ArticlePDF Available

Landslip Remediation of Fairlight Cove, Brighton Cliff MSc Environmental Geology

Authors:

Abstract and Figures

The Fairlight Cliff is nearly 50 to 55 metre high from sea level. Generally, the cliff orientated in the direction of the southwest to northeast. The length from Goldbury Point to Cliff End is divided into three sections by two major faults; Haddock’s Fault to the northeast and the Fairlight Cove Fault to the Southwest. The End Cliff consists of Cretaceous sediments, which includes of Fairlight Clays, Ashdown Sands and Waldhurst Clay. Generally, the study area has more debris flow materials. In the cliff area, clay has more water contents, which causes extra load on the area. The clay has been eroded due to weathering, which is weak to medium strong. In the west part of Fairlight Cliff, under the base of sandstone lamination of silty mudstone is present, which has organic rich material and ichnotaxa fossils. Vertical fractures and joints are dominated and in some places conjugate fracture can be seen as well. In addition, two faults are present in the Cliff End oriented to opposite directions and formed a Graben. In order to develop future protection of the cliffs, short, medium and long term recessions should be considered. The outcome of the field investigation for future management will require concentrating on four main forces that affect the landslide; toe erosion, groundwater accumulation, surface water and slop activity. In the “do nothing” option, the ground under tension and disturbed material around the cliff will slip quickly toward the sea, if the current slope process continues as before. The “do something” options are used to protect the cliff against erosion by the sea. However, from the “do something” approach nine schemes have been considered using a hard defence to form a protective berm at the toe of the landslip to prevent its continuing erosion from wave attack.
Content may be subject to copyright.
0
Landslip Remediation of Fairlight Cove,
Brighton Cliff
MSc Environmental Geology
Zakeria Shnizai
01-06-2012
i
Table of Contents
1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 1
2. Aims .................................................................................................................................... 2
3. Objectives ........................................................................................................................... 2
4. History of the Site ............................................................................................................... 2
5. Geology and stratigraphy of the study area ....................................................................... 3
6. Methodology ...................................................................................................................... 4
7. Field Investigation............................................................................................................... 4
7.1. First day of the field investigation ............................................................................... 4
7.1.1. Site 1..................................................................................................................... 4
7.1.2. Site 2..................................................................................................................... 5
7.1.3. Site 3..................................................................................................................... 7
7.1.4. Site 4..................................................................................................................... 7
7.2. Second day field investigation .................................................................................... 9
7.2.1. Site 1..................................................................................................................... 9
7.2.2. Site 2................................................................................................................... 11
7.2.3. Site 3................................................................................................................... 11
8. Project Appraisal Report ................................................................................................... 12
9. Option Selection ............................................................................................................... 14
9.1. Scheme Considerations ............................................................................................. 14
9.2. Do Nothing ................................................................................................................ 14
9.3. Do Something ............................................................................................................ 14
10. Result ............................................................................................................................ 15
11. Conclusion ..................................................................................................................... 16
12. References .................................................................................................................... 17
Appendix 1 ............................................................................................................................... 18
Appendix 2 ............................................................................................................................... 19
Appendix 3 ............................................................................................................................... 19
1
Fairlight Cove Report
1. Introduction
Fairlight Cove is a seaside village, which is located in the East Sussex England. The site
extends approximately 5 km to the east of Hasting County and covers approximately 139.8
acre area (Rother District Council, 2005). Based on the information obtained from Geograph
Britain and Ireland website, the Fairlight Cove area can be found on the national grid
reference TQ8612.
The Fairlight Cliff upper beach at the toe of the cliff comprises shingles and has been
stabilised appropriately to allow vegetation. The Cliff is nearly 50 to 55 metre high from sea
level, which includes the beach, cliff face and the immediate cliff top between Hastings and
Pett Level (figure 1). The cliffs are selected as a Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
because of its geological and biological importance. Generally, the cliff orientated in the
direction of the southwest to northeast with the main drift of near-shore sediment from
west to east (Rother District Council, 2005).
Figure 1: Map of the study area from Fairlight Cliff to Cliff End (Bywaysbyrailway, 2012).
2
This report includes the analysis of field investigation which was carried out on the Fairlight
Cove study area on 19th and 20th of March 2012. The field work was carried out at this site
with major concentrations of rock mass properties. In the field, hydrological and
hydrogeological, structural influences on rock instability along the cliff, scan line data and
graphic logs were considered. The scan line data were plotted onto the stereonet by making
an input file with dip software, which is specially utilised for the stereographic projection.
The report also deals with site geology and stratigraphy, methodology, project appraisal
report and possible solution for the landslide. Finally, result of the field investigation and
conclusion will be discussed.
2. Aims
The main aim of this report is to evaluate the remediation of Fairlight Cove Landslip in
relation to the data, which was collected during fieldwork on 19th and 20th of May 2012. As
well as, the potential for cliff collapse and any hazards to engineering work should be
analysed in the study area.
3. Objectives
In order to obtain the aims using the fieldwork collected data and literature review
especially Project Appraisal Report related to the study area.
4. History of the Site
According to Terry Oakes Associates Limited (2005), development of the village began
during the 1920s, and residential houses and buildings extend into places to the present cliff
top. The cliffs all over the study area have been subjected to erosion to differing degrees,
which depend on their location. In 1990, Fairlight Cove Cliff near to the Sea Road had
become eroded. In 1998 and 2000, a major landslip collapse occurred at the cliff in frontage
of Rockmead Road. In May 2004 one another landslide was occurred in the area. In the past
eight years, there has been a dramatic increase in cliff loss along the majority of the
frontage of Rockmead Road. This has led to the demolition of five houses and evacuation of
others. According to Rother District Council (2005), the Landslip area indicates that there
was a long term recession of the cliff top at an average rate from 0.46 m/year to 5.0 m/year.
3
5. Geology and stratigraphy of the study area
According to the British Geological Survey (2005), the coastal cliff length from Goldbury
Point to Cliff End is divided into three sections by two major faults; Haddock’s Fault to the
northeast and the Fairlight Cove Fault to the southwest. The cliffs to the west of the Fairlight
Cove Reverse Fault are also dominated by the Fairlight Anticline.
The End Cliff consists of Cretaceous sediments, which includes of Fairlight Clays, Ashdown
Sands and Waldhurst Clay (figure 2). Ashdown Formation comprises of sandstones,
siltstones, mudstone and clay. An exposure in the Fairlight Cliff shows that the Cliff End
Sandstone is a member of the lower Wadhurst Clay Formation. The Wadhurst Clay
Formation includes of shales and sandstone with ironstone that has specimens of dinosaurs,
pterosaurs, turtle, and crocodiles (Rother District Council, 2005).
Figure 2: Geological map of the study area (from BGS, 1980).
The Fairlight site is the best place for Dinosaur remains and have a unique lower cretaceous
mammal fauna, which can be found anywhere along the cliff. Fossils can be found in the site
all over the fallen cliffs’ rocks. The best place to investigate for finding dinosaur fossils is
between boulders and the base of the cliff. It is the place to explore part of the early
cretaceous epoch, which in the earth’s history dating approximately 139 to 143 million years
ago. At that time, Fairlight was part of the European landmass (Shepherd, 2002).
4
Shepherd (2002) also mentioned that rivers and streams originally transported the exposed
sediments of the cliff to the foreshore as sands and silts. The detailed stratigraphy of the
cliffs between Fairlight and Pett level is shown in figure-3.
Figure 3: Stratigraphy of the study area (Shepherd, 2002).
6. Methodology
During fieldwork investigation of the Fairlight Cove Cliff certain equipment were used, which
includes of GPS, Geological hammer, tape measure metre, and compass. GPS was used for
obtaining our exact location in the map and site. A geological hammer was utilised to chip
bits of rock to be able to observe unweathered surfaces. A tape measure metre was to
record the thickness of beds or measure length of the cliff. A compass was used to find the
orientation of geological planes and lineation in relation to the dip, dip direction and strike.
During the fieldwork, a camera was also used to take photos of the interesting areas from
the geological view point.
In the lab, Dip software was used to plot the recorded scanline data onto the stereonet. The
software uses the interactive analysis of orientation based geological data. A plane with dip
direction, beddings, and poles are drawn inside the stereonet plot to observe discontinuities
which control the cliff rocks.
7. Field Investigation
7.1. First day of the field investigation
7.1.1. Site 1
This site investigation was taken on the 19th of May 2012. This site has TQ E11866 and
N11866. Generally, the area has debris flow materials due to water flow on the face of the
landslide, which creates mud flows and generate further cliff failure (Figure 4). Probably, the
5
type of slipping is a rotation flow failure. Bed of this site is from 0.5 to 1m thick and mostly
consists of clay and less sandstone, which is weak to medium strong and commonly has
beige colour. Clay has more water contents, which causes extra load on the area. Some
parts have different colours, because in some parts it is oxidised or have organic rich
material especially above the bed. The oxidised section has reddish colour and the organic
rich layer colour is black.
In the bottom section, sandstone is strong and probably cemented with carbonate. The
area has 50˚ strike and dipping to the southwest. The exposure part has clay mixed with
sandstone, which locates above the debris materials. One metre above the bed, the clay has
white colour which might have some salt contents. The orientation of a layer was measured,
which has dip 25˚, dip direction 214˚ and strike 124˚.
Figure 4: Debris flow and exposure bed.
7.1.2. Site 2
This site is about 100m far from the first. Basically there are armour stones against the
landscape to protect the cliff from waves and erosions (figure 6). It means that the armour
stones protect the area which is not actively eroded except the small erosion part. Actually,
the armour stones are large boulder with bigger sizes, which are used to form a type of sea
wall for protection and allow water through the gaps to disperse wave energy. These
armour stones could be granite and basalt, because these kind of rocks are resistant to
waves and erosions. Debris flow materials also exist on the toe part of the area
A small drainage pool is present at the site to cut slope drain and direct surface runoff or
groundwater into a stabilised watercourse and trapping device, and prevent movement of
6
the cliff (figure 5). Therefore, slope surface water and groundwater can have a major impact
on coastal slope erosion and stability. Previously, a part of the cliff near to Rockmead Road
was destroyed due to landslide. The action of gravity is the primary driving force for the
landslide to occur and water may increase the gravitational force as well.
On the other hand, some geo-membrane liners also had been used as construction of
reinforced soil walls to protect costal cliff from erosion and also to control the coastal
drainage slope (figure 6). Geo-membrane liners mostly consist of butyl rubber, PVC,
polypropylene and so on. These materials have different characteristics which affect
installation procedures. The material can be used as an underlay or an overlay, which
depends on the use.
Figure 5: Drainage outlet into the pool, then discharge to the sea.
Figure 6: Armour stones and geo-membrane in the area.
7
7.1.3. Site 3
This location with TQ E87906 and N11690 has a monitoring point or borehole. The borehole
was drilled to obtain samples or monitor water levels within the ground. This area is also a
drainage area and has debris flow materials nearly 100m far from the cliff. In this site, the
cliff consists of clay and sandstone. In the area, some evidences of erosion can be observed
as well.
7.1.4. Site 4
This site is located in the west of the monitoring point and has TQ E87866, N11600. The site
consists of clay mixed with sandstone, which has grey colour. The clay has been eroded due
to weathering, which is weak to medium strong. Organic rich materials are present in the
clay layer, which is formed from completely decomposed living organisms (figure 7). In the
bottom of the cliff, sandstone is present and it mostly has grey to brown colour. About 25m
far to the west, the clay layers have more water contents, which has dark brownish colour,
and the section has a steep slope with having water channel and pipes.
Then 10m away from this point, the total length of the section is approximately 160m that
has iron stains and organic rich materials. Mostly, clay and sandstone of this section have
more percentage of iron. The iron staining is caused by a chemical interaction between iron
and certain minerals, which produces an unsightly reddish staining. In some parts, the cliff
has been eroded and slipped that has light to dark grey colour (figure 7). Generally, in the
base of this section sandstone has taken place which is moderately strong and, has fine
grains size. Thickness of the sandstone bed is from 1 to 2m and grey to brown colour.
Under the base of sandstone, lamination of silty mudstone is present, which has organic rich
material and ichnotaxa fossils that look like white spots. This part has yellowish colour
materials as well, which might be sulphur (figure 8). Coal is also present in the silty
mudstone which has a dark grey colour with fine grains. Silty mudstone is definitely weak
and has woods and fossils.
Commonly in this section of the cliff regular failure occurs. It has debris flow materials,
which are very weak (figure 7). Erosion process is also present which soil and clay are
removed from the cliff’s surface by natural processes especially water. In the sandstone, the
strike is 290˚, dip is 18˚ and dip direction is toward the northeast.
8
Figure 8: Debris flow and organic rich layer.
Scanlinee data were taken at various locations in the base part of the section, which has TQ
E88803 and N13104 (Appendix 1). Scanline survey is very important for identifying rock
quality estimation and obtaining data in rock engineering. In this section, scaneline survey
was done to record and describe rock fracturing in the outcrop area. The data have been
plotted using dip software which consists of dip direction, beddings and poles. The figure 9
and figure 10 evidently shows wedge failure, so the fracture sets cross. Size and geometry of
the fracture sets limit the lateral failures, so the failure will mostly occur to downward.
Figure 9: Poles and planes.
The stereonet plot shows that the slope face direction is in the same direction of dip. The
bedding discontinuities striking are to east and west. The main concentrations of the poles
are in the northwest and southeast (figure 10).
Figure 7: The yellow colour which might
be sulphur.
9
Figure 10: Concentrations of poles
7.2. Second day field investigation
7.2.1. Site 1
This section is the cliff end and located in the northeast of the Haddock’s reverse fault with
TQ E88766, N13081. The cliff composed of a massive sandstone layer of the Ashdown
Formation, which is nearly 5m thick and has grey colour. Ashdown Sandstone is overlaid by
the Wadhurst Clay and this is in turn overlaid by Cliff End Sandstone. The roundness index of
the Ashdown sandstone grain is from rounded to sub-round. The sandstone is weak to
medium strong, has iron staining and small organic rich layers inside. The organic rich layer
is approximately 1m above the base of the cliff and has 2 to 5cm thickness. The organic
materials consist of coal, lignite and peaty soil.
Approximately 40m far toward the west there is also sandstone, which has iron staining
nearly 3m above the base section. On this site, the strike is 78˚, dip is 70˚ and dip direction is
toward northwest. The sandstone is weak to medium strong and has fine grain size. It is also
poorly cemented which has a light brown colour. In some parts has an organic rich layer that
has black colour.
Cross bedding and discontinuity are present. Vertical fractures and joints are dominated and
in some places conjugate fractures can be seen as well. In addition, here two faults are
present in the Cliff End, which are oriented in opposite directions and formed a Graben that
10
the central part went downward (figure 11). In geology Graben is an elongated block of the
earth’s crust laying between two faults and displaced downward relative to the blocks on
either side.
Figure 11: Graben fault in the End Cliff.
In this section the rocks are generally oriented to the direction of the northeast to
southwest, with relatively face orientation 40˚. The scanline data, which was collected
during fieldwork, show that wedge failure could be dominant and control the stability of this
cliff face (figure 12). In some parts the orientation of discontinuities has opposite
orientation to the cliff face, so toppling or sliding may occur there. The main concentrations
of the poles are in the west of the stereonet plot.
Figure 12: Poles concentration.
11
7.2.2. Site 2
This site is also in the Cliff End, but far from the previous part. The sandstone of this site is
also weak to strong and has fine grain size. The layer has moisture content, which has dark
brownish colour. In this site, cemented mudstone and clay are present as well.
There is a layer of organic rich materials that has dark colour, fine to medium strong and
coarse grain size. But, in some parts the hardness is weak to medium strong. This layer is
from 64cm to 1m thick and shows fluvial environment not marine environment. Laminated
sand with much cemented iron oxide is present that might be hematite and goethite. In this
section strike is 80˚, dip is 67˚ and dip direction is toward the south.
7.2.3. Site 3
In this location TQ E88544, N12493 generally Ashdown sandstone is present in relation to
the east side. The sandstone is moderately strong, which has fine grains size and grey
colour. Inside the sandstone, some layers of silt had been taken place.
In the direction of west side clay gush is present. The clay has plastic characteristics and has
very low permeability that impedes the escape of fluid from the reservoir rocks. The clay,
which is situated in the fault zone, is also completely impermeable and plays seal role
(figure 13). In the below part with location TQ E88544 and N12493 , the fault is from 50cm
to 60cm wide and in the upper part the fault wideness is getting decrease and it is from 20
to 30cm. The fault zone clay has grey colour and it is laminated. Top part of the clay layer
has iron staining, which has 2m thickness and mostly consist of hematite. In the fault zone
strike is 285˚, dip is 33˚and dip direction is to the southwest.
Figure 13: Fault location with TQ E88544,
N12493 in the lower part.
12
This part of the cliff is not stable and has flat bedded. The scan line plots show a possibility
of wedge failure. As well as, various discontinuities oriented to different direction, which
might cause small different failures, such as sliding, toppling and so on (figure 14 and 15).
Figure 14: Pole concentration (data from the east side).
Figure 15: Pole concentrations (data from the west side close to fault zone).
8. Project Appraisal Report
The Project Appraisal Report (PAR) constitutes its application for a scheme under the Coast
Protection Act, 1949. The report follows scoping study undertaken by Terry Oakes
Associates Limited (TOAL) which assessed the issues and possible solution for dealing with
the problems connected with landslide at Rockmead Road. TOAL mentioned that if the cliff
collapsing under a cyclical failure continues, 195 houses in the Fairlight cove to Pett Level
area will be lost in the coming 100 years. Therefore, TOAL observed the technical,
environmental and economics suitability of a range of options to stop or slow down the rest
13
of the cliff top collapse. Terry Oakes Associates Limited also offered feasible protection up
to 100 years. In the report, fifteen options, including “do nothing” against erosion scenarios
are considered, which three of the options related to engineering solution that could be
used to implement the proposed policy for 50 years (Rother District Council, 2005).
According to the Terry Oakes Associates Limited (2005), there is increase in the cliff lose
between Haddocks Reverse Fault to Cliff End section. Mostly the cliff lose is in front of
Rockmead road, which was observed during field investigation. The material in this area is
mostly consists of loose and unconsolidated rocks, which are very easily eroded by waves
action.
In order to develop future retreat of the cliff, geotechnical consultant group tested physical
characteristics of the rocks, analysed the configuration of the cliff and look at historical map
to provide their interpretation of the result which include:
a) Short Term Recession
If the “do nothing” is adopted, the current slope processes are expected to continue. In
result, the ground under tension and disturbed material around the cliff will slip quickly
toward the sea. The disturbed and initial failure ground will be lost within the 10 next years.
b) Medium Term Recession
In the medium term sea erosion will dominate. In this term, tension zone will slip quickly
into the sea, ongoing sea erosion will steepen the slope, a critical inclination will be reached
at the next cliff trigger and continuously the cycle of cliff toe erosion and cliff failure will be
repeated.
c) Long Term Regression
The model for long term collapse takes place as a sequence of toe erosion and sliding
repetition. Continuously, the whole cycle of toe erosion will be followed by repeating the
cliff failure.
14
9. Option Selection
9.1. Scheme Considerations
The outcome of the field study and investigation for a future management solution will
require concentrating on the following four main forces that affect the landslide (Rother
District Council, 2005).
I. During high water period, the materials of the landslip failure and toe of the cliff
cause to erosion by wave attack and tidal currents. In addition, continues erosion of
the landslip toe removes any buttressing effect.
II. At the Rockmead Road site groundwater has accumulated, which can weaken the
sandstones and clays, further aggravating their tendency to fail.
III. The surrounding area surface water and its effect on the sub-surface layers is also
contributing to the instability of the site including landslip mainly after heavy rain.
IV. The creation of hollows within the slope and the landslip area, which water
accumulates there, can cause continuous ground movement.
9.2. Do Nothing
In the “do nothing” option, the ground under tension and disturbed material around the cliff
will slip quickly toward the sea if the current slope processes are expected to continue.
However, the do nothing doesn’t have adverse effects on the Site of Special Scientific
Interest (SSSI) and local coastal processes (Rother District Council, 2005).
9.3. Do Something
The “Do Something” approaches are to retreat the cliff instability. The “do something”
processes are used to protect the cliff against erosion by the sea, thus protecting housing,
infrastructure, the cliff and the hinterland from erosion often at the dynamic coastal
landscape. However, from the “do something” approach nine schemes have been
considered using a hard defence to form a protective berm at the toe of the landslip to
prevent its continuing erosion from wave attack (Rother District Council, 2005). These
include of the following methods:
1. Erosion protection rock berm at toe
15
Bringing the armour stones (large boulders) via Fairlight Village to the area is one of the
ways to protect the cliff and to allow water through the gaps and disperse the energy of the
waves by reducing the erosion strength.
2. Extended erosion protection rock berm at the toe of landslip
3. Retaining rock berm at toe of landslip
4. Rock berm forward of the toe of landslip
5. Sheet piling and rock revetment at toe of landslip:
Geo-membrane liners are another way to protect the cliff from erosion. Geo-membrane
liners are impermeable membranes used widely as cut-offs (TOAL, 2005). Reventments are
wooden barriers constructed towards the beach to protect the base of the cliffs. Energy
from wave is dispersed by reventments, which less beach material is eroded compared to
the sea wall (Internetgeography, 2009).
6. Precast concrete wall at landslip toe
These are large concrete blocks and boulders located offshore to change the direction of
waves and reduce longshore drift and help to absorb wave energy (Internetgeography,
2009).
7. Toe revetment scheme 20 year design life
8. Comprehensive defence scheme
9. Comprehensive defence scheme delayed by 20 years
10. Result
During the field investigation, the cliff from Pett-level to Fairlight Cove was considered to be
unstable coastal area and the frontage of the cliffs is susceptible to more landslides. The
area has debris flow and mud flow materials that are unconsolidated, unstable, and it could
be easily eroded by wave action. Therefore, armour stones, geo-membrane and drainage
pool had been used to protect the cliffs.
The scanline data plots mostly show a possibility of wedge failures, but there will be plane
failure and toppling failure. As well as the presence of different type of discontinuities
oriented to different direction, so they might cause rock sliding and small debris flow.
16
11. Conclusion
The Fairlight Cliff is nearly 50 to 55 metre high from sea level. Generally, the cliff orientated
in the direction of the southwest to northeast. The length from Goldbury Point to Cliff End is
divided into three sections by two major faults; Haddock’s Fault to the northeast and the
Fairlight Cove Fault to the Southwest. The End Cliff consists of Cretaceous sediments, which
includes of Fairlight Clays, Ashdown Sands and Waldhurst Clay.
Generally, the study area has more debris flow materials. In the cliff area, clay has more
water contents, which causes extra load on the area. The clay has been eroded due to
weathering, which is weak to medium strong. In the west part of Fairlight Cliff, under the
base of sandstone lamination of silty mudstone is present, which has organic rich material
and ichnotaxa fossils. Vertical fractures and joints are dominated and in some places
conjugate fracture can be seen as well. In addition, two faults are present in the Cliff End
oriented to opposite directions and formed a Graben.
In order to develop future protection of the cliffs, short, medium and long term recessions
should be considered. The outcome of the field investigation for future management will
require concentrating on four main forces that affect the landslide; toe erosion,
groundwater accumulation, surface water and slop activity. In the “do nothing” option, the
ground under tension and disturbed material around the cliff will slip quickly toward the
sea, if the current slope process continues as before. The “do something” options are used
to protect the cliff against erosion by the sea. However, from the “do something” approach
nine schemes have been considered using a hard defence to form a protective berm at the
toe of the landslip to prevent its continuing erosion from wave attack.
17
12. References
British Geological Survey (BGS), (2005). Geological Investigation of the Ashdown Beds at
Fairlight, East Sussex. [Online] Available at:
<http://nora.nerc.ac.uk/11252/1/CR05040N.pdf> [Accessed 26 April 2012].
British Geological Survey (BGS), (1980). Geological Survey of Great Britain (England and
Wales) Geological Map of Hastings & Dungeness. Sheet 320/321, Scale 1:50 000.
Bywaysbyrailway, (2012). An ever-changing coastline. [Online] Available at
<http://bywaysbyrailway.wordpress.com/2011/10/26/an-ever-changing-coastline/>
[Accessed 01 May 2012].
Geograph Britain and Ireland, (no date). Fairlight. [Online] Available at:
<http://www.geograph.org.uk/search.php?i=31728608> [Accessed 25 April 2012].
Hastingsfossils, (2008). Geological Guide to Hastings. [Online] Available at:
<http://www.hastingsfossils.co.uk/geology-guide.asp> [Accessed 22 May 2012].
Internetgeography, (2009). Case Study, Coastal Management. [Online] Available at:
<http://www.geography.learnontheinternet.co.uk/topics/coastal_management.html
[Accessed 10 May 2007].
Rother District Council, (2005). Landslip at Rockmead Road, Fairlight Cove Coast Protection
Work. Environmental Statement. [Online] Available at
<https://studentcentral.brighton.ac.uk/> [Accessed 25 April 2012]. Rother District
Council (2005). Project Appraisal Report. [Online] Available at
<https://studentcentral.brighton.ac.uk/> [Accessed 25 April 2012].
Shepherd R., (2002). Fairlight (East Sussex). [Online] Available at:
<http://www.discoveringfossils.co.uk/fairlight_fossils.htm> [Accessed 02 May 2012].
Terry Oakes Associates (2005). Landslip at Rockmead Road, Fairlight Cove a Scoping Study.
[Online] Available at < <https://studentcentral.brighton.ac.uk/> [Accessed 25 April
2012].
18
Appendix 1
Locality: TQ E87830, N11525
Date: 19/03/2012
Face Orientation: Dip - 40˚, Dip Direction - 280˚ NE-SW
Fracture
distance
(m)
dip (00°)
Dip
direction
direction of dip
strike
(000°)
aperture (mm)
fill
roughness
persistence
(m)
1
2
68
124
SE
34
100
silty
clay
smooth
3
2
2.8
88
0
N
270
10
no
smooth
2.5
3
6.5
68
133
SE
43
10
no
smooth
1
4
6.81
80
309
NW
39
20
no
smooth
5
5
8.1
75
349
N
259
5
no
smooth
2
6
9.8
70
292
NW
202
5
no
smooth
4
7
10.7
87
123
SE
33
5
no
smooth
5
8
13.7
90
260
-
350
5
no
smooth
3
9
15.1
86
130
SE
220
15
no
smooth
3
10
16.2
88
126
SE
216
50
no
undulating
4
11
17.5
80
65
NE
335
80
no
smooth
2
12
20
82
320
NW
50
40
no
smooth
3.5
13
23.7
82
300
NW
30
20
no
smooth
2
14
24.2
70
170
S
80
30
no
undulating
9
15
26.25
88
64
NE
154
20
no
smooth
3.5
16
27.5
82
124
SE
34
50
no
undulating
2
19
Appendix 2
Locality: TQ E8803, N13104, Date: 20/03/2012, Face Orientation: Dip 40˚, Dip Direction: 280˚ NE-SW
Fracture
distance (m)
dip (00°)
Dip direction
direction of dip
strike (000°)
aperture (mm)
fill
roughness
persistence (m)
1
1.5
85
113
SE
23
70
clay
undulating
> section
2
2.2
85
180
SE
90
close
no
undulating
> section
3
7.6
82
104
SE
14
50
clay
undulating
> section
4
8
90
130
SE
220
20
clay
smooth
> section
5
8.3
88
122
SE
212
close
no
smooth
> section
6
8.7
80
148
SE
238
20
clay
smooth
> section
7
12.5
90
162
-
72
close
no
smooth
> section
8
15.3
90
124
-
34
50
clay
smooth
> section
9
16.3
87
100
SE
10
5
clay
smooth
> section
10
17.5
72
118
SE
28
40
sand
undulating
> section
11
22.7
88
116
SE
26
60
no
smooth
> section
Appendix 3
Locality: Second point close to fault zone, Date: 20/03/2012, Face Orientation: Dip 40˚, Direction 280˚, NE-SW
Fracture
distance (m)
dip (00°)
Dip direction
direction of dip
strike (000°)
aperture (mm)
fill
roughness
persistence (m)
1
1.2
67
172
S
82
10
no
undulating
> section
2
2
66
169
S
79
10
no
undulating
> section
3
4.5
79
350
N
80
15
no
rough
> section
4
5.6
86
72
NE
342
20
no
rough
> section
5
12.5
79
189
S
279
60
no
rough
> section
6
13.1
90
208
-
298
15
no
rough
> section
7
17.5
80
82
NE
352
5
no
rough
> section
8
28
86
76
NE
166
50
no
rough
> section
9
28.5
86
132
SE
222
no
rough
> section
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
Geological Investigation of the Ashdown Beds at Fairlight, East Sussex
References British Geological Survey (BGS), (2005). Geological Investigation of the Ashdown Beds at Fairlight, East Sussex. [Online] Available at: <http://nora.nerc.ac.uk/11252/1/CR05040N.pdf> [Accessed 26 April 2012].
Geological Survey of Great Britain (England and Wales) Geological Map of Hastings & Dungeness
British Geological Survey (BGS), (1980). Geological Survey of Great Britain (England and Wales) Geological Map of Hastings & Dungeness. Sheet 320/321, Scale 1:50 000.
An ever-changing coastline
  • Bywaysbyrailway
Bywaysbyrailway, (2012). An ever-changing coastline. [Online] Available at <http://bywaysbyrailway.wordpress.com/2011/10/26/an-ever-changing-coastline/> [Accessed 01 May 2012].
Geological Guide to Hastings
  • Hastingsfossils
Hastingsfossils, (2008). Geological Guide to Hastings. [Online] Available at: <http://www.hastingsfossils.co.uk/geology-guide.asp> [Accessed 22 May 2012].
Case Study, Coastal Management
  • Internetgeography
Internetgeography, (2009). Case Study, Coastal Management. [Online] Available at: <http://www.geography.learnontheinternet.co.uk/topics/coastal_management.html [Accessed 10 May 2007].
Landslip at Rockmead Road, Fairlight Cove Coast Protection Work. Environmental Statement
  • Rother District Council
Rother District Council, (2005). Landslip at Rockmead Road, Fairlight Cove Coast Protection Work. Environmental Statement. [Online] Available at <https://studentcentral.brighton.ac.uk/> [Accessed 25 April 2012]. Rother District Council (2005). Project Appraisal Report. [Online] Available at <https://studentcentral.brighton.ac.uk/> [Accessed 25 April 2012].
Fairlight (East Sussex)
  • R Shepherd
Shepherd R., (2002). Fairlight (East Sussex). [Online] Available at: <http://www.discoveringfossils.co.uk/fairlight_fossils.htm> [Accessed 02 May 2012].
Landslip at Rockmead Road, Fairlight Cove a Scoping Study
  • Terry Oakes Associates
Terry Oakes Associates (2005). Landslip at Rockmead Road, Fairlight Cove a Scoping Study. [Online] Available at < <https://studentcentral.brighton.ac.uk/> [Accessed 25 April 2012].