RPA
Risk & Policy Analysts
Wolferton Creek to South Hunstanton and
Scratby and California Pathfinders
Teresa Fenn
Risk & Policy Analysts
Acknowledgements
 Our approach has been built around views and
feedback from key stakeholders and local
communities:
– Key Stakeholder/Management Group
– Scratby Coastal Erosion Group (SCEG)
– Workshop attendees
– Drop-in sessions
– People who have responded to newsletter
articles and questionnaires
 Also had a lot of support, advice, information,
guidance and comments from BCKLWN and
GYBC
RPA
Two Very Different Projects…
No
rock
berm
RPA
Two Very Different Projects…
RPA
Two Very Different Projects…
RPA
Two Very Different Projects…
 Scratby and
California
 Wolferton Creek to
South Hunstanton
 Coastal erosion
 Coastal flooding
 Looking at
adaptation in case
there is no money
for extension of
rock berm and in
long-term
 Securing
contributions to
continue maintaining
defences
RPA
…with Commonalities
 Both faced with obstacles and
unknowns, especially:
– money
– awareness of risks
– what local communities want
 Need to identify options to enable
the communities and businesses at
risk to continue
RPA
Finding Funding
 Need money whether you are
providing defences or adapting
 Defences in short-term may cost
less…
 …adaptation has to be long-term
solution to reduce future risks but
with help for those that need it
RPA
What do the Communities want?
 Defences…and many think Government should
pay
– up to 78% in Scratby
– 34% suggested Government in Wolferton
Creek to South Hunstanton
 Not to have to move
– people wanted to contribute to defences
rather than have to adapt
– Scratby people preferred options that allowed
them to stay in their properties
 Not to feel victimised (by lines on map, having to
pay for what others get for free)
 …but were willing to talk about contributions,
adaptation and to look at long-term solutions
RPA
How Much Money do We Need?
 What could come from central Government…
 Payments for outcomes…not much
 Wolferton Creek to South Hunstanton:
– up to £97,000 per year
– 12% of annual costs (£800,000 per year)
 Scratby and California:
– around £3 million
– …but adaptation options start at around
£8 million…and go up to £50 million
RPA
What Can be Raised Locally?
 What is local?
 Just those who are affected?
– Should just those affected pay, or should they
pay a bit more (a surcharge?)
– Contributions through parish precepts - not
preferred…and could extend beyond direct
beneficiaries
– ‘Shoreline Drainage Board’ – whose members
are the direct beneficiaries
 Those who may benefit indirectly?
– Contributions from across the Borough
– …but those who are paying may also want to
benefit, increasing the costs?
 Wider: County? National?
RPA
What Might Communities be Willing to Pay?
 Wolferton Creek to South Hunstanton:
– Overall (80): £33 per household per year
– Questionnaires (52): £41 per year
– Drop-in session (9): £31 per household per year
– Newsletters (19): £14 per household per year
 Scratby (per household per year):
– To help fund purchase of properties (129): £9
– To pay for ‘property swap’ (118): £5
– To help pay for buy and rent back (96): £5
– To help cover maintenance costs (112): £8
 …but this is willingness to pay of direct beneficiaries or
the affected communities
RPA
How Much Might They Have to Pay?
Wolferton Creek to Hunstanton
Contribution
Residents:
per Band D
property
Businesses:
% of Business
Rates
Utilities: per
installation
Transport:
per
organisation
responsible
Landowners:
per ha of
farmed land
By Income Paid to
Borough-wide
Borough Council
Below 5m
Above 5m
£4
£2
Scratby and California
By National Taxation
By National Taxation
Borough-wide
(Council Tax/Business
(All Tax)
Rates)
Cost (per
Below 5m Above 5m Below 5m Above 5m
Option
£27
£14
Purchase
properties
2.9%
1.5%
0.5%
£740
£370
£380
£190
Buy and rent
£460
-
£0.72
£0.36
0.2%
Property swap
back
Help with
£1,600
maintenance£0.004
£0.002
household per
year)
£16
£8
£7 to £12
1.8%
0.9%
£690
£350
£12
£2 to £5
to £11
£3£40
-
-
-
RPA
What Do Businesses Want?
 Very little response, to either project
 Some caravan parks willing to contribute
 Others not affected by previous flooding,
less sure they could pass costs on
 Awareness is being increased…
 Chamber of Trade comments based on
affordability for retail sector
RPA
What Can We Deliver?
 Mechanism for securing contributions:
– Regional Flood and Coastal Committee:
• allocation of GiA
• raising local levy
– Council Tax/Parish Precept:
• but concerns over capping
• use of Council Tax to procure others
– Business Improvement Districts:
• single sector business or Tourism BID
– …Shoreline Drainage Board:
• but potential issue with legislation
 Adaptation:
– Planning policies (Coastal Change Management Area,
enables rollback)
– Change to housing policy (safety net)
– Hard to do more without funding to pump-prime options
RPA
What Needs to Change?
 Attitudes and awareness of risk:
– low turnout at drop-in sessions
– 12 at Heacham (in snow!)
– 9 to workshop for those living in most atrisk properties at Scratby
 Need to improve consistency of understanding:
– Scratby: some people far back from the
cliff top were concerned about their
properties
– Scratby: confusion over SMP and what it
was showing
– Heacham/Hunstanton: 19 replies to
newsletters…but still ‘theoretical’?
RPA
What Needs to Change?
 Localism Bill:
– Council Tax – referenda? capping?
– Parish precepts – not transparent enough?
 Contributions:
– EA policy – support where some money comes from local
sources
– RFCCs – allocation of GiA
– Defra payments – too open to interpretation and yet too
restrictive
 Other options:
– New Homes Bonus – too focused on additional homes?
– Housing Associations – restricted, e.g. by Decent Homes
Standard
– Planning Gain – but limited by community views on additional
development
– Community Interest Company – needs local people to come
together to manage…but still needs funding
RPA
Recommendations

For Local Authorities:
– ongoing two-way communications plan (businesses, community,
landowners)
– Coastal Change Management Area and associated policies
– potential for small-scale planning gain (linked to New Homes
Bonus?)
– change to social housing policy to help those affected by coastal
change

Local MP:
– Influence Defra payments for outcomes to help ensure they
cover adaptation options
– Potential for funding not allocated to defences to be used to help
pay for adaptation

General:
– Where do you draw the line between who pays and who does
not, or who pays a surcharge and who does not?
– If collecting a flood levy locally, how do you make it transparent
and accountable?
RPA
Project Achievements

Both were community-led projects
– opportunities for everyone to be involved
– decisions proposed and agreed by the community

Scratby:
– door-to-door canvass and questionnaire delivery
produced good response rates
– development of CCMA through concept statement,
agreed by community
– development of future Community Development Plan
– allayed concerns of many residents about coastal change

Wolferton Creek to South Hunstanton:
– consensus that local contributions are an appropriate way
to help fund coastal defences
– stakeholder agreement on acceptable approach
– raised awareness of issue of future funding…and of the
risks
RPA
Any questions?
RPA Farthing Green House, 1 Beccles Road, Loddon, Norfolk, NR14 6LT
Tel: 01508 528465
Email: teresa.fenn@rpaltd.co.uk
RPA