Dorset and East Waterborne Transport Scoping Study

September 2oo9 A study report by Fisher Associates (September 2oo9) for AONB and Transport Working Group

This report was commissioned by the Dorset Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) to investigate potential for waterborne transport along the Dorset and Coast which would offer an enhanced, reliable and realistic alternative transport opportunity for both functional and leisure journeys, and would enable integration between waterborne and surface transport. The Steering Group for this project comprised representatives from Dorset AONB, the Jurassic Coast Team, Devon and Dorset County Councils and the Jurassic Coast Trust.

For further information, please contact: Sue Mitchell, Dorset AONB  01305 228236  [email protected] or Sally King, Jurassic Coast Team  01305 225091  [email protected]

map image (Not to be used for navigational purposes) Imray Folio 2300, with thanks to Imray Nautical Charts 2009. Reproduced by Permission of Imray, Laurie Norie and Wilson Ltd

Front and rear cover photographs: Stephen Paul Hardy All photos in report sourced by Fisher Associates Dorset and East Devon Waterborne Passenger Transport Scoping Study

Final Report

24th September 2009

Prepared by Fisher Associates for Dorset AONB

Document History Details Date Notes Draft Final Report 7th August 2009 Draft submitted for review Discussion Draft 9th September 2009 Revised working draft incorporating comments for discussion at review meeting Final Report 11th September 2009 Final draft submitted for approval Final Report 24th September 2009 Final Report incorporating final amendments

Fisher Associates, Seaways, Rowes Lane, East End, Lymington, SO41 5SU

Tel: 01590 626 220 www.fisherassoc.co.uk Fax: 01590 626 359

1 Contents

1 INTRODUCTION ...... 3 2 STUDY FOCUS AND METHODOLOGY...... 4 3 MARKET ANALYSIS...... 6 3.1 POPULATION ...... 6 3.2 TRAVEL TO WORK MARKET ...... 7 3.3 LEISURE MARKET...... 11 3.4 ATTRACTIONS ...... 13 3.5 WALKING ...... 15 3.6 ROAD USE...... 16 3.7 CONCLUSION...... 18 4 SUPPLY SIDE ISSUES...... 20 4.1 PROPENSITY TO TRAVEL BY WATER...... 20 4.2 CONSTRAINTS...... 21 4.3 ACCESS TO THE WATER ...... 23 4.4 EXISTING SERVICES ...... 25 4.5 REGULATION OF PASSENGER SERVICES ...... 26 4.6 VESSELS...... 27 5 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 31 5.1 SUMMARY OF KEY FINDINGS...... 31 5.1.1 Potential demand ...... 31 5.1.2 Supply side issues...... 32 5.2 BARRIERS...... 33 5.3 RECOMMENDATIONS...... 35 5.3.1 Tactical steps...... 35 5.3.2 Strategic actions ...... 36 5.4 CONCLUSION...... 36 APPENDIX I: BOAT OPERATORS...... 39 APPENDIX II: REGULATION OF PASSENGER SERVICES (TECHNICAL)...... 42

2 1 Introduction The Dorset and East Devon Coastal Corridor Action Plan aims for an integrated delivery plan for the coastal corridor encompassing sustainable access, transport, information and interpretation, visitor management and facilities, community celebration and action and environmental enhancement.

The key partners in the project are Dorset AONB, East Devon AONB, World Heritage Team, Dorset Countryside, Team, National Trust, Natural , Dorset Coast Forum, local authorities and heritage committees.

Within this context, the Dorset AONB partnership has appointed Fisher Associates to investigate the long-term potential for waterborne transport along the Jurassic Coast World Heritage Site of Dorset and East Devon, which would offer an enhanced, reliable and realistic alternative transport opportunity for both functional and leisure journeys, and would enable integration between waterborne and surface transport.

This report is structured as follows:

♦ Chapter 2 explains the focus and broad methodology of the study.

♦ Chapter 3 presents an assessment of the market potential for water based passenger transport services.

♦ Chapter 4 discusses supply side issues – that is to say issues connected with the vessels and landing facilities that are needed to operate services, and the constraints that impact on these.

♦ Section 5 summarises the key findings (from Sections 3 and 4), then provides an assessment of the barriers to growth of water based passenger services, and provides recommendations and conclusions.

Sections 2 and 5 provide a summarised appreciation of the report for those that are short of time.

3 2 Study focus and methodology This is a scoping study. It is strategic in nature, and although it considers the present day, it is concerned primarily with the long-term perspective to 2060 and beyond, since this matches thinking on the response to climate change, sea level rise, and coastal erosion (see box on page 5). This long-term perspective means that we can realistically adopt the philosophy that “great oaks from small acorns grow”.

This study also underlines the need to continually explore transportation opportunities in the context of tertiary and marine spatial plans, the forthcoming third generation Local Transport Plan, and in the context of the Government’s policy document “Delivering a Sustainable Transport System” (DaSTS) November 2008.1

The fundamental question is: How and where and when could waterborne passenger transport replace car journeys?

At its core, this study provides a high level review of the potential for waterborne passenger transport in terms of the market for it, and supply side issues related to providing it.

Demand comes potentially from two main classes of passenger:

♦ Local people engaged in daily activities such as home-to-work travel, travelling for working purposes, and travelling on other functional journeys (e.g. to shops).

♦ Tourists and local people engaged in leisure activity.

There is a tendency to jump to conclusions on the supply side, particularly on the type and size of vessels. The UK coast hosts services operated by vessels ranging from a few passengers to a few hundred passengers, from slow to fast, and no such presumptions are made in this study. Replacing a leisure based car journey via a small boat is no less valuable than replacing a commuter car journey via a fast ferry.

The focus is the “Jurassic Coast” - defined as Studland to Exmouth (excluding the Exe Estuary). However, this sits firmly in the context of the wider coastal region from Torbay to Christchurch Bay (the “Study Coast”), and it was determined at an early stage to widen the scope to consider the influence of this where sensible.

As the study progressed, it became clear that the scale of the stakeholder community was larger and more diverse than we anticipated. There are well over 100

1 DaSTS sets five goals for transport (supporting national economic competitiveness and growth, reducing emissions, contributing to better safety security and health, promoting greater equality, and improving quality of life), with the expectation that development of our transport systems collectively supports all five goals. It encourages developing new solutions to long-term transport challenges by planning for uncertainty with a range of scenarios. This study is a pragmatic transport planning response by Devon and Dorset County Councils to DaSTS, and to the long-term development of an alternative means of transport.

4 stakeholder bodies, ranging from public sector to private sector and all shades in between. This review is therefore written with the diversity of this community in mind.

To the extent practical, the study aims to be evidenced based. Significant effort has gone into obtaining useful data – including by members of the Project Steering Group whom we gratefully acknowledge for their assistance.

Considerable time could be spent on designing capture of and collecting data to make a robust quantitative analysis. This report takes the practical approach of using what can be found now within the scope of this commission. Even so, it is highly likely that there is more useful data in the wider stakeholder community that only an extended effort will eventually unearth.

The analysis and conclusions are based upon the data collected and the application of our own experience, also on a sample survey and consultation exercise that included telephone interviews (including with several boat operators), and responses to a qualitative questionnaire asking for views on opportunities and constraints. Additional specific submissions were received from the RNLI and the National Trust. We acknowledge with thanks the contribution of all those who have participated.

It was intended that this study would be informed by a parallel water based visual inspection of the Study Coast to provide more information on the potential for developing landing sites, and to improve the robustness of the research. Unfortunately, two attempts to undertake this were foiled due to rough seas, which led to the postponement of this exercise by the study Steering Group to enable the publication of this scoping report within a constrained timescale.

The changing coast The National Trust’s “Shifting Shores” report sets out the need for thinking against a 50 to 100 year perspective, and to finding solutions to our coastal issues that work with nature, rather than against it.

Consistent with this theme, the Dorset Coast Forum has developed long term scenarios for three locations along the Study Coast – of which one is on the Jurassic Coast ( and the Spittles) – positing a sea level rise of about 1m by 2070, with drier summers and stormier winters.

The scenario for Black Ven and the Spittles (between and ), hypothesises that the coast would be receding at 4m per year by then, and that some car based infrastructure (e.g. car parks) would have been destroyed, and replacement found to be uneconomic. It was concluded that there was no integrated solution to increased pressure on the road network anticipated in the future, and that effective transport policies were needed to allow access by sea.

5 3 Market analysis The main focus of the research has been to obtain an idea of the numbers of people that are making car journeys on the Study Coast, their journey origins and destinations, and their journey purposes. This allows us to start considering:

♦ What role maritime transport services might play in the existing transport network, or a modified network adapted to provide the links and create favourable conditions for maritime services to flourish.

♦ Alternatives when overland journeys become restricted or prevented in the future by the effects of reducing fuel availability and climate change.

We have obtained a range of data that enables us to understand the scale of this.

3.1 Population The Study Coast includes the following primary cities / conurbations: Christchurch; Bournemouth / Boscombe; Poole; Weymouth / Portland; Exmouth / ; and Torbay. Secondary centres of population are: ; Bridport; Charmouth / Lyme Regis; Seaton; ; and Dawlish / Teignmouth. Table 3.1 below gives a rough picture of the size of these population centres.

Table 3.1: Population data (various years 2001 to 2007)

Town Resident Population Bournemouth UA 163200 Poole UA 138100 Torbay UA2 134200 Weymouth 50917 Exmouth inc BS 47124 Christchurch 44865 Teignmouth 19226 Sidmouth 17416 Dawlish 15588 Portland 12795 Seaton 12461 Bridport 11909 Swanage 10138 Lyme Regis 3504

Total 681443 Source: various all originating from census data

2 Of which Torquay 49%, Paignton 37%, Brixham 14%

6 Clearly the Bournemouth / Poole conurbation in the east, and Torbay in the west, dominate in terms of population. Weymouth and Exmouth are significant centres mid- way between these, and Christchurch is also significant. The secondary population centres generally offer markets of 10,000 to 20,000 people.

Based on the data provided, we can estimate that:

♦ Approximately 275,000 of these people are economically active.

♦ The population over 60 / 65 is approximately 175,000.

Thus there is a large population living on the coast, and this is a prospective demand base for water passenger transport services. The economically active offer a potential travel to work market.

3.2 Travel to work market The economically active population travels to work – unless they work at home. Based on analysis undertaken by Dorset County Council, Table 3.2 and Figure 3.1 illustrate key patterns of commuting between coastal towns, based on 2001 census data. Ignoring the general impact of Exeter, some interesting observations can be made using this data:

♦ Over 10,000 lived in Poole but worked in Bournemouth, plus 10,000 vice versa.

♦ Over 5,000 people lived in Bournemouth or Poole but worked in Christchurch, plus about 5,000 vice versa.

♦ About 450 people lived in Swanage, but worked in Bournemouth or Poole, and about 100 in the reverse direction.

♦ The number of people travelling from Jurassic Coast settlements to other key specified towns is approximately: 350 to Sidmouth; 300 to Weymouth; 250 to Bridport; 100 to Charmouth / Lyme.

♦ Over 700 lived in Dawlish / Teignmouth, but worked in Torbay, plus 300 vice versa.

These journeys are across all modes, and it may be that as well as car use there is significant rail use in some instances (e.g. Christchurch, Bournemouth, Poole).

There is a large potential market for water based passenger services within Christchurch Bay / Poole Bay, on the scale of tens of thousands per day (30,000 each way). As far as the Jurassic Coast is concerned, we conclude that depending on the actual stretch of coast, water based services timed for commuters would have a potential market on the scale of hundreds of passengers per day. Note that this data does not catch all functional journeys, e.g. it does not include people travelling for shopping.

7 As an illustration, a 6 month seasonal service capturing say 100 passengers per day (50 each way) would remove 100 car journeys per day (assuming single occupancy). 3 or 4 such services would remove say 300 to 400 car journeys per day. From a boat operator’s perspective, each service would generate 13,000 passengers over 6 months.

8 Table 3.2 - Number of people of working age that live in one location (left) and work in another (top) (2001)

Work

Poole Exeter Torbay Seaton Bridport Swanage Sidmouth Weymouth Christchurch Bournemouth Charmouth/Lyme Exmouth/Budleigh

Dawlish/Teignmouth Bournemouth 10345 72 10 6 4103 42 3 0 0 0 6 6

Poole 10524 70 13 0 1182 64 6 0 0 0 0 0

Weymouth 175 358 14 3 30 18 103 3 3 0 0 3

Exeter 8 18 6 336 3 0 0 3 12 103 401 215

Torbay 12 12 6 1453 3 0 6 0 9 6 24 294

Christchurch 3931 987 11 3 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0

Swanage 133 332 27 3 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0

Home Bridport 9 36 110 18 0 0 0 66 3 0 3 0

Charmouth/Lyme 0 3 6 27 0 0 0 128 6 6 0 0

Seaton 0 0 0 133 0 0 0 15 46 152 37 0

Sidmouth 0 3 0 404 12 0 0 0 6 39 97 3

Exmouth/Budleigh 3 9 6 3636 82 6 0 3 6 15 197 15

Dawlish/Teignmouth 0 3 0 1632 732 0 0 0 0 0 3 39

Source: Research and Information Group, Dorset County Council

9 Figure 3.1: Representation of number of people of working age that live in one location and work in another (2001)

Christchurc Exeter Seaton Lyme Poole Sidmouth Bournemou h Regis Bridport Dawlish Swanage th Weymout Exmouth Torbay h

10 3.3 Leisure market Data on tourism and day visitor activity and its value is given in Table 3.3.3

The hinterland of the Study Coast is a major leisure destination. Spending related to this supports about 48,000 jobs across the areas identified, and this has a significant economic impact. Given the trend for increased tourism and more active use of leisure time, a balance needs to be struck between managing the numbers already visiting, and increasing numbers and degrading the product that attracts visitors in the first place.

Based on 2007 data, 5 million trips are made by staying visitors, generating 21 million bed nights. These are augmented by a staggering 16 million day visits.

In terms of spend, the total value was estimated at £1.8 billion in 2007, of which some £450 million (25%) was spent on “travel” and “attractions / entertainment”.

Looking at the data for the four areas neighbouring the Jurassic Coast (Purbeck, , Weymouth and East Devon), these account consistently for about 50% of all visitors and spend. The combined leisure visits (trips by staying visitors + day visits) was 10.4 million. The combined spending on travel and attractions / entertainment was £218 million.

Research commissioned by the Dorset and East Devon World Heritage Site Steering Group (An Economic, Social and Cultural Impact Study of the Jurassic Coast, 2008), concluded that 5 million leisure visits were made to the Jurassic Coast, (about 50% of the total for the four areas neighbouring the Jurassic Coast). The combined spending on travel and attractions / entertainment for the Jurassic Coast can thus be estimated at over £100 million.

This huge seasonal influx of visitors must have a dramatic impact on the road network. Whilst the visitors themselves bring economic benefits, their reliance on road-based access (mainly by car), has a significant impact on landscape, communities, air quality, and damage to the historic environment in villages.

The actual numbers are extremely broad brush, but it is the scale of these numbers that is important. The potential market is measured in millions of leisure journeys, not hundreds of thousands. The value of the market is measured in tens of millions of pounds, not single millions.

3 Tourists are assumed to mean people travelling to and staying in places outside their usual environment for leisure purposes. Day visitors are assumed to be “local people” engaged in leisure activities starting from and returning to their homes.

11 Table 3.3: Leisure activity and spend (£ million)

Christ- West East Teign- Area church Poole Purbeck Dorset Weymouth Devon bridge Torbay Total

Trips by staying visitors 195,000 476,000 444,000 725,700 478,800 782,000 596,300 1,296,200 4,994,000

Staying visitor nights 838,000 1,864,000 1,909,000 3,102,400 1,851,400 3,470,000 2,675,800 5,367,300 21,077,900

Day visits 827,473 2,298,000 1,734,000 2,750,000 1,024,000 2,467,000 2,378,000 2,329,000 15,807,473

Spend by staying visitors 35.2 76.5 80.4 136.9 93.8 166.4 114.8 322.1 1026.1 Spend by day visitors 35.7 103.7 66.1 113.2 55.1 105.6 103.3 101.5 684.2 Other tourism related spend 4.7 15.9 4.9 9.4 7.8 13.9 12 14.8 83.4 Total spend 75.6 196.1 151.4 259.5 156.7 285.9 230.1 438.4 1793.7 Of which spending on: Travel 10.5 26.6 24.9 39.8 22.8 41.1 31.2 64.7 261.6 Attractions / Entertainment 8.1 18.7 17.1 27.4 14.5 29.9 23.9 46.3 185.9

Jobs related to tourism spending 1,860 4,576 3,309 6,335 4,480 7,940 6,385 13,060 47,945

Source: South West Tourism, 2007

12 3.4 Attractions Data has been obtained on visitor attractions to provide further insights into the leisure market. The data presented in Table 3.4 illustrates data on visitor numbers to key attractions on or near the coast. Table 3.4: Annual visitor numbers at key coastal attractions (2007) Attraction Visitors A la Ronde (Exmouth) 29,000 – The Old Bakery, Manor Mill and Forge 3,000 Charmouth Heritage Coast Centre 75,000 Christchurch Priory 89,000 Corfe Castle 135,000 Corfe Castle Model Village and Gardens 22,000 Dorset Belle Cruises (Bournemouth / Poole / Swanage) 61,000 240,000 Fairlynch Arts Centre & Museum (Budleigh) 2,000 Highcliffe Castle 50,000 Lulworth Castle 78,000 > 500,000 Lyme Regis Philpot Museum 15,000 Marine House at Beer 55,000 Oldway Mansion (Paignton) 1,000,000 Paignton Zoo Environmental Park 508,000 Pecorama Pleasure Gardens and Exhibition (Seaton) 59,000 Portland Castle 22,000 Portland Museum 5,000 Seaton Tramway 97,000 Sidmouth Museum 4,000 Studland Beach and Nature reserve > 1,000,000 Swanage Railway 202,000 The Donkey Sanctuary (Sidmouth) 190,000 Wareham Town Museum 6,000 Total Study Coast > 4,447.000 Of which core Jurassic Coast > 2,739,000 Source: South West Tourism based on Visit Britain survey, plus individual data

13 The number of visitors varies according to the weather, and wider economic conditions, which influence whether people holiday in the UK or abroad.

It has proven very difficult to obtain data on the travel patterns of visitors. We can however illustrate this with several examples.

Swanage Railway carried 45,000 passengers in August 2008, indicating a very high summer peak, with perhaps 20% of annual total carried in the peak month. The trend at Studland is for increasing off-peak usage.

A survey of visitors to Lulworth Cove on a day in August indicated the following origins based on 200 responses from 300 questionnaires:

Lulworth: 17% (e.g. camping locally)

Weymouth: 16%

Poole & Bournemouth: 11%

Swanage & Corfe: 10%

Wareham: 7%

Dorchester: 3%

Presumed nil respondents: 36%

Apparently 98% of visitors to Studland arrive by car. In connection with the “Purbeck Transportation Study”, a visitor survey of 212 people indicated the following modal use: 92% travelled by car, but walking was also popular (50%), and also a significant minority used the train (37%). 2% used the Studland Ferry with an average reported delay time of 44 minutes.

In connection with the Norden Park and Ride Study, which undertook interviews at both Norden Park & Ride and at Corfe Castle, it was established that 44% of day visitors to the Castle came from within the BH postcode – mainly the Bournemouth / Poole conurbation. For people on longer holidays in the area, 38% were staying within 5 miles of the Castle. The majority of visitors arrive by car (74%), 10% on foot, and the remainder via Swanage Railway or bus.

There are some notable omissions from Table 3.4, for example visitors to piers at Bournemouth / Boscombe / Swanage / Torquay, and to specific coastal locations such as / / etc. Thus in addition to the 2.7 million visitors identified for Jurassic Coast in Table 3.4, another 2.3 million can be assumed to visit other non specified locations, thus reconciling with the 5 million total identified in Section 3.3.

14 Assuming that 50% of the market for visitors to the Jurassic Coast (2.5 million visits) is served over the three peak summer months, this equates to about 27,000 visitors per day in summer. If 80% travel by car, with 3 to a vehicle, this equates to about 7,200 car visits per day. People must drive to their destination and return from it – suggesting double the number of car journeys. However, some people may link attractions, and making allowance for this, we assume that there are perhaps 10,000 car journeys per day in summer related to these 2.5 million visits. If water passenger transport could service perhaps 5% to 10% of visitors, this would remove 500 to 1,000 car journeys per day.

Travel by sea would also add value to leisure markets. It offers an experience beyond simply getting from A to B, including views and interpretation of the coastline that would not otherwise be possible. Water transport has potential to improve the viability of some coastal attractions, offering the opportunity to attract more visitors if it is packaged with other forms of public transport linking attractions.

3.5 Walking The following data obtained from various sources including the “People Counter Project”, East Devon AONB, and Dorset Countryside Coastal Ranger Team gives an indication of the scale of annual use for coastal footpaths on the Jurassic Coast:

Otter Estuary (Budleigh Salterton): 84,000

Beer Head: 90,000

West Cliff (Bridport): 59,000

Culverwell, Portland: 62,000

Osmington Mills (east of Weymouth): 76,000

Monthly data for Otter Estuary and Beer indicates use of about 4,000 walkers per month over the winter, and 10,000 to 12,000 per month over summer months. These people could be on circular day trips, or engaged on longer linear walks. They provide a potential niche market for linking in with water based services.

15 3.6 Road use Useful data has been obtained on road traffic flows for coastal roads in Dorset (see Table 3.5). Some broader contextual information is shown for Devon in Figure 3.2.

Figure 3.2: Average daily traffic flow 2003 (Devon)

Source: Devon County Council

16 Table 3.5: Annual average daily traffic on roads accessing the Jurassic Coast – August flows

SITE ROAD LOCATION AADF (Annual Average Daily Traffic) Percentage Growth Since

No. No. 1983 1990 94-98 2000 2003 2006 2007 2003 2000 1996 1990 1983 Average Sites in Italics indicate sites not monitored every year, but on a three year cycle. 4 7 11 17 24 Unobserved flows estimated from similar or adjacent counts. Years Years Years Years Years GROUP 23 - SUMMARY OF FLOWS ON ROADS ACCESSING JURASSIC COAST - AUGUST FLOWS

17 A3052 WEST OF LYME REGIS 1,600 3,100 3,380 3,600 3,490 3,400 3,300 -3% -8% 1% 10% 113% 18 A3052 EAST OF LYME REGIS 3,400 3,700 4,460 4,600 4,890 4,900 4,800 0% 4% 10% 32% 44% 308 B3157 EAST OF BRIDPORT 2,800 5,800 5,860 6,200 7,000 7,300 7,100 4% 15% 25% 26% 161% 310 B3157 2,900 5,100 4,960 5,000 5,900 6,100 6,500 3% 30% 23% 20% 110% 353 B3351 REMPSTONE 1,000 1,600 1,860 2,100 2,200 2,500 2,500 14% 19% 34% 56% 150% 359 A351 EAST OF CORFE CASTLE 4,500 6,400 7,260 7,400 7,500 8,000 8,100 7% 9% 10% 25% 78% 846 B3070 WEST LULWORTH n/a n/a n/a 1,200 2,000 1,800 1,900 -10% 58% N/A N/A N/A 1933 STUDLAND FERRY ROAD n/a n/a n/a n/a 2,500 2,900 3,200 16% N/A N/A N/A N/A OVERALL FLOWS/GROWTH AT SELECTED SITES since 1983 11,200 18,900 19,940 20,700 22,600 23,900 24,200 6% 17% 21% 28% 116% OVERALL FLOWS/GROWTH AT ALL SITES since 2003 35,480 36,900 37,400 4% N/A N/A N/A N/A

Source: Dorset County Council

17 It is certain that bottlenecks on the road system result in serious congestion during peak periods, and traffic on coastal roads in August can be up to 6,500 to 8,100 vehicles per day. Traffic has grown on some sections of road by between 23% to 34% in just 11 years.

Even if the rate of growth of traffic slows in the future relative to historic trends, it is simply not sustainable to consider that ever increasing traffic, resulting in serious congestion and air pollution during peak periods, can be accommodated on ever improving roads on the Jurassic Coast. We understand that road capacity in the longer term could deteriorate due to loss of roads because of coastal erosion. Loss of parking for cars at key destinations will exacerbate the problem, e.g. we understand that the National Trust have estimated that they will lose 400 car park spaces at Studland due to coastal erosion.

The question is: what is Plan B?

3.7 Conclusion To try and quantify the market, we can assume that the 5 million visitors to the Jurassic Coast would be supplemented by a further 5 million visitors to other coastal areas on the Study Coast.4 A combined market of 10 million visitors is a big market.

There can be no doubt that this presents significant POTENTIAL for widespread development of water based passenger services. There is an evidenced based potential seasonal market, primarily for people undertaking leisure journeys, but also possibly for people travelling to work, on a significant scale in relation to both the capacity of boats that might supply services, and the overall use of roads. Specific examples of opportunities include:

♦ Intra Bay commuter, shopping and leisure services (especially Christchurch Bay / Poole Bay, and possibly Torbay).

♦ Coastal shopping and leisure services linking primary population centres (Poole / Bournemouth, Weymouth / Portland, Exmouth, and Torbay).

♦ Commuter and shopping services linking to secondary towns.

♦ Leisure services linking primary population and tourist centres with coastal based attractions.

♦ Leisure services linking coastal based attractions.

♦ Niche services targeted on walkers and cyclists.

4 Assumes that c. 50% of the 10.4 million visitors to Christchurch, Poole, Teignbridge, and Torbay (ref Table 3.3) visit the coast.

18 A very rough hypothesis is that water based passenger services might remove at least 1,000 car journeys per day from Jurassic Coast coastal roads in summer in the short-term (say 5 to 10 years)5. This would be about a 2.5% reduction in overall flows (total c. 40,000 annual average daily traffic) at sites identified in Table 3.5.

There is potential, however, for much more significant penetration of water passenger transport in the medium and longer term. If water transport accommodated 10% of existing overall flows (i.e. replacing about 4,000 car journeys per day), this would be equivalent to perhaps 10 to 15 years growth in road use.

The scale of services on the Metro del Mare in Italy (see box) exemplars such a scenario. Such a vision really is a potential medium to long-term “Plan B”.

Metro del Mare The seasonal Metrodelmare (metro of the sea) operates in the Bay of Naples and Gulf of Salerno (see Figure 3.3). Journeys take from a few minutes up to several hours. Metro del Mare is one of several ferry and boat companies operating out of Sorrento and along the Campania coastline. Applying this kind of vision for the Study Coast is available for those who can dare to imagine it!

Figure 3.3: Metrodelmare network, Italy

5 Based on the illustrations of 300 to 400 commuting, plus 500 to 1,000 visiting.

19 4 Supply side issues

4.1 Propensity to travel by water The propensity to travel by water will be influenced by the following supply side factors:

♦ Cost

♦ Time savings

♦ Reliability

♦ Predictability

♦ Level of integration with other modes

♦ Convenience

♦ Comfort

♦ Culture / attitude towards the marine environment

Journey purpose has an obvious impact on the relative importance of these factors. Time critical journeys to work will be very sensitive to elapsed time and reliability, whereas leisure journeys may be more sensitive to cost.

It is self evident that reliable services that are good value, save time, are well integrated with other modes, easy to catch, and comfortable will win patronage. Any shortfall on the factors identified compared to the status quo will result in resistance to use of services by water. The extent to which an actual market for water based transport is realised will depend critically on the supply side response to these factors in the context of the constraints of the marine environment.

20 4.2 Constraints The marine environment on the Jurassic Coast presents a number of complexities and constraints that must be understood.

There are two High Waters (HW) and two Low Waters (LW) every lunar day (which is approaching 25 hours). The times of these therefore appear to advance over time measured by our 24 hour solar days (see Figure 4.1). The heights of the HW and LW (hence the range between these) also vary. On “springs” in the example the range is 3m, whereas on “neaps” one week later it is only 1m.

The timing and height of tides are calculated in advance, and therefore planning of services can also be done in advance. This allows investigation of whether tidal constraints may impact on services. Ideally services would be operable at all states of the tide, and keep to set times.

Figure 4.1: Tide example – Lyme Regis

The ebb and flow of water associated with high and low waters generate tidal velocity. Midway between HW and LW such velocities would typically be 0.5 to 1 knot in (for example). Velocities can be much higher around headlands, as much as 3 to 4 knots around .

Tides can therefore help or hinder progress at sea, and they are very inconvenient with respect to scheduled services. As an extreme example, a conventional displacement vessel able to carry 100 to 200 passengers at a speed of 12 knots might take 45 minutes, or up to 1.5 hours to undertake a 12 nautical mile passage, depending on tidal velocity. The impact of tidal velocity on scheduling reduces as speed of the vessel increases.

21 The two main headlands (Portland Bill and St Alban’s Head), and the upwelling and tidal velocities that are associated with these, generate choppy conditions that can be dangerous to small vessels. This has an impact on regulatory requirements, and on vessel design.

The main driver of sea state is of course the wind at the time – the stronger the wind and the longer it is blowing for, the bigger the waves will be. When the wind is blowing against the tide, seas will be steeper than when they are going in the same direction. Persistent ocean winds can generate long travelling swell waves that last well after the storms that caused them have dissipated. These generally come from the Atlantic, and may be from a different direction to local wind waves, causing confused seas.

So sea state varies on a daily basis, and by location, but also seasonally. Notwithstanding recent persistent moderate or even rough sea conditions in the current summer (2009), one would expect generally slight to moderate sea conditions over summer, worsening on average into the winter period.

Services in the high season can be significantly affected by sea state. Several operators noted that some services did not operate for several weeks over July 2009.

The MOD firing range west of St Albans Head presents a specific issue. The range stretches out to sea (see figure 4.2), and is active 5 days per week, plus two evenings, plus 6 weekends, but with no firing Aug & public holidays.

Figure 4.2: Lulworth firing range

Byelaws allow the enforcement of exclusion of boats from this area, however, these “shall not apply to any vessel in the ordinary course of navigation … remaining in the sea area no longer than necessary ...” Thus there is no absolute constraint to navigation.

To conclude, the marine environment is more complex than other modes. Its characteristics have a big impact on optimising criteria that encourage travel by sea.

22 4.3 Access to the water If passengers cannot get safely into a boat, a service cannot be offered.

The main landing opportunities with reference to Figure 4.3 include:

♦ The commercial / leisure ports of Poole, Weymouth, Portland and Teignmouth.

♦ The other significant but mainly leisure / fisheries ports of Torquay and Brixham.

♦ The smaller port facilities / harbours at Exmouth, Lyme Bay, and West Bay (Bridport).

♦ Relatively sheltered locations (depending on sea conditions) at Lulworth Cove, , Swanage, and Studand.

Additional to these and not shown on the diagram are Bournemouth Pier and Christchurch Harbour / Mudeford. Figure 4.3: Key landing points

The opportunities seem promising, however, there is a significant lack of capability in most locations due to factors such as insufficient depth, lack of berth space, lack of quay space, lack of connectivity (road, rail, by foot or cycle) etc. There has never been an attempt at a systematic and coordinated upgrading to provide a network of landing facilities for appropriate classes of boat. Consequently operators report that lack of suitable landing points is a major impediment to development of sea services.

23 The possibility of wider use of craft with ramps or fold down planks (as used by Stuart Line see Figure 4.4) can be considered, but these are generally quite restricted in the tidal and sea state conditions in which they can be operated.

Figure 4.4: Craft with beach access capability

The key issues that need consideration are:

♦ Identifying existing pontoons / jetties that have potential for basing marine facilities, and the feasibility of developing these, including appropriate landside access and modal change facilities.

♦ For new locations, obtaining rights (and related costs) for access over foreshore and for structures / moorings on the seabed, and determining appropriate berthing structures ranging from temporary to permanent.

♦ Environmental considerations in their broadest sense including landscape.

With reference specifically to the Jurassic Coast, a range of seasonal landing facilities should be investigated. Imagination is needed. For example, removable open deck floors supported by piles could be used for walking on. Such structures offer scope for design as innovative public art, rather than basic functional structures.

24 Subject to establishing technical feasibility, the benefits of this concept are:

♦ Technically speaking, such open structures would offer little resistance to the sea, limiting potential for their damage (decks would be removed out of season). They would have minimal impact on the seabed, and could be readily removed at a future date by cutting off piles.

♦ They would make a significant impact on overcoming regulatory constraints (discussed later) by providing additional landing opportunities.

♦ A competition to design “sculptures” would generate huge interest. They could attain the kind of status that the Angel of the North has achieved, raising the profile of the Jurassic Coast. This would provide a specific motivator to use sea- based services to view and access the Jurassic Coast (a number of consultees have commented that the way to see this is from the sea). They would also encourage cruise ship calls to neighbouring ports, which are starting to market the Jurassic Coast as a cruise attraction.

4.4 Existing services Some 30 operators have been identified along the Jurassic Coast, and a further 10 for Torbay (see Appendix I). Most of these are small scale trip boat operations.

There has been some attempt to market other parts of the transport network with sea services. These include:

♦ Boat between Sidmouth and Exmouth (Stuart Lines) and reverse journey by CoastHopper 157 bus. This service offers joint ticketing.

♦ CoastlinX 53 bus to and from Lyme Regis / West Bay, linking with boat trips between the harbours.

♦ Rail to Weymouth linking with boat trips along the Jurassic Coast.

We understand from consultation with operators that there are ad hoc examples where customers of boat services use buses for a return journey – sometimes enforced by changes in sea conditions. Such possibilities need to be planned for. There appears to be little or no joint ticketing with other modes, or with attractions.

25 4.5 Regulation of passenger services The regulatory environment for passenger services has a major impact on vessel design and operation, hence on the cost of providing services on the Jurassic Coast.

There are three main regulatory issues:

♦ Categorisation of waters

♦ Classing of vessels

♦ Certification of crew

A technical explanation of some of the regulations is presented in Appendix II. In non-technical terms, the impact of these regulations is:

♦ Regulations require ships to be constructed to a “class” that is appropriate to the height of the waves and their intended distance from refuge.

♦ Operators wishing to work off the Jurassic Coast ideally need relatively highly classed vessels (meaning ships constructed to standards that offer robust seakeeping and safety margins), if they are to operate throughout the year.

♦ A lesser class applies for seasonal operation (April to October inc.) off the Jurassic Coast, but this is still high in comparison to the standard applied to a vessel for operation in say Poole Harbour (for example).

♦ The technical specification of ships is determined by rules for each class of ship. For example higher classed ships must have two engines. It is not surprising that the higher the class, the more expensive the ship. We do not have specific examples, but broadly speaking it seems that a 100 to 150 passenger vessel designed for Poole Harbour would cost perhaps £0.5 to £0.7 million, and the cost of this might double if constructed to a standard for operation off the Jurassic Coast.

♦ Where passenger vessels operate in waters with increasingly larger waves and further from land, regulations also require increasingly higher qualifications of the crew, particularly the Skipper / Master. We know from the consultation that this is an issue with respect to training staff for certification, and pay for crew.

The perception of some consultees is that possible tighter enforcement by the Maritime & Coastguard Agency of regulatory restrictions on the existing boats being operated in the environs of the Study Coast may be resulting in constraints on operations that previously were not manifest. According to some consultees, this is resulting (for example) in an inability to round Saint Alban’s Head, and the need to employ staff with higher qualifications.

26 Marine safety is not to be trifled with. Any strategy for increasing use of passenger transport by sea needs to understand the issues, and set the highest standards. The RNLI have noted their interest, and that a strategy may provide an opportunity to facilitate an appropriate upgrading of rescue capability if necessary.

4.6 Vessels The specification of types of vessels, and the feasibility of operating these, needs to be considered at the appropriate time. The following give some ideas of the breadth of options on offer (Figures 4.5 to 4.10), ranging from vessels for restricted use along the study coast, through to fully classed sea going vessels for international use.

Figure 4.5: Dorset Belle Cruises vessel

27 Figure 4.6: Stuart Line Cruises vessels

Figure 4.7: Med speed ferry: 41m, 260 pax, 24kt

28 Figure 4.8: High speed ferry (US): 41m, 300 pax, 39kt

Figure 4.9: Slow speed ferry (Shetland): 35m, 16 cars, 100 pax

29 Figure 4.10: Condor Ferries: 87m, 185 cars, 750 pax

Study is needed to consider the potential roles that a mix of vessels balancing the following variables might offer such as:

♦ Passenger capacity

♦ (regulatory) Class of vessel

♦ Speed of vessel

♦ Sea keeping characteristics / comfort

♦ Landing facility requirements

Design studies should be undertaken to develop common classes of vessels. This should include consideration of the fleet deployed by existing operators. Different classes or types of vessel would be designed in outline to serve different markets such as:

♦ Intra bay “short” haul

♦ Inter bay “long” haul

♦ Coastal hopper

♦ Etc

… on the style of the Metro del Mare services (see Section 3.7).

This would reduce procurement costs of vessels, which could be contracted by various operators. It would also enable standardisation of landing facilities to accommodate these, which could be constructed (where necessary) by the different harbour authorities – including (potentially) new authorities where none presently exist.

30 5 Conclusion and recommendations

5.1 Summary of key findings

5.1.1 Potential demand The combined impact of functional and leisure journeys results in traffic on coastal roads in August of up to 6,500 to 8,100 vehicles per day. Traffic has grown on some sections of road by between 23% to 34% in just 11 years.

There is a large population living on the Study Coast (c. 0.7 million), and this is a potential demand base for water passenger transport services. The economically active offer a potential travel to work market.

There is a large potential market for water based commuter services within Christchurch Bay / Poole Bay, on the scale of tens of thousands per day (30,000 each way). For the Jurassic Coast, water based commuter services would have a potential market on the scale of hundreds of passengers per day. Three or four such services might remove say 300 to 400 car journeys per day.

The potential leisure market over the Study Coast is estimated at 10 million visits. Related spend on “travel” and “attractions / entertainment” is estimated to be over £200 million. Approximately half of this (5 million visits, £100 million spend) may be attributed to the Jurassic Coast. Data on visitor attractions provides specific details on some leisure activity. It illustrates how people are drawn to the coast by the specific attractions on offer.

This is a big market. It is measured in millions of journeys, and its value is measured in tens of millions of pounds.

In terms of the impact of leisure visits on road traffic on the Jurassic Coast, these may generate perhaps 10,000 car journeys per day over the summer period. If water passenger transport could service perhaps 5% to 10% of visitors, this would remove 500 to 1,000 car journeys per day.

Combining the commuting and leisure markets, we hypothesise that there is potential for removing at least 1,000 car journeys per day in summer on the Jurassic Coast in the short-term (5 to 10 years).

Note that this does not include an allowance for other functional journeys such as shopping. There are also typically 10,000 to 12,000 walkers per month in summer using the coastal paths. These offer a niche market for services, as may cyclists.

31 5.1.2 Supply side issues Some 30 existing boat operators have been identified along the Jurassic Coast, and a further 10 for Torbay. Most of these are small scale trip boat operations. There is little integration of sea services with other modes, but there has been some attempt to link with bus services.

Regulatory “classes” for passenger vessels determine their operating limits – it is not surprising that the higher the class, the more expensive the vessel. Where passenger vessels operate in waters with increasingly larger waves, regulations require increasingly higher qualifications of the crew, particularly the Skipper / Master.

Marine safety is not to be trifled with. Any strategy for increasing use of passenger transport by sea needs to understand the issues, and set the highest standards.

Study is needed to consider the potential roles that a mix of vessels balancing the following variables might offer such as:

♦ Passenger capacity

♦ Class of vessel

♦ Speed of vessel

♦ Sea keeping characteristics / comfort

♦ Landing facility requirements

Outline design studies should be undertaken to develop common classes of vessels for specific purposes. This would reduce construction costs of vessels, and also enable standardisation of landing facilities.

There has never been an attempt at a systematic and coordinated upgrading to provide a network of landing facilities for appropriate classes of boat. Consequently operators report that lack of landing points is a major impediment to development of sea services.

A range of seasonal landing facilities should be investigated. Imagination is needed. For example, the feasibility of removable open deck floors supported by piles could be considered. Such structures could be designed as innovative art projects.

Providing more landing points will enable more classes of passenger ship to operate within their regulatory limits.

32 5.2 Barriers The evidence indicates that there is a sizeable market. Suitable boats can be procured, and landing places developed. The private sector is active, and the public sector needs more sustainable transport options. These are factors supporting potential for water based passenger transport.

Unfortunately there is a huge gap between its potential, and the collective stakeholder community’s ability to realise this. The barriers that have been identified are:

1) The perception that marine services would be of little value, because they would be seasonal and weather dependent, and therefore somehow wasteful:

♦ The road carriageway and junction network is designed to handle peak flows. These happen in the summer. Conceptually speaking, sea services should be thought of as additional peak road capacity. Vessels that are not used in the winter may be laid up, just like unused peak capacity on roads.

♦ In general, visitors will not be inclined to visit attractions etc when the weather is poor, and therefore when services cannot operate in the operating season due to rough seas, demand is self-limiting.

2) The perception that marine services are of little value because they will only serve leisure markets:

♦ The data suggests that visitors to attractions on the Jurassic Coast in the summer may generate some 10,000 car journeys per day, and this is perhaps 25% of overall flows identified on Jurassic Coast coastal roads. Providing visitors with realistic alternatives could therefore have a significant impact on freeing up existing road capacity.

♦ It is true that leisure markets are the main opportunity, however, under the right conditions, there is also potential to serve people undertaking functional journeys.

3) The perception that the coast is too exposed and seas too rough to permit reliable operation of services:

♦ The classification of passenger vessels specifically foresees safe design of vessels for such operations – particularly from April to October. The real issue is that these cost more to construct, and more to operate than vessels typically used (for example within Poole Harbour) …

♦ … but it is true that on some occasions highly classed vessels will still not be able to operate during this period.

33 4) It is true that current landing places may not be adequate, but the perception that additional facilities cannot be provided is wrong:

♦ It is possible to provide temporary facilities that permit landing of people from boats operating seasonally in the type of conditions that are likely to prevail. These actually offer real potential to: enhance the profile of the Jurassic Coast; become significant factors in encouraging people to use an alternative to the car; and address regulatory constraints.

♦ The reality of owning a harbour is that significant sums eventually need to be spent on its maintenance and renewal. A strategy that places these within a coastal passenger transport network would have a significant impact on the development of appropriate facilities within these in the medium to long-term, and of connectivity from harbours to final destinations.

5) The perception that an expanded network of services is not financially viable, (even if appropriate landing places existed), is based on the deeply flawed supposition that ALL the financial risk should be assumed by the private sector. This is wrong in principle because:

♦ The public sector is responsible for achieving sustainability in all its senses.

♦ It is clear that passenger transport by sea can make a significant impact on supporting sustainable access to the Jurassic Coast and the wider Study Coast, and the public sector should accept risks that are appropriate to the level of benefits offered.

6) The perception that there is simply no public funding to support development of sea based infrastructure and services, therefore it is not worth trying, is rather myopic:

♦ The public sector is responsible for funding and providing roads. It subsidises rail services through the franchise mechanism. It subsidises rural bus services more locally.

♦ It allocates funding to these based on socio-economic, spatial, environmental, and political priorities, which are set out in various documents such as Local Transport Plans, Local Development Frameworks, and regional plans. These plans are often based on multi-modal studies, the majority of which ignore sea transport – they are effectively land-modal studies.

♦ So the funding is there for transport – it is just that transport by sea is not considered.

7) Finally, with respect to passenger transport by sea, there is no effective link between key public sector bodies, nor between the public and private sectors, to enable these barriers to be tackled.

34 5.3 Recommendations Recommendations have been developed at two levels:

♦ Tactical steps: These are short-term actions that start to address perceptional and coordination issues, and pave the way to medium and long-term goals.

♦ Strategic actions: These are stepping stones that form the thrust of achieving a step change in use of water based passenger transport in the medium to long- term.

5.3.1 Tactical steps It is self-evident that a coordinated response across a wide group of stakeholders is needed if there is to be any prospect of breaking down the barriers identified in Section 5.2. This response must tackle perceptions, and create the capability to make effective organisational links.

In discussions with stakeholders, and as part of a qualitative questionnaire, we investigated whether the creation of a new marine coastal transport forum to set strategic direction, integrate policies and plans, and implement projects would be a “good thing” or a “waste of time”. The views based on 28 interactions were:

♦ A clear majority (about 2/3) supported this. One respondent took the view that a short sharp “task and finish” group might be formed with 1 year to research, propose, lobby and deliver a real opportunity package.

♦ Some people who did not specifically support it did not necessarily think it would be a waste of time, but took the view that the existing Devon Maritime Forum and Dorset Coast Forum could be vehicles for this. (In fact both of these support the concept in principle).

♦ A sceptical minority considered that nothing could be achieved by any forum. The reasoning provided by one respondent (from the public sector) was that there are already too many organisations for boat operators to interact with, and that “getting public sector ducks in a row” could best be done by an individual.

We have no doubt that some kind of sustained organisational response is needed to address the barriers and we recommend:

1. Preparation of the terms of reference for a Working Group to operate for 12 months in 2010. The lead for this and its membership need to be decided.

2. The subsequent formation of a permanent organisational response to be defined by the Working Group.

The objective of this response will be to change the way that the public sector thinks about water transport and undertakes transport planning, resulting in water transport being fully integrated into plans and policies, and by extension opening up funding for

35 developing a sea based network. This will take at least 5 years to achieve, but this is near term in the context of our 50 year perspective.

5.3.2 Strategic actions We recommend the near / short-term implementation of several strategic steps that will support a step change in development of water transport services:

1. Attempt further data collection, simple modelling of future demand over 10 / 30 / 50 years with market share scenarios, linked to the identification of key route / supply hypotheses, including completion of visual survey, and a survey of people’s views about travelling by water. The substance for the vision will be distilled from this.

2. Adopt a 10 / 30 / 50 year vision for future development of water based transport services, defining their scope and planned penetration over these timescales.

3. Develop outline design studies for common classes of vessels that suit the market opportunities, based on satisfying appropriate regulations, and promulgate these and encourage their adoption.

4. Develop and implement a systematic and coordinated plan to provide a network of landing facilities for appropriate classes of vessel, including innovative seasonal facilities for the Jurassic Coast, with supporting infrastructure such as car parks, Park & Ride links, bus infrastructure etc.

5. Identify pilot projects, for example one based on Weymouth / Portland in the context of the 2012 Olympic Games, one based on Studland / Swanage / Corfe, and any others to be identified by the Working Group.

6. Develop an integrated “enabling” plan covering issues such as: changing people’s perceptions of marine transport, providing information on services, combined marketing, linking sea services with other modes, and combining ticketing with other modes and attractions.

7. As water based transport becomes integrated into overall transport planning, develop public funding that bridges the gaps in financial viability for the private sector and port authorities.

5.4 Conclusion Road traffic has grown on some sections of coastal roads by between 23% to 34% in just 11 years. Road traffic has a major environmental impact (in its widest sense). Community attitude surveys relating to tourism in the southwest show that one of the few consistent areas of concern relate to car-related issues, and the East Devon / Dorset road infrastructure is under particular pressure.

36 Even if the rate of growth of traffic slows in the future relative to historic trends, it is simply not sustainable to consider that ever increasing traffic can be accommodated on ever improving roads on the Jurassic Coast, particularly considering the potential long term loss of roads and parking due to coastal erosion. A “Plan B” is essential.

There is an evidenced based POTENTIAL market, primarily for tourism and leisure journeys, but possibly also commuting, on a significant scale. A rough hypothesis is that water based passenger services might remove at least 1,000 car journeys per day from Jurassic Coast coastal roads in August in the short-term (say 5 to 10 years). This would equate to about a 2.5% reduction in current overall flows.

There is potential, however, for much more significant penetration of water passenger transport. Such a scenario is illustrated by the scale of services on the Metro del Mare in Italy. Such a step change in the use of water based passenger transport would have a significant impact on car use.

Over the medium to long-term, it would be possible to strategically manage demand in such a way as to effectively leave some sections of demand with much clearer choices on why it should use water based passenger transport. It should also be possible to use the planning system, e.g. new planning applications for tourist attractions on the coast should perhaps contain conditions related to incorporating sustainable marine access.

If water transport accommodated the equivalent to 10% of existing overall flows (i.e. replaced about 4,000 car journeys per day), this would be equivalent to perhaps 10 to 15 years growth in road use. Such a target in the medium term (15 to 20 years) would provide a springboard for greater penetration in the long-term (50 years), as building blocks are put in place and the concept becomes more established.

It is self evident that reliable services that are good value, save time, are well integrated with other modes, easy to catch, and comfortable will win patronage. The extent to which an actual market for water based transport is realised will depend critically on the supply side response to the challenges of the marine environment.

The influence of this operational environment creates more complexities than would be typical with other transport modes, and has a big impact on optimising criteria that encourage travel by sea. When marine environment constraints are viewed in tandem with regulatory constraints, widespread use of water based passenger services fortuitously offers the most potential when leisure demand is most active over the summer and shoulder periods.

37 The major barriers to development of greater use of water transport for passengers are perceptional, rather than related to the marine environment or regulatory issues.

The overall perception of the stakeholder community is that it cannot be done – even though it can. The perception is that it is too difficult to tackle – even though it isn’t. We consider that these perceptions exist because the stakeholder community is not organised or coherent enough to recognise and change them.

Thus water based passenger transport is not on the public policy agenda, and therefore not on the funding agenda. Nine times out of ten, the solution to transport problems is more road capacity. When will this lacuna of strategic thinking be filled?

In the final analysis, realising the potential for water based passenger transport is significantly dependent on funding – both private AND public. The public sector must bear its share of the risk, and PARTLY fund the development of a sea transport network if it wants this to contribute to sustainable objectives.

Such funding is only possible if water based passenger transport delivers policy and sustainability, and delivers public benefits identified ex ante. Public funding will therefore never support water based passenger transport without it first getting on the policy agenda as a transport mode. There needs to be a realisation at national / regional / local policy levels, and within the appropriate planning bodies, of the need to include marine options when considering sustainable transport.

The plans and policies that set this agenda roll over in cycles of several years, and therefore this will take several years to achieve. There is however a window of opportunity for quick action over the next 3 years leading up to hosting of Olympic sailing events in Weymouth. This will provide a spike in transport demand, some of which will have potential to be serviced by water. It could then become a question of planning to preserve the best legacy from this, to enable regular patronage to subsequently grow to financially sustainable levels.

Thus in the short-term, policy makers must understand the cost of NOT developing sea-based transport, develop a vision for it, and get it on the policy agenda. Development of a sea-based network must be based on rational apportioning of risks and rewards between the key stakeholders, leading to funding of investment needed in infrastructure and vessels, and on providing the right atmosphere for services to flourish.

An immediate and significant change in attitude is needed now if this is to happen. We do not underestimate how difficult this will be, BUT let us be clear that this is achievable. Stamina, patience and partnership will be essential.

38 Appendix I: Boat operators The following have been identified as the main boat operators with services linking to the Jurassic Coast:

Exmouth

♦ STUART LINE CRUISES: Jurassic Coast Cruises leave Exmouth marina every Tuesday, Thursday & Sunday throughout the summer. On alternate weeks the boat stops at Sidmouth. Also River Exe cruises all year round Web: www.stuartlinecruises.co.uk

♦ EXEPLORER WATER TAXI LTD: Provides a boat link to Starcross, water taxi service in the Exmouth estuary and manages visitor mooring bookings

Beer and Seaton

♦ LOY BOY: Mackerel trips and coastal trips from Seaton

♦ SAMBE: Pleasure trips along the coast from Beer to Lyme Regis with commentary. Maximum of 11 passengers

♦ BRANSCOMBE PEARL II: Mackerel trips and short coastal cruises from Branscombe Beach. Maximum of 10 passengers. Trips subject to weather conditions

Lyme Regis

♦ SUNBEAM: One hour trips along the Jurassic Coast with commentary on a traditional open carved fishing boat

♦ KRAKEN: Specialising in school trips. Mackerel fishing trips. Families and groups welcome

♦ MARIE F: For stories from the Jurassic Coast step aboard and listen to locally told tales. Also mackerel and deep sea fishing trips

♦ LYME REGIS PLEASURE BOAT COMPANY Self drive hire boats from the Cobb in Lyme Regis

♦ SUSIE B: Guided tours and smugglers tales, anywhere between Portland and Exmouth Web: www.susie-b.co.uk

♦ JOZILEE: Fishing and specialising in Jurassic Coast boat trips

♦ JOINT VENTURE: Jurassic Coast tours and three – six hour deep-sea trips. One hour scenic or mackerel trips

♦ FRANCES JANE BOAT TRIPS: Specialising in evening trips for private parties, fishing or scenic tours. Also one-hour mackerel fishing trips

39 West Bay

♦ HUNTRESS II: Specialising in dive and SCUBA charters and chartered trips round the bay for groups with prior booking.

♦ LYME BAY RIB CHARTER: Water taxi between West Bay and Lyme Regis. 15 minute fast trips from West Bay Web: www.lymebayribcharter.co.uk

Weymouth & Studland

♦ FERRY STEP CRUISES: One-hour cruise around and the breakwaters

♦ WEYMOUTH WHITEWATER: Fast one or two hour scenic rides with close up views around Portland or along the coast to Durdle Door, Lulworth Cove and Worbarrow Bay. From Weymouth Harbour Web: www.weymouth- whitewater.co.uk

♦ THE FLEET OBSERVER: A glass bottomed boat specifically built to explore the Fleet Lagoon and Portland Harbour. The hour-long trips sail daily Web: www.thefleetobserver.co.uk

♦ MV FREEDOM: The boat is specifically equipped for the disabled. Trips are usually along the coast toward Lulworth Cove, Portland Harbour and Portland Bill Web: www.mvfreedom.co.uk

♦ DISCOVERER: Glass bottomed boat trips exploring the shallow waters around Web: www.underseaworld.co.uk

♦ WHITE MOTOR BOATS LTD: Daily ferry service to Portland and Lulworth Cove from Weymouth Harbour and cruises along the Jurassic Coast. Also available for private charters Web: www.whitemotorboat.freeuk.com

♦ UK SEA SAFARI: Adventures to suit all ages including Jurassic Coast explorations and educational trips Web: www.ukseasafaris.co.uk

Lulworth Cove

LULWORTH MARINE: Fast rib rides to Durdle Door and longer trips by arrangement

Swanage

♦ MARSH’S BOATS: Family run boat trips exploring the local history, wildlife and geology of the Purbeck Cliffs Web: www.marshsboats.co.uk

Wareham

♦ BRENSCOMBE RIB CHARTER: Charter trips to Poole Harbour, along the Jurassic Coast, Yarmouth, Lymington and Swanage Bay. Also offer ‘fast blasts’, water skiing, wake boarding and other activities Web: www.brenscombeoutdoor.co.uk

40 Poole and Bournemouth

♦ THE DORSET BELLES: Trips from Bournemouth, Poole and Swanage Pier from April to October. Evening cruises to to view the puffin colony

♦ BLUE LINE CRUISES LTD: Trips from Poole Quay to or to Swanage on Sundays, Tuesdays and Thursdays Web: www.bluelinecruises.co.uk

♦ BROWNSEA ISLAND FERRIES LTD: Trips around Poole Harbour. Web: www.brownseaislandferries.com

♦ GREENSLADES FERRY SERVICE: to Brownsea Island, as well as trips around Poole Harbour

♦ DOLPHIN III: Free trips for the disabled within Poole Harbour

♦ WAVERLEY: Steam in style aboard the last sea-going paddle steamer in the world. Cruising from many piers along the Jurassic Coast during September Web: www.waverleyexcursions.co.uk

There are also a number of boat operators in the Torbay area including:

♦ Blue Sea Cruises

♦ Torbaycharters

♦ Brixham Belle Cruises

♦ Quayside Marine

♦ Black Diamond South West

♦ C & O Engineering

♦ Riviera Princess

♦ Greenway Ferry Service

♦ Torquay - North Quay

♦ Torquay Harbour Boarding Pontoon

41 Appendix II: Regulation of passenger services (technical) Merchant Shipping Notice MSN 1776 (M) sets out the categorisation of UK waters that are not classed as “sea”. The relevant details for the Study Coast are summarised in Table II.1.

Table II.1: Categorisation of the Study Coast

Region and location Cat A, B or C* Cat D*

Poole Cat C: north of the chain ferry None

Weymouth None Within Portland Harbour and between the River Wey and Portland Harbour

Weymouth Bay None In summer west of a line from to Grove Point

Wyke Regis Cat B: Within the Wyke Regis None Training Area

Exeter Cat C: North of Warren Point None to Inshore Lifeboat Station

Teignmouth Cat C: within the harbour None

* Cat B: sig. wave height not expected to exceed 0.6m

* Cat C: sig. wave height not expected to exceed 1.2m

* Cat D: sig. wave height not expected to exceed 2.0 m

Thus excluding harbours, all of the Study Coast is classed as “sea” with minor exceptions.

Passenger ship operations are subject to Section 85 of the Merchant Shipping Act 1995, and the Safety of Life at Sea convention. Passenger ships are categorised as Class I to Class IV(A) in the UK. They may also be categorised as Class A to D according to an EU classification system – which is also recognised in the UK. Details of these are given in Table II.2.

42 Table II.2: Classification of passenger vessels

UK Passenger ships not engaged on international voyages EU Class

Class Equivalent

Ships engaged on voyages of any kind other than A international voyages, which are not ships of Classes III to II(A) B VI(A) as defined in the Merchant Shipping (Passenger Ship Construction: Ships of Classes III to VI(A)) Regulations 1998;

Ships engaged only on voyages in the course of which they B restricted are at no time more than 70 miles by sea from their point of III departure and not more than 18 miles from the coast of the , and which are at sea only in favourable weather and during restricted periods (April to October inc);

Ships engaged only on voyages in Category A, B, C or D N/A IV waters;

Ships engaged only on voyages in Category A, B or C N/A V waters;

Ships engaged only on voyages with not more than 250 C

passengers on board, to sea, or in Category A, B, C or D restricted waters, in all cases in favourable weather and during VI restricted periods, in the course of which the ships are at no time more than 15 miles, exclusive of any Category A, B, C or D waters, from their point of departure nor more than 3 miles from land;

Ships carrying not more than 50 passengers for a distance of B, C and D not more than 6 miles on voyages to or from isolated all communities on the islands or coast of the United Kingdom restricted and which do not proceed for a distance of more than 3 miles from land; subject to any conditions which the Secretary of VI(A) State may impose.

43 EU EU Domestic passenger ship classification Class

A Voyages other than voyages covered by Classes B, C and D.

Voyages in the course of which it is at no time more than 20 B miles from the line of the coast, where shipwrecked persons can land, corresponding to the medium tide height.

Voyages in sea areas where the probability of exceeding 2.5m significant wave height is smaller than 10% over a one- year period for all-year round operation, or over a specific C restricted period, in the course of which it is at no time more than 15 miles from a place of refuge, nor more than 5 miles from the line of the coast, where shipwrecked persons can land, corresponding to the medium tide height.

Voyages in sea areas where the probability of exceeding 1.5m significant wave height is smaller than 10% over a one- year period for all-year round operation, or over a specific D restricted period, in the course of which it is at no time more than 6 miles from a place of refuge, nor more than 3 miles from the line of the coast, where shipwrecked persons can land.

44 The definition of categorisation of waters for EU Classing of passenger ships is set out in MSN 1747 (M), and this depends on the time of year (see Table II.3).

Table II.3: Categorisation of waters for EU classing purposes

“All Year” Operation

Sea area EU “D” Sea area EU “C”

♦ Hope’s Nose to Straight Point ♦ Start Point to Portland Bill

♦ Straight Point to Beer Head ♦ Portland Bill to North Foreland

♦ The Nothe, Weymouth to Redcliff ♦ (in other words all of the Study Coast) Point

♦ (i.e. mainly only the western part of Lyme Bay)

“Summer Only” Operation (April to October inclusive)

Sea area EU “D” Sea area EU “C”

♦ Berry Head to Blacknor Point, ♦ Tater-du, Cornwall to North Foreland Portland passing to the south of the Isle of Wight ♦ Grove Point Portland to Rope Lake Head (near Kimmeridge) ♦ (i.e. extends the “All Year” categorisation further out to sea) ♦ / Durlston Head to Hurst Point

♦ (in other words all the Study Coast but not rounding Portland Bill or Saint Albans Head)

The impact is that operators wishing to work on the Study Coast ideally need EU Class B or UK Class II(A). The alternative EU Class C brings in a significant constraint of being no more that 15 miles from a place of refuge. Another alternative is living with operations restricted to April - October, and EU Class D or UK Class III or VI vessels for relatively local operations.

45