Appendix 3.1
Land use classification
This is a revised land use classifications from Flair 1990.
This appendix comprises the revised hierarchical land use classification for all the MUFHRC land use sectors (1 - 9) which also appears in the FLAIR 1990 report (N'Jai et al, 1990). This is a development of the land use classification originally developed in Penning-Rowsell and Chatterton (1977) and subsequently updated by Parker et al (1987). Data sources given in this Appendix refer to the first documentation of the particular categories. These sources should be consulted for detailed information on the category concerned. The sources (referred to in this appendix) are abbreviations for earlier Flood Hazard Research Centre publications.
PC refers to the ‘Blue Manual' (Penning-Rowsell and Chatterton, 1977) PGT refers to the ‘Red Manual' (Parker, Green and Thompson, 1987) FHRC refers to the ‘Update' Report (Suleman et al, 1988)
Residential Property Land Use Codes
Land use code Type Category Subcategory
(Social Class) (column number) 21 22 23 24 Detached 1 1 0 0 Pre-1919 1 1 1 0 AB 1 1 1 1 C1 1 1 1 2 C2 1 1 1 3 DE 1 1 1 4 1919-1944 1 1 2 0 AB 1 1 2 1 C1 1 1 2 2 C2 1 1 2 3 DE 1 1 2 4 1945-1964 1 1 3 0 AB 1 1 3 1 C1 1 1 3 2 C2 1 1 3 3 DE 1 1 3 4 1965-1974 1 1 4 0 AB 1 1 4 1 C1 1 1 4 2 C2 1 1 4 3 DE 1 1 4 4 1975-1985 1 1 5 0 AB 1 1 5 1 C1 1 1 5 2 C2 1 1 5 3 DE 1 1 5 4 1975-1985 utility 1 1 7 0 AB 1 1 7 1 C1 1 1 7 2 C2 1 1 7 3 DE 1 1 7 4 Post 1985 1 1 8 0 AB 1 1 8 1 C1 1 1 8 2 C2 1 1 8 3 DE 1 1 8 4
Land use code Type Category Subcategory
(Social Class) (column number) 21 22 23 24 Semi-detached 1 2 0 0 Pre-1919 1 2 1 0 AB 1 2 1 1 C1 1 2 1 2 C2 1 2 1 3 DE 1 2 1 4 1919-1944 1 2 2 0 AB 1 2 2 1 C1 1 2 2 2 C2 1 2 2 3 DE 1 2 2 4 1945-1964 1 2 3 0 AB 1 2 3 1 C1 1 2 3 2 C2 1 2 3 3 DE 1 2 3 4 1965-1974 1 2 4 0 AB 1 2 4 1 C1 1 2 4 2 C2 1 2 4 3 DE 1 2 4 4 1975-1985 1 2 5 0 AB 1 2 5 1 C1 1 2 5 2 C2 1 2 5 3 DE 1 2 5 4 1975-1985 - utility 1 2 7 0 AB 1 2 7 1 C1 1 2 7 2 C2 1 2 7 3 DE 1 2 7 4 Post 1985 1 2 8 0 AB 1 2 8 1 C1 1 2 8 2 C2 1 2 8 3 DE 1 2 8 4
Land use code Type Category Subcategory
(Social Class) (column number) 21 22 23 24 Terrace 1 3 0 0 Pre-1919 1 3 1 0 AB 1 3 1 1 C1 1 3 1 2 C2 1 3 1 3 DE 1 3 1 4 1919-1944 1 3 2 0 AB 1 3 2 1 C1 1 3 2 2 C2 1 3 2 3 DE 1 3 2 4 1945-1964 1 3 3 0 AB 1 3 3 1 C1 1 3 3 2 C2 1 3 3 3 DE 1 3 3 4 1965-1974 1 3 4 0 AB 1 3 4 1 C1 1 3 4 2 C2 1 3 4 3 DE 1 3 4 4 1975-1985 1 3 5 0 AB 1 3 5 1 C1 1 3 5 2 C2 1 3 5 3 DE 1 3 5 4 1975-1985 - utility 1 3 7 0 AB 1 3 7 1 C1 1 3 7 2 C2 1 3 7 3 DE 1 3 7 4 Post 1985 1 3 8 0 AB 1 3 8 1 C1 1 3 8 2 C2 1 3 8 3 DE 1 3 8 4
Land use code Type Category Subcategory
(Social Class) (column number) 21 22 23 24 Bungalow 1 4 0 0 Pre-1919 1 4 1 0 AB 1 4 1 1 C1 1 4 1 2 C2 1 4 1 3 DE 1 4 1 4 1919-1944 1 4 2 0 AB 1 4 2 1 C1 1 4 2 2 C2 1 4 2 3 DE 1 4 2 4 1945-1964 1 4 3 0 AB 1 4 3 1 C1 1 4 3 2 C2 1 4 3 3 DE 1 4 3 4 1965-1974 1 4 4 0 AB 1 4 4 1 C1 1 4 4 2 C2 1 4 4 3 DE 1 4 4 4 1975-1985 1 4 5 0 AB 1 4 5 1 C1 1 4 5 2 C2 1 4 5 3 DE 1 4 5 4 Post 1985 1 4 8 0 AB 1 4 8 1 C1 1 4 8 2 C2 1 4 8 3 DE 1 4 8 4
Land use code Type Category Subcategory
(Social Class) (column number) 21 22 23 24 Flat 1 5 0 0 Pre-1919 1 5 1 0 AB 1 5 1 1 C1 1 5 1 2 C2 1 5 1 3 DE 1 5 1 4 1919-1944 1 5 2 0 AB 1 5 2 1 C1 1 5 2 2 C2 1 5 2 3 DE 1 5 2 4 1945-1964 1 5 3 0 AB 1 5 3 1 C1 1 5 3 2 C2 1 5 3 3 DE 1 5 3 4 1965-1974 1 5 4 0 AB 1 5 4 1 C1 1 5 4 2 C2 1 5 4 3 DE 1 5 4 4 1975-1985 1 5 5 0 AB 1 5 5 1 C1 1 5 5 2 C2 1 5 5 3 DE 1 5 5 4 Post 1985 1 5 8 0 AB 1 5 8 1 C1 1 5 8 2 C2 1 5 8 3 DE 1 5 8 4
Non-Residential Property Land Use Codes
Entries with a grey background have associated depth/damage files in Appendix 5.6
Category Subcategory Land use code
Shop/store 21
High street shop 211
Super/Hyperstore 213 Retail Warehouse 214 Showroom 215 Kiosk 216 Outdoor market 217 Indoor market 218 Vehicle Services 22 Garage/vehicle repair 221 Filling Station 222 Car Showroom 223 Plant Hire 224 Retail Services 23 Hairdresser 231 Betting Shop 232 Launderette 233 Public House/Club 234 Restaurant 235 Café/Fast Food 236 Post Office 237 Garden Centre 238 Office 3
Office (non specific) 310
Hi-Tech Office 311 Bank 320 Distribution/Logistics 4 Warehouse 410 Warehouse – electrical goods 411 Warehouse – non-frozen goods 412 Warehouse – frozen goods 413 Land used for storage 420
Road Haulage 430 Leisure 51 Hotel 511 Boarding House 512 Caravan – touring 513 Caravan – static 514
Self catering unit 515
Hostel 516
Bingo 517
Theatre/Cinema 518
Category Subcategory Land use code Sport 52 Playing fields/grounds 521 Golf Course 522 Sports/Leisure Centre 523 Amusement park/arcade 524 Football ground 525 Mooring/Wharf/Marina 526 Swimming Pool 527 Public Building 6
School University College 610 Surgery/Health care centre 620
Residential Home 625 Hall/Community Centre 630 Library 640 Fire/Ambulance 650 Police station 651 Hospital 660 Museum 670 Law Court 680 Church 690 Industry 8 Workshop 810 Factory/Works/Mill 820 Extractive/Heavy Industry 830 Sewage Treatment 840 Laboratory 850 Miscellaneous 9 Car Park 910 Public Conveniences 920 Cemetery/Crematorium 930 Bus Station 940 Dock Hereditament 950 Electricity Hereditament 960
1
Appendix 6. 1 Rail disruption: suggested algorithm
(Developed by John Chatterton)
The following are the necessary calculation steps:
Step 1: Determine the number of passenger journeys for the rail link at risk from flooding per 24-hour period by each franchise operator (Table 2).
Step 2: Obtain/create a map of the rail network with each Franchise operator marked. Superimpose the network on to the flood plain area map.
Step 3: Create a database of which operators cross each part of the indicative flood plain. This will include:
1. The population within a 50 km radius of the edge of each flood plain area;
2. This population as a percentage of the total population of the sum of all populations for all flood plain areas traversed by each operator;
Multiply this percentage by column (c) in Table 2 to obtain a surrogate figure of the number of passengers per 24 hours travelling across the flood plain via each operator. The reasoning here is that the larger the population hinterland of the flood plain area in question the larger the passenger base on the route.
Step 4: Apply compensation figures per passenger hour delayed or cancelled (Table 3).
Step 5: Apply Table 1 (delay/cancellation percentage) to Passenger numbers travelling across each flood plain area (Table 3) by passenger type (Table 2, columns d, e, f) and compensation payments (Table 4).
Step 6: Conversion to annual average disruption. Use Road traffic Return period disruption durations, but assume no rail traffic disruption until the 1 in 25 year event unless the Standard of Service protects the flood plain against more frequent events.
Up to and incl. 5 year return period 0 hours Up to and incl. 10 year return period 0 hours Up to and incl. 25 year return period 12 hours Up to and incl. 50 year return period 24 hours Up to and incl. 100 year return period 48 hours Up to and incl. 200 year return period 96 hours
As with road traffic disruption, this model will be complex for the Fenland type situations or during widespread flooding, as delays and cancellations will have significant ‘knock-on’ effects. Disruption will escalate as flooding becomes regional. The disruption figures above represent a minimum economic cost of disruption, relating to the separate flooding of individual flood plain areas in isolation from other areas, rather than all-region impacts.
Table 1: Percentage delay/cancel due to flooding
Rail service Delay % Cancel %
Regional 40 60
Intercity 40 60
Commuter 40 60
Freight 45 55
2
Table 2: Passenger numbers/types by rail company/franchise operator
Rail company No. of passenger journeys Service operated % split Per year Per 24 hr Regional Intercity Commuter
(a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f)
Anglia 5,990,000 16,411 70 0 30
Cardiff Railway 6,100,000 16,712 100 0 0
Central trains 32,400,000 88,767 100 0 0
Chiltern railways 8,800,000 24,110 0 20 80
Connex South Central 93,000,000 254,795 20 0 80
Connex South Eastern 117,200,000 321,096 20 20 60
Cross Country 1,250,000 34,247 25 75 0 Gatwick Express 3,700,000 10,137 0 100 0 Great Eastern 51,600,000 141,370 0 25 75 GNER 13,700,000 37,534 15 80 5 Great Western 1,640,000 44,932 30 45 25 Island line 709,000 1,942 100 0 0 LTS Rail 23,700,000 64,932 0 0 100 Merseyrail Electrics 23,000,000 63,014 100 0 0 Midland Mainline 6,300,000 17,260 10 75 15
North western Trains 27,000,000 73,973 90 0 10
Regional Railways North East 42,000,000 115,068 100 0 0
Silver link 30,700,000 84,110 40 0 60
South West Trains 118,200,000 323,836 25 0 70
Thames link 30,200,000 82,740 40 0 60
Thames Trains 28,500,000 78,082 40 0 60
Wales and west 13,600,000 37,260 80 20 0
West Anglia Great Northern 52,800,000 144,658 40 0 60
West Coat trains 14,990,000 41,068 15 70 15
Source: OPRAF
Table 3: Computation of passengers travelling across flood plain areas by operator
Operator IFP polygon reference Population of flood plain areas plus 50 km hinterland (Mock-up data) Total population of all hinterlands for each operator (Mock-up data) Percentage (c/d*100) Total Passengers travelling across flood plain areas
/24 hours (e/100)*col c from Table 2 (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) Anglian FP 1 36,057 1,875,452 1.93 317 FP2a 28,748 1,875,452 1.53 251 FP3 etc Cardiff FP65 134,899 789,788 17.08 2,854
Table 4: Compensation payments
Regional (£/hour) Intercity (£/hour) Commuter (£/hour) Per passenger hour
delay 13.8 13.2 11.4 Per passenger cancelled 6.9 13.2 5.7 Source: Railtrack
3 Table 5: Disruption costs across each flood plain area
Flood plain areas reference
Operator Passengers Cost of Delay per hour (£) Cost of cancellation per hour (£)
(a) (b) (c) (d) (e)
Type of passenger Type of passenger
Reg Inter Com Reg Inter Com
FP65 Cardiff 119 657 0 0 411 0 0
Notes:
Cols a to c comes from Table 3 with passengers converted to hourly figures
Cols d multiplies delay cost for each type of passenger 40% delay (Table 1) and passenger split from Table 2 (Cardiff is 100% regional) and delay compensation per hour from delayed passengers (Table 4) i.e.
2,854 passengers/24 hours * 0.4 (delay %) * 1.0 (100% regional) * 13.8 (regional delay compensation per hour) = £657
and
2,854 passengers/24 hours * 0.5 (cancelled %) * 1.0 (100% regional) * 6.9 (regional cancellation compensation per hour) = £411
Total disruption costs for FP65 = £1,068 per hour
ESW (England, Wales and Scotland) Freight Services
The same approach can be taken for freight if digital maps can be provided of the routes taken by ESW. A simple approach would be to assign a value of £300 loss per hour (source: Railtrack) for every service delayed and £750 for every service cancelled (source Railtrack). There are some 265 EWS services per 24 hours (Great Britain) and it seems appropriate to pro rate the number of services traversing flood plain areas as before, by multiplying the total services by each IFP hinterland population as a fraction of the total IFP hinterland population (but only for the flood plain areas through which EWS operate). We do not have the split between England/Wales and Scotland.
1
Appendix 6. 1 Standard checklist for emergency
service survey
This checklist is used to determine the costs incurred by individual emergency service organisations in a recent flood event.
We need to form a general overview of the commitment of your organisation during the ____________ (date) flood emergency in __________ (place). The answers to the following questions will help us form this overview.
Staff
1. Approximately how many staff were committed by this organisation to this flood emergency before, during and after the event?
2. How many staff hour were committed by this organisation before, during and after the event? 3. What proportion of these staff hours were worked at a) normal rates, and b) at overtime rates? 4. What is your organisation's a) average normal wage rate, and b) average overtime wage rate?
Vehicles
5. Approximately how many vehicles were committed by this organisation to the flood emergency before, during and after the flood event?
6. What additional vehicle mileages were committed by your organisation as a consequence of the flood emergency? (These are vehicle mileages incurred over and above those which would have been incurred by your organisation had the flood emergency not occurred).
Equipment
7. What items of equipment were used by this organisation in connection with the flood emergency?
8. What additional equipment costs has this organisation incurred as a result of the flood emergency? (These are costs over and above those which your organisation would have borne had the flood emergency not occurred).
Other costs and charges
9. Did your organisation incur any other costs not already identified as a result of the flood emergency? Please specify.
10. Has your organisation made any charge on any other organisation as a result of the flood emergency? Please specify.
11. Has your organisation been charged by any other organisation as a result of the flood emergency? Please specify.
1
Appendix 6. 1 Bellwin claims, thresholds and total
expense for County Councils, District Councils and
Unitary Authorities (£)
Local Authorities
Thresholds
Claim
Total
East Sussex 766,000 6,500,000 7,266,000 West Sussex 1,120,000 5,987,640 7,107,640 Denbighshire 209,221 2,722,504 2,931,725 Gloucestershire County 850,000 998,283 1,848,283 Isle of Wight 254,000 1,500,000 1,754,000 Devon County 1,060,000 377,261 1,437,261 Monmouthshire 163,468 1,231,735 1,395,203 Selby 16,000 1,096,181 1,112,181 Shropshire 420,000 672,306 1,092,306 Flintshire 300,534 647,792 948,326 York City 292,000 549,435 841,435
Redcar & Cleveland 295,000 500,795 795,795
Wiltshire 626,000 52,236 678,236
Herefordshire 298,000 352,476 650,476
Wrexham 252,937 390,699 643,636
Middlesbrough 327,000 245,955 572,955
Brighton & Hove 492,000 65,713 557,713
Shepway 27,000 515,000 542,000 Maidstone 30,000 505,424 535,424 Caerphilly 367,307 105,854 473,161 Carmarthenshire 381,648 79,521 461,169 Harrogate 31,000 426,761 457,761 Conwy 224,683 205,283 429,966 Gwynedd 266,819 136,706 403,525 West Berkshire 255,000 137,615 392,615 Scarborough 29,000 347,135 376,135 Ashford 23,000 276,786 299,786 Lewes 18,000 273,788 291,788 Ryedale 12,000 277,000 289,000 Canterbury 33,000 241,074 274,074 Hambleton 18,000 249,455 267,455 Tunbridge Wells 24,000 240,940 264,940
Shrewsbury and Atcham 20,000 231,369 251,369
Sevenoaks 24,000 212,168 236,168
Tonbridge and Malling 23,000 209,056 232,056
Tandridge District 15,000 215,201 230,201
Craven 12,000 194,473 206,473
Woking 20,000 181,115 201,115
Winchester 23,000 137,580 160,580
2
Local Authorities
Thresholds
Claim
Total
Epping Forest 26,000 118,887 144,887 Dover 28,000 97,919 125,919 Richmondshire 11,000 113,026 124,026 Elmbridge 26,000 93,641 119,641 New Forest 34,000 80,430 114,430 Swale 30,000 82,931 112,931 Charnwood 31,000 68,121 99,121 Wealden 28,000 66,112 94,112 Braintree 27,000 66,551 93,551 Teignbridge 27,000 60,036 87,036 Bassetlaw 25,000 54,915 79,915 Mid Sussex 24,000 54,927 78,927 Gosport 18,000 59,450 77,450 Worcester 22,000 54,266 76,266 Wear Valley 16,000 56,747 72,747 Chichester 24,000 47,199 71,199 Arun 32,000 32,966 64,966 Runnymede 16,000 48,107 64,107 Gloucester 26,000 33,099 59,099 Salisbury 24,000 33,809 57,809 Guildford 27,000 23,289 50,289 Gravesham 22,000 27,838 49,838 Stafford 25,000 23,073 48,073 Rushcliffe 19,000 29,053 48,053 Test Valley 22,000 25,593 47,593 Wyre 23,000 24,000 47,000 Dartford 20,000 26,538 46,538 Waverley 22,000 23,070 45,070
Reigate and Banstead 24,000 20,243 44,243
Taunton Deane 22,000 22,178 44,178 Thanet 37,000 5,332 42,332 Hart 14,000 24,082 38,082 South Derbyshire 16,000 20,907 36,907 Bridgnorth 10,000 24,216 34,216 Castle Morpeth 10,000 24,035 34,035 Oswestry 8,000 25,000 33,000 Havant 28,000 4,656 32,656
Newark and Sherwood 24,000 8,361 32,361
Lichfield 18,000 8,651 26,651
Derbyshire Dale 15,000 10,697 25,697
Mid Suffolk 16,000 8,305 24,305
Erewash 21,000 2,865 23,865
1
Appendix 8. 1 Checklist of recreational uses
COASTS RIVERS
GENERAL/INFORMAL GENERAL/INFORMAL
Land based Land based
Strolling Strolling
Walking Walking
Dog walking Dog walking
Sitting/sunbathing Sitting/sunbathing
Picnicking Picnicking
Observing nature/birds Observing nature/birds
Childrens’ games/play Childrens’ games/play
Other games: e.g football/cricket Other games: e.g football/cricket
Cycling Cycling
Roller skating/skate boarding Roller skating/skate boarding Viewing history/heritage/landscape Viewing history/heritage/landscape
Viewing boats Viewing boats
Playing in the sand -
Water based Water based
Paddling/swimming Paddling/swimming
Dipping/observing nature Dipping/observing nature
SPECIALIST SPECIALIST
Land based Land based
Nature studies Nature studies
Heritage/archaeological studies Heritage/archaeological studies
Geological studies Geological studies
Golf Golf
Horse riding Horse riding
Bird watching Bird watching
Bait digging -
Sand yachting -
Rock climbing -
Hang gliding -
Football/cricket Football/ cricket
Water based Water based
Angling/fishing Angling/fishing
Rowing/canoeing Rowing/canoeing
Sailing/sailboarding Sailing/sailboarding
Motor cruising Motor cruising
Jet skiing/water skiing Jet skiing/water skiing
1
Appendix 8. 2 Summary of possible effects of
options on coastal and riverine recreation and
amenity
COASTS
DO NOTHING OPTION
Beaches
Changes in beach composition: e.g from sand to coarse material such as pebbles affecting the suitability of the beach for childrens play, for sitting and for walking.
Changes in beach profile: as a beach steepens its value for walking, sitting and lying will be reduced.
Extend of beach at low and high tide: as a beach flattens with erosion, beach will be exposed for less time at low tide and less of the upper part will be exposed at high tide or access to the beach may become impossible. Promenades, seawalls and groynes
As a beach is lowered by erosion or as a result of flooding, the seawall may itself become undermined or damaged.
Where the beach has become lowered by erosion, there may be a steep drop or steep steps from the seawall to the beach making access inconvenient or unsafe.
Damage to the seawall may make the seafront appear dilapidated and visually unattractive.
With undermining, slumping and collapse, promenades and seawalls may become dangerous and access may in extreme cases be restricted or closed altogether.
Damaged groynes may initially appear unattractive and may thus reduce enjoyment. Eventually the dilapidation of the groynes may present a hazard to beach visitors.
Lowering of beaches may make access over groynes difficult or hazardous. With long shore drift, different levels of beach material may build up on either side of groynes creating a further potential hazard.
Erosion or flooding may damage or destroy access facilities for specialist users such as ramps for boat launching.
Cliffs
Erosion of unprotected cliffs may result in large pieces of material falling onto the beach below making the beach unsafe.
Increasing cliff top erosion may make the cliff edge unstable and dangerous. This may result in access to the cliff edge and views being restricted.
Erosion may result in the reduction of the cliff top area available for recreation. This may be significant where the area is restricted or used for special recreational purposes such as golf courses.
Where cliff top footpaths such as long distance routes cannot be moved back but have to be diverted inland, there will be a loss of amenity and recreational enjoyment
Erosion or flooding may damage or destroy access steps or ramps from cliff top to beach or seawall resulting in restrictions on or closure of access.
Other types of coastal area
Erosion to sand dunes is likely to result in restrictions to access.
Although saltmarshes may be less used for general recreation they may attract specialist users and erosion or flooding of saltmarshes may result in restrictions or loss of access for bird watchers or walkers.
Freshwater sites and land behind coastal defences with important recreational or environmental uses such as the Norfolk Broads or Cley marshes may be threatened by erosion and flooding from the sea (Bateman et al. 2001).
DO SOMETHING OPTIONS
Different techniques for coastal protection and sea defence have different effects on coastal recreation and techniques may well be perceived differently depending on visitors experience and views.
Beach nourishment
Beach nourishment may simply reinstate a beach to its pre erosion condition or it may enhance the condition and recreational enjoyment of the beach. Such enhancement may only be allowable for central government grant aid where it it is an integral part of a coastal protection or flood defence scheme.
Where nourishment is from outside sources rather than from recycling of material transported off the site, then there may be the opportunity change the nature of the beach material from a mixture to a purely sandy beach thus potentially enhancing recreational opportunities.
Beach nourishment is likely to increase the height of the beach, thus the amount of beach exposed and available for recreation at high tide and reducing the drop from seawall to beach and attendant hazards.
2
The effects on recreational use and enjoyment of beach renourishment can range from extreme disruption in the short terms where major engineering works are involved (as in the case of Hastings) or minimal disruption where small scale works can be carried out outside the main tourist season. Where there is year round recreational use of the site as at Hengistbury Head, annual works even over the winter season may be seen as disruptive of recreation.
Conventional and fishtail groynes, seawalls and off shore reefs
Groynes, apart from their benefits in retaining beach material and thus enhancing beach recreation, can be seen as beneficial in themselves, providing support for those sitting, shelter from the wind and containment for children Penning-Rowsell et al. 1989; 1992).
There may also be opportunities to create walkways for strollers and anglers on top of rock groynes.
Groynes and seawalls may however be seen by some as intrusive and as detracting from the ‘natural’ appearance of a seafront.
Response to groynes and seawalls may also depend upon the material from which they are constructed (see Hengistbury, Cliftonville and Corton studies). However, responses appear to vary and while some may perceive rock armoured groynes and seawalls as potentially hazardous, restrictive of access and traps for rubbish, others do not.
Structures such as fishtail groynes and offshore reefs have the potential to create new recreational opportunities for water based activities such as angling and sailing or boating by providing access to the sea and also shelter.
The introduction of new recreational activity such as boating or angling may enhance the enjoyment of other users of the seafront through watching these activities. However, this may result in a conflict between existing users and potential new users
Seawalls seldom have any direct benefit themselves but promenades upon them can add another dimension to the recreational experience at the sea front and allow access there to pushchairs, wheelchairs and cycles. Protective seawalls along the base of cliffs similarly may introduce a new recreational feature and enhance access.
Cliff regrading
This may offer the opportunity for creating an amenity walkway enhancing access and the range of users of the cliff top.
RIVERS
DO NOTHING OPTION
Flooding along rivers will usually cause only a temporary loss of recreation and amenity to those using rivers and riversides for recreation. The erosion of undeveloped river banks usually can be overcome by routing riverside paths a little further inland. Many riversides do not attract large numbers of visitors apart from those in busy town parks, city centres and country park settings. Thus, usually there will be too few visitors and recreation benefits to justify protecting undeveloped riverside sites although preventing damage to recreation might be an additional benefit where there are other direct damages to be prevented.
Where access along the river is restricted to a narrow corridor as was the case at Branbridges and Oak Weir along the River Medway (Tapsell et al, 1998), erosion can make paths inconvenient or dangerous to use and threaten public access.
Flooding of some specialist riverside recreation areas may damage facilities such as golf courses, boating facilities,paths and playing fields making them unusable or less enjoyable.
Erosion of river banks may pose a threat to navigations and boating recreation. DO SOMETHING OPTIONS
Where flood defences have to be renewed or flood defence standards raised, or where new defences have to be installed, for example, with new development or redevelopment, there may be associated recreation and amenity benefits through:
a new flood relief channel, for example the new Jubilee River in Maidenhead;
new flood retention ponds, lakes and wetland areas offering amenity and a new recreational resource;
replacement of ‘hard engineering’ with ‘soft engineering’, river rehabilitation;
Appendix 8.3 Detailed summaries of the scenarios presented in text and drawings in the surveys
Beach and promenade erosion
Current site Eroded site Site with scheme option(s)
Yellow Manual Standard data: 4 sites
Limited or good beach above high tide. Mixed or sandy beach,
Groynes and seawall are in reasonable or good condition,
Little or no beach at high tide, No or less sand on beach,
Groynes show decay or are in poor condition. Sea wall is cracked in places.
Wide beach at high tide.
Drop from promenade to beach is shorter. Beach of sand and pebbles or sand. There are no groynes visible. Seawall is in good condition.
Lee -on-Solent NA NA NA
Herne Bay Visitors survey
Little or no beach at high tide. Mainly shingle beach with some sand. Steeply shelving beach is reached by steps. Sea wall and promenade are in need of some attention.
There are wooden groynes,
No beach at high tide. Mainly shingle beach.
There is a longer drop and stairs from promenade to beach.
Promenade and seawall are in poor condition. with cracks and undermining causing total collapse in places.
The groynes are in a poor state of repair.
A wide sand and shingle beach at high tide. There is a shorter drop from promenade to beach.
Promenade and seawall are in good condition. Groynes have been removed.
A curved rock jetty, stretching 200 yards off shore with access for fishing and walking. a) As above with jetty without watercraft. b) As above but with mooring and boat launch facilities from jetty.
c)No jetty. Seawall, promenade etc. are higher and in good condition.
High, wide shingle beach.
Wooden groynes have been replaced by fewer higher rock groynes.
Cliftonville
There is a concrete sea wall with a wide promenade on top running along the base of most of the cliffs.
Three sections of cliff are not protected by this seawall.
Therefore, it is not possible to walk all the way along the base of the cliffs at high tide.
The unprotected cliff faces have been worn away and the coastline has retreated inland by several feet.
Debris from the cliffs has fallen onto the beach. The cliff top promenade is fenced off and closed for safety where the cliffs are badly eroded. It is not possible to walk along the cliff tops without a detour inland.
The cliffs are stable and the cliff top promenades are protected and accessible. a)There is a concrete seawall with a wide promenade, with three new slipways providing access all along the base of the cliffs.
b) Unprotected parts of the cliffs are protected at their base by a sloping rock wall with a narrow walkway on top providing access all along the base of the cliffs.
Corton (Residents, staying visitors)
The coastal defences, seawall and walkway have collapsed in three places
The access point in the centre of the village and most of the beach is closed
A 500 metre section of the beach at the southern end of the village is open
The beach is low and there is little beach at high tide
At times there is a big drop down to the beach from the seawall
The groynes are dilapidated
The coastal defences, seawall and walkway have collapsed along almost the whole seafront. There is no access along most of the beach because of hazards of seawall debris there. The only access to the beach is at the extreme southern end of the village.
The groynes have almost decayed away. The clifftops are eroding and changing to a more natural appearance.
Some clifftop visitor facilities are deteriorating with a prospect of closure.
a)Protect for a limited period
The coastal defences have collapsed along large parts of the seafront and the cliff face is protected by rocks/rock filled baskets.
It is no longer possible to walk all the way along the foot of the cliffs as only a few sections of walkway remain in place.
There is only limited access to the beach at two points.
The beach is low and partly covered in rocks protecting the base of the cliffs.
The groynes are very dilapidated. There is only a narrow beach at high tide. b) Protect for a longer period
Where the cliff protection has collapsed the cliff face is protected by rocks.
There is a concrete walkway all along the base of the cliffs.
Concrete steps lead from the walkway onto the beach; a wide beach is maintained.
There is full access to the beach from three points in the village.
There are new rock groynes along the seafront. c) Managed retreat
The cliffs are faced with earth and vegetation and have a natural appearance.
There are no coastal defences and no walkway at the base of the cliffs.
The only access to the beach is at the extreme southern end of the village but from there the full length of the beach will be open,
The beach is narrow but probably walkable at high tide,
The cliff is eroding and some visitor facilities are dilapidated with a prospect of closure,
St Mildred’s
Bay Good sand beach at high tide.
There is minor damage to groynes and sea wall. There is safe access along the length of the promenade.
The beach is littered with seawall debris and reduced in size at high tide.
There is severe damage to seawall and groynes.
The esplanade has been undermined and is uneven and dangerous to walk on.
Size of the beach is protected.
There is a new reinforced concrete seawall. The esplanade is resurfaced and accessible. Groynes have been repaired and more groynes added to further protect the size of the beach.
Hastings
There is no beach at high tide. Beach is shingle with some sand.
Seawall and breakwater are old and shows some signs of decay.
The beach is lower with less beach uncovered at low tide.
There is a longer drop from promenade to beach.
Breakwater is uneven and decaying.
Seawall is deeply cracked, undermined in places so that the promenade could become dangerous or collapse in places.
Beach level is higher, so there is no longer a big drop from promenade to beach.
There is a strengthened, renewed breakwater. The seawall supporting the promenade is faced with new material.
Breach scenarios Hengistbury
Head
The soft cliff headland is eroding.
It has varied and accessible conservation and archaeological sites.
There are clifftop paths and access along the beach.
The head is mainly protected by one rock groyne
The recreation area on cliff tops would be reduced in size with eventual loss of the clifftop path and access.
The headland could be breached and become and become an island accessible only by ferry. Conservation sites would be lost through erosion and the breach.
a)Five additional rock groynes have been provided to fully control erosion of the beach, cliffs and clifftop path.
The beach would be slightly wider and higher. b)Three rock groynes have been provided. This scheme would not fully protect the high cliffs and cliff top path from erosion and the cliff edge and access would eventually be lost. The beach would become slightly wider and higher.
c) There are no new rock groynes.
The head is protected by large amounts of additional shingle material which reduce the erosion of the cliffs and prevent a breach. A dredger and heavy equipment would have to be at work on the beach for up to five months. Work would have to be carried out every two years or in two years out of three in order to maintain the protection.
Hurst Spit There is a wide shingle spit with Hurst Spit Castle at its extreme end.
The Spit has been worn away by the sea. Hurst Spit Castle is protected by a ring of groynes and other works.
The Castle is only accessible by ferry across open water.
Moorings will be lost and some areas will become less suitable for sailboarding
More shingle has been added to the spit creating a slightly wider shingle spit than the current spit.
Access to Hurst Spit Castle is maintained along the spit.
1
Appendix 8. 4 Estimating visits numbers: Infra-red
and manual counts, and case study examples
1.
General points on infra-red counters and manual counts
1.1
Installing infra-red and other counters
Clearly the characteristics of the site and the type of counter selected will affect these issues.
Based on experience in installing infra-red and other counters, the following recommendations are made.
1. The number of counters needs to be sufficient to capture most of the visits to the site but not so many
as to lead to many multiple passages.
2. The burden in terms of staff time for reading and maintenance needs to be considered when deciding
on the number and type of counters to be installed. Walking along a river or seafront taking readings
and checking a large number of counters can be very time consuming.
3. Sites under general surveillance or unobtrusive sites may reduce the risk of vandalism of counters,
which can be high.
4. Firm fastening points and very robust counters are required as vandals have been known to remove or
dismantle counters.
5. Access points need to be narrow enough to be within the range of infra-red counters and fixing points
need to comply with the manufacturers instructions.
6. Places where people congregate and may stand in front of counters blocking the passage need to be
avoided.
7. Sites where people pass for other purposes e.g. to visit cafes, toilets or visitor centres should be
avoided.
8. Exposed sites should be avoided as some counters can be affected by wind.
9. The practicality of the siting for the purposes of maintenance and count reading should be considered.
Scottish Natural Heritage’s Recreation and Access Officer, on the basis of their studies, may be able to
provide general advice on locating and calibrating counters, on types of counter and on suppliers of
counters. The Forestry Commission in Scotland is another possible source of advice.
In addition to installing and collecting people counter data, the following four steps need to be undertaken.
1.2
Manual calibration counts
The raw count data of passages past a point needs to be translated into adult passages past the point
through manual calibration of the count data. Experience with infra-red counters has indicated that the raw
count data generally substantially overestimates the number of adult visits. Overestimates may occur in
the following ways.
1. Children and dogs may be registered.
2. An adult walking slowly may register more than one count.
3. Small vehicles: pushchairs, wheelchairs, bicycles, as well as ladders, long fishing equipment may
register large numbers on the counter.
4. Children playing or running to and fro or people deliberately passing their hands in front of the beam
may distort the count.
5. A visitor may pass a single counter several times during the course of a visit.
Underestimates can occur due to:
1. People standing in front of an infra-red counter blocking the beam.
2. Several people passing side by side, in groups
Manual calibration should be undertaken for an extended period at each counter. Scottish Natural Heritage
in its recent information sheet (Scottish Natural Heritage, no date) advises that for each counter, a
calibration survey should be undertaken over four or five periods of at least one hour covering a range of
times of day and weekdays as well as weekends. Each separate survey period should cover at least 100
2
people and the length of survey time should be adjusted to ensure that that number is counted. The
calibration for each counter should thus cover at least 300 to 450 counts
A calibration factor can then be derived for each counter:
Number of eligible visitors (adults aged 18 and over) observed during the manual count period
Counter reading during the manual count period
1.3
Survey data on passages past counters and correction for multiple and non-passes
Survey data are also required to estimate:
1. The proportion of visitors missed by the counters. It will normally be impossible to cover all the
possible access points to a site and a site may be open along its boundary without defined access
points. Therefore, it is necessary to establish how many visitor access the site without passing any of
the counter points through a survey question on how the site was accessed.
2. The number of multiple passages past counters by visitors during the course of a visit. It is necessary
to ask survey questions to establish which counter points the visitor has passed and how many times
each point has been passed during a visit through a series of survey questions.
If a CV survey is undertaken, these questions can be incorporated into the CV survey questionnaire;
otherwise a short personal interview survey of visitors incorporating these questions would need to be
undertaken.
In the Cliftonville survey respondents were asked the following questions to correct for non-passage past
counters and multiple passages:
Q1
‘In the course of your visit today so far, how many times if at all have you passed each of these
points?
Respondents were shown a card listing the 6 counter points and a map indicating their location
Q2
‘ During the remainder of your visit today, how many times if at all, do you expect to pass each of
these points?
Respondents were again shown the list and map.
From this survey data a counter correction factor for multiple passes and non passage -can be derived.
1.4
Calculation of visitor numbers where data are missing
Regression analysis can be used to predict what the visit numbers are likely to be at a counter for which
data is missing for a particular day or period by using the relationship between that counter and another
counter for which data is available.
1.5
Aggregation of the data over the year
Where, as is commonly the case, infra-red or other count data are installed for only part of the year, it is
necessary to extrapolate from the data available to derive data for the year as a whole. Examples of
different ways in which this may be done are given in the Cliftonville case study below (Figure 8.1). In
addition, Green (2003) provides guidance and data on variations in visit numbers which can also be used
as a guide (Table 1). It is noticeable that the pattern of visits over the year to different types of sites shows
significant variations. Therefore, it is necessary to decide to which type of site: e.g. country park, heritage
or RSPB reserve, the site under study is most similar. However, Green’s data for forest sites indicates that
even between similar types of site, there can be marked variations in seasonal usage and this is also
shown in Table 1 for country parks.
3
Table 1: Variations in visit numbers over the year (source: Green 2003)
January February March April May June July August September October November December Total tourism trips by UK residents to England 0.46 0.54 0.66 0.80 0.79 0.73 0.85 1.00 0.77 0.75 0.52 0.75 National Trust properties 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.50 0.64 0.55 0.68 1.00 0.45 0.36 0.23 0.00 RSPB reserves 0.73 0.45 0.45 0.82 1.36 1.18 0.91 1.00 0.64 0.73 0.55 0.45 The Wallace Collection 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.91 1.00 1.03 0.96 1.00 0.85 1.01 1.12 0.92 Imperial War Museum 0.71 0.95 1.01 0.85 0.73 0.71 0.88 1.00 0.64 0.88 0.71 0.50 Cabinet War Rooms 0.39 0.44 0.69 0.60 0.68 0.77 0.89 1.00 0.74 0.73 0.51 0.38 HMS Belfast 0.33 0.48 0.57 0.77 0.51 0.51 0.75 1.00 0.44 0.64 0.30 0.25 Duxford 0.39 0.44 0.69 0.60 0.67 0.77 0.89 1.00 0.74 0.73 0.51 0.38 English Heritage - mean 0.06 0.11 0.28 0.39 0.50 0.83 0.72 1.00 1.06 0.39 0.22 0.06 Dinton Pastures Country Park 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.94 0.65 0.74 1.00 0.72 0.76 0.47 0.42 Wat Tyler country park 0.04 0.15 0.12 0.42 0.38 0.35 0.50 1.00 0.54 0.23 0.08 0.04
4
2.
Case study of the calculation of annual visit numbers: Cliftonville, near Margate, Kent
2.1
Installing infra-red counters
As part of the assessment of the benefits of coastal recreation at Cliftonville, near Margate Kent in 1993,
infra-red counters were installed by Thanet District Council. The seafront at Cliftonville under investigation
comprised a section of about seven-eighths of a mile in length on three levels, the beach itself, a lower
promenade on a concrete sea wall with slipways protecting eroding cliffs along part of the site and a cliff
top with a promenade, shelters and grassed areas. Under the ‘Do nothing’ option without further cliff toe
protection, cliff erosion would continue and damage to the beach, and cliff top promenade would be
sustained and parts would be threatened with closure. Two options for cliff toe protection with a concrete
sea wall and promenade or a rock faced sea wall and narrower promenade to protect areas currently
without a sea wall were proposed.
There is open access to the cliff top at either end of the study area from the road and along most of the
length of the cliff top promenade. There are three points where the cliff top promenade crosses a bridge
and there is access to the lower promenade and beach from the cliff top at eleven points. Infra-red
counters were sited by Thanet District Council at the following six points covering the main access points
but not all of them and the use of the three levels and the length of the site.
1.
Across Newgate Gap Bridge (
Across clifftop promenade)
2.
Walpole Bay stairs (stairs from cliff top to Beach)
3.
Across Hodges Gap Bridge (across cliff top promenade)
4.
Across the top of the Jet Ski stairs (stairs to the beach from cliff top)
5.
Across Sackett’s Bridge (across the cliff top promenade)
6.
Across the top of Sacketts Gap (road leading from cliff top to beach)
Counter data were available for the period from April 14 to September 29 1993.
2.2
Manual calibration count methods
Manual counts were conducted to monitor and establish the relationship between the passages recorded
by the counter and the actual passages by adult visitors to the seafront by two observers over a 5-week
period from 30 July to 1 September. A 30-minute count was taken at each counter point on each of the
allocated count days. The counter at which the observer started was rotated to ensure that manual counts
were taken at each counter at different times of day.
A calibration count record was completed at each counter on a count calibration record form. The number
on the infra-red counter was noted at the start and completion of the manual count. To obtain a detailed
record of the number of adults passing the counter, passages were separated into the following categories:
Adults aged 18 and over
Children and young people under 18
Those of whose age the observer was uncertain
Dogs (any size)
Adults with other equipment were recorded separately e.g. a man pushing a woman in a wheel chair
An adult pushing a pram or pushchair containing a child;
An adult on or pushing a bike.
Additional comments on special factors affecting the count and the weather conditions throughout the day
were noted in case they affected the reliability of the counter.
A counter calibration factor was then determined to correct for mis-counts due to environmental factors and
invalid counts (e.g. passages of children or dogs etc.). The counter calibration factor was calculated for
each counter for each day as:
Number of eligible visitors (adults aged 18 and over) observed during the manual count period
Counter reading during the manual count period.
5
2.3
Survey data on passages past counters and correction for multiple and non-passes
As infra-red counters were placed at only 6 points along the seafront, visitors could have been missed by
the count or they could have been recorded more than once as they passed along the seafront.
Questions were therefore included in the CV survey to establish the number of multiple passages past
each counter and the number of non-passages among the visitors who were interviewed on site.
Respondents were asked:
‘In the course of your visit so far today how many times if at all have you walked across these clifftop
bridges’ and the names of the three bridges were then read out. They were then asked.
‘How many times if at all have you used any of these ways down to the lower promenade and beach so far
today’ for eight access points including the three with infra-red counters.
Respondents were also asked on how many times they expected to use the same bridges and access
points during the remainder of their visit. On the basis of this data, a counter correction factor for multiple
passages could be calculated:
the total number of passages past a counter point during visits indicated by the respondents
the total number of respondents
Using the counter calibration factor for non-adults etc and the counter correction factor for multiple
passages, overall adjusted count data for each counter point can be arrived at.
The calculation of this overall adjusted count data number using the counter calibration factor for
non-adults etc. and the counter correction factor for multiple passages can be illustrated using the data in Table
1.
Newgate Gap: Overall adjusted count data for August 1 = 4753 x 0.42 = 679
2.94
6
Table 2. Implementation of the correction factors calculated from the manual counts for August 1
1993
Date:
August1 1993
Actual
Daily infra-red
count
Counter
Calibration
Factor for
Non-adults etc.
(constant)
Adjusted
count data
for non-adults
etc.
Counter
Correction
factor for
multiple passes
(constant)
Overall
Adjusted count
data for August
1
Newgate Gap
4753
0.42
1996
2.94
679
Walpole Bay stairs
3036
0.58
1760
3.46
509
Hodge’s Gap
Bridge
2486
0.52
1293
2.07
624
Jet Ski
659
0.62
409
3.54
115
Sackett’s Gap
Bridge
3468
0.30
1040
3.04
342
Sackett’s Gap
1334
0.33
440
3.04
145
15,736
2,414
2.4
Calculation of visitor numbers where data are missing
Technical and other problems with counters meant that data were missing for some counters for some
days. It was therefore, necessary to calculate the visit numbers where the data were missing to complete
the data set. Using regression analysis, it was possible to arrive at regression equations with which to
calculate the likely number of visitors past the counters for which data was missing on a particular day
using data from the counters for which information was available. Table 3 illustrates these equations.
Table 3. Calculation of visitor numbers where data are missing
Infra-red counter point
Regression equation
Newgate Gap
= (1.54 Walpole Bay Stairs) + 488
Walpole Bay Stairs
= (1.74 Jet-ski Stairs) + (0.28 Newgate Gap) + 56
Hodge’s Gap Bridge
= (0.25 Sackett’s Bridge) + (0.49 Walpole Bay Stairs) + 464
Jet Ski Stairs
= (0.24 Walpole Bay Stairs) + 23
Sackett’s Gap Bridge
= (0.82 Sackett’s Gap) + (0.34 Hodge’s Gap Bridge) + 290
Sackett’s Gap
= (0.33 Sackett’s Gap Bridge) + (0.21 Walpole Bay stairs) – 81.0
2.5
Aggregation of the data over the year
At Cliftonville, infra-red counter data were available from 14 April to 29 September 1993. Therefore it was
necessary to extrapolate from this available count data to the annual visit data. The degree to which visit
numbers vary over the year is the critical factor here. Furthermore, there is likely to be a marked seasonal
variation in the types of visitor (local, day and staying) who visit certain types of site such as coastal sites
although the variation may be less for river sites which attract a large number of local visitors (Fouquet et
al. 1991). One method of expressing variation between visit numbers in different months of the year is by
the ratio of the number of visits in the peak week (usually August Bank Holiday week) to those in the lowest
week (usually sometime in February). For sites such as local parks this ratio can be as low as 4 to 1; for
sites which attract mainly day and staying visitors the ratio can be as high as 40 to 1 (Collins 1977).
Two estimates of annual visit numbers were made using the weekly index of visitors (Figure 8.1) published
by the Countryside Commission in 1977 (Collins, 1977). These figures have been computed from ticket
7
sales to 5 Ancient monuments and 16 Forestry Commission sites in 1975. Over the period April to
September for which infra-red count data were available, the visit pattern at Cliftonville was broadly
comparable to that for the Ancient Monuments and Forests (Garner et al. 1994).
Two weeks which contained a full set of data for all counters were chosen as base weeks: July 6-12 and
July 20-26. In order to estimate the visit numbers for each week of the year for which infra-red count data
were not available, a visit ratio was calculated using the ratios in the Ancient monument data for the base
week and the week for which data were not available. The visit ratio between the weeks April 6-12 and July
6-12 was calculated as follows:
40:77 = 40/77 = visit ratio 0.52.
(40 and 77 are the ratios in the Ancient Monument Index for the weeks April 6-12 and July 6-12
respectively shown in Figure 8.1)
As the visit numbers for the week July 6-12 were known to be 5,730 from the infra-red count, the visit
numbers for the week April 6-12 could then be calculated using the visit ratio:
0.52 x 5,730 = 2976 visits for April 6-12.
The visit numbers for the other weeks for which there was no infra-red count data available were calculated
in this way and a similar procedure was used based on the second base week, July 20-26 as a test of
sensitivity. Total annual visit numbers were computed as 135,660 based on July 6-12 and
146,287 based on July 20-26 figures.
This procedure makes the assumption that seasonal visiting at the site will be similar to that at the Ancient
monuments. These procedures are likely to give conservative estimates at any sites where there is a high
proportion of local visitors. Visiting by local people is usually less spread more evenly around the year than
would be the case at Ancient Monuments or Forests which tend to attract high proportions of
holidaymakers and day visitors over summer and holiday periods. Furthermore the Ancient Monument data
is very old and may not fully reflect current holiday and visiting patterns. Where reliable year round data
are available that are more recent, more local or comparable to the site under investigation an index based
on those data could be derived and used in a similar way.
8
Figure 8.1
Ticket sales at 5 Ancient Monuments and 16 Forestry Commission sites in 1975
(weekly totals, indexed on the average of 5 peak weeks – w/c July 20 to w/c August 17)
1
Table 1: Variations in visit numbers over the year (Source: Green 2003)
Site Jan Feb Mar April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec
Total tourism trips by UK residents in England 2001 0.46 National Trust properties RSPB reserves The Wallace Collection 997/8 Imperial War Museum 1993 Cabinet War Rooms 1993 HMS Belfast 1993 Duxford Museum 1993 English Heritage Mean Dinton Pastures Country Park 1997/8 Wat Tyler Country Park
1
2
Serial Number
RESIDENTS QUESTIONNAIRE
COAST/RIVER RECREATION SURVEY
NAME OF SITE...………
YEAR OF SURVEY
CONFIDENTIAL
===================================================================
Location of interviewer ...
Interviewer ...
(name, number, initials)
Interview number
Date (day/month/year
e.g. 22 -10 - 02
Day
Mon = 1 Tue = 2 Wed = 3 Thu = 4
Fri = 5 Sat = 6 Sun = 7
Time interview started (24 hour clock)
Time interview finished (24 hour clock)
Duration
minutes
Weather Conditions (Circle one code for each of a,b,c,d,)
(a)
Sunny = 1
Broken cloud = 2
Overcast = 3
(b)
Hot (>20) = 1 Warm (15-20) = 2
Cool (10-15) = 3
Cold (<10) = 4
(c)
Dry = 1
Drizzle/Showers = 2 Persistent rain = 3
(d)
Calm = 1
Breezy = 2
Windy = 3
==================================================================
Interviewer instructions are in bold type. To complete - interviewers please:
circle code number or enter numbers or words in the boxes or spaces provided
as appropriate.
3
READ OUT
Hello, my name is ... from ... survey organisation (Show ID Card). We are conducting a
survey for ...
The coast/cliffs/beach/riverside here is/are being eroded/is deteriorating (and there is a risk of
flooding in the future). The aim of the survey is to find out how people use the area and how their
enjoyment will be affected if the erosion/deterioration/flooding is allowed to continue.
..., (name of coastal protection/flood defence authority) is considering whether works to the
coast/cliffs/beach/river and riverside are desirable and economically justified.
(Insert a brief description of the proposed coast protection/flood defence
works if desired)
READ OUT
The survey is strictly confidential. The names and views of individuals participating will not be
revealed to anyone outside the survey organisation. The results will be published in statistical
and unidentifiable form only.
_______________________________________________________________________________
SECTION A: INTRODUCTION - applies to ALL RESPONDENTS
_
INTRODUCTION
1.
How long have you lived in...………..……….(name of town/resort)?
Years...
2.
Overall, how do you rate this town/resort as a place to live?
(RATE ON THE SCALE SHOWN BELOW)
(SHOW CARD C)
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
very
about
very
4
RECREATIONAL USE OF THE SEAFRONT/RIVER/RIVERSIDE
3.
(a)
How often, on average, do you visit this seafront/river/riverside
(beach/promenade/cliffs) for recreation in the Spring and Summer (April to
September)?
SHOW MAP DEFINING SEAFRONT EXTENT
PROMPT
At least daily = 1
At least 3 times a week = 2
Once or twice a week = 3
At least fortnightly = 4
At least once a month = 5
About 3 to 5 times = 6
About once or twice = 7
Less than once in Spring and Summer = 8
Never visit in Spring and Summer = 9
(b)
How
often,
on
average,
do
you
visit
this
seafront/river/riverside
(beach/promenade/cliffs) for recreation in the Autumn and Winter (October to
March)?
SHOW MAP DEFINING SEAFRONT EXTENT
PROMPT
At least daily = 1
At least 3 times a week = 2
Once or twice a week = 3
At least fortnightly = 4
At least once a month = 5
About 3 to 5 times = 6
About once or twice = 7
Less than once in Autumn and Winter = 8
Never visit in Autumn and Winter = 9
4.
How long would it normally take you to get from your home to this
seafront/river/riverside?
SHOW MAP DEFINING SEAFRONT/RIVER/RIVERSIDE EXTENT
PROMPT
0-5 minutes = 1
6-10 minutes = 2
11-15 minutes = 3
16-30 minutes = 4
31-60 minutes = 5
More than 1 hour - 2 hours = 6
More than 2 hours - 3 hours = 7
More than 3 hours - 4 hours = 8
More than 4 hours = 9
Don't know = -8
5
IF NEVER VISIT AT ALL (Q3(a) =9 and Q3(b)=9) GO TO Q8
5.
(a)
Do you usually visit this seafront/river/riverside alone or in a group?
Alone = 1 GO TO Q6
In group = 2 ASK Q5(b)
(b)
Does the group usually include children under the age of 16?
Yes = 1
No = 0
6.
What activities do you or members of your group usually take part in during visits to this
seafront/river/riverside? (SHOW CARD B)
RING ALL CODES THAT APPLY
A. Sitting/sunbathing/picnicking...…... Y
B. Walking the dog...…... Y
C. Paddling………. Y
D. Swimming………. Y
E. Sail-boarding………. Y
F. Games or sports………. Y
G. Angling/fishing………. Y
H. Sailing/Boating………. Y
I.
Walking less than 2 miles………. Y
J.
Walking 2 miles or more……….. Y
K. Visiting a café/pub or restaurant………… Y
L. Visiting...(named attraction)…. Y
M. Other (specify)………
Y
7.
How long do you usually spend at this seafront/river/riverside when you visit?
PROMPT
0-15 minutes = 1
16-30 minutes = 2
31-60 minutes = 3
More than 1 hour - 2 hours = 4
More than 2 hours - 3 hours = 5
More than 3 hours - 4 hours = 6
More than 4 hours = 7
Don't know = 8
8.
Which local coast/river site do you visit most often for recreation: this
seafront/river/riverside or another local coast /riversite?
SHOW MAP DEFINING SEAFRONT/RIVER/RIVERSIDE EXTENT
This site = 1
Another local coastal/river site = 2
please specify:...
Never visit local coast/rivers for recreation = 3
6
