View
32
Download
0
Category
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
Beachy Head to Selsey Bill Shoreline Management Plan 1st Review Key Stakeholders Forum. Roger Spencer (Arun DC) Adam Hosking (Halcrow Group). www.sdcg.org.uk. SMP4D@ Halcrow.com. Structure for today. Introductions Presentation SMP background Stakeholder Involvement Strategy - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
Key Stakeholders Meeting. 25 September 2003.
Beachy Head to Selsey BillShoreline Management Plan1st Review
Key Stakeholders Forum
Roger Spencer (Arun DC)Adam Hosking (Halcrow Group)
SMP4D@Halcrow.comwww.sdcg.org.uk
Key Stakeholders Meeting. 25 September 2003.
Structure for today
• Introductions• Presentation
– SMP background– Stakeholder Involvement Strategy– Issues Identification Approach
• Questions on Approach• Break-out sessions to review issues table• What next in SMP?
Key Stakeholders Meeting. 25 September 2003.
Shoreline Management Plans (SMPs)
• The SMP is a (non-statutory) policy document for coastal defence management planning
• It will however take account of other existing planning initiatives and legislative requirements
• It will inform wider (statutory) strategic planning, but
• It will not set policy for anything other than coastal defence management
Key Stakeholders Meeting. 25 September 2003.
COASTAL DEFENCE PLANNINGThe UK Strategic Framework
Shoreline Management Plans
Identify general policies, e.g. “hold the line” and general implementation requirements
e.g. SMP4d
Strategy Plans Identifies nature and timing of works to be undertaken
e.g. Rivers Arun to Adur
Schemes Design and construction of capital works and maintenance
e.g. Shoreham & Lancing Sea Defences
Key Stakeholders Meeting. 25 September 2003.
Aim of the SMP
• To promote sustainable management policies for a coastline into the 22nd century
• Seek to achieve long-term objectives without committing to unsustainable defences
• Consider objectives, policy setting and management requirements for 3 main time periods….
…. 0-20 years, 20-50 years and 50-100 years• Provide a timeline for management changes, which
will provide direction for decision makers to move from the present towards the future
Key Stakeholders Meeting. 25 September 2003.
Why review the SMP?
• SMPs are working documents that need to be revised to incorporate up-to date information and changes in policy guidance and ongoing shoreline evolution
• First SMP was produced in 1996/7• New SMP needs to take account of:
– Latest technical studies (e.g. Futurecoast)– Issues identified by most recent defence planning (i.e.
coastal defence strategy plans which now cover most of the SMP area)
– Changes in legislation (e.g. EU Habitat Directive)– Changes in national defence planning requirements
Key Stakeholders Meeting. 25 September 2003.
SMP work flow
6 . F ina lise S h ore lineM anag em en t P lan
M ay
5 . P ub lic co nsu lta tionApril - M ay
4 . P o licy ap pra isalNovem ber - M arch
3 . D e fin e o b jec tivesSept - Novem ber
2 . In itia l d a taassessm ent
July - Aug
1 . D ata G atheringJune - Septem ber
Key Stakeholders Meeting. 25 September 2003.
SMP work flow: Data Gathering
Project team
June 2003Coastal Group Meeting
Agree Stakeholder Engagement Strategy and overall approach
July 2003Develop initial Stakeholder Engagement materials
Stakeholder list, letter/questionnaire
August 2003Issue Stakeholder Engagement Materials
As well as identifying issues, seek to identify what other information is available
August 2003 Field Visit Key project team members
August/ September 2003
Stakeholder FeedbackIdentification of information and issues.
August/ September 2003
Information Collection From Stakeholders.
Key Stakeholders Meeting. 25 September 2003.
SMP work flow : Initial data assessments and define objectives
September 2003 Analyse Responses Develop Issues Table
September 2003 Stakeholder meetingReview and discussion of identified issues
September/ October 2003
Conduct theme reviews
Obtain data from designated sources
September/ October 2003
Develop process understanding
Assess shoreline evolution for base cases
October/ November 2003
Complete issues table Define and rank objectives
November 2003 Stakeholder meetingReview/ agree objectives and ranking
November 2003 Finalise Objectives
Key Stakeholders Meeting. 25 September 2003.
SMP work flow: Policy appraisal and SMP production
December/ January 2003
Policy Scenario Assessment
Use objectives and process baseline to identify appropriate policies for SMP and assess shoreline response to policies
February 2004 Stakeholder MeetingStakeholder review of proposed policies
February/ March 2004
Finalise policy and draft document
April/May 2004 Public ConsultationDraft document available for review
May 2004 Complete SMPDetermine changes needed and amend draft document
Key Stakeholders Meeting. 25 September 2003.
Role of Issues & Objectives(‘Issues’ are raised by stakeholders/reviews, ‘objectives’ aim to resolve issues)
• Central to new approach to SMPs– Informs selection of policies– Provides focus for stakeholder consensus
• Policy appraisal is ‘objective led’• Objectives appraised to identify most suitable
shoreline management policy
Key Stakeholders Meeting. 25 September 2003.
SMP Management Model
CONTRACTORCLIENT
MANAGEMENTGROUP
Other individualstakeholders
andorganisations
not on theForum
KEYSTAKEHOLDERS’
FORUM
Key Stakeholders Meeting. 25 September 2003.
Remit of Key Stakeholders’ Forum
• Comprises representatives of the key stakeholder organisations likely to be affected by the SMP
• Suggests issues and their priorities to be considered within the SMP
• Meets periodically throughout production of SMP
• Provides comment on proposals of Client Management Group and the Contractor
Key Stakeholders Meeting. 25 September 2003.
KSF MembershipEastbourne BC Wealden DC Lewes DC
Brighton & Hove CC Adur DC Worthing DC
Arun DC Chichester DC English Nature
Environment Agency West Sussex CC East Sussex CC
English Heritage Sussex Wildlife TrustSussex Downs
Conservation Board
Sussex Sea Fisheries RSPB National Trust
Royal Yachting Association
Sussex Association of Local Councils
National Farmers Union
Brighton Marina Co. Railtrack Shoreham Port*
Littlehampton Harbour Board*
Defra, FCD*Defra, Fisheries
Inspectorate*
Southern Water* Sea Containers Ports* South Coast Power*
Key Stakeholders Meeting. 25 September 2003.
Approach to Stakeholder Involvement
• Identified organisations and individuals with an interest in the preparation of the SMP
• Letter of Invitation explaining reasoning and background to all Stakeholders
• Questionnaire to all Stakeholders asking for contact details, data and concerns/issues
• Discussions with the Client Management Group comprising the local authorities, Environment Agency, English Nature and Defra
Key Stakeholders Meeting. 25 September 2003.
Approach to Identifying Issues
• Familiarisation visits to whole coastline, concentrating on sensitive areas
• Review of current SMP
• Review of information and other documents provided by authorities and found on the internet
• Issues raised in the responses to the questionnaires sent to 150 stakeholders
Key Stakeholders Meeting. 25 September 2003.
Issues based methodology
• Provides systematic and consistent evaluation process of subjective and objective criteria
• Identifies what really matters not just the obvious• Offers a strategic approach• Based upon ‘Quality of Life Capital’, developed by
Countryside Agency, English Nature, English Heritage and the Environment Agency
Key Stakeholders Meeting. 25 September 2003.
Identification of Issues
Location Feature Issue associated with Feature
FCD Issue?
Affect policy?
Why is issue important?
Who are beneficiaries?
Key Stakeholders Meeting. 25 September 2003.
Issues Table for Sub-Cell 4d (cont)
• Beneficiaries ranked as:– Individuals – not organisations– Local – residents, groups in immediate area– Regional Users – local authorities, regional
communities, organisations and businesses– National Users – National organisations– International Users
Key Stakeholders Meeting. 25 September 2003.
Issues Table for Sub-Cell 4d
• Three forms of issues– technical– environmental– socio-economic
• Generic issues for:– Towns and other settlements– Open coast
Key Stakeholders Meeting. 25 September 2003.
• Protecting people and their homes• Protecting commercial property and the local
economy• Protecting local infrastructure and services• Protecting recreation and tourism sites and
activities• Maintaining access to the beach• Protecting of specific designated sites and
features
Generic Issues for Towns
Key Stakeholders Meeting. 25 September 2003.
• Preserving environmental designations e.g. SSSI, SNCI, SPA, AONB, NNR
• Protecting agricultural land• Maintaining access to the beach for
launching/recreation• Protecting marine archaeological sites• Protecting coastal developments
Generic Issues for Open Coast
Key Stakeholders Meeting. 25 September 2003.
Structure for today
• Introductions• Presentations
– SMP background– Stakeholder Involvement Strategy– Issues Identification Approach
• Questions on Approach• Break-out sessions to review issues table• What next in SMP?
Key Stakeholders Meeting. 25 September 2003.
Break out sessions
• Divide into groups• Consider in turn,
– the ISSUES (does it affect policy?), – the FEATURES these relate to– Why is this important, i.e. what are the
BENEFITS– WHO benefits
• Remember to also consider TIMESCALES over which these apply (0-20, 20-50, 50-100 years)
Key Stakeholders Meeting. 25 September 2003.
Next Steps
• Finalise the issues table• Use process study to appraise potential future
flooding and erosion risks (over 20, 50 and 100 years)
• Use ‘theme reviews’ to rank shoreline management objectives
• Review by Stakeholders.• Policy Appraisal
Key Stakeholders Meeting. 25 September 2003.
Converting Issues to Objectives
Ranking objectives is based upon answering 4 questions:
• At what scales (spatial/temporal) is the benefit important? If the feature were lost tomorrow, at what (spatial) scale would there be an impact? Also, is the feature, or benefit, of finite temporal importance (i.e. less that 100 years?).
• Can the benefit be substituted? Can the benefit can be replaced at the appropriate scale.
• Is there enough of the benefit? Scarcity of the benefit at the scale at which it is important.
• Importance of the benefit at the SMP scale or greater? If the feature were lost tomorrow, what would the impact be?
Key Stakeholders Meeting. 25 September 2003.
Objective SettingRanking of Objectives
Rank Criteria
Very High High importance and rarity, international/national/regional scale limited potential for substitution
High High importance and rarity, international scale but potential for substitution
High High importance and rarity, local or regional scale, and limited potential for substitution
Medium Medium importance and rarity, regional scale, but limited potential for substitution
Low Medium importance and rarity, local scale, but potential for substitution
Negligible Low or very low importance and rarity, local scale
Key Stakeholders Meeting. 25 September 2003.
Policy Appraisal
Once we have defined and agreed the ranked objectives, they will be used in policy appraisal.
There are 4 possible policy options:
• hold the existing defence line• advance the existing defence line• managed realignment• no active intervention
These will be appraised to develop ‘policy scenarios’ which will be tested against process understanding to determined preferred policy.
Review by Key Stakeholders and Elected members.
Key Stakeholders Meeting. 25 September 2003.
Points to consider
In answering the questions for the range of issues affecting the coast we need to consider:
• What should we use to appraise whether there is enough of a benefit e.g. housing or shops? County/Regional housing targets?
• Are all SSSI sites unique, or should we count some as re-creatable? (EN/CWT guidance)
• Are all urban assets more beneficial than rural assets, due to future regeneration/development potential? (Development sites or more general)
• How should we appraise importance of features such as recreation areas? Primary users, e.g. local, etc?
Key Stakeholders Meeting. 25 September 2003.
Meeting 2
• Thursday 27 November 2003
• Review objectives
• Appraise Ranking
• Agree way forward with policy appraisal.
• Comments to: SMP4D@Halcrow.com
Recommended