Fairbourne (village) to be abandoned?

[Gloster]

A report on my news feed, so I can’t do a link (but then, I can’t do links anyway) says that Fairbourne (Gwynedd) will be the first village in the UK to be entirely abandoned due to the current round of climate change. It is reckoned that by 2054 it will no longer be safe or sustainable to maintain the flood defences.

 

[Islineclear3_1]

It's predicted that a lot of seaside towns (or parts therof) around the Essex and Kent coasts will be underwater as sea levels rise

 

[Mcr Warrior]

Reckon that the hamlet of Birling Gap on the South Coast (East Sussex) will have long gone by 2054. Built on the top of chalk cliffs, which tend to dramatically crumble away in storms/bad weather.

 

[Bletchleyite]

While the Fairbourne Railway would inevitably close, this does pose a danger to the Cambrian Coast line too - likely it will have to be rebuilt higher up alongside the main road (which would certainly be protected).

 

[HSTEd]

Ultimately this decision is a result of the local government having to pay for flood defences but not being required to compensate the residents of the town or provide them with replacement housing.

Much cheaper for the council and the government to just abandon them to homelessness than do anything.

If they were required to pay for replacement housing it would be orders of magnitude cheaper for them to defend in place.
This is an important legislative problem that is going to have to be addressed or we will be in serious trouble.

 

[quantinghome]

While the Fairbourne Railway would inevitably close, this does pose a danger to the Cambrian Coast line too - likely it will have to be rebuilt higher up alongside the main road (which would certainly be protected).

The Cambrian Coast line is on embankment or bridge over the Mawddach estuary, and protected from storms by the salt marsh, so it's probably OK as it is.

 

[Bletchleyite]

If they were required to pay for replacement housing it would be orders of magnitude cheaper for them to defend in place.

Would it? The population is about 1200, so you aren't talking a massive housing estate you need to build.

This is an important legislative problem that is going to have to be addressed or we will be in serious trouble.

Yes, I would agree that while insurance is normally a personal issue, if anyone is forced by legislation to abandon their home, they should be rehoused. Not just compulsory purchase, as values there will be very low, but provided with a replacement home, even if it is a social rented one rather than given it for free.

 

[HSTEd]

Would it? The population is about 1200, so you aren't talking a massive housing estate you need to build.

Building the housing is not the hard part, its persuading anywhere to grant planning permission for said estate.

There is a reason the average value of a home in the UK is now ~£264,000.

Which means we are talking ~£100+m for ~500 houses.

 

[alxndr]

Ultimately this decision is a result of the local government having to pay for flood defences but not being required to compensate the residents of the town or provide them with replacement housing.

Much cheaper for the council and the government to just abandon them to homelessness than do anything.

If they were required to pay for replacement housing it would be orders of magnitude cheaper for them to defend in place.
This is an important legislative problem that is going to have to be addressed or we will be in serious trouble.

Defending one bit of coastline doesn't solve the problem, it just moves it slightly further down the coast. It's inevitable that some places will be lost, like some have been lost before.

 

[DelW]

I thought I remembered this coming up before ...

Cambrian coast - Fairbourne

Took a trip down the coast yesterday to take advantage of the good weather. Passing Fairbourne, it struck me that I have heard nothing of what the implications for this line are when the flood defences for the village stop being maintained in the next decade, as the line is pretty close to sea...

www.railforums.co.uk

Fairbourne to be abandoned to the sea?

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/residents-fight-to-save-welsh-village-from-being-141117843.html The people of Fairbourne in Cardigan Bay, west Wales, are devastated that officials have opted to ‘decommission’ their village, eventually abandoning sea defences and allowing the 500 homes to be taken by...

www.railforums.co.uk

 

[LSWR Cavalier]

I saw reports about this a while ago, people have been given decades notice, they are luckier than people displaced by a new road built in a couple of years.

I think the line might have to be raised or protected.

One interesting challenge is the demographic, Fairbourne is a largely English-speaking settlement surrounded by places where a lot of Welsh is spoken.

 

[HSTEd]

Defending one bit of coastline doesn't solve the problem, it just moves it slightly further down the coast. It's inevitable that some places will be lost, like some have been lost before.

Well to a certain extent yes, but it is also possible to chose the material removed.

We can remove the ground underneath this extremely expensive to replace settlement, or we can have it remove rock and concrete dug out of a quarry or dredged for the purpose.

I don't think people fully grasp the power at our disposal to shape our environment in a way that previous generations could never conceive of.
Or the absolutely enormous cost of replacing what is being abandoned here.

 

[XAM2175]

I saw reports about this a while ago, people have been given decades notice, they are luckier than people displaced by a new road built in a couple of years.

Yes, but the news has already devalued their houses, and unless the policy is reversed or compensation is provided that money's not coming back.

 

[Sm5]

Building the housing is not the hard part, its persuading anywhere to grant planning permission for said estate.

There is a reason the average value of a home in the UK is now ~£264,000.

Which means we are talking ~£100+m for ~500 houses.

The cost of building a house is very often a fraction of the cost of its resale value.
Buying land and building a housing estate neednt be expensive, but selling it is very lucrative.. which is why builders do it.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 12 Nov 2021 ==

Yes, but the news has already devalued their houses, and unless the policy is reversed or compensation is provided that money's not coming back.

I’d imagine the home owners might be charged for the demolition of those homes and removal of waste to, so it doesnt harm the environment too.

 

[johnnychips]

Defending one bit of coastline doesn't solve the problem, it just moves it slightly further down the coast. It's inevitable that some places will be lost, like some have been lost before.

This is an excellent point. It was decided to protect the village of Mappleton on the East Yorkshire coast because the main road through it passed very near to the eroding cliffs. They built a rock revetment to protect the cliff and two large rock groynes to trap the sand, which would diminish the waves’ power.

Of course, the cliffs down the coast, now deprived from the sand protecting them, eroded at a much faster rate, leading farms to be abandoned.

I am sure that everybody who did GCSE Geography after 1990 will be familiar with this.

Unfortunately, I am not sure what the exact circumstances at Fairbourne are.

 

[HSTEd]

The cost of building a house is very often a fraction of the cost of its resale value.
Buying land and building a housing estate neednt be expensive, but selling it is very lucrative.. which is why builders do it.

That's because housebuilders aren't actually businesses for building houses.

They are businesses in the business of obtaining permission from the state for housing to exist.

The state is effectively extinguishing several hundred such permissions and there is no evidence that replacements will granted.

Those permissions are extraordinarily valuable such that abandoning them is insanity - as replacements are politically impossible to obtain.