Christchurch City Council Sumner and New Brighton Beach visitor surveys: 2005 Final draft Rob Greenaway & Associates www.greenaway.co.nz 14 June 2005 Christchurch City Council Sumner and New Brighton Beach visitor surveys: 2005 Contents 1. Summary................................................................................................................................................... 3 1.1. Sumner summary............................................................................................................................ 3 1.2. New Brighton summary................................................................................................................... 3 1.3. Result set summary ........................................................................................................................ 4 2. Purpose of report ...................................................................................................................................... 7 3. Survey sites............................................................................................................................................... 7 3.1. New Brighton .................................................................................................................................. 7 3.2. Sumner / Moncks Bay study ........................................................................................................... 8 4. Method ...................................................................................................................................................... 9 4.1. Error...............................................................................................................................................10 4.2. Non-response ................................................................................................................................11 5. Results .....................................................................................................................................................12 5.1. Demographics................................................................................................................................12 5.2. Activity ...........................................................................................................................................14 5.3. Preferences and perceptions .........................................................................................................20 5.4. Change over time...........................................................................................................................16 5.5. Conflict...........................................................................................................................................19 5.6. Satisfaction ....................................................................................................................................21 6. Access – New Brighton ............................................................................................................................39 7. Appendix one: Questionnaires .................................................................................................................41 RG&A 14 June 2005 2 1. Summary This report presents the findings of a survey of recreational visitors to the New Brighton and Sumner beach areas over summer 2004 / 05. Surveying was conducted over the summer period mid-December 2004 to mid-April 2005 on 31 days in Sumner and Moncks Bay, and 26 days at New Brighton. A total of 666 questionnaires was completed in Sumner and 431 in New Brighton, not including those who were questioned more than once and were doing the same main activity when approached. This summary presents a review of the findings for each beach, and a summary of findings by result set. The latter compares the results between each beach. 1.1. Sumner summary The survey results indicate that almost half the users of the Sumner Beach and Moncks Bay area were from the nearby suburbs of Sumner, Redcliffs, Moncks Bay and Mount Pleasant. Walking (38%), entertaining children (14%), dog walking (9%) and surfing (7%) were the main primary activities, although a fifth of visitors also swam during their visit (only 3% of respondents named swimming as their main activity). Scarborough Park was a key destination in the area for caregivers with children. The area shows very low levels of conflict between users, with 31% of respondents reporting no interactions with other visitors to the area. Where an interaction was reported, 94% were considered to be positive, 3% neutral and only 3% negative (similar studies showed levels of negative interaction of 5% on the Port Hills and 14% at Spencer Park). Almost half of respondents had been dissatisfied with an aspect of a past visit to the area. Dog faeces and litter accounted for over a third of reasons for dissatisfaction. Weather and boy racers accounted each for 10% of reasons for dissatisfaction. Two thirds of respondents felt the area was the same as when they first visited, while 24% felt the area had improved. Better walkways, more cafes and shops and improved facilities accounted for many of the perceptions of improvement. Ten percent of respondents felt the area was worse than when they first visited, with an increase in the number of visitors, more traffic and dog restrictions accounting for a majority of the perceptions of decline, although water quality issues were also significant. Just over three-quarters of respondents felt dogs in the area were OK or fine, or OK when restrained, and 21% did not like them. Just over three-quarters of respondents also felt parking was adequate or good. The natural environment, accessibility, the sand, walkways and cafes and shops were very important features of the area, although activities for children rated very highly for many respondents. Better policing of dogs and their owners, beach grooming and improved toilet and changing facilities were the most common calls for improvement. 1.2. New Brighton summary The survey results indicate that almost 45% of users of the New Brighton Beach area were from the nearby suburbs New Brighton, North Beach, Parklands, Aranui, Burwood and Bexley (24% of respondents walked from their homes to the beach). Walking (24%), entertaining children (16%), RG&A 14 June 2005 3 dog walking (12%), surfing (8%), relaxing (8%) and swimming (8%) were the main primary activities, although almost a quarter of visitors swam as a secondary activity during their visit. The area shows very low levels of conflict between users, with 30% of respondents reporting no interactions with other visitors to the area. Where an interaction was reported, 90% were considered to be positive, 9% neutral and only 1% negative (similar studies showed levels of negative interaction of 5% on the Port Hills and 14% at Spencer Park). Just over 40% of respondents had been dissatisfied with an aspect of a past visit to the area. Dogs and litter accounted for 40% of reasons for dissatisfaction. Dog faeces, weather and beach debris and seaweed accounted each for 8% of reasons for dissatisfaction. Over 80% of respondents felt the area was the same as when they first visited, while 14% felt the area had improved. The library and pier and better facilities generally accounted for many of the perceptions of improvement. Only 4% of respondents felt the area was worse than when they first visited, although no single reason stood out. Over 90% of respondents felt access to the beach was good, OK, fine or excellent, and 90% reported parking to be good (over 80% of respondents’ cars were parked in one of three locations). Approximately 85% of respondents were positive about the character of the sand dunes, and 6% stated they should be lowered or were too big. The opportunity for exercise, relaxation, fresh air and the natural environment were important features, although activities for children rated very highly for many respondents. Beach grooming, more cafes and shops, policing of dogs and more rubbish bins were the most common calls for improvement. 1.3. Result set summary 1. Demographics. The respondent profiles generally paralleled that of Canterbury, with a slight over-representation of the ages between 30 and 49. Those over 70 years of age made up only 3% of respondents for Brighton and 8% for Sumner (Sumner being closer to the regional average). Females made up 54% and 56% of the samples, which is a little above the regional gender profile. Those in full-time employment were under- represented at Brighton compared with the regional average for the 2001 census, while Sumner was closer to the regional average. Maori visitors to Brighton made up 10% of the visitor sample, and this was higher than that of Sumner (3%) and higher than the percentage of Maori in the general Canterbury population (7%). Education levels in both locations were higher than the average for Canterbury, which is not unusual in outdoor recreation surveys. Most respondents sampled in this survey (90%) were resident in the Christchurch area. Residents from nearby suburbs were most likely to be beach visitors (hence the demographics of respondents are more likely to represent those of local suburbs). Almost 50% of respondents in the Sumner sample were from Sumner, Redcliffs, Mount Pleasant and Moncks Bay. Almost 45% of respondents from the New Brighton sample were from New Brighton, North Beach, Parklands, Aranui, Burwood and Bexley. 2. Activity. The primary