporate within Development Plans.

2025 Berwick BC Planners

MA06 Budle Bay to Seahouses Local management to encourage dune development at Monk’s House.

2055 Berwick BC

MA06 Budle Bay to Seahouses Planning to use alternative road (Broad Road) as main thoroughfare at Seahouses in the longer‐term. Incorporate within Development Plans.

2075 Berwick BC Planners

MA06 Budle Bay to Seahouses Realign road south of Bamburgh Moor. 2090 County Council Highways

MA06 Budle Bay to Seahouses Use Broad Road as main thoroughfare at Seahouses in the longer‐term.

2090 County Council Highways

MA07 Seahouses to Beadnell Discussion with landowners regarding potential increase in flood plain of Annstead Burn for nature conservation purposes.

2010 Environment Agency

MA08 Beadnell and Beadnell Bay Development control seaward of the harbour road. Ongoing Berwick BC Planners

MA08 Beadnell and Beadnell Bay Discussion with landowners regarding potential increase in flood plain of Brunton Burn for nature conservation purposes.


MA08 Beadnell and Beadnell Bay Beadnell North Sea Wall Improvements Project Appraisal Report 2010 Berwick BC

MA08 Beadnell and Beadnell Bay Development control on northern section of Beadnell Bay to maintain ‘buffer zone’.

Ongoing Berwick BC Planners

MA09 Embleton Bay Minor works to enhance general protection at Low Newton in light of sea level rise.

2055 Alnwick DC

MA10 Castle Rock to Boulmer Plan for longer‐term realignment of the road north of Howick. Incorporate within Development Plans.

2055 County Council Highways

MA10 Castle Rock to Boulmer Realignment of the road north of Howick. 2090 County Council Highways

MA

Number


MA12 Foxton Bay Planning now to set back the access steps in Foxton Bay. 2030 Alnwick DC

MA12 Foxton Bay Set back the access steps. 2030 Alnwick DC

MA13 Alnmouth Bay Adapt the present land use to allow a more natural system approach to management.

Ongoing Alnwick DC Planners

MA13 Alnmouth Bay Formal review of Alnmouth Strategy 2010 Alnwick DC

MA13 Alnmouth Bay Alnmouth Bay adaptation 2011 onwards Alnwick DC

MA13 Alnmouth Bay Possible reinforcement of management at the mouth of the River Aln to HTL.

2055 Alnwick DC

MA14 Birling Links Plan for longer‐term adaptation of Birling Carrs Caravan Park. 2105 Caravan Park

MA16 South Amble Future works at South Amble 2025 Alnwick DC

MA17 Beacon Hill to Creswell Develop a progressive transitional management approach, with ongoing discussion regarding the possible need for further management to the area behind Bondi Carrs.

Ongoing Alnwick DC

MA17 Beacon Hill to Creswell Consideration of longer‐term options for drainage of Ladyburn Lake within a Druridge Bay Adaptation Strategy.

2011 Castle Morpeth BC Northumberland County Council

MA17 Beacon Hill to Creswell Discussion with landowners about potential habitat enhancements associated with opening low lying land to flooding.


MA17 Beacon Hill to Creswell Possible need for further management to the area behind Bondi Carrs.

2009‐2015 Alnwick DC

MA18 Snab Point Longer‐term realignment of the road and Caravan Park. 2075 County CouncilHighways / Caravan Park

MA19 Lynemouth Bay Develop longer‐term land use plan for the area. 2035 Castle Morpeth BC / Wansbeck DC

MA20 Newbiggin Plan for longer‐term realignment of sections of the Newbiggin golf course and Caravan Park.

Ongoing Golf Club / Caravan Park

MA20 Newbiggin Newbiggin Bay Beach Management 2009 onwards Wansbeck DC

MA21 Spital Point to Blyth East Pier Plan for longer‐term realignment of sections of the Sandy Bay Caravan Park.

2055 Caravan Park

MA21 Spital Point to Blyth East Pier Inform land use plans to set development back from the eroding shore by a suitable buffer zone.

Ongoing Wansbeck DC Planners

MA21 Spital Point to Blyth East Pier Selective local works on a retreated alignment to safeguard properties and assets (e.g. Cambois House and Cottages) and

2055 Wansbeck DC

MA

Number


help with wider‐scale coastal reconfiguration.

MA23 Blyth West Pier to Seaton Sluice Local realignment at the southern end of the existing Blyth promenade in the longer‐term.

2075 Blyth Valley DC

MA24 Seaton Sluice to Curry’s Point Local intervention to maintain/relocate access steps to Hartley Cove.

2055 North Tyneside


Develop solution to longer‐term management of Tynemouth Longsands that avoids new lengths of linear defence.

2055 North Tyneside


Longer‐term MR of shoreline in Tynemouth Longsands through local strategically placed structures to pull the coast forward and build up protective beaches.

2055 North Tyneside


MA01 River Tyne to South Pier Revise strategy for Littlehaven, with intention to realign defence. Deteriorating defence and overtopping. Ensure integration with redevelopment. Maintain navigation and water sports

2007 South Tyneside Council (STC)

MA02 Herd Sand Establish plan for dune management including long term plan for recreation area. Maintain integrity of dunes. Long term roll back. Integration of recreational use.


MA02 Herd Sand Outline strategy for Herd Sands developed in conjunction with land use plan. Ensure integration with redevelopment. Maintain function of dunes and use of beach and water sports. Sustainable defence line.

2012

MA03 Trow Trow: design development. Establish specific design criteria and undertake design. Develop an appropriate immediate action to address potential contamination. Development of long term realignment.

ongoing South Tyneside Council (STC)

MA04 Frenchmans Bay to Lizard Point Planning Strategy. Development of realignment strategy for road, car parking and access. Including examination of alternative route for road. (Discussion with highway authority. Establish necessary policy within land use plans to allow relocation. Confirm policy approach prior to review of SMP3).


MA05 Lizard Point to Souter Point Assess potential impacts and confirm SMP policy. 2010 South Tyneside Council (STC)

MA05 Lizard Point to Souter Point Retired defence at Harbour quarry (subject to investigations and 2025 South Tyneside Council (STC)

MA

Number


plan)


Review strategy priorities against outcome measures 2008 Sunderland City Council


Scheme development. Review strategy and develop appraisal for maintenance and refurbishment plan. Significant economic loss due to erosion and flooding. Aim to extend life of existing defences. A key driver for future works will be to maintain important amenity of area. The condition of defences is becoming critical.

2010 Sunderland City Council/Co‐ordinated with South Tyneside Council

MA07 Sunderland Harbour Review strategy for port area Sunderland City Council

MA07 Sunderland Harbour Review strategy priorities against outcome measures 2008 Sunderland City Council

MA07 Sunderland Harbour Review strategy. High economic risk. Possible biodiversity opportunities. Maintaining SSSI. Port operation and watersports.


MA08 Sunderland Harbour to Pincushion Point

Review strategy priorities against outcome measures 2008 Sunderland City Council


Scheme development for Harbour East Bay. Review and develop defence requirements to Port regeneration area. High economic risk. Examine opportunity for realignment to provide an integrated approach with regeneration. Defences in poor condition.



Review strategy along Hendon/ Rryhope frontage. High economic risk. Part of regeneration plan.


MA09 Pincusion Point to Chourdon Point

Review overall coastal strategy 2014 Easington DC

MA11 Blackhall Rocks to Heugh Breakwater

Schemes for North Hartlepool to be identified by strategies no date presented

Hartlepool BC


Management strategy for Crimdon Valley. Potential for biodiversity. Resolve local land use together with access and environmental enhancement.

2009 Co‐ordinated by Hartlepool BC/ Easington DC/ Durham Heritage Coast


Development strategy for area of North Sands. Develop an integrated approach to defence of the cemetery frontage. Identify potential erosion risk contribution. Potential development in risk area. Opportunity for enhancement of designated area and local biodiversity. Ensure integration with

2007 Co‐ordinated by Hartlepool BC

MA

Number


redevelopment. Maintain heritage and amenity value

MA12 Hartlepool Bay Middleton Beach. Advise on defence. Ensure integration with redevelopment to provide sustainable defence

2009 Co‐ordinated by Hartlepool BC

MA12 Hartlepool Bay Marina. Detailed project appraisal report. Develop recommendations of strategy. High economic risk. Review sustainable development. Benefits associated with port. Possible biodiversity improvement. Interaction with Middleton development

2010 Private/ Co‐ordinated by Hartlepool BC

MA12 Hartlepool Bay Town walls. Detailed scheme appraisal report. Economic value and protection of property. Potential opportunity for biodiversity. Important Heritage issues. Maintain navigation.


MA12 Hartlepool Bay Heugh Breakwater. Review strategy to confirm policy for management. Impact on designated area. Use of frontage and potential additional defence requirement. Impact on navigation


MA13 Tees Bay Strategy for Seaton Carew, review of condition and develop management strategy. High economic value. Poor condition of defences. Potential for more sustainable defence. Beach use. Amenity value. Long term redevelopment

2009 Hartlepool BC

MA13 Tees Bay Management plan for Seaton Dunes. Co‐ordinate land use and dune management. High opportunity for biodiversity linked to designated areas. Amenity use of area. Associated flood risk

2010 Co‐ordinated by Hartlepool BC (Environment Agency)

MA13 Tees Bay Review flood risk to rear of Coatham dunes. Examine need for retired flood defence. Potential economic risk and risk to property. Advice against unsustainable development. Long term evolution of dunes with biodiversity opportunities. Transition between Coatham and Coatham dunes.

2010 Environment Agency. / Redcar and Cleveland BC.

MA13 Tees Bay Management review. Review of defence measures associated with development at Coatham. Integration of sustainable defences.

2007 Co‐ordinated by Redcar and Cleveland BC

MA13 Tees Bay Review flood defence strategy to Teesmouth. High economic value. Advice against unsustainable development. Ensure integration with port development. Opportunity for biodiversity linked to designated areas. Maintain navigation and water sports

2012 Environment Agency. (Hartlepool BC/ Redcar and Cleveland BC.)

MA14 Coaltham and Redcar Revised strategy and appraisal. Extend strategy to Redcar east On going Environment Agency/ Redcar and

MA

Number


and develop detailed schemes. High economic risk. High risk to properties. Potential development issues. Integration with designated sites. Amenity use of Redcar and beach. Long term management of East Redcar

Cleveland BC

MA15 Mill Howle to Saltburn Develop strategy for Marske and Saltburn. High economic loss. Risk to properties. Potential for biodiversity enhancement. Amenity use of area. Maintain water sports and access

2009 Redcar and Cleveland BC

MA19 Cowbar and Staithes Review of all SBC Coastal Strategies ongoing Scarborough BC

MA19 Cowbar and Staithes Review Staithes strategy. Review flood risk and set out long term management of harbour and piers. Economic loss. Risk to properties. Heritage and community support in line with NYMNP objectives. Harbour use. Management of Cowbar lane

2009 Scarborough BC/ Redcar and Cleveland BC

MA19 Cowbar and Staithes Review strategy priorities against outcome measures. 2008 Scarborough BC

MA20 Staithes to Cobble Dump Review strategy priorities against outcome measures. 2008 Scarborough BC

MA20 Staithes to Cobble Dump Review of all SBC Coastal Strategies ongoing SBC

MA21 Cobble Dump to Sandsend Ness Review strategy priorities against outcome measures. 2008 Scarborough BC

MA21 Cobble Dump to Sandsend Ness Review of all SBC Coastal Strategies SBC

MA22 Sandsend Ness to Upgang Beck Sandsend ‐ Strategy Review. Highway investigation and review possible realignment of coastal strategic route. Potential for more sustainable defence. Longer term economic damage and risk to properties. Impacts on environmental value. Information to feed back to coastal strategy Heritage and community support in line with NYMNP objectives

2009 Scarborough BC/ NYCC

MA22 Sandsend Ness to Upgang Beck Review strategy priorities against outcome measures. 2008 Scarborough BC

MA22 Sandsend Ness to Upgang Beck Review of all SBC Coastal Strategies ongoing SBC

MA23 Upgang Beck to Whitby Abbey Review strategy priorities against outcome measures. 2008 Scarborough BC

MA23 Upgang Beck to Whitby Abbey Review of all SBC Coastal Strategies ongoing SBC

MA23 Upgang Beck to Whitby Abbey Whitby ‐ Appraisal of Whitby Harbour Piers, examining condition of Piers and development of management approach. High economic loss and risk to property. Links to management of foreshore. Maintain navigation and water sports

Ongoingpending funding.

Scarborough BC

MA23 Upgang Beck to Whitby Abbey Strategy study examining flood risk within Whitby harbour. High economic loss and risk to property. Important issues in relation to sustaining recreational and commercial centre of Whitby.

2008 Environment Agency/ Scarborough BC

MA

Number


MA24 Whitby to Saltwick Nab Review strategy priorities against outcome measures. 2008 Scarborough BC

MA24 Whitby to Saltwick Nab Review of all SBC Coastal Strategies ongoing SBC

MA24 Whitby to Saltwick Nab Negotiate retreat of the Cleveland Way 2025 NYMNPA/ Heritage Coast


Review strategy priorities against outcome measures. 2008 Scarborough BC


Review of all SBC Coastal Strategies ongoing SBC


Robin Hoods Bay ‐ Develop Strategy for Robin Hood’s Bay, further consideration of cliff stability. High economic damage and risk to properties. Implications for development in risk area. Heritage and community support in line with NYMNP objectives

2010/2012 Scarborough BC

MA26 Hundale Point to Scalby Ness Review of all SBC Coastal Strategies ongoing Scarborough BC

MA26 Hundale Point to Scalby Ness Review strategy priorities against outcome measures. 2008 Scarborough BC

MA27 Scalby Ness to Castle Cliff Scarborough ‐ Review Holbeck to Scalby Mills Strategy. High economic value and risk to properties. Ensure integration with redevelopment. Incorporate strategy for Scalby Ness. Safety and use of promenade.

Scarborough BC

MA27 Scalby Ness to Castle Cliff Review strategy priorities against outcome measures. 2008 Scarborough BC

MA27 Scalby Ness to Castle Cliff Review of all SBC Coastal Strategies ongoing SBC

MA28 Castle Cliff to White Nab Review of all SBC Coastal Strategies ongoing SBC

MA28 Castle Cliff to White Nab Review strategy priorities against outcome measures. 2008 Scarborough BC

MA28 Castle Cliff to White Nab Scarborough ‐ Review Holbeck to Scalby Mills Strategy, High economic value and risk to properties. Integration with sea front and amenity. Maintain navigation and leisure issues

on‐going Scarborough BC

MA29 White Nab to Cayton Bay Review of all SBC Coastal Strategies ongoing SBC

MA29 White Nab to Cayton Bay Cayton Bay: Realignment strategy, develop managed realignment and access strategy plan. Maintaining use of Cayton Bay. Advice on sustainable development.

2012 Scarborough BC

MA29 White Nab to Cayton Bay Cayton Bay: Management plan, to review implications of managed realignment. Risk to properties. Highway management. Important environmental issues. Access and amenity

2008 Scarborough BC/ NYCC/National Trust

MA29 White Nab to Cayton Bay Review strategy priorities against outcome measures. 2008 Scarborough BC

MA30 Cayton Bay to Filey Brigg Review strategy priorities against outcome measures. 2008 Scarborough BC

MA30 Cayton Bay to Filey Brigg Review of all SBC Coastal Strategies ongoing SBC

MA

Number


MA31 Filey Brigg to Muston Sands Review strategy priorities against outcome measures. 2008 Scarborough BC

MA31 Filey Brigg to Muston Sands Review of all SBC Coastal Strategies ongoing SBC

MA31 Filey Brigg to Muston Sands Filey ‐ Scheme appraisal to develop strategy recommendations for outflanking defence. High economic value and risk to properties. Important amenity of Filey Bay

2008 Scarborough BC

MA32 Muston Sands to Speeton Cliffs Filey Bay Management Plan for Flat Cliffs, to support management for realignment. Properties at risk. Potential unsustainable development. Access road. Potential contamination. Impacts on biodiversity.

2007 Residents and private sector Supported by Scarborough BC

MA32 Muston Sands to Speeton Cliffs Review strategy priorities against outcome measures. 2008 Scarborough BC

MA32 Muston Sands to Speeton Cliffs Review of all SBC Coastal Strategies ongoing SBC

Table D3. Monitoring Actions

MA

Number



All MAs Establish links between the SMP2 coastal monitoring (Section 7) and the North East Tidal Flood Forecasting System


All MAs Continue beach surveys to understand rates and mechanisms of coastal change

Surveys in spring and autumn of each year


All MAs Continue structural condition inspections to understand rates and mechanisms of deterioration

Walk‐over surveys once every 2 years (from summer 2010)


All MAs Continued data collection for SMP3: Full measures beach profile September/Oct Northumberland County Council

MA

Number


surveys ober each year North Tyneside Council

All MAs Continued data collection for SMP3: Partial measures beach profile surveys

March/April each year


MA4 Holy Island Hinterland Continued data collection for SMP3: Topographic surveys of Holy Island causeway

September/October each year

Northumberland County Council

MA13 Alnmouth Bay Continued data collection for SMP3: Topographic surveys of Alnmouth Beach

September/October and March/April each year;


MA20 Newbiggin Continued data collection for SMP3: Cliff top surveys at Newbiggin Bay Caravan Park



MA21 Spital Point to Blyth East Pier Continued data collection for SMP3: Cliff top surveys at Sandy Bay Caravan Park



All MAs Continued data collection for SMP3: Walk‐over inspections of the coastal defences and natural features (dunes, slopes, cliffs). Information updated into the MS Access database and fed across to the Environment Agency for inclusion in its own National Flood and Coastal Defence Database

every 2 years Northumberland County Council North Tyneside Council

A new Cell 1 Regional Monitoring Programme: One wave recording buoy off the Northumberland coast


All MAs A new Cell 1 Regional Monitoring Programme: Aerial photography of the coastline at low water

once every 6 years


All MAs A new Cell 1 Regional Monitoring Programme: Development of a cell‐wide website for data storage

not given Northumberland County Council North Tyneside Council

MA01 North of Berwick Coastal monitoring. Ongoing Berwick BC

MA02 Tweed Estuary Coastal monitoring. Ongoing Berwick BC

MA03 Scremerston Cliffs Coastal monitoring Ongoing Berwick BC

MA04 Holy Island Hinterland Coastal monitoring. Ongoing Berwick BC

MA05 Holy Island North and East Coastal monitoring. Ongoing Berwick BC

MA06 Budle Bay to Seahouses Coastal monitoring. Ongoing Berwick BC

MA

Number


MA21 Spital Point to Blyth East Pier Cambois cliff top monitoring 2009 Wansbeck DC


MA01 ‐ MA03

River Tyne to South Pier Herd Sand Trow

Northern section of coast: Air photography. Long term background monitoring of shape of beaches and cliff and foreshore position. Detailed examination of erosion of Trow point

Two yearly South Tyneside Council (STC)

MA01 ‐ MA03


Northern section of coast: Topographic survey. Survey covering both open beaches and dunes

yearly South Tyneside Council (STC)

MA01 ‐ MA03


Northern section of coast: Cliff crest profiles; Profiles along the Ryhope cliff


MA01 ‐ MA03


Northern section of coast: Crest profiles; Local variation of beaches and vulnerability of defences (along the Seaburn walls)

quarterly South Tyneside Council (STC)

MA01 ‐ MA03


Northern section of coast: Defence inspection. Visual inspection and record photographs of defences.

After storms/ two yearly

South Tyneside Council (STC)

MA01 ‐ MA03


Northern section of coast: Bathymetric survey. Corridor survey out to 10m CD contour at Sunderland North beach. Corridor survey out to 20m. CD contour centred on Herd sands.

Five yearly 10 yearly


MA03 ‐ MA06

Trow, Frenchmans Bay to Lizard Point, Lizard Point to Souter Point and Souter Point to Sunderland Harbour

Southern section of coast: Air photography Long term background monitoring of erosion of cliffs.

Two yearly South Tyneside Council (STC)

MA03 ‐ MA06


Southern section of coast: Topographic survey. Survey covering Trow Quarry.


MA03 ‐ MA06


Southern section of coast: Defence inspection Visual inspection of defences. and record photographs



MA06 ‐ Souter Point to Sunderland Air photography: Long term background monitoring of shape Two yearly Sunderland City Council

MA

Number


MA08 Harbour, Sunderland Harbour and Sunderland Harbour to Pincushion Point

of beaches and cliff and foreshore position.

MA06 ‐ MA08

Souter Point to Sunderland Harbour, Sunderland Harbour and Sunderland Harbour to Pincushion Point

Topographic survey: Survey covering beaches to north and south of Sunderland with local survey at the Bents

yearly Sunderland City Council

MA06 ‐ MA08


Cliff crest profiles: Profiles along the Ryhope cliff yearly Sunderland City Council

MA06 ‐ MA08


Crest profiles: Local variation of beaches and vulnerability of defences along the Seaburn walls

quarterly Sunderland City Council

MA06 ‐ MA08


Defence inspection: Visual inspection and record photographs of defences.


Sunderland City Council

MA06 ‐ MA08


Bathymetric survey: Corridor survey out to 10m CD contour at Sunderland North beach.

Five yearly Sunderland City Council

MA06 ‐ MA08


Bathymetric survey: Corridor survey out to 20m. CD contour 10 yearly Sunderland City Council

MA09‐MA11

Pincusion Point to Chourdon Point, Chourdon Point to to Blackhall Rocks and Blackhall Rocks to Heugh Breakwater

Air photography: Long term background monitoring of cliff erosion.

Two yearly Easington DC

MA09‐MA11


Beach profiles: Covering areas identified in strategy, establishing both trends and variation.

yearly Easington DC

MA

Number


MA09‐MA11


Crest profiles: Erosion of Cliff crest at Dawdon Beach yearly Easington DC

MA09‐MA11




Easington DC

MA09‐MA11


Bathymetric survey: Corridor survey out to 10m CD contour at Seaham.

Five yearly Easington DC

MA09‐MA11


Bathymetric survey: Corridor survey out to 20m. CD contour, centred on bays along frontage

10 yearly Easington DC


Monitoring recommendations for North Hartlepool: Air photography. Long term background monitoring of shape of beaches and pressures on natural frontages.

Two yearly Hartlepool BC


Monitoring recommendations for North Hartlepool: Topographic survey. Survey covering open beaches and back dunes.

Yearly Hartlepool BC


Monitoring recommendations for North Hartlepool: Topographic survey. Survey covering rock headland

Five yearly Hartlepool BC


Monitoring recommendations for North Hartlepool: Defence inspection. Visual inspection and record photographs of defences.


Hartlepool BC

MA12 Hartlepool Bay Monitoring recommendations for Hartlepool Bay: Topographic survey. Survey covering foreshore levels.

yearly Hartlepool BC

MA12 Hartlepool Bay Monitoring recommendations for Hartlepool Bay: Defence inspection. Visual inspection and record photographs of defences


Hartlepool BC

MA12 Hartlepool Bay Monitoring recommendations for Hartlepool Bay: Bird counts Establish bird use of area in the lee of the Heugh Breakwater. (Co‐ordinate with TBC)

As required Hartlepool BC

MA

Number


MA12 Hartlepool Bay Monitoring recommendations for Hartlepool Bay: Bathymetric survey. Co‐ordinate monitoring with Tees Port

Determined by port operations

Hartlepool BC

MA12 Hartlepool Bay Monitoring recommendations for Hartlepool Bay: Water levels Collate local water level data.

Event driven Hartlepool BC

MA13 Tees Bay Monitoring recommendations for Seaton Carew and TeesmouthAir photography: Long term background monitoring of the evolution of Tees Bay.

Two yearly Hartlepool BC

MA13 Tees Bay Monitoring recommendations for Seaton Carew and Teesmouth Topographic survey: Survey covering foreshore and dunes levels.

yearly Hartlepool BC

MA13 Tees Bay Monitoring recommendations for Seaton Carew and Teesmouth Topographic survey: Local survey in front of Seaton Carew

After storms / six monthly

Hartlepool BC

MA13 Tees Bay Monitoring recommendations for Seaton Carew and TeesmouthDefence inspection: Visual inspection and record photographs of defences.


Hartlepool BC

MA13 Tees Bay Monitoring recommendations for Seaton Carew and Teesmouth Bird counts: Establish bird use (Co‐ordinate with TBC)

As required Hartlepool BC

MA13 Tees Bay Monitoring recommendations for Seaton Carew and Teesmouth Bathymetric survey: Co‐ordinate monitoring with Tees Port.


Hartlepool BC

MA13 Tees Bay Monitoring recommendations for Seaton Carew and Teesmouth Water levels. Co‐ordinate local water level data.

Event driven Hartlepool BC

MA14 Coaltham and Redcar Monitoring recommendations for the Coatham and Redcar frontages: Air photography Long term background monitoring of the evolution of Tees Bay.

Two yearly

MA14 Coaltham and Redcar Monitoring recommendations for the Coatham and Redcar frontages: Topographic survey Survey covering foreshore and dunes levels.

yearly

MA14 Coaltham and Redcar Monitoring recommendations for the Coatham and Redcar frontages: Topographic survey Local survey in front of Coatham, Redcar and Redcar East


MA14 Coaltham and Redcar Monitoring recommendations for the Coatham and Redcar frontages: Defence inspection Visual inspection and record photographs of defences.


MA14 Coaltham and Redcar Monitoring recommendations for the Coatham and Redcar frontages: Bathymetric survey Co‐ordinate monitoring with Tees


MA

Number


Port

MA14 Coaltham and Redcar Monitoring recommendations for the Coatham and Redcar frontages. Water levels Co‐ordinate local water level data.

Event driven

MA15 ‐ MA19

Mill Howle to Saltburn, Saltburn to Huntcliff, Huntcliff and Hummersea Cliff, Boulby and Cowbar and Staithes

Monitoring recommendations for Marske through to Staithes. Air photography: Long term background monitoring of the evolution of cliffs.

Two yearly Redcar and Cleveland BC

MA15 ‐ MA19


Monitoring recommendations for Marske through to Staithes. Cliff face surveys; Support work by Durham University

Monthly Redcar and Cleveland BC

MA15 ‐ MA19


Monitoring recommendations for Marske through to Staithes. Cliff crest profiles; Continue monitoring profiles at Cowbar lane

yearly Redcar and Cleveland BC

MA15 ‐ MA19


Monitoring recommendations for Marske through to Staithes. Topographic survey: Survey covering foreshore and dunes levels

yearly Redcar and Cleveland BC

MA15 ‐ MA19


Monitoring recommendations for Marske through to Staithes. Topographic survey: Local survey in front of Saltburn, Cattersty Sands and Skinningrove.


Redcar and Cleveland BC

MA15 ‐ MA19


Monitoring recommendations for Marske through to Staithes. Defence inspection; Visual inspection and record photographs of defences.


Redcar and Cleveland BC

MA15 ‐ MA19


Monitoring recommendations for Marske through to Staithes. Bathymetric survey: Corridor survey out to 10m CD contour at Saltburn and Skinningrove.

Five yearly Redcar and Cleveland BC

MA15 ‐ MA19


Monitoring recommendations for Marske through to Staithes. Bathymetric survey: Corridor survey out to 20m. CD contour, centred on bays along frontage.

10 yearly Redcar and Cleveland BC

MA

Number


MA15 ‐ MA19


Monitoring recommendations for Marske through to Staithes. Sea bed sediments: Side scan sonar and initial seismic profiling

Ten yearly Redcar and Cleveland BC

MA19 ‐ MA25

Cowbar and Staithes, Staithes to Runswick Bay, Runswick Bay to Sandsend Ness, Sandsend Wyke, Whitby, Whitby to Saltwick Nab and Saltwick Nab to Hundale Point (Robin Hoods Bay)

Monitoring recommendations for the northern section of the coast. Air photography. Long term background monitoring of the evolution of cliffs.

Two yearly Scarborough BC

MA19 ‐ MA25


Monitoring recommendations for the northern section of the coast: Cliff face surveys. Stability issues

Monthly Scarborough BC

MA19 ‐ MA25


Monitoring recommendations for the northern section of the coast. Topographic survey: Survey covering foreshore and cliffs in Whitby Bay.

yearly Scarborough BC

MA19 ‐ MA25


Monitoring recommendations for the northern section of the coast. Topographic survey: Local survey in front of Runswick and Robin Hood’s Bay.


Scarborough BC

MA19 ‐ MA25


Monitoring recommendations for the northern section of the coast. Defence inspection: Visual inspection and record photographs of defences.

After storms/ annually

Scarborough BC

MA19 ‐ Cowbar and Staithes, Staithes to Monitoring recommendations for the northern section of the Five yearly Scarborough BC

MA

Number


MA25 Runswick Bay, Runswick Bay to Sandsend Ness, Sandsend Wyke, Whitby, Whitby to Saltwick Nab and Saltwick Nab to Hundale Point (Robin Hoods Bay)

coast. Bathymetric survey: Corridor survey out to 10m CD contour at Whitby.

MA19 ‐ MA25


Monitoring recommendations for the northern section of the coast. Bathymetric survey. Corridor survey out to 20m. CD contour, centred on bays along frontage.

10 yearly Scarborough BC

MA19 ‐ MA25


Monitoring recommendations for the northern section of the coast. Sea bed sediments. Side scan sonar and initial seismic profiling

Ten yearly Scarborough BC

MA26‐ MA29

Hundale Point to Scalby Ness, Scarborough North Bay and Castle Cliffs, Scarborough Sough Sands and Harbour and Black Rocks to Filey Brigg

Monitoring recommendations for the Scarborough frontage: Air photography. Long term background monitoring of the beach shape and cliffs.

Two yearly Scarborough BC

MA26‐ MA29


Monitoring recommendations for the Scarborough frontage: Cliff stability. Inclinometers and slope movement

Continuous Scarborough BC

MA26‐ MA29


Monitoring recommendations for the Scarborough frontage: Topographic survey. Survey covering foreshore areas. (monitoring linked to beach management)

yearly Scarborough BC

MA26‐ MA29

Hundale Point to Scalby Ness, Scarborough North Bay and Castle Cliffs, Scarborough Sough

Monitoring recommendations for the Scarborough frontage: Topographic survey. Local survey in front of defences


Scarborough BC

MA

Number


Sands and Harbour and Black Rocks to Filey Brigg

MA26‐ MA29


Monitoring recommendations for the Scarborough frontage: Defence inspection. Visual inspection and record photographs of defences.


Scarborough BC

MA26‐ MA29


Monitoring recommendations for the Scarborough frontage. Bathymetric survey. Corridor survey out to 10m CD contour.

Five yearly Scarborough BC

MA26‐ MA29


Monitoring recommendations for the Scarborough frontage. Bathymetric survey. Corridor survey out to 10m CD contour. Corridor survey out to 20m. CD contour, centred on bays along frontage.


MA26‐ MA29


Monitoring recommendations for the Scarborough frontage. Sea bed sediments. Side scan sonar and initial seismic profiling


MA30 ‐ MA32

Filey, South Filey Bay and Muston Sands to Speeton Cliffs

Monitoring recommendations for the southern section of coast. Air photography. Long term background monitoring of the beach shape and cliffs.

Two yearly

MA30 ‐ MA32


Monitoring recommendations for the southern section of coast. Cliff stability; Inclinometers and slope movement

Continuous

MA30 ‐ MA32


Monitoring recommendations for the southern section of coast. Topographic survey. Survey covering foreshore areas.

yearly

MA30 ‐ MA32


Monitoring recommendations for the southern section of coast. Topographic survey: Local survey in front of defences at Filey


MA30 ‐ MA32


Monitoring recommendations for the southern section of coast. Defence inspection: Visual inspection and record photographs of defences.


MA

Number


MA30 ‐ MA32


Monitoring recommendations for the southern section of coast. Bathymetric survey. Corridor survey out to 10m CD contour.

Five yearly

MA30 ‐ MA32


Monitoring recommendations for the southern section of coast. Bathymetric survey: Corridor survey out to 20m. CD contour, centred on bays along frontage.

10 yearly

MA30 ‐ MA32


Monitoring recommendations for the southern section of coast. Sea bed sediments: Side scan sonar and initial seismic profiling

10 yearly

MA33 Muston sands to Flamborough Head

Air photography. Long term background monitoring of the beach shape and cliffs.

Two yearly

MA33 Muston sands to Flamborough Head


After storms/ two annually

Table D4. Scheme Actions

MA

Number



MA02 Tweed Estuary Raise defence crests on northern bank. 2055 Berwick BC

MA02 Tweed Estuary Raise defence crests on southern bank. 2055 Berwick BC

MA08 Beadnell and Beadnell Bay Beadnell North Sea Wall Improvements 2010‐2012 Berwick BC

MA11 Boulmer to Seaton Point Boulmer. 2009‐2013 Alnwick DC

MA18 Snab Point Short term defence to road north of Snab Point. 2012‐2013 Castle Morpeth BC

MA20 Newbiggin Local intervention between Newbiggin Point and Church Point to safeguard St. Bartholomew’s Church and graveyard.

2010 Wansbeck DC

MA20 Newbiggin Newbiggin Bay Beach Recharge 2008 Wansbeck DC

MA21 Spital Point to Blyth East Pier Improvement works at North Blyth 2011 Private

MA23 Blyth West Pier to Seaton Sluice Dune management along Blyth South Beach using ‘soft’ techniques to prevent breaching by the sea.

Ongoing Blyth Valley DC

MA23 Blyth West Pier to Seaton Sluice Improvement works to Seaton Sluice harbour structures. 2009‐2013 Blyth Valley DC

MA24 Seaton Sluice to Curry’s Point St. Mary’s Island Causeway improvements 2015 North Tyneside

MA25 Curry’s Point to Brown’s Point Local works to stop ongoing outflanking at end of revetment at 2009‐10 North Tyneside

MA

Number


Trinity Road Car Park.

MA25 Curry’s Point to Brown’s Point Whitley Bay Central Promenade – improvements 2011‐2015 North Tyneside

MA25 Curry’s Point to Brown’s Point Whitley Bay Southern Promenade – improvements 2015 North Tyneside


Improvement works at Cullercoats Piers. 2009‐11 North Tyneside


Tynemouth Longsands Bear’s Back Seawall ‐ improvements 2010‐12 North Tyneside


Outdoor Pool 2015 North Tyneside


Sea Banks Seawall ‐ improvements 2015 North Tyneside


Fish Quay – improvements 2010‐2013 North Tyneside


MA01 River Tyne to South Pier Develop new promenade on realignment 2009 South Tyneside Council

MA02 Herd Sand Initial scheme implementation to the south of Herd Sands 2011

MA02 Herd Sand Dune management 2008

MA03 Trow Short term defence (to Trow quarry) 2008 South Tyneside Council


Potential schemes to South Sunderland 2012 Sunderland City Council


Scheme under review for Harbour East Bay 2009 Sunderland City Council


Scheme Development for Headland. Detailed appraisal for improving defences. High economic consequence. Impact on designated areas. Maintaining heritage and amenity

on going Hartlepool BC

MA12 Hartlepool Bay Sceme ‐ Town walls 2009 Hartlepool BC

MA13 Tees Bay Management for Seaton Carew defences determined from strategy.

2010 Hartlepool BC

MA14 Coaltham and Redcar Improved protection to Redcar frontage 2009 Environment Agency/ Redcar and Cleveland BC

MA17 Huntcliff and Hummersea Cliff Skinningrove Scheme Development. Define specific works based on strategy. Support for local community. Economic risk and potential loss of properties. Maintaining access and amenity.

2008 Redcar and Cleveland BC

MA17 Huntcliff and Hummersea Cliff Schemes: Refurbishment of defences (Maintain Skinningrove 2009 Redcar and Cleveland BC

MA

Number


jetty with rock)

MA18 Boulby Potential need to relocate Cowbar Lane (not coast protection) 2016 Redcar and Cleveland BC

MA19 Cowbar and Staithes Potential scheme to improve flood risk to Staithes Harbour 2012 Scarborough BC

MA21 Cobble Dump to Sandsend Ness Scheme appraisal for defence of Runswick Bay. Develop recommendations of strategy. High economic damages and risk to properties. Potential biodiversity opportunity. Heritage and community support in line with NYMNP objectives.

2008 Scarborough BC

MA21 Cobble Dump to Sandsend Ness Runswick Bay ‐ Implementation of scheme in line with strategy 2010 Scarborough BC

MA23 Upgang Beck to Whitby Abbey Whitby Harbour Pier improvements 2010 Scarborough BC

MA27 Scalby Ness to Castle Cliff North Bay Cliffs – Seawall repairs and slope stabilisation scheme Scarborough BC

MA27 Scalby Ness to Castle Cliff Sea Life Centre – Rock berm and seawall repairs scheme 2008 Scarborough BC

MA27 Scalby Ness to Castle Cliff Peasholm Gap and Clarence Gardens ‐ Rock scheme revetment in front of existing seawall, seawall repairs and slope stabilisation

2013 Scarborough BC

MA28 Castle Cliff to White Nab Scarborough South Bay: Rose Gardens ‐ Rock revetment in front of existing seawall, seawall repairs and slope stabilisation

2015 Scarborough BC

MA28 Castle Cliff to White Nab Scarborough South Bay: Foreshore Road and St Nicholas Cliff –Raise height of existing wall, drainage improvement Foreshore Road and slope stabilisation

2012 Scarborough BC

MA28 Castle Cliff to White Nab Scarborough South Bay: Spa Chalet Cliff ‐ Rock revetment in front of existing seawall, seawall repairs and slope stabilisation

2008 Scarborough BC

MA28 Castle Cliff to White Nab Scarborough South Bay: The Spa – Rock revetment in front of existing seawall, seawall repairs and slope stabilisation

2008 Scarborough BC

MA28 Castle Cliff to White Nab Scarborough South Bay: South Bay Pool – Rock revetment in front of existing seawall, seawall repairs and slope stabilisation

2013 Scarborough BC

MA28 Castle Cliff to White Nab Scarborough South Bay: South Cliff Gardens – Rock revetment in front of existing seawall, seawall repairs and slope stabilisation

2010 Scarborough BC

MA29 White Nab to Cayton Bay Cliff stability investigations at Cayton Bay 2007 Scarborough BC

MA31 Filey Brigg to Muston Sands Filey – Cliff Stabilisation scheme 2010 Scarborough BC

MA31 Filey Brigg to Muston Sands Filey ‐ Outflanking defence at Filey 2010 Scarborough BC

Table D5. Study and Investigation Actions

MA

Number



All MAs (Northumberland SAC) Precisely establish the nature and magnitude of impacts on designated nature conservation sites, with particular regard to the potential loss of intertidal rocky reef habitat within the Northumbria Coast SPA ‐ assess possible impacts, future habitat loss and associated timescales. Any such study should link in with the Environment Agency’s ongoing LIDAR programme, north east tidal gauges, and also with the Cell 1 Regional Monitoring Programme. Study should investigate the loss of habitat due to submergence of a landform feature due to rising sea level rather than erosion


MA02 Tweed Estuary Investigate long‐term need to increase defence crest levels through Tweed Estuary Strategy.

2009‐10 Berwick BC

MA02 Tweed Estuary Assess need for longer‐term works to retain beach in front of sea wall at Spittal.

2055 Berwick BC

MA02 Tweed Estuary Detailed study to modify defences around Sandstell Point, thereby changing flow patterns around the head, creating more stable conditions for dune development and possibly limited areas of saltmarsh or mud flat.

2020 Berwick BC

MA04 Holy Island Hinterland Investigate need for local defence to low lying hinterland under a MR policy, impact on Holy Island causeway and impact on adjacent sandflats.


MA10 Castle Rock to Boulmer Detailed examination of benefits of protecting areas adjacent to the harbour at Craster.

2015 Alnwick DC

MA12 Foxton Bay Investigate how ad hoc defences at Foxton Hall can be adapted to encourage sediment retention.

2025 Alnwick DC

MA15 Amble Investigations into structural condition of North Breakwater. 2009 Alnwick DC

MA15 Amble Investigate need to raise road and habitat enhancement opportunities to west of marina.

2025 Alnwick DC

MA16 South Amble Investigate local risk to the cemetery at South Amble from instability of the coastal slope.

2011 Alnwick DC

MA18 Snab Point Assess short term defence to the road just north of Snab Point, with planning for longer‐term realignment of road and Caravan

2010‐2011 Castle Morpeth BC

MA

Number


Park within a Creswell Strategy.

MA20 Newbiggin Investigate flood risk to the town via Newbiggin Moor. 2010 Environment Agency

MA21 Spital Point to Blyth East Pier Investigations into medium‐ to longer‐term management of the mouth of the Wansbeck estuary, including potential benefits of weir removal and/or local training works.

2010 Wansbeck DC

MA22 Blyth Harbour Review flood risk to Blyth from various sources. 2009 Environment Agency

MA23 Blyth West Pier to Seaton Sluice Investigate local erosion around the outfall of Meggie’s Burn. 2009 Blyth Valley DC


Examine defence standard against tidal flooding at Fish Quay. 2009 North Tyneside


MA04 Frenchmans Bay to Lizard Point Marsden Bay, risk assessment of areas of concern, initial surveys and report


MA05 Lizard Point to Souter Point Risk assessment (at harbour Quarry) initial surveys and report 2007 South Tyneside Council (STC)

MA05 Lizard Point to Souter Point Investigation. Examine nature and extent of material in Harbour quarry. Concern over potential pollution and amenity use of land. Urgency relates to continued need for defence of weak spots and potential increasing requirement.



Complete investigation of Halliwell Banks. Management of potential contamination. Potentially high economic value. Take account of and integrate with long term policy. Management of coastal access issues



Longitudinal access study to Hendon Beach. 2007 Sunderland City Council

MA09 Pincusion Point to Chourdon Point

Investigate potential contamination at Dawdon Beach. Potential consequences of contamination. Providing advice in planning regeneration of port. Management of coastal access.

2010 Easington DC

MA20 Staithes to Cobble Dump Port Mulgrave ‐ Investigation to examine slope stability and dependency on harbour area. Potential development issues. Maintain navigation. Heritage and community support in line with NYMNP objectives.

2010 Scarborough BC


Robin Hoods Bay North of Mount Pleasant Study 2010/ 2012 Scarborough BC

MA31 Filey Brigg to Muston Sands Filey ‐ Investigation to examine stability of coastal slopes at Filey taking account of long term management to main wall.

2008 Scarborough BC

Appendix C WFD Water bodies within Cell 1

WFD Waterbodies within Cell 1

Table C1 WFD waterbodies within the Cell1 coastal area that have been screened into the assessment.

Waterbody Type

Waterbody Name Waterbody ID SMP2 Area PDZ Number Management Area Number

Coastal Northumberland North

GB650301440000 Northumberland to North Tyneside

PDZ1 and PDZ2

MA1 –MA6

Coastal Holy Island & Budle Bay


PDZ1 MA4, MA5

Coastal Farne Islands to Newton Haven


PDZ1 and PDZ2

MA4, MA6, MA7, MA8, MA9

Coastal Northumberland South


PDZ2, PDZ3, PDZ4, PDZ5

MA9 – MA20

Coastal Hadston Links and Cresswell Ponds


PDZ4 MA17

Coastal Tyne and Wear GB650301500002 Northumberland to North Tyneside

PDZ5, PDZ6 MA20 – MA27


PDZ1, PDZ2, PDZ3, PDZ4

MA1 – MA11

Coastal Yorkshire North GB650301500003 River Tyne to Flamborough Head

PDZ5 – PDZ12

MA12 – MA33

Transitional Tweed GB510202110000 Northumberland to North Tyneside

PDZ1 MA2

Transitional Aln GB510302203300 Northumberland to North Tyneside

PDZ3 MA13

Transitional Coquet GB510302203000 Northumberland to North Tyneside

PDZ3 MA15

Transitional Wansbeck GB510302210100 Northumberland to North Tyneside

PDZ5 MA21

Transitional Blyth (N) GB510302203200 Northumberland to North Tyneside

PDZ5 MA21, MA22

Transitional Tyne GB510302310200 Northumberland to North Tyneside

PDZ6 MA27


PDZ1 MA1, MA2

Transitional Wear GB510302402900 River Tyne to Flamborough Head

PDZ3 MA7

Transitional Tees GB510302509900 River Tyne to Flamborough Head

PDZ5 MA13

Transitional Esk (E) GB510402703400 River Tyne to Flamborough Head

PDZ8 MA23

Waterbody Type

Waterbody Name Waterbody ID SMP2 Area PDZ Number Management Area Number

River Tweed GB10202173070* Northumberland to North Tyneside

PDZ1 MA1, MA2

River Whiteadder GB102021073100 Northumberland to North Tyneside

PDZ1 MA1

River Swinehoe Burn from Source to N Sea


PDZ2 MA7

River Brunton Burn from Source to N Sea


PDZ2 MA8

River Long Nanny from Source to N Sea


PDZ2 MA8

River Embleton Burn form Source to N Sea


PDZ2 MA9

River Hipsburn Catchment (trib of tidal Aln)


PDZ3 MA13

Groundwater Wear Magnesian Limestone

GB40301G701700 River Tyne to Flamborough Head

PDZ 1‐ PDZ5 MA2 ‐MA12

Groundwater Derwent Vale of Pickering Corallian Limestone


PDZ12 MA30, MA31

Groundwater Hull & East Riding Chalk


PDZ12 MA33

* The ID code in the table is taken from the SMP2 however the freshwater body of the River Tweed (Coldstream to Tidal limit) is located within Scotland and is administered by SEPA. The waterbody identifier code is 5200.

Table C2. River waterbodies and groundwater bodies identified within the Cell 1 frontage but scoped out of assessment.

Waterbody Type Waterbody Name Waterbody ID

Groundwater Northumberland Carboniferous Limestone and Coal Measures

GB40302G700200

Groundwater Tyne Carboniferous Limestone and Coal Measures GB40302G701500

Groundwater Tees Sherwood Sandstone GB40301G702000

Groundwater Tees Mercia Mudstone & Redcar Mudstone GB40302G701300

Groundwater Esk & Yorkshire Coast Ravenscar GB40402G702300

Groundwater Derwent North Yorkshire Moors Ravenscar GB40402G700800

River Scremerston Coastal Area GB103021073250

River North Low from Berrington Burn to N Sea GB103021073240

River South Low from Source to N Sea GB103021073220

River Fenham Burn Catchment (to N Sea) GB103022076490

River Elwick Burn from Source to Ross Low GB103022076480


River Waren Burn from Newlands Burn to N Sea GB103022076440

River North Bamburgh Coastal Area GB103022076450

River Monks Ho Coastal Area GB103022076420

River Rennington Burn from Source to N Sea GB103022076360

River Longhoughton Coastal Area GB103022076320

River Seaton Ho Coastal Area GB103022076300

River Aln from Edlingham Burn to Tidal Limit GB103022076350

River Tyelaw Burn Catchment (trib of Coquet) GB103022076720

River Coquet from Ridlees Burn to Tidal Limit GB103022076690

River Chevington Burn from Steads Burn to Tidal Limit GB103022076530

River High Hauxley Coastal Area GB103022076610

River Unnamed stream draining to Druridge Bay (N) GB103022076810

River Unnamed stream draining to Druridge Bay (S) GB103022076800

River Lyne from Source to Tidal Limit GB103022076820

River Newbiggin Coastal Area GB103022077000

River Wansbeck from Font to North Sea GB103022077060

River Sleek Burn / Hepscott Burn Source to Tidal Limit GB103022076230

River Pont/Blyth from Small Burn to Tidal Limit GB103022077050

River Cowpen Area (south bank Tidal Blyth) GB103022077250

River Shankhouse to Cowpen / Blyth Area GB103022076210

River Blyth Coastal Area GB103022077260

River Meggies Burn to North Sea (Cramlington Catchment) GB103022076200

River Seaton Burn from Source to Tidal Limit GB103022076190

River Brierdene Burn from Source to North Sea GB103022076180

River Cut Throat Dene to Whitburn Bay Coastal Area GB103024077680

River Doxford Park to Hendon Coastal Area GB103024077640

River Ryhope Coastal Area GB103024077610

River Burdon to Ryhope Coastal Area GB103025075990

River Seaton Coastal Area GB103025075980

River Dalton Beck from Murton Beck to North Sea GB103025075970

River Hazel Dene to Dawdon Coastal Area GB103025075960

River Hawthorn Burn from Source to North Sea GB103025075950

River Peterlee to Easington Colliery Coastal Area GB103025075940

River Castle Eden Burn from Source to North Sea GB103025075930

River High Hesleden to Blue House Gill Coastal Area GB103025075920


River Blackhall Rocks Coastal Area GB103025075900

River Crimdon Beck from Source to Sea GB103025075910

River Nelson to Hart Warren Dunes (Trib of Crimdon Beck) GB103025075890

River Hart Beck from Source to Sea (Hartlepool) GB103025075880

River Seaton Carew Coastal Area GB103025072010

River Redcar Coastal Area GB103025072660

River Marske Central Coastal area GB103025072000

River Marske South Coastal Area GB103025071980

River Skelton Beck Catch (Saltburn) trib of North Sea GB103025071970

River Saltburn Gill Catch trib of North Sea GB103025071960

River Kilton Beck from Middle Gill Beck to North Sea GB103025071950

River Staithes Beck from Newton Beck to the North Sea GB104027068760

River Runswick Bay Middle Coastal Area GB104027068740

River Runswick Bay South Coastal Area GB104027068730

River Sandsend North Coastal Area GB104027069570

River Sandsend Beck/Mickley Bk from Source to North Sea GB104027068720

River East Row Beck from Source to North Sea GB204027068710

River Newholme Beck from Source to North Sea (Sandsend) GB104027068700

River Whitby (North of Esk) GB104027068690

River Rigg Mill Bk/Long Mill Bk catch (trib of Esk) GB104027068140

River Hawsker Bottoms Catchment (drains to N Sea) GB104027068680

River Mill Beck/Ramsdale Beck catchment (trib N Tea) GB104027068670

River Stoupe Beck catchment (trib of N Sea) GB104027068660

River Hayburn Beck/Thorny Beck catch (drains to N Sea) GB104027068610

River Burniston Beck/Sea Cut/Scalby Beck Catch to N Sea GB104027067980

River Scarborough North GB104027067920

River Filey North GB104027067850

River Long Whins Gill catch (drainds to N Sea) GB104027067820

River Reighton Coastal Area GB104027067780

River Flamborough North Landing Catchment GB104026067170

Appendix D Assessment Table 1

Assessment Table 1 for the Northumberland to North Tyneside SMP2.

Assessment Table 1 for the River Tyne to Flamborough Head SMP2.

water framework directive screening report 1 wfd... · section 1 cell 1 wfd screening report_final...

Documents