Halcrow, Coastal Studies Forward Programme Data Compilation ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

The accuracy of the LiDAR surveys can be assessed by comparison with fixedpoints of known elevation and calculation of root mean square error (RMSE).Data for the different LiDAR surveys is summarised in Table 3.1 which highlightsthe improvements in accuracy and resolution of each subsequent survey.Dataset Date of survey Resolution (m) RMSE of originaldata (m)2002 DEM May 2002 2.0 0.1232004 DEM December 2004 2.0 0.0852006 DEM February 2006 2.0 0.0602009 DEM March 2009 0.5 0.027Table 3.1. RMSE errors for LiDAR surveys3.3 Repeat baseline surveyA repeat baseline survey was carried out in March 2009 by the EA GeomaticsGroup and consisted of a synchronous 0.5m resolution LiDAR and 12.5cmresolution digital aerial imagery survey, a shoreline RTK survey and a multibeamecho sounder bathymetry survey. These data have been used to assess and quantifyplanform and vertical changes of the shorelines since 2002. Survey results havebeen provided separately.3.4 Coastal inspectionsAnnual coastal inspections are documented in Halcrow 2004b, 2005a, 2006a,2007a and 2009a and key observations from these reports are summarised in Table3.1. These reports describe the prevailing conditions at the coastline duringinspection and makes comparisons with those documented previously to highlightareas of change. They provide field verification of shoreline change and assistunderstanding of the nature, magnitude and mechanisms of change; theinspections also provide independent calibration of the remote sensing survey data.3.5 Summary of monitoring resultsCoastal change data, measured in GIS by comparing historical orthorectified aerialphotography and Ordnance Survey (OS) mapping to the baseline survey datasetsare summarised in Figure 3.1. The aerial photography covers the period 1941 to2009, while historical OS mapping covers the period 1863 to 2002.Doc No 1 Rev 2: Date: May 2010 25
Table 3.1. Summary of coastal inspection findings (2000-2009)CBU Site observations Very little activity on the sandstone cliffs. Shallow mudslides commonly seen in the1. St Bees Head till-capped composite cliffs. Storm beach has very little activity observed on boulder-strewn foreshore Cliffs at southern extent show gradual degradation2. St Bees Storm beach elevation and angle varies greatlypromenade Foreshore - morphology and position of sand bars varies greatly, with occasionaloutcrops of gravel or peat observed3. St Bees GolfCourse4. Pow Beck5. NorthCoulderton6. Coulderton7. NethertownStation8. Nethertown9. Braystones10. Ehen Valley Cliffs very active with talus rapidly reworked into the storm beach Foreshore - morphology and position of sand bars varies greatly, with occasionaloutcrops of gravel or peat observed Shoreline eroding with degradation of gabions and undermining of footbridge anddefences south of stream. Defences collapsed in 2007/08 and repaired by 2009. Unprotected headland in north of CBU active with active cliff erosion and talusrapidly reworked into the storm beach Accumulation of gravel headland with stabilisation by vegetation at the southernlimit of the storm beach Foreshore gravels with occasional mobile overlying sand bars Shoreline being built out by residents of beach front bungalows. Storm beach often covered by veneer of sand Unprotected cliffs show localised activity Railway embankment suffered localised failure in 2007/08 with repair using gabionsand rock armour Sandstone outcrop on foreshore being quarried with removal of large blocks >5m 2 Cliffs with localised episodic failures which have deposited boulders on the stormbeach Persistent high and narrow storm beach. Localised failures of railway embankment which have been repaired using sleepersor bounders. Localised reworking of upper storm beach to build flood defence bund to protectbungalows (freshly cut exposure observed in 2009 revealed storm beach iscomposed of very sandy gravel with a veneer of gravel. River outlet beneath railway and through storm beach is buried periodically Number of bungalows has increased since 2002 Construction of waste water treatment plant since 2002 Accumulation of sand at back of beach Erosion of vegetation from dunes apparently due to trail bike use11. Sellafield Storm beach excavated for temporary storage of recovered Sealines12. Ehen andCalder Changing pattern of channel and gravel bars on foreshore fan delta Growth of gravel headland south of river Calder mouth13. Seascale Localised erosion of sand and shallow failure of railway embankmentDoc No 1 Rev 2: Date: May 2010 26
Page 2 and 3: This page is left blank intentional
Page 4 and 5: LLW Repository LtdCoastal Studies F
Page 6 and 7: LLW Repository LtdCoastal Studies F
Page 8 and 9: 1 Introduction1.1 Coastal studies f
Page 10 and 11: Table 1.1. Halcrow reports relevant
Page 12 and 13: Figure 1.1. Structure of the forwar
Page 14 and 15: sample of quantified 3D data of coa
Page 16 and 17: 2 Coastal System Characterisation2.
Page 18 and 19: model whereby variations with depth
Page 20 and 21: total alongshore sediment transport
Page 22 and 23: UnitSt Bees HeadSt BeesPromenadeSt
Page 24 and 25: to have been characterised by fring
Page 26 and 27: Figure 2.3 Relative sea-level recon
Page 28 and 29: Period Sea-level RSL change Seabed
Page 30 and 31: Figure 2.4. Shoreline resistance mo
Page 34 and 35: CBU14. WhitriggsScar15. Carl Crag16
Page 36 and 37: changed significantly in elevation.
Page 38 and 39: climate change and sea-level rise,
Page 40 and 41: 19902000201020202030204020502060207
Page 42 and 43: A version of this model has been pu
Page 44 and 45: A summary of the ‘best estimate
Page 46 and 47: TP x = Tidal prism of estuary landw
Page 48 and 49: The Mite estuary will widen as its
Page 50 and 51: described is applicable over a rang
Page 52 and 53: HALCROW GROUP LIMITED (2002b) Coast
Page 54 and 55: SOULSBY R. (1997) Dynamics of marin
Page 56 and 57: LLWR Coastal Studies: catalogue of
Page 74 and 75: !"! ! #!!$!%%&!!!#!# &&"#
Page 76 and 77: !"! ! #!!$!%%&!!!#!# &&"#C0!+ /,)0
Page 78 and 79: !"! ! #!!$!%%&!!!#!# &&"#0 , * 2
Page 80 and 81: !"! ! #!!$!%%&!!!#!# &&"#- " 73. "
Page 82 and 83:
!"! ! #!!$!%%&!!!#!# &&"#!8008"* 3
Page 84 and 85:
!< ; "< ; "C .C0!. ). +++ + , 2
Page 86 and 87:
Appendix CBibliography (papers not
Page 88 and 89:
0(' * !=+*/(/ -'!.:+->/00%44-
Page 90 and 91:
: 3*%!,;+-'%*
Page 92 and 93:
866!+' -% !,-%4!%&4%*%+!,' = ($(
Page 94 and 95:
9 3 A'"%#!'&!# % !+%''+!% &.! !'?
Page 96 and 97:
8" -+'!+&"-!,' +-#+&!!+'/ ,7 /
Page 98 and 99:
G=A%*
Page 100 and 101:
9 +> !4+- +/9 )$8=-'!+8/)@) '
Page 102 and 103:
=: =-+*+;-*% !
Page 104 and 105:
3866(+-*!%,#%44!,%&#%%,# %*+, %' +%
Page 106 and 107:
: ( *( // 3= 866(+%' %*%,%
Page 108 and 109:
3 866( 7-#' +-#;; +,-%
Page 110 and 111:
(+&*4-+C !+'+;8$!&"&B"!*!?-!"#*!#%
Page 112 and 113:
)) !,4%4-/844/ 9 9 ::0 /!-7
Page 114 and 115:
= 83-+?%?!*!' !+%' *!4+'!!++#4"% !
Page 116:
G: :
show all

Halcrow, Coastal Studies Forward Programme Data Compilation ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?