SlideShare a Scribd company logo
The above provides the local details in respect of the SMP-wide policy presented in the preceding sections of this Plan
document. These details must be read in the context of the wider-scales issues and policy implications, as reported therein.
Severn Estuary SMP2 Review – Final Report
1
SHARPNESS TO SEVERN CROSSINGS
This Theme area contains the Policy Unit SEV 1, SEV 2, SEV 3, SEV 4, SEV 5 and SEV6.
It encompasses the shoreline from downstream of Sharpness, to Aust at Severn Crossings.
The Key Policy Drivers in this area are:
• Critical infrastructure – Oldbury and Berkeley Nuclear Power Stations;
• Residential areas – Oldbury-on-Severn.
The above provides the local details in respect of the SMP-wide policy presented in the preceding sections of this Plan
document. These details must be read in the context of the wider-scales issues and policy implications, as reported therein.
Severn Estuary SMP2 Review – Final Report
2
The above provides the local details in respect of the SMP-wide policy presented in the preceding sections of this Plan
document. These details must be read in the context of the wider-scales issues and policy implications, as reported therein.
Severn Estuary SMP2 Review – Final Report
3
Policy Unit: SEV 1 – South of Sharpness Docks to Bull Rock (east bank
of the River Severn)
The above provides the local details in respect of the SMP-wide policy presented in the preceding sections of this Plan
document. These details must be read in the context of the wider-scales issues and policy implications, as reported therein.
Severn Estuary SMP2 Review – Final Report
4
Preferred Policies to Implement the Plan:
Epoch
Preferred
Policy
Comments
0 to 20
years
(2025)
HTL
The Short Term policy for this unit is Hold The Line.
The current defences are expected to remain in place for this epoch but may
require some reconstruction / extensive works. Actions should take account
of potential impacts in all linked Policy Units (SEV 2, SEV 3, SEV 4, SEV 5,
and SEV 6). HTL will manage the risk of impacts from flooding to Key Policy
Drivers such as Oldbury and Berkeley Nuclear Power Stations.
HTL does not guarantee funding to build or maintain current or future
defences or to counter sea level rise.
20 to 50
years
(2055)
HTL
The medium term policy for this unit is Hold The Line.
The existing defences will come to the end of their serviceable life in this
epoch. HTL recommends that defences are replaced. The position, size and
materials of new defences should be considered in detail to ensure actions
take account of potential impacts on linked Policy Units (SEV 2, SEV 3, SEV
4, SEV 5, and SEV 6). The location and type of defence should be
determined by the SEFRMS. HTL will manage the risk of impact from
flooding to Key Policy Drivers such as Oldbury and Berkeley Nuclear Power
Stations (or new power stations in these locations).
HTL does not guarantee funding to build or maintain current or future
defences or to counter sea level rise.
50 to 100
years
(2105)
HTL
The long term policy for this unit is Hold The Line.
New defences should be maintained. HTL will manage the risk of flooding in
this and linked Policy Units (SEV 2, SEV 3, SEV 4, SEV 5, and SEV 6). HTL
will manage the risk of impact from flooding to Key Policy Drivers such as
Oldbury and Berkeley Nuclear Power Stations (or new power stations in
these locations).
HTL does not guarantee funding to build or maintain current or future
defences or to counter sea level rise.
Economics
Policy
Unit
Existing
SMP1
Policy
Time Period
(epoch)
SMP2 Assessment
0-
20
20-
50
50-
100
Preferred Plan Present Value
Damages
Preferred Plan Present Value
Defence Costs
SEV 1 HTL HTL HTL HTL
£46m
(SEV1-6 total)
£15m
(SEV1-6 total)
The preferred policy for this unit is economically viable. The preferred policy is economically viable for the
linked Policy Units of SEV 1, SEV 2, SEV 3, SEV 4, SEV 5 and SEV 6, but the benefit-cost ratio (BCR) is
low. Where the BCR is low, schemes may be less likely to receive public funding and it may be necessary
to find funding from other sources. The costs and damages of the preferred policy in the table above relate
to actions taken in all linked policy units.
The above provides the local details in respect of the SMP-wide policy presented in the preceding sections of this Plan
document. These details must be read in the context of the wider-scales issues and policy implications, as reported therein.
Severn Estuary SMP2 Review – Final Report
5
Predicted Implication of the Preferred Plan for the SEV 1 Policy Unit
Time
Period
Management Activities
Property, Land Use and
Human Health
Nature Conservation –
including Earth
Heritage, Geology and
Biodiversity
Landscape Character
and Visual Amenity
Historic Environment
Amenity and
Recreational Use
0 – 20
years
The current earth
embankment defences
are expected to come to
the end of their
serviceable life during the
next epoch but may
require reconstruction /
extensive works during
this epoch. Hydraulic
linkage to a number of
units would result in a
large floodplain should
defences come to the end
of their serviceable life.
Major assets are at flood
risk in this and linked
Policy Units should
defences come to the end
of their serviceable life
including Oldbury and
Berkley Power stations.
Defences will manage the
risk of impacts to existing
property, land use or
human health.
A HTL policy will not
impact the nature
conservation sites during
this time period. Works
should take account of
possible environmental
impacts and the need for
an EIA.
Defences are likely to
come to the end of their
serviceable life in the next
epoch but may require
reconstruction / extensive
works during this epoch.
Increased height of
defences or change in
defence construction
materials will affect local
landscape - increasing
presence in the
landscape and disrupting
views.
Defences will manage the
risk of impacts to the
historic environment
Defences will manage the
risk to amenity or
recreational value of the
land
20 – 50
years
The current earth
embankment defences
are expected to come to
the end of their
serviceable life during this
epoch and should be
replaced. An on-going
maintenance programme
should be established to
ensure the defences
afford protection to the
assets at risk
Major assets are at flood
risk in this and linked
Policy Units should
defences come to the end
of their serviceable life
including Oldbury and
Berkley Power stations
(or new builds in these
locations). Defences will
manage the risk of
impacts to existing
property, land use or
human health.
Coastal squeeze will
occur which will result in
loss of intertidal habitats.
Works should take
account of possible
environmental impacts
and the need for an EIA.
Defences are likely to
come to the end of their
serviceable life in this
epoch and should be
reconstructed. Increased
height of defences or
change in defence
construction materials will
affect local landscape -
increasing presence in
the landscape and
disrupting views.
Defences will manage the
risk of impacts to the
historic environment
Defences will manage the
risk to amenity or
recreational value of the
land
The above provides the local details in respect of the SMP-wide policy presented in the preceding sections of this Plan
document. These details must be read in the context of the wider-scales issues and policy implications, as reported therein.
Severn Estuary SMP2 Review – Final Report
6
Time
Period
Management Activities
Property, Land Use and
Human Health
Nature Conservation –
including Earth
Heritage, Geology and
Biodiversity
Landscape Character
and Visual Amenity
Historic Environment
Amenity and
Recreational Use
50 – 100
years
An on-going maintenance
programme should be
established including the
monitoring of shoreline
erosion as sea level rise
increases.
Major assets are at flood
risk in this and linked
Policy Units should
defences come to the end
of their serviceable life
including Oldbury and
Berkley Power stations
(or new builds in these
locations). Defences will
manage the risk of
impacts to existing
property, land use or
human health.
Coastal squeeze will
occur which will result in
loss of intertidal habitats.
Works should take
account of possible
environmental impacts
and the need for an EIA.
Increased height of
defences or change in
defence construction
materials will affect local
landscape - increasing
presence in the
landscape and disrupting
views.
Defences will manage the
risk of impacts to the
historic environment
Defences will manage the
risk to amenity or
recreational value of the
land
The above provides the local details in respect of the SMP-wide policy presented in the preceding sections of this Plan
document. These details must be read in the context of the wider-scales issues and policy implications, as reported therein.
Severn Estuary SMP2 Review – Final Report
7
Policy Unit: SEV 2 – Bull Rock to southern boundary of Berkeley Power
Station (east bank of the River Severn)
The above provides the local details in respect of the SMP-wide policy presented in the preceding sections of this Plan
document. These details must be read in the context of the wider-scales issues and policy implications, as reported therein.
Severn Estuary SMP2 Review – Final Report
8
Preferred Policies to Implement the Plan:
Epoch
Preferred
Policy
Comments
0 to 20
years
(2025)
HTL
The Short Term policy for this unit is Hold The Line.
The current defences are expected to remain in place for this epoch but may
require some reconstruction / extensive works during this epoch. Actions
should take account of potential impacts in all linked Policy Units (SEV 1,
SEV 3, SEV 4, SEV5, and SEV 6).
HTL will manage the risk of impacts from flooding to Key Policy Drivers such
as Oldbury and Berkeley Nuclear Power Stations.
HTL does not guarantee funding to build or maintain current or future
defences or to counter sea level rise.
20 to 50
years
(2055)
HTL
The medium term policy for this unit is Hold The Line.
The existing defences are expected to come to the end of their serviceable
life in this epoch. HTL recommends that defences are replaced. The
position, size and materials of new defences should be considered in detail
to ensure actions take account of potential impacts on linked Policy Units
(SEV 1, SEV 3, SEV 4, SEV5, and SEV 6). The location and type of defence
should be determined by the SEFRMS.
HTL will manage the risk of impacts from flooding to Key Policy Drivers such
as Oldbury and Berkeley Nuclear Power Stations (or new power stations in
these locations).
HTL does not guarantee funding to build or maintain current or future
defences or to counter sea level rise.
50 to 100
years
(2105)
HTL
The long term policy for this unit is Hold The Line.
New defences should be maintained. HTL will manage the risk from flooding
in this and linked Policy Units (SEV 1, SEV 3, SEV 4, SEV5, and SEV 6).
HTL will manage the risk of impacts from flooding to Key Policy Drivers such
as Oldbury and Berkeley Nuclear Power Stations (or new power stations in
these locations).
HTL does not guarantee funding to build or maintain current or future
defences or to counter sea level rise.
The above provides the local details in respect of the SMP-wide policy presented in the preceding sections of this Plan
document. These details must be read in the context of the wider-scales issues and policy implications, as reported therein.
Severn Estuary SMP2 Review – Final Report
9
Economics
Policy
Unit
Existing
SMP1
Policy
Time Period
(epoch)
SMP2 Assessment
0-
20
20-
50
50-
100
Preferred Plan Present Value
Damages
Preferred Plan Present Value
Defence Costs
SEV 2 HTL HTL HTL HTL
£46m
(SEV1-6 total)
£15m
(SEV1-6 total)
The preferred policy for this unit is economically viable. The preferred policy is economically viable for the
linked Policy Units of SEV 1, SEV 2, SEV 3, SEV 4, SEV 5 and SEV 6, but the benefit-cost ratio (BCR) is
low. Where the BCR is low, schemes may be less likely to receive public funding and it may be necessary
to find funding from other sources. The costs and damages of the preferred policy in the table above relate
to actions taken in all linked policy units.
The above provides the local details in respect of the SMP-wide policy presented in the preceding sections of this Plan
document. These details must be read in the context of the wider-scales issues and policy implications, as reported therein.
Severn Estuary SMP2 Review – Final Report
10
Predicted Implication of the Preferred Plan for the SEV 2 Policy Unit
Time
Period
Management Activities
Property, Land Use and
Human Health
Nature Conservation –
including Earth
Heritage, Geology and
Biodiversity
Landscape Character
and Visual Amenity
Historic Environment
Amenity and
Recreational Use
0 – 20
years
The current earth
embankment defences
are expected to come to
the end of their
serviceable life during the
next epoch but may
require reconstruction /
extensive works during
this epoch. Hydraulic
linkage to a number of
units would result in a
large floodplain should
defences come to the end
of their serviceable life.
Major assets are at flood
risk in this and linked
Policy Units should
defences come to the end
of their serviceable life
including Oldbury and
Berkley Power stations.
Defences will manage the
risk of impacts to existing
property, land use or
human health.
A HTL policy will not
impact the nature
conservation sites during
this time period. Works
should take account of
possible environmental
impacts and the need for
an EIA.
Defences are likely to
come to the end of their
serviceable life in the next
epoch but may require
reconstruction / extensive
works during this epoch.
Increased height of
defences or change in
defence construction
materials will affect local
landscape - increasing
presence in the
landscape and disrupting
views.
Defences will manage the
risk of impacts to the
historic environment
Defences will manage the
risk to amenity or
recreational value of the
land
20 – 50
years
The current earth
embankment defences
are expected to come to
the end of their
serviceable life during this
epoch and should be
replaced. An on-going
maintenance programme
should be established to
ensure the defences
afford protection to the
assets at risk
Major assets are at flood
risk in this and linked
Policy Units should
defences come to the end
of their serviceable life
including Oldbury and
Berkley Power stations
(or new builds in these
locations). Defences will
manage the risk of
impacts to existing
property, land use or
human health.
Coastal squeeze will
occur which will result in
loss of intertidal habitats.
Works should take
account of possible
environmental impacts
and the need for an EIA.
Defences are likely to
come to the end of their
serviceable life in this
epoch and should be
reconstructed. Increased
height of defences or
change in defence
construction materials will
affect local landscape -
increasing presence in
the landscape and
disrupting views.
Defences will manage the
risk of impacts to the
historic environment
Defences will manage the
risk to amenity or
recreational value of the
land
The above provides the local details in respect of the SMP-wide policy presented in the preceding sections of this Plan
document. These details must be read in the context of the wider-scales issues and policy implications, as reported therein.
Severn Estuary SMP2 Review – Final Report
11
Time
Period
Management Activities
Property, Land Use and
Human Health
Nature Conservation –
including Earth
Heritage, Geology and
Biodiversity
Landscape Character
and Visual Amenity
Historic Environment
Amenity and
Recreational Use
50 – 100
years
An on-going maintenance
programme should be
established including the
monitoring of shoreline
erosion as sea level rise
increases.
Major assets are at flood
risk in this and linked
Policy Units should
defences come to the end
of their serviceable life
including Oldbury and
Berkley Power stations
(or new builds in these
locations). Defences will
manage the risk of
impacts to existing
property, land use or
human health.
Coastal squeeze will
occur which will result in
loss of intertidal habitats.
Works should take
account of possible
environmental impacts
and the need for an EIA.
Increased height of
defences or change in
defence construction
materials will affect local
landscape - increasing
presence in the
landscape and disrupting
views.
Defences will manage the
risk of impacts to the
historic environment
Defences will manage the
risk to amenity or
recreational value of the
land
The above provides the local details in respect of the SMP-wide policy presented in the preceding sections of this Plan
document. These details must be read in the context of the wider-scales issues and policy implications, as reported therein.
Severn Estuary SMP2 Review – Final Report
12
Policy Unit: SEV 3 – Southern boundary of Berkeley Power Station to
Oldbury Power Station (east bank of the River Severn)
The above provides the local details in respect of the SMP-wide policy presented in the preceding sections of this Plan
document. These details must be read in the context of the wider-scales issues and policy implications, as reported therein.
Severn Estuary SMP2 Review – Final Report
13
Preferred Policies to Implement the Plan:
Epoch
Preferred
Policy
Comments
0 to 20
years
(2025)
HTL
The Short Term policy for this unit is Hold The Line.
The current defences are expected to remain in place for this epoch but may
require some reconstruction / extensive works during this epoch. Actions
should take account of potential impacts in all linked Policy Units (SEV2,
SEV3, SEV 4, SEV 5, and SEV 6).
HTL will manage the risk of impacts from flooding to Key Policy Drivers such
as Oldbury and Berkeley Nuclear Power Stations.
HTL does not guarantee funding to build or maintain current or future
defences or to counter sea level rise.
20 to 50
years
(2055)
HTL
The medium term policy for this unit is Hold The Line.
The existing defences will come to the end of their serviceable life in this
epoch. HTL recommends that defences are replaced. The position, size
and materials of new defences should be considered in detail to ensure
actions take account of potential impacts on linked Policy Units (SEV 1, SEV
2, SEV 4, SEV 5, and SEV 6). The location and type of defence should be
determined by the SEFRMS.
HTL will manage the risk of impacts from flooding to Key Policy Drivers such
as Oldbury and Berkeley Nuclear Power Stations (or new power stations in
these locations).
HTL does not guarantee funding to build or maintain current or future
defences or to counter sea level rise.
50 to 100
years
(2105)
HTL
The long term policy for this unit is Hold The Line.
New defences should be maintained. HTL will manage the risk of flooding in
this and linked Policy Units (SEV 1, SEV 2, SEV 4, SEV 5, and SEV 6).
HTL will manage the risk of impacts from flooding to Key Policy Drivers such
as Oldbury and Berkeley Nuclear Power Stations (or new power stations in
these locations)..
HTL does not guarantee funding to build or maintain current or future
defences or to counter sea level rise.
The above provides the local details in respect of the SMP-wide policy presented in the preceding sections of this Plan
document. These details must be read in the context of the wider-scales issues and policy implications, as reported therein.
Severn Estuary SMP2 Review – Final Report
14
Economics
Policy
Unit
Existing
SMP1
Policy
Time Period
(epoch)
SMP2 Assessment
0-
20
20-
50
50-
100
Preferred Plan Present Value
Damages
Preferred Plan Present Value
Defence Costs
SEV 3 HTL HTL HTL HTL
£46m
(SEV1-6 total)
£15m
(SEV1-6 total)
The preferred policy for this unit is economically viable. The preferred policy is economically viable for the
linked Policy Units of SEV 1, SEV 2, SEV 3, SEV 4, SEV 5 and SEV 6, but the benefit-cost ratio (BCR) is
low. Where the BCR is low, schemes may be less likely to receive public funding and it may be necessary
to find funding from other sources. The costs and damages of the preferred policy in the table above relate
to actions taken in all linked policy units.
The above provides the local details in respect of the SMP-wide policy presented in the preceding sections of this Plan
document. These details must be read in the context of the wider-scales issues and policy implications, as reported therein.
Severn Estuary SMP2 Review – Final Report
15
Predicted Implication of the Preferred Plan for the SEV 3 Policy Unit
Time
Period
Management Activities
Property, Land Use and
Human Health
Nature Conservation –
including Earth
Heritage, Geology and
Biodiversity
Landscape Character
and Visual Amenity
Historic Environment
Amenity and
Recreational Use
0 – 20
years
The current earth
embankment defences
are expected to come to
the end of their
serviceable life during the
next epoch but may
require reconstruction /
extensive works during
this epoch. Hydraulic
linkage to a number of
units would result in a
large floodplain should
defences come to the end
of their serviceable life.
Major assets are at flood
risk in this and linked
Policy Units should
defences come to the end
of their serviceable life
including Oldbury and
Berkley Power stations.
Defences will manage the
risk of impacts to existing
property, land use or
human health.
A HTL policy will not
impact the nature
conservation sites during
this time period. Works
should take account of
possible environmental
impacts and the need for
an EIA.
Defences are likely to
come to the end of their
serviceable life in the next
epoch but may require
reconstruction / extensive
works during this epoch.
Increased height of
defences or change in
defence construction
materials will affect local
landscape - increasing
presence in the
landscape and disrupting
views.
Defences will manage the
risk of impacts to the
historic environment
Defences will manage the
risk to amenity or
recreational value of the
land
20 – 50
years
The current earth
embankment defences
are expected to come to
the end of their
serviceable life during this
epoch and should be
replaced. An on-going
maintenance programme
should be established to
ensure the defences
afford protection to the
assets at risk
Major assets are at flood
risk in this and linked
Policy Units should
defences come to the end
of their serviceable life
including Oldbury and
Berkley Power stations
(or new builds in these
locations). Defences will
manage the risk of
impacts to existing
property, land use or
human health.
Coastal squeeze will
occur which will result in
loss of intertidal habitats.
Works should take
account of possible
environmental impacts
and the need for an EIA.
Defences are likely to
come to the end of their
serviceable life in this
epoch and should be
reconstructed. Increased
height of defences or
change in defence
construction materials will
affect local landscape -
increasing presence in
the landscape and
disrupting views.
Defences will manage the
risk of impacts to the
historic environment
Defences will manage the
risk to amenity or
recreational value of the
land
The above provides the local details in respect of the SMP-wide policy presented in the preceding sections of this Plan
document. These details must be read in the context of the wider-scales issues and policy implications, as reported therein.
Severn Estuary SMP2 Review – Final Report
16
Time
Period
Management Activities
Property, Land Use and
Human Health
Nature Conservation –
including Earth
Heritage, Geology and
Biodiversity
Landscape Character
and Visual Amenity
Historic Environment
Amenity and
Recreational Use
50 – 100
years
An on-going maintenance
programme should be
established including the
monitoring of shoreline
erosion as sea level rise
increases.
Major assets are at flood
risk in this and linked
Policy Units should
defences come to the end
of their serviceable life
including Oldbury and
Berkley Power stations
(or new builds in these
locations). Defences will
manage the risk of
impacts to existing
property, land use or
human health.
Coastal squeeze will
occur which will result in
loss of intertidal habitats.
Works should take
account of possible
environmental impacts
and the need for an EIA.
Increased height of
defences or change in
defence construction
materials will affect local
landscape - increasing
presence in the
landscape and disrupting
views.
Defences will manage the
risk of impacts to the
historic environment
Defences will manage the
risk to amenity or
recreational value of the
land
The above provides the local details in respect of the SMP-wide policy presented in the preceding sections of this Plan
document. These details must be read in the context of the wider-scales issues and policy implications, as reported therein.
Severn Estuary SMP2 Review – Final Report
17
Policy Unit: SEV 4 – Oldbury Power Station (east bank of the River
Severn)
The above provides the local details in respect of the SMP-wide policy presented in the preceding sections of this Plan
document. These details must be read in the context of the wider-scales issues and policy implications, as reported therein.
Severn Estuary SMP2 Review – Final Report
18
Preferred Policies to Implement the Plan:
Epoch
Preferred
Policy
Comments
0 to 20
years
(2025)
HTL
The Short Term policy for this unit is Hold The Line.
The current defences are expected to remain in place for this epoch but may
require some reconstruction / extensive works during this epoch. Actions
should take account of potential impacts in all linked Policy Units (SEV 1,
SEV 2, SEV 3, SEV 5, and SEV 6).
HTL will manage the risk of impacts from flooding to Key Policy Drivers such
as Oldbury and Berkeley Nuclear Power Stations. Although Oldbury Power
Station is on higher ground, the risk of flooding from coastal flooding from
linked Policy Units is high and should be managed.
HTL does not guarantee funding to build or maintain current or future
defences or to counter sea level rise.
20 to 50
years
(2055)
HTL
The medium term policy for this unit is Hold The Line.
The existing defences will come to the end of their serviceable life in this
epoch. HTL recommends that defences arereplaced. The position, size and
materials of new defences should be considered in detail to ensure actions
take account of potential impacts on linked Policy Units (SEV 1, SEV 2, SEV
3, SEV 5, and SEV 6). The location and type of defence should be
determined by the SEFRMS.
HTL will manage the risk of impacts from flooding to Key Policy Drivers such
as Oldbury and Berkeley Nuclear Power Stations (or new power stations in
these locations).
HTL does not guarantee funding to build or maintain current or future
defences or to counter sea level rise.
50 to 100
years
(2105)
HTL
The long term policy for this unit is Hold The Line.
New defences should be maintained. HTL will manage the risk of flooding in
this and linked Policy Units (SEV 1, SEV 2, SEV 3, SEV 5, and SEV 6).
HTL will manage the risk of impacts from flooding to Key Policy Drivers such
as Oldbury and Berkeley Nuclear Power Stations (or new power stations in
these locations).
HTL does not guarantee funding to build or maintain current or future
defences or to counter sea level rise.
The above provides the local details in respect of the SMP-wide policy presented in the preceding sections of this Plan
document. These details must be read in the context of the wider-scales issues and policy implications, as reported therein.
Severn Estuary SMP2 Review – Final Report
19
Economics
Policy
Unit
Existing
SMP1
Policy
Time Period
(epoch)
SMP2 Assessment
0-
20
20-
50
50-
100
Preferred Plan Present Value
Damages
Preferred Plan Present Value
Defence Costs
SEV 4 HTL HTL HTL HTL
£46m
(SEV1-6 total)
£15m
(SEV1-6 total)
The preferred policy for this unit is economically viable. The preferred policy is economically viable for the
linked Policy Units of SEV 1, SEV 2, SEV 3, SEV 4, SEV 5 and SEV 6, but the benefit-cost ratio (BCR) is
low. Where the BCR is low, schemes may be less likely to receive public funding and it may be necessary
to find funding from other sources. The costs and damages of the preferred policy in the table above relate
to actions taken in all linked policy units.
The above provides the local details in respect of the SMP-wide policy presented in the preceding sections of this Plan
document. These details must be read in the context of the wider-scales issues and policy implications, as reported therein.
Severn Estuary SMP2 Review – Final Report
20
Predicted Implication of the Preferred Plan for the SEV 4 Policy Unit
Time
Period
Management Activities
Property, Land Use and
Human Health
Nature Conservation –
including Earth
Heritage, Geology and
Biodiversity
Landscape Character
and Visual Amenity
Historic Environment
Amenity and
Recreational Use
0 – 20
years
The current earth
embankment defences
are expected to come to
the end of their
serviceable life during the
next epoch but may
require reconstruction /
extensive works during
this epoch. Hydraulic
linkage to a number of
units would result in a
large floodplain should
defences come to the end
of their serviceable life.
Major assets are at flood
risk in this and linked
Policy Units should
defences come to the end
of their serviceable life
including Oldbury and
Berkley Power stations.
Defences will manage the
risk of impacts to existing
property, land use or
human health.
A HTL policy will not
impact the nature
conservation sites during
this time period. Works
should take account of
possible environmental
impacts and the need for
an EIA.
Defences are likely to
come to the end of their
serviceable life in the next
epoch but may require
reconstruction / extensive
works during this epoch.
Increased height of
defences or change in
defence construction
materials will affect local
landscape - increasing
presence in the
landscape and disrupting
views.
Defences will manage the
risk of impacts to the
historic environment
Defences will manage the
risk to amenity or
recreational value of the
land
20 – 50
years
The current earth
embankment defences
are expected to come to
the end of their
serviceable life during this
epoch and should be
replaced. An on-going
maintenance programme
should be established to
ensure the defences
afford protection to the
assets at risk
Major assets are at flood
risk in this and linked
Policy Units should
defences come to the end
of their serviceable life
including Oldbury and
Berkley Power stations
(or new builds in these
locations). Defences will
manage the risk of
impacts to existing
property, land use or
human health.
Coastal squeeze will
occur which will result in
loss of intertidal habitats.
Works should take
account of possible
environmental impacts
and the need for an EIA.
Defences are likely to
come to the end of their
serviceable life in this
epoch and should be
reconstructed. Increased
height of defences or
change in defence
construction materials will
affect local landscape -
increasing presence in
the landscape and
disrupting views.
Defences will manage the
risk of impacts to the
historic environment
Defences will manage the
risk to amenity or
recreational value of the
land
The above provides the local details in respect of the SMP-wide policy presented in the preceding sections of this Plan
document. These details must be read in the context of the wider-scales issues and policy implications, as reported therein.
Severn Estuary SMP2 Review – Final Report
21
Time
Period
Management Activities
Property, Land Use and
Human Health
Nature Conservation –
including Earth
Heritage, Geology and
Biodiversity
Landscape Character
and Visual Amenity
Historic Environment
Amenity and
Recreational Use
50 – 100
years
An on-going maintenance
programme should be
established including the
monitoring of shoreline
erosion as sea level rise
increases.
Major assets are at flood
risk in this and linked
Policy Units should
defences come to the end
of their serviceable life
including Oldbury and
Berkley Power stations
(or new builds in these
locations). Defences will
manage the risk of
impacts to existing
property, land use or
human health.
Coastal squeeze will
occur which will result in
loss of intertidal habitats.
Works should take
account of possible
environmental impacts
and the need for an EIA.
Increased height of
defences or change in
defence construction
materials will affect local
landscape - increasing
presence in the
landscape and disrupting
views.
Defences will manage the
risk of impacts to the
historic environment
Defences will manage the
risk to amenity or
recreational value of the
land
The above provides the local details in respect of the SMP-wide policy presented in the preceding sections of this Plan
document. These details must be read in the context of the wider-scales issues and policy implications, as reported therein.
Severn Estuary SMP2 Review – Final Report
22
Policy Unit: SEV 5 – Oldbury Power Station to Littleton Warth (east
bank of the River Severn)
The above provides the local details in respect of the SMP-wide policy presented in the preceding sections of this Plan
document. These details must be read in the context of the wider-scales issues and policy implications, as reported therein.
Severn Estuary SMP2 Review – Final Report
23
Preferred Policies to Implement the Plan:
Epoch
Preferred
Policy
Comments
0 to 20
years
(2025)
HTL
The Short Term policy for this unit is Hold The Line.
The current defences are expected to remain in place for this epoch but may
require some reconstruction / extensive works during this epoch. Actions
should take account of potential impacts in all linked Policy Units (SEV 1,
SEV 2, SEV 3, SEV 4, and SEV 6).
HTL will manage the risk of impacts from flooding to Key Policy Drivers such
as Oldbury and Berkeley Nuclear Power Stations. Although Oldbury Power
Station is on higher ground, the risk of flooding from coastal flooding from
linked Policy Units is high and should be managed.
HTL does not guarantee funding to build or maintain current or future
defences or to counter sea level rise.
20 to 50
years
(2055) HTL
The medium term policy for this unit is Hold The Line.
The existing defences will come to the end of their serviceable life in this
epoch. HTL recommends that defences arereplaced. The position, size and
materials of new defences should be considered in detail to ensure actions
take account of potential impacts on linked Policy Units (SEV 1, SEV 2, SEV
3, SEV 4, and SEV 6). The location and type of defence should be
determined by the SEFRMS.
HTL will manage the risk of impacts from flooding to Key Policy Drivers such
as Oldbury and Berkeley Nuclear Power Stations (or new power stations in
these locations).
HTL does not guarantee funding to build or maintain current or future
defences or to counter sea level rise.
50 to 100
years
(2105) HTL
The long term policy for this unit is Hold The Line.
New defences should be maintained. HTL will manage the risk of flooding in
this and linked Policy Units (SEV 1, SEV 2, SEV 3, SEV 4, and SEV 6).
HTL will manage the risk of impacts from flooding to Key Policy Drivers such
as Oldbury and Berkeley Nuclear Power Stations (or new power stations in
these locations).
HTL does not guarantee funding to build or maintain current or future
defences or to counter sea level rise.
The above provides the local details in respect of the SMP-wide policy presented in the preceding sections of this Plan
document. These details must be read in the context of the wider-scales issues and policy implications, as reported therein.
Severn Estuary SMP2 Review – Final Report
24
Economics
Policy
Unit
Existing
SMP1
Policy
Time Period
(epoch)
SMP2 Assessment
0-
20
20-
50
50-
100
Preferred Plan Present Value
Damages
Preferred Plan Present Value
Defence Costs
SEV 5 HTL HTL HTL HTL
£46m
(SEV1-6 total)
£15m
(SEV1-6 total)
The preferred policy for this unit is economically viable. The preferred policy is economically viable for the
linked Policy Units of SEV 1, SEV 2, SEV 3, SEV 4, SEV 5 and SEV 6, but the benefit-cost ratio (BCR) is
low. Where the BCR is low, schemes may be less likely to receive public funding and it may be necessary
to find funding from other sources. The costs and damages of the preferred policy in the table above relate
to actions taken in all linked policy units.
The above provides the local details in respect of the SMP-wide policy presented in the preceding sections of this Plan
document. These details must be read in the context of the wider-scales issues and policy implications, as reported therein.
Severn Estuary SMP2 Review – Final Report
25
Predicted Implication of the Preferred Plan for the SEV 5 Policy Unit
Time
Period
Management Activities
Property, Land Use and
Human Health
Nature Conservation –
including Earth
Heritage, Geology and
Biodiversity
Landscape Character
and Visual Amenity
Historic Environment
Amenity and
Recreational Use
0 – 20
years
The current earth
embankment defences
are expected to come to
the end of their
serviceable life during the
next epoch but may
require reconstruction /
extensive works during
this epoch. Hydraulic
linkage to a number of
units would result in a
large floodplain should
defences come to the end
of their serviceable life.
Major assets are at flood
risk in this and linked
Policy Units should
defences come to the end
of their serviceable life
including Oldbury and
Berkley Power stations.
Defences will manage the
risk of impacts to existing
property, land use or
human health.
A HTL policy will not
impact the nature
conservation sites during
this time period. Works
should take account of
possible environmental
impacts and the need for
an EIA.
Defences are likely to
come to the end of their
serviceable life in the next
epoch but may require
reconstruction / extensive
works during this epoch.
Increased height of
defences or change in
defence construction
materials will affect local
landscape - increasing
presence in the
landscape and disrupting
views.
Defences will manage the
risk of impacts to the
historic environment
Defences will manage the
risk to amenity or
recreational value of the
land
20 – 50
years
The current earth
embankment defences
are expected to come to
the end of their
serviceable life during this
epoch and should be
replaced. An on-going
maintenance programme
should be established to
ensure the defences
afford protection to the
assets at risk
Major assets are at flood
risk in this and linked
Policy Units should
defences come to the end
of their serviceable life
including Oldbury and
Berkley Power stations
(or new builds in these
locations). Defences will
manage the risk of
impacts to existing
property, land use or
human health.
Coastal squeeze will
occur which will result in
loss of intertidal habitats.
Works should take
account of possible
environmental impacts
and the need for an EIA.
Defences are likely to
come to the end of their
serviceable life in this
epoch and should be
reconstructed. Increased
height of defences or
change in defence
construction materials will
affect local landscape -
increasing presence in
the landscape and
disrupting views.
Defences will manage the
risk of impacts to the
historic environment
Defences will manage the
risk to amenity or
recreational value of the
land
The above provides the local details in respect of the SMP-wide policy presented in the preceding sections of this Plan
document. These details must be read in the context of the wider-scales issues and policy implications, as reported therein.
Severn Estuary SMP2 Review – Final Report
26
Time
Period
Management Activities
Property, Land Use and
Human Health
Nature Conservation –
including Earth
Heritage, Geology and
Biodiversity
Landscape Character
and Visual Amenity
Historic Environment
Amenity and
Recreational Use
50 – 100
years
An on-going maintenance
programme should be
established including the
monitoring of shoreline
erosion as sea level rise
increases.
Major assets are at flood
risk in this and linked
Policy Units should
defences come to the end
of their serviceable life
including Oldbury and
Berkley Power stations
(or new builds in these
locations). Defences will
manage the risk of
impacts to existing
property, land use or
human health.
Coastal squeeze will
occur which will result in
loss of intertidal habitats.
Works should take
account of possible
environmental impacts
and the need for an EIA.
Increased height of
defences or change in
defence construction
materials will affect local
landscape - increasing
presence in the
landscape and disrupting
views.
Defences will manage the
risk of impacts to the
historic environment
Defences will manage the
risk to amenity or
recreational value of the
land
The above provides the local details in respect of the SMP-wide policy presented in the preceding sections of this Plan
document. These details must be read in the context of the wider-scales issues and policy implications, as reported therein.
Severn Estuary SMP2 Review – Final Report
27
Policy Unit: SEV 6 - Littleton Warth to Aust Ferry (east bank of the
River Severn)
The above provides the local details in respect of the SMP-wide policy presented in the preceding sections of this Plan
document. These details must be read in the context of the wider-scales issues and policy implications, as reported therein.
Severn Estuary SMP2 Review – Final Report
28
Preferred Policies to Implement the Plan:
Epoch
Preferred
Policy
Comments
0 to 20
years
(2025)
NAI
The Short Term policy for this unit is No Active Intervention.
High ground and hard geology naturally limit the risk of coastal flooding and
erosion in this Policy Unit. NAI will allow natural processes on Aust Cliff
(SSSI) to continue with little or no impact on the assets on the cliff top.
20 to 50
years
(2055) NAI
The Short Term policy for this unit is No Active Intervention.
High ground and hard geology naturally limit the risk of coastal flooding and
erosion in this Policy Unit. NAI will allow natural processes on Aust Cliff
(SSSI) to continue with little or no impact on the assets on the cliff top.
50 to 100
years
(2105) NAI
The Short Term policy for this unit is No Active Intervention.
High ground and hard geology naturally limit the risk of coastal flooding and
erosion in this Policy Unit. NAI will allow natural processes on Aust Cliff
(SSSI) to continue with little or no impact on the assets on the cliff top.
In the long term, the rate of erosion should be monitored. If the rate of
erosion increases, or assets are at risk (e.g. Old Severn Road Bridge), action
should be considered. Funds to undertake actions are not guaranteed.
Economics
Policy
Unit
Existing
SMP1
Policy
Time Period
(epoch)
SMP2 Assessment
0-
20
20-
50
50-
100
Preferred Plan Present Value
Damages
Preferred Plan Present Value
Defence Costs
SEV 6
Do
Nothing
(Locally
HTL)
NAI NAI NAI
£46m
(SEV1-6 total)
£15m
(SEV1-6 total)
The preferred policy has no economic impact in this Policy Unit.
The preferred policy for this unit is economically viable. The preferred policy is economically viable for the
linked Policy Units of SEV 1, SEV 2, SEV 3, SEV 4, SEV 5 and SEV 6, but the benefit-cost ratio (BCR) is
low. Where the BCR is low, schemes may be less likely to receive public funding and it may be necessary
to find funding from other sources. The costs of the preferred policy in the table above relate to actions
taken in linked policy units, not SEV 6.
The above provides the local details in respect of the SMP-wide policy presented in the preceding sections of this Plan
document. These details must be read in the context of the wider-scales issues and policy implications, as reported therein.
Severn Estuary SMP2 Review – Final Report
29
Predicted Implication of the Preferred Plan for the SEV 6 Policy Unit
Time
Period
Management Activities
Property, Land Use and
Human Health
Nature Conservation –
including Earth
Heritage, Geology and
Biodiversity
Landscape Character
and Visual Amenity
Historic Environment
Amenity and
Recreational Use
0 – 20
years
The cliffs will remain
stable in this period, and
as a result management
activities will be very
limited.
Limited erosion and flood
risk will not impact on
existing property, land
use or human health.
A NAI policy will allow
natural processes to
dominate. There will be
continued exposure of
Aust Cliff SSSI.
Limited erosion and flood
risk will not impact on
existing landscape and
visual amenity
Limited erosion and flood
risk will not impact on the
historic environment
Limited erosion and flood
risk will not impact on the
amenity value of the land
or recreational use.
20 – 50
years
The cliffs will undergo
limited erosion within this
period, and as a result
management activities
will be very limited. in the
medium term monitoring
should be established to
ensure the stability of the
M48 crossing
Limited erosion and flood
risk will not impact on
existing property, land
use or human health.
A NAI policy will allow
habitats to roll back so
intertidal habitats and
features will be
maintained. The rate of
roll back will be restricted
by hard geology and high
ground. There will be
continued exposure of
Aust Cliff SSSI.
Limited erosion and flood
risk will not impact on
existing landscape and
visual amenity
Limited erosion and flood
risk will not impact on the
historic environment
Limited erosion and flood
risk will not impact on the
amenity value of the land
or recreational use.
50 – 100
years
The cliffs will undergo
limited erosion within this
period, and as a result
management activities
will be very limited. . in
the long term the
monitoring programme
should continue to ensure
the stability of the M48
crossing
Limited erosion and flood
risk will not impact on
existing property, land
use or human health.
A NAI policy will allow
habitats to roll back so
intertidal habitats and
features will be
maintained. The rate of
roll back will be restricted
by hard geology and high
ground. There will be
continued exposure of
Aust Cliff SSSI.
Limited erosion and flood
risk will not impact on
existing landscape and
visual amenity
Limited erosion and flood
risk will not impact on the
historic environment
Limited erosion and flood
risk will not impact on the
amenity value of the land
or recreational use.

More Related Content

PDF
Smp2 part b policy statements portishead only_final
PDF
Smp2 part b policy statements tidenham only_final
PDF
Smp2 part b policy statements newport-usk only_final
PDF
Smp2 part b policy statements glos-haw bridge only_final
PDF
Smp2 part b policy statements lydney-glos only_final
PDF
Smp2 part b policy statements caldicot only_final
PDF
Smp2 part b policy statements glos-sharpness only_final
PDF
Smp2 part b policy statements chepstow-wye only_final
Smp2 part b policy statements portishead only_final
Smp2 part b policy statements tidenham only_final
Smp2 part b policy statements newport-usk only_final
Smp2 part b policy statements glos-haw bridge only_final
Smp2 part b policy statements lydney-glos only_final
Smp2 part b policy statements caldicot only_final
Smp2 part b policy statements glos-sharpness only_final
Smp2 part b policy statements chepstow-wye only_final

What's hot (19)

PDF
Smp2 part b policy statements bristol only_final
PDF
Smp2 part b policy statements cardiff only_final
PDF
Smp2 part b policy statements kingston seymour only_final
PPT
Multi-Hazard Mitigation Presentation
PDF
Smp2 part b policy statements holms only_final
PDF
NAP Expo 2015 Session VII, II National strategies on integrating CCA, Vietnam
PDF
Alaska
PDF
Flood erosioncontrolfs4
PPSX
Climate Change Adaptation Policy for Hawaii
PDF
Nelsonquarrylanteigne 121011161032-phpapp01
PPT
Nelson quarry lanteigne
PDF
backgrounder_lmfls
PPT
Overview Of Public Informational Hearing
PPT
Louisiana In-Lieu-Fee Wetland Mitigation Program Proposal
PDF
RIVER BASIN MANAGEMENT 1997
PDF
PDF
Eacc bangladesh
PDF
Int. Roundtable on Transboundary Waters Management, 15-16.12.2011, Ivica Trumbic
PDF
Sn woodfibre update-01
Smp2 part b policy statements bristol only_final
Smp2 part b policy statements cardiff only_final
Smp2 part b policy statements kingston seymour only_final
Multi-Hazard Mitigation Presentation
Smp2 part b policy statements holms only_final
NAP Expo 2015 Session VII, II National strategies on integrating CCA, Vietnam
Alaska
Flood erosioncontrolfs4
Climate Change Adaptation Policy for Hawaii
Nelsonquarrylanteigne 121011161032-phpapp01
Nelson quarry lanteigne
backgrounder_lmfls
Overview Of Public Informational Hearing
Louisiana In-Lieu-Fee Wetland Mitigation Program Proposal
RIVER BASIN MANAGEMENT 1997
Eacc bangladesh
Int. Roundtable on Transboundary Waters Management, 15-16.12.2011, Ivica Trumbic
Sn woodfibre update-01
Ad

Viewers also liked (20)

PDF
Appendix a development of the smp2 final_dec2010
PDF
Appendix c baseline understanding final_dec2010
PDF
Smp2 part c action plan final
PDF
Appendix b stakeholder engagement and consultation final_dec2010
PDF
PII_IQPC_May_04
PDF
Appendix k metadata and bibliographic database final_dec2010
PDF
Paper 43 - Deep Water Pipeline CT 9_2_15
PDF
Appendix d theme review final_dec2010a
DOC
Tasnia
PDF
Appendix i part a sea_final_dec2010
PDF
PII Paper for PetroMin Gas Pipeline Conference
PDF
26-grover-john-final
PDF
Appendix i part b _hra_final_dec2010
PDF
OSEA 2006 - Precom Impact final
PDF
Offshore - Coiled Tubing Offers Pre-Commissioning Tool for Deepwater Pipeline...
PDF
Offshore Ind Gases J Grover 11 Dec 07
PDF
Appendix g preferred management approach testing final_dec2010
PDF
Appendix f policy development and appraisal final_dec2010
PDF
OGJ Nordstream
PDF
Smp2 part a main report final
Appendix a development of the smp2 final_dec2010
Appendix c baseline understanding final_dec2010
Smp2 part c action plan final
Appendix b stakeholder engagement and consultation final_dec2010
PII_IQPC_May_04
Appendix k metadata and bibliographic database final_dec2010
Paper 43 - Deep Water Pipeline CT 9_2_15
Appendix d theme review final_dec2010a
Tasnia
Appendix i part a sea_final_dec2010
PII Paper for PetroMin Gas Pipeline Conference
26-grover-john-final
Appendix i part b _hra_final_dec2010
OSEA 2006 - Precom Impact final
Offshore - Coiled Tubing Offers Pre-Commissioning Tool for Deepwater Pipeline...
Offshore Ind Gases J Grover 11 Dec 07
Appendix g preferred management approach testing final_dec2010
Appendix f policy development and appraisal final_dec2010
OGJ Nordstream
Smp2 part a main report final
Ad

Similar to Smp2 part b policy statements sharpness-sev cross only_final (12)

PDF
Smp2 part b policy statements wentlooge only_final
PDF
Smp2 part b policy statements intro sections_final
PDF
Appendix h economics final dec2010
PDF
Appendix e issues and features final_dec2010
PDF
Appendix j wfd assessment final_dec2010
PDF
2012 06 Bristol Channel Strategic Coastal Group – Shoreline and Flood Risk Ma...
PDF
2011 08 Proposed Nuclear Power Development: Hinkley Point C, An Update – Nige...
PDF
Appendix i part a sea annexes_final_dec2010
PPT
2007 08 Public Engagement with Tidal Power Options - Mervyn Bramley, Universi...
PPTX
Sustainability East - East of England Climate Change Adaptation
PPS
2010 00 Severn Estuary Forum 2010
PPT
2008 03 Tidal Power: The Options Peter Kydd, Parsons Brinckerhoff
Smp2 part b policy statements wentlooge only_final
Smp2 part b policy statements intro sections_final
Appendix h economics final dec2010
Appendix e issues and features final_dec2010
Appendix j wfd assessment final_dec2010
2012 06 Bristol Channel Strategic Coastal Group – Shoreline and Flood Risk Ma...
2011 08 Proposed Nuclear Power Development: Hinkley Point C, An Update – Nige...
Appendix i part a sea annexes_final_dec2010
2007 08 Public Engagement with Tidal Power Options - Mervyn Bramley, Universi...
Sustainability East - East of England Climate Change Adaptation
2010 00 Severn Estuary Forum 2010
2008 03 Tidal Power: The Options Peter Kydd, Parsons Brinckerhoff

Recently uploaded (20)

PDF
Effects of rice-husk biochar and aluminum sulfate application on rice grain q...
PDF
FMM Slides For OSH Management Requirement
PPTX
Green Modern Sustainable Living Nature Presentation_20250226_230231_0000.pptx
PPTX
"One Earth Celebrating World Environment Day"
PDF
Earthquake, learn from the past and do it now.pdf
PDF
The Role of Non-Legal Advocates in Fighting Social Injustice.pdf
PPTX
Biodiversity of nature in environmental studies.pptx
DOCX
Epoxy Coated Steel Bolted Tanks for Anaerobic Digestion (AD) Plants Core Comp...
PDF
Effect of salinity on biochimical and anatomical characteristics of sweet pep...
PPT
PPTPresentation3 jhsvdasvdjhavsdhsvjcksjbc.jasb..ppt
DOCX
Epoxy Coated Steel Bolted Tanks for Leachate Storage Securely Contain Landfil...
DOCX
Epoxy Coated Steel Bolted Tanks for Farm Digesters Supports On-Farm Organic W...
PPTX
Delivery census may 2025.pptxMNNN HJTDV U
PDF
Cave Diggers Simplified cave survey methods and mapping
PDF
Urban Hub 50: Spirits of Place - & the Souls' of Places
PPTX
Environmental Ethics: issues and possible solutions
DOCX
Epoxy Coated Steel Bolted Tanks for Beverage Wastewater Storage Manages Liqui...
PPTX
Biodiversity.udfnfndrijfreniufrnsiufnriufrenfuiernfuire
PPTX
Green and Cream Aesthetic Group Project Presentation.pptx
PDF
Insitu conservation seminar , national park ,enthobotanical significance
Effects of rice-husk biochar and aluminum sulfate application on rice grain q...
FMM Slides For OSH Management Requirement
Green Modern Sustainable Living Nature Presentation_20250226_230231_0000.pptx
"One Earth Celebrating World Environment Day"
Earthquake, learn from the past and do it now.pdf
The Role of Non-Legal Advocates in Fighting Social Injustice.pdf
Biodiversity of nature in environmental studies.pptx
Epoxy Coated Steel Bolted Tanks for Anaerobic Digestion (AD) Plants Core Comp...
Effect of salinity on biochimical and anatomical characteristics of sweet pep...
PPTPresentation3 jhsvdasvdjhavsdhsvjcksjbc.jasb..ppt
Epoxy Coated Steel Bolted Tanks for Leachate Storage Securely Contain Landfil...
Epoxy Coated Steel Bolted Tanks for Farm Digesters Supports On-Farm Organic W...
Delivery census may 2025.pptxMNNN HJTDV U
Cave Diggers Simplified cave survey methods and mapping
Urban Hub 50: Spirits of Place - & the Souls' of Places
Environmental Ethics: issues and possible solutions
Epoxy Coated Steel Bolted Tanks for Beverage Wastewater Storage Manages Liqui...
Biodiversity.udfnfndrijfreniufrnsiufnriufrenfuiernfuire
Green and Cream Aesthetic Group Project Presentation.pptx
Insitu conservation seminar , national park ,enthobotanical significance

Smp2 part b policy statements sharpness-sev cross only_final

  • 1. The above provides the local details in respect of the SMP-wide policy presented in the preceding sections of this Plan document. These details must be read in the context of the wider-scales issues and policy implications, as reported therein. Severn Estuary SMP2 Review – Final Report 1 SHARPNESS TO SEVERN CROSSINGS This Theme area contains the Policy Unit SEV 1, SEV 2, SEV 3, SEV 4, SEV 5 and SEV6. It encompasses the shoreline from downstream of Sharpness, to Aust at Severn Crossings. The Key Policy Drivers in this area are: • Critical infrastructure – Oldbury and Berkeley Nuclear Power Stations; • Residential areas – Oldbury-on-Severn.
  • 2. The above provides the local details in respect of the SMP-wide policy presented in the preceding sections of this Plan document. These details must be read in the context of the wider-scales issues and policy implications, as reported therein. Severn Estuary SMP2 Review – Final Report 2
  • 3. The above provides the local details in respect of the SMP-wide policy presented in the preceding sections of this Plan document. These details must be read in the context of the wider-scales issues and policy implications, as reported therein. Severn Estuary SMP2 Review – Final Report 3 Policy Unit: SEV 1 – South of Sharpness Docks to Bull Rock (east bank of the River Severn)
  • 4. The above provides the local details in respect of the SMP-wide policy presented in the preceding sections of this Plan document. These details must be read in the context of the wider-scales issues and policy implications, as reported therein. Severn Estuary SMP2 Review – Final Report 4 Preferred Policies to Implement the Plan: Epoch Preferred Policy Comments 0 to 20 years (2025) HTL The Short Term policy for this unit is Hold The Line. The current defences are expected to remain in place for this epoch but may require some reconstruction / extensive works. Actions should take account of potential impacts in all linked Policy Units (SEV 2, SEV 3, SEV 4, SEV 5, and SEV 6). HTL will manage the risk of impacts from flooding to Key Policy Drivers such as Oldbury and Berkeley Nuclear Power Stations. HTL does not guarantee funding to build or maintain current or future defences or to counter sea level rise. 20 to 50 years (2055) HTL The medium term policy for this unit is Hold The Line. The existing defences will come to the end of their serviceable life in this epoch. HTL recommends that defences are replaced. The position, size and materials of new defences should be considered in detail to ensure actions take account of potential impacts on linked Policy Units (SEV 2, SEV 3, SEV 4, SEV 5, and SEV 6). The location and type of defence should be determined by the SEFRMS. HTL will manage the risk of impact from flooding to Key Policy Drivers such as Oldbury and Berkeley Nuclear Power Stations (or new power stations in these locations). HTL does not guarantee funding to build or maintain current or future defences or to counter sea level rise. 50 to 100 years (2105) HTL The long term policy for this unit is Hold The Line. New defences should be maintained. HTL will manage the risk of flooding in this and linked Policy Units (SEV 2, SEV 3, SEV 4, SEV 5, and SEV 6). HTL will manage the risk of impact from flooding to Key Policy Drivers such as Oldbury and Berkeley Nuclear Power Stations (or new power stations in these locations). HTL does not guarantee funding to build or maintain current or future defences or to counter sea level rise. Economics Policy Unit Existing SMP1 Policy Time Period (epoch) SMP2 Assessment 0- 20 20- 50 50- 100 Preferred Plan Present Value Damages Preferred Plan Present Value Defence Costs SEV 1 HTL HTL HTL HTL £46m (SEV1-6 total) £15m (SEV1-6 total) The preferred policy for this unit is economically viable. The preferred policy is economically viable for the linked Policy Units of SEV 1, SEV 2, SEV 3, SEV 4, SEV 5 and SEV 6, but the benefit-cost ratio (BCR) is low. Where the BCR is low, schemes may be less likely to receive public funding and it may be necessary to find funding from other sources. The costs and damages of the preferred policy in the table above relate to actions taken in all linked policy units.
  • 5. The above provides the local details in respect of the SMP-wide policy presented in the preceding sections of this Plan document. These details must be read in the context of the wider-scales issues and policy implications, as reported therein. Severn Estuary SMP2 Review – Final Report 5 Predicted Implication of the Preferred Plan for the SEV 1 Policy Unit Time Period Management Activities Property, Land Use and Human Health Nature Conservation – including Earth Heritage, Geology and Biodiversity Landscape Character and Visual Amenity Historic Environment Amenity and Recreational Use 0 – 20 years The current earth embankment defences are expected to come to the end of their serviceable life during the next epoch but may require reconstruction / extensive works during this epoch. Hydraulic linkage to a number of units would result in a large floodplain should defences come to the end of their serviceable life. Major assets are at flood risk in this and linked Policy Units should defences come to the end of their serviceable life including Oldbury and Berkley Power stations. Defences will manage the risk of impacts to existing property, land use or human health. A HTL policy will not impact the nature conservation sites during this time period. Works should take account of possible environmental impacts and the need for an EIA. Defences are likely to come to the end of their serviceable life in the next epoch but may require reconstruction / extensive works during this epoch. Increased height of defences or change in defence construction materials will affect local landscape - increasing presence in the landscape and disrupting views. Defences will manage the risk of impacts to the historic environment Defences will manage the risk to amenity or recreational value of the land 20 – 50 years The current earth embankment defences are expected to come to the end of their serviceable life during this epoch and should be replaced. An on-going maintenance programme should be established to ensure the defences afford protection to the assets at risk Major assets are at flood risk in this and linked Policy Units should defences come to the end of their serviceable life including Oldbury and Berkley Power stations (or new builds in these locations). Defences will manage the risk of impacts to existing property, land use or human health. Coastal squeeze will occur which will result in loss of intertidal habitats. Works should take account of possible environmental impacts and the need for an EIA. Defences are likely to come to the end of their serviceable life in this epoch and should be reconstructed. Increased height of defences or change in defence construction materials will affect local landscape - increasing presence in the landscape and disrupting views. Defences will manage the risk of impacts to the historic environment Defences will manage the risk to amenity or recreational value of the land
  • 6. The above provides the local details in respect of the SMP-wide policy presented in the preceding sections of this Plan document. These details must be read in the context of the wider-scales issues and policy implications, as reported therein. Severn Estuary SMP2 Review – Final Report 6 Time Period Management Activities Property, Land Use and Human Health Nature Conservation – including Earth Heritage, Geology and Biodiversity Landscape Character and Visual Amenity Historic Environment Amenity and Recreational Use 50 – 100 years An on-going maintenance programme should be established including the monitoring of shoreline erosion as sea level rise increases. Major assets are at flood risk in this and linked Policy Units should defences come to the end of their serviceable life including Oldbury and Berkley Power stations (or new builds in these locations). Defences will manage the risk of impacts to existing property, land use or human health. Coastal squeeze will occur which will result in loss of intertidal habitats. Works should take account of possible environmental impacts and the need for an EIA. Increased height of defences or change in defence construction materials will affect local landscape - increasing presence in the landscape and disrupting views. Defences will manage the risk of impacts to the historic environment Defences will manage the risk to amenity or recreational value of the land
  • 7. The above provides the local details in respect of the SMP-wide policy presented in the preceding sections of this Plan document. These details must be read in the context of the wider-scales issues and policy implications, as reported therein. Severn Estuary SMP2 Review – Final Report 7 Policy Unit: SEV 2 – Bull Rock to southern boundary of Berkeley Power Station (east bank of the River Severn)
  • 8. The above provides the local details in respect of the SMP-wide policy presented in the preceding sections of this Plan document. These details must be read in the context of the wider-scales issues and policy implications, as reported therein. Severn Estuary SMP2 Review – Final Report 8 Preferred Policies to Implement the Plan: Epoch Preferred Policy Comments 0 to 20 years (2025) HTL The Short Term policy for this unit is Hold The Line. The current defences are expected to remain in place for this epoch but may require some reconstruction / extensive works during this epoch. Actions should take account of potential impacts in all linked Policy Units (SEV 1, SEV 3, SEV 4, SEV5, and SEV 6). HTL will manage the risk of impacts from flooding to Key Policy Drivers such as Oldbury and Berkeley Nuclear Power Stations. HTL does not guarantee funding to build or maintain current or future defences or to counter sea level rise. 20 to 50 years (2055) HTL The medium term policy for this unit is Hold The Line. The existing defences are expected to come to the end of their serviceable life in this epoch. HTL recommends that defences are replaced. The position, size and materials of new defences should be considered in detail to ensure actions take account of potential impacts on linked Policy Units (SEV 1, SEV 3, SEV 4, SEV5, and SEV 6). The location and type of defence should be determined by the SEFRMS. HTL will manage the risk of impacts from flooding to Key Policy Drivers such as Oldbury and Berkeley Nuclear Power Stations (or new power stations in these locations). HTL does not guarantee funding to build or maintain current or future defences or to counter sea level rise. 50 to 100 years (2105) HTL The long term policy for this unit is Hold The Line. New defences should be maintained. HTL will manage the risk from flooding in this and linked Policy Units (SEV 1, SEV 3, SEV 4, SEV5, and SEV 6). HTL will manage the risk of impacts from flooding to Key Policy Drivers such as Oldbury and Berkeley Nuclear Power Stations (or new power stations in these locations). HTL does not guarantee funding to build or maintain current or future defences or to counter sea level rise.
  • 9. The above provides the local details in respect of the SMP-wide policy presented in the preceding sections of this Plan document. These details must be read in the context of the wider-scales issues and policy implications, as reported therein. Severn Estuary SMP2 Review – Final Report 9 Economics Policy Unit Existing SMP1 Policy Time Period (epoch) SMP2 Assessment 0- 20 20- 50 50- 100 Preferred Plan Present Value Damages Preferred Plan Present Value Defence Costs SEV 2 HTL HTL HTL HTL £46m (SEV1-6 total) £15m (SEV1-6 total) The preferred policy for this unit is economically viable. The preferred policy is economically viable for the linked Policy Units of SEV 1, SEV 2, SEV 3, SEV 4, SEV 5 and SEV 6, but the benefit-cost ratio (BCR) is low. Where the BCR is low, schemes may be less likely to receive public funding and it may be necessary to find funding from other sources. The costs and damages of the preferred policy in the table above relate to actions taken in all linked policy units.
  • 10. The above provides the local details in respect of the SMP-wide policy presented in the preceding sections of this Plan document. These details must be read in the context of the wider-scales issues and policy implications, as reported therein. Severn Estuary SMP2 Review – Final Report 10 Predicted Implication of the Preferred Plan for the SEV 2 Policy Unit Time Period Management Activities Property, Land Use and Human Health Nature Conservation – including Earth Heritage, Geology and Biodiversity Landscape Character and Visual Amenity Historic Environment Amenity and Recreational Use 0 – 20 years The current earth embankment defences are expected to come to the end of their serviceable life during the next epoch but may require reconstruction / extensive works during this epoch. Hydraulic linkage to a number of units would result in a large floodplain should defences come to the end of their serviceable life. Major assets are at flood risk in this and linked Policy Units should defences come to the end of their serviceable life including Oldbury and Berkley Power stations. Defences will manage the risk of impacts to existing property, land use or human health. A HTL policy will not impact the nature conservation sites during this time period. Works should take account of possible environmental impacts and the need for an EIA. Defences are likely to come to the end of their serviceable life in the next epoch but may require reconstruction / extensive works during this epoch. Increased height of defences or change in defence construction materials will affect local landscape - increasing presence in the landscape and disrupting views. Defences will manage the risk of impacts to the historic environment Defences will manage the risk to amenity or recreational value of the land 20 – 50 years The current earth embankment defences are expected to come to the end of their serviceable life during this epoch and should be replaced. An on-going maintenance programme should be established to ensure the defences afford protection to the assets at risk Major assets are at flood risk in this and linked Policy Units should defences come to the end of their serviceable life including Oldbury and Berkley Power stations (or new builds in these locations). Defences will manage the risk of impacts to existing property, land use or human health. Coastal squeeze will occur which will result in loss of intertidal habitats. Works should take account of possible environmental impacts and the need for an EIA. Defences are likely to come to the end of their serviceable life in this epoch and should be reconstructed. Increased height of defences or change in defence construction materials will affect local landscape - increasing presence in the landscape and disrupting views. Defences will manage the risk of impacts to the historic environment Defences will manage the risk to amenity or recreational value of the land
  • 11. The above provides the local details in respect of the SMP-wide policy presented in the preceding sections of this Plan document. These details must be read in the context of the wider-scales issues and policy implications, as reported therein. Severn Estuary SMP2 Review – Final Report 11 Time Period Management Activities Property, Land Use and Human Health Nature Conservation – including Earth Heritage, Geology and Biodiversity Landscape Character and Visual Amenity Historic Environment Amenity and Recreational Use 50 – 100 years An on-going maintenance programme should be established including the monitoring of shoreline erosion as sea level rise increases. Major assets are at flood risk in this and linked Policy Units should defences come to the end of their serviceable life including Oldbury and Berkley Power stations (or new builds in these locations). Defences will manage the risk of impacts to existing property, land use or human health. Coastal squeeze will occur which will result in loss of intertidal habitats. Works should take account of possible environmental impacts and the need for an EIA. Increased height of defences or change in defence construction materials will affect local landscape - increasing presence in the landscape and disrupting views. Defences will manage the risk of impacts to the historic environment Defences will manage the risk to amenity or recreational value of the land
  • 12. The above provides the local details in respect of the SMP-wide policy presented in the preceding sections of this Plan document. These details must be read in the context of the wider-scales issues and policy implications, as reported therein. Severn Estuary SMP2 Review – Final Report 12 Policy Unit: SEV 3 – Southern boundary of Berkeley Power Station to Oldbury Power Station (east bank of the River Severn)
  • 13. The above provides the local details in respect of the SMP-wide policy presented in the preceding sections of this Plan document. These details must be read in the context of the wider-scales issues and policy implications, as reported therein. Severn Estuary SMP2 Review – Final Report 13 Preferred Policies to Implement the Plan: Epoch Preferred Policy Comments 0 to 20 years (2025) HTL The Short Term policy for this unit is Hold The Line. The current defences are expected to remain in place for this epoch but may require some reconstruction / extensive works during this epoch. Actions should take account of potential impacts in all linked Policy Units (SEV2, SEV3, SEV 4, SEV 5, and SEV 6). HTL will manage the risk of impacts from flooding to Key Policy Drivers such as Oldbury and Berkeley Nuclear Power Stations. HTL does not guarantee funding to build or maintain current or future defences or to counter sea level rise. 20 to 50 years (2055) HTL The medium term policy for this unit is Hold The Line. The existing defences will come to the end of their serviceable life in this epoch. HTL recommends that defences are replaced. The position, size and materials of new defences should be considered in detail to ensure actions take account of potential impacts on linked Policy Units (SEV 1, SEV 2, SEV 4, SEV 5, and SEV 6). The location and type of defence should be determined by the SEFRMS. HTL will manage the risk of impacts from flooding to Key Policy Drivers such as Oldbury and Berkeley Nuclear Power Stations (or new power stations in these locations). HTL does not guarantee funding to build or maintain current or future defences or to counter sea level rise. 50 to 100 years (2105) HTL The long term policy for this unit is Hold The Line. New defences should be maintained. HTL will manage the risk of flooding in this and linked Policy Units (SEV 1, SEV 2, SEV 4, SEV 5, and SEV 6). HTL will manage the risk of impacts from flooding to Key Policy Drivers such as Oldbury and Berkeley Nuclear Power Stations (or new power stations in these locations).. HTL does not guarantee funding to build or maintain current or future defences or to counter sea level rise.
  • 14. The above provides the local details in respect of the SMP-wide policy presented in the preceding sections of this Plan document. These details must be read in the context of the wider-scales issues and policy implications, as reported therein. Severn Estuary SMP2 Review – Final Report 14 Economics Policy Unit Existing SMP1 Policy Time Period (epoch) SMP2 Assessment 0- 20 20- 50 50- 100 Preferred Plan Present Value Damages Preferred Plan Present Value Defence Costs SEV 3 HTL HTL HTL HTL £46m (SEV1-6 total) £15m (SEV1-6 total) The preferred policy for this unit is economically viable. The preferred policy is economically viable for the linked Policy Units of SEV 1, SEV 2, SEV 3, SEV 4, SEV 5 and SEV 6, but the benefit-cost ratio (BCR) is low. Where the BCR is low, schemes may be less likely to receive public funding and it may be necessary to find funding from other sources. The costs and damages of the preferred policy in the table above relate to actions taken in all linked policy units.
  • 15. The above provides the local details in respect of the SMP-wide policy presented in the preceding sections of this Plan document. These details must be read in the context of the wider-scales issues and policy implications, as reported therein. Severn Estuary SMP2 Review – Final Report 15 Predicted Implication of the Preferred Plan for the SEV 3 Policy Unit Time Period Management Activities Property, Land Use and Human Health Nature Conservation – including Earth Heritage, Geology and Biodiversity Landscape Character and Visual Amenity Historic Environment Amenity and Recreational Use 0 – 20 years The current earth embankment defences are expected to come to the end of their serviceable life during the next epoch but may require reconstruction / extensive works during this epoch. Hydraulic linkage to a number of units would result in a large floodplain should defences come to the end of their serviceable life. Major assets are at flood risk in this and linked Policy Units should defences come to the end of their serviceable life including Oldbury and Berkley Power stations. Defences will manage the risk of impacts to existing property, land use or human health. A HTL policy will not impact the nature conservation sites during this time period. Works should take account of possible environmental impacts and the need for an EIA. Defences are likely to come to the end of their serviceable life in the next epoch but may require reconstruction / extensive works during this epoch. Increased height of defences or change in defence construction materials will affect local landscape - increasing presence in the landscape and disrupting views. Defences will manage the risk of impacts to the historic environment Defences will manage the risk to amenity or recreational value of the land 20 – 50 years The current earth embankment defences are expected to come to the end of their serviceable life during this epoch and should be replaced. An on-going maintenance programme should be established to ensure the defences afford protection to the assets at risk Major assets are at flood risk in this and linked Policy Units should defences come to the end of their serviceable life including Oldbury and Berkley Power stations (or new builds in these locations). Defences will manage the risk of impacts to existing property, land use or human health. Coastal squeeze will occur which will result in loss of intertidal habitats. Works should take account of possible environmental impacts and the need for an EIA. Defences are likely to come to the end of their serviceable life in this epoch and should be reconstructed. Increased height of defences or change in defence construction materials will affect local landscape - increasing presence in the landscape and disrupting views. Defences will manage the risk of impacts to the historic environment Defences will manage the risk to amenity or recreational value of the land
  • 16. The above provides the local details in respect of the SMP-wide policy presented in the preceding sections of this Plan document. These details must be read in the context of the wider-scales issues and policy implications, as reported therein. Severn Estuary SMP2 Review – Final Report 16 Time Period Management Activities Property, Land Use and Human Health Nature Conservation – including Earth Heritage, Geology and Biodiversity Landscape Character and Visual Amenity Historic Environment Amenity and Recreational Use 50 – 100 years An on-going maintenance programme should be established including the monitoring of shoreline erosion as sea level rise increases. Major assets are at flood risk in this and linked Policy Units should defences come to the end of their serviceable life including Oldbury and Berkley Power stations (or new builds in these locations). Defences will manage the risk of impacts to existing property, land use or human health. Coastal squeeze will occur which will result in loss of intertidal habitats. Works should take account of possible environmental impacts and the need for an EIA. Increased height of defences or change in defence construction materials will affect local landscape - increasing presence in the landscape and disrupting views. Defences will manage the risk of impacts to the historic environment Defences will manage the risk to amenity or recreational value of the land
  • 17. The above provides the local details in respect of the SMP-wide policy presented in the preceding sections of this Plan document. These details must be read in the context of the wider-scales issues and policy implications, as reported therein. Severn Estuary SMP2 Review – Final Report 17 Policy Unit: SEV 4 – Oldbury Power Station (east bank of the River Severn)
  • 18. The above provides the local details in respect of the SMP-wide policy presented in the preceding sections of this Plan document. These details must be read in the context of the wider-scales issues and policy implications, as reported therein. Severn Estuary SMP2 Review – Final Report 18 Preferred Policies to Implement the Plan: Epoch Preferred Policy Comments 0 to 20 years (2025) HTL The Short Term policy for this unit is Hold The Line. The current defences are expected to remain in place for this epoch but may require some reconstruction / extensive works during this epoch. Actions should take account of potential impacts in all linked Policy Units (SEV 1, SEV 2, SEV 3, SEV 5, and SEV 6). HTL will manage the risk of impacts from flooding to Key Policy Drivers such as Oldbury and Berkeley Nuclear Power Stations. Although Oldbury Power Station is on higher ground, the risk of flooding from coastal flooding from linked Policy Units is high and should be managed. HTL does not guarantee funding to build or maintain current or future defences or to counter sea level rise. 20 to 50 years (2055) HTL The medium term policy for this unit is Hold The Line. The existing defences will come to the end of their serviceable life in this epoch. HTL recommends that defences arereplaced. The position, size and materials of new defences should be considered in detail to ensure actions take account of potential impacts on linked Policy Units (SEV 1, SEV 2, SEV 3, SEV 5, and SEV 6). The location and type of defence should be determined by the SEFRMS. HTL will manage the risk of impacts from flooding to Key Policy Drivers such as Oldbury and Berkeley Nuclear Power Stations (or new power stations in these locations). HTL does not guarantee funding to build or maintain current or future defences or to counter sea level rise. 50 to 100 years (2105) HTL The long term policy for this unit is Hold The Line. New defences should be maintained. HTL will manage the risk of flooding in this and linked Policy Units (SEV 1, SEV 2, SEV 3, SEV 5, and SEV 6). HTL will manage the risk of impacts from flooding to Key Policy Drivers such as Oldbury and Berkeley Nuclear Power Stations (or new power stations in these locations). HTL does not guarantee funding to build or maintain current or future defences or to counter sea level rise.
  • 19. The above provides the local details in respect of the SMP-wide policy presented in the preceding sections of this Plan document. These details must be read in the context of the wider-scales issues and policy implications, as reported therein. Severn Estuary SMP2 Review – Final Report 19 Economics Policy Unit Existing SMP1 Policy Time Period (epoch) SMP2 Assessment 0- 20 20- 50 50- 100 Preferred Plan Present Value Damages Preferred Plan Present Value Defence Costs SEV 4 HTL HTL HTL HTL £46m (SEV1-6 total) £15m (SEV1-6 total) The preferred policy for this unit is economically viable. The preferred policy is economically viable for the linked Policy Units of SEV 1, SEV 2, SEV 3, SEV 4, SEV 5 and SEV 6, but the benefit-cost ratio (BCR) is low. Where the BCR is low, schemes may be less likely to receive public funding and it may be necessary to find funding from other sources. The costs and damages of the preferred policy in the table above relate to actions taken in all linked policy units.
  • 20. The above provides the local details in respect of the SMP-wide policy presented in the preceding sections of this Plan document. These details must be read in the context of the wider-scales issues and policy implications, as reported therein. Severn Estuary SMP2 Review – Final Report 20 Predicted Implication of the Preferred Plan for the SEV 4 Policy Unit Time Period Management Activities Property, Land Use and Human Health Nature Conservation – including Earth Heritage, Geology and Biodiversity Landscape Character and Visual Amenity Historic Environment Amenity and Recreational Use 0 – 20 years The current earth embankment defences are expected to come to the end of their serviceable life during the next epoch but may require reconstruction / extensive works during this epoch. Hydraulic linkage to a number of units would result in a large floodplain should defences come to the end of their serviceable life. Major assets are at flood risk in this and linked Policy Units should defences come to the end of their serviceable life including Oldbury and Berkley Power stations. Defences will manage the risk of impacts to existing property, land use or human health. A HTL policy will not impact the nature conservation sites during this time period. Works should take account of possible environmental impacts and the need for an EIA. Defences are likely to come to the end of their serviceable life in the next epoch but may require reconstruction / extensive works during this epoch. Increased height of defences or change in defence construction materials will affect local landscape - increasing presence in the landscape and disrupting views. Defences will manage the risk of impacts to the historic environment Defences will manage the risk to amenity or recreational value of the land 20 – 50 years The current earth embankment defences are expected to come to the end of their serviceable life during this epoch and should be replaced. An on-going maintenance programme should be established to ensure the defences afford protection to the assets at risk Major assets are at flood risk in this and linked Policy Units should defences come to the end of their serviceable life including Oldbury and Berkley Power stations (or new builds in these locations). Defences will manage the risk of impacts to existing property, land use or human health. Coastal squeeze will occur which will result in loss of intertidal habitats. Works should take account of possible environmental impacts and the need for an EIA. Defences are likely to come to the end of their serviceable life in this epoch and should be reconstructed. Increased height of defences or change in defence construction materials will affect local landscape - increasing presence in the landscape and disrupting views. Defences will manage the risk of impacts to the historic environment Defences will manage the risk to amenity or recreational value of the land
  • 21. The above provides the local details in respect of the SMP-wide policy presented in the preceding sections of this Plan document. These details must be read in the context of the wider-scales issues and policy implications, as reported therein. Severn Estuary SMP2 Review – Final Report 21 Time Period Management Activities Property, Land Use and Human Health Nature Conservation – including Earth Heritage, Geology and Biodiversity Landscape Character and Visual Amenity Historic Environment Amenity and Recreational Use 50 – 100 years An on-going maintenance programme should be established including the monitoring of shoreline erosion as sea level rise increases. Major assets are at flood risk in this and linked Policy Units should defences come to the end of their serviceable life including Oldbury and Berkley Power stations (or new builds in these locations). Defences will manage the risk of impacts to existing property, land use or human health. Coastal squeeze will occur which will result in loss of intertidal habitats. Works should take account of possible environmental impacts and the need for an EIA. Increased height of defences or change in defence construction materials will affect local landscape - increasing presence in the landscape and disrupting views. Defences will manage the risk of impacts to the historic environment Defences will manage the risk to amenity or recreational value of the land
  • 22. The above provides the local details in respect of the SMP-wide policy presented in the preceding sections of this Plan document. These details must be read in the context of the wider-scales issues and policy implications, as reported therein. Severn Estuary SMP2 Review – Final Report 22 Policy Unit: SEV 5 – Oldbury Power Station to Littleton Warth (east bank of the River Severn)
  • 23. The above provides the local details in respect of the SMP-wide policy presented in the preceding sections of this Plan document. These details must be read in the context of the wider-scales issues and policy implications, as reported therein. Severn Estuary SMP2 Review – Final Report 23 Preferred Policies to Implement the Plan: Epoch Preferred Policy Comments 0 to 20 years (2025) HTL The Short Term policy for this unit is Hold The Line. The current defences are expected to remain in place for this epoch but may require some reconstruction / extensive works during this epoch. Actions should take account of potential impacts in all linked Policy Units (SEV 1, SEV 2, SEV 3, SEV 4, and SEV 6). HTL will manage the risk of impacts from flooding to Key Policy Drivers such as Oldbury and Berkeley Nuclear Power Stations. Although Oldbury Power Station is on higher ground, the risk of flooding from coastal flooding from linked Policy Units is high and should be managed. HTL does not guarantee funding to build or maintain current or future defences or to counter sea level rise. 20 to 50 years (2055) HTL The medium term policy for this unit is Hold The Line. The existing defences will come to the end of their serviceable life in this epoch. HTL recommends that defences arereplaced. The position, size and materials of new defences should be considered in detail to ensure actions take account of potential impacts on linked Policy Units (SEV 1, SEV 2, SEV 3, SEV 4, and SEV 6). The location and type of defence should be determined by the SEFRMS. HTL will manage the risk of impacts from flooding to Key Policy Drivers such as Oldbury and Berkeley Nuclear Power Stations (or new power stations in these locations). HTL does not guarantee funding to build or maintain current or future defences or to counter sea level rise. 50 to 100 years (2105) HTL The long term policy for this unit is Hold The Line. New defences should be maintained. HTL will manage the risk of flooding in this and linked Policy Units (SEV 1, SEV 2, SEV 3, SEV 4, and SEV 6). HTL will manage the risk of impacts from flooding to Key Policy Drivers such as Oldbury and Berkeley Nuclear Power Stations (or new power stations in these locations). HTL does not guarantee funding to build or maintain current or future defences or to counter sea level rise.
  • 24. The above provides the local details in respect of the SMP-wide policy presented in the preceding sections of this Plan document. These details must be read in the context of the wider-scales issues and policy implications, as reported therein. Severn Estuary SMP2 Review – Final Report 24 Economics Policy Unit Existing SMP1 Policy Time Period (epoch) SMP2 Assessment 0- 20 20- 50 50- 100 Preferred Plan Present Value Damages Preferred Plan Present Value Defence Costs SEV 5 HTL HTL HTL HTL £46m (SEV1-6 total) £15m (SEV1-6 total) The preferred policy for this unit is economically viable. The preferred policy is economically viable for the linked Policy Units of SEV 1, SEV 2, SEV 3, SEV 4, SEV 5 and SEV 6, but the benefit-cost ratio (BCR) is low. Where the BCR is low, schemes may be less likely to receive public funding and it may be necessary to find funding from other sources. The costs and damages of the preferred policy in the table above relate to actions taken in all linked policy units.
  • 25. The above provides the local details in respect of the SMP-wide policy presented in the preceding sections of this Plan document. These details must be read in the context of the wider-scales issues and policy implications, as reported therein. Severn Estuary SMP2 Review – Final Report 25 Predicted Implication of the Preferred Plan for the SEV 5 Policy Unit Time Period Management Activities Property, Land Use and Human Health Nature Conservation – including Earth Heritage, Geology and Biodiversity Landscape Character and Visual Amenity Historic Environment Amenity and Recreational Use 0 – 20 years The current earth embankment defences are expected to come to the end of their serviceable life during the next epoch but may require reconstruction / extensive works during this epoch. Hydraulic linkage to a number of units would result in a large floodplain should defences come to the end of their serviceable life. Major assets are at flood risk in this and linked Policy Units should defences come to the end of their serviceable life including Oldbury and Berkley Power stations. Defences will manage the risk of impacts to existing property, land use or human health. A HTL policy will not impact the nature conservation sites during this time period. Works should take account of possible environmental impacts and the need for an EIA. Defences are likely to come to the end of their serviceable life in the next epoch but may require reconstruction / extensive works during this epoch. Increased height of defences or change in defence construction materials will affect local landscape - increasing presence in the landscape and disrupting views. Defences will manage the risk of impacts to the historic environment Defences will manage the risk to amenity or recreational value of the land 20 – 50 years The current earth embankment defences are expected to come to the end of their serviceable life during this epoch and should be replaced. An on-going maintenance programme should be established to ensure the defences afford protection to the assets at risk Major assets are at flood risk in this and linked Policy Units should defences come to the end of their serviceable life including Oldbury and Berkley Power stations (or new builds in these locations). Defences will manage the risk of impacts to existing property, land use or human health. Coastal squeeze will occur which will result in loss of intertidal habitats. Works should take account of possible environmental impacts and the need for an EIA. Defences are likely to come to the end of their serviceable life in this epoch and should be reconstructed. Increased height of defences or change in defence construction materials will affect local landscape - increasing presence in the landscape and disrupting views. Defences will manage the risk of impacts to the historic environment Defences will manage the risk to amenity or recreational value of the land
  • 26. The above provides the local details in respect of the SMP-wide policy presented in the preceding sections of this Plan document. These details must be read in the context of the wider-scales issues and policy implications, as reported therein. Severn Estuary SMP2 Review – Final Report 26 Time Period Management Activities Property, Land Use and Human Health Nature Conservation – including Earth Heritage, Geology and Biodiversity Landscape Character and Visual Amenity Historic Environment Amenity and Recreational Use 50 – 100 years An on-going maintenance programme should be established including the monitoring of shoreline erosion as sea level rise increases. Major assets are at flood risk in this and linked Policy Units should defences come to the end of their serviceable life including Oldbury and Berkley Power stations (or new builds in these locations). Defences will manage the risk of impacts to existing property, land use or human health. Coastal squeeze will occur which will result in loss of intertidal habitats. Works should take account of possible environmental impacts and the need for an EIA. Increased height of defences or change in defence construction materials will affect local landscape - increasing presence in the landscape and disrupting views. Defences will manage the risk of impacts to the historic environment Defences will manage the risk to amenity or recreational value of the land
  • 27. The above provides the local details in respect of the SMP-wide policy presented in the preceding sections of this Plan document. These details must be read in the context of the wider-scales issues and policy implications, as reported therein. Severn Estuary SMP2 Review – Final Report 27 Policy Unit: SEV 6 - Littleton Warth to Aust Ferry (east bank of the River Severn)
  • 28. The above provides the local details in respect of the SMP-wide policy presented in the preceding sections of this Plan document. These details must be read in the context of the wider-scales issues and policy implications, as reported therein. Severn Estuary SMP2 Review – Final Report 28 Preferred Policies to Implement the Plan: Epoch Preferred Policy Comments 0 to 20 years (2025) NAI The Short Term policy for this unit is No Active Intervention. High ground and hard geology naturally limit the risk of coastal flooding and erosion in this Policy Unit. NAI will allow natural processes on Aust Cliff (SSSI) to continue with little or no impact on the assets on the cliff top. 20 to 50 years (2055) NAI The Short Term policy for this unit is No Active Intervention. High ground and hard geology naturally limit the risk of coastal flooding and erosion in this Policy Unit. NAI will allow natural processes on Aust Cliff (SSSI) to continue with little or no impact on the assets on the cliff top. 50 to 100 years (2105) NAI The Short Term policy for this unit is No Active Intervention. High ground and hard geology naturally limit the risk of coastal flooding and erosion in this Policy Unit. NAI will allow natural processes on Aust Cliff (SSSI) to continue with little or no impact on the assets on the cliff top. In the long term, the rate of erosion should be monitored. If the rate of erosion increases, or assets are at risk (e.g. Old Severn Road Bridge), action should be considered. Funds to undertake actions are not guaranteed. Economics Policy Unit Existing SMP1 Policy Time Period (epoch) SMP2 Assessment 0- 20 20- 50 50- 100 Preferred Plan Present Value Damages Preferred Plan Present Value Defence Costs SEV 6 Do Nothing (Locally HTL) NAI NAI NAI £46m (SEV1-6 total) £15m (SEV1-6 total) The preferred policy has no economic impact in this Policy Unit. The preferred policy for this unit is economically viable. The preferred policy is economically viable for the linked Policy Units of SEV 1, SEV 2, SEV 3, SEV 4, SEV 5 and SEV 6, but the benefit-cost ratio (BCR) is low. Where the BCR is low, schemes may be less likely to receive public funding and it may be necessary to find funding from other sources. The costs of the preferred policy in the table above relate to actions taken in linked policy units, not SEV 6.
  • 29. The above provides the local details in respect of the SMP-wide policy presented in the preceding sections of this Plan document. These details must be read in the context of the wider-scales issues and policy implications, as reported therein. Severn Estuary SMP2 Review – Final Report 29 Predicted Implication of the Preferred Plan for the SEV 6 Policy Unit Time Period Management Activities Property, Land Use and Human Health Nature Conservation – including Earth Heritage, Geology and Biodiversity Landscape Character and Visual Amenity Historic Environment Amenity and Recreational Use 0 – 20 years The cliffs will remain stable in this period, and as a result management activities will be very limited. Limited erosion and flood risk will not impact on existing property, land use or human health. A NAI policy will allow natural processes to dominate. There will be continued exposure of Aust Cliff SSSI. Limited erosion and flood risk will not impact on existing landscape and visual amenity Limited erosion and flood risk will not impact on the historic environment Limited erosion and flood risk will not impact on the amenity value of the land or recreational use. 20 – 50 years The cliffs will undergo limited erosion within this period, and as a result management activities will be very limited. in the medium term monitoring should be established to ensure the stability of the M48 crossing Limited erosion and flood risk will not impact on existing property, land use or human health. A NAI policy will allow habitats to roll back so intertidal habitats and features will be maintained. The rate of roll back will be restricted by hard geology and high ground. There will be continued exposure of Aust Cliff SSSI. Limited erosion and flood risk will not impact on existing landscape and visual amenity Limited erosion and flood risk will not impact on the historic environment Limited erosion and flood risk will not impact on the amenity value of the land or recreational use. 50 – 100 years The cliffs will undergo limited erosion within this period, and as a result management activities will be very limited. . in the long term the monitoring programme should continue to ensure the stability of the M48 crossing Limited erosion and flood risk will not impact on existing property, land use or human health. A NAI policy will allow habitats to roll back so intertidal habitats and features will be maintained. The rate of roll back will be restricted by hard geology and high ground. There will be continued exposure of Aust Cliff SSSI. Limited erosion and flood risk will not impact on existing landscape and visual amenity Limited erosion and flood risk will not impact on the historic environment Limited erosion and flood risk will not impact on the amenity value of the land or recreational use.