KINGSTON FORESHORE STRATEGY

PRELIMINARY ISSUES AND OPPORTUNITIES PAPER

Date: March 1998

THE GREENHOUSE EFFECT

The Ministerial Direction to all Planning Authorities on the Form and Content of Planning Schemes states that: "Planning is to contribute to the protection of air, land and water quality and the conservation of natural ecosystems, resources, energy and cultural heritage". In particular planning should: "Adopt a risk management approach which aims to avoid or minimise environmental degradation hazards".

The Hon. Marie Tehan states: "In completing the Victorian Coastal Strategy, the planners will take into account up to date research and available material on the potential effects of the Greenhouse Effect which is expected to have a major influence on Victoria's coastline"

The Making the Most of the Bay report also stresses the importance of taking into account the likely effect of climate change when making planning decisions. For example, was the impact of climate change considered when plans for an extension to the Carrum Lifesaving Club were discussed?

The Making the Most of the Bay report considers that the Carrum Bight, within the City of Kingston, is most at risk from climate change. Proposals to deepen the entrance to Port Phillip Bay at the Heads and dredge the shipping channels to accommodate larger container vessels will, according the President of the Port Phillip Conservation Council, cause higher tide levels in the Bay. With or without the predicted rise in sea levels due to the Greenhouse Effect, higher tide levels in the Bay will create havoc to buildings and residences in foreshore areas around the Bay – especially in the Carrum Bight.

The building of seawalls, marinas or rock walling to protect the creek mouth may offer initial protection but could also contribute to erosion of beaches, for example, Hampton Beach which was denuded after harbour extensions by Sandringham Yacht Club. Drains, piers and breakwaters interrupt the drift of sand which denudes beaches, which then require costly repeated sand renourishment.

During the planning and design phase of future development projects, all of the possible problems associated with the greenhouse effect should be addressed and considered. If structures are planned for the foreshore, they are doubly at risk, firstly from the erosion of the beach in front of them and then from storm surges and rising sea levels. Can the Kingston Council afford to take these risks?

It is clear from evidence available along the l3kms of Kingston Foreshore that any proposal to utilise buildings located on sandy beaches such as the Mentone Lifesaving Club, Parkdale Yacht Club and Carrum Lifesaving Club, or to consider siting a bicycle path on the sand below the cliffs between Parkers Road and Bay Street, Mordialloc would be irresponsible.

The City of Chelsea Greenhouse Strategy Report (November 1990) reports the loss of buildings due to foreshore erosion:

• The 4th Chelsea Sea Scouts building which was located at the end of Newington Parade, Chelsea, lost by erosion and wave damage in 1978.
• One of the oldest private bathing box structures on the foreshore, at the end of Williams Grove, destroyed by erosion and wave damage in the late 1970s.
• Loss of bathing boxes from behind the seawall at Gnotuk Avenue in the late 1970s due to the loss of beach in this area undermining the wall.
• Loss of several bathing boxes in high storm conditions during 1980 in the Chelsea area.
• Renourishment of Aspendale beach in 1978.

"The slow but steadily receding nature of the City's shoreline in general has also been confirmed in discussions with personnel of the Port and Harbour Branch of the Port of Melbourne Authority"(1).

BEACH RENOURISHMENT

Approximately 4.2 million dollars was spent on the Beach Renourishment Program in Port Phillip Bay between 1975 and 1987. Poorly planned activities designed to increase tourist appeal can result in unforeseen impacts on a range of beneficial uses. For example, beach renourishment to provide wider expanses of sand for recreational use at Rosebud has resulted in changed patterns in sand drift (2).

ARTIFICIAL STRUCTURES

Artificial structures in the Bay such as marinas and rock walls have the potential to either enhance or threaten the protection of beneficial uses.

"For example, the construction of a breakwater may provide deeper water fishing, promenading and a haven for boats, or it may change the pattern of sand movement resulting in beach erosion and a reduction of beach-based recreational activities"(3).

Extensions to the Sandringham Yacht Club site caused the Hampton Beach to erode. It has since been renourished at considerable cost.

The Royal Brighton Yacht Club acknowledges that the breakwater built in the 1950's to provide safe anchorage for yachts in the vicinity of the Club has caused erosion of the beach immediately to the north of the club (4).

GI. Pearman, CSIRO Division of Atmospheric Research, Aspendale (Victoria) quotes Dr EC. Bird who lists a wide range of possible first order impacts that need to be considered:

• accelerated recession of the coastlines
• narrowed beaches
• flooding of low-lying coastal plains
• intensified erosion, structural damage and marine flooding in storm surges
• rise of water table in coastal areas (5)

COASTAL MANAGEMENT

Planners of systems, in particular coastal planners, must be cognisant of the climatic, sea level and direct carbon dioxide effects that might influence their predictions (6)

"Coastal management, depending on the magnitude of the sea level rise, may be greatly affected. Remedial action could be extremely costly, with major capital works necessary to protect low lying areas and specially waterfront buildings, marinas, ports, and industries sited near the coastline. Beaches and holiday resorts may be badly affected". (7)

THE FUTURE

The economic, social and environmental impacts of sea level rises on coastal systems need to be carefully considered in developing policy and management strategies. Long term commitment to monitor future sea level changes and to continue to research into potential impacts are required. (8)

Whilst there might be kudos to be gained for local government in the short term, it is essential that careful consideration is given to the important matter of sea level rises in this bayside area. Decisions made concerning the siting of 'new developments' in vulnerable coastal areas means that when local government planners move on, local residents will be left to contemplate and pay for the disasters resulting from poor planning decisions.

Author: M. Rimington

END-NOTES

(1) City of Chelsea (1990) Greenhouse Strategy Report, Nov.

(2) EPA (1997) Victoria: Policy impact assessment: Protecting water quality in Port Phillip Bay, EPA Publication 540, Aug.

(3) Ibid., p.30.

(4) Johns, PM. (1996) "Royal Brighton Yacht Club's Response to the Draft Bayside Coastal Strategy" in, Starboard, Vol. 25, No. 5, Dec.

(5) Pearman. GI. (1986) "Climatic Change and Coastal Management" in, Planner, Dec.

(6) Ibid., p. 12.

(7) Pittock, B. (1987) "The greenhouse effect" in, Engineers Australia, Feb 6, 1987, p. 43 (Further info. from CSIRO Division Atmospheric Research, Aspendale. Victoria.)

(8) Port of Melbourne Authority & Dept. of Conservation and Natural Resources (1993) Victorian Coastal Vulnerability Study: Assessing the Potential Impact of the Greenhouse Effect on the Victorian Coast, Jan.

Back to the MBCL Resource Page