Beach Nourishment Operations in Wales and Likely Future Requirements in an Era of Sea Level Rise and Climate Change 2010-CCW Science Report No 928

Beach nourishment operations in Wales and likely

future requirements for beach nourishment in an era of

sea level rise and climate change – a Pilot Study

Oblique aerial image of Rhyl Beach

Source: Environment Agency (2008)

COUNTRYSIDE COUNCIL

FOR WALES

CCW Science Report No. 928

Contract No: 211 MFG 09

McCue, J; Pye, K; Wareing, A.

Beach nourishment operations in

Wales and likely future

requirements for beach

nourishment in an era of sea level

rise and climate change – a Pilot

Study

Final Report

May 2010

© CCGC/CCW 2010

You may reproduce this document free of charge for non-commercial and internal business

purposes in any format or medium, provided that you do so accurately, acknowledging both the

source and Countryside Council for Wales's copyright, and do not use it in a misleading context.

This is a report of research commissioned by the Countryside Council for Wales. However, the

views and recommendations presented in this report are not necessarily those of the Council and

should, therefore, not be attributed to the Countryside Council for Wales.

Beach nourishment operations in Wales and likely future requirements for beach nourishment in an era of


Report series:

Report number: CCW Science Report No. 928

Publication date:

Contract number: Contract No: 211 MFG 09

Contractor: Atkins Ltd

Contract Manager: Jonathan McCue

Title: Beach nourishment operations in Wales and likely future

requirements for beach nourishment in an era of sea level rise

and climate change – a Pilot Study

Author(s): McCue, J; Pye, K; Wareing, A.

Restrictions: None

Distribution List (core):

CCW HQ & Regional Libraries

National Library of Wales

British Library

Welsh Assembly Government Library

Scottish Natural Heritage Library

Natural England Library

Joint Nature Conservation Committee Library

The Steering Group

Rod Jones, CCW

Ceri Seaton, CCW

Nicola Rimington, CCW

Natalie Newton, Environment Agency Wales

Peter Jones, Welsh Assembly Government (WAG)

Kerry Kierle, WAG

Mark Russell, British Marine Aggregates Producers Association (BMAPA)

Ian Selby, The Crown Estate

Russell Dobbins, Aggregates Levy fund for Wales, WAG

Distribution list (others)

All Coastal Groups, via the Chair

All Welsh Coastal Local Authorities (including National Park Authorities) - Planning,

Regeneration, Tourism, Coast protection, Ecology

Welsh Assembly Government- Planning, Marine Spatial Planning, Marine Consents, Tourism,

Economic development, Green seas

Wales Coastal Forum

Wales Coastal and Maritime Partnership

Relevant Authorities Groups - Carmarthen Bay, Pembrokeshire, Cardigan Bay, Pen Llyn a’r

Sarnau, Menai Strai and Conwy Bay, Dee Estuary, Severn Estuary

Port Authorities

BMAPA members

National Trust

Internal distribution within Steering Group organisations

Recommended citation for this volume:

McCue, J; Pye, K; Wareing, A. Beach nourishment operations in Wales and likely future

requirements for beach nourishment in an era of sea level rise and climate change – A Pilot Study. CCW Science Report No. 928, CCW, Wales.



RHAGAIR

Traethau yw un o asedau allweddol arfordir Cymru. Maent yn hollbwysig i gynnal twristiaeth

arfordirol. Yn ogystal â hyn, maent yn ategu asedau pwysig o ran gwarchod natur a'r dirwedd.

Maent hefyd yn amddiffynfa arfordirol 'naturiol', gan wasgaru ynni'r tonnau, a helpu i warchod

strwythurau naturiol a strwythurau o waith dyn y tu cefn iddynt. Fodd bynnag, mewn oes mae

lefel y môr yn codi, maent o dan fygythiad difrifol. Er enghraifft, mae amddiffynfeydd o waith

dyn sydd wedi lleihau'r cyflenwad naturiol o waddod eisoes wedi effeithio'n andwyol ar sawl un

ohonynt.

Mae'r prosiect peilot hwn yn archwilio faint o waith adfer gwaddod a allai fod yn ofynnol er

mwyn cynnal a diogelu gwerth traethau Cymru sydd mewn perygl ar hyn o bryd ac yn y dyfodol.

Mae egwyddorion cynaliadwyedd yn sail i'r astudiaeth. Gellir cyflawni hyn drwy helpu i sicrhau

cynaliadwyedd economaidd cymunedau arfordirol sy'n dibynnu ar dwristiaeth, drwy gynnal

traethau, a thirwedd o safon uchel; neu drwy wella'r amgylchedd naturiol drwy ddarparu

cyflenwad o waddod ar gyfer twyni tywod. Mae hyn yn arbennig o bwysig a pherthnasol yng

nghyd-destun Cymru gan fod Llywodraeth Cynulliad Cymru yn un o ychydig lywodraethau yn y

byd sydd â dyletswydd gyfreithiol o ran cynaliadwyedd.

Roedd y Grŵp Llywio ar gyfer y prosiect yn cynnwys Cyngor Cefn Gwlad Cymru, Llywodraeth

Cynulliad Cymru, Asiantaeth yr Amgylchedd Cymru, Ystad y Goron a Chymdeithas

Cynhyrchwyr Agregau Morol Prydain. Gyda'i gilydd mae gan y sefydliadau hyn gyfrifoldebau i

reoli'r arfordir a gwely'r môr o amrywiaeth o safbwyntiau, gan gynnwys yn rhinwedd

perchenogion tir, y dirwedd, gwarchod natur, hamdden, mynediad, cynllunio, trwyddedu, rheoli

perygl llifogydd ac arfordiroedd, ac adnoddau. Fodd bynnag, cydnabyddir bod nifer o

sefydliadau eraill y mae angen eu cynnwys yn y prosiect wrth ddatblygu i gam nesaf y gwaith, a

ariennir drwy ddyfarniad gan Gronfa Ardoll Agregau Cymru.

Nod y gwaith hwn yw helpu i osod y sail i gynnal gwaith ymgynghori ehangach ac adfer

gwaddod ar draethau.



FOREWORD

Beaches are one of the key assets of the Welsh coast. They play a vital role in sustaining coastal

tourism. In addition, they underpin important nature conservation and landscape assets. They

also function as a 'natural' coastal defence, dissipating wave energy, and helping to protect both

natural and man made structures to their rear. However, in an era of sea level rise they are under

serious threat. For example, many are already adversely affected by manmade defences which

have reduced the natural sediment supply.

This pilot project examines the potential requirement for beach nourishment to maintain and

safeguard the value of Welsh beaches which are at current and future risk.

The study is underpinned by the principles of sustainability. This can be achieved by helping to

deliver the economic sustainability of coastal communities which rely on tourism, through

maintaining the beach asset, and high quality landscape; or by enhancing the natural

environment by providing a sediment supply for sand dunes. This is particularly important and

relevant in a Welsh context because the Welsh Assembly Government is one of only a few

governments in the world to have a legal duty with regard to sustainability.

The Steering Group for the project consisted of the Countryside Council for Wales, Welsh

Assembly Government, Environment Agency Wales, The Crown Estate, and British Marine

Aggregates Producers Association (BMAPA). Collectively these organizations have

responsibilities for management of the coastline and seabed from a variety of perspectives,

including landowner, landscape, nature conservation, recreation, access, planning, licensing,

flood and coastal risk management, and resources. It is recognised, however, that there are

numerous other organizations which need to be involved in the project going forward in the next

phase of this work, which will be funded by an award from the Aggregates Levy Fund for Wales.

This work is designed to help build the foundations on which the wider consultation and use of

beach nourishment can be based.



iii

CONTENTS

Rhagair ....................................................................................................................................... i

Foreword ................................................................................................................................... ii

Contents .................................................................................................................................... iii

List of Tables ............................................................................................................................. v

List of Figures .......................................................................................................................... vi

Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................... ix

Crynodeb Gweithredol ............................................................................................................... x

Executive Summary ................................................................................................................. xii

1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Scope and purpose of the project..............................................................................................1

1.2 Aims and objectives ...................................................................................................................1

1.3 Steering Group ...........................................................................................................................2

1.4 Study Limitations .......................................................................................................................3

2 The Strategic Importance of Beach Nourishment ............................................................. 4

2.1 The coastal environment ...........................................................................................................4

2.2 The importance of beaches and problems associated with beach erosion ............................5

2.3 Previous Beach Nourishment Schemes ....................................................................................6

2.4 Climate and sea level change ....................................................................................................8

2.5 Coastal tourism and beach recreation .....................................................................................9

2.6 Integrated management ...........................................................................................................10

3 Methodology .................................................................................................................... 11

3.1 Work Package 1 - Initial Beach Case Study Assessment and Meeting ...............................11

3.2 Work Package 2 – Data Review and Initial Site Analysis ....................................................12

3.3 Work Package 3 – Beach Case Study Assessment ................................................................12

4 Results – Individual Case Study Sites .............................................................................. 14

4.1 Talacre ......................................................................................................................................14

4.2 Abergele-Pensarn .....................................................................................................................17

4.3 Traeth Crugan ..........................................................................................................................21

4.4 Morfa Dyffryn ..........................................................................................................................23

4.5 Broadwater – Tywyn – Aberdovey .........................................................................................25

4.6 Tenby North Beach ..................................................................................................................28

4.7 Port Eynon ................................................................................................................................30

4.8 Swansea Bay North ..................................................................................................................32

4.9 Aberavon ...................................................................................................................................34

4.10 Porthcawl ..................................................................................................................................36

5 Discussion ........................................................................................................................ 38



iv

6 Conclusions and Recommendations ................................................................................ 40

6.1 Conclusions ...............................................................................................................................40

6.2 Recommendations ....................................................................................................................40

7 References ........................................................................................................................ 42

Appendix A: Eurosion Data ................................................................................................... 46

Appendix B: Site Description Summary Sheets ...................................................................... 50



v

LIST OF TABLES

Table 2.1 Assumed tidal levels at possible nourishment sites in Wales, taken from the 2009 Admiralty

Tide Tables. Values taken directly from the tables in bold type, values extrapolated from the

relevant Standard Port in regular type. MHW and MLW assumed to be midway between

spring and neap levels.

Table 2.2 Advance or retreat of the HAT mark, between the First Edition County Series Ordnance

Survey maps (published in 1880s and 1890s) and aerial photography flown in 2006. Table 2.3 UKCP09 predictions of future increases in relative sea level, assuming low, medium and

high emissions scenarios. Increases are relative to 2010.

Table 3.1 Selected case study sites.

Table 4.1 Initial volumes of nourishment material required at each site for the example scenario.

The design profile assumes a 20 m wide flat-topped berm at the level of HAT, sloping

down to the existing profile at an angle of 1:25, or to MTL, whichever is closer to the

HAT mark. Table 4.2 Planar areas of the defined possible nourishment areas (between HAT and MTL), and

minimum, maximum and best estimates of volumes of sediment required to maintain the

existing beach profile by 2030, 2060 and 2100 based on UKCP09 sea level rise predictions.

Minima represent the 5% values for the low emission (SRES B1) scenario, maxima represent

the 95% values for the high emissions (A1FI) scenario, and best estimates represent the 50%

values for the medium emissions (A1B) scenario. Increases are relative to 2010. N.B. The

calculations make no allowance for post-nourishment losses and re-nourishment required,

and therefore are underestimates of the total volumes of sediment which would be required.

Table 4.3 Nourishment volumes required over the period 2010 to 2030, assuming an initial

nourishment in 2010 followed by five-yearly re-nourishment campaigns to replace 50%

losses, and additional volumes required to raise the beach profile due to sea level rise, based

on minimum, maximum and best estimates from UKCP09 sea level rise predictions. Minima

represent the 5% values for the low emission (SRES B1) scenario, maxima represent the

95% values for the high emissions (A1FI) scenario, and best estimates represent the 50%

values for the medium emissions (A1B) scenario.

Table 5.1 Summary of actual and potential benefits of beach nourishment at the ten study sites.



vi

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1.1 Location of possible case study areas.

Figure 2.1 Concept diagrams showing examples of ‘Good’ beaches.

Figure 2.2 Examples of ‘Good’ beaches: wide, high, wave-dissipative beaches at (a) Harlech, looking

north in August 1991; and (b) Broad Haven, west of Stackpole Warren, in March 2009.

Figure 2.3 Concept diagrams showing examples of ‘Poor’ beaches.

Figure 2.4 Example of a ‘Poor’ beach: Ffrith Beach, Rhyl, with very low beach levels, dilapidated

groynes and exposed sea wall: (a) oblique aerial photograph taken March 2008; (b) ground

photograph looking west taken February 2010.

Figure 2.5 Concept diagram showing possible alternative sources of artificial nourishment material.

After Pye (2010).

Figure 2.6 Some alternative methods of beach nourishment. After Pye (2010).

Figure 2.7 Schematic diagrams showing sediment losses following initial beach nourishment on (a) an

open-ended system, such as a straight open-coast beach, and (b) a semi-closed system, such

as a pocket beach. After Pye (2010).

Figure 2.8 Examples of previously successful beach nourishment: (a) Miami Beach, taken 2007; (b)

oblique aerial photograph of West Shore, Llandudno, taken March 2008.

Figure 2.9 Conceptual models of shoreline evolution during sea level rise: (a) Bruun’s model of

shoreline retreat in response to sea level rise, and (b) ‘Hold The Line’ model with no net

change in shoreline position or beach form in response to sea level rise.

Figure 2.10 Future sea level rise preditions from 1990 based on the DEFRA (2006) sea level rise

allowances (for south west England and Wales), and UKCP09 projections (for Holyhead,

grid cell 18745) based on the 95th percentile modelled output values (considered very

unlikely to be exceeded) for low (SRES B1), medium (SRES A1B1) and high (SRES A1FI)

emission scenarios.

Figure 4.1 Composite aerial photograph of Site 1: Gronant-Talacre, flown 15/07/2006. Also shown are

the limits of the defined possible nourishment area, the area of the previous nourishment

scheme in February and March 2003, KPAL beach profile locations, and tide lines from the

First Edition County Series Ordnance Survey maps surveyed in 1871.

Figure 4.2 Oblique aerial photographs of (a) Talacre and Point of Ayr viewed from the east, and (b) the

nourished area of the shore near the Point of Ayr Lighthouse, taken in March 2008. Source:

Northwest Coastal Group.

Figure 4.3 The beach at Talacre taken during nourishment in February-March 2003. Source:

Countryside Council for Wales.

Figure 4.4 The upper beach (a) and frontal dunes (b) at Talacre in March 2004, one year after beach

nourishment.

Figure 4.5 Cross-sectional profiles P3 to P7 at Talacre, Autumn 2007.

Figure 4.6 The upper beach and frontal dunes (a) east and (b) west of Point of Ayr Lighthouse, in

February 2010.

Figure 4.7 Composite aerial photograph of Site 2: Abergele-Pensarn, flown 15/07/2006. Also shown are

the limits of the defined possible nourishment areas, position of Conwy County Borough

Council beach cross-sectional profiles, and tide lines taken from First Edition County Series

Ordnance Survey Maps surveyed in 1872.

Figure 4.8 Oblique aerial photographs of (a) central part and (b) western end of the Abergele-Pensarn

ridge complex, March 2008. Source: Northwest Coastal Group.

Figure 4.9 Cross-sectional beach profiles across the beach at Site 2: Abergele-Pensarn, surveyed in

October 2009.

Figure 4.10 Western end of the Abergele-Pensarn ridge complex looking (a) west and (b) east, February

2010.

Figure 4.11 Composite aerial photograph of Site 3: Traeth Crugan, flown 09/06/2006. Also shown are

the limits of the defined possible nourishment areas, position of Gwynedd Council beach

cross-sectional profiles, and the tide lines taken from First Edition County Series Ordnance

Survey Maps surveyed in 1888.

Figure 4.12 Cross-sectional beach profiles across the beach at Traeth Crugan. After Faber Maunsell

(2008).



vii

Figure 4.13 Rock armour sea defences and upper beach at Traeth Crugan looking (a) west and (b) east, in

2006.

Figure 4.14 Composite aerial photograph of Site 4: Morfa Dyffryn, flown 15/07/2006. Also shown are

the limits of the defined possible nourishment area, positions of Gwynedd Council beach

cross –sectional profiles, and tide lines from First Edition County Series Ordnance Survey

maps surveyed in 1887.

Figure 4.15 Offset of tidal contours relative to the station on beach profiles 34 and 35 at Morfa Dyffryn.

After Pye and Saye (2005).

Figure 4.16 The dunes at Morfa Dyffryn, taken May 2007.

Figure 4.17 Composite aerial photograph of Site 5: Broadwater-Aberdovey, flown 03/06/2006. Also

shown are the limits of the defined possible nourishment area, positions of Gwynedd Council

beach cross-sectional profiles, and the tide lines taken from First Edition County Series


Figure 4.18 (a) Removal of excess sand from area of boat ramp at Aberdovey promenade, (b)

emplacement of nourishment sand at low points in the foredunes, Aberdovey Golf Club

frontage. Source: Gwynedd Council.

Figure 4.19 Cross-sectional beach profiles between Aberdovey and Tywyn, measured on 13-14 February

1992 and 2 May 2008.

Figure 4.20 (a) Nourished area of the frontal dunes, Aberdovey Golf Club frontage, March 2007; and (b)

the beach fronting Penllyn Marshes, north of Aberdovey Golf Club, April 2008.

Figure 4.21 (a) The beach at Tywyn, showing low beach levels and damage to promenade, and (b) beach

and railway line between Tywyn and Broad Water, showing limited flood protection, both

taken May 2007.

Figure 4.22 Composite aerial photograph of Site 6: Tenby North Beach, flown 03/06/2006. Also shown

are the limits of the defined possible nourishment area, positions of Swansea and Carmarthen

Bay beach cross-sectional profiles, and the tide lines taken from First Edition County Series

Ordnance Survey Maps surveyed in 1887-8.

Figure 4.23 Cross-sectional beach profiles at Site 6: Tenby North Beach.

Figure 4.24 Tenby North Beach (a) looking north from Castle Mound, taken March 2009, (b) looking

south from the northern end, taken February 2010.

Figure 4.25 Composite aerial photograph of Site 7: Port Eynon, flown 02/06/2006. Also shown are the

limits of the defined possible nourishment area, positions of Swansea and Carmarthen Bay


Ordnance Survey Maps surveyed in 1877-8.

Figure 4.26 The beach at Port Eynon (a) looking southwest from Horton; and (b) looking northeast from

Port Eynon. Source: Llanelli Sand Dredging.

Figure 4.27 Cross-sectional beach profiles at Port Eynon.

Figure 4.28 Composite aerial photograph of Site 8: Northwest Swansea Bay, flown 05/04/2006. Also

shown are the limits of the defined possible nourishment area, positions of Swansea and

Carmarthen Bay beach cross-sectional profiles, and the tide lines taken from First Edition

County Series Ordnance Survey Maps surveyed in 1876-8.

Figure 4.29 Cross-sectional beach profiles in Northwest Swansea Bay.

Figure 4.30 (a) Northern Swansea Bay near Black Pill (a) looking west and (b) looking east, taken

February 2010.

Figure 4.31 Composite aerial photograph of Site 9: Baglan-Aberavon, flown 02-3/06/2006 at 2m

resolution. Also shown are the limits of the defined possible nourishment area, positions of

Swansea and Carmarthen Bay beach cross-sectional profiles, and the tide lines taken from

First Edition County Series Ordnance Survey Maps surveyed in 1875-77.

Figure 4.32 Cross-sectional beach profiles between Baglan and Aberavon.

Figure 4.33 (a) The upper beach at Aberavon looking north, taken March 2009; (b) Bulldozer removing

sand from sea wall steps at Aberavon, February 2010.

Figure 4.34 (a) The beach towards the northern end of Aberavon promenade, looking south, showing

windblown sand buildup on the stepped revetment; and (b) the beach fronting the southern

end of Baglan Burrows, looking north. Photographs taken in February 2010.

Figure 4.35 Composite aerial photograph of Site 10: Porthcawl, flown 03/06/2006. Also shown are the

limits of the defined possible nourishment area, positions of Swansea and Carmarthen Bay



viii



Figure 4.36 Cross-sectional beach profiles at Porthcawl.

Figure 4.37 The beach at Sandy Bay, Porthcawl (a) looking east from the western end; and (b) looking

west from the eastern end. Photographs taken February 2010.

Figure 5.1 Licensed dredging areas in: (a) NW Region and (b) SW Region. Source: Crown Estate.

Figure 5.2 Dredging application, option and prospecting areas in the SW Region (there are currently no

areas in the NW Region). Source: Crown Estate.



ix

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We wish to thank the staff of CCW and members of the project Steering Group who have

provided information and comments during the undertaking of this Pilot Project. Particular

thanks are due to the following for provision of data and advice relating to specific sites:

Alan Williams (Coastal Engineering UK Ltd), Bob Minty (Port of Neath), Greg Guthrie (Royal

Haskoning), Paul Day (CCW), Howard Blackwood (Shore Management (Wales), and Alun

Williams (Gwynedd Council). Technical assistance in preparation of the report was provided by

Simon Blott (KPAL) and Richard Agnew (Atkins).



x

CRYNODEB GWEITHREDOL

Mae traethau yn adnodd naturiol, cymdeithasol ac economaidd allweddol i Gymru. Yn ogystal â

bod yn amddiffynfa arfordirol hanfodol i gymunedau lleol, ac yn fodd i gynnal cynefinoedd

naturiol allweddol o bwysigrwydd cenedlaethol a rhyngwladol, maent hefyd yn un o asedau

tirwedd a hamdden pwysicaf Cymru sy'n sail i dwristiaeth arfordirol. Er enghraifft, mae arfordir

Cymru yn hanfodol bwysig i'r diwydiant twristiaeth yng Nghymru. Yn rhanbarthau Cymru, mae

twristiaeth glan môr yn arbennig o bwysig yn y Gogledd a'r De-orllewin, lle mae'n cyfrif am

52% o wariant twristiaid. Yn 2009, daeth y gwariant sy'n gysylltiedig ag ymweliadau dros nos ar

yr arfordir i gyfanswm o tua £601 miliwn neu 43% o gyfanswm gwariant twristiaid yng

Nghymru. Yn bwysig, mae ymweliadau arfordirol yn cyfrif am 37% o'r holl ymweliadau dros

nos yng Nghymru (Llywodraeth Cynulliad Cymru, 2010). Ar y llaw arall, yn 2009/10 £6 miliwn

oedd cyllideb Llywodraeth Cynulliad Cymru ar gyfer cefnogi gwaith awdurdodau lleol Cymru o

ran amddiffynfeydd mewndirol ac arfordirol gyda'r mwyafrif yn canolbwyntio ar amddiffyn

asedau tuag at gefn yr amddiffynfeydd. Cyfradd isel o'r gyllideb hon a ddefnyddiwyd i wella

traethau.

Gan gofio'r ystadegau economaidd pwysig hyn, mae rhai heriau mawr yn ein hwynebu y dyfodol

o ran cynnal a gwella traethau. Mae codiad yn lefel y môr a newid yn yr hinsawdd yn

fygythiadau a allai fod yn ddifrifol i draethau Cymru, yn arbennig y rhai sydd o flaen

amddiffynfeydd caled. Mae traethau yn aml o dan bwysau o ganlyniad i amddiffynfeydd

cyfredol gan eu bod wedi tynnu ffynonellau gwaddod o'r system. Fodd bynnag, er mwyn ymdopi

â chodiad yn lefel y môr a chynnal traethau ar yr un lefel gymharol â'r llanw, mae angen llawer

mwy o waddod ar draethau, nad yw ar gael yn naturiol yn aml mwyach.

Yn gysylltiedig â'r uchod, mae un o'r problemau mawr y mae Cymru'n debygol o'i hwynebu yn

ymwneud â faint yn fwy o waddod y bydd ei angen yn ôl pob tebyg i adfer a chynnal traethau

iach, o ble y daw a sut y telir amdano. I geisio mynd i'r afael â'r cyntaf o'r problemau hyn,

comisiynwyd Atkins Ltd ynghyd â Kenneth Pye Associates Ltd (KPAL) gan y Grŵp Llywio i

gynnal prosiect ymchwil ddesg i ystyried y gofynion tebygol ar gyfer gwaith adfer lefelau

gwaddod dros y ganrif nesaf. Er mwyn gwneud hyn, dewiswyd sampl cynrychioliadol o 10 o

draethau Cymru a oedd yn cwmpasu'r amrywiaeth o draethau yng Nghymru.

Ar gyfer pob un o'r 10 ardal astudiaeth achos a ddewiswyd, amcangyfrifwyd ar faint o waddod

newydd y byddai ei angen i gynnal prosiect 'gwella traethau' cychwynnol, wedi'i ddilyn gan

waith adfer gwaddod bob pum mlynedd yn ystod yr 20 mlynedd nesaf, gan ragdybio bod 50% o'r

gwaddod a osodir yn cael ei golli rhwng gwaith adfer, a chan ganiatáu ar gyfer codiad

rhagdybiedig yn lefel y môr dros yr un cyfnod o amser. Mae'r amcangyfrif gorau o ran lefelau

gwaddod ar gyfer senario allyriadau canolig codiad yn lefel y môr UKCP09 yn amrywio rhwng

142,000 m3 ar Draeth Gogleddol Dinbych-y-pysgod i 2,017,000 m3 ar Draeth Aberafan.

O dan bob un o'r senarios codiad yn lefel y môr a ystyriwyd, dengys y canlyniadau ar y gofynion

posibl o ran adfer gwaddod fod lefelau adfer gwaddod cychwynnol wrth 'wella' traethau ar bob

un o'r safleoedd a nodwyd yn eithaf cymedrol. Y mwyaf ohonynt yw 641 x 103 m3 ar Draeth

Aberafan. Mae'r gofynion ar gyfer y safleoedd amfae caeëdig llai megis Traeth Gogleddol

Dinbych-y-pysgod, Traeth Crugan a Bae Porth Einion yn gymharol fach ( < 150 x 103 m3).

Mae'r lefelau sydd eu hangen i gynnal proffiliau presennol traethau ar y 10 safle yn amrywio'n

sylweddol, yn dibynnu ar hyd y draethlin, yr amrediad llanw (ac felly lled y traeth), a chyfradd y

codiad yn lefel y môr a ystyriwyd. Gan ystyried gwerth 'amcangyfrif gorau' (50fed canradd) y

senario allyriadau canolig, byddai angen y lefelau lleiaf o waddod erbyn 2100 byddai ar Draeth

Gogledd Dinbych-y-pysgod a Thraeth Crugan (24 a 30 x 103 m3 yn y drefn honno), a byddai



xi

angen y lefelau uchaf yng Ngogledd Bae Abertawe a Thraeth Aberafan (614 a 541 x 103 m3 yn

y drefn honno). Nid yw'r un o'r gwerthoedd yn fawr iawn o'u cymharu â lefelau adfer gwaddod

ar gyfer cynlluniau mawr a gwblhawyd eisoes yn Lloegr, megis y rhai yn Bournemouth,

Mablethorpe - Skegness a Heacham. Fodd bynnag, dylid cofio nad yw'r cyfrifiadau 'cynnydd

lefelau' hyn yn ystyried y gwaddod a gollir a fyddai'n anochel yn dilyn gwaith adfer gwaddod

cychwynnol a'r gwaith a gynhelir wedi hynny.

Fodd bynnag, mae cyfrifiadau o werthoedd yr astudiaeth beilot ar gyfer faint o dywod y byddai

ei angen yn deillio o'r fethodoleg a ddefnyddiwyd ac maent yn debygol o newid pe câi

methodoleg wahanol ei defnyddio. Serch hynny, gellir eu hystyried yn arwydd o'r lefelau tebygol

sydd eu hangen a'r gobaith yw y caiff rhai o'r amcangyfrifon hyn eu mireinio mewn gwaith

diweddarach. Felly, bwriad y canlyniadau yw llywio cam nesaf y gwaith a gynhelir gyda rhagor

o arian gan Gronfa'r Ardoll Agregau ar gyfer Cymru. Wrth ystyried gwaith adfer gwaddod ar y

safleoedd peilot (neu leoliadau eraill lle mae angen lefelau sylweddol), rhaid ystyried yr holl

opsiynau o ran adnoddau a byddai hyn yn ffurfio elfen bwysig o'r astudiaeth arfaethedig yn y

dyfodol.

I gloi, mae'r astudiaeth beilot wedi amlygu'r manteision pwysig y gallai gwaith adfer gwaddod

eu sicrhau ac mae'n cyfiawnhau'n llwyr yr ystyriaeth fanylach o'i ddefnydd. Mae'r astudiaeth

hefyd yn dangos yn glir, mewn oes lle mae disgwyl i'r codiad yn lefel y môr gynyddu, os ydym

am gynnal traethau Cymru yn eu cyflwr presennol bydd angen dechrau ar brosiect adfer

gwaddod traethau mawr. Gallai ymgyrch o'r fath sicrhau manteision o ran cynefinoedd, y

dirwedd, gweithgareddau hamdden ac amddiffynfeydd arfordirol, ond dim ond pe bai rhagor o

arian a systemau rheoli effeithiol ar waith i alluogi hynny. Mae'r astudiaeth beilot yn argymell y

dylid cynnal rhagor o ymchwiliadau i ffynonellau gwaddod posibl ynghyd â chynnal

gwerthusiad economaidd manylach sy'n ystyried echdynnu deunyddiau, costau trafnidiaeth a'r

costau cysylltiedig sydd ynghlwm wrth gydymffurfiaeth reoliadol (asesiad o'r effaith

amgylcheddol a gwaith monitro cyn ac ar ôl y gwaith).



xii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Beaches are a key natural, social and economic resource for Wales. They not only provide a vital

coastal defence function for local communities, and material for the maintenance of key natural

habitats of national and international importance, but they also represent one of Wales’s premier

landscape and recreational assets which underpins coastal tourism. The Welsh coast, for

example, is vitally important to the tourism industry in Wales. Within the Welsh regions, seaside

tourism is particularly important for the North and South West, where it accounts for 52% of

tourism spend. The spending associated with an overnight visit to the coast, in 2009, amounted

to around £601million or 43% of total tourism spending in Wales. Importantly, visits to the

coast account for 37% of all overnight trips in Wales (Welsh Assembly Government, 2010). By

contrast the Welsh Assembly Government’s budget for 2009/10 for supporting the work of

Welsh local authorities for both inland and coastal defence works was £6 million with the

majority being targeted on defending assets to the rear of the defences. A minimal proportion of

this budget was used to enhance beaches.

With these important economic statistics in mind, there are some major future challenges to

maintaining and enhancing beaches. Sea level rise and climate change represent a potentially

serious threat to Welsh beaches, particularly those fronting hard defences. Beaches are often

under pressure as a consequence of existing defences because they have removed sediment

sources from the system. However, to cope with sea level rise and maintain beaches at the same

relative position to the tides they need substantially more sediment which is often not now

naturally available.

Linked to the above, one of the key issues Wales is likely to face relates to how much more

sediment is likely to be required to restore and maintain healthy beaches, where will it come

from and how will it be paid for. To try and address the first of these issues Atkins Ltd together

with Kenneth Pye Associates Ltd (KPAL) were commissioned by the Steering Group to carry

out a desk based research project to consider the likely requirements for beach nourishment

operations over the coming century. To do this a representative sample of ten Welsh beaches was

chosen which encompassed the range of the Welsh beach resource.

For each of the ten selected case study areas, estimates have been made of the sediment

nourishment volumes that would be required to carry out an initial 'beach improvement' followed

by re-nourishment at 5 yearly intervals in the following 20 years, assuming that 50% of the

emplaced sediment is lost between re-nourishment events, and allowing for projected sea level

rise over the same time period. The best estimate sediment volumes for the UKCP09 medium

emissions sea level rise scenario range from 142,000 m3 at Tenby North Beach to 2,017,000 m

3

at Aberavon Sands.

The results of the potential sediment nourishment requirements under each of the sea level rise

scenarios considered, show that initial beach 'improvement' nourishment volumes at all of the

identified sites are relatively modest, the largest being 641 x 103 m

3 at Aberavon Sands. The

requirements for the smaller enclosed embayment sites such as Tenby North Beach, Traeth

Crugan and Port Eynon Bay are relatively small (< 150 x 103 m

3).

The volumes required to maintain the existing beach profiles at the ten sites vary considerably,

depending both on the length of shoreline, the tidal range (and therefore beach width), and the

rate of sea level rise considered. Considering the 'best estimate' (50th percentile) value for the

medium emissions scenario, the smallest volumes of sediment required by 2100 would be at

Tenby North Beach and Traeth Crugan (24 and 30 x 103 m

3, respectively), while the largest

volumes would be required in Swansea Bay North and at Aberavon Sands (614 and 541 x 103



xiii

m3, respectively). None of the values are particularly large when compared with nourishment

volumes for large schemes already carried out in England, such as those at Bournemouth,

Mablethorpe - Skegness and Heacham. It should, however, be borne in mind that these 'volume

increase’ calculations do not take into account sediment losses which would inevitably occur

following initial nourishment and each re-nourishment.

The pilot study calculated values for the amount of sand needed are, however, a product of the

methodology used and are likely to change if a different methodology was used. Nevertheless,

they can be considered indicative of the likely scale required and it is hoped to refine some of

these estimates in later work. The results therefore are intended to inform the next phase of work

which will be carried out with further funding from the Aggregates Levy Fund for Wales.

Consideration of future nourishment at the pilot sites (or other locations where significant

volumes are required) needs to consider all resource options and would form an important

element of the proposed future study.

In conclusion, the pilot study has highlighted the important benefits that beach nourishment

could provide and fully justifies the more detailed consideration of its use. The study also clearly

demonstrates that, in an era when the rate of sea level rise is expected to increase, if we want to

maintain Welsh beaches in their current condition then a major beach feeding project will be

required. Such a campaign could deliver habitat, landscape, recreational and coastal defence

benefits but only if additional finance and effective management systems were in place to enable

this to occur. The pilot study recommends that further investigations be undertaken into possible

sediment sources together with a more detailed economic appraisal, taking account not only of

material extraction and transport costs but also the associated costs of regulatory compliance

(environmental impact assessment and monitoring pre and post-works).



1

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Scope and purpose of the project

Atkins Limited (Atkins) were commissioned in January 2010 by the Countryside Council for

Wales (CCW) to undertake a pilot study to consider the likely future requirements for beach

nourishment operations in Wales under conditions of possible accelerated sea level rise and

climate change, with delivery of the final report by March 2010.

Beaches in Wales are important for several reasons, including as a major 'attractor' of relevance

to the tourist industry and local, regional and national economies. The Welsh Coast is vitally

important to the tourism industry in Wales. The spending associated with an overnight visit to

the coast, in 2006, amounted to around £648million (nearly 40% of total tourism spending in

Wales). Beaches are also a form of natural coastal defence relevant to flood and erosion risk

management, and as natural features and biological habitats relevant to nature conservation.

Consequently there is a requirement to assess the future threats to the sustainability of Welsh

beaches and to investigate means of managing the risks associated with possible future sea level

and climate change (Welsh Audit Office, 2009).

The potential benefits of beach nourishment include the creation of wider, more extensive areas

of 'dry beach' and a more attractive general coastal landscape, reduced rates of coastal erosion

and improved standard of coastal flood defence, reduced requirement to construct and maintain

'hard' coastal defence structures, and creation / preservation of areas or priority habitat such as

vegetated shingle and sand dunes. Factors which may limit the expansion of beach nourishment

activities include the need to ensure adequate supplies of reasonably priced, suitable sediments,

which in turn is dependent on the availability of sediment sources, transport costs, monitoring

requirements, the magnitude of future changes in sea level and climate (especially storminess

which exercises a key control of wave climate, sediment mobility and the frequency of re-

nourishment requirements), and, perhaps most importantly, the availability of future funding

which will be tied to general economic conditions. While these issues are touched on in the

present report, it is intended that they will be the subject of more detailed consideration at a later

stage in the programme.

The pilot study represents the first stage in a wider programme of work to help encourage and

facilitate the use of beach nourishment on the Welsh coast. Although beach nourishment has

been widely and extensively used as coastal management tool in many parts of the world, it has

so far been employed in Wales only on a relatively small scale. The principal purpose of the pilot

study is therefore to assess the potential contribution which increased use of beach nourishment

could make, including the potential benefits that may arise for tourism, coastal erosion and flood

risk management, and nature conservation. In addition, the study identifies factors which might

limit the adoption of this method of beach management in Wales.

This pilot study is essentially a research project undertaken prior to more detailed planning work

that would be required for the development of specific scheme proposals. The project provides a

a generic assessment and is not intended to promote offshore extraction of aggregates or any

specific coastal scheme.

1.2 Aims and objectives

The principal aim of the pilot study is to examine ten example sites where beach nourishment

might be an appropriate engineered management option over the next 20, 50 and 100 years. The



2

ten selected areas have been chosen to include both sand and mixed sand/shingle systems around

the coasts of North, West and South Wales and which reflect varying relative importance of

touristic / recreational, flood and erosion risk management and nature conservation interests. The

ten chosen sites are as follows (see Figure 1.1 for locations):

• Talacre;

• Abergele - Pensarn;

• Traeth Crugan;

• Morfa Dyffryn;

• Broadwater - Tywyn – Aberdovey;

• Tenby North Beach;

• Port Eynon Bay;

• Northern Swansea Bay (Black Pill to Swansea Docks);

• Aberavon Sands (eastern Swansea Bay); and

• Porthcawl (Sandy Bay and Trecco Bay).

For each site, the study aims to identify the potential benefits of, and requirements for, beach

nourishment. For the purposes of illustration and inter-site comparison, estimates are made of the

approximate volumes of material which would be required to:

(a) improve the current condition of the current beach by creating an initial upper 'dry

beach' berm, 20 m wide and tapering seawards at a gradient of 1:25 to intersect the

existing beach profile;

(b) maintain the existing beach form under condition of sea level rise over time periods

of 20, 50 and 100 years, using estimates of local sea level rise derived from data

available on UKCP09 website user interface; and

(c) maintain the existing profile under conditions of sea level rise over a period of 20

years, allowing for natural sediment losses and consequent requirements for re-

nourishment at 5-yearly intervals (an assumed 50% loss of material between re-

nourishment events).

The calculated volumes presented are provided solely as illustrations of the general magnitudes

of required sediment volumes. It is anticipated that more detailed assessment of different options

would be undertaken for scheme design purposes at specific sites.

1.3 Steering Group

In view of the short timescale available for the project, stakeholder engagement has been key to

its successful completion. Significant input has been provided by a number of the Steering Group

members, including CCW, Environment Agency Wales, The Crown Estate and British Marine

Aggregates Producers Association (BMAPA). Opinions and data have also been sought from

several coastal managers, local authority engineers, consultants, harbour authorities and others

during the course of the project. Overall management of the project has been undertaken by

Atkins Ltd with specific technical input relating to the case study sites provided by Kenneth Pye

Associates Ltd.



3

1.4 Study Limitations

The original Terms of Reference recommended the assessment of data and information from a

variety of sources. The authors have embraced the considerable challenge of reviewing as much

information as possible within a very tight project timescale (6 weeks maximum) set for the

study. Within this constraint it has not been possible to obtain and utilise all types of available

data, notably Lidar data, for the chosen study sites. It is recommended that such data should be

used to produce refined nourishment requirement volume estimates in any future work.

Following internal notification of the pilot study a few concerned responses were received by

CCW with regards to potential impacts on biological habitats. It is acknowledged that the

potential impacts of beach nourishment can be both positive and negative in terms of to

biological habitats; these have not been addressed within the pilot study and would require

further investigation at a plan/design stage.



4

2 THE STRATEGIC IMPORTANCE OF BEACH NOURISHMENT

2.1 The coastal environment

The rural coast of Wales is a magnificent resource for residents and visitors to enjoy, offering

spectacular coastal scenery, attractive small towns and villages, opportunities for informal land

and water based recreation and a wildlife environment of exceptional diversity and interest. The

coast is also valued for its unspoilt scenery, peace and quiet. A balance needs to be struck on the

rural coast between tranquil areas and areas supporting a large number of people and a range of

activity (Welsh Assembly Government, 2008).

The environmental quality of the Welsh coastline is reflected in the range and number of

designations and protected sites that cover the coastline of Wales, with 70% of the coastline

designated for its environmental quality. In terms of EU and international designations, many

parts of the coastal and marine environment of Wales are designated as Special Areas of

Conservation (SAC) and Marine Special Areas of Conservation due to the richness of their

benthic habitats. These areas are chosen for being the best examples in the UK for containing

habitat types and species listed in the EU Habitats Directive. Other parts of the coast are

designated as Special Protection Areas to conserve the habitats of certain rare or vulnerable birds

and regularly occurring migratory birds. The Dovey Estuary, nearAberdovey, is the only

designated Biosphere Reserve in Wales. The Biosphere reserves are areas nominated by national

governments and designated under UNESCO’s Man and the Biosphere (MAB) programme

(Welsh Assembly Government, 2008). In addition, some are priority habitats or contain listed

species under EC and international legislation.

The western coastline of Wales and generally the seabed of the Southern Irish Sea contain a

diverse range of marine habitats and species, from algae dominated rocky reefs to deep muddy

areas inhabited by burrowing animals. The rocky reefs tend to be found close to the coast in

relatively shallow water, although there are also relatively large areas offshore to the north and

west of Anglesey. Also close to the coast are extensive areas of sediment, ranging from muds to

gravels. The central part of the Southern Irish Sea (St Georges Channel) has deeper water, often

in excess of 100m and generally coarser sediments (sands and gravels). Previous studies have

also shown the seabed environment here is highly variable, and contains a diverse range of

biological communities (Robinson et al. HABMAP, 2007).

The mean spring tidal range around the coast of Wales is large, varying from just over 4 metres

in central Cardigan Bay to over 12 m in the inner Bristol Channel, with the result that beaches

and associated intertidal flats are very extensive. Tidal levels and ranges for the ten selected case

study sites are summarised in Table 2.1 All ten sites can be described as macrotidal according to

the definition of Davies (1964). The coastal orientation, and therefore exposure to wind and

wave energy, differs between the sites. Talacre and Abergele - Pensarn experience dominant

waves from the northwest, Traeth Crugan, Morfa Dyffryn and Broadwater - Aberdovey are

influenced both strong waves from north-westerly, westerly and south-westerly directions,

Tenby North Beach is affected mainly by waves from the southeast and east (some of which are

refracted offshore south-westerly waves), while Port Eynon, northern Swansea Bay, Aberavon

and Porthcawl are influenced by dominant south-westerly waves, including long-distance swell

from the as far away as the South Atlantic. Talacre, Tenby North Beach, Port Eynon Bay,

Swansea Bay North, Aberavon Sands and Porthcawl represent sand-dominated beach systems,

Abergele-Pensarn is a gravel-dominated system, while Traeth Crugan, Morfa Dyffryn and

Broadwater-Tywyn-Aberdovey are examples of mixed sand - gravel beach systems.



5

2.2 The importance of beaches and problems associated with beach erosion

Beaches represent the first line of coastal defence and are of critical importance in dissipating

wave and tidal energy. They therefore exert a significant control on both erosion/ accretion

trends and water levels along the coast. All beaches are subject to change over time due to the

interaction of waves and tides, and fluctuations in the local sediment budget. Reductions in

sediment supply, or an increase in wave and/or tidal energy, can rapidly lead to falling beach

levels and recession of the shoreline (defined here as the level of the highest astronomical tide,

HAT). Alternating periods of beach erosion and accretion can occur on a variety of timescales,

ranging from seasonal (winter / summer), through decadal to centennial. Changes generally only

become significant if maintained for several decades or longer. The net movement of the HAT

line since the later 19th century at each of the ten case study sites is summarised in Table 2.2.

Abergele - Pensarn is the only site which has experienced net seaward accretion over the period,

and parts of even this site have experienced net erosion in recent decades.

Many of the sites show a spatially variable pattern of net erosion, stability and accretion over the

period, reflecting the importance of longshore sediment transport processes on many parts of the

coast; sediment eroded from the up-drift ends of sediment transport cells is frequently deposited

at the distal, down-drift ends of the cells - a fact which needs to be taken into consideration if

designing any beach nourishment scheme. The highest average rates of net shoreline recession

recorded at any of the ten site was recorded near the Point of Ayr (profile P7) at Talacre, while

the highest average rates of progradation (accretion) over the period have been experienced at the

northern end of the Aberavon Sands - Baglan site (profiles P217 & P218). At several sites,

including Tenby North Beach, Morfa Dyffryn and Traeth Crugan, the HAT line has shown little

or no net movement over the period, although is several of these instances the beaches have

steepened due to a landward movement of the low water mark (Futurecoast, 2002; Pye & Saye,

2005).

From several perspectives, a 'good beach' can be defined as one which has a relatively wide

backshore which is dry under most tidal conditions, a wide, relatively high foreshore which is

effective in dissipating wave energy, and which has a zone of sand dunes or vegetated shingle

behind the normal HAT line which provides a further reservoir of sediment which can be

released to the beach during storm conditions (Figure 2.1). Such beaches provide effective

natural coastal defences, a wide range of ecological habitats which promote biodiversity, have

high aesthetic appeal and a large 'useable' space for recreational and touristic activities. In

general, gravel (shingle) beaches are more effective in dissipating wave energy, and are less

susceptible to damage during individual storms, than beaches on which sand dominates both the

upper and lower parts of the beach. Two examples of such 'good' beaches are illustrated in Figure

2.2. Harlech Beach, located in Tremadoc Bay, provides one of the few examples in Wales where

a relatively open coast 'receptive shore' is still receiving significant supplies of sediment from

the offshore and nearshore zones, and where large parts of the frontage are either stable or

slowly accreting, despite high seasonal visitor pressure. Broadhaven in Pembrokeshire provides a

example of a smaller headland-bound 'pocket' beach which experiences a similar positive

sediment budget, resulting in a wide sandy foreshore, wide backshore and newly forming

embryo dunes and foredunes.

By the same token, 'poor beaches' may be defined as ones which are very narrow, low, frequently

wet and often backed by hard coastal defence structures (Figure 2.3). The value of such beaches

as natural coastal defences is severely limited, and costs of artificially controlling back-beach

erosion, and of maintaining an adequate level of flood protection, are often high. The presence of

vertical sea walls of other structures can itself enhance the problem of beach loss due to

accentuated wave reflection and toe scour (Figure 2.3a & b). Such beach systems are unattractive



6

from a visual point of view, are often un-usable for recreational / touristic purposes at high tide,

and are of limited nature conservation value. Access to the beaches from the promenade or sea

wall is often difficult. An example of such a 'poor' beach near the eastern end of Rhyl is

illustrated in Figures 2.4a & b. At this location the coastal defences run at an oblique angle to the

natural orientation of the ridges and runnels on the foreshore, creating particularly low areas

where the runnels abut the toe of the defences. This coastline has experienced long-term loss of

sediment due to restricted supply from the west and a tendency for net eastward alongshore drift.

The groyne systems along the coast are now in a state of disrepair and have limited effect. Beach

levels have fallen to a point where sheet piling at the toe of the sea wall is exposed, standing

water and/ or underlying silts and peat deposits are exposed over large areas of the beach, and

recreational appeal is severely reduced. While addition of rock armour might improve the

standard of flood protection by itself it would do little to raise beach levels or increase the

touristic and nature conservation value of the beach.

Even if artificial defences are not present, a narrow backshore and steep foreshore in front of a

naturally eroding dune cliff or shingle ridge or eroding dune cliff provides limited useable space

for recreational / tourist space and is widely to be perceived as unattractive or even dangerous

for swimmers and other users (Figures 2.3c & d).

2.3 Previous Beach Nourishment Schemes

2.3.1 Artificial beach nourishment schemes in North America, Europe and other parts of the

World

A distinction needs to be made between natural beach nourishment and artificial (or man-made)

beach nourishment (Pye, 2010). Under natural conditions beaches may be nourished with

sediment from several possible sources, including neighbouring river mouths, the offshore /

nearshore sea bed, up-drift coastal erosion, or in situ-biogenic sediment production. Artificial

nourishment may be unintentional or intentional. Examples of unintentional artificial

nourishment include the dumping of mine and quarry waste on the shore or into rivers which

subsequently transport the material to the coast, or accelerated rates of soil erosion due to de-

vegetation which result in increased rates of sediment supply to the coastal zone. Intentional

artificial beach nourishment most commonly involves the purposeful placement of material

(natural or artificial sediment) to create or replenish a beach. Beach creation involves the

construction of a beach where none-existed previously; beach replenishment (sometimes also

referred to as beach recharge or beach fill) involves the restoration or improvement of an existing

beach. Repeat placement of additional material on a beach which has already been artificially

nourished is referred to as beach re-nourishment.

It is often stated in the coastal scientific literature that the first major artificial beach

nourishment schemes were undertaken in California and New Jersey during the period 1919 -

1922, and the practice became increasing popular in the United States between the Wars.

Amongst the most significant early schemes where the creation of a recreational beach at Coney

Island in 1922 using dredgings from New York Harbour, and the creation of a large recreational

beach at Waikiki, Hawaii, in 1939 (Finkl & Walker, 2005). The first large-scale project in

Europe was undertaken on the German island of Nordeney commencing in 1951. Since that time

beach nourishment has been undertaken in many other European countries including Belgium,

Denmark, The Netherlands, France, Portugal and Spain, as well as many other parts of the world.

Several case study examples are described in Schwartz & Bird (1990) and in Appendix 1 to this

report. One of largest single schemes undertaken was at Miami Beach in Florida between 1975

and 1980, when more than 10 x 106 m3 of sediment was placed on a 20 km length of beach for

combined recreational and storm protection purposes. Other major recent schemes have been



7

undertaken as part of major construction and economic development programmes in Dubai,

China and Malaysia. In the Netherlands, beach nourishment has become the principal tool by

which a policy of 'dynamic preservation of the coastline' will be delivered. Under this policy, the

coastal profile of the Dutch coast down to a depth of -20 m, as it existed in 1990, will be

maintained by nourishment every 5 years in order to keep pace with rising sea level (Mulder et

al., 2006). The principal source of sediment will be provided by dredging of offshore areas

beyond the -20 m isobath. Regular and detailed monitoring of the beach, nearshore and offshore

areas provides a key part of the strategy (van der Lee, 2009).

In the United Kingdom, the first significant artificial sand beach nourishment schemes

undertaken primarily for recreation purposes were undertaken at Bournemouth and Portobello

(Edinburgh) in the early 1970's. Prior to this time there had only been small scale nourishments

of beaches in several places using harbour dredging, quarry and construction waste (both

sediment and rock). Since the 1970's large-scale nourishment projects using both sand and

shingle have been undertaken on several parts of the UK coast, mainly in eastern and southern

England. The main drivers have been both flood protection (e.g. Lincshore in Lincolnshire and

Heacham in Norfolk) and recreational (e.g. Bournemouth). The initial Lincshore project in the

late 1990's involved placement of approximately 7.5 x 106 m3 of coarse sand along the shore

between Mablethorpe and Skegness; subsequent annual re-nourishment requirements have

averaged about 450 x 103 m3 (Blott & Pye, 2004).

2.3.2 Artificial beach nourishment in Wales

Compared with other parts of the world, including England, previous beach nourishment

operations in Wales have been few and mostly small-scale. Dredgings from a number of small

harbours and ports have been used to nourish nearby beaches and dunes; examples include

Pwlheli, Aberdovey, Aberystwyth, Aberaeron and Neath. A small pilot study was undertaken in

2000 to examine the feasibility of using dredgings from the approach to Neath Harbour for

beneficial beach recharge; approximately 14 x 103 m

3 of sandy material was deposited offshore

from Sker Beach (Kenfig Sands) on the assumption that it would move shorewards under the

influence of natural processes (BP Chemical Ltd, 2000). Subsequently c. 6 x 103 m

3 of sand from

this source was used to nourish the north-western end of Aberavon - Baglan dunes; in 2007

approximately 115 x 103 m

3 was used to nourish the northern end of the Aberavon foreshore,

and in 2008 c. 220 x 106 m

3 was used to nourish the beach in front of Crymlyn Burrows. In 2003,

approximately 180 x 103 m

3 of dredged material (mainly sand) from the approaches to Mostyn

docks was used to nourish the beach at Talacre, east of Prestatyn.

During the early 1990's volumes of c. 100 - 150 x 103 m

3 of sand were used for beach

nourishment as part of a number of wider coastal protection schemes, including those at Llanelli,

Machynys and Llandudno West Shore. A significant proportion of the material used at Llanelli

and Machynys was reportedly sources from offshore sources. Other significant nourishment

projects, involving on or mainly cobble or gravel-sized material, were undertaken at Llandudno

North Shore, Penrhyn, Morfa Dinlle and Kinmel Bay, amongst other places, but most involved

relatively small quantities of material (generally < 15 x 103 m

3).

2.3.3 Guidance relating to beach nourishment

A number of manuals and collected conference papers have been published which provide

general guidance on strategy and specific technical aspects relating to beach nourishment. These

include Delft Hydraulics Laboratory (1987), van der Graaff et al., (1991), National Research

Council (1995), Dean (2002) and Dean & Dalrymple (2002).



8

The CIRIA Beach Management Manual (Simm et al., 1996) contains a chapter on beach

recharge and discusses its role in relation to other techniques of beach management. The Manual

is currently being revised and a second edition is expected to be published later in 2010.

A review of European experience with beach nourishment, focused on engineering aspects, was

undertaken by Hamm et al. (2002), while the potential ecological effects have been reviewed by

Speybroeck et al. (2006).

Figure 2.5 presents a simple concept diagram which illustrates the main potential sources of

sediment for artificial nourishment, while Figure 2.6 summarises the main methods by which

nourishment can be undertaken. Various options for sediment emplacement exist, including

formation of a rectangular or tapered sediment wedge on part, or all, of the upper beach,

deposition of nourishment material as an offshore berm, or trickle-charging with sediment from

one end of the system (Pye, 2010). Whatever the method and form of the initial emplacement, re-

distribution of sediment is likely to occur under the influence of natural processes (Figure 2.7).

The rate at which this occurs will depend on the specific local coastal physiography and coastal

energy regime. Figure 2.8 illustrates two examples of nourishment schemes which are generally

regarded to have been successful in their objectives (Miami Beach and Llandudno West Shore).

In general, beach nourishment, whether used alone or in conjunction with other measures,

provides a more environmentally acceptable method of shoreline management than hard defence

structures in terms of landscape and visual impacts (ECUS, 2000).

2.4 Climate and sea level change

Climate change is likely to have significant impacts on the coast. Figures from the UK Climate

Impacts Programme 2009 (UKCP09) and the UK Meteorological Office indicate that:

• Mean Global temperatures could rise anywhere between 1.5°C and 5.8°C by 2080 –

between 2 and 8 times the rise already seen since 1990. In the UK, an average rise of 2-

3.5°C is anticipated.

• Winters will become wetter (20-30% wetter by 2080) and summers may become drier

(35-50% drier by 2080). Heavier rainfalls will become more frequent.

• Relative sea level will continue to rise around the UK coastline, at varying rates which

will depend party on the pattern of crustal movements, partly on actual levels of global

emissions, and partly on the nature of complex responses and interactions between the

coupled atmosphere-ocean-cryosphere systems; modelling results indicate a wide range

of possible values for the magnitude of total sea level rise, ranging for, 0.3 to 1.9 m over

the next century. Figure 2.10 indicates a comparative example of the UKCP09 scenarios

(low-medium and high emissions) compared to existing Defra guidance (2006). These

show that the sea level rise predictions will amount to less than 1m, from a base year of

1990. The H++ scenario states a sea level rise of 1.9m but unlike the low, medium and

high scenarios, no detailed information is available on how this increase will be reached.

• The potential impacts of climate change are likely to be various. An example is the

possible increase in extreme weather events such as storminess which may have the

effect of increasing flooding in low-lying areas, and increase erosion rates that could lead

to a loss of beaches. A rise in sea level would have implications for low lying lands and

coastal infrastructure. Tourism is also a contributor to climate change. The tourism

industry and visitors alike are becoming more aware of the need to reduce their carbon



9

footprints, which may well lead to an increase in demand for domestic holidays (Welsh

Assembly Government, 2008).

Bruun (1962) proposed a well-known two-dimensional model which predicts the effects of sea

level rise on beaches, assuming a closed sediment system. According to this model, a rise on sea

level will result in a lateral retreat of the high water mark by a predictable amount as sediment is

eroded from the shoreface and re-deposited on the proximal sea floor (Figure 2.9a). An

equilibrium beach profile is assumed to be maintained as coastal retreat progresses. Although

this is a simplistic model which has been widely criticised, it still provides a useful conceptual

framework.

At its simplest, beach nourishment can be considered as a method by which retreat of the

shoreline (high water mark) can be slowed or prevented and an equilibrium beach profile

maintained (to some fixed distance offshore) during sea level rise (Figure 2.9 b). In essence this

concept lies at the heart of the Dutch coastal defence policy of 'dynamic preservation of the

coastline' adopted in 1990. The volumes of sediment required to achieve this condition are likely

to be large and the costs could be high, depending on the rates of sea level rise, the location of

suitable sediment sources, and the nature of feasible transportation methods.

Estimates of possible future sea level rise for each of the 10 case study sites considered in this

study were calculated from data available via the UKCP09 website user interface. A summary of

the values obtained for three different emissions scenarios and different climate model outputs is

provided in Table 2.3.

Consideration of issues of suitable sediment sources and transport costs will be undertaken in a

later stage of the work programme. For example, nourishment schemes to protect the coastline

from the affects of climate and sea level change should themselves have a minimal negative

impact as possible on the same effect. The “carbon footprint” of the proposed nourishment

schemes will be calculated, expressed in terms of the amount of carbon dioxide, or its equivalent

of other greenhouse gasses, emitted. Both the “embedded” carbon dioxide in the materials used

and transport of those materials will be estimated. The results of this analysis will help inform

the decision-making process to select the optimal nourishment scheme design.

2.5 Coastal tourism and beach recreation

The Welsh Coast is vitally important to the tourism industry in Wales. The spending associated

with an overnight visit to the coast, in 2009, amounted to around £601million or 43% of total

tourism spending in Wales. It attracts around 3.4 million staying trips (14 million nights) each

year together with an estimated 25 million tourism day trips (Welsh Assembly Government,

2010).

The majority (78%) of seaside tourism is for leisure purposes although places such as Cardiff,

Swansea and Llandudno also attract some business tourism. Visits to the coast account for 37%

of all overnight trips in Wales - a much higher proportion than in England and Scotland where

visits account for only 20% and 13% respectively (Welsh Assembly Government, 2010). Within

the Welsh regions, seaside tourism is particularly important for the North and South West, where

it accounts for 52% of tourism spend. The direct impact of tourism amounts to an estimated

3.2% of whole-economy value added in Wales (Welsh Assembly Government, 2008).

The importance of coastal tourism is also reflected by the Welsh Assembly Government in their

‘One Wales: A progressive agenda for the government of Wales’ document which also proposes



10

to construct an all-Wales coastal path as part of its plan to maintain clean, healthy and

sustainable local environments in which people can take pride (Welsh Assembly Government,

2007). Its importance is outlined within the Coastal Tourism Strategy which was identified as

one of the key national actions within the Wales Spatial Plan. The purpose of the Coastal

Tourism Strategy is to identify a clear way forward for the development of Coastal Tourism,

which realises and builds on the economic potential of the coastline of Wales whilst respecting

its environmental quality and recognising the importance of achieving community benefits.

A key recommendation of the Strategy is that proposals for tourism investment recognise and

take account of the implications of climate change impacts, particularly the increasing flood and

erosion risks, and assist with adaption to those impacts.

2.6 Integrated management

Data and information management is defined as a key pressure “theme” in Making the Most of

Wales’ Coast, the ICZM Strategy for Wales. Previous work undertaken by Atkins for CCW

(McCue, J. et al., 2008)helped CCW review what information currently exists, where data is

stored, and whether it is helpful in improving the understanding of issues such as habitat

replacement, natural evolution of landforms and the economic implications of natural shoreline

change over time.

CCW are at the forefront of ICZM in Wales and with increasing pressure on the coastal resource,

and a growing recognition that the coastline should be managed in a more strategic and co-

ordinated way, the impact of visitors on sites around the coast may result in additional

management costs to land owners and local authorities in terms of sustaining the quality of the

environment and providing facilities for visitors to enjoy a safe experience.

The proposed Action Plan set for that project (section 7) is a useful source of information and

proposed intervention with relation to the delivery of ICZM principles within Wales. Sustainable

beach solutions for the future were presented as a key area for consideration.



11

3 METHODOLOGY

The project methodology has centred on 4 work packages (WP):

• WP1 – Initial Beach Case Study Assessment and Inception Meeting;

• WP2 – Data Review and Initial Site Analysis;

• WP3 – Beach Case Study Assessment; and

• WP4 – Draft and Final Reporting.

3.1 Work Package 1 - Initial Beach Case Study Assessment and Meeting

Aim: To introduce the project team, confirm the communication strategy with CCW, scope out

the approach to each Work Package, and discuss possible beach case study areas.

To assist in ensuring project completion within the tight project timescales, Atkins undertook a

rapid desk-top study of numerous potential case study sites for the project, for discussion at the

Inception Meeting on 3rd

February 2010. A preliminary set of case study criteria was adopted to

help ascertain which case studies are appropriate for further evaluation. These criteria were

developed in line with CCW's key corporate drivers.

The following sites were discussed at the Inception Meeting:

• Talacre-Gronant

• Rhyl-Prestatyn

• Abergele-Towyn

• Morfa Dinlle

• Traeth Crugan

• Llanaber-Morfa Dyffryn

• Fairbourne

• Broadwater-Tywyn-Aberdovey

• Borth-Ynyslas

• Swansea Bay (North)

• Swansea Bay (East)

• Porthcawl-Ogmore

• Rhoose-Barry Island

• Penrhyn Bay

• Nicholaston Burrows

• Oxwich Bay

Of these 16 sites, 4 were retained as pilot sites but truncated in their length (Talacre, Abergele,

Morfa Dyffryn and Porthcawl), 3 were retained in their entirety (Traeth Crugan, Broadwater-



12

Tywyn-Aberdovey, Swansea Bay (North) and 3 sites were introduced (Tenby, Port Eynon Bay

and Aberavon Sands) in order to best represent a mix of sand, shingle and mixed beaches of

varying significance to nature conservation, flood risk management and tourism, geographically

spread around the Welsh coast. Therefore, the final ten selected pilot sites were defined as:

• Talacre

• Abergele - Pensarn

• Traeth Crugan

• Morfa Dyffryn

• Broadwater - Tywyn - Aberdovey

• Tenby North Beach

• Port Eynon Bay

• Northern Swansea Bay (Black Pill to Swansea Docks)

• Aberavon Sands (eastern Swansea Bay)

• Porthcawl (Sandy Bay and Trecco Bay)

3.2 Work Package 2 – Data Review and Initial Site Analysis

Aim: To collate and review existing published information of relevance and to develop and

analyse the agreed list of possible beach nourishment case study areas.

Following agreement of the case study sites at the Inception Meeting, for each site we have

developed a more detailed overview of the distribution, sedimentary character, morphology and

recent erosion / accretion status of beaches. Table 3.1 provides a summary of this information.

3.3 Work Package 3 – Beach Case Study Assessment

For the ten selected case study sites the principal methods employed in this study have been:

• Desk study evaluation of published and unpublished literature;

• Analysis of aerial photographs provided by CCW and available on Google Earth;

• Analysis of selected beach profile data previously provided by local authorities;

• Field reconnaissance visits to most of the sites;

• Analysis of sea level and climate change projection data on the UKCP09 website

userinterface (accessed via ukclimateprojections.defra.gov.uk);

• Calculation of sediment volumes based on current beach topography and predicted rates

of sea level rise; and

• Data synthesis and development of recommendations.

It was originally intended to use Environment Agency lidar data in order to assist the sediment

volume requirement calculations but unfortunately the data were not made available in time to

allow their inclusion in the study. It is therefore recommended that they be used in the next stage

of the programme.



13

The volumes of sediment nourishment required with the defined sections of beach were

calculated in three ways:

(1) In order to assess the volumes required to create an improved beach', a hypothetical

initial nourishment profile was assumed, consisting of a 20 m wide flat-topped- berm

at the level of HAT, ending in a seaward gradient of 1 in 25 down to the intersection

with the existing beach profile, or, where the existing beach slope was too steep to

allow intersection with a 1 in 25 gradient, the assumed nourishment profile was taken

to end in a uniform slope down to the mean tide level (MTL). Available beach profile

data were then used to calculate the difference between the existing (most up-to-date)

beach surface and the hypothetical design profile. Each profile was assumed to

represent a length of frontage on either side, and this length multiplied by the cross-

sectional area of required nourishment to obtain the volume of required sediment fill

(no allowance being made for over-fill or losses during or after the nourishment

process)

(2) In order to assess the volumes required to maintain the profile of the existing beach

under conditions of projected sea level rise over 20, 50 and 100 year time scales, a

planar area for each beach was first defined down to mean tide level at each site

(levels being defined from the available beach profiles and 2009 Admiralty Tide

Tables for the nearest Standard or Secondary Port. Estimates of sea level rise for each

case study area and each shoreline management 'epoch' were then calculated using

information downloaded from the UKCP09 website. Values were obtained for three

emissions scenarios (low, medium and high), and representing the 5th, 50th and 90th

percentile modelled values (Table 2.3). The 'minimum' expected sea level rise was

taken to be the 5th percentile value for the low emissions scenario, while the

'maximum' expected rise was taken to be the 95th percentile for the high emissions

scenario. Values of up to 1.9m of sea level rise have been considered possible but very

unlikely by the UK Met Office, and therefore have not been considered for the

purposes of the present report. A 'best estimate' value for sea level rise was taken to be

the 50th percentile value for the medium emissions scenario (Table 2.3). Each of these

sea level rise increments was then multiplied by the planar areas specified above to

give an estimate of the volume fill requirement to maintain the existing beach form. It

should be noted that these calculations provide an under-estimate of the actual volume

of sediment which would need to be added to the beach since the volume fill

calculations take no account of losses of nourished sediment which would inevitably

occur and which would need to be compensated for in an actual scheme.

(3) In order to estimate the volume of sediment which would be required to undertake an

initial nourishment improvement scheme, and then to maintain it in the face of sea

level rise and natural erosional losses, the initial nourishment requirements from (1)

above were used in conjunction with sea level rise estimates from (2). The

assumptions were (a) an initial nourishment in 2010 (Table 4.1), (b) four subsequent

five-yearly re-nourishments, each replacing an assumed 50% loss from the previous

nourishment, and (c) minimum, best estimate and maximum values for sea level rise

by 2030, indicated in Table 4.2. These amounts were then added to produce the total

sediment volume requirements indicated in Table 4.3.



14

4 RESULTS – INDIVIDUAL CASE STUDY SITES

4.1 Talacre

4.1.1 General geomorphological character

The Talacre site forms part of the eastern end of a dune-capped barrier spit system which extends

eastwards from Rhyl towards the entrance to the Dee estuary. Extensive areas of low-lying

ground, mainly representing reclaimed marshland, lie behind the barrier. Around Rhyl and

Prestatyn large areas of the former dunes have been levelled and built on. Between Gronant and

Talacre there are two main lines of dunes which converge at the western (Gronant) end. In

between is an area of lower ground occupied by deflation areas, sand sheets and low hummocky

dunes (Figure 4.1). The age of the Talacre - Gronant dune system is not well constrained by

dating, but back barrier peat deposits exposed at the eastern end of the Rhyl foreshore have been

radiocarbon-dated at 5000 - 6000 years old, suggesting that a sand and/or gravel barrier has

existed in the area at least since mid-Holocene times. The present dune and gravel barrier ridges

partially overlie and cross-cut older ridges in the Talacre area.

4.1.2 Coastal processes

This part of the North Wales coast is macrotidal with a mean spring tidal range of 7.70 m (Table

2.1). Maximum flood and ebb spring tidal velocities in the ‘Wild Road’ channel off the Point of

Ayr reach 1.5 m s-1

, resulting in strong scour and high sediment transport rates in both directions,

but with net residual drift towards the Dee estuary. The dominant waves in Liverpool Bay

approach from the west and west-northwest, but wave refraction results in a more north-westerly

approach angle along the coastal frontage between Gronant and Point of Ayr lighthouse, and

giving rise to net easterly littoral drift along the upper foreshore (Shoreline Management

Partnership, 1993, 1999; Babtie, 2001a; HR Wallingford, 2008; Wolf, 2008). The rate of

sediment supply to the Talacre area by littoral drift has been significantly diminished by the

construction of groynes and other coastal structures further west over the past 150 years.

The interaction of moderate wave energy and large tidal range gives rise to a wide multi-barred

foreshore composed mainly of medium sand. Between Gronant and Talacre the intertidal zone

decreases in an easterly direction as the WSW-ENE-trending shoreline approaches the Wild

Road low-water channel. Inter-tidal wave heights increase eastwards, resulting in greater

potential for gravel transport along the upper beach. Near Point of Ayr lighthouse the dune toe is

partially protected by a narrow gravel berm which increases in size and to form a distinct ridge at

the eastern end of the system. Exposure to the dominant westerly winds also increases eastwards

between Gronant and the Point of Ayr lighthouse, resulting in greater potential aeolian sand

transport and development of larger dunes and blowouts. To the east of the lighthouse the coastal

orientation changes to W-E and then NW-SE, with the result that the exposure to westerly winds

is reduced, and winds from the NW, N, NE, E and SE assume greater relative importance.

4.1.3 Historical shoreline change

During the 17th

and 18th

centuries there was significant accretion in the Point of Ayr area, partly

as a result of strong sediment drift from the west and partly due to seaward movement of the

Wild Road low water channel. In 1812 an embankment was constructed between the (then) Point

and Tanlan, thereby removing tidal influence from the former marshlands to the west, and in



15

1844 a new metal pile lighthouse was constructed c. 800 m seaward of an earlier stone and brick

one built in 1776 (Ashton, 1920). However, landward movement of the Wild Road Channel

must have commenced shortly after 1850 and the metal pile lighthouse was replaced in 1883 by

a lightship. Today the original lighthouse stands on the foreshore approximately 120 m from the

dune toe (Figure 4.2).

Comparison of historical maps and aerial photographs (Babtie, 2001a; Pye & Saye, 2005) shows

that the dune toe between Gronant and Talacre (Profiles 3, 4 & 5 shown in Figure 4.1) has

experienced little net change between 1871 and the present day, but the eastern part of the

frontage around the Point of Ayr lighthouse has suffered significant net erosion (total retreat of

42 m at Profile 6 and 106 m at Profile 7). Much of the erosion near the lighthouse occurred after

1970 and was associated with a landward movement (>460 m) of the low water mark on the

southern side of the Wild Road channel. Erosion of the Point has been accompanied by further

accretion of sand and gravel ridges, with areas of intervening saltmarsh, at the entrance to the

Dee estuary, east of Talacre village.

4.1.4 Flood defence, nature conservation and recreational importance

The beach and dunes provide a natural flood defence for the areas of low-lying land behind,

including several caravan parks, an oil terminal and the villages of Talacre and Lower Gronant.

The study area forms part of, and/or lies adjacent to, several designated nature conservation

areas, including the Gronant Dunes and Talacre Warren SSSI (re-notified 1983), the Gronant

Dunes Local Nature Reserve, and the Dee Estuary SSSI, Ramsar Site, Special Protection Area

and Special Area of Conservation. There is also an RSPB reserve to the east of Talacre village.

Talacre beach is highly popular with recreational visitors, notably in the summer months when

pressures on the beach and dunes are high. Visitors include local residents, day-trippers and

longer-stay guests, mainly from North Wales and North-west England (Jemmett, 1999).

4.1.5 Shoreline management policy

The SMP I for coastal sub-Cell 11a. Shoreline Management Partnership, 1999a) placed this

frontage within Management Unit 4/3 (Barkby Beach to Talacre Access), for which the Preferred

Management Policy was ‘Do Nothing’. The SMP II Draft policy for this Policy Unit (now 4/4,

Halcrow, 2009) is Managed Realignment in the Short Term (0 to 20 years), Medium Term (20 –

50 years) and Long Term (50 -100 years). Under this policy it is intended that the natural defence

which the dunes provide will be maintained while allowing the dunes and Point of Ayr to evolve

naturally. Measures will continue to be taken to control the rate of dune erosion, including

possible use of beach nourishment. Strengthening and maintenance of the line of secondary

defence is recommended in the Medium and Longer Terms.

4.1.6 Previous beach nourishment

A review of coastal processes, morphological change and coast protection / flood risk

management issues along the Gronant – Talacre – Point of Ayr frontage was undertaken by

Babtie (2001a). Among the recommendations arising from this study, incorporated in the

Management Plan for the area (Babtie, 2001b), were sand nourishment of the beach along the

north-central part of the frontage and shingle nourishment along the upper beach along a 850m

section near the Point of Ayr lighthouse (areas shown in Figure 4.1). Following the development

of a Method Statement and monitoring programme (Flintshire County Council, 2003), the beach



16

was nourished in February - March 2003 maintenance dredgings (mainly medium and fine sand)

from the approach channel to the Port of Mostyn. Sand was stock-piled on the upper beach prior

to re-profiling using a bulldozer (Figure 4.3). The initial nourished profile aimed to increase the

width and height of the backshore by forming a ramp reaching 6.0 m OD in front of the eroding

dune cliffs. The initial volume of sand emplaced was reported to be 176 x 103 m

3,

of which

about c. 85% was estimated to remain on the beach after 2 years (Jacobs-Babtie, 2005).

By March 2004 the modified nourished profile was still clearly evident (Figure 4.4a) although

significant quantities of sand had been blown into low areas of the frontal dunes raising their

overall level (Figure 4.4b). Sand deposited on the upper beach has continued to be blown into the

dunes and moved alongshore, resulting in a further drop in upper beach levels (Figure 4.5) and

allowing erosion of the dune toe during winter storms (Figure 4.6). It is likely that recession of

the HAT line on the open coast will resume at its former rate unless re-nourishment is

undertaken, and may accelerate in the medium to longer term if forecasts of future sea level rise

prove to be correct. However, accretion is likely to continue on the Dee estuary side of the Point

(Saye & Pye, 2005).

4.1.7 Future nourishment: potential benefits and requirements

For the purposes of the present study, preliminary consideration has been given to the

requirements for further nourishment which would assist the policy objectives identified in the

SMP II (Halcrow, 2009), and which would also provide additional nature conservation and

recreational benefits. The main potential benefits of additional nourishment in this area would

be:

• increase in foredune height / cross-sectional area / sediment volume, providing a more

effective primary flood defence and a reservoir of sand to feed the beach during major

storms – effective in the short, medium and longer term if the frontal dunes are allowed

to ‘roll back’ in the face of rising sea level and continuing erosion

• enhanced sand supply to frontal dunes and inter-dune areas, resulting in stimulation of

vegetation growth (mainly a short-term effect) and expansion of areas of bare sand,

beneficial to species such as the sand lizard

• sediment feed to the down-drift end of the system, enhancing growth of new embryo

dunes / low foredunes

• increase in area of ‘dry’ beach at high water – reduction in recreational pressure on the

beach and frontal dunes

The principal justification for further nourishment on this frontage is likely to be flood risk

management, notably the requirement to protect the village of Talacre and the BHP Billiton gas

terminal. However, nourishment could also be justified as a means by which the Talacre dune

system, which lies with the Dee Estuary SAC, could be returned to a more favourable condition

by restoring a local sediment budget similar to that which existed prior to the interruption of

sediment supply by construction of coastal defence structures further to the west.

The further nourishment scenario considered for purposes of illustration in the present study

involves creation of a 20 m wide flat-topped sand berm at the level of HAT, terminating in a

seaward slope with gradient of 1:25 until the slope meets the existing beach surface. The total



17

width of the nourished profile in this instance would be 43 – 91 m. For the defined length of

shore defined, this would represent a total fill volume of 148 x 103 m

3.

The increased volumes which would be filled with sediment in order to maintain a constant

profile across the entire beach between HAT and MTL in each of the shoreline management

epochs, using estimates of sea level rise derived from the UKCP09 website, range from a

minimum of 30 x103 m

3 on a 20 year timescale to a maximum on 1 x 10

6 m

3 on a 100 year time

scale.

The volume required to maintain an initially nourished volume over 20 years from 2010, taking

into account project sea level rise and an assumed 50% loss during each 5 year period between

re-nourishments, would range from 474 to 616 x103 m

3.

These relatively large nourishment volume requirements reflect the relatively large area of beach

above MTL.

Sand for further beach nourishment may be provided by maintenance dredging of the approaches

to Mostyn Docks, although the amount available may well be less than in 2003-04 when capital

works were undertaken (channel deepening were undertaken); availability from this source will

be dependent partly on the commercial fortunes and operational requirements of the port. An

alternative source of both sand and gravel could be provided by licenced dredging areas in

Liverpool Bay. Larger quantities of gravel could be used in future to provide greater protection

for the dune toe and to create shore-parallel ridges which could act as partial wave breaks.

4.2 Abergele-Pensarn


The Abergele – Pensarn coastal frontage lies immediately to the east of the Llanddulas

promontory on the central part of the North Wales coast (Figure 4.7). It forms part of a large

shingle and sand barrier system which forms the seaward boundary of a large area of low-lying

land adjacent to the River Clwyd. The River originally took a meandering course through a

structurally-controlled, rock-bound embayment, and was flanked by extensive saltmarshes

(Morfa Rhuddlan), but during the 13th

century the river was artificially straightened and the

marshland was subsequently embanked and reclaimed (mostly following Act of Parliament in

1793 and 1807).

The western part of the barrier system extends from the Llanddulas headland to Fford (Kinmel

Bay) on the western side of the mouth of the River Clywd. The upper part of the active beach is

generally composed of coarse gravel and cobbles, while the lower beach consists mainly of

medium sand. Landward of the active beach is a variable width of stabilized shingle ridges

which are capped by low dunes and windblown sand sheets. Peat and formers back-barrier silts

are periodically exposed on lower parts of the foreshore, testifying to long-term retreat of the

shoreline in this area. Between Abergele, Pensarn and Tywyn the coastal shingle has mostly

been buried by development, but west of Abergele a significant width of un-developed shingle

ridges still remains (Figure 4.8).



18


The frontage is macrotidal with a mean spring tidal range of 7.02 m (Table 2.1). The flood tide

runs in an easterly direction approximately parallel to the coast at maximum spring tide

velocities of c. 0.6 m s-1

, while the ebb tide runs in the opposite direction with peak spring

velocities of c. 0.5 m s-1

. The dominant waves approach from WNW and NW directions;

modelling results have indicated 10 and 100 year Hs values of 4.13 m and 4.75 m, respectively

(HR Wallingford, 1993; Shoreline Management Partnership, 1999a). The net direction of

transport for both sand and shingle is easterly, although modelling has suggested significant

variations in potential sediment drift rates along the frontage, being close to zero at Ty Crwn and

c. 16 x 103 m

3 at Pensarn promenade (HR Wallingford, 1993). This reflects the greater shelter

offered to the western part of the system by the Llanddulas promontory. East of Pensarn where

the shoreline orientation presents a smaller oblique angle to the north-westerly waves the

potential drift rate declines to c. 4 x 103 m

3. Ridges and runnels on the mid and lower foreshore

are oriented approximately perpendicular to the dominant waves, with the result that longshore

drift rates of sand on the lower foreshore are limited. Periodic changes in the positions of the

ridges and runnels, the landward ends of which abut obliquely against the natural shingle ridge

and artificial sea defences, cause alternating episodes of upper shoreface stability and erosion.

Prior to the 20th

century, this coastal frontage received a generous supply of shingle from erosion

of the boulder clay cliffs to the east of Penmaen Rhos Head, between Llanddulas and Old

Colwyn (Ashton, 1920). Some shingle was also supplied by erosion of limestone outcrops and

dumping of quarry waste at Llanddulas. However, during the late 19th

and 20th

centuries

construction of sea defences between Old Colwyn and the coast east of Llanddulas progressively

reduced the rate of sediment supply and easterly transport. Erosion of the shore in front of the

municipal waste tip at Llanddulas, immediately east of the case study frontage, had become

severe by 1960 and in the following 20 years a range of measures were implemented to control

it, including training works at the mouth of the River Dulas, and groynes on the east side of the

river. Bunding of the shingle within the groyne bays was undertaken in the 1980’s and a rock

revetment was built in front of the tip between 1988 and 1980, with further additions in 1991 and

1998. The construction of sea defences along the A55 frontage further west during the late

1970’s and early 1980’s further reduced the sediment supply to areas down-drift. However,

construction of a new promenade near Abergele - Pensarn Station, and a new rock revetment at

Tywyn following the 1990 storm surge, created a barrier to eastward drift of shingle away from

the case-study frontage. Only recently has easterly drift been re-established (Coastal Engineering

UK, 2008).


Comparison of historical maps suggests that the shingle beach at Abergele west prograded

seawards between 1870 and 1960. However, the accretionary trend changed to one of erosion

with the commencement of the Llanddulas sea defences after 1960. Analysis of beach profile

data for the period 1968-90 led Lee (2005) to conclude that the western and eastern ends of the

Abergele – Pensarn ridge complex experienced net erosion while the central section experienced

net accretion, although changes in beach plan were relatively minor. Analysis of data for the

period 1997 – 2004 showed a spatially variable pattern of shingle volume change and a slight net

overall loss, with the greatest net loss occurring at the western end of the system. No significant

change in the barrier crest position was detected, indicating that retreat due to over-washing had

not been important during the period, with most of the sediment loss being accounted from by

beach face erosion.



19

Beach profiles in the stable central part of the frontage generally show a more gently sloping

gradient than at the eroding western end and in front of the Abergele - Pensarn promenade at the

eastern end (Figure 4.9). Erosion at the western end of the system is beginning to presents a

threat to the flood wall at the western end of the caravan park (Costal Engineering UK, 2008).

The edge of the vegetated shingle in this area is marked by a 1 m high cliff which shows clear

evidence of active recession (Figure 4.10). The cliff edge along the line of unprotected vegetated

shingle now lies c. 8m landward of the line of rock revetment just to the west, and the width of

vegetated shingle has been reduced to less than 5 m in places (Figure 4.8b). Unless action is

taken, the erosion front is likely to impinge on the flood wall within 5 years. However, as noted

by Lee (2005), construction of further hard defences in this area would be likely to extend the

problem of erosion in an easterly direction (down-drift); consequently; beach nourishment may

present a better management alternative.


As noted above, the vegetated beach ridge plain is backed by a 1.5 m high floodwall (constructed

after the February 1990 storm surge), a service road, the North Wales coastal path and cycle-

way, and a caravan park, behind which run the Chester to Holyhead railway line and the A55

trunk road.

Pensarn Beach was notified as a SSSI in 1977 for its SD1 pioneer shingle communities and SD8

more stable vegetation communities. The ridge complex represents c. 13% of the total resource

of vegetated shingle in Wales (University of Newcastle, 2000); loss of vegetated shingle area at

Hen Wrynch is therefore a matter of importance.

The beach is fairly heavily used for recreational purposes, including seasonal occupants of

several caravan parks in the Tywyn - Pensarn - Abergele - Llanddulas area.


The SMP1 recognised that maintenance of the shingle bank between Hen Wrych and Pensarn

(Management Unit No. 3/4) is essential for any future strategy for coastal defence in this area,

and beach replenishment was identified as an option for future consideration (Shoreline

Management Partnership, 1999a). The SMP2 preferred policy for the Llanddulas - Pensarn

frontage (included in Policy Unit 2.3) during all three epochs is also ‘Hold The Line’, involving

beach maintenance and improvement (Halcrow, 2009). Owing the presence of the railway

embankment and A55 behind the beach there is little scope for the beach system to retreat

landwards under conditions of accelerated sea level rise. Over a 100 year timescale the beach

system may therefore become ‘squeezed’, with resulting loss of habitat, unless intervention

measures are implemented.


Although there dumping of quarry waste at Llanddulas may inadvertently led to some

nourishment of the beach between Hen Wrych and Pensarn, there is no record of deliberate

previous nourishment of this frontage.

4.2.7 Future nourishment: potential benefits and requirements

Following the 1990 storm surge and large-scale breach in the defences at Towyn, HR

Wallingford (1993) examined the defence options and concluded that shingle beach



20

nourishment, combined with secondary flood walls set back behind the beach crest, could

provide a feasible solution. Three options were identified:

(1) Re-nourishment of an open shingle beach with 80 x 103 m

3 of gravel-size material from

the nearby Raynes Quarry every 5 years

(2) Re-nourishment with a system of 19 rock groynes to slow the rate of longshore sediment

drift and to stabilise the beach

(3) Re-nourishment with breakwaters placed on the lower beach near the sand / shingle

boundary (crest height of 6.0 m OD and a length of 2500 m) to stabilise the beach

Lee (2005) concluded that only the first option offered the opportunity for amelioration of

habitat loss while minimising the effect on coastal processes, but this option would require a

long-term commitment for re-nourishment and might in the long-term prove considerably more

expensive than the other options involving structures. However, to date no significant

nourishment has been undertaken.

The principal potential benefits of beach nourishment in this area would be:

• stabilization of the shoreline and enhancement of the shingle beach as the primary sea

defence, thereby reducing pressure on secondary defences and reducing flood and erosion

risk to existing assets, including regional transport infrastructure (main railway line and

trunk road)

• reduction / cessation of loss of priority habitat (vegetated shingle); potential creation of

new habitat

• recreational / touristic benefit by increasing area of ‘dry beach’, maintaining security of

tourist accommodation (caravan parks), and maintenance of the North Wales Coastal

Path and cycleway

For the purposes of this study, a scenario has been considered in which a 20 m wide shingle

berm at the level of HAT is created, terminating in a constant gradient down to MTL level.

Based on 2009 beach profile data, the overall nourishment width would vary from 52 to 121 m,

resulting in a total required fill volume of 430 x 103 m

3.

In order to maintain the 2009 beach area and cross-sectional profiles between HAT and MTL,

taking account of projected sea level rise, over a 20 year timescale the minimum sediment fill

volume would be 4 x 103 m

3 and the maximum requirement over 100 years would be 136 x 10

3

m3 (no allowance being made for sediment losses).

To undertake initial nourishment and maintain an equivalent volume over a period of 20 years

would require between 1.29 and 1.31 x 106 m

3 of sediment.

The main requirement for sediment nourishment of the upper beach will be gravel, potential

sources of which include nearby limestone quarries. However, further investigation is required to

assess its suitability in terms of angularity / roundness and durability. Naturally occurring known

sources of rounded gravel are unlikely to be able to satisfy the volumes required.



21

4.3 Traeth Crugan


Traeth Crugan represents the western part of a larger bay-head barrier beach system which links

the rock head of Carreg y Defaid in the west and the former bedrock island of Carreg yr Imbill

in the east. The eastern part of the beach is known as Pwlheli South Beach, represents a former

spit system which has grown eastwards to attach itself to Carreg y Imbil. The western part of the

barrier is very narrow and the periodic exposure of back-barrier deposits on the lower

beachprovide evidence of long-term coastal retreat in this area (Figure 4.11). Almost the entire

length of this part of the frontage is protected by rock armour and the beach consists mainly of

cobles, gravel and coarse sand. A gravel-armoured scar forms an intertidal exposure 400 - 600 m

offshore. Behind the rock armour revetments is an artificial embankment which protects a large

area of low-lying land (the Afon Penrhos floodplain) from tidal flooding. The beach in this area

consists of a steep upper beach and a more gently sloping lower foreshore (Figures 4.12 & 4.13).

The width of the barrier increases and becomes more sandy in an easterly direction. The plan

form of the beach shows a slight bulge in the central-eastern part of Traeth Crugan due to long-

term net accumulation of sediment in this area (Figure 4.11). A change to erosion along this part

of the shoreline after the mid 1970's resulted in the placement of additional rock armour which

has 'fossilized' the shoreline position, with resultant steepending of the fronting beach in recent

decades.

Further east, the average gradient of the beach reduces and an upper beach berm becomes more

pronounced. (Figure 4.12). Dunes up to 12 m high occur between the promenade at Pwlheli

South Beach and Carreg y Imbil. The dunes provide an important semi-natural flood defence for

a large area of residential property which lies between the dunes and Pwlheli harbour. Since the

1970's the morphology and sediments along the entire Traeth Crugan - Pwlheli South Beach

frontage have been significantly affected by beach management measures and dune restoration

works associated with the promenade re-development at Pwlheli West End. The shoreline of

Traeth Crugan has been progressively hardened as the beach erosion front has moved eastwards

over time.


The area experiences a macrotidal regime (mean spring tidal range of 4.50 m) and is exposed to

refracted waves which approach Tremadoc Bay mainly from the southwest. Inter-annual and

shorter-term fluctuations in beach profiles are governed principally by storm sequencing in

Tremadoc Bay (Neill et al., 2008). The general net sediment drift direction along the upper beach

is from west to east, with drifted material passing around Carreg yr Imbill and being deposited at

the entrance to Pwlheli harbour where it poses a problem for navigation (Faber Maunsell, 2008).


At the extreme western end of the beach the high water mark has receded landwards by 10 - 30

m since 1888, but along the central and eastern parts of the frontage there has been little net

change, with slight net seaward movement of the high water mark along the western part of the

Pwlheli Golf Club frontage and further east.



22


The Traeth Crugan beach and associated structures are important in providing coastal flood

protection to the Afon Penrhos lowlands and the adjacent Pwlheli Golf Club. The western

hinterland is relatively undeveloped but is crossed by the A499 Pwlheli to Abersoch Road.

Flooding of this area could potentially affect the flood protection status of the western part of

Pwlheli.

Traeth Crugan falls within the Pen Llyn a'r Sarnau SAC and the foreshore forms part of Myndd

Tir Y Cwmwd A'r Glannau At Garrey Yr Imbill SSSI. The main biotope present is Mobile gravel

with sparse infauna but the site is important for the occurrence of the amphipod

Pectenogammarus planicrurus with coarse sand and fine gravel deposits which occur on the mid

to upper beach (Webb et al., 2010).

Pwlheli South Beach is popular with local residents and tourists during the summer months, but

the coarser grained and more distal parts of Traeth Crugan are of less importance in this respect.


A study by Posford Duvivier (1996) into problems of erosion along the Traeth Crugan - Pwlheli

Golf Club frontage concluded that Hold the Line was the best policy option and that recycling of

dredgings from Pwlheli harbour to nourish the beach offered the bests solution. The first

Northern Cardigan Bay Shoreline Management Plan (Gwynedd Council, 2002) also identified a

policy of Hold the Line for the Traeth Crugan frontage but, in the light of comments received

from CCW during the consultation phase, recognised the need for a strategic appraisal of defence

options to be carried out. CCW were of the opinion that Hold the Line is sustainable only in the

short-term and that longer term other options, including Managed Realignment, might have to be

considered. A further review of the management options by Faber Maunsell (2008) also

concluded that, while sediment recycling / beach nourishment should be continued in the short to

medium term, plans should be made for removal and/ or realignment of defences in the medium

to longer term. The preferred option under the SMPII review, currently being undertaken by

Royal Haskoning, has not yet been announced.


In 2002, following a serious storm, the beach was nourished using capproximately 35 x 103 m

3

of dredgings from Pwlheli harbour and approach channel. Delivery to the beach was

accomplished using land-base plant. A repeat operation was carried out in February and March

2007. The short-term effects of the nourishment were to raise upper beach levels and to increase

the availability of sand for wind-blown transport to the back-beach area. However, following the

initial nourishment in 2002 beach levels gradually returned to their previous levels by 2007.

Following re-nourishment levels were again increased but have since fallen again and are likely

to continue to fall in future years as sand is lost both onshore (by wind action) and alongshore

(by wave-induced littoral drift).

4.3.7 Future beach nourishment: potential benefits and requirements

As noted above, continued beach nourishment at Traeth Crugan would remove the need for

construction of new rock armour defences and would provide time in which detailed plans for

managed realignment and/ or removal of existing defences can be made. Addition of sediment

would increase the usable recreational area of the beach and potentially increase the extent of



23

suitable habitat for species such as Pectenogammarus planicrurus if suitably coarse-sized

material is used.

For the purposes of illustration in the present study, creation of a 20 m dry beach berm and with

slope down to existing mean tide level would create a sediment fill would create a total

nourished width of beach of 28 - 39 m and an overall fill volume of 68 x 103 m

3 (Table 4.1). In

order to maintain the existing (2006) beach profile in the face of sea level rise, a minimum of 2 x

103 m

3 would be required on a 20 year timescale and a maximum volume of 59 x 10

3 m

3 would

be required over 100 year timescale (Tables 4.2). In order to maintain the existing period over a

20 year period, allowing for a 50% volume loss in each 5 year period between re-nourishment

operations, a volume of 206 to 210 x 103 m

3 of sediment would be required, depending on the

rate of sea level rise.

While maintenance dredging of the entrance to Pwlheli harbour is likely to supply sufficient

material to satisfy the nourishment requirements in the short term (20 years), there is likely to be

an increasing short-fall in the medium and longer term which would need to be satisfied from

sources further afield (offshore or onshore). Continued recycling of sediment dredged from

Pwlheli Harbour and placement on the beaches to the west could also likely to add to a problem

of sediment starvation at Abererch and other beaches to the east, creating a sediment demand that

could only be satisfied by supply from offshore or other onshore sources.

4.4 Morfa Dyffryn


Morfa Dyffryn is a cuspate feature which has formed to seaward of a mid-Holocene cliff-line

(Figure 4.14). The name of the area arises from the extensive area of former marshy ground

which extends west and north from the village of Dyffryn Ardudwy. Today the system consists

of a dune-capped sand and gravel barrier on its western side and a large area of back-barrier

sand-flat which formerly was covered in large marsh by salt, brackish and freshwater marsh. The

main barrier beach links Shell Island (Mochras) in the north with the upland coast near Llanaber

in the south, but is broken near Tal y Bont where the Afon Ysgethin enters the sea. Shell Island

is an outlier of glacial till from which a gravel ridge (Sarn Badric) extends offshore for several

kilometres (Coastal Geomorphology Partnership, 2000). Wave erosion of the till cliffs at Shell

Island has supplied sediment for a small spit system which extends in a northeasterly direction

towards the entrance to estuary of the Afon Artro. The flanks of the Artro estuary behind the

Mochras spit are fringed by active saltmarsh which was more extensive before reclamation and

creation of the Llanbedr Airfield (now dis-used).

Morfa Dyffryn is significant for its extensive development of sand dunes and associated

blowouts. It represents one of the most active sand dune fields in the United Kingdom and is

characterized by transgressive dunes which in places are more than 15 m high. Towards the

landward side of the dune field the dunes are generally better vegetated and less active. To

seaward of the dunes is mixed sand and shingle beach which today is relatively narrow. Areas of

eroded till and former soil horizons are periodically exposed on parts of the beach near Shell

Island.



24


The Morfa Dyffryn coast is macrotidal but the mean spring tidal range is only 4.30 m, resulting

in a narrower intertidal zone than those found on some other parts of the Welsh coast. The main

coastal orientation runs almost transverse to the prevailing south-westerly winds and dominant

waves, with the result that potential rates of wind-blow sand transport are high but the potential

for longshore sediment transport is relatively low, although historical there has been slow net

northward movement of sediment. In recent decades rates of northerly sediment drift have been

reduced by a variety of ad hoc measures undertaken to protect the caravan parks and other

developed frontages along the southern part of the coastal frontage. Little or no sand appears to

be supplied to the coast from the offshore zone at the present time. North of Shell Island the

shore orientation is almost parallel to the south-westerly winds and waves, with the result that

potential longshore sediment transport rates are higher. However, wind exposure on the northern

side of Shell Island is much reduced and dune development is on a much smaller scale than on

the southern side where very large composite parabolic parabolic dunes occur.


Evidence from historical maps and aerial photographs indicates that since 1887 the high water

mark has shown almost no movement at Shell Island but has receded by up to 20 m at the

southern end of the system (Table 2.2). However, monitoring of beach profiles established by

Gwynedd Council has demonstrated there has been little movement of the HAT and MHWS tide

lines in the south since 1992, although a slight landward movement of the MHWNT and MTL

tidal offsets is indicated (Figure 4.15). The beach has consequently become narrower, slightly

steeper and more stony.


The dune belt forms a barrier against tidal flooding for the low-lying marshy land, railway line

and coastal settlements behind.

The dune system is of high nature conservation importance, notably for its wide range of dune

landforms and habitats, including active transgressive dunes and slacks formed in blowout

depressions (Figure 4.16). The area was established as a National Nature Reserve in 1962 and

forms part of the Morfa Dyffryn SSSI, the Harlech a Morfa Dyffryn SAC, the Pen Llyn a'r

Sarnau SAC and the Snowdonia National Park.

The area is popular with visitors in the summer months and a number of caravan parks and

camping sites are located adjacent to and within the area. The location is especially popular with

naturists.


The preferred policy identified in the SMPI was 'Do Nothing' (Gwynedd Council, 2003). The

preferred policy identified in SMPII has not yet been announced but is likely to be No Active

Intervention.


There are no records of previous beach nourishment at Morfa Dyffryn.



25

4.4.7 Future beach nourishment requirements and benefits

If left to its own devices, the main NW - SE shoreline is likely to continue to erode, probably at

an accelerating rate if there is a significant increase in the rate of sea level rise or an increase in

storminess (Pye & Saye, 2005). Owing to the high degree of wind exposure, a significant

proportion of the eroding beach sediment will be transferred landwards into the dune system

rather than being moved offshore by wave action, thereby acting to accelerate the rate of

shoreface recession. Shell Island will continue to act as a relative hard point; there may be an

increase in the rate of cliff erosion in this area but the amounts of sediment released are unlikely

to large enough to have a significant effect on the rate of shoreline recession, especially to the

south. A combination of wind and wave winnowing of the beach sediments will increase the

tendency towards a stony beach which will in the longer term act to self-regulate the rate of

shoreline recession but which will produce a beach which is less visually attractive from a

recreational / touristic perspective. The potential benefits which might arise from sand beach

nourishment would therefore to slow the rate of shoreface recession in the short to medium term

and to maintain a more appealing beach character. Increased availability of sediment for wind

transport would enhance the existing mobile dunes and encourage their landward movement;

however, the effectiveness of aeolian transport on this coast means that the positive effects of

nourishment on the beach per se are likely to be short-lived.

The calculated volume of sediment required to create a 20 m flat-topped berm at HAT level,

terminating in a uniform slope down to MTL, would be 369 x 103 m

3. The resulting total width of

initially nourished beach would vary from 62 m to 163m.

Maintaining the existing beach in the face of sea level l rise would require a minimum volume of

14 x 103 m

3 to be filled with sediment over 20 years, and a maximum volume of 400 x 10

3 m

3

over a 100 year time scale. To undertake an initial 'improvement' nourishment and maintain it

over 20 years in the face of sea level rise, allowing for 50% losses between 5 yearly

nourishments, would require 1.12 x 106

m3 to 1.18 x 10

6 m

3 of sediment

nourishment and re-

nourishment.

4.5 Broadwater – Tywyn – Aberdovey


The Broadwater - Aberdovey open coast frontage comprises two main coastal barrier systems

centred on an upland area formed of bedrock and glacial till at Tywyn (Figure 4.17). The

northern barrier, which is shingle-dominated, extends northwards from Tywyn towards another

bedrock headland at Tonfanau. Behind this barrier is an extensive area of lowland which forms

part of the Afon Dysinni valley, Prior to reclamation in the 16th to 18th centuries much of this

areas represented an active intertidal estuary, but tidal exchange is now regulated through an

artificial channel at Dysinni Bridge. The Broadwater lagoon represents a shallow remnant of a

once-much larger area of tidal flat and saltmarsh

The barrier to the south of Twywn consists of a mixture of sand and shingle, reinforced by

placed slate blocks along the Pen-Llyn marshes frontage. The shingle ridge is generally smaller

than the ridge north of Tywyn but non-the-less forms a significant part of the flood-defence

between Tywyn and Aberdovey Golf Club. The ridge is backed by a small area of dunes at the

Tywyn end and by a much larger dune system at the southern end. A large part of the southern

dune area is occupied by Aberdovey Golf Club and a caravan park. To seaward of the shingle



26

ridge and dunes is a relatively flat, low sandy foreshore. Along the central and northern part of

the beach the sand cover is thin and overlies back-barrier peat and silt deposits which are

periodically exposed. There presence provides evidence of long-term barrier retreat (Pye & Blott,

2006).


The mean spring tidal range in the area is about 4.30 m (Table 2.1), resulting in a exposure of a

moderately wide foreshore at low tide. Flood tidal currents are directed northward, sub-parallel

to the coast, while slightly weaker ebb-currents are directed southwards. A more complex flow

pattern occurs close to the entrance to the Dyfi estuary in the south.

The general orientation of the coastline lies at a slight oblique angle to the prevailing south-

westerly winds and dominant waves. Net sediment drift directs are subject to considerable

variability in response to alternating periods of dominance by south-westerly and north-westerly

waves. The long-term net drift direction to the north of Tywyn is northerly, while south of

Tywyn it is southerly. The artificially protected frontage at Tywyn now forms a slight 'headland'

and effective littoral drift divide. Sediment accumulation still takes place at the distal ends of the

drift system near the Dysinni entrance and in front of the promenade at Aberdyfi (Figure 4.18).


Comparison of historical maps and aerial photographs has indicated that since 1887 there has

been very little change in the position of the back-beach at Tywyn but the undefended / lightly

defended coast immediately to the north and south of the town has retreated by 20 - 40 m (Table

2.2). Significant net accretion (up to 152 m) has occurred near the mouth of the Afon Dysinni

and at the southern end of the Aberdovey Golf Course frontage (up to 77m). The net result has

been the formation of two shallow bays centred on a 'hinge point' at Tywyn.

Monitoring of beach profiles since 1992 by Gwynedd Council has shown a continuing slow fall

in beach levels and retreat of the dune toe along the open coast part of the Aberdovey Golf Club

frontage. (Figure 4.19). Beach levels and the volume of shingle on the upper beach along the

Pen-llyn marshes frontage have also been falling although the position of the backshore has not

changed due to the presence of slate blocks which were placed in the 1970's and 1980's.


The Tywyn to Aberdoveyshingle and sand barrier provides a semi-natural flood defence for the

low-lying area of Pen-lyn marshes and for the Cambrian coast railway which runs along its

landward edge (Figure 4.20b). The Tywyn to Aber Dysynni shingle barrier provides the main

flood defence for northern parts of Tywyn, the Broadwater lagoon and the lower Dysinni valley.

North of Tywyn the Cambrian coast railway line runs very close to the beach and is protected

only by the shingle beach and a low line of rock armour (Figure 4.21b). At Tywyn itself there a

variety of hard defence structures, including a concrete faced promenade and groynes, which

have fallen into a state of disrepair (Figure 21a). A defence improvement scheme is currently

underway and will involve the construction of a detached headland breakwater, new rock

groynes, rock revetment and improvements to the sea wall (Atkins, 2009).

The area is of high conservation importance, including, or lying adjacent to, several designated

areas: the Llyn Peninsula a'r Sarnau SAC, Broadwater SSSI, Dyfi SSSI, Snowdonia National

Park and Dyfi Estuary Biosphere Reserve. The barrier north of Tywyn contains a significant area



27

of vegetated shingle and the Aberdovey dunes contain a variety of significant dune habitats and

vegetation communities.

Both Aberdovey and Tywyn are popular with day trippers and longer term holiday visitors.

Aberdovey Golf Club attracts a significant number of visitors from throughout the UK and

overseas, notably North America.


The SMPI (Gwynedd Council, 2003) identified a preferred policy option of Retreat for the

Aberdovey Golf Course and Pen Llyn Marshes frontage, and suggested the construction of a set

back flood defence bund to protect the railway, coast road and other infrastructure from flooding.

The Environment Agency Wales have agreed to maintain the defences along the Pen-llyn section

for a period of 25 years (until approximately 2030). Gwynedd Council and Aberdovey Colf Club

are currently collaborating to slow the rate of recession of the Golf Club dune frontage under a

policy of what amounts to Managed Realignment.

The SMP1 preferred policy for the Tywyn to Broadwater frontage was Hold the Line on account

of the need to protect residential property in Tywyn itself, the proximity of the railway line, and

the practical and cost issues likely to be associated with the establishment of set-back defences

across a long section of the Dysinni valley.

The SMPII preferred policies, which are being developed by Royal Haskoning, have at the time

of writing not been announced but are most likely to be Hold the Line for the Tywyn to

Broadwater frontage and No Active Intervention or Managed Realignment for the Pen-Llyn to

Aberdyfi frontage.


Ad hoc nourishment of the beach at Tywyn has been undertaken in the past, chiefly following

storm damage to the promenade and groynes, using a variety of materials including imported

shingle and cobbles from on-shore sources and construction waste. However, there are no

records of large-scale sand importation.

Since the early 1990's Gwynedd Council has carried out an annual sand shift which involves

removal of excess sand from Aberdovey dock, and the adjoining area of the promenade, and

deposition of the material at low points in the frontal dunes along the Aberdovey Golf Club

frontage. The excess sand at Aberdovey creates problems for navigation into the dock and

requires periodic clearing of wind-blown sand from the promenade, road and adjoining

properties. Excess material (mainly sand but with some shingle) is removed by digger (Figure

4.18a) and truck-hauled along the beach to selected points of deposition (Figure 4.18b). The

objectives have been to infill low points in the frontal dunes where storm tide ingress is possible

and to construct a continuous line of relatively high dunes slightly inland of the present dune toe,

thereby allowing for the natural long-term trend of coastal recession. The total amount of

material moved annually has varied, depending on the quantity of excess sediment in the

licenced removal area, but has typically been in the range of 10 - 20 x 103 tonnes (7.5 - 15 x 10

3

m3). Wind erosion of the emplaced sand has been reduced by covering the nourished sand

surface with brashings (Figure 4.20a). Temporary fencing and warning notices have also been

employed to encourage the establishment of vegetation.



28


The ongoing Tywyn coastal defences improvement scheme includes plans for small-scale beach

nourishment adjacent to the new detached headland breakwater. The principal purpose of the

nourishment is to prevent draw-down of sediment from adjoining areas of more exposed beach

and accumulation in the lee of the breakwater. The sources of material have yet to been

confirmed, but may include a combination of cobbles from an onshore quarry source and

dredged sand from Pwlheli harbour entrance channel.

For the purposes of illustration in the present project, a hypothetical nourishment scheme along

the entire shore from the Dysinni to Aberdovey has been considered in order to illustrate the

volumes of sediment which would be required for a larger-scale, 'strategic' nourishment scheme.

Construction of a 20 m wide, flat-topped berm at HAT level has been assumed, terminating

along the southern part of the frontage (south of Tywyn) in a 1:25 seaward slope and along the

naturally steeper northern part (north of Tywyn) in a uniform slope down to MTL. The resulting

total width of nourished beach in this instance would range from 23 m to 100 m, with a total

required sediment volume of 491 x 103 m

3.

To maintain the existing beach form along the entire frontage in the face of future sea level rise

would require infilling with sediment of an additional volume of between 18 x 103 m

3 and 502 x

103 m

3 (no allowance being made for sediment losses due to erosion).

Creation of an initial nourished profile and subsequent maintenance of the same profile in the

face of sea level rise over a 20 year period would require emplacement of between 1.49 and 1.56

x 106 m

3 of sediment, assuming 50% losses between 5-yearly re-nourishments.

Any nourishment scheme along this frontage would require importation of a range of sediment

types, including gravel, cobbles and sand. Current and likely future dredging volumes from the

small harbours around Cardigan Bay would be unlikely to satisfy the demand for a large or long-

term scheme. Relatively proximal onshore quarry sources might be able to satisfy the

requirement for cobble sized material but are unlikely to be able to satisfy the requirement for

coarse gravel (shingle) and sand.

4.6 Tenby North Beach


Tenby North Beach is a small bay-head beach located to the northwest of Castle Moundand

south of First Point (Figure 4.22). Tenby Harbour is located at the southern end. The beach is

backed by steep slopes with a seawall at its foot (Figures 4.23 & 4.24). In the southern part of the

bay the low-tide beach is relatively wide (> 250 m) but low (below 1 m OD) and has a gentle

gradient. Consequently there is no high tide 'dry beach'. At the northern end the low tide beach is

less than 100 m wide but the back-beach is much higher, reaching 5 m OD. However, the width

of the high tide dry-beach varies from 0 to only 10m. A large rock (Gosker Rock) separates the

wider, flatter southern part of the beach from the narrower, steeper northern part. The beach is

composed almost entirely of medium well-sorted sand with only localised rock outcrops and

ephemeral patches of shingle.



29


The tidal range in the area is large, exceeding 7.5 m on mean spring tides (Table 2.1). Owing to

the easterly orientation of the beach it is sheltered from the direct force of south-westerly waves,

although waves from this direction are refracted around St Catharine's Island and are able to

reach the shore. Shorter period, steeper waves approach the shore directly from the east and

northeast. Sediment movement occurs mainly in an onshore-offshore direction due to fluctuating

wave conditions, although there is some limited longshore drift in both directions.


The position of the back-beach has shown virtually no movement since 1887 (Table 2.2) The

mean low water mark has shown a net landward movement in the northern part of the bay during

this period but has moved seawards slightly in the central and southern parts (Figure 4.21).


Owing to the steeply rising nature of the ground to the west, the beach itself has little importance

in terms of flood protection although it serves a coast protection function by breaking wave

energy and reducing the pressure on the seawalls at the cliff toe. In time, future sea level rise will

reduce the width of the available dry beach width and tourist amenity. In addition this will act to

create a positive feedback loop with accelerated beach draw down as waves are reflected from

the sea wall at the back of the beach, leading to instability and ultimate failure of the wall in due

course.

The beach lies within, or adjacent to, the Tenby Cliffs and St Catharine's Island SSSI, the

Carmarthen Bay SAC and the Pembrokeshire Coast National Park.

Tenby is one of the most popular holiday destinations in Wales, attracting large numbers of long-

stay visitors from other parts of the United Kingdom and Europe. The North Beach is

approximately 1 km long and is the smaller of two main beaches at Tenby. The larger South

Beach extends over a distance of 2 km to the southwest of St Catharine's Island as far as Giltar

Point and retains a greater width of dry beach at high tide. However, it is generally less sheltered

than the north beach and potentially more hazardous for bathing and other recreational activities.

The small available area of dry sand area on the North Beach at high tide results in high densities

of visitors and limits the provision of traditional beach activities. Two other small areas of high

tide dry beach occur, one within the harbour and the other adjacent to Castle Hill.


The preferred policy identified for the North Beach in the SMP1 was Hold the Line (Shoreline

Management Partnership, 1999b); this is also the preferred policy identified in the SMP2

currently in preparation by Halcrow (2010).


There are no records of previous beach nourishment on Tenby North Beach.



30


The principal potential benefit of beach nourishment would be to increase the area of the high

tide dry beach available to recreational users. Increased beach width and elevation would also

increase the capacity of the beach to dissipate storm wave energy, thereby reducing the

requirements for maintenance of the back-beach sea wall and creating the possibility of embryo

dunes at the less heavily used northern end of the beach. However, excessive beach nourishment

could cause potential problems of sedimentation within the harbour area.

The limits of the hypothetic nourishment considered for illustration purposes in this study are

shown in Figure 4.22; these exclude the harbour area but otherwise extend seawards to the mid-

tide level. The total width of beach which would require initial nourishment in the considered

example would vary from 63 to 80 m, creating an initial dry beach at HAT level along

approximately 900 m of the back-beach. This would more than quadruple the existing area

available for recreational use at high tide, allowing an increase in visitor numbers and comfort.

The total volume of sandy sediment required to achieve the initial nourishment profile would be

relatively modest (46 x 103 m

3).

The additional volume which would need to filled with sand in order to maintain the existing

beach profile / area under conditions of future sea level rise would vary from a minimum of 2 x

103 m

3 over 20 years to 45 x 10

3 m

3 over 100 years. The volume of sediment required to carry

out the initial nourishment and subsequently maintain the average beach level in the face of sea

level rise over the next 20 years, allowing for losses of 50% of the material placed in the initial

nourishment and each subsequent 5 yearly re-nourishment, would range between 140 and 146 x

103

m3, depending on the rate of sea level rise.

There is only limited opportunity to nourish the more northerly parts of the beach using small-

scale dredgings from the harbour, and it is likely that the bulk of any nourishment material

would need to be brought from further away (e.g. dredgings at Burry Port) or from offshore

sources (e.g. Nobel Banks).

4.7 Port Eynon


Port Eynon Bay, located on the south coast of the Gower, is a relatively small rock-bound

embayment which lies between the rocky headlands of Port Eynon Point in the west and Oxwich

Point in the east. (Figure 4.25) The distance between the two headlands across the mouth of the

bay is approximately 4 km. The bay has an asymmetric plan form with a mainly sand beach in

the west and an exposed rock shore platform in the east. The back of the bay is fringed by sand

dunes which are locally protected by small-scale sea defences. The land behind the beach rises

fairly steeply towards the villages of Port Eynon and Horton. The toe of the slope deposits has

been cliffed in the past by wave action at a time when fronting dunes were absent. At the

western and eastern ends of the beach, rock scars are exposed on the mid and lower foreshore,

but in the middle of the bay the beach is normally sandy down to the low tide mark. Beach levels

are lower at the western (Port Eynon) end of the bay where the backshore is now very narrow

and periodically absent altogether. The backshore width increases towards the eastern end of the

bay although the foreshore width becomes narrower in that direction.



31


Port Eynon Bay experiences a large tidal range (MSTR of 8.4 m), with the result that a wide

foreshore is exposed at low tide (Table 2.1). The bay is influenced by refracted waves from the

southwest and by waves approaching directly from the south and southeast. Evidence suggests a

long-term net sediment drift in an easterly direction across the upper beach. Offshore movement

of sediment from the upper beach into the deeper water of the bay occurs during storms, with

onshore movement of material leading to re-building of the beach during fair weather periods.

Material moves offshore during exceptionally large storms may be moved into very deep water

from which it cannot be returned by fair-weather waves.


Comparison of historical maps and aerial photographs has shown that since 1877 the HAT line

has moved inland by 24 m at the Port Eynon end of the Bay but has moved seawards by 4 m at

the Horton end. For most of the 20th century much of the bay had a sandy backshore and

relatively high overall beach levels (Figure 4.26), but since the 1990's beach levels have fallen,

resulting in a narrower backshore and more extensive exposure of rock scars and patches of

gravel. Monitoring of beach profile levels by Swansea Bay Coastal Group since 1999 has shown

a steady decline in beach levels although the position of the back-beach line has not changes

significantly (Figure 4.27).


Owing to the generally rising nature of the land behind the beach and dunes are of limited

importance in terms of flood risk prevention. There are also relatively few properties at risk from

erosion.

The area falls within, or lies adjacent to, several designated areas, including the Gower Coast

SSSI, the Gower Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, and the South Wales Limestone Coast

SAC.

Port Eynon Bay is popular as a recreational area for residents of the wider Swansea area and with

tourists to the Gower from other parts of the UK.


The SMP1 preferred policy for the whole shoreline was 'Hold the Line' (Shoreline Management

Partnership, 2001) but the preferred policy identified in the draft SMPII document is 'No Active

Intervention'.


There are no records of previous beach nourishment in Port Eynon Bay.


The reduction in beach extent, particularly of the dry backshore, in Port Eynon Bay is having a

detrimental effect on the visual appearance of the bay and on its attractiveness to visitors.

Continues loss of sand would worsen the situation as inter-tidal rock exposures become more

extensive and as increased erosion pressure is put on the dunes and artificial defences at the back



32

of the beach. The main potential benefits of beach nourishment would therefore be in terms of

landscape quality and amenity value.

Owing to the relatively small size of the bay, the total volume of sand required to create a 20 m

wide high topped berm at HAT level along the defined length of shore would be only 152 x 103

m3. However, the total width of nourished beach would be relatively large (128 to 149 m) on

account of the gentle overall beach gradient.

The volume which would nee to be filled with sediment in order to maintain the existing beach

form in the face of sea level rise would range from a minimum of 5 x 103

m3 to a maximum of

124 x 103 m

3. The volume of sediment required to initially nourish the beach and then to

maintain it over a 20 year period, allowing for sea level rise and erosional losses of 50% between

each re-nourishment, would be 460 - 477 x 103 m

3.

The nearest potential source of nourishment sand would be the licenced dredging area on

Helwick Bank. Alternative longer-term potential sources would be the Nobel Banks area of

Carmarthen Bay and other licensed dredging areas in the Bristol Channel. In the short-term

beneficial use might be made of dredgings from locations such as the entrance to Burry Port

harbour.

4.8 Swansea Bay North


Swansea Bay is a large macrotidal embayment with a mean spring tidal range of 8.5 m at

Swansea (Table 2.1). There is weak residual anticlockwise tidal circulation in the northern part

of the bay. The western side of the Bay is defined by the upland area of the Gower Peninsula but

the northern side is characterised by a relatively wide coastal plain which has now been

extensively built on. A dune-capped barrier beach system with back-barrier marshlands formed

in this area during the mid to late Holocene, fed by landward movement of sediments from the

floor of Swansea Bay, but supply of sediment over the past century has been low.

The entire shoreline between Mumbles and Swansea Docks is protected by artificial defences.

Remnants of the former dune system, now cut off from the sea, occur between Lower Sketty and

Brynmill. Small areas of actively forming dunes occur on the seaward side of the sea defences

between the University and County Hall. This area forms a natural sink for windblown sand

which causes periodic problems when it is blown onto the cycleway, promenade and A4067

trunk road behind.


The north-western part of the bay between Black Pill and Swansea Docks (Figure 4.28) is

sheltered from south-westerly winds and waves and winds / waves from the south and south-east

exert the greatest influence. Wave energy at the shoreline is low except during easterly and

south-easterly gales. Longshore sediment transport rates on the upper foreshore are low, but the

evidence suggests an overall slight net easterly drift. The beach between the University and

County Hall has a relatively wide backshore with incipient dune development, while the beach to

the southwest of the University has a narrower backshore and a narrow belt of older, degraded

dunes (Figure 4.30).



33


Evidence from historical maps and aerial photographs indicates that the western end of the study

frontage has experienced net landward movement of the HAT line of 20 - 41 m since 1876,

whereas there has been up to 84 m of seaward movement at the eastern end, mainly due to land

reclamation (Table 2.2). Monitoring of beach profiles since 1999 has shown a slight overall fall

in levels at the western end, although the position of the HAT line has not changed (Figure 4.29).

There has been little change at the eastern end of the system.

4.8.4. Flood defence, nature conservation and recreational importance

As noted above, the entire shoreline of northern Swnsea Bay is backed by hard defences. The

beach and narrow belt of dunes to seaward of the defences provide additional protection. The

hinterland is generally low-lying and contains significant infrastructure, including the A4067

road, Swansea University, Morriston Hospital, and the rugby / cricket club.

The dunes at Black Pill are included within the Black Pill SSSI but the reminder of the area is

not currently covered by nature conservation of heritage designations.

The beach is a popular recreational area for local residents and University students but Swansea

is not a major holiday destination.


The preferred policy for this frontage identified in both the SMPI (Shoreline Management

Partnership, 2001) and the draft SMP II being prepared by Halcrow (2010) is 'Hold the Line'.

4.8.6. Previous beach nourishment

Excess sand from removed from the upper beach and dunes between Sketty and County Hall,

and cleared from the promenade, cycleway and road after southerly gales, has been used to

nourish the beach further to the south-west, between Black Pill and Oystermouth, where beach

levels are low.


The coastal defences along this part of northern Swansea Bay may come under increased

pressure if there is a significant future increase in the rate of sea level rise, and/ or storminess.

Given the limited scope to move the defences landward, and the need to protect high asset land,

there will be a requirement to improve the defences in future years. This could be done either by

construction of higher sea walls, placement of rock armour, addition of new beach material, or a

combination of these. Enhancement of the beach through nourishment would potentially reduce

the standard to which artificial defences have to be constructed / maintained, retain high visual

landscape quality, and enhance the recreational / toursitic value to both local residents and

outside visitors. An improved beach could, combined with other improvements, significantly

increase the appeal of Swansea as a tourist and conference destination.

By way of example, the volume of sediment required to construct a 20 m wide flat-topped berm

along the defined frontage would be 345 x 103 m

3. The width of nourished beach would range

from 91 to 128 m. Problems of wind-blown sand invasion onto the promenade and road could



34

be avoided either by the use of coarse sand and/ or the placement of sand-trapping barriers along

the top of the beach.

Maintenance of the existing beach form in the face of rising sea level over the next 20 - 100

years would require additional sediment to fill a volume ranging from 49 x 103 m

3 to 1.16 x 10

6

m3. The volume of sediment required to carry out the initial nourishment improvements, and

then to maintain it by re-nourishment at 5 yearly intervals over a 20 year period, has been

calculated to be 1.08 to 1.24 x 106 m

3.

Potential sources of sand for nourishment would be maintenance dredgings from Swansea, Neath

and Port Talbot harbours (subject to sediment quality standards being attained), and licensed

offshore dredging area sin the Bristol Channel and Carmarthen Bay.

4.9 Aberavon


Aberavon Sands extend between Port Talbot outer harbour and the entrance to the Neath estuary

on the north-eastern side of Swansea Bay (Figure 4.31). Historically the area to landward was an

area of low-lying dunes and marshes formed during the mid to late Holocene period, but it has

been significantly modified by human activities during the Industrial and Post-Industrial periods.

A large residential urban area (Port Talbot and Sandfields) occupies the area behind the southern

and central parts of Aberavon Sands, while the area behind the northern part of the beach at

Baglan is occupied mainly by factories and warehouses. A sea wall and promenade, protected by

rock revetment at the southern end, runs the entire length of the Port Talbot frontage. Begond the

northern end of the sea wall there is a relatively short section of rock armour and gabions, but the

frontage of Baglan Burrows is undefended.


Eastern Swansea Bay has a large tidal range (MSTR of 8.7), resulting in exposure of a wide

beach at low tide. Tidal current velocities are relatively low, with a slight residual anti-clockwise

circulation in northern Swansea Bay. Aberavon Sands has a high degree of exposure to wind and

waves from the southwest, and to a lesser extent from the south. The net sediment littoral drift

direction is northerly. Port Talbot Outer Harbou effectively acts as a groyne which limits the

movement of sediment from areas further south; the harbour itself also acts a as a sediment trap

and requires periodic dredging. Consequently the southern part of Aberavon Beach is starved of

sediment and experiences net loss of material to areas further north.


Historical maps and aerial photographs show that the HAT mark has retreated landwards along

the southern Port Talbot frontage by 30 - 48 m since 1876 (Table 2.2), but along the Baglan

frontage the HAT line has moved seawards by up to 900m. Accretion in the northern areas has

been associated within the infilling of the former Baglan Bay after construction of training walls

to fix the entrance channel into the River Neath. Similar accretion has occurred on the northern

side of the Neath estuary at Crymlyn Burrows (Figure 4.31).

Monitoring of beach profiles by Swansea Bay Coastal Group since 1999 has shown a slight

overall fall in levels along most of the Port Talbot frontage, with some continued accretion at the

Baglan end (Figure 4.32). The dune frontage at the southern end of Baglan Burrows shows



35

small-scale cliffing and significant blowout development, partly due to wave erosion and partly

to heavy recreational pressure. Recent storm-erosion of the dune front has also affected Crymlyn

Burrows, and sand eroded from both sides of the estuary has shown a tendency to invade the

trained channel, creating a requirement for enhanced maintenance dredging.


The primary flood defence along the Port Talbot urban frontage is provided by hard defences (a

stepped seawall and rock revetment in the south; Figure 4.33). However, the condition of he

artificial defences may be compromise din the future of beach levels continue to drop. This is

likely to be a particular problem at the sediment starve Port Talbot docks end of the system

(Figure 4/33a). Along the central and northern parts of the defended frontage the beach levels

fluctuate in response to storm conditions and periodic problems are currently encountered with

excessive sand build-up on the upper beach and lower parts of the stepped sea wall. Current

management policy is to draw such excess sand back down the beach using plant in order to

prevent further problems of wind-blown sand encroachment onto the promenade (Figures 4.33b

& 4.34a). Falling beach levels along the southern end of the undefended Baglan Burrows

frontage will lead to further dune erosion and degradation in this area (Figure 4.34b).


The preferred policy option for the Port Talbot frontage identified in both the SMP I and SMP II

is 'Hold the Line'.


Sand dredged from the Neath estuary harbour approaches has been used on a number of

occasions to nourish the beach and dunes on both sides of the estuary, at Baglan and Crymlyn.

However, there are no records of nourishment having been undertaken further south on the Port

Talbot beach frontage.


A future shoreline management policy of 'Hold the Line' will require maintenance and possible

improvements to the hard defences. However, if beach levels continue to fall, and there is an

increase in relative sea level rise and/ or storminess, this will become increasingly difficult to

achieve unless beach nourishment is undertaken.

For purposes of illustration, creation of a 20 m wide flat-topped berm at HAT level along the

entire defined frontage would require a total sediment volume of 641 x 103

m3.

This would

involve a total nourished width of 74 - 155 m, depending on the existing beach slope.

Maintenance of the existing beach form in the face of sea level rise would require sediment

infilling of a volume ranging from 228 x 103 m

3 to 1.02 x10

6 m

3 over time periods of 20 to 100

years.

In order to create the initial improved nourished profile and then to maintain it by 5-yearly re-

nourishment would require 1.97 to 2.10 x 106 m

3 of sediment.



36

Potential sources of sandy sediment for nourishment include maintenance dredgings from Neath,

Swansea and Port Talbot harbour approaches, and licenced offshore aggregate extraction areas in

the Bristol Channel.

4.10 Porthcawl


The Porthcawl area has a number of small sandy bays which are bounded by rocky

promontories. The two bays considered in this study (Sandy Bay and Trecco Bay, Figure 4.35)

are the two most heavily used beaches or recreational purposes.

Sandy Bay is bounded on the west by Porthcawl Point, the harbour wall and a former railway

embankment along which a road now runs. The back of the beach is defined by the Coney Island

amusement park at the western end and by a belt of sand dunes at the eastern end. The eastern

side of the bay is defined by a further bedrock outcrop at Rhych point. Trecco Bay is bounded on

its western side by Rhych Point and on its eastern side by Newton Point. The back of the beach

is flanked by a large static caravan park. Both beaches can be described as 'bay-head' or 'pocket'

beaches.


Porthcawl experiences the largest tidal range of all the sites considered (MSTR = 8.9 m, Table

2.1). However, owing to the relatively steep gradient of the beaches (Figure 4.36), the exposed

width at low tide is not a large as might be expected.

Both beaches are exposed to wave action from the southwest, although some protection is

afforded by the rocky promontories on either side. Under fair weather conditions sediment is

moved landwards, while during severe storms there is some offshore movement. Trecco Bay is

slightly more exposed than Sandy Bay and therefore more susceptible to sand movement. There

appears to be little exchange of sediment between the bays or with neighbouring pocket beaches

to the west and east.


Historical maps and aerial photographs shown that the HAT line has not moved significantly

since 1876 at the western end of Sandy Bay, but there has been seaward movement of about 15

m at the eastern end where a ridge of dunes has developed (Figure 4.35; Table 2.2). By contrast,

in the central part of Trecco Bay the HAT line has retreated landwards by 48m since 1876.

Beach profile monitoring by Swansea Bay Coastal Group has shown that beach levels in both

bays have fluctuated since 1999 but there has been no significant overall change (Figure 4.36).

At the present time the backshore is very narrow, and at times virtually absent, at the western end

of Sandy bay and in much of Trecco Bay, although a significant width remains at the eastern

end of Sandy Bay (Figure 4.37). The restricted area of dry beach at high tide provides a

significant constraint on the recreational use of the two beaches.


The beach and dunes in Sandy Bay form a significant part of the flood defence for a small area

of low-lying land in the hinterland. Trecco Bay is backed by naturally rising land.



37

The two beaches are not currently covered by conservation designations but the important

Merthyr Mawr NNR (important for its dune system) lies only a short distance to the east.

Porthcawl is a major recreational and holiday destination for residents of South Wales and

neighbouring areas (especially Cardiff and Bridgend).


The SMPI identified a preferred policy of 'Hold the Line' or possibly 'Advance the Line' subject

to development proposals. The draft SMPII proposes 'Hold the Line' for both bays.


There are no records of beach nourishment in sandy bay and Trecco Bay although nourishment

has been reported to have been undertaken in rest Bay, to the west, during the 1980's. Much of

the material was eroded within a few years and has not been replaced.


It is of major economic importance to the town of Porthcawl to maintain, and if possible

enhance, the quality of its tourist beaches. In the future, it is likely that the beaches will be

increasingly squeezed between rising sea level and a fixed back-beach 9either natural rock

outcrops or hard defences. Beach therefore provides a potential means of allowing the useable

beach area to be maintained while the position of the back-beach remains fixed.

In the example where a flat-topped 20 m wide berm at HAT level is created, a total sediment

volume of 159 x 103

m3 of sandy sediment would be required. Maintenance of the existing beach

form would require sediment infilling of between 11 - and 251 x 103

m3 of sediment over time

periods of 20 to 100 years. Creation of the initial 'improved' profile by nourishment, followed by

maintenance over a 20 year period using re-nourishment at 5 yearly intervals, would require a

total of 488 - 521 x 103 m

3 of sediment, assuming 50% losses between nourishment episodes.

Potential sources of sand for future nourishment include harbour dredgings and licenced offshore

aggregate areas in the Bristol Channel.



38

5 DISCUSSION

The results of the potential sediment nourishment requirements under each of the scenarios

considered, and for all ten case study sites, are summarised in Tables 4.1, 4.2 and 4.3.

Table 4.1 shows that initial beach 'improvement' nourishment volumes at all of the identified

sites are relatively modest, the largest being 641 x 103 m

3 at Aberavon Sands. The requirements

for the smaller enclosed embayment sites such as Tenby North Beach, Traeth Crugan and Port

Eynon Bay are relatively small (< 150 x 103 m

3).

The volumes required to maintain the existing beach profiles at the ten sites vary considerably,

depending both on the length of shoreline, the tidal range (and therefore beach width), and the

rate of sea level rise considered. Considering the 'best estimate' (50th percentile) value for the

medium emissions scenario, the smallest volumes of sediment required by 2100 would be at

Tenby North Beach and Traeth Crugan (24 and 30 x 103

m3, respectively), while the largest

volumes would be required in Swansea Bay North and at Aberavon Sands (614 and 541 x 103

m3, respectively - Table 4.2). None of the values are particularly large when compared with

nourishment volumes for large schemes already carried out in England, such as those at

Bournemouth, Mablethorpe - Skegness and Heacham. It should, however, be borne in mind that

these volume increase calculations do not take into account sediment losses which would

inevitably occur following initial nourishment and each re-nourishment.

Table 4.3 summarises the estimated nourishment volumes which would be required to carry out

an initial 'beach improvement' nourishment followed by re-nourishment at 5 yearly intervals in

the following 20 years, assuming that 50% of the emplaced sediment is lost between re-

nourishment events, and allowing for projected sea level rise over the same time period. The best

estimate sediment volumes for the medium emissions scenario range from 142 x 103 m

3 at Tenby

North Beach to 2017 x 103 m

3 at Aberavon Sands. The question of where such larger quantities

of sediment could be sources from warrants more detailed consideration in later stages of the

work programme.

Table 5.1 indicates, for the ten locations, where beach re-nourishment has been used as beach

management practice in the past, and if this has been deemed successful or not. For future

management it also includes the appropriate factors that it could be used for, namely for flood

and coastal erosion defence purposes, habitat remediation / creation and to benefit coastal

tourism and recreation.

As discussed in section 2.3.2, dredgings from a number of small harbours and ports have been

used to date in order to nourish nearby beaches and dunes. Examples include Pwlheli,

Aberdovey, Aberystwyth, Aberaeron and Neath. If any future recharge were to take place at the

pilot sites (Swansea Bay North and Aberavon Sands) or any other sites where significant

volumes are required, existing dredge licences, or even currently un-licenced resources that have

as yet not been used to provide re-nourishment material to Welsh beaches may become a viable

option from which to source material.

Therefore, these sources should be investigated on greater detail and Figures 5.1 and 5.2 show

existing dredge sites, licensed by The Crown Estate in the Bristol Channel and Irish Sea

respectively. Of the aforementioned harbours from which dredging have been used to source re-

nourishment, Neath is indicated on Figure 5.1 as the other harbours are located within Cardigan

Bay, more distant from both Bristol Channel and Irish Sea dredge sites. However, we would



39

envisage that the costs and the potential benefits of nourishment at selected sites should be

subjected to more detailed investigation of resource distribution and composition combined with

economic appraisal, taking account not only of material extraction and delivery costs but also the

associated costs of regulatory compliance (environmental impact assessment and monitoring pre

and post-works).



40

6 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

6.1 Conclusions

This pilot study has considered ten sites around the Welsh coast where beach nourishment has or

has not been previously used as a beach management tool. Talacre, Traeth Crugan, and parts of

Swansea Bay north and Aberavon Sands have undergone various scales of recharge with varying

degrees of success. Talacre is the largest scheme to have been undertaken and has produced

significant benefits over the succeeding six year period.. However, beach nourishment generally

does not provide a one-off solution to a coastal defence or habitat recreation issues issue, and

beach levels at Talacre have now fallen to a point where further re-nourishment needs to be

considered.

It is concluded that beach nourishment is an under-used method of beach management in Wales

compared with many other parts of the world, and that considerable benefits could arise if greater

use is made of the technique in future. Beaches form an important first line of coastal defence

and healthy beaches can contribute significantly to coastal erosion and flood risk management by

dissipating wave and tidal energy and thereby reducing the requirements for capital and

maintenance expenditure on hard defences. Beach nourishment also offers significant

environmental and landscape benefits when compared with traditional hard engineering works.

Evidence from many other parts of the work also shows that beach nourishment can be an

important catalyst for economic development of an area and can play an important role in

stimulating tourism.

6.2 Recommendations

Based on the work undertaken in this Pilot Study, the following recommendations are made:

• Further consideration should be given to identifying potential sources of different

grading of potential nourishment material; resources of coarse sand, fine gravel,

medium gravel and cobble are of particular interest, and potential sources include

both the sea bed and inland quarries.

• Further work should be undertaken to characterise the particle size, colour and

mineralogical properties of Welsh beaches in order to ensure that naturally

occurring sediment are matched as closely as possible with suitable nourishment

materials.

• More detailed evaluation should be undertaken at some of the Pilot Study sites

using Lidar data to provide more accurate quantification of the present beach

morphology and the volumes of nourishment material required.

• The ecological effects of nourishment in the short, medium and longer term

should be investigated in more detail so that the most appropriate nourishment

methodologies for particular sites can be identified.

• The costs and the potential benefits of nourishment at selected sites should be

subjected to more detailed economic appraisal, taking account not only of

material extraction and transport costs but also the associated costs of regulatory

compliance (environmental impact assessment and monitoring pre and post-

works).



41

• The “carbon footprint” of the proposed nourishment schemes should be

calculated. The results of this analysis will help inform the decision-making

process to select the optimal sustainable nourishment scheme design.



42

7 REFERENCES

Ashton, W. (1920) The Evolution of a Coastline, Barrow to Aberystwyth and the Isle of Man.

Edward Stanford Ltd., London, 302pp.

Atkins (2009) Twywn Coastal Defence Scheme, Design and Access Statement. Report to

Gwynedd Council, Atkins Global Limited.

Babtie (2001a) Gronant, Talacre and Point of Ayr, Beach and Dune System – Study and

Modelling, Final Report to Flintshire County Council by Babtie Group Ltd., Croydon.

Babtie (2001b) Gronant, Talacre and Point of Ayr Beach and Dune System Management Plan.

Second Draft. Prepared for Flintshire Country Council by Babtie Group, Glasgow.

Blott, S.J. & Pye, K. (2004) Morphological and sedimentological changes on an artificially

nourished beach, Lincolnshire. Journal of Coastal Research 20, 214-233.

BP Chemical Group Ltd (2000 Beneficial Use of Dredged Sand. Sand from Neath Estuary Used

for Beach Nourishment at Sker. Report produced by Shoreline Management Partnership

on behalf of BP Chemicals, Baglan.

Bruun, P. (1962) Sea level rise as a cause of shore erosion. American Society of Civil Engineers,

Journal of the Waterways and Harbours Division 88, 117-130.

Coastal Engineering UK Ltd (2008) Coastal Defence Annual Inspection Report 2007. Report to

Conwy County Borough Council by produced by Coastal Engineering UK Ltd.,

Thurstaston, Wirral.

Coastal Geomorphology Partnership (2000) Pen Llyn A-R Sarnau Candidate Speical Area of

Conservation: Coastal Processes Surveillance and Research Requirements. CCW

Contract Science Report No. 417, CCW, Bangor.

Davies, J.L. (1964) A morphogenic approach to world shorelines. Zeitschrift fur Gemorphologie

8, 127-142.

Dean, R.G. (2002) Beach Nourishment Theory and Practice. Advanced Series on Ocean

Engineering Volume 18. World Scientific, New Jersey, 399pp.

Dean, R.G. & Dalrymple, R.A. (2005) Coastal Processes with Engineering Applications.

Chapter 11. Beach Fill and Soft Engineering Structures. Cambridge University Press,

Cambridge, pp343-386.

Delft Hydraulics Laboratory (1987) Manual on Artificial Beach Nourishment. Delft Hydraulic

Laboratory Centre for Civil Engineering Research, Codes and Specifications. Report No.

130, 195pp.

ECUS (2003). Guidance for Coastal Defence in Relation to their Landscape and Visual Impacts.

Report prepared by Environmental Consultancy, University of Sheffield, for the

Countryside Council for Wales. CCW Contract Science Report No. 551, CCW Bangor.

Countryside Council for Wales.



43

Eurosion (2004). ‘http://www.eurosion.org/shoreline/table.htm’.

Faber-Maunsell (2008) Traeth Crugan - Pwlheli Coastal Defence. Report to Gwynedd Council

by Faber Maunsell / AECOM, Birkenhead, 292pp.

Finkl, C.W. & Walker, H.J. (2005) Beach nourishment. In Schwartz, M.L. (ed.) Encyclopedia of

Coastal Science. Springer, Dordrecht, 147-161.

Flintshire County Council (2003) Method Statement & Monitoring Programme for the Beach

Nourishment Works at Talacre Beach. Flintshire County Council, Flint, Report Number

TS0120/R01B.

Gwynedd Council (2003) North Cardigan Bay Shoreline Management Plan. Gywnedd Council

Dollgellau.

Halcrow (2002) Futurecoast Report to DEFRA by Halcrow Group, Swindon. Available only on

CD.

Halcrow Group Ltd. (2006). Assessment of Constraints imposed on Future Shoreline

Management of Rail Assets Adjacent to the Coast. Report to Railtrack by Halcrow Group

Ltd. Swindon.

Halcrow (2009) North West England and Wales Shoreline Management Plan SMP2. Main SMP

Document – Consultation Draft. Prepared for the North West England and North Wales

Coastal Group by Halcrow Group Ltd., Swindon.

Halcrow (2010). Shoreline Management Plan SMP2, Lavernock Point to St Ann’s Head:

Identification of Preferred Policy. Report prepared on behalf of the Swansea and

Carmarthen Bay Engineering Group by Halcrow Group, Swindon.

Hamm, L., Capobianco, M., Dette, H.H., Lechuga, A., Spanhoff, R & Stive, MJ.F. (2002) A

summary of European experience with shore nourishment. Coastal Engineering 47, 237-

264.

Hanson, A. Brampton, M. Capobianco, H.H. Dette, L. Hamm, C. Laustrup, A. Lechuga, R.

Spanhoff (2002). ‘Beach nourishment projects, practices, and objectives - A European

overview’.

HR Wallingford Ltd (1993) Pensarn Beach Numerical Model Studies. Report EX2848 prepared

for Colwyn Bay Borough Council by HR Wallingford Ltd, Wallingford.

HR Wallingford Ltd. (2008) Coastal Process Study: Rhyl to Prestatyn. Report EC5690, prepared

for Martin Wright Associates Ltd as part of their report to Denbighshire County Council

on the Development of a Coastal Defence Strategy. HR Wallingford Ltd, Wallingford.

Jacobs-Babtie (2006) Gronant, Talacre and Point of Ayr Beach and Dune Study. Beach

Nourishment Works, Report on Monitoring 2002-2004. Report to Flintshire County

Council by Jacobs Babtie, Croydon.



44

Jemmett, A. (1999) The Beach and sand Dunes at Point of Ayr – An Overview of Recent

Changes and Management Issues. Report prepared by Dr. Alan Jemmett, Project

Manager Dee Estuary Strategy, for the Talacre Panel.

Lee, M. (2005) Investigation of Beach Levels at Pensarn Shingle Ridge. Contract No. Fe 73-01-

507 Report prepared for Countryside Council for Wales by Dr. Mark Lee, York.

McCue, J., Cousins, N. & Gubby, S. (2008) Supporting ICZM Delivery in Wales: Enhancing the

evidence base for coastal decision making. CCW Contract FC 73-03-339.

Mulder, J.P.M., Nederbragt, G., Steetzel, H.J., van Koningsveld, M. & Wang, Z.B. (2006)

Different implementation scenarios for the large-scale coastal policy of the Netherlands.

Proceedings International Conference on Coastal Engineering, 2006, Volume 2,

pp1705-1717.

National Research Council (1995) Beach Nourishment and Protection. National Academy Press,

Washington DC, 334pp.

Neill, S.P., Elliott, A.J. & Hashemi, M.R. (2008) A model of inter-annual variability in beach

levels in Tremadoc Bay, eastern Irish Sea. Continental Shelf Research 28, 1769-1781.

Posford-Duvivier (1996) Pwlheli Golf Course Strategy Study. Report to Dwyfor District Council

Councilby Posford Duvivier, Peterborough.

Pye, K. (2010) Beach and sand dune nourishment: past, present and future uses. Progress in

Physical Geography (in press)

Pye, K. & Blott, S.J. (2006) The Geomorphology and Environmental Context of the Aberdovey

Coastal Dune System. Kenneth Pye Associates Ltd External Research Report No. EX604,

prepared on behalf of Aberdovey Golf Club, June 2006.

Pye, K. & Saye, S.E. (2005) The Geomorphological Response of Welsh Sand Dune Systems to

Sea Level Rise Over the Next 100 Years and the Management Implications for SAC and

SSSI Sites. CCW Contract Science Series Report No. 670, Countryside Council for

Wales, Bangor.

Robinson, K. Ramsay, J. Wilson, A. Mackie, A. Wheeler, F. O’Beirn, C. Lindenbaum, K. Van

Landeghem, F. McBreen, N. Mitchell. (2007) ‘HABMAP: Habitat Mapping for

conservation and management of the southern Irish Sea. Report to the Welsh European

Funding Office.

Schwartz, M.L. & Bird, E.C.F. (ed.) (1990) Artificial Beaches. Journal of Coastal Research

Special Issue No. 6. The Coastal Education and Research Foundation, Fort Lauderdale,

140pp.

Shoreline Management Partnership (1993) Point of Ayr Study, Talacre Dunes. Report to

Hamilton Oil Company Ltd by Shoreline Management Partnership, Rossett, Nr. Chester.

Shoreline Management Partnership (1999a) Liverpool Bay Shoreline Management Plan. Sub

Cell 11a, Great Ormes Head to Formby Point. Prepared for Liverpool Bay Coastal

Group by Shoreline Management Partnership, Rossett, Nr. Chester.



45

Shoreline Management Partnership (1999b) Shoreline Management Plan for Sub-Cell 11a

(Great Ormes Head to Formby Point) Plan Document and Context Report. Prepared for

Liverpool Bay Coastal Group by Shoreline Management Partnership, Rossett, Nr.

Chester.

Shoreline Management Partnership (2000) Worms Head to St. Govan's Head Shoreline

Management Plan. Prepared for Carmarthen Bay Coastal Engineering Group by

Shoreline Management Partnership, Rossett, Near Chester.

Shoreline Management Partnership (2001) Lavernock Point to Worms Head Shoreline

Management Plan. Prepared for Swansea Bay Coastal Engineering Group by Shoreline

Management Partnership, Rossett, Near Chester.

Simm, J.D., Brampon, A.H., Beech, N.W. & Brook, J.S. (1996) Beach Management Manual.

CIRIA, London, 448pp.

Speybroeck, J., Bonte, D., Coutens, W., Gheskierf, T., Grootaett, P., Maelfait, J-P., Mathys, M.,

Provoost, S., Sabbe, K., Stienen, W.W.M., van Lancker, V., Vincx, M. & Degraer, S. (2006)

Beach nourishment: an ecologically sound coastal defence alternative: A review. Aquatic

Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 16, 419-435.

University of Newcastle (2000) Shingle Resources Survey, Wales. A Geomorphological Review

of the Nature and Conservation Status of Welsh Shingle Beaches. Report to Countryside

Council for Wales by the University of Newcastle Department of Coastal Management.

Van de Graaff, J., Niemeyer, H.D. & van Overeem, J. (eds.) (1991) Artificial Beach

Nourishments. Coastal Engineering Special Issue, (Volume 16, Part 1), Elsevier,

Amsterdam, 162pp.

Van der Lee, W. (2009) Practical experiences in monitoring and dynamic preservation of the

Dutch coast: a case study. In Pye, K. & Ritchie, W. (eds.) The Measurement of Coastal

Change. Proceedings of the St. Fergus Symposium. Aberdeen Institute of Coastal

Management, University of Aberdeen, 85-94.

Webb, H., Pye, K., Huckle, J. & Blott, S.J. (2010) Beach Topographic Variability in Relation to

Significant Biological Change. CCW Contract Science Report, CCW, Bangor (in press).

Welsh Assembly Government (2007) One Wales A Progressive Agenda for the Government of

Wales. Welsh Assembly Government, Cardiff.

Welsh Assembly Government (2008) Coastal Tourism Strategy Visit Wales. Report by the

Tourism and Marketing Division of the Welsh Assembly Government, Cardiff.

Welsh Audit Office (2009) Coastal Erosion and Tidal Flooding Risks in Wales. Welsh Audit

Office, Cardiff, 61pp.

Wolf, J. (2008) Development of Estuary Morphological Models. Joint DEFRA / EA Flood and

Coastal Erosion Risk Management R & D Programme R & D Technical Report

FD2107/TR, Appendix A1: Swan Modelling of Liverpool Bay Including Dee, Mersey and

Ribble Estuaries, 22pp.



46

APPENDIX A: EUROSION DATA

Previous Beach Nourishment Schemes from elsewhere in Europe (Eurosion, 2004).

Number Country Case study Coastal type Policy Measure

1. Belgium De Haan Sedimentary macrotidal

(Sandy beaches and

dunes)

Hold the line Seawall / Nourishment

2. Belgium Zeebrugge-Knokke

Heist

Sedimentary macrotidal

(Sandy beaches and

dunes)

Hold the line Seawall / Groynes /

Harbour breakwater /

Nourishment

3. Bulgaria Shabla-Krapetz Soft Rock

Sedimentary microtidal

(Sandy beaches)

Hold the line /

Managed

realignment

Seawall / Dyke

4. Cyprus Dolos-Kiti Sedimentary microtidal

(Shingle beaches)

Limited

intervention / Do

nothing

Harbour breakwater /

Groynes / Detached

breakwater / Revetment

5. Denmark Hyllingebjerg-

Liseleje

Soft rock


(Sandy beaches)

Hold the line Slope protection /

Groynes / Detached

breakwater /

Nourishment

6. Denmark Køge bay Sedimentary microtidal

(Sandy beaches and

dunes)

Move seaward /

Hold the line

Groynes / Dyke / Filter

tubes

7. Denmark Western coast of

Jutland


(Sandy beaches and

dunes)

Hold line /

Managed

realignment / Do

nothing / Limited

intervention

Groynes / Detached

breakwater / Revetment/

Nourishment / Dune

protection

8. Estonia Tallin Soft Rock


(sandy & shingle

beaches, narrow

vegetated shores,

artificial coastline)

Hold the line /

Limited

Intervention

Revegetation forestry /

Nourishment / Seawall /

Slope protection

9. Finland Western coast of

Finland

Soft Rock


(sandy & shingle

beaches, saltmarsh)

Do nothing None

10. France Aquitaine coast Sedimentary macrotidal

(sandy beaches and

dunes)

Hold the line

/Limited

intervention

Revegetation / Seawall /

Revetment / Groynes

11. France Chatelaillon Sedimentary macrotidal

(sandy beach)

Hold the line /

(Move seaward)

Seawall / Groynes (past)

Nourishment

12. France Haute-Normandie Soft Rock


(shingle beaches)

Do Nothing / Hold

the line / Managed

realignment

Groynes / Nourishment

13. France Rémire–Montjoly

(French Guyana)

Hard Rock


(sandy beaches)

Do nothing

(Limited

intervention-

future)

Future: Breakwater /

Nourishment

14. France Rhône delta Sedimentary microtidal

(delta, sandy beaches

and dunes)

Hold the line / Do

Nothing / Limited

intervention

Groynes / Seawall /

Breakwater / Revetment

/ Nourishment / Wind

trap Sand ripping

15. France Sables d’Olonne Hard Rock


(sandy beaches and

dunes)

Hold the line Seawall / Beach drainage

16. Germany Elbe estuary Sedimentary macrotidal

(estuary, saltmarsh)

Hold the line Dyke / Revetment /

Saltmarsh creation /

Polder / Groynes /

Saltmarsh Drainage

17. Germany Isle of Sylt

(Isles Schleswig-

Holstein)

Soft Rock


(sandy beaches and

dunes)

Hold the line /

Managed

realignment

Revetment / Seawall /

Rif Enhancement /




47


18. Germany Rostock Soft Rock


(sandy beaches and

dunes)

Hold the line /

Limited

intervention

Groynes / Revetment /

Seawall / Revegetation /

Nourishment

19. Greece Lakkopetra Sedimentary microtidal

(sandy beaches)

Limited

intervention

Detached breakwater

20. Greece Mesollogi lagoon

area


(sandy beaches and

dunes, saltmarsh)

Hold the line Groynes

21. Ireland Rosslare Soft Rock


(sandy beaches and

dunes)

Hold the line Groynes / Revetment /

Nourishment

22. Ireland Rossnowlagh Soft Rock


(sandy beaches and

dunes)

None

(Locally Hold the

line)

Revetment

(Future: dune

nourishment)

23. Italy Cirqaccio-

Ciracciello

(Isle of Procida)

Soft Rock


(sandy beach)

Hold the line Beach drainage /

Breakwater

24. Italy Giardini-Naxos

(Isle of Sicily)

Hard Rock


(sandy beach)

Hold the line Groynes / Seawall /

Detached breakwater /

Nourishment

25. Italy Goro mouth- Po

delta



and dunes)

Limited

intervention /

Hold the line

Nourishment / Groynes /

Revetment / Dune

rebuilding

26. Italy Lu Littaroni -

La Liccia

(Isle of Sardinia)

Hard Rock


(sandy beaches and

dunes)

Do nothing None

27. Italy Marina di Massa -

Marina di Pisa


(sandy beaches,

artificial coastline)

Hold the line Seawall / Groynes /


Submerged breakwater /

Nourishment

28. Italy Marina di Ravenna-

Lido Adriano


(sandy beaches and

dunes)

Hold the line Seawall / Submerged

breakwater / Detached

breakwater / Groynes /

Jetty / Nourishment

29. Italy Marinella di

Sarzana


(sandy beaches)

Hold the line Groynes / Detached

breakwater / Jetty /

Artificial island /

Nourishment

30. Italy Vecchia Pineta Sedimentary microtidal

(sandy beaches and

dunes)

Hold the line Submerged breakwater /

Nourishment / Beach

Drainage

31. Latvia Gulf of Riga Sedimentary microtidal


and dunes, narrow

vegetated shores)

Limited

intervention /

Hold the line

Forest plantation /

Seawall / Revetment /

Nourishment

32. Lithuania Klaipeda Soft Rock


(sandy beaches and

dunes, narrow

vegetated shores)

Limited

intervention

Forest plantation /

Nourishment

33. Malta Xemxija -

Ghajn Tuffieha

Soft Rock


(sandy beaches)

Do nothing /

Limited

intervention

Revegetation

34. The Netherlands Holland coast Sedimentary macrotidal

(sandy beaches and

dunes)

Hold the line Nourishment / Groynes

35. The Netherlands Wadden Sea islands Sedimentary macrotidal

(sandy beaches and

dunes)

Limited

intervention /

Hold the line / Do

nothing

Groynes / Revetment /

Nourishment / Cross-

shore dam

36. The Netherlands Western Scheldt

estuary



Hold the line /

Move seaward

Nourishment /

Revetment / Groyne /

Pier protection



48


37. Poland Hel peninsula Soft Rock


(sandy beaches and

dunes)


Nourishment

38. Poland Western Coast of

Poland

Soft Rock


(sandy beaches and

dunes)

Hold the line / Do

nothing

Seawall / Groynes /

Nourishment /

Revegetation

39. Portugal Azores

(Azores Islands)

Hard Rock Hold the line Harbours / Marinas /

Slope stabilisation

40. Portugal Cova do Vapor Soft Rock


(sandy beaches and

dunes)

Hold the line Nourishment / Groynes /

Seawall

41. Portugal Estela Sedimentary macrotidal

(sandy beaches and

dunes)

Limited

intervention

Dune nourishment /

Sand ripping / Wind trap

/ Sand bags

42. Portugal Vagueira-Mira Sedimentary macrotidal

(sandy beaches and

dunes)

Hold the line /

Managed

realignment

Groynes / Jetty /

Nourishment

43. Portugal Vale do Lobo Soft Rock


(sandy beaches and

dunes)

Hold the line Revetment /

Nourishment

44. Romania Danube delta Sedimentary microtidal


and dunes)

(Hold the line)

Do Nothing

Jetty / Groynes /

Nourishment

45. Romania Mamaia Sedimentary microtidal

(sandy beaches and

dunes)

Limited

intervention /

Hold the line


Nourishment

46. Slovenia Slovenian coast Hard Rock

Soft Rock


(shingle beaches,

saltmarshes, artificial

coastline)

Hold the line /

Limited

intervention /

Move seaward

Seawall / Submerged

breakwater / Dyke

47. Spain Can Picafort

(Isle of Mallorca)


(sandy beaches and

dunes)

Limited

intervention

Nourishment

48. Spain Castellón Sedimentary microtidal

(sandy & shingle

beaches, dunes)


breakwater /

Nourishment

49. Spain Ebro delta Sedimentary microtidal


and dunes)

Limited

intervention /

Hold the line /

(Managed

relignment)

Dune nourishment /

Wind traps /

Revegetation / Beach

Drainage

50. Spain El Médano

(Canary Islands)


(sandy beaches and

dunes, narrow

vegetated shores)

Do nothing /

Limited

intervention

Dune nourishment /

Revegetation

51. Spain Gross Hard Rock


(sandy beaches)

Hold the line Jetty / Nourishment

52. Spain Mar Menor Sedimentary microtidal

(sandy beaches and

dunes)

Hold the line /

Limited

intervention


53. Spain Sitges Hard Rock


(sandy beaches)


breakwater / Seawall /

Artificial island /

Nourishment

54. Sweden Falsterbo peninsula Sedimentary microtidal

(sandy beaches and

dunes)

Do nothing Seawall /

Groynes(Future:

revegetation /

nourishment)

55. Sweden Ystad Sedimentary microtidal

(sandy beaches and


Dune plantation /



49

dunes) Geotextile


56. United

Kingdom

Essex estuaries Sedimentary macrotidal

(estuary, saltmarsh,

shingle beaches)

Hold the line /

Managed

realignment / Do

nothing

Seawall / Revetments /

Embankment / Groynes /

Polder / Nourishment

57. United

Kingdom

Holderness coast Soft Rock


(sandy and shingle

beaches)

Hold the line /

Do nothing

Groynes / Seawall /

Revetment

58. United

Kingdom

Humber estuary Sedimentary macrotidal


Hold the line /

(Managed

realignment)

Embankment /

Revetment / Seawall /

Tidal flat recreation

59. United

Kingdom

Luccombe-

Blackgang

(Isle of Wight)

Soft Rock


(shingle beaches)

Managed

realignment /

Hold the line / Do

nothing

Seawall / Revetment /

Groynes / Nourishment /

Slope stabilisation

60. United

Kingdom

South Downs

(Sussex)

Soft Rock


(shingle beaches)

Hold the line /

Managed

realignment

Seawall / Groynes /

Nourishment



50

APPENDIX B: SITE DESCRIPTION SUMMARY SHEETS



Beach Management Case Study Site – Talacre Unitary Authority: Sir y Fflint – Flintshire

Length of Coastline: 2900m

Current SMP2 Policy: Hold-the-line

Coastal Management Overview This North/North-west facing coastline has a large unspoiled expansive sandy foreshore backed by gently sloping

dunes which graduate into a low-lying backshore. To the east there are shingle banks and dune ridges with large

quantities of aeolian sand between which lie tidal channels and developing saltmarsh. The shingle banks are formed

primarily from drifted beach nourishment material. Further east at Talacre Warren are two dune ridges with dune

slacks. Located behind these dunes is the Prestatyn Gutter canal which discharges to the western frontage of the

dunes.

Coastal Processes and Geomorphology Assuming no inlet was established on the North Wales shoreline, this area would be likely to gradually silt up

because of the available sediment within the Dee estuary, with subsequent re-formation of saltmarsh

geomorphology. The limit of the flooding would be constrained by the original cliff-line of the estuary. The majority

of sand material is either retained by coastal defences or contributes to the significant accretion of material at the

Point of Ayr, where it forms an expansive intertidal zone, and subsequently material to be used in the development

of the Talacre Sand Dunes.

Coastal Protection and Flood Risk This section of shoreline has been defended over the last 100 years, and with no defences there would be significant

flooding of the low-lying land as there is no natural form of defence either in front of or behind the present

embankment. With no secondary defences in place this inundation could extend behind Talacre, resulting in a

dramatic change in the shoreline form and position.

Natural and Historic Environment Issues Designated areas include: Ramsar The Dee Estuary (Wales); SPA The Dee Estuary (Wales); SAC Dee Estuary /

Aber Dyfrdwy; SSSI Dee Estuary / Aber Afon Dyfrdwy; and Gronant Dunes & Talacre Warren SSSI.

Beach Recreational Issues Gronant Dunes is an area of sand dunes and foreshore that stretch to the Point of Ayr, Talacre. This area has

outstanding wildlife and it is a site of Special Scientific Interest. Both Gronant and Talacre Dunes are popular with

holidaymakers and local residents.

Governance Issues The Crown Estate licenses nearby dredge sites that may prove a possible source of future recharge material although

the management and provision of the material is currently less clear. Material may also be available from Mostyn

Docks.

Future Beach Nourishment Implications

Nourishment Volume (m3)

Initial volume of nourishment material required 148,080

Volume of sediment required to maintain the existing beach profile for sea

level rise to 2100 (medium emissions scenario)

504,000

Volume of sediment required by 2030, assuming an initial re-nourishment

in 2010 and five-yearly re-nourishment campaigns to replace 50% losses

531,000



Beach Management Case Study Site - Abergele Unitary Authority: Conwy – Conwy



Coastal Management Overview This stretch of the coastline is North/North-west facing, with Pensarn beach situated centrally, between Rhyl to the

east and Colwyn Bay to the west. The beach is generally a combination of sand and shingle.

Coastal Processes and Geomorphology East of Abergele the three controlling headlands at Rhos Point, Tan Penmaen Head and Llanddulas would

experience a moderate degree of erosion. To the west, from Abergele to Prestatyn, the shoreline would take a more

linear form. This would cause the shoreline to become more normal to the approaching wave direction thus

ultimately reducing the net sediment transport rate along the frontage. Accretion toward the Point of Ayr would

consequently be reduced.

Coastal Protection and Flood Risk A revetment and seawall in places, originally constructed 1845-48, re-furbished 1906, defends the entire frontage

with an additional flood embankment protecting the Abergele to Towyn frontage from inundation. Following in

destruction in the 1990 storms, the seawall and rock revetment was rebuilt in 1993, at Towyn. At Kinmel Bay,

beach recharge and groynes have acted as a drift barrier and advanced the shoreline seaward. A shingle bank fronts

the wall to the east of Abergele with dunes to landward and low-lying hinterland. Bars and troughs in the sand

foreshore migrate eastward across the frontage influencing cycles of erosion / accretion. The developed frontage

beach is constrained in places by railway and trunk roads, though is well-developed between this infrastructure.

Natural and Historic Environment Issues Designated areas include three SSSIs: the Traeth Pensarn; Llanddulas Limestone and Gwrych Castle Wood; the

Coed y Gopa.

Beach Recreational Issues Pensarn beach is important for recreational activities such as Windsurfing and Canoeing. The developed frontage is

a tourist destination.






68,000



1,301,000



Beach Management Case Study Site – Traeth Crugan Unitary Authority: Gwynedd – Gwynedd



Coastal Management Overview This area of South-east facing coastline has a backshore characterised by a single, narrow sand dune ridge. The

height of the dune is generally 3 - 5 m and the crest width is approximately 3 - 4 m. Much of the dune system is

poorly vegetated. At the low water mark, patches of clean sand, shingle and boulders are apparent, while at high

water this gives way to a cleaner ground of gravel and coarse sand.

Coastal Processes and Geomorphology Erosion of the sand dunes at Traeth Crugan and Pwllheli Golf Club are providing sand, which accretes eastwards by

littoral drift along the Pwllheli promenade. There is, however, ongoing loss to this frontage as material by-passes

Carreg yr Imbill and is deposited in the harbour mouth. There is a problem with siltation of the inner harbour at

Pwllheli and this is thought to be due to the low tidal current velocities through the harbour entrance. Although the

sea bed is generally free of silt outside the harbour entrance, the eroding glaciogenic cliffs to the west of the harbour

are a source of suspended silt and mud. Continued protection of the dunes at Traeth Crugan and Pwllheli Golf Club

would eventually result in a reduced supply of sand to the promenade area of Pwllheli south beach and as a

consequence the areas that are currently accreting are likely to experience erosion. Continued sea level rise and a

breach in the dunes at Morfa Garreg due to the reduced supply of sediment could result a new outlet to the sea to the

east of Carreg yr Imbill.

Coastal Protection and Flood Risk The sand dunes at Traeth Crugan and Pwllheli Golf Club are subject to local erosion and are protected in places by

stretches of rock revetment.

Natural and Historic Environment Issues This area of coastline is undeveloped, with designated sites; the Pen Llyn a'r Sarnau / Lleyn Peninsula and the

Sarnau SAC, and the Mynydd Tir Y Cwmwd A'r Glannau At Garreg Yr Imbill SSSI.

Beach Recreational Issues This area is important recreationally for the golf course users and also for sea anglers. The lagoon at Traeth Crugan

also has a lagoon which sits within a string of banks and reefs which form an arc offshore which has a very diverse

bivalve fauna.






30,000



210,000



Beach Management Case Study Site – Morfa Dyffryn Unitary Authority: Gwynedd – Gwynedd


Current SMP1 Policy: Do Nothing

Coastal Management Overview This South-west facing coastline has an extensive dune foreland, begining at Llanaber and has grown northwards

and incorporated within itself the former moraine island of Mochras. Between Llanaber and Morfa Dyffryn there is

sand beach overlying peat beds, fringed with dunes on its outer margin.

Coastal Processes and Geomorphology In areas of the beach, the underlying peat is exposed and eroding, thereby causing permanent loss in beach volume

since the eroded peat will disperse from the area. There is a large-scale northwards sediment transport pathway

throughout most of Cardigan Bay. This longshore movement of sediment has generally been considered to

contribute to the northwards prolongating spits and structures including Morfa Dyffryn. The accreting sediment is

attributed largely to that sourced by erosion of the glacigenic cliffs in the southern part of Cardigan Bay. Along the

southern coast of the Lleyn Peninsula, littoral drift is generally to the east, with widespread erosion of the glacigenic

cliffs and sand dune systems contributing to the sediment supply. If beach nourishment is not undertaken, in the

short term it is possible that material released from erosion of the dunes capping the ridge, and the breakdown of the

ridge itself, would feed Morfa Dyffryn to the north, temporarily halting erosion of the dune system there. However,

when the supply of sand and shingle diminishes, further erosion of Morfa Dyffryn dunes would be expected, with

the eroded material being deposited on the foreshore.

Coastal Protection and Flood Risk With present management practices, the small sections of defended coastline (Llanaber Point, the caravan parks at

Sunnysands, Islawrfordd and Barmouth Holiday Village) are likely to remain as hard spots resisting landward

movement and effectively becoming promontories as the shoreline to either side migrates landwards. The

promontories would effectively reduce northwards littoral drift of material, resulting in a smaller supply of sand to

Morfa Dyffryn resulting in erosion of the Morfa Dyffryn dunes.

Natural and Historic Environment Issues Designated sites include: Morfa Harlech a Morfa Dyffryn SAC; Morfa Dyffryn NNR; Morfa Dyffryn SSSI;

Snowdonia National Park; Pen Llyn a'r Sarnau / Lleyn Peninsula and the Sarnau SAC.

Beach Recreational Issues Part of the beach is an officially recognised naturist area. The beach is also known for dolphin sightings.






202,000



1,144,000



Beach Management Case Study Site - Broadwater-Tywyn-

Aberdovey Unitary Authority: Gwynedd – Gwynedd


Current SMP1 Policy: Retreat south of Twywn, hold-the-line north of Twywn to Broadwater

Coastal Management Overview This coastline is South-west facing with a combination of sandy and pebbly beaches. The area is a mixture of

developed and undeveloped with Tywyn town and a golf course, along with undeveloped areas around.

Coastal Processes and Geomorphology This area of the coast is eroding between Tywyn and Club House Aberdovey / accretion East of Aberdovey.

Coastal Protection and Flood Risk There is a groyne field in front of Tywyn / Shingle ridge in place, sandy beach backed by dunes or Penllyn marshes.

Natural and Historic Environment Issues Sites include Pen Llyn a'r Sarnau / Lleyn Peninsula and the Sarnau SAC; Broadwater SSSI; Dyfi SSSI; Snowdonia

National Park; Dunes part of Dovey SSSI within Pen Llyn A’R SAR.

Beach Recreational Issues This area is important for recreation e.g. fishing, sailing, surfing and other water sports off Aberdovey harbour.






257,000



1,518,000



Beach Management Case Study Site - Tenby Unitary Authority: Sir Benfro – Pembrokeshire



Coastal Management Overview This part of the coastline has sandy beaches backed by rocky cliffs. Carmarthen Bay within which Tenby is situated

is a storm-dominated bay, which has been cut largely into softer Carboniferous rocks, in particular mudstones of the

Carboniferous Coal Measures. Resistant Carboniferous Limestones form headlands on the Gower Peninsula, and at

Tenby and Giltar Point. Millstone Grit forms cliffed promontories between Tenby and Ragwen Point.

Coastal Processes and Geomorphology Carmarthen Bay, as a whole is a sink for sediments. This is due to its position sheltered from the main tidal streams.

Sediment cover, predominantly sandy, is up to 10 metres thick in the centre of the Bay, thinning towards the

shoreline. The Bay contains a fairly constant volume of sediment, which is reworked during storms, with no major

exchange of sediment between the Bay and the Bristol Channel or Celtic Sea. Varying rates of cliff retreat around

the western end of Carmarthen Bay, due to differential erosion of rocks of varying resistance, is responsible for the

current topography of headlands and bays. Carboniferous sandstones and limestones form headlands, but mudstone-

rich beds within the Carboniferous Coal Measures and Millstone Grit have been susceptible to greater erosion and

recession. Very little sand is derived from erosion of sandstones on this coastline. Most sand released from cliff

erosion will be stored locally on the beaches, or washed into Carmarthen Bay by storm wave currents. There is a

small net littoral drift to the east within the western part of Carmarthen Bay.

Coastal Protection and Flood Risk Much of the open-cliffed coastline is undefended, with defences being restricted to the settlements of Tenby,

Saundersfoot, Wisemans Bridge, Amroth and Pendine, with few implications for the rest of the coastline. These

defences will not significantly affect the future shoreline evolution. The construction of the railway embankment

across the Ritec estuary aided the development and stabilisation of South Beach Tenby. The presence of the railway

embankment will limit the scope for retreat of the sand dunes here.

Natural and Historic Environment Issues Designated areas include the following: SSSI Lydstep Head To Tenby Burrows; National Park Pembrokeshire

Coast; SAC Carmarthen Bay and Estuaries / Bae Caerfyrddin ac Aberoedd; SSSI Tenby Cliffs and St. Catherine's

Island.

Beach Recreational Issues Tenby beach is a popular tourist destination which is used for Canoeing, Sailing and Sea Angling.






24,000



142,000



Beach Management Case Study Site – Port Eynon Unitary Authority: Abertawe – Swansea


Current SMP1/2 Policy: No Active Intervention

Coastal Management Overview Port Eynon is a very popular tourist resort. Port Eynon Point, to the south west of the bay, is the most southerly

point of the Gower Peninsula. The bay is also in the area of outstanding natural beauty with sandy beaches and rock

pools.

Coastal Processes and Geomorphology The coastline is backed by dune systems within the embayments, e.g. Oxwich Bay and Port-Eynon Bay. The

orientation of the bays, as illustrated by soft sediments, has been due to incident wave climate over longer periods of

time. The resistant geology of the cliffs throughout this frontage is a fundamental control upon both large-scale and

local-scale development. The Carboniferous Limestone rocky headlands are local controls because they act to

refract and diffract incident waves, creating weak drift reversals. This means that the larger embayments, e.g.

Oxwich Bay, along this coastline are generally stable and experience limited net drift. Oxwich Point also provides

some shelter to the western part of this shoreline. These cliffs have a very low potential recession rate and therefore

significant change along the cliffed shoreline is not expected over the next century.

Unfortunately, both Port Eynon and Horton beaches have suffered in the last ten years from denudation of their sand

cover. A large proportion of the sand on the coast is likely to have been derived by wave action from the shoreface.

There has been large scale dredging of sand from Helwick Bank and it is possible that the dredging of sands from

Helwick Bank may influence sand budgets on the coast, such as at Port Eynon Bay.

Coastal Protection and Flood Risk Much of the open-cliffed coastline is undefended, with defences being restricted to individual embayments. Where

defences are present, principally in the form of seawalls or revetments (such as in Port Eynon, Oxwich, Caswell, and

Langland Bays), they protect localised areas from erosion but with few implications for the rest of the coastline.

Natural and Historic Environment Issues Designated areas include the following: SAC Limestone Coast of South West Wales / Arfordir Calchfaen De

Orllewin Cymru; SSSI Gower Coast: Rhossili to Porteynon; AONB Gower; SSSI Horton, Eastern And Western

Slade; SSSI Oxwich Bay; SAC Gower Ash Woods / Coedydd Ynn Gwyr; NNR Oxwich.

Beach Recreational Issues This area is popular for sailing, surfing, and has boat launching facilities.






66,000



467,000



Beach Management Case Study Site – Swansea (North) Unitary Authority: Abertawe – Swansea


Current SMP1/2 Policy: Hold-the-line

Coastal Management Overview This area of coast is a large, sweeping, curving, sandy bay with the headland at Mumbles as the focal point to the

West. Apart from the cliffs which occur near Mumbles, the rest of the coastline is low lying.

Coastal Processes and Geomorphology The seabed east of Swansea Bay comprises mainly bedrock, with locally thin accumulations of sand and gravel.

Extensive areas of rock are exposed across the channel off the South Glamorgan coast where there are maximum

stresses on the seabed due to the tidal currents. Closer to shore near Swansea Bay, Helwick and Nash Sands form

banner banks reflecting changes in the orientation of the coastline. These banks provide limited protection to the

coastline from open-ocean wave activity. Overall, the plan shape of Swansea Bay is dominantly a south to south-

west facing bay bounded on either side by broadly east-west trending hard rock coasts composed primarily of early

Carboniferous limestones. Rates of transport of sand and gravel are likely to have been lower than those of the

cliffed coasts of the Gower and South Glamorgan because Swansea Bay has been largely sheltered from westerly

storms and weaker ebb-currents. Swansea Bay is generally a sink for sediments.

Coastal Protection and Flood Risk As a whole, there has been significant human interference within Swansea Bay, where reclamation, slag dumping,

dredging, navigation works, and sand winning have all had an influence upon its recent evolution. The estuaries

within the Bay have been heavily modified through human development. Within the Afan Estuary, there are no

saltmarshes or mudflats, with sand occupying virtually the whole system. The upper part of the Neath Estuary is

extensively reclaimed and industrialised, with docks and considerable navigational dredging. The dredging of

sediments from the river channels has impacted on the distribution of sands and muds in the bay to date and it is

likely that the cessation of dredging in the River Neath would influence sand and mud accumulation in the central

part of Swansea Bay. The Swansea Barrage, built between 1989 and 1992, now limits the flux of bedload sediments

transported by tidal processes.

Natural and Historic Environment Issues The Blackpill SSSI is the only designated area on this stretch of the coastline.

Beach Recreational Issues Sea uses in this area include leisure craft for sailing and fishing from Oystermouth/Mumbles, Swansea-Cork Ferry

and commercial craft using Swansea, Port Talbot and Neath docks.






614,000



1,144,000



Beach Management Case Study Site - Aberavon

Unitary Authority: Castell-nedd Port Talbot - Neath Port Talbot



Coastal Management Overview Aberavon, to the East of Swansea Bay is a highly industrialised area of coast characterised by heavy industry around

Port Talbot including the Corus (margam) steel works, whose tall apparatus and chimneys are clearly visible from

the beach. The coastline here is straight, in contrast to the curved coast which can be seen further west, and has a

high, hilly backdrop, particularly in the Port Talbot area. The Neath and Tawe fault valleys emerge betwen the hills.

There are extensive coastal dune systems to the South-east at Kenfig, Margam and Crylyn Burrows.

Coastal Processes and Geomorphology The coastal plain widens particularly around Port Talbot, which is built on former sand dunes. These are still

apparent around the very extensive Kenfig and Margam Burrows although the latter helps cover waste from the steel

works. The Tawe and Neath rivers reach the coast, the latter forming a minor estuary of mud and sand flanked by

sand dunes including Crymlyn Burrows.

Coastal Protection and Flood Risk In the 1950s many of the sand dunes of Aberavon Beach disappeared as part of the development of the Sandfields

estate. During this development, a 1.25 mile sea defence wall was built. This is also fronted by a rock revetment.

Natural and Historic Environment Issues One designated area exists to the north of this area of coastline; Crymlyn Burrows SSSI.

Beach Recreational Issues Averavon Beach is a favourite with surfers.






541,000



2,017,000



Beach Management Case Study Site - Porthcawl Unitary Authority: Pen-y-bont ar Ogwr – Bridgend



Coastal Management Overview This area is characterised by a flat coastal plain around Porthcawl with low rocky headland and sandy enclosed

beaches. Much of the coastline is composed of relatively resistant cliffs and rock platforms, which have

experienced little movement over the centuries. Porthcawl is an urban area with a large caravan site at Trecco Bay,

and a golf course.

Coastal Processes and Geomorphology There has been significant modification to this shoreline as a result of human interference. Much of the area of

dunes has since been significantly modified and built up, so little of the originally morphology remains. Merthyr-

mawr Warren is an extensive sand dune system nestled in a natural cove between Porthcawl and the River Ogmore.

Although most of the sand contained within this system is relict, the dunes having built up over the last 6,000 years,

there is still an active interchange between the beach and dunes. The cliffs at Porthcawl and between Ogmore River

and Nash Point would continue to be dominated by low rates of erosion. The foreshore could be subjected to

narrowing under increased storm wave activity as landward movement of the beaches is constrained by the backing

cliffs. Some local coastal protection works exist in the form of seawalls and revetments between Hutchwns Point

and Porthcawl Point. Overall, there is no notable trend of either accretion or erosion of beaches, though some

beaches, such as in Trecco Bay, Porthcawl, have seen erosion in recent years.

Coastal Protection and Flood Risk Climate change may threaten low lying land with flooding in the future. Porthcawl waterfront is also proposed for

substantial regeneration as part of the 7 Bays Project. The Planning Guidance outlines proposals that will result in

the regeneration of Porthcawl's Waterfront, stretching from Cosy Corner and the harbour in the south, to Trecco Bay

in the east. The plan includes the construction of new sea defences, enabling regeneration of the area to take place

and whilst also helping to protect over 440 existing properties which may be at the risk of flooding.

Natural and Historic Environment Issues Close by designated areas to the east of this shoreline include the Kenfig / Cynffig SAC, and the Merthyr Mawr

SSSI.

Beach Recreational Issues The sea here is used for swimming and surfing.






133,000



501,000

Tables

Site Station used fortidal levels HAT MHWS MHW MHWN MTL MLWN MLW MLWS LAT CD MSTR

Site 1 : Gronant-Talacre Hilbre Island 5.21 4.07 3.17 2.27 0.22 -1.83 -2.73 -3.63 -4.62 -4.93 7.70Site 2 : Abergele-Pensarn Colwyn Bay 4.77 3.70 2.85 2.00 0.24 -1.66 -2.49 -3.32 -4.23 -4.10 7.02Site 3 : Traeth Crugan Pwllheli 3.41 2.66 1.91 1.16 0.32 -0.54 -1.19 -1.84 -2.42 -2.44 4.50Site 4 : Morfa Dyffryn Barmouth 3.31 2.56 1.81 1.06 0.20 -0.64 -1.19 -1.74 -2.23 -2.44 4.30Site 5 : Broadwater-Aberdovey Aberdovey 3.31 2.56 1.81 1.06 0.17 -0.44 -1.09 -1.74 -2.32 -2.44 4.30Site 6 : Tenby North Beach Tenby 4.95 3.90 2.85 1.80 -0.01 -1.50 -2.55 -3.60 -4.53 -4.50 7.50Site 7 : Port Eynon Mumbles 5.50 4.30 3.10 1.90 0.05 -1.90 -3.00 -4.10 -5.08 -5.00 8.40Site 8 : Northwest Swansea Bay Swansea 5.50 4.50 3.35 2.20 0.16 -1.90 -2.95 -4.00 -5.00 -5.00 8.50Site 9 : Baglan-Aberavon Port Talbot 5.80 4.60 3.40 2.20 0.22 -1.70 -2.90 -4.10 -5.17 -5.20 8.70Site 10 : Porthcawl Porthcawl 5.80 4.60 3.40 2.20 0.01 -2.00 -3.15 -4.30 -5.32 -5.30 8.90

Elevations relative to Ordnance Datum (in metres)

Table 2.1 Assumed tidal levels at possible nourishment sites in Wales, taken from the 2009 Admiralty Tide Tables. Values taken directly from the tables in bold type, values extrapolated from the relevant Standard Port in regular type. MHW and MLW assumed to be midway between spring and neap levels.

Profile Period Advance (+) Average Rateor Retreat (-) of Change(m) (cm/year)

Site 1 : Gronant-Talacre P3 1871-2006 -18 -13P4 1871-2007 0 0P5 1871-2008 +14 +10P6 1871-2009 -53 -39P7 1871-2010 -107 -79

Site 2 : Abergele-Pensarn P45 1872-2006 +58 +43P46 1872-2006 +90 +67P47 1872-2006 +66 +49P48 1872-2006 +40 +30P49 1872-2006 +12 +9

Site 3 : Traeth Crugan P70 1888-2006 +3 +3P71 1888-2006 0 0

Site 4 : Morfa Dyffryn P34 1887-2006 -18 -15P35 1887-2006 -19 -16P36 1887-2006 -4 -3P37 1887-2006 0 0P38 1887-2006 0 0

Site 5 : Broadwater-Aberdovey P3 1887-2006 +25 +21P4 1887-2006 +152 +128P5 1887-2006 +39 +33P6 1887-2006 -21 -18P7 1887-2006 -7 -5P8 1887-2006 0 0P9 1887-2006 0 0P10 1887-2006 0 0P11 1887-2006 -37 -31P12 1887-2006 -8 -6P13 1887-2006 +77 +65

Site 6 : Tenby North Beach P12 1887-2006 0 0P13 1887-2006 0 0

Site 7 : Port Eynon P103 1877-2006 -24 -18P104 1877-2006 +4 +3

Site 8 : Northwest Swansea Bay P206 1876-2006 -41 -31P207 1876-2006 -24 -19P208 1876-2006 -22 -17P209 1876-2006 0 0P210 1876-2006 +84 +65

Site 9 : Baglan-Aberavon P217 1875-2006 +898 +685P218 1875-2006 +723 +552P219 1875-2006 +115 +88P220 1875-2006 -30 -23P221 1875-2006 -48 -36

Site 10 : Porthcawl P237 1876-2006 0 0P238 1876-2006 +20 +15P240 1876-2006 -62 -48

Table 2.2 Advance or retreat of the HAT mark, between the Firest Edition County Series Ordnance Survey maps (published in 1880s and 1890s) and aerial photography flown in 2006.

Site UKCP09grid cell

2030 2060 2100Low Emissions Scenario (SRES B1 Storyline)Site 1 : Gronant-Talacre 18964 5.2 (2.2 - 8.1) 14.5 (6.3 - 22.8) 30.0 (12.9 - 47.1)Site 2 : Abergele-Pensarn 18961 5.1 (2.2 - 8.0) 14.4 (6.2 - 22.5) 29.7 (12.6 - 46.8)Site 3 : Traeth Crugan 19976 5.2 (2.4 - 8.1) 14.7 (6.6 - 22.9) 30.3 (13.3 - 47.5)Site 4 : Morfa Dyffryn 20184 5.3 (2.5 - 8.2) 14.9 (6.8 - 23.2) 30.8 (13.8 - 47.9)Site 5 : Broadwater-Aberdovey 20800 5.5 (2.7 - 8.4) 15.4 (7.3 - 23.6) 31.6 (14.6 - 48.8)Site 6 : Tenby North Beach 23048 6.1 (3.3 - 9.0) 16.9 (8.8 - 25.1) 34.3 (17.3 - 51.4)Site 7 : Port Eynon 23259 6.1 (3.3 - 9.1) 17.0 (8.8 - 25.2) 34.4 (17.4 - 51.5)Site 8 : Northwest Swansea Bay 23261 6.1 (3.3 - 9.0) 16.9 (8.8 - 25.2) 34.4 (17.3 - 51.5)Site 9 : Baglan-Aberavon 23263 6.1 (3.3 - 9.0) 16.9 (8.8 - 25.1) 34.3 (17.3 - 51.4)Site 10 : Porthcawl 23470 6.2 (3.3 - 9.1) 17.0 (8.9 - 25.2) 34.5 (17.5 - 51.6)

Medium Emissions Scenario (SRES A1B Storyline)Site 1 : Gronant-Talacre 18964 6.3 (2.6 - 10.1) 17.7 (7.1 - 28.4) 36.7 (14.4 - 59.0)Site 2 : Abergele-Pensarn 18961 6.3 (2.4 - 10.0) 17.6 (6.8 - 28.3) 36.4 (14.0 - 58.7)Site 3 : Traeth Crugan 19976 6.4 (2.6 - 10.1) 17.9 (7.2 - 28.6) 37.0 (14.7 - 59.3)Site 4 : Morfa Dyffryn 20184 6.5 (2.7 - 10.2) 18.2 (7.5 - 28.8) 37.4 (15.1 - 59.8)Site 5 : Broadwater-Aberdovey 20800 6.6 (2.9 - 10.4) 18.6 (7.9 - 29.3) 38.3 (16.0 - 60.6)Site 6 : Tenby North Beach 23048 7.2 (3.5 - 11.1) 20.1 (9.4 - 30.9) 41.0 (18.7 - 63.4)Site 7 : Port Eynon 23259 7.3 (3.5 - 11.0) 20.2 (9.5 - 30.9) 41.1 (18.8 - 63.4)Site 8 : Northwest Swansea Bay 23261 7.3 (3.5 - 11.0) 20.1 (9.5 - 30.8) 41.0 (18.7 - 63.4)Site 9 : Baglan-Aberavon 23263 7.2 (3.5 - 11.1) 20.1 (9.4 - 30.9) 41.0 (18.7 - 63.4)Site 10 : Porthcawl 23470 7.3 (3.6 - 11.0) 20.2 (9.5 - 30.9) 41.2 (18.8 - 63.5)

High Emissions Scenario (SRES A1FI Storyline)Site 1 : Gronant-Talacre 18964 7.7 (2.9 - 12.5) 21.7 (8.1 - 35.3) 44.9 (16.5 - 73.2)Site 2 : Abergele-Pensarn 18961 7.6 (2.8 - 12.4) 21.4 (7.8 - 35.0) 44.5 (16.1 - 72.9)Site 3 : Traeth Crugan 19976 7.8 (3.0 - 12.5) 21.8 (8.2 - 35.4) 45.2 (16.8 - 73.6)Site 4 : Morfa Dyffryn 20184 7.9 (3.1 - 12.6) 22.1 (8.5 - 35.7) 45.6 (17.3 - 74.0)Site 5 : Broadwater-Aberdovey 20800 8.0 (3.3 - 12.8) 22.5 (9.0 - 36.1) 46.5 (18.1 - 74.9)Site 6 : Tenby North Beach 23048 8.6 (3.8 - 13.4) 24.0 (10.4 - 37.6) 49.2 (20.8 - 77.5)Site 7 : Port Eynon 23259 8.7 (3.9 - 13.5) 24.1 (10.5 - 37.7) 49.3 (20.9 - 77.6)Site 8 : Northwest Swansea Bay 23261 8.7 (3.9 - 13.4) 24.1 (10.5 - 37.7) 49.2 (20.8 - 77.6)Site 9 : Baglan-Aberavon 23263 8.6 (3.8 - 13.4) 24.0 (10.4 - 37.6) 49.2 (20.8 - 77.5)Site 10 : Porthcawl 23470 8.7 (3.9 - 13.5) 24.1 (10.6 - 37.7) 49.3 (21.0 - 77.7)

Increase in mean sea level from 2010 (cm)50% value (5-95% range in brackets)

Table 2.3 UKCP09 predictions of future increases in relative sea level , assuming low, medium and high emissions scenarios. Increases are relative to 2010.

Beach nourishment options in Wales and likely future requirements for beach nourishment in an era of sea level rise and climate change

Table 3.1 Selected case study sites.

Criteria Talacre Abergele Traeth Crugan Morfa Dyffryn Broadwater-Tywyn-Aberdovey

GEOGRAPHY Open coast or estuarine?

Estuarine Open Coast Open Coast Open Coast Open Coast

Eroding or accreting?

The majority of sand material is either retained by coastal defences or contributes to the significant accretion of material at the Point of Ayr, where it forms an expansive intertidal zone, and subsequently material to be used in the development of the Talacre Sand Dunes.

Source of material is relict – sediment supply through re-working of shoreline deposits. East of Abergele the three controlling headlands at Rhos Point, Tan Penmaen Head and Llanddulas would experience a moderate degree of erosion.

Erosion of the sand dunes at Traeth Crugan and Pwllheli Golf Club are providing sand, which accretes eastwards by littoral drift along the Pwllheli promenade. There is ongoing loss to this frontage as material by-passes Carreg yr Imbill and is deposited in the harbour mouth. There is a problem with siltation of the inner harbour at Pwllheli and this is thought to be due to the low tidal current velocities through the harbour entrance. Although the sea bed is generally free of silt outside the harbour entrance, the eroding glaciogenic cliffs to the west of the harbour are a source of suspended silt and mud.

In areas of the beach, the underlying peat is exposed and eroding, thereby causing permanent loss in beach volume since the eroded peat will disperse from the area. There is a large-scale northwards sediment transport pathway throughout most of Cardigan Bay.

Eroding between Tywyn and Club House Aberdovey / Accretion East of Aberdovey

COASTAL DEFENCES Material? This beach has a large unspoiled expansive sandy

foreshore backed by gently sloping dunes which graduate into a low-lying backshore.

The beach is generally a combination of sand and shingle. At the low water mark, patches of clean sand, shingle and boulders are apparent, while at high water this gives way to a cleaner ground of gravel and coarse sand.

Sandy beach overlying peat beds. A combination of sandy and pebbly beaches.

Hard or soft defences?

Large sandy beach with shallow gradient / shingle ridge. Considerable tidal range backed throughout by dunes.

Revetment (and wall in places) originally constructed 1845-48, re-furbished 1906. New revetment in places built in 1993 following 400m breach at Towyn in 1990. Shingle bank fronts wall to east of Abergele with dunes to landward and low-lying hinterland. Bars and troughs in sand foreshore migrate eastward across frontage influencing cycles of erosion / accretion.

The backshore is characterised by a single, narrow sand dune ridge. The height of the dune is generally 3 - 5 m and the crest width is approximately 3 - 4 m. Much of the dune system is poorly vegetated. The sand dunes at Traeth Crugan and Pwllheli Golf Club are subject to local erosion and are protected in places by stretches of rock revetment.

Sandy beach backed by dunes . Outcropping of shingle ridge down to Llanaber/ timber breastwork and rock revetment in front of caravan park 1km north. Down to Llanaber, railway line is built against the shoreline and protected by rock armour / Concrete promenade in front of railway line at Llanaber, fronted by rock revetment

Groyne field in front of Tywyn / Shingle ridge in place, sandy beach backed by dunes or Penllyn marshes

MANAGEMENT ISSUES Developed or undeveloped coast?

Undeveloped but caravan park, golf course and villages of Talacre and Gronant in the hinterland

Developed frontage tourist destination, beach constrained in places by railway and trunk roads though well-developed between this infrastructure.

Undeveloped along the whole coast line. Largely undeveloped - Four caravan parks, Llanaber village and railway line along part of the frontage

Mixed - Tywyn town and golf course.

Cross council boundary coverage?

Sir y Fflint - Flintshire Conwy – Conwy Gwynedd – Gwynedd

Gwynedd – Gwynedd Gwynedd North of Estuary

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Designated or non-designated?

Dee Estuary SSSI and Gronant Dunes & Talacre Warren SSSI. Gronant Dunes and Talacre Warren are part of the proposed Dee Estuary SAC and the proposed extension to the Dee Estuary SPA and Ramsar Site.

SSSI: Traeth Pensarn SSSI: Llanddulas Limestone And Gwrych Castle Wood SSSI: Coed Y Gopa

Designated sites: Pen Llyn a'r Sarnau / Lleyn Peninsula and the Sarnau SAC, and the Mynydd Tir Y Cwmwd A'r Glannau At Garreg Yr Imbill SSSI.

SAC: Morfa Harlech a Morfa Dyffryn NNR: Morfa Dyffryn SSSI: Morfa Dyffryn National Park: Snowdonia SAC: Pen Llyn a'r Sarnau / Lleyn Peninsula and the Sarnau

Dunes part of Dovey SSSI within Pen Llyn A’R SAR

Important for recreation and access?

Both Gronant and Talacre Dunes are popular with holidaymakers and local residents. Beach access through dunes and car park.

Pensarn beach is important for recreational activities such as Windsurfing and Canoeing. Beach access over mainline railway.

This area is important recreationally for the golf course users and also for Sea Anglers. The lagoon at Traeth Crugan also has a lagoon which sits within a string of banks and reefs which form an arc offshore which has a very diverse bivalve fauna.

Part of the beach is an officially recognised naturist area, one kilometre in length. The beach is also known for regular sightings of dolphins.

Fishing, sailing and watersports off Aberdovey harbour.

Beach nourishment options in Wales and likely future requirements for beach nourishment in an era of sea level rise and climate change

Table 3.1 (cont’d) Selected case study sites.

Criteria Tenby (North) Port Eynon Swansea Bay (North) Aberavon Porthcawl GEOGRAPHY Open coast or estuarine?

Open Coast Open Coast Estuarine / Open Coast Open Coast / Estuarine Estuarine / Open Coast

Eroding or accreting?

Varying rates of cliff retreat around the western end of Carmarthen Bay, due to differential erosion of rocks of varying resistance, is responsible for the current topography of headlands and intervening bays. Carboniferous sandstones and limestone form headlands, but mudstone-rich beds within the Carboniferous Coal Measures and Millstone Grit have been susceptible to greater erosion and recession.

The cliffs between Worms Head and Port Eynon Point, around Oxwich Point and between Great Tor and Mumbles Head will be dominated by very low rates of erosion.

Rates of transport of sand and gravel are likely to have been lower than those of the cliffed coasts of the Gower and South Glamorgan because Swansea Bay has been largely sheltered from westerly storms and weaker ebb-currents. Swansea Bay is generally a sink for sediments.

Much of this coastline is composed of relatively resistant cliffs and rock platforms, which have experienced little movement over the centuries. Overall, there is no notable trend of either accretion or erosion of beaches, though some beaches, such as in Trecco Bay, Porthcawl, have seen erosion in recent years.

COASTAL DEFENCES Material? Resistant Carboniferous Limestones form headlands such as

Worms Head and Burry Holms on the Gower Peninsula, and at Tenby and Giltar Point. Millstone Grit forms cliffed promontories between Tenby and Ragwen Point.

The resistant early Carboniferous limestone geology will constrain the future broad-scale configuration of this rocky cliffed coast. These cliffs have a very low potential recession rate and therefore significant change along the cliffed shoreline is not expected over the next century. Due to the exposure of these rocky shorelines and the lack of contemporary sediment input there would not be any significant new sediment accumulations.

The seabed east of Swansea Bay comprises mainly bedrock, with locally thin accumulations of sand and gravel. Extensive areas of rock are exposed across the channel off the South Glamorgan coast where there are maximum stresses on the seabed due to the tidal currents. Overall, the plan shape of Swansea Bay is dominantly a south to south-west facing bay bounded on either side by broadly east-west trending hard rock coasts composed primarily of early Carboniferous limestone.

This is a highly industrialised area of coast. The coastal plain widens particularly around Port Talbot, which is built on former sand dunes.

This area is characterised by a flat coastal plain around Porthcawl with low rocky headland and sandy enclosed beaches.

Hard or soft defences?

4 km of sandy beaches. Very little sand is derived from erosion of sandstones on this coastline. Most sand released from cliff erosion will be stored locally on the beaches, especially within pocket beaches, or will be washed into Carmarthen Bay by storm wave currents. Rock clasts (pebbles and shingle) liberated by rock falls generally remain on the adjacent rock platforms in the short term. Clay released from erosion of mudrocks will be carried by storm and tidal currents into the outer Bristol Channel. Much of the open-cliffed coastline is undefended, with defences being restricted to the settlements of Tenby, Saundersfoot, Wisemans Bridge, Amroth and Pendine, with few implications for the rest of the coastline.

Much of the open-cliffed coastline is undefended, with defences being restricted to individual embayments. Where defences are present, principally in the form of seawalls or revetments (such as in Port Eynon, Oxwich, Caswell, and Langland Bays), they protect localised areas from erosion but with few implications for the rest of the coastline.

Sand (mud?), wide intertidal area, wood fences to retain sand on the western side bay / Seawall and concrete revetment on the northern side then harbour jetty Closer to shore near Swansea Bay, Helwick and Nash Sands form banner banks reflecting changes in the orientation of the coastline. These banks provide limited protection to the coastline from open-ocean wave activity.

In the 1950s many of the sand dunes of Aberavon Beach disappeared as part of the development of the Sandfields estate. During this development, a 1.25 mile sea defence wall was built. This is also fronted by a rock revetment.

Rocky coast on western side with coves / sandy beach alternated with headlands / concrete promenade / jetty harbour / four small fishtail groynes / sandy beach backed by dunes to the east / rocky platform in front of Ogmore. There has been significant modification to this shoreline as a result of human interference. Much of the area of dunes has since been significantly modified and built up, so little of the originally morphology remains.

MANAGEMENT ISSUES Developed or undeveloped coast?

Tenby is developed with undeveloped land around. Port Eynon is largely undeveloped with a small residential area and camping and caravan park.

Heavily developed This is a highly industrialised area of coast characterised by heavy industry around Port Talbot.

Developed - Town, golf course, caravan park

Cross council boundary coverage?

Sir Benfro – Pembrokeshire Abertawe - Swansea Abertawe – Swansea Castell-nedd Port Talbot - Neath Port Talbot

Pen-y-bont ar Ogwr - Bridgend

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Designated or non-designated?

SSSI: Lydstep Head To Tenby Burrows National Park: Pembrokeshire Coast SAC: Carmarthen Bay and Estuaries / Bae Caerfyrddin ac Aberoedd SSSI: tenby cliffs and st. Catherine's island

SAC: Limestone Coast of South West Wales / Arfordir Calchfaen De Orllewin Cymru SSSI: Gower Coast: Rhossili To Porteynon AONB: Gower SSSI: Horton, Eastern And Western Slade SSSI: Oxwich Bay SAC: Gower Ash Woods / Coedydd Ynn Gwyr NNR: Oxwich

SSSI: Blackpill, Swansea SSSI: Crymlyn Burrows SAC: Kenfig / Cynffig SSSI: Merthyr Mawr

Important for recreation and access?

Tenby is a very busy UK holiday resort during summer. Caravan and Camping park. Access beach, watersport Averavon Beach is a favourite with surfers.

The sea here is used for swimming and surfing.

Profile Shoreline length Existing profile Design profile Required Additional Nourishment Total nourishment Assumedrepresented by area to MTL area to MTL nourishment area required volume required volume required nourishment

profile (m) (m2) (m2) width (m) (m2) per profile (m3) for site (m3) profile slopeSite 1 : Gronant-Talacre P3 408 183 202 43 20 8139 148080 1:25

P4 756 219 266 59 47 35169 1:25P5 712 245 306 72 61 43431 1:25P6 671 295 353 91 58 38833 1:25P7 365 231 292 68 62 22508 1:25

Site 2 : Abergele-Pensarn P46 1306 98 316 121 218 284997 429709 Slope to MTLP47 385 101 162 52 60 23301 Slope to MTLP48 498 101 200 69 100 49618 Slope to MTLP49 466 125 279 103 154 71793 Slope to MTL

Site 3 : Traeth Crugan P70 612 35 74 28 39 24163 68159 Slope to MTLP71 1079 50 90 39 41 43996 Slope to MTL

Site 4 : Morfa Dyffryn P34 897 74 128 62 55 48935 369486 Slope to MTLP35 1607 165 220 122 55 88303 Slope to MTLP36 1245 149 284 163 136 168948 Slope to MTLP37 1133 162 218 120 56 63300 Slope to MTL

Site 5 : Broadwater-Aberdovey P4 270 129 169 69 40 10817 491394 1:25P5 633 126 178 79 52 32616 1:25P6 806 104 185 93 81 65210 1:25P7 1241 89 186 100 97 120550 Slope to MTLP8 987 93 151 76 58 57042 Slope to MTLP9 670 79 141 70 63 41988 Slope to MTLP10 691 75 130 63 55 37981 Slope to MTLP11 1082 34 92 39 58 62599 Slope to MTLP12 1218 32 67 23 35 42551 Slope to MTLP13 656 71 101 45 31 20041 Slope to MTL

Table 4.1 Initial volumes of nourishment material required at each site for the example scenario. The design profile assumes a 20 m wide flat-topped berm at the level of HAT, sloping down to the existing profile at a angle of 1:25, or to MTL, whichever is closer to the HAT mark.

Profile Shoreline length Existing profile Design profile Required Additional Nourishment Total nourishment Assumedrepresented by area to MTL area to MTL nourishment area required volume required volume required nourishment

profile (m) (m2) (m2) width (m) (m2) per profile (m3) for site (m3) profile slopeSite 6 : Tenby North Beach P12 347 62 132 63 70 24291 45964 Slope to MTL

P13 425 192 243 80 51 21673 Slope to MTLSite 7 : Port Eynon P103 508 307 461 149 153 77908 151636 Slope to MTL

P104 704 293 398 128 105 73728 Slope to MTLSite 8 : Northwest Swansea Bay P206 768 298 412 99 114 87565 344832 1:25

P207 979 332 460 125 128 125261 1:25P208 934 424 444 128 20 18589 1:25P209 1103 372 429 106 57 62604 1:25P210 996 346 397 91 51 50813 1:25

Site 9 : Baglan-Aberavon P217 641 311 355 74 44 28296 640784 1:25P218 1055 343 419 96 76 80427 1:25P219 1078 295 474 128 179 192948 1:25P220 767 327 484 128 158 120739 1:25P221 860 246 500 155 254 218374 1:25

Site 10 : Porthcawl P237 418 320 396 83 76 31794 159268 1:25P238 234 384 454 117 70 16417 1:25P240 700 338 496 142 159 111056 1:25

Table 4.1 continued.

Site Planar areaof proposednourishment Minimum Best Maximum Minimum Best Maximum Minimum Best Maximum

(x103 m2) Estimate Estimate EstimateSite 1 : Gronant-Talacre 1373 30 86 172 86 243 485 177 504 1005Site 2 : Abergele-Pensarn 187 4 12 23 12 33 65 24 68 136Site 3 : Traeth Crugan 81 2 5 10 5 14 29 11 30 59Site 4 : Morfa Dyffryn 540 14 35 68 37 98 193 75 202 400Site 5 : Broadwater-Aberdovey 670 18 44 86 49 125 242 98 257 502Site 6 : Tenby North Beach 58 2 4 8 5 12 22 10 24 45Site 7 : Port Eynon 160 5 12 22 14 32 60 28 66 124Site 8 : Northwest Swansea Bay 1498 49 109 201 132 301 565 259 614 1163Site 9 : Baglan-Aberavon 1319 44 95 177 116 265 496 228 541 1022Site 10 : Porthcawl 323 11 24 44 29 65 122 56 133 251

Sea level rise by 2030 (cm) Sea level rise by 2060 (cm) Sea level rise by 2100 (cm)Volumes of sediment required to maintain the existing beach profile (x103 m3)

Table 4.2 Planar areas of the defined possible nourishment areas (between HAT and MTL), and minimum, maximum and best estimates of volumes of sediment required to maintain the existing beach profile by 2030, 2060 and 2100 based on UKCP09 sea level rise predictions. Minima represent the 5% values for the low emission (SRES B1) scenario, maxima represent the 95% values for the high emissions (A1FI) scenario, and best estimates represent the 50% values for the medium emissions (A1B) scenario. Increases are relative to 2010. N.B. The calculations make no allowance for post-nourishment losses and re-nourishment required, and therefore are underestimates of the total volumes of sediment which would be required.

Site Initial Four renourishments Volumes required to maintain

nourishment assuming 50% losses

(x103 m3) every five years Minimum Best Maximum Minimum Best Maximum

(x103 m3) Estimate EstimateSite 1 : Gronant-Talacre 148 296 30 86 172 474 531 616Site 2 : Abergele-Pensarn 430 859 4 12 23 1293 1301 1312Site 3 : Traeth Crugan 68 136 2 5 10 206 210 215Site 4 : Morfa Dyffryn 369 739 14 35 68 1122 1144 1177Site 5 : Broadwater-Aberdovey 491 983 18 44 86 1492 1518 1560Site 6 : Tenby North Beach 46 92 2 4 8 140 142 146Site 7 : Port Eynon 152 303 5 12 22 460 467 477Site 8 : Northwest Swansea Bay 345 690 49 109 201 1084 1144 1235Site 9 : Baglan-Aberavon 641 1282 44 95 177 1966 2017 2099Site 10 : Porthcawl 159 319 11 24 44 488 501 521

existing beach profile (x103 m3)

Total volume of sediment

required by 2030 (x103 m3)

Table 4.3 Nourishment volumes required over the period 2010 to 2030, assuming an initial nourishment in 2010 followed by five-yearly renourishment campaigns to replace 50% losses, and additional volumes required to raise the beach profile due to sea level rise, based on minimum, maximum and best estimates from UKCP09 sea level rise predictions. Minima represent the 5% values for the low emission (SRES B1) scenario, maxima represent the 95% values for the high emissions (A1FI) scenario, and best estimates represent the 50% values for the medium emissions (A1B) scenario.

Table 5.1 Summary of actual and potential benefits of beach nourishment at the ten study sites.

Has beach nourishment been used to date?

If so, has it been thought a success?

Actual or potential benefits of beach nourishment

Flood and coastal erosion risk management

Habitat creation/ remediation

Tourism and recreation

Talacre

Abergele - Pensarn

Traeth Crugan

Morfa Dyffryn

Broadwater - Tywyn – Aberdovey

Tenby North Beach

Port Eynon Bay

Northern Swansea Bay (Black Pill to Swansea Docks)

Aberavon Sands (eastern Swansea Bay)

Porthcawl (Sandy Bay and Trecco Bay)

Figures

Figure 1.1 Location of possible case study areas.

Tenby NorthBeach Port

Eynon NorthwestSwansea Bay

Baglan-Aberavon

Porthcawl

Broadwater-Aberdovey

TalacreAbergele-Pensarn

MorfaDyffryn

TraethCrugan

MHW

MLW

embryodunes

sanddunes

WAVE DISSIPATION

WIND TRANSPORT

(a) Soft defences, sand only Flood protection:Recreational use:Biodiversity/nature conservation:Visual appearance/landscape quality:Beach access:

Moderate/GoodGoodGoodGoodGood

Wide forshore, gently sloping

Wide backshore,with drying beach

MHW

MLW

vegetated shingle

sanddunes

sand

sandWAVE DISSIPATION

LIMITED WIND TRANSPORT

(b) Gravel upper beach,sand lower beach

Flood protection:Recreational use:Biodiversity/nature conservation:Visual appearance/landscape quality:Beach access:

Moderate/GoodModerate/GoodGoodGoodModerate/Good

Wide forshore, gently sloping

Wide, high backshore,with drying beach

activeshingle

Figure 2.1 Concept diagrams showing examples of ‘Good’ beaches.

sand

sand

sand

gravel

Figure 2.2 Examples of ‘Good’ beaches: wide, high, wave-dissipative beaches at (a) Harlech, looking north in August 1991; and (b) Broad Haven, west of Stackpole Warren, in March 2009.

(a)

(b)

(a) Low beach levelsfronting sea wall

thin sandlayer

MHW

MLW

exposed back-barriersand/ peat deposits

scourhole

no high tide‘dry beach’

HIGH DEGREE OFWAVE REFLECTANCE

sea wall


PoorPoorPoorPoorPoor

(b) Low beach levelsfronting rock armour

thin sandlayer

MHW

MLW

exposed back-barriersand/ peat deposits

REDUCED WAVEREFLECTANCE

sea wall/revetment


ModeratePoor/DangerousPoorPoorPoor

angularrock armour

(c) Narrow beach fronting eroding sand dunes


PoorPoorPoorModerateModerate

Figure 2.3 Concept diagrams showing examples of ‘Poor’ beaches.

MHW

MLW

LIMITED WAVE DISSIPATION

narrow foreshore

very narrowbackshore

narrow erodingforedune

landward movementof dunes

(d) Narrow beach fronting narrow shingle barrier


PoorPoorModerateModerateModerate

MHW

MLW

LIMITED WAVE DISSIPATIONvery narrowbackshore

shingle bermwith narrow crest

retreat by washoverand breaching

relativelynarrow foreshore

infilling over back-barriersaline lagoons and

burial of marshback-barrier depositsexposed on foreshore

sand

sand

back-barrier deposits

gravel

Figure 2.4 Example of a ‘Poor’ beach: Ffrith Beach, Rhyl, with very low beach levels, dilapidated groynes and exposed sea wall: (a) oblique aerial photograph taken March2008; (b) ground photograph looking west taken February 2010.

(a)

(b)

Figure 2.5 Concept diagram showing possible alternative sources of artificial nourishment material. After Pye (2010).

marina

river

Solid rock upland

Dominantwave

approach

10

9

8

7

6

5

43

2

1

11

1234567891011

Port and harbour dredging (captial and maintenance)Inland quarry (hard and soft rock)Inland quarry (unconsolidated gravel and/or sand)Excavation for buildings and infrastructureIndustrial waste productsNearshore sea bed borrow pitNearshore banks (ebb tidal delta shoal)Proximal offshore zone (>20 m depth)Distal offshore depositsNeighbouring beach depositsDowndrift sediment sink - sediment recycled

coastal plain

Figure 2.6 Some alternative methods of beach nourishment. After Pye (2010).

marineinputs

landinputs

longshoretrickle-feed

road

truck haul beach deposit

offshore deposit (subtidal berm)

conveyor transport excavationsite

conveyor deposit

dredger pipe

dredger

‘rainbow’deposition

Hydraulicnourishment

landward movement of sediment by natural processes

SEA LAND

Key

nourishment material

initial beach

dune nourishment deposits (usually truck ortractor/trailer haul)

t0

t1

t2

t3

Figure 2.7 Schematic diagrams showing sediment losses following initial beach nourishment on (a) an open-ended system, such as a straight open-coast beach, and (b) a semi-closed system, such as a pocket beach. After Pye (2010).

Landward transfer losses(aeolian transportand/or washover)

“spead out”losses

offshorelosses

Dominantwave

approach

“spead out”losses

(a)

limited losses offshore

Landward lossesto dunes

t0t1

t2t3sediment spreads out but little is lost from the system

gravel concentrated on backshore

sand moves to nearshore

(b)

sediment losses due to longshore

drift

Dominantwave

approach

Key

nourishment material (t1)

initial beach (t0)

seaward position of beach after time period (t2)

seaward position of beach after time period (t3)

headland

headland

Figure 2.8 Examples of previously successful beach nourishment: (a) Miami Beach, taken 2007; (b) oblique aerial photograph of West Shore, Llandudno, taken March 2008.

(a)

(b)

Mean sea level 2Mean sea level 1

Shorelineposition 1

Shorelineposition 2

(a) Simple 2-D Bruun ModelNatural retreat, no nourishment

t1

t2

sea level rise

erosion distance

Mean sea level 1sea level rise

Mean sea level 2

t1t2

(b) ‘Hold The Line’Large-scale nourishment required

No change inshoreline position

Figure 2.9 Conceptual models of shoreline evolution during sea level rise: (a) Bruun’s model of shoreline retreat in response to sea level rise, and (b) ‘Hold The Line’ model with no net change in shoreline position or beach form in response to sea level rise.

Erosion

Accretion

Wholeprofile

accretion

0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.60

0.70

0.80

0.90

1.00

1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100

Sea

leve

l ris

e (m

)

DEFRA (2006)

UKCP09 - low emissions 95%ile

UKCP09 - medium emissions 95%ile

UKCP09 - high emissions 95%ile

Figure 2.10 Future sea level rise preditions from 1990 based on the DEFRA (2006) sea level rise allowances (for south west England and Wales), and UKCP09 projections (for Holyhead,grid cell 18745) based on the 95th percentile modelled output values (considered very unlikely to be exceeded) for low (SRES B1), medium (SRES A1B1) and high (SRES A1FI) emission scenarios.

308500 309000 309500 310000 310500 311000 311500 312000 312500 313000383000

383500

384000

384500

385000

385500

386000

LowerGronant

Talacre

Point of AyrLighthouse

Figure 4.2 Oblique aerial photographs of (a) Talacre and Point of Ayr viewed from the east, and (b) the nourished area of the shore near the Point of Ayr Lighthouse, taken in March 2008. Source: Northwest Coastal Group.

(a)

(b)

Figure 4.3 The beach at Talacre taken during nourishment in February-March 2003.Source: Countryside Council for Wales.

(a)

(b)

Figure 4.4 The upper beach (a) and frontal dunes (b) at Talacre in March 2004, one year after beach nourishment.

(a)

(b)

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

8

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700

Elev

atio

n (m

OD

)

Chainage (m)

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

8

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700

Elev

atio

n (m

OD

)

Chainage (m)

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

8

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700

Elev

atio

n (m

OD

)

Chainage (m)

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

8

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700

Elev

atio

n (m

OD

)

Chainage (m)

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

8

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700

Elev

atio

n (m

OD

)

Chainage (m)

Figure 4.5 Cross-sectional profiles P3 to P7 at Talacre, Autumn 2007.

P3 P4

P5 P6

P7

Figure 4.6 The upper beach and frontal dunes (a) east and (b) west of Point of Ayr Lighthouse, in February 2010.

(a)

(b)

291000 291500 292000 292500 293000 293500 294000 294500 295000 295500 296000377500

378000

378500

379000

379500

380000

P45

P46P47

P48P49

R. Dulas mouth

Pensarn

Abergele

HenWrych

Figure 4.8 Oblique aerial photographs of (a) central part and (b) western end of the Abergele-Pensarn ridge complex, March 2008. Source: Northwest Coastal Group.

(a)

(b)

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

8

-50 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450

Elev

atio

n (m

OD

)

Chainage (m)

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

8

-50 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450

Elev

atio

n (m

OD

)

Chainage (m)

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

8

-50 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450

Elev

atio

n (m

OD

)

Chainage (m)

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

8

-50 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450

Elev

atio

n (m

OD

)

Chainage (m)

P46 P47

P48 P49

Figure 4.9 Cross-sectional beach profiles across the beach at Site 2 : Abergele-Pensarn , surveyed in October 2009.

Figure 4.10 Western end of the Abergele-Pensarn ridge complex looking (a) west and (b) east, February 2010.

(a)

(b)

234000 234200 234400 234600 234800 235000 235200 235400 235600 235800 236000 236200 236400332000

332200

332400

332600

332800

333000

333200

333400

333600

333800

334000

P70

P71

-2

-1

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

00105005-

Chainage (m)

Ele

vati

on

(m

)

-2

-1

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

00105005-

Chainage (m)

Ele

vati

on

(m

)

Spring 1996 Spring 1997 Autumn 1997 Spring 1998 Autumn 1998 Spring 1999 Autumn 1999Spring 2000 Autumn 2000 Spring 2001 Autumn 2001 Spring 2002 Autumn 2002 Spring 2003Autumn 2003 Spring 2004 Autumn 2004 Spring 2005 Autumn 2005 Spring 2006

Figure 4.12 Cross-sectional beach profiles across the beach at Traeth Crugan.After Faber Maunsell (2008).

Profile P70

Profile P71

Figure 4.13 Rock armour sea defences and upper beach at Traeth Cruganlooking (a) west and (b) east, in 2006.

(a)

(b)

Composite aerial photograph of Site 4 : Morfa Dyffryn, flown 15/07/2006. Also shown are thelimits of the defined possible nourishment area, positions of Gwynedd Council beach cross‐sectional profiles, and tide lines from First Edition County Series Ordnance Survey mapssurveyed in 1887.

Figure 4.15 Offset of tidal contours relative to the station on beach profiles 34 and 35 at Morfa Dyffryn. After Pye and Saye (2005)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

S19

92

A19

92

S19

93

A19

93

S19

94

A19

94

S19

95

A19

95

S19

96

A19

96

S19

97

A19

97

S19

98

A19

98

S19

99

A19

99

S20

00

A20

00

S20

01

A20

01

S20

02

A20

02

S20

03

Dis

tanc

e fro

m S

tatio

n (m

)

Year/Season

PROFILE 34

HAT

MHWST

MHWNT

MTL

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

S19

92

A19

92

S19

93

A19

93

S19

94

A19

94

S19

95

A19

95

S19

96

A19

96

S19

97

A19

97

S19

98

A19

98

S19

99

A19

99

S20

00

A20

00

S20

01

A20

01

S20

02

A20

02

S20

03

Dis

tanc

e fro

m S

tatio

n (m

)

Year/Season

PROFILE 35

HAT

MHWST

MHWNT

MTL

Figure 4.15 continued.

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

S19

92

A19

92

S19

93

A19

93

S19

94

A19

94

S19

95

A19

95

S19

96

A19

96

S19

97

A19

97

S19

98

A19

98

S19

99

A19

99

S20

00

A20

00

S20

01

A20

01

S20

02

A20

02

S20

03

Dis

tanc

e fro

m S

tatio

n (m

)

Year/Season

PROFILE 36

HAT

MHWST

MHWNT

MTL

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

S19

92

A19

92

S19

93

A19

93

S19

94

A19

94

S19

95

A19

95

S19

96

A19

96

S19

97

A19

97

S19

98

A19

98

S19

99

A19

99

S20

00

A20

00

S20

01

A20

01

S20

02

A20

02

S20

03

Dis

tanc

e fro

m S

tatio

n (m

)

Year/Season

PROFILE 37

HAT

MHWST

MHWNT

MTL

Figure 4.16 The dunes at Morfa Dyffryn, taken May 2007.

(a)

(b)

255000 255500 256000 256500 257000 257500 258000 258500 259000 259500 260000 260500 261000295000

295500

296000

296500

297000

297500

298000

298500

299000

299500

300000

300500

301000

301500

302000

302500

303000

303500

304000

P3

P4

P5

P6

P7

P8

P9

P10

P11

P12

P13

0 250 500 750 1000

Figure 4.18 (a) Removal of excess sand from area of boat ramp at Aberdovey promenade, (b) emplacement of nourishment sand at low points in the foredunes, Aberdovey Golf Club frontage. Source: Gwynedd Council.

(a)

(b)

-1

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

-50 0 50 100 150 200 250 300

Elev

atio

n (m

OD

)

Chainage (m)

May-08

Feb-92

Figure 4.19 Cross-sectional beach profiles between Aberdovey and Tywyn, measured on 13-14 February 1992 and 2 May 2008.

P3-1

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

-50 0 50 100 150 200 250 300

Elev

atio

n (m

OD

)

Chainage (m)

May-08

Feb-92

P4

-1

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

-50 0 50 100 150 200 250 300

Elev

atio

n (m

OD

)

Chainage (m)

May-08

Feb-92

P5-1

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

-50 0 50 100 150 200 250 300

Elev

atio

n (m

OD

)

Chainage (m)

May-08

Feb-92

P6

-1

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

-50 0 50 100 150 200 250 300

Elev

atio

n (m

OD

)

Chainage (m)

May-08

Feb-92

P7-1

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

-50 0 50 100 150 200 250 300

Elev

atio

n (m

OD

)

Chainage (m)

May-08

Feb-92

P8

Figure 4.20 (a) Nourished area of the frontal dunes, Aberdovey Golf Club frontage, March 2007; and (b) the beach fronting Penllyn Marshes, north of Aberdovey Golf Club, April 2008

(a)

(b)

Figure 4.21 (a) The beach at Tywyn, showing low beach levels and damage to promenade, and (b) beach and railway line between Tywyn and Broad Water, showing limited flood protection, both taken May 2007.

(a)

(b)

212800 213000 213200 213400 213600 213800 214000 214200200200

200400

200600

200800

201000

201200

201400

201600

P12

P13

CastleMound

Tenby

FirstPoint

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

-50 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350

Elev

atio

n (m

OD

)

Chainage (m)

Profile 12

08/10/1999 22/03/200010/10/2000 04/04/200126/10/2001 26/04/200215/10/2002 07/10/200314/04/2004 30/09/200428/06/2005 04/07/200620/06/2007 21/05/200801/05/2003 14/05/1999

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

-50 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350

Elev

atio

n (m

OD

)

Chainage (m)

Profile 13

08/10/1999 22/03/200010/10/2000 04/04/200129/10/2001 26/04/200215/10/2002 07/10/200314/04/2004 30/09/200428/06/2005 04/07/200620/06/2007 21/05/200801/05/2003 14/05/1999

Figure 4.23 Cross-sectional beach profiles at Site 6 : Tenby North Beach.

Figure 4.24 Tenby North Beach (a) looking north from Castle Mound, taken March 2009, (b) looking south from the northern end, taken February 2010.

(a)

(b)

246400 246600 246800 247000 247200 247400 247600 247800 248000 248200 248400184200

184400

184600

184800

185000

185200

185400

185600

185800

P103

P104

Port EynonPoint

Port Eynon

Horton

Figure 4.26 The beach at Port Eynon (a) looking southwest from Horton; and(b) looking northeast from Port Eynon. Source: Llanelli Sand Dredging.

(a)

(b)

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

-50 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500

Elev

atio

n (m

OD

)

Chainage (m)

Profile 103

29/09/1999 03/03/200008/09/2000 11/03/200125/09/2001 03/04/200216/09/2002 19/08/200316/03/2004 08/09/200427/04/2005 01/06/200613/06/2007 02/07/200811/03/2003 10/04/1999

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

-50 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350

Elev

atio

n (m

OD

)

Chainage (m)

Profile 104

29/09/1999 03/03/200008/09/2000 11/03/200125/09/2001 03/04/200216/09/2002 19/08/200316/03/2004 08/09/200427/04/2005 01/06/200613/06/2007 02/07/200811/03/2003 10/04/1999

Figure 4.27 Cross-sectional beach profiles at Port Eynon.

261500 262000 262500 263000 263500 264000 264500 265000 265500 266000 266500 267000190000

190500

191000

191500

192000

192500

193000

P206

P207

P208

P209P210

0 250 500 750 1000

Scale (m)

Swansea

LowerSketty

BlackPill

SwanseaUniversity

WestPier

Brynmill

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

-100 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500

Elev

atio

n (m

OD

)

Chainage (m)

Profile 206

08/04/1999 02/10/199911/03/2000 01/09/200008/03/2001 07/10/200102/04/2002 09/09/200202/09/2003 24/03/200414/09/2004 10/05/200508/06/2006 30/05/200710/06/2008 17/03/200309/06/1998

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

-100 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500

Elev

atio

n (m

OD

)

Chainage (m)

Profile 207

31/03/1999 03/10/199911/03/2000 01/09/200008/03/2001 07/10/200102/04/2002 09/09/200202/09/2003 24/03/200414/09/2004 10/05/200508/06/2006 31/05/200710/06/2008 17/03/200310/06/1998

Figure 4.29 Cross-sectional beach profiles in Northwest Swansea Bay.

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

-100 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500

Elev

atio

n (m

OD

)

Chainage (m)

Profile 208

30/03/1999 16/09/199901/03/2000 31/08/200008/03/2001 04/10/200102/04/2002 09/09/200202/09/2003 24/03/200414/09/2004 10/05/200508/06/2006 30/05/200710/06/2008 17/03/200310/06/1998

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

-100 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500

Elev

atio

n (m

OD

)

Chainage (m)

Profile 209

30/03/1999 16/09/199901/03/2000 31/08/200008/03/2001 02/10/200103/04/2002 19/09/200202/09/2003 26/03/200414/09/2004 09/05/200531/05/2006 30/05/200710/06/2008 27/03/200310/06/1998


-4

-2

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

-100 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500

Elev

atio

n (m

OD

)

Chainage (m)

Profile 210

30/03/1999 16/09/199901/03/2000 31/08/200008/03/2001 24/09/200103/04/2002 19/09/200226/08/2003 26/03/200413/09/2004 04/05/200512/06/2006 31/05/200711/06/2008 01/04/200310/06/1998


Figure 4.30 (a) Northern Swansea Bay near Black Pill (a) looking west and (b) looking east, taken February 2010.

(a)

(b)

271000 271500 272000 272500 273000 273500 274000 274500 275000 275500187000

187500

188000

188500

189000

189500

190000

190500

191000

191500

192000

192500

193000

193500

0 250 500 750 1000

P217

P218

P219

P220

P221

0 250 500 750 1000

Scale (m)

Port Talbot

BaglanBurrows

CrymlynBurrows

Baglan

Aberavon

River Neath

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

-100 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500

Elev

atio

n (m

OD

)

Chainage (m)

Profile 217

12/04/1999 22/09/199917/03/2000 05/09/200015/03/2001 08/10/200116/04/2002 23/09/200209/09/2003 29/03/200417/09/2004 17/05/200518/07/2006 05/06/200730/06/2008 01/04/200301/07/1998

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

-100 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500

Elev

atio

n (m

OD

)

Chainage (m)

Profile 218

12/04/1999 22/09/199917/03/2000 05/09/200015/03/2001 08/10/200108/04/2002 23/09/200209/09/2003 29/03/200417/09/2004 17/05/200518/07/2006 04/06/200709/06/2008 01/04/200301/07/1998

Figure 4.32 Cross-sectional beach profiles between Baglan and Aberavon.

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

-100 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500

Elev

atio

n (m

OD

)

Chainage (m)

Profile 220

05/04/1999 22/09/199902/03/2000 04/09/200007/03/2001 25/09/200104/04/2002 23/09/200220/08/2003 16/03/200407/09/2004 17/05/200505/06/2006 01/06/200709/06/2008 01/04/200311/06/1998

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

-100 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500

Elev

atio

n (m

OD

)

Chainage (m)

Profile 219

05/04/1999 22/09/199902/03/2000 05/09/200007/03/2001 25/09/200104/04/2002 23/09/200220/08/2003 16/03/200407/09/2004 17/05/200505/06/2006 01/06/200709/06/2008 01/04/200311/06/1998


-4

-2

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

-100 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500

Elev

atio

n (m

OD

)

Chainage (m)

Profile 221

05/04/1999 22/09/199902/03/2000 04/09/200007/03/2001 25/09/200104/04/2002 23/09/200220/08/2003 16/03/200407/09/2004 17/05/200505/06/2006 01/06/200709/06/2008 01/04/200311/06/1998


Figure 4.33 (a) The upper beach at Aberavon looking north, taken March 2009;(b) Bulldozer removing sand from sea wall steps at Aberavon,February 2010.

(a)

(b)

Figure 4.34 (a) The beach towards the northern end of Aberavon promenade, looking south, showing windblown sand buildup on the stepped revetment; and (b) the beach fronting the southern end of Baglan Burrows, looking north. Photographs taken February 2010.

(a)

(b)

281400 281600 281800 282000 282200 282400 282600 282800 283000 283200 283400 283600 283800 284000176000

176200

176400

176600

176800

177000

177200

177400

177600

0 200 400 600 800

P237P238

P240

Porthcawl

PorthcawlPoint

TreccoBay

SandyBay

NewtonPoint

RhychPoint

NewtonBurrows

Newton

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

-50 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600

Elev

atio

n (m

OD

)

Chainage (m)

Profile 237

28/03/1999 18/09/199911/03/2000 07/09/200009/03/2001 26/09/200105/04/2002 17/09/200229/08/2003 18/03/200421/09/2004 25/05/200520/06/2006 06/06/200704/06/2008 18/03/200316/06/1998

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

-50 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600

Elev

atio

n (m

OD

)

Chainage (m)

Profile 238

28/03/1999 18/09/199911/03/2000 07/09/200014/03/2001 26/09/200108/04/2002 17/09/200215/09/2003 18/03/200423/09/2004 01/06/200520/06/2006 06/06/200704/06/2008 12/03/200316/06/1998

Figure 4.36 Cross-sectional beach profiles at Porthcawl.

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

-50 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600

Elev

atio

n (m

OD

)

Chainage (m)

Profile 240

09/04/1999 18/09/199913/03/2000 07/09/200009/03/2001 26/09/200105/04/2002 17/09/200213/08/2003 10/03/200423/09/2004 01/06/200520/06/2006 06/06/200704/06/2008 12/03/200316/06/1998


Figure 4.37 The beach at Sandy Bay, Porthcawl (a) looking east from the western end; and (b) looking west from the eastern end. Photographs taken February 2010.

(a)

(b)

CHART H:LICENSED DREDGING AREAS FOR THENORTH WEST REGION

04 0

0 W

03 3

0 W

03 0

0 W

54 00 N

53 30 N

331

392393 A

B

12M

ileTerritorial Sea

Limit

6M

ileF

ishingLim

it

457

PRESTON

MORECAMBE

FLEETWOOD

BLACKPOOL

SOUTHPORT

LIVERPOOL

BARROW-IN-FURNESS

GRANGE-OVER-SANDS

SCALE : 1:500,000

NOTE: NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION

CEMEX UK Materials Ltd.(Mersey Sand Supplies - Tel. 01512 071 886)

193/1 (A) 193/2 (B)

Norwest Sand & Ballast Co.(Mersey Sand Supplies - Tel. 01512 071 886)

175/1 (A)175/2 (B) 393

Tarmac Marine Dredging Ltd.(Tel. 01243 817 200)

195/1 (A) 195/2 (B)331392

Westminster Gravels Ltd. (Tel. 01489 885 933)

457 (From 01/07/2010)

DATE: APRIL 2010

From 01/07/2010

CHART G:LICENSED DREDGING AREAS FOR THESOUTH WEST REGION

04 0

0 W

03 3

0 W

03 0

0 W

04 3

0 W

51 00 N

385

391

377 379 381

51 30 N476

6M

ileFi

shin

gLi

mit

472

England / Wales Boundary

373*

470/1470/2

BUDE

SWANSEA

CARDIFF

NEWPORT

WATCHET

LLANELLI

MINEHEAD

CAMARTHEN

PORTHCAWL

ILFRACOMBE

WESTWARD HO!

BURNHAM-ON-SEA

WESTON-SUPER-MARE

SCALE : 1:600,000


British Dredging Ltd.(Tel. 023 8072 0200)

379385

CEMEX UK Marine Ltd.(Tel. 023 8072 0200)

472

Hanson Aggregates Marine Ltd.(Tel. 023 8082 8200)

377 470/2391 472470/1

Llanelli Sand Dredging Ltd.(Tel. 01489 885 933)

373 (Dormant)476

Tarmac Marine Dredging Ltd.Formerly United Marine Dredging Ltd.(Tel. 01243 817 200)

381 470/2470/1 472

DATE: APRIL 2010

Awaiting relicensing*Licence

Figure 5.1 Licensed dredging areas in: (a) NW Region and (b) SW Region.Source: Crown Estate.

(b)

(a)

CHART F:

486/5

455 459

6M

ileFi

shin

gLi

mit

04 3

0 W

04 0

0 W

03 3

0 W

03 0

0 W

51 30 N

51 00 N

England/Wales Boundary486/3

486/2486/1486/4

486

SWANSEA

CARDIFF

NEWPORT

WATCHET

LLANELLI

MINEHEAD

CAMARTHEN

PORTHCAWL

ILFRACOMBE

WESTWARD HO!

BURNHAM-ON-SEA

WESTON-SUPER-MARE

DATE: APRIL 2010

SCALE : 1:600,000


British Dredging Ltd.(Tel. 023 8072 0200)

486/1 486/3 486/5 486/2 486/4

Severn Sands Ltd.(Tel 01633 258589)

455459

Hanson Aggregates Marine Ltd.(Tel. 023 8082 8200)

486/1 486/3 486/5486/2 486/4 Tarmac Marine Dredging Ltd.United Marine Dredging Ltd.(Tel. 01243 817200)

486/1 486/3 486/5486/2 486/4

DREDGING APPLICATION, OPTION AND PROSPECTING AREAS FOR SOUTH WEST REGION

Application AreaPre Application AreaOption or Prospecting Area

Figure 5.2 Dredging application, option and prospecting areas in the SW Region (there are currently no areas in the NW Region). Source: Crown Estate.

Documents

Beach Nourishment Operations in Wales and Likely Future Requirements in an Era of Sea Level Rise and Climate Change 2010-CCW Science Report No 928