More than 40 years ago, a council option to acquire Wamberal beachfront homes was the cheapest option among a list of possible beach management strategies.
The option was noted in a Land and Environment decision in 1993 dealing with a development application to build a beachfront home at Wamberal.
The other options were to continue to allow development; to construct a seawall and provide periodic sand nourishment along with that; or to restore the beach by constructing a sand dunes system along with periodic sand nourishment.
The then Gosford Council argued that it was against the public interest to allow further development in the locality because of the historical impact of the coastal processes, in particular major storm events, on public and private property.
“The council’s concern is that the constant dynamic action of the wind and the sea will cause sand levels on the site to be depleted over time,” the Judgement states.
“In the case of Wamberal Beach, only a portion of the eroded sand is returned resulting in a gradual long term recession of the shoreline.
“Engineers, called by both parties, agree that the so-called zone of wave impact will progress landward of the top of the existing frontal dune over the planning period but they disagree in respect of the extent of the recession over fifty years.”
The Judge said he accepted the evidence of the engineer who gave evidence on behalf of the council, that if the recession of the shoreline was permitted to occur without intervention, the frontal dune would be located under the building and in a storm equivalent to the one which occurred in 1978 all the pile foundations of the proposed home would be exposed to wave impact as, by then, they would be situated in the wave impact zone.
“This contention was not seriously challenged other than on the basis that, such long term recession would not be allowed to occur because during, or following major storms, remedial action would be taken by individual property owners, community groups or public authorities to protect the properties along the beach frontage or to reinstate the frontal dune to its former state,” the 1993 judgement stated.
But the Court was not prepared to accept that preventative and reparation works were inevitable following a major recession of the dune.
The Judge said this was despite the applicant’s town planner concluding that, “having regard to the value of properties fronting Wamberal Beach”, in the event of a severe storm, beach nourishment measures and stabilisation measures would be immediately undertaken to protect dwellings along the beach and that it is most unlikely, in the town planner’s opinion, for the council or the whole community to stand idly by and watch the destruction of major buildings.
“This suggests that the community will be placed under pressure, in the event of a major storm event, to undertake urgent preventative or restorative works,” the Judge said.
“Reliance on such an approach where the paramount consideration under such circumstances is unlikely to be a long term one would be the antithesis of good planning.
“The prospect of the implementation of a responsible beach management strategy in the short term appears to be remote, particularly having regard to the substantial cost involved to which, historically, a majority of land owners have shown reluctance to contribute,” the Judge continued.
“Many property owners defaulted on agreed contributions to an earlier scheme resulting in the council incurring a substantial loss.”
“It is interesting to note that in 1985 the option of acquiring the relevant properties into public ownership was the cheapest of the positive options,” the Judge noted.
Fast forward more than 30 years since that court case.
Wamberal Save Our Sand will hold a protest at the beach on Sunday, January 21, arguing against the current beach management plan for the beach.
Council-under-administration has publicly confirmed it has paid $100,000 towards a combined development application for a seawall with Wamberal beachfront owners.
Council says the money is only for its council-owned land as part of a whole of embayment development application.
The embayment includes about 72 blocks of privately owned land plus public land, some of which Crown Land was suggesting last year it could transfer into council ownership.
There has been no public confirmation of any changes of crown/council ownership but Council’s Catchment to Coast advisory committee (meetings are not open to the public) is expecting to be updated on the DA at its first meeting in 2024.
SOS says the community group and the wider community are disappointed by Council’s lack of transparency about the wall.
The group has written to Council, challenging the organisation to provide evidence that a seawall would protect the beach and lagoons.
“SOS has put dozens of important questions to Council about the seawall and Council has repeatedly refused to provide material responses to those questions,” a spokesperson said.
The beach protest starts at noon. The public is invited to attend.
