\n The Christchurch Bay and Harbour FCERM* Strategy was produced in partnership with the Environment Agency and technical consultants AECOM.\n<\/p>\n
\n It highlights that ageing existing coastal defences and the changing climate (including rising sea levels) put more than 3,500 properties at risk from coastal flooding and or being lost to coastal erosion. \u00a0\n<\/p>\n
\n The 3,500 at-risk properties includes 1,600 properties at risk from coastal erosion and 2,200 properties at risk from tidal flooding.\n<\/p>\n
\n If nothing was done over the next 100 years, the coastal frontage will suffer around \u00a31 billion in damages (cash value over 100 years), according to the councils.\n<\/p>\n
\n null (Image: BCP council)\n<\/p>\n
\n Councillor Andy Hadley, Portfolio Holder for Climate Response, Environment and Energy at BCP Council, said: \u201cThis is a major milestone and is the first time a cohesive strategy has been adopted for this stretch of coastline. It recommends where and by when (in specified time periods) schemes should be implemented and how much they may cost. Importantly, the strategy ensures that works carried out in one area would have no detrimental effect on another and provides opportunities to enhance the environment.\n<\/p>\n
\n \u201cThe value of damages is not designed to alarm people but enables us to evidence and justify available options to \u2018do something\u2019 to minimise the risks to people, properties, infrastructure and open spaces.\u00a0 With backing from the Environment Agency, it also allows us to bid for government funding rather than relying solely on councils\u2019 limited resources as has happened in the past.\u201d\n<\/p>\n
\n Graphic showing the plan (Image: New Forest District Council)\n<\/p>\n
\n Councillor Geoffrey Blunden, Portfolio Holder for Environment and Sustainability at New Forest District Council, added:\u00a0 \u201cThe strategy recommends an adaptive pathway with up to three flexible options for each area; a National Economic option, a Local Aspirational option which was developed using public views and which tends to be the costliest to deliver, and a Back-up option if funding cannot be secured.\n<\/p>\n
\n \u201cAlthough there is no guarantee of achieving 100 per cent government funding for the scheme options, the strategy options provide flexibility at the time of delivery, depending on the funding available\u200b. \u00a0Any shortfalls will not default to the Council, rather it gives clarity for seeking funding support from partners and \/ or impacted communities. \u00a0By working together to manage the risks,\u00a0we intend to ensure that\u00a0future generations will be able to continue to enjoy the coastline.\u200b\u200b\u201d\n<\/p>\n
\n In the New Forest, this strategy which ends just west of Hurst Spit, interacts with the emerging Hurst Spit to Lymington Strategy.\n<\/p>\n
\n Councils do not have a statutory responsibility to undertake coastal defence works if central government funding\u00a0is not\u00a0available. \u00a0If additional partnership funding for new schemes\u00a0cannot\u00a0be achieved, the Strategy will default to the option identifying the minimum amount of intervention through the maintenance of existing coastal defences,\u00a0for as long as\u00a0it is\u00a0feasible to do so\u00a0(i.e. defences might not always be maintained into the future).\u00a0\n<\/p>\n
\n Under the current National Economic funding rules, the funding\u00a0available from central government won\u2019t\u00a0cover the full cost of new coastal\u00a0defences. \u00a0Upon adoption, a commitment has been made to identify how funding shortfalls over the next 20 years can be secured.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole (BCP) Council and New Forest District Council have both signed up, and the strategy…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":645915,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[3843],"tags":[728,70,16,15],"class_list":{"0":"post-645914","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-environment","8":"tag-environment","9":"tag-science","10":"tag-uk","11":"tag-united-kingdom"},"share_on_mastodon":{"url":"https:\/\/pubeurope.com\/@uk\/115756683966112699","error":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/645914","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=645914"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/645914\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/645915"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=645914"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=645914"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=645914"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}