2021-01-18 GC - Item 3 - Attachment 1 - Coastal Hazards Adaptation Plan for Community Consultation

Even without these broader socio-economic costs, the financial cost of implementation would be
significant given the level of protection required to withstand a major storm event such as a 100
year ARI storm event. The required height, required length, land tenure arrangements (where
should it be located, who would maintain it), would lead to excessive construction and ongoing
maintenance costs.

Depending on the funding arrangements, a portion of the costs would likely be borne by the
broader community through general rates or other government funds, even though the works are
expected to have negative impacts for the community and economy given the loss of beach
values.

It is important to note that the Eastern Beaches and Teewah Beach are unlike Noosa Main Beach.
Noosa Main Beach has an existing bouldered seawall protecting the foreshore and importantly,
has access to sand that accumulates at the river mouth as it moves northward. This sand is then
piped southward and pumped onto Noosa Main Beach by Council's sand recycling system when
the beach becomes eroded. This ensures the seawall is covered by sand for most of the year, and
that a suitable beach width is available for safe recreational use. For the Eastern Beaches and
Teewah, there is no readily available sand supply to continually recycle sand back onto the beach
in front of a rock wall. In addition, there are material uncertainties regarding a reliable long-term
sand supply in the nearshore and offshore environment (i.e. adjacent to these localities).

The analysis demonstrates that the construction of hard-engineered revetment walls would be
unviable as it is unable to demonstrate sufficient public benefit to justify the economic, social and
environmental costs involved. This option is therefore considered not feasible from a socio-
economic perspective.

Acquisition of private residential properties

This option looked at what opportunities could be available for Council to acquire properties
impacted by coastal erosion. This also included options for temporary lease back to the property
owners. The cost benefit analysis demonstrated that this option does not deliver sufficient benefits
and therefore is not feasible for further consideration at this stage.

Planning scheme response (development controls)

Planning controls are currently in place for coastal development to limit the encroachment of
buildings and structures into the vegetated dune areas to preserve natural coastal processes of
erosion and sand accumulation. This includes building setbacks from the seaward boundary of lots
through the Noosa Plan 2020, as well as State coastal building lines for some lots under the
Coastal Protection and Management Act.

These planning controls are supported by maintenance of existing vegetated dune areas by
Council and local bushcare groups to enhance these vital buffer areas including active
management of weeds and pests, and fencing and replanting.

However, this current approach does not fully account for the increased erosion risk anticipated
over the coming decades as a result of sea level rise and projected increases in extreme weather.
Changes to the Noosa Plan 2020 are therefore needed to better plan for these medium to long
term projections.

Redesign and relocation of key recreational and infrastructure assets
Across the coastal areas, there are numerous recreational and service infrastructure assets that
will increasingly be under threat from erosion overtime. Options for these public assets to be either
re-located outside high-risk areas or re-designed to be more resilient need further investigation.




Noosa Council – Coastal Hazards Adaptation Plan 2020 - 2030 (community consultation version)   Page 27