1 / 50

Managing Public Access: An Analysis of Beachgoers in Wrightsville Beach, North Carolina

Managing Public Access: An Analysis of Beachgoers in Wrightsville Beach, North Carolina. Mark T. Imperial, Ph.D. Master of Public Administration Program University of North Carolina at Wilmington imperialm@uncw.edu http://people.uncw.edu/imperialm/ & Chris Dumas, Ph.D.

keith
Download Presentation

Managing Public Access: An Analysis of Beachgoers in Wrightsville Beach, North Carolina

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Managing Public Access:An Analysis of Beachgoers in Wrightsville Beach, North Carolina Mark T. Imperial, Ph.D. Master of Public Administration Program University of North Carolina at Wilmington imperialm@uncw.edu http://people.uncw.edu/imperialm/ & Chris Dumas, Ph.D. Department of Economics and Finance University of North Carolina at Wilmington dumasc@uncw.edu

  2. Objectives of the Study • Determine who the beachgoers are and where they come from • Help argue for greater return of property tax revenue and services from New Hanover County • Help argue for additional funds from the Tourism Development Authority (TDA) • Obtain information that can be used for planning and management purposes • Information incorporated into CAMA Land Use Plan • Help determine how to allocate services • Feedback on services and policy questions (e.g., cost of parking) • Two samples • Typical summer weekday and weekend day

  3. Wrightsville Beach, NC

  4. Wrightsville Beach, NC • Population • Year round: 2,604 (declined 11.3% since 1990) • Seasonal: approximately 11,000 on a typical summer weekend • Additional visitors: approximately 8,000 • Build out community, trend is towards redevelopment • Basic Demographics • Education: 60% college or greater (31% in the County) • Median Age: 37.1 (2nd lowest) • Racial Composition: 98.1% white

  5. Wrightsville Beach, NC • Income • Per Capita Income: $36,575 (4th highest among NC beaches) • Median Household Income: $55,903 (6th) • Median Family Income: $71,641 (1st) • Housing • Median Value of Owner Occupied Housing: $480,600 (3rd) • Rent: 80.8% is above $750/month (only 42.4% in County) • Multi-family units: 58% of housing units • 41.8% of Housing Units Occupied Year Round: 41.8% (7th) • Trend towards greater seasonal housing

  6. Public Access Facilities • Beach accesses: 44 (8% of sites) • Length: 4 miles • Public access points/mile: 10.9 (2nd in NC) • CAMA signs: 43 (10.5%) • Parking lot spaces: 605 (8.8%) • Parking spaces/mile: 150.1 (most in NC) • Accesses w/uncounted parking: 38 (874 spaces) • Uncounted parking spaces/mile: 218.5 • Dune walkways: 8 (2%) • Overlook decks/gazebos: 6 (6.8%)

  7. Beach Access Facilities • Handicap Accesses • To dune crest: 9 (7.6% of all NC) • To deck/gazebo: 6 (9/8%) • To beach: 6 (8.6%) • Handicap parking spaces: 20 (8.7%) • Restroom facilities: 3 (6.7%) • Showers: 3 (5.4%) • Picnic tables: 0 (only 13 statewide) • Vehicle access: 6 (6.7%) • Bike racks: 3 (2.5%) • Lifeguards: 10 stands, down from 12

  8. Methodological Challenges • Approximately 4 miles of beach • Beachgoers are not normally distributed • Public access sites • Parking availability • Multi-unit, high density structures & hotels • Need to randomly sample groups of beachgoers • Need to randomly sample adult in a group of beachgoers • Recruiting, training, and managing 20 to 30 surveyors working for 8 hours in 90 degree heat

  9. Distribution of Beachgoers • Rented a pilot and small plane • Flew the length of the beach at 500 ft. • Digital video and still photos for the length of the beach • Counts • Used the photos to break beach into 118 segments using visible landmarks • Team of 2 used videos to count all people, walking, sitting, swimming, etc. and averaged their counts • Data aggregated into 10 grids, then 8

  10. Distribution of BeachgoersSaturday, June 21, 2003 @ 1:30 PM

  11. Distribution of BeachgoersTuesday, June 21, 2003 @ 3:30 PM

  12. Distribution of Beachgoers

  13. Knowing DistributionProvides Useful Information • It is unlikely that there are more than about 8,000 people on the beach at any one time • Much less than previously thought • Only 1,479 parking spaces • Knowing distribution of beachgoers could improve service delivery: • Linear programming models can be used to optimize the allocation of services like placement of lifeguard stands and trash barrels • Information used to site new facilities (e.g., restrooms)

  14. Survey Instrument • Questionnaire with open- and closed-ended question to find out such things as • Where people came from • How they traveled to the beach • Duration of stay • Factors affection choice of specific beach location • Demographic information • Three versions with different section of questions on • Spending behavior • Contingent behavior on response to increased parking costs • Perceptions of service delivery to residents and visitors • Questionnaires administered by surveyors

  15. Surveyors & Training • Surveyors allocated to 8 grids using a computer algorithm • Ranged from 1 to 10 • Computer model also produced a skip pattern • Made sure experienced surveyor in each grid to help supervise • Training on • Reading questionnaire and collect data • Randomly sampling groups and adults within groups • Reading the informed consent and not interview people under 18 • Using GPS meters • Research team kept in touch via cell phone and collected morning surveys at lunch

  16. Sampling Strategy • Randomly sampling groups • Start at beginning of grid and identify 1st group of beachgoers • Count off systematically until reaching skip number • Random number card used to pick first group and then counted off groups using skip number • Moved systematically in different ways depending o density of groups • Randomly sampling adult • Picked an adult and counted off systematically giving each a number • Used the next random number from the card to select the adult • Asked to participate and read the informed consent • Procedures used to ensure that everyone had an equal probability of getting sampled

  17. Data Entry • At conclusion of AM/PM sessions data was checked to ensure it had appropriate identifying information • Questionnaire coded using software identical to that used for telephone surveys to construct the computer database • Multiple reference points used to identify incorrectly entered data using cross tabulations • Data was checked a final time for potential errors and variables to assist in the analysis were created

  18. Response Rates

  19. Demographics of Beachgoers • Sex • Male: 37.4% • Female: 62.2% • Race • White: 95.2% • Education • High school: 9.5% • Some college: 24.9% • College or greater: 64.9% • Income • 16.6% < $35,000 • 28.6% > $100,000

  20. Where do People Come From? • North Carolina: 75.4% • Mostly New Hanover County, few from Brunswick and Pender Counties • Raleigh metro area is biggest source of NC visitors • Out of State: 24.5% • Virginia, Pennsylvania, Georgia, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Illinois, Texas, etc. • Out of state visitors come from all over • How did they discover Wrightsville Beach? • Grew up here/local resident: 22.9% • Family, friends, word of mouth: 57.4%

  21. Group Characteristics • Group size: • Mean: 4.33 • Range: 1 to 31 • Years coming to Wrightsville Beach • Mean: 12.16 • Median: 8 • Range: 0 to 65 • When do you typically frequent the beach? • During the week: 16.2% • Weekends: 31.8% • Vacation: 32.1%

  22. Primary Purpose of Your Trip to the Beach Today

  23. Current Trip Characteristics • Number of expected trips in 2003 • Mean: 13.03 trips • Median: 3 trips • Length of trip • Mean: 4.11days • Median: 3 days • Range: 1 to 90 days • Total hours on beach • Mean: 4.59 hrs • Median: 4 hrs • How did they travel to beach? • Drive/Passenger in car: 69% • Walk: 29.6%

  24. Where did they park?

  25. Other Parking Questions • How long to find a space? • Mean: 4.07 minutes. • Median: 1 minute • Range: 0 to 90 minutes. • Did they park in the area they wanted? • Yes: 91.7% • In the last year, did you try to visit but went elsewhere because there was no parking? • Yes: 31.1% • Number of blocks to walk to the beach • Mean: .9 • Range: 0 to 9

  26. Factors Used to Select Specific Location on Beach

  27. Factors Used to Select Specific Location on Beach • Have they been to same location before? • Yes: 79.9% • Most important factors in choosing location? • Near where you parked: 27.6% • Near condo: 20.3% • Near few people: 7.9% • Near good swimming: 3.9% • Near people know/meet: 3.7% • Near good surfing: 3.6% • Near restrooms: 3% • Near lifeguards: 2.4% • Near a lot of people: 1.4%

  28. Spending Behavior • Looked at the total spent individually: • Wrightsville Beach • Locally but off Wrightsville Beach • Outside the local area • Spending by categories such as: • Parking • Gasoline • Restaurants • Groceries • Beach gear • Entertainment • Hotel/Model/Condo • Rental car/air travel

  29. Spending Behavior

  30. Grading Beach Services

  31. Wrightsville Beach Compared to Other Beaches

  32. Overall Satisfaction

  33. Directions for Future Research • Analyze the economic data collected • Travel cost models • Economic impact models • Contingent valuation models • Random utility models • Analyze management data • Parking prices • Provision of services • Perceptions of services • Better management of beach traffic • Follow-up survey planned Summer ‘05

  34. Questions?

  35. Age of Respondents

  36. Education

  37. Income

More Related