Lunenburg Part 2 - Section 5 - Social Vulnerability - August 30.pdf

More documents

Recommendations

Info

costly damage if pipes freeze and burst. Power loss is an urgent concern for medically dependent persons who rely on devices such as respirators for survival. Emergency backup generators are a financial cost that socially vulnerable people may not be able to afford. The Tancook Islands are isolated, accessible only by ferry; only a small number of residents are present year-round. Consultees noted that ferry infrastructure is threatened by erosion around the ferry docks. Riisser’s Beach has no cellular phone service or payphones; although authorities evacuate the campground if a severe storm is anticipated, campers caught in unexpected severe weather could be unable to contact emergency services. Overall, many consultees indicated that access problems and damage to infrastructure are increasing in frequency, and the costs of accessing remote areas and providing comprehensive emergency service rise continually. Damage to infrastructure is costly to repair, and a significant burden for a municipality with limited resources, particularly if damage is recurring. Some argued that municipalities shoulder an unfair proportion of infrastructure maintenance costs. Due to budget constraints, the Municipality currently does not perform proactive maintenance of infrastructure, instead allowing facilities and equipment to function as long as possible, only performing repairs when a component has broken. Consultees identified a number of places of employment in locations with increased risk of storm damage or inundation, such as LaHave Seafoods, the High Liner Foods fish plant, the LaHave Bakery, boatworks in Lunenburg and Mahone Bay, and numerous active fishing wharves. Damage to these locations could cause loss of employment and private property, resulting in new or increased social vulnerability. Constraints to Risk Prevention Consultees demonstrated abundant knowledge about risk and probability of coastal flooding. However, the ability of the Municipality to undertake preventative measures is severely limited by the fact that the majority of the District, including much of the coastline, is unplanned, with no land use planning controls. Consultees explained that a plebiscite with 66% of voters in support of planning would be required to institute land use planning; although there is an additional clause that would allow Council to institute planning, councilors and staff both felt that this would be unlikely to occur except in an extreme situation, such as an imminent threat to the area’s supply of drinking water. Consultees noted that in those areas where secondary plans do exist, planning was instituted in reaction to a proposed development that residents objected to - such as an asphalt plant in the Blockhouse area, and a gun range near Riverport –rather than as a means to plan proactively. Consultees had mixed perspectives about local interest in planning: some suggested that there are no local champions for planning or climate change adaptation while others identified significant community support for coastal planning, and speculated that this could be the majority view. Several communities have expressed interest in coastal planning; examples include Petite Riviere and the entire Broad Cove to LaHave area, where over eighty residents attended an informational workshop; and Kingsburg, where the Kingsburg Coastal Conservancy includes a large proportion of residents. All consultees agreed that many long-time residents have a strong sense of ownership of their land, and resist interference in their private property rights. However, they may also object to new coastal development that blocks their view and access to the water. New residents may be more supportive of land use planning; many have previously lived in areas with restrictions imposed by planning controls, or have witnessed the types of problems that can occur without planning. Consultees agreed that while local people are generally knowledgeable about weather 64
patterns and potential dangers (“Hell’s Point was named for a reason….”), new residents are more likely to build in risky areas, and may be unaware of coastal processes and hazards. Consultees noted that there is no mechanism for educating residents about these risks. A representative of REMO also noted that the organization is not consulted about development. Examples of recent development in potentially hazardous areas include newly-constructed homes amongst sand dunes very close to sea level, or on eroding drumlin cliffs in Kingsburg; and fish shacks converted to residences in Oakland and Indian Point. Several consultees claimed that some new residents had complained about armour rock blocking their view until they witnessed a severe storm and saw first-hand the effectiveness of armour rock in protecting properties. Due to the lack of planning control over coastal development, new physical vulnerability is being generated in potentially hazardous coastal areas. While all consultees recognized this problem, and felt that there should be some sort of control in place to either prevent new construction in at-risk areas, or require engineering solutions, they had mixed views about how this type of control could be instituted. Some argued that the Province must act first, instituting a provincewide coastal planning initiative. The reasons provided varied widely. Some felt that a provincial policy would remove the political risk from municipal governments. Some argued that scientific rationale was required to remove property rights in order to avoid potentially costly legal challenges. Others were unaware of a municipality’s authority to institute planning controls without a specific grant of power from the provinces. One consultee expressed the view that coastal planning in the District would be futile if the rest of the province’s coast was left unplanned, and that adaptation was not a function of municipal planning. The only area of clear consensus amongst consultees was that the Municipality needs reliable research in order to determine setbacks in a rational way, but lacks the resources to undertake this research. Emergency Management A variety of organizations participate in Emergency Management in the Municipality of the District of Lunenburg. The Regional Emergency Management Organization (REMO) coordinates amongst the emergency advisory groups and Assistant Emergency Coordinators from each of the District of Lunenburg, the District of Chester, the Town of Bridgewater, and the Town of Mahone Bay and helps each municipality to form emergency plans, and advises the Nova Scotia Emergency Management Organization about the needs of the municipalities. REMO also provides supplies to communities in need, beginning 72 hours after an extreme event. REMO uses the Nova Scotia hazard risk vulnerability assessment model, which identifies vulnerabilities corresponding to various types of hazards. In this context, ‘vulnerability’ is used in a general sense, and does not refer to social vulnerability; however, a number of socially vulnerable groups are identified in the framework: Aboriginal people, children, seniors, homeless persons and other transient populations, persons with limited mobility, persons with a variety of health concerns, medically-dependent individuals, persons with limited knowledge of official languages, persons with low education, persons with low income, persons reliant on social assistance, unemployed persons, single parents and single income families. REMO’s efforts regarding these potentially vulnerable groups has focused on educating the public about what vulnerabilities may exist under different hazard situations, and how individuals with these vulnerabilities should respond. REMO has held town hall meetings regarding flood risks, providing information to residents about what to do in the event of a flood, in order to reduce vulnerability. 65
Page 1 and 2:
Atlantic Climate Adaptation Solutio
Page 3 and 4:
And, thank you to the many resident
Page 5 and 6:
The District’s extensive and irre
Page 7 and 8:
OAKLAND 61 PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION FE
Page 9 and 10:
Introduction Social vulnerability r
Page 11 and 12:
and over time. This creates a justi
Page 13 and 14:
also emphasize the need for detaile
Page 15 and 16:
Data Interpretation: Analysis For e
Page 17 and 18:
maps of equal or superior quality t
Page 19 and 20:
person’s employment improves and
Page 21 and 22: as providing valid information. She
Page 23 and 24: communication and collective action
Page 25 and 26: alone are particularly vulnerable i
Page 27 and 28: marginalization, limiting their acc
Page 29 and 30: disability in the event of a natura
Page 31 and 32: The prevalence of low income is a p
Page 33 and 34: Field Observations Travelling throu
Page 35 and 36: Average results for Nova Scotia are
Page 37 and 38: Next, the results from Table 3 are
Page 39 and 40: Figure 4. Social Vulnerability in t
Page 41 and 42: Seniors are more likely than other
Page 43 and 44: Figure 5. Storm Surge Scenarios in
Page 45 and 46: The Petite Riviere Bridge Several b
Page 47 and 48: This may reflect the Very High prop
Page 49 and 50: Table 7. Areas Requiring Attention
Page 51 and 52: Table 9. Areas Requiring Attention
Page 53 and 54: The area’s relatively high popula
Page 55 and 56: A High proportion of residents are
Page 57 and 58: An Average level of residents are s
Page 59 and 60: pharmacies, for medical services. I
Page 61 and 62: Figure 7: Storm Surge Scenarios wit
Page 63 and 64: The Plan also addresses the need fo
Page 65 and 66: A related ICSP strategic goal is to
Page 67 and 68: While the Economic Development Stra
Page 69 and 70: Oakland The Oakland Secondary Plann
Page 71: to maintain existing conditions and
Page 75 and 76: new residents, seasonal residents,
Page 77 and 78: vulnerabilities for individuals wit
Page 79 and 80: Two coastal dissemination areas hav
Page 81 and 82: about this program and use their kn
Page 83 and 84: Groome, P. (2010). Census Changes H
Page 85 and 86: Appendix A: Annotated Bibliography
Page 87 and 88: and analyzed using a Decision Tree
Page 89 and 90: Dolan, A.H., and I.J. Walker. “Un
Page 91 and 92: in health care or mitigating socioe
Page 93 and 94: Appendix B: Table of Indicators and
Page 95 and 96: No Secondary Education Adger et al.
Page 97 and 98: Appendix C: Maps of Profile by Indi
Page 99 and 100: Government Transfer Payments This s
Page 101 and 102: Children The District has a Below A
Page 103 and 104: Seniors Living Alone The District h
Page 105 and 106: No Secondary Education Social vulne
Page 107 and 108: dissemination areas where no reside
Page 109 and 110: Visible Minorities The District of
Page 111 and 112: Appendix D: Radar Diagrams for each
Page 113 and 114: 105
Page 115 and 116: DA 82 DA 83 Aboriginal Identity Vis
Page 117 and 118: DA 123 DA 124 Aboriginal Identity V
Page 119 and 120: DA 160 DA 161 Aboriginal Identity V
Page 121 and 122: Mahone Bay Food Bank Hospital, Long
Page 123:
South Shore Big Brothers Big Sister
show all

Lunenburg Part 2 - Section 5 - Social Vulnerability - August 30.pdf

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?