Wamberal 'Owners Against The Wall' Seek Erosion Alternatives
It is a commonly held view that property owners on the Central Coast's erosion-prone Wamberal Beach want a seawall to stop their homes from being claimed by the sea. But homeowner Paul Greenberg is challenging that perception through his new group Owners Against The Wall.
He purchased his property in December 2020, just months after dozens of houses on Wamberal's beachfront were evacuated due to severe erosion.
Mr Greenberg said he and a few other nearby residents "want to put the brakes" on the seawall plan and find alternatives.
"A wall creates more problems than it solves," he said.
Housing foundations became exposed after large powerful waves lashed the Wamberal beachfront in July 2020 (ABC News)
Plan stacking up for most
The Central Coast Council is pushing ahead with community consultation about solutions, with a vertical seawall emerging as the preferred option.
Minutes from the February meeting of the New South Wales government-led Wamberal Seawall Advisory Taskforce revealed that "landowners were seeking to prepare detailed designs and formulate a DA for an integrated form of protection".
The large cost of building a wall would likely fall to the home owners, but that does not worry Mr Greenberg.
He said after researching both sides of the argument he believed a "concrete bunker" would be "unsightly" and lead to a loss of sand along the beach, affecting ecology and public access.
Mr Greenberg is concerned a seawall would result in a loss of sand, but authorities disagree (ABC Central Coast: Sofie Wainwright)
Mr Greenberg was critical of the state of the foreshore at Collaroy Beach on Sydney's Northern Beaches as a result of newly built walls.
"I think [Wamberal] beach belongs to the community in perpetuity," he said.
Mr Greenberg echoed the views of Save Our Sand (SOS), another local group opposing seawall development.
But he wants a separate group to ensure owners' voices are heard.
Dozens of houses along Wamberal Beach are vulnerable to erosion.(Supplied: Central Coast Council)
Disagreement about loss
The Northern Beaches Council said erosion naturally occurred when there were large swells, high tides and strong winds, but the beach generally recovered once conditions eased.
Minutes from the taskforce's meeting attributed to chair Phil Watson said it was "misleading and incorrect" to say protection would lead to sand loss.
"It has been disappointing to observe some recent negative media from a contingent in the community convinced that protection works will result in the loss of the beach at Wamberal," the minutes said.
Central Coast Council administrator Rik Hart recently said relying on emergency works rather than pushing ahead with a long-term solution would "negatively impact beach aesthetic and usability".
Save Our Sand has offered a list of alternatives to building the wall (ABC Central Coast: Sofie Wainwright)
If not a wall, what?
SOS said the onus to find a solution should be on the authorities, which should have taken a deeper dive and conducted wider community consultation.
But the group has suggested that creating an offshore reef, sand nourishment, house buy-backs or simply letting nature take its course were all options.
"We are trying to save Wamberal Beach," an SOS spokesperson said.
Mr Greenberg says he plans to carry-out a letterbox drop to gauge neighbourhood sentiment and gain members this week.
// SOFIE WAINWRIGHT
© Australian Broadcasting Corporation. All rights reserved.
Comments
“The real conflict of the beach is not between sea and shore but between Man and Nature. On the beach, Nature has achieved a dynamic equilibrium that is alien to Man and his static sense of equilibrium. Once a line has been established, whether it be a shoreline or a property line, Man unreasonably expects it to stay put.”
The quote above, by Gary Soucie from a 1973 article in The Smithsonian, is probably more relevant now than when it was written.
Take heed, councillors, use the knowledge we've already learnt, make better decisions.
Keep up the good work, Paul.
It is worth reviewing what has been done and what can be improved.....
Lennox Hd mainbeach has a retreating shoreline and properties were demolished and/or washed away in 1974. Studies of the Lennox beach 'beach erosion control works', (timber posts, rocks, walls & then groins have been built;) methods were reviewed in 2016. Excerpt below.
"As the sea level rises, wave, tide and wind processes are occurring at a higher position at the
beach face, with the beach and dune evolving to a more landward position to return to equilibrium
with the new sea level. There is an upward and landward translation of the profile that is in
equilibrium with the prevailing conditions at the new sea level position. "
Reference: https://ballina.nsw.gov.au/files/260718-Item-11_7---Lennox-Head-Rock-Wal... page 31
Garys quote above in 1973, reflect the concept that everything in in flux / change. Some engineers tried to calculate beach erosion like Bruun from 1954 to 1962.
Bruun, P. 1962. Sea-level rise as a cause of shore erosion. Proc.Am.Soc.Civ.Eng., J.Water Harbors Div. 88: 117-130.
Lennox surf club (was a two storey timber building built on skegs / giant skis in the 1980's)..... once designed for a planned retreat....?
BTW: If all of Antarctica ice melts .....sea levels could rise by 58m
If all the ice covering Antarctica , Greenland, and in mountain glaciers around the world were to melt, sea level would rise about 70 meters (230 feet).
However, all the ice is not going to melt. The Antarctic ice cap, where most of the ice exists, has survived much warmer times.
The concern is that portions of the Greenland and West Antarctic ice caps may disappear. We do not know how much or how quickly this could happen, because we do not know exactly how it will happen.....
https://www.amnh.org/explore/ology/earth/ask-a-scientist-about-our-envir...
One way to approach the problem of not understanding the process is to study how sea level changed in the past. Earth is nearly as warm now as it was during the last interglacial period, about 125,000 years ago. At that time, sea level was 4 to 6 meters (13-20 feet) higher. It seems that this higher sea level was due to the melting Greenland and West Antarctic ice caps.
Great info mr BBBird.
Its never been explained why its up to the Council to save these properties in the first place. I hear rumours of Council liability for approving the houses, but this has not been stated publicly to my knowledge. Surely no Judge would accept these spastics didn't know they were building in a stupid spot. The central coast is a rooted joint with pretty much every beach chock full of cunts houses on the foreshore.
Australian Climate Change Adaptation Research Network for Settlements and Infrastructure (ACCARNS)
Discussion Paper on Coastal Issues & Law 2012
https://www.accarnsi.unsw.edu.au/sites/accarnsi/files/uploads/PDF/Discus...
buy a little beach shack knock it down , put a great big house on it. ocean clams the beach.
ask for help. buy beach front . pay mega bucks , this is beach front living .remove your house put the coastal plants back and see how it holds back the ocean.
I like the 'let the nature take it's course' plan but the homeowners probably feel otherwise.
I second the “let nature take it’s course “ sentiment.
Move .
I honestly have no idea why someone would want to live so close to the beach,
you don't have to live right on top of it.
the strangest thinking is most people who live this close to the ocean either don't use it or take it for granted.
this whole topic seems pretty redundant.
And the Darwin award goes to...
"He purchased his property in December 2020, just months after dozens of houses on Wamberal's beachfront were evacuated due to severe erosion"
'Street view' limited without 'coast view'.
Great to see a landowner with serious skin in the game thinking about the bigger picture. I hope some kind of reef system gets a genuine look in. The main issue is the amount of wave energy reaching the frontal dune system. Though in this case even if an offshore reef was put in place to take out most of hte wave energy on the really big days, they've built so close to the existing shoreline already that shoreline recession from just good old sea level rise may still be their undoing (i.e. it'll still nibble away at the base of the dunes).
Re. liability. The council could be liable if the damage was foreseeable at the time the development approval was granted. Specifically, whether they had the information at hand that showed the risk to people and property to be significant and ignored it, or they had the means to get said information but did not do so.
The onus is on the approving authority, almost always a local council, at the time a development application is made/granted. So if someone bought a 70s shack say, in 2015, and hasn't tried to rebuild or done significant modifications that require approval, then IMO they have Buckley's of getting compensation. However, if someone bought said shack in 2015 and then knocked it down and re-built a bigger fancier house, then they'd probably have decent grounds to pursue compensation. One complicating/frustrating fact for Councils and the 95% of ratepayers that would be footing the bill is whether planning regulations allow them to refuse approval on ground of erosion risk. If that's not the case, some times the applicant can have a council's refusal at the State-level planning court overturned on grounds the Council didn't have the regulatory backing to do so. I don't think it's been tested yet, but legal opinions I've seen indicate if that was the case (the court overruled the council and gave approval), and then damage occurred, the Council might still be on the hook for compensation (go figure). It all differs a bit by State though.
We want the govt to stay out of our lives, unless of course we make a dumb decision and then we'll try to pin it on them for allowing us to do so...
*insert disclaimer "the above does not constitute legal or technical advice, go seek your own, it's just the unreliable personal opinion of some pleb on the internet, etc. etc."
the more common this becomes the less likely one will be able to seek compensation from government for your not fit purchase, or receive relatively small scale protection works paid for by taxpayers (e.g collaroy). Legislation will change to ensure that. You would bankrupt every LGA. Planned retreat will be the only available measure and prices afforded will reduce dramatically in line with increased uptake.
https://www.smh.com.au/property/news/property-worth-25b-at-risk-from-coa...
try not to vomit in the mouth reading the real estate quotes.
With this knowledge why are Councils along the NSW north coast and Queensland south coast still approving very high rise apartment blocks so close to beaches?
The NSW Coastal Council's role is to provide independent and expert advice on coastal issues to the Minister administering the Coastal Management Act 2016.
Coastal Council role
The NSW Coastal Council provides independent and expert advice on matters relating to the Minister's functions under the Act, and in relation to the development and implementation of coastal management programs by local councils.
The Coastal Council may, at the Minister's request, provide advice to another public authority on matters relating to coastal management.
Specific aspects of the Coastal Council's role include providing advice to the Minister on the certification of coastal management programs, on the implementation of a coastal management program following a performance audit, and on technical or scientific matters of strategic importance such as sea level rise.
The NSW Coastal Council replaces the NSW Coastal Panel and the Coastal Expert Panel.
Reference: https://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/topics/water/coasts/coastal-managemen...
eg. "The Minister for the Environment requested advice from the NSW Coastal Panel with respect to the management of beach erosion at Kingscliff in the Tweed Shire Council local government area.
The terms of reference for this advice were:
The Coastal Panel's opinion on the causes of the recent erosion at Kingscliff, including if this erosion is likely to continue and, if so, under what circumstances
Recommendations on potential short- and long-term technically feasible and cost-effective strategies for managing erosion at Kingscliff. This is to include a review of the strategies in the 2005 Tweed Shire Coastline Management Plan and any other strategies proposed by council.
The Minister for the Environment has accepted the advice provided by the Coastal Panel within its report (PDF 1.75MB).
https://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/topics/water/coasts/coastal-managemen...
To get an idea of what the Coastal Panel in 2011 prediction of potential coastal erosion at Kingscliff is ....
refer to link below Map (Figure 3) page 7
https://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/-/media/OEH/Corporate-Site/Documents/...
"the Minister notes that there is no single long term solution to the erosion problems, and
it is likely that a combination of approaches will be necessary in the short term and long
term. "
"Options that should be thoroughly investigated include a terminal seawall
complemented by ongoing beach nourishment, a field of groynes with or without beach
nourishment in the short term and planned retreat in the long term"
TweedShire Council has been investigating longer term options (at Kingscliff) since 2004.
It is currently investigating sand sources for a long term sand nourishment program and design feasibility for a terminal seawall.
Over the last two years (2010/11), Council and the State Government have spent approximately $1.5 million on short -term erosion protection works (at Kingscliff). Reference above.
I think that's the issue, the NSW Coastal Council provides advice, but isn't empowered to approve/refuse development applications?
I think you'll find there are oodles of LGAs across the country that have been looking at this issue. Some are doing their best, some are burying their heads in the sand (before it erodes), and the rest are in aggressive denial.
All three of the "surf coast" councils up here have done work on this topic (to varying degrees). General public seem largely unaware or apathetic about the findings and the decisions facing councils to protect private assets (multi-million dollar houses) vs. public assets and activities (worth considerably more). Most involvement from public players seemed to be the usual local enviro groups and those with a vested (beachfront) interest, plus occasional person coming out of the woodwork seeing a hot topic relating to a council as another opportunity to grind their axe. I've seen similar work done across NSW, VIC and WA.
https://www.noosa.qld.gov.au/coastal-hazards-adaptation-plan
https://els.sunshinecoast.qld.gov.au/Discover-by-location/Coastal-Hazard...
https://www.goldcoast.qld.gov.au/Council-region/Future-plans-budget/Plan...
A projected rise in mean sea level of 0.8 metres by the year 2100 has been adopted as a planning benchmark by the Queensland Government, based on climate modelling for probable scenarios presented in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
This hazard could result in permanent sea water inundation of low-lying property and infrastructure ......if effective coastal adaptation strategies aren’t delivered.
Another ECL is off the NSW coast this week. Storm tides of 2m are forecast on Friday ...1st April 22
Well the projected sea level rises aren't a fait accompli, at least according to the IPCC. Avoiding the problem altogether through massive emissions reduction and removal of atmospheric carbon should still be where the majority of legislative efforts and funding goes.
We're almost out of time, so in order to do it will mean the elite class abandoning some of their ideologies, particularly regarding "free trade". Though we'll need to adapt given the limits to impacts of what we do here versus the rest of the world. Given where things are at, 1.1m is probably a better figure to be using. I'd be interested in Craig's thoughts on this.
Just in case anyone else jumps into this conversation... The notion that a small player like us can't affect things on the global stage is absolute nonsense. Believe it or not, history will judge the Abbot Government's reversal of the carbon levy scheme setup by the Gillard government as a key juncture in the global response to climate change. We were held up as a beacon of hope and true leadership, given our status as a wealthy, large natural resource exporter and high emitting (per capita) nation. That is, if the Aussies are willing to do it, we all can. In fact, our efforts at the time had a direct hand in progress being made in the UK and in parts of Canada.
Mowgli, bbbird, thank you for your excellent contributions.
I recently watched a documentary on the building of the Burj Al Arab in Dubai. To reduce the impact of waves in a storm surge they used a system of hollow concrete blocks laid on a sloped retaining wall. These blocks absorbed the force of the waves by acting like a sponge, that is turning the energy back onto itself. I've always wondered if this would work on coastal walls in Australia.
I remember coolangatta, kirrra .Bilinga had houses going in drink as well...etc As a kid at North Kirra in the 80s we'd jump off the rocks to paddle out.No beach...now look at it 40 yrs of climate change and now 200m of sand.... it can be done. .ps if any one knows how this feat was achieved.......please share the old brains a bit rusty on the deets...
This any gd to you Davos
https://www.tweedsandbypass.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/49986...
Cheers udo !
I dont get why the guy bought a house there in 2020 after a few had already been washed away... are they cheap now or what?
well placed series of artificial reefs will provide a barrier for the beach, new surf spots for surfers, and 5 to 10 years after completion, sea life habitats, fishing and diving spots on flat days.
Win, win, win, win, and win
What did wealthy western Countries do in the past sealevel inflow storms....
"sand is your ally...."
https://phys.org/news/2019-12-built-sand-dutch-ally.html
"Work on the dike started in 1963 as part of the Netherlands' flood defence system following a catastrophic storm surge in 1953, when flood waters killed some 1,800 people.
But scientists in recent years noted the 68-metre-wide dyke – which has a road on top—no longer met safety standards and had to be reinforced..... The prospect of a dam breach is inconceivable in a country where at least one third of the land lies below sea level."
Dutch Coastal Dikes
“God created the earth but the Dutch made Holland.”
– popular proverb
The Dutch, living on a seacoast, save disappearing land by building protective dikes, and reclaiming marshland for agriculture, and have been doing so for a very long time. In the first century AD, Pliny the Elder described inland farmers constructing dams in tidal creeks to protect their land against high water. Today’s world is also plagued by flooding. .....
"LOCAL AND NATIONAL GOVERNMENT
Another lesson to be learned from the Dutch is collective governance. Local communities came together to form water boards that had, by common consent, wide powers of inspection, discipline and governance. The aristocracy, which possessed large landholdings, supported the water boards; these local organizations called out the dike army as needed. Water boards were democratic organizations, but slowly received formal charters from the rulers of various districts. In effect, local water boards also produced revenue through self-taxation: each village contributed to the upkeep of their local dikes."
Reference
https://blogs.umb.edu/buildingtheworld/waterworks/protective-dikes-and-l...
Photos
https://www.dutchwatersector.com/news/boskalis-and-van-oord-to-reinforce...
"The level has been rising gradually since 1890 by about 0.2 cm per year due to the melting of the ice and the warming up of the ocean," expert Fedor Baart, of the research organisation Deltares
Bad storms can temporarily push water levels up by a meter, which accounts for an average rise of about one centimetre, Baart explained.
The institute also highlighted that every 18.6 years the seas rise and fall by two centimetres on a tidal cycle.
"The last peak was in 2004, and the level is now rising again to the next peak in early 2023," Deltares said in a statement.
https://phys.org/news/2018-01-sea-dutch-coast-highest.html
" The ruler of West-Friesland, Bishop van Zuden, commanded in April 1319: “Everybody shall come to work at the dike on instruction of the baliff " lol.
The Water Board shall dig watercourses and construct sluices and bridges in the region. The Board shall develop these works in locations that will be the most adequate and profitable for the region and in such ways that the inhabitants downstream profit equally from these works as will the inhabitants in the upstream region…all people possessing land between the Meuse and the Waal shall stand ready to pay for the cost and the maintenance of the watercourses, sluices, weirs, and bridges according to the ratio of their land ownership…the dijkgraaf will inspect the dikes between the Meuse and the Waal with the same frequency in every village.
– H. van Heinigen, Tussen Maas en Waal. (Zutphen: De Walburg Pers, 1972, 440-442. English translation by Pieter Huisman.
Reference: https://blogs.umb.edu/buildingtheworld/waterworks/protective-dikes-and-l...
Blame it on the moon