Lonsdale Bight: Groyne Options - Summary of Feedback

7 – 27 August 2018 Acknowledgements The Victorian Government’s Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning (DELWP) acknowledges Parks Victoria, the Borough of Queenscliffe, Cardno and the Bellarine Catchment Network for their contributions to the Point Lonsdale Bight community consultation of August 2018.

The Victorian Government proudly acknowledges Victoria’s Aboriginal communities and their rich culture; and pays its respects to their Elders past and present. The government also recognises the intrinsic connection of Traditional Owners to Country and acknowledges their contribution in the management of land, water and resources. We acknowledge Aboriginal people as Australia’s first peoples and as the Traditional Owners and custodians of the land and water on which we rely. We recognise and value the ongoing contribution of Aboriginal people and communities to Victorian life and how this enriches us. We embrace the spirit of reconciliation, working towards the equality of outcomes and ensuring an equal voice.

© The State of Victoria Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning, 2018 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International licence. You are free to re-use the work under that licence, on the condition that you credit the State of Victoria as author. The licence does not apply to any images, photographs or branding, including the Victorian Coat of Arms, the Victorian Government logo and the Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning (DELWP) logo. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

Disclaimer This publication may be of assistance to you, but the State of Victoria and its employees do not guarantee that the publication is without flaw of any kind or is wholly appropriate for your purposes and therefore disclaims all liability for any error, loss or other consequence which may arise from you relying on any information in this publication.

Accessibility If you would like to receive this publication in an alternative format, please telephone the DELWP Customer Service Centre on 136186, email [email protected] or via the National Relay Service on 133 677 www.relayservice.com.au. This document is also available on the internet at www.delwp.vic.gov.au

2 Lonsdale Bight: Groyne Options - Summary of Feedback 7 - 27 August 2018 Contents

1. Background ...... 4 1.1 Point Lonsdale Groyne Field Design Options Study, 2018 ...... 4

2. Community Engagement ...... 5 2.1 Purpose ...... 5 2.2 Community open house and online survey ...... 5

3. What we heard from the community ...... 5 3.1 Overview ...... 5 3.2 Common themes from the community ...... 5 3.3 Summary of what we heard from the community in August 2018 ...... 7 3.4 Summary of final thoughts and comments from the open house events ...... 13

4. Responses to technical feedback ...... 14

5. Next steps ...... 15

6. Appendices ...... 16

Appendix A Summary of community engagement undertaken ...... 17

Appendix B Groyne study findings ...... 18 Groyne evaluation criteria ...... 18 Presented groyne options ...... 19 Demographics of open house attendees ...... 25

Lonsdale Bight: 3 Groyne Options - Summary of Feedback 7 - 27 August 2018 1. Background

The Lonsdale Bight foreshore is an important recreational asset for the Bellarine and Geelong region. It is also part of the Port Phillip Heads (PPH) Marine National Park and is recognised for its state-wide environmental, cultural and recreational values. Point Lonsdale is at the entrance of Port Phillip Bay and is exposed to complex and varying coastal processes which cause shoreline erosion and fluctuations in beach levels. Seawalls and groynes of different types have been constructed over many years, aimed at protecting the foreshore and attempting to retain a sandy beach with varying degrees of success. In response to community concern about low sand levels at Point Lonsdale front beach, the Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning (DELWP) commissioned the Lonsdale Bight Review and Options Overview. The final report, prepared by consultants BMT WBM Pty Ltd and overseen by DELWP and project partners Borough of Queenscliffe and Parks Victoria, was released in December 2017. Five management options from the report were recommended: • Do nothing and accept natural variability (short and/or long term); • Local redistribution of sand (short term); • Targeted beach renourishment (short term); • Groyne field modification – without and with beach nourishment (long term), and; • Offshore breakwaters (long term). In February 2018, the Hon. Lisa Neville, Labor Member for Bellarine, and Borough of Queenscliffe Mayor, Cr Susan Salter, announced Victorian Government funding for a detailed Point Lonsdale groyne field design and projected impacts study, along with a Point Lonsdale community sand monitoring program. This feedback summary outlines the community engagement process undertaken on the 2018 Cardno ‘Point Lonsdale Groyne Investigations: Long term options to maintain a sandy beach’. It includes the study findings presented to the community and summarises community feedback obtained in August 2018.

1.1 Point Lonsdale Groyne Field Design Options Study, 2018 DELWP, with support from Parks Victoria and Borough of Queenscliffe, worked with coastal engineering consultants Cardno to investigate and assess potential groyne design options for the protection and preservation of the Point Lonsdale front beach area. The ‘Point Lonsdale Groyne Investigations: Long term options to maintain a sandy beach’ produced six design options and modelled the potential of each option to manage and maintain sand on the Point Lonsdale front beach. The study also assessed each groyne option against 10 key criteria, such as sand retention ability, public safety risk, environmental risk, impact on beach accessibility and costs to construct and maintain the different groyne types. Key coastal management issues for Lonsdale Bight relate primarily to: • The rise and fall of beach levels influencing beach amenity, integrity of coastal protection structures and public safety during periods when sand levels are low; • Future climate change influences, including sea level rise and increased wave energy impacting on the coastline, and; • The importance of the Marine National Park values and ensuring these are not compromised.

4 Lonsdale Bight: Groyne Options - Summary of Feedback 7 - 27 August 2018 2. Community Engagement

2.1 Purpose DELWP is committed to working with the community to deliver services that support liveable, inclusive and sustainable communities and thriving natural environments. The DELWP community charter outlines what the community can expect from DELWP in our work and interacting with the public. The charter can be found at http://www2.delwp.vic.gov.au/communities-and-regions/community-charter A variety of communication and engagement tools were utilised to promote and facilitate community consultation for this project.

2.2 Community open house and online survey The six groyne design options and potential impacts were presented to the community in poster format during two open house sessions at the Point Lonsdale Bowls Club, on Tuesday 7 and Saturday 11 August 2018. A total of 126 people attended and provided input on what they liked and disliked about each design option, along with any final thoughts on the project. Staff from DELWP, Parks Victoria, Cardno and the Borough of Queenscliffe were on-hand to facilitate the sessions. Bellarine Catchment Network staff captured contact details of those interested in a new community sand monitoring program. The groyne analysis information and an online survey were available on the Engage Victoria website from 7 to 27 August 2018. 3. What we heard from the community

3.1 Overview The community provided a diverse range of views on the six groyne design options presented, along with a number of alternative suggestions for sand management at the site. Feedback also raised concerns about considerations such as impacts of sea-level rise and studies on sand movement prior to the installation of any new structures. The total responses comprised:

126 + 7 + = open online 2 135 written Considered house survey submissions responses attendees responses

3.2 Common themes from the community The community feedback provided some common recurring themes, including: • Protection of the marine and coastal environment and visual amenity is of high importance • A strong desire to have the three original timber groynes below the bowls club re-instated and preference for timber groynes over rock or polymer generally • Protection of the existing seawall is also considered important • Ensuring the surf break is maintained for surfers and kids’ enjoyment • Consideration be given to a beach rock swimming pool below the bowls club. A summary of responses provided by the community is contained on the following pages. All feedback has been read and considered, with the following table summarising and grouping key issues. It is not

Lonsdale Bight: 5 Groyne Options - Summary of Feedback 7 - 27 August 2018 intended to capture every comment, but to reflect the diversity of views raised in the surveys and written submissions.

Direct quotes have been included to demonstrate the range of feedback received. The name or email/property address of the submitter is not identified to comply with privacy requirements which are in place to ensure that all people can share their view in a confidential manner.

6 Lonsdale Bight: Groyne Options - Summary of Feedback 7 - 27 August 2018 3.3 Summary of what we heard from the community in August 2018

SUMMARY OF FEEDBACK OPTIONS FEEDBACK QUOTES

Maintain the three existing rock There is support for groynes this option based on “‘Very low environmental minimal impact” environmental and visual impact

Some thought additional protection “Cheaper, looks like the place we know now” of the seawall may be needed

High sand build-up on the beach and “Maintenance of existing

onto the promenade groynes is VERY at times was also IMPORTANT!” noted

“Minimal environmental

impact option - need to consider marine park first - before/more than human use!”

“Doesn't include the option to

'enhance' as part of 'maintenance'”

“We need groynes. These are better than none. The sea

level has risen. Erosion will not go away”

“Current option has gotten us to where we are now i.e. it's not working”

Lonsdale Bight: 7 Groyne Options - Summary of Feedback 7 - 27 August 2018 SUMMARY OF FEEDBACK OPTIONS FEEDBACK QUOTES

Extend the three existing rock There were concerns “Can the groyne extensions groynes over environmental be on an angle to face into and recreational the waves? Thereby impacts of this option retaining sand at the angle”

A few said this option has merit or

potential but may “Almost perfect - just need impact the surf break one more groyne below the bowling club”

“Better waves for kids”

“Why can't the extensions be angled south-east to capture sand better?”

“The option does nothing to

address the dramatic scouring beneath the bowling club”

“Won't be able to walk

around even at low tide”

“The promenade and seawall need protection”

“Environmental impact too great”

“Potential to impact negatively on existing surf break, 'hippos' ”

8 Lonsdale Bight: Groyne Options - Summary of Feedback 7 - 27 August 2018 SUMMARY OF FEEDBACK OPTIONS FEEDBACK QUOTES

Add four additional rock Some felt this would result in too “Least intrusive of 'additional' groynes many groynes on groynes” the beach and/or did not support rock groynes “Additional groynes should be Some liked this rock in keeping with existing” proposal for various reasons including in-keeping with existing rock “This option results in the groynes and being most beach reclaimed” a tried and tested material “Rocks too brutal. Don't Some felt this relate back to the Point option would Lonsdale environment 'town protect the seawall character'” and promenade but potentially disrupt beach access

“With additional groynes, space between them would be about 70m, very crowded”

“Too many groynes”

“Visual impact on beach”

“Extra groynes are good”

Lonsdale Bight: 9 Groyne Options - Summary of Feedback 7 - 27 August 2018 SUMMARY OF FEEDBACK OPTIONS FEEDBACK QUOTES

Add four additional rock The majority disliked groynes and a breakwater the rock breakwater “Accept any structure will included in this change the environment” option based on environmental and visual grounds, with some concerns over “Creates more beach the loss of surf break but…visually intrusive”

Some liked this proposal mainly to “Breakwater too brutal for reduce swell and to Point Lonsdale - 4 timber help protect the groynes only” seawall

Several alternative “Impact on the reef – suggestions were sensitive” listed next to this option (see Table 1: Recurring themes suggested by “Breakwater impacts on the community, pg 14.) surf break”

“The breakwater will prevent the swell from building up. i.e. water is whipped around the shallows scouring out sand, sand rock and groyne foundations”

10 Lonsdale Bight: Groyne Options - Summary of Feedback 7 - 27 August 2018 SUMMARY OF FEEDBACK OPTIONS FEEDBACK QUOTES

Generally, there Add four additional timber “Builds beach for user without was support for impacting on surf zone” groynes more timber groynes mainly on environmental and aesthetic “Like timber but can see merit grounds, of polymer” ensuring sand can flow through

“The original 50s/60s timber Some disliked groynes DID function, but the proposed they had to be replaced south-east frequently” facing angle

Some disliked the option as it may be difficult “Can't walk over the top of to climb over these - have to go around” and safety concerns at the shoreline

Some support “Timber will not last as long” for polymer with reservation

A minority did not support the option “No plastic only natural materials”

Lonsdale Bight: 11 Groyne Options - Summary of Feedback 7 - 27 August 2018 SUMMARY OF FEEDBACK OPTIONS FEEDBACK QUOTES

Add additional rock and timber There was a lot of criticism about the groynes “Positive - Wooden number of groynes option/design had gaps that and rock allows wave energy to pass component through” destroying the beach aesthetics, recreational enjoyment and natural cycles

“This will retain sand on the Some liked the addition of timber south sides of each groyne” groynes

A few queried the width of beach this “Extra groynes will help but option is trying to won't make a significant achieve, noting it change” doesn’t need to be the same width all the way “Too much interference with the ‘natural’ cycles”

“Nothing to retain sand beneath the bowling club”

“Creating 4 x additional groynes makes the beach look like ‘a groyne beach’”

“Insufficient change to warrant the effort”

12 Lonsdale Bight: Groyne Options - Summary of Feedback 7 - 27 August 2018 3.4 Summary of final thoughts and comments from the open house events

FINAL/PARTING COMMENTS

• Many felt the existing groynes were adequate to maintain a beach and did not want any additional groynes impacting the coastal and marine environment, amenity, or recreational and surfing conditions.

• There was strong opposition to a breakwater for the same reasons, some seeking replacement of the three shorter timber groynes below the bowls club for proven ability to retain sand.

• Some were concerned the options were limited to more groynes, or that important factors such as sea-level rise, sand loss at nearby sites, or problems created by too much sand, had not been considered along with beach accessibility over any groynes.

• Alternative options put forward included:

- a single breakwater/groyne only, to increase sand opposite the shops - an off-shore breakwater/scuttled ship or concrete wave attenuator - sand monitoring to inform the need for any more groynes at the site - realigning the groynes appropriately

• Protection of the seawall was raised again.

• Some praised the groyne options analysis and display, while others found it confusing and suggested a presentation from Cardno at the beginning of the session.

• Additional suggestions were to place the views of others on the web, advise the next steps in the process and the formation of a working group to discuss the solutions.

Lonsdale Bight: 13 Groyne Options - Summary of Feedback 7 - 27 August 2018 4. Responses to technical feedback

Several technical concerns and recurring suggestions were made by community members throughout our consultation sessions that were alternate to Cardno’s possible groyne solutions. The following is a table of responses from Cardno that address these recurring themes.

Table 1: Recurring themes suggested by community.

Option Response Three timber groynes • As these structures run almost perpendicular with the wave direction, below the Point they are likely to encounter higher wave loads and regular Lonsdale Bowls Club maintenance is likely to be required. As such, using timber alone at to be reinstated this location and alignment wouldn’t be recommended. Timber groynes will last longer where they are closer to wave direction. • As sea levels, waves and storm events continue to increase (in both frequency and magnitude), what has previously worked, may no longer be a viable option. Note that it is almost 40 years since some of these photos were taken. • As the photos show, the timber groynes have come and gone, panels have changed, perhaps replaced over time. As maintenance and change has happened over the time, comments such as “they lasted for 50 years” which was heard at the workshop, are not quite true.

DELWP response: DELWP generally value the option of constructing low maintenance infrastructure rather than committing to a regular high intensity maintenance regime as part of the solution. Protection of the • Maintaining a sand beach up to high water is one means of protecting seawall the seawall. • Other protection would require a rock revetment to be built in front of the wall. This would effectively “bury” the seaward side of the wall. The revetment is likely to increase sand loss from the beach if waves were breaking against it due to the increased turbulence. The revetment would also effectively move the water line seawards, increasing the likelihood of it being exposed to wave activity.

DELWP response: DELWP has commissioned Coastal Engineers AW Maritime to assess the condition of coastal protection structures at the Point Lonsdale front beach. Any funding sought for future maintenance will be prioritised based on recommendations of the condition assessment. At this stage, there are no plans to build a rock revetment in front of the sea wall due to the likely impact on sand levels.

14 Lonsdale Bight: Groyne Options - Summary of Feedback 7 - 27 August 2018 Option Response Beach rock • This area is potentially exposed to significant wave activity. swimming pool below • Construction would be difficult and therefore expensive. the bowls club • Consideration would be required as to whether the pool could be flushed by natural processes or would require a filtration/water treatment system. • Access to the pool would be required along the foreshore. • The facilities would require protection from wave action, presumably using a rock revetment which may be in relatively deep water with implications for rock size and quantity. • The construction may impact on the quality of the surf in this vicinity.

DELWP response: This suggestion is out of scope of this project, which is to identify groyne field design options that may be suitable to manage and maintain sand on the Point Lonsdale front beach. Groynes parallel to • Groynes parallel to the beach amount to offshore breakwaters. the beach • Offshore breakwaters have been considered in previous investigations, including Vantree and BMT WBM. To be effective, they are likely to be significant structures with implications for cost, visual amenity and environmental impact.

DELWP response: This suggestion is out of scope of this project, which is to identify groyne field design options that may be suitable to manage and maintain sand on the Point Lonsdale front beach. Together with this, there is not a lot of support for offshore breakwaters due to impacts on visual amenity, environmental and recreational use (eg. Surfing and swimming).

5. Next steps

DELWP will lead further community consultation in early 2019 to seek a community preference for either extra timber or extra rock groynes. Information will be presented on the design and construction of groynes and how they work, and the pros and cons of each option, such as cost, resilience and effectiveness. Of the six groyne options presented, given the general feedback received from the community, the following options will not be explored further: - Add four additional rock groynes and a breakwater - Extend the three existing rock groynes - Using polymer as a groyne material. The remaining options are now: - Maintain the three existing rock groynes (do nothing) - Add four additional rock groynes - Add four additional timber groynes - Add additional rock and timber groynes

Lonsdale Bight: 15 Groyne Options - Summary of Feedback 7 - 27 August 2018 6. Appendices

16 Lonsdale Bight: Groyne Options - Summary of Feedback 7 – 27 August 2018 Appendix A Summary of community engagement undertaken

When What Tool Audience

Week 1 of Project update - Minister Media release - local and Bellarine community June social media

6 June Project update Email blast Previously engaged community stakeholders

21 June Project update Engage Victoria website Bellarine community/all

16 July Open house promotion Poster/flyer Local distribution community Email stakeholders/all Social media

30 July Print article from media Geelong Advertiser Geelong and Bellarine release/ open house readership promotion

1 August Print article from media The Echo Geelong, Surf Coast and release/ open house Bellarine editions promotion

1 August Print and online article from The Rip Point Lonsdale and project update email Queenscliff community

6 August Open house promotion Social media Bellarine community/all

7 August Open house 1 Open house: posters and Bellarine community/all discussion Online survey begins Engage Victoria website

11 August Open house 2 Open house: posters and Bellarine community/all discussion Online survey continues Engage Victoria website

16 August Thank you to community for Social media post People who attended open attending open house houses Promote online survey Bellarine community/all

27 August Online survey concludes Engage Victoria website Bellarine community/all Engage Victoria survey report

Lonsdale Bight: 17 Groyne Options - Summary of Feedback 7 - 27 August 2018 Appendix B Groyne study engagement material

Information presented to the community on the findings of the groyne assessment study included:

• An aerial map of the current front beach situation • A table comparing groyne types: materials, costs, advantages, disadvantages • The evaluation criteria used to assess each option

Groyne evaluation criteria

Table 2:

Evaluation criteria Description

Likelihood of beach loss at The likelihood that the amount of sand will continue to fluctuate (building up and various times of the year eroding) along some sections of the beach at various times of the year.

Likelihood of permanent/long The likelihood that the beach will continue to lose sand/disappear. term beach loss

Likelihood of structure The likelihood of structure failure based on the material lifespan under coastal maintenance / failure within conditions, the location and the structure alignment. 20 years

Capital cost The total cost to build the structure including labour, materials and equipment.

Maintenance cost The cost of maintenance if the structure should fail within 20 years, including labour, materials and equipment.

Impact on beach accessibility Groyne structures can alter the connectivity along the beach - Can beach users / connectivity walk along the beach unimpeded? Does the structure present access difficulties?

Construction effort The amount of construction required to build the structure. Considers complexities of on land/in water, material type and equipment required.

Footprint / size / presence The space the structure will take up. Considers overall footprint, length, width, height and how this may affect visual amenity.

Public safety risk Potential hazard the structure presents. Considers drop-off in beach elevation between the two sides of the structure (difference 1-2 m), beach users climbing on the structure, falls, trip hazards and cuts/abrasions.

Environmental risk / effect – Effects on the intertidal and subtidal reef, rockpools, biodiversity, construction intertidal / reef / rockpools footprint within the Marine National Park boundary, modification to sediment community and transport.

18 Lonsdale Bight: Groyne Options - Summary of Feedback 7 – 27 August 2018 Presented groyne options As part of the open house events, six groyne options were presented to members of the public. They were invited to review all the options and leave comments on each.

Lonsdale Bight: 19 Groyne Options - Summary of Feedback 7 - 27 August 2018

20 Lonsdale Bight: Groyne Options - Summary of Feedback 7 – 27 August 2018 Lonsdale Bight: 21 Groyne Options - Summary of Feedback 7 - 27 August 2018

22 Lonsdale Bight: Groyne Options - Summary of Feedback 7 – 27 August 2018 Lonsdale Bight: 23 Groyne Options - Summary of Feedback 7 - 27 August 2018

24 Lonsdale Bight: Groyne Options - Summary of Feedback 7 – 27 August 2018 Demographics of open house attendees Open house - Tuesday 7 August 3pm -7 pm

Postcode Numbers

3225 – Point Lonsdale / Queenscliff 55 3226 – Ocean Grove / Barwon Heads 5 3232 – Lorne 1 Total 61

Open house - Saturday 11 August 1pm - 4pm

Postcode Numbers

3225 - Point Lonsdale / Queenscliff 48 3082 – Mill Park, Melbourne 2 3226 - Ocean Grove / Barwon Heads 1 3124 – Camberwell, Melbourne 1 3363 – Creswick, Melbourne 2 3350 – Ballarat 4 3073 – Melbourne 3 3032 – Maribyrnong, Melbourne 2 3054 – Carlton, Melbourne 2 Total 65

Engage Victoria online survey - 7 - 27 August 2018

Postcode Numbers

3225 - Point Lonsdale / Queenscliff 4 3350 – Ballarat 1 3077 – n/a 1 3133 - Vermont 1 3104 – Balwyn North 1 Total 8

Written submissions to DELWP - August 2018 Numbers Postcode 3225 2 Total 2

Grand Total 136

2 5 Lonsdale Bight: Groyne Options - Summary of Feedback 7 – 27 August 2018