|
|
2 |
10.1 |
12.5.1
Windy Harbour Boat Ramp - Acceptance of Construction
Scope
|
PROPONENT |
Shire of Manjimup |
|
OWNER |
Shire of Manjimup |
|
LOCATION / ADDRESS: |
Windy Harbour |
|
WARD: |
Coastal |
|
ZONE: |
|
|
DIVISION: |
Works |
|
FILE REFERENCE: |
WRK13 |
|
LEGISLATION: |
Local Government Act 1995 |
|
AUTHOR: |
Doug Elkins |
|
DATE OF REPORT: |
15 November 2010 |
|
DECLARATION OF INTEREST: |
Nil |
|
SIGNATURE: |
|
Background:
Councillors will be aware of a
grant to refurbish the Windy Harbour boat ramp facility. As part of the
process of attaining approval to commence the project, the Shire was required
to engage a specialist consultant to determine a ‘design wave’ and review the
Shire’s design. As part of this process, the specialist consultant noted
that the proposed new boat ramp is deficient, in the context of the Australian
Standard 3962-2001, in that the wave height at the launching facility is
regularly over 0.2m and the length of the proposed ramp does not extend far
enough into the ocean.
While the proposed ramp is an improvement on the existing ramp and should result in a reduced risk, rather than an increased risk for the user, any construction will be in the knowledge of the deficiencies. Accordingly, it is appropriate for Council to consider the risk it is assuming and confirm its acceptance of that risk. A copy of the design of the proposed ramp is included in the attachments.
ATTACHMENT:
12.5.1(1)
PUBLIC Consultation Undertaken:
Nil
COMMENT
(Includes Options):
The proposed ramp does not vary
from the existing ramp with regard to the height of the waves at the boat ramp
location. The proposed upgrade does not change the location of the ramp,
or result in any change that exacerbates the current situation other than to
reduce the non-compliance with the standard by extending the ramp
seaward. In reality, the risk being assumed by Council is the same risk
that currently exists with the current ramp, or on the beach where visitors
launch their boat from the beach. The proposed ramp is wider than the
existing ramp, at 5m wide, and will provide additional space to cope with
launching or retrieving a boat in less than ideal conditions.
Wave Risk
The proposed ramp is non-compliant with Australian Standard 3962-2001 in that the ramp is not sheltered from waves that exceed 0.2m in height. The extent of the risk is described by the Shire’s consultants as regular and frequent with the non-compliance with the standard likely to be dangerous during periods of increased wave activity. Accordingly, the risk being assumed is real and likely not minor.
The current management of wave risk at the boat ramp is through a warning sign. The sign clearly details the risk of using the facility including specifically noting the need to be aware of waves, among other things, and to exercise ‘extreme caution’. The sign has been reviewed by the Shire’s solicitors and has been constructed and installed in accordance with their advice.
If it is Council’s desire not to accept the risk, then there are two options available for consideration. The first option open to Council is to construct a breakwater or similar structure around the boat ramp in order to create a shelter. This option is likely to be prohibitively expensive and most likely beyond Council’s capacity to pay. If Council were to attempt to fund such a facility through the Recreational Boating Facilities Scheme an amount of 25% of the project value would need to be found.
Should this be Council’s preference, it might be possible to attain some other form of funding, such as a Royalties for Regions grant. Importantly, should Council decide that this is the preferred solution, and accordingly reprioritise its projects for Royalties for Regions funding, the construction of the currently proposed boat ramp does not preclude the construction of a breakwater. Unless, such an upgrade of the boat ramp is intended to service the boats of the local community (generally smaller boats), the Windy Harbour Management Plan (WHMP) requires funding to be sourced externally.
However, the suggestion that a breakwater will resolve all issues is simplistic. While a breakwater might resolve the problem with the wave height at the boat ramp, such a major structure extending into the ocean will have environmental consequences. Such a project would be major. Within the context of the level of use of the existing boat ramp, and the incident history, it would be unlikely that the financial and environmental costs would be justified by the risk reduction benefits. Accordingly, this is not considered a legitimate short-term option.
The second option open to Council is the removal of the ramp. The land between the high water mark and the low water mark is Unallocated Crown Land and is the responsibility of the State (Department of Environment and Conservation). The boat ramp is considered to be the responsibility of the Shire, as it is likely to fall within the meaning of section 3.53 of the Local Government Act 1995, which vests the responsibility for controlling and managing otherwise unvested structures, including jetties, in the Local Government. The removal of the boat ramp would remove the unvested facility and therefore any liability. Boat owners could still launch their boats from the beach, as many currently do, without Council assuming any risk. This option would not change the wave height and therefore the risk to the individual, but could remove the liability for Council.
The WHMP notes that ‘. . . many, if not most, boat launches occur from the beach and not the boat ramp . . .’. The WHMP is not clear as to the intention to ultimately retain the boat ramp, although it does note that the responsibility for maintaining the current ramp is with the Shire and responsibility for any upgrade of the boat ramp is with the State Government. Without clear direction from the WHMP, a desire by Council to remove the ramp would require public consultation.
Although there is a risk with the boat ramp, the boat ramp has been in place for a long period of time and Council has (possibly without knowledge) assumed that risk over that time. In acknowledgement of the risk, the Shire has erected a sign warning of the dangers of using the ramp and the variability of the ramp depending on such things as waves and weather. However, the refurbishment of the ramp may encourage larger boats to use the facility, increasing the likelihood and consequence of an incident. The WHMP discusses the risk of undertaking a refurbishment of the boat ramp, suggesting that it will result in increasing risks with larger boats utilising the facility if upgrades (or major maintenance) are completed. It is recommended that Council acknowledge the risk of using the ramp and continue to maintain a sign warning of the dangers. In addition, it is recommended that an additional sign be erected to place a length limit on the boat ramp of 6m in accordance with the approximate standard of the facility (as noted in the WHMP), noting that any upgrade to facilitate larger boats, should be undertaken by the State.
Boat Ramp Length
The second variance from the applicable Australian Standard is the length of the boat ramp. Under Australian Standard 3962:2001, the end of the ramp should be 600mm below the lowest predicted water level. In the case of the current ramp and the proposed ramp, the end of the ramp is above the lowest predicted water level.
The proposed new ramp has been extended a further 5m seaward from the current ramp and has been designed to finish below the beach level when the sand is washed into the bay. The intent of the design is not to extend the ramp to provide a facility that will provide all year all weather access, but to improve the current situation, where there is risk of dropping the trailer off the ramp and when the beach is washed into the bay, there is a long run from the end of the ramp to the water. Ideally, the boat ramp would be extended for the full recommended length, however, this would result in a significant increase in costs, as construction would have to occur under water.
The design is such that the boat ramp can be used for beach launching over summer and used for launching from the ramp over winter without the risk of dropping off the ramp. Accordingly, although the ramp does not extend to the depth required by the Australian Standard, in recognition of the commonality of beach launching at Windy Harbour, the ramp has been designed to improve the current situation and to utilise beach launching when conditions suit. It is considered that the result may be some inconvenience if there are occasions where it is not possible to use the ramp to launch, but the frequency of any inconvenience will be reduced by the fact that the ramp extends significantly further into the water. The proposed extension is considered a reasonable compromise between increasing the usability of the ramp, without incurring unreasonable cost. Accordingly, it is recommended that Council note that the ramp may be unusable at low tides.
STATUTORY ENVIRONMENT:
The Local Government Act 1995
vests the management and responsibility for the ramp in the Council.
Liability is generally within the realm of Common Law.
Policy / Strategic Implications:
The WHMP acknowledges
responsibility for maintaining the ramp. Arguably, this project is little
more than major maintenance and within the contemplation of the WHMP. As
the State Government is funding 75% of the project, any improvements to the
facility can be considered to be funded by the State Government in accordance
with the requirements of the WHMP.
Financial Implications:
The project budget is
$80,000. A requirement of the State was the engagement of a specialist
consulting engineer at a cost of $9404. The Department of Transport has
agreed to fully fund the cost of the specialist consultant engineer, through additional
grant funds.
Sustainability:
Environmental: It is not
expected that the minor extension will have limited environmental impacts.
Economic: Nil
Social: The project, while retaining some risk, is expected to provide a safer and more usable facility, improving access for the community to the ocean.
VOTING REQUIREMENTS: SIMPLE MAJORITY
Officer Recommendation:
That Council:
1 Accept the risk of the proposed
refurbishment of the Windy Harbour boat ramp in accordance with the attachment,
noting that the ramp does not comply with Australian Standard 3962:2001 in that
there is no shielding from the expected frequent waves exceeding 0.2m in
height;
2 Maintain a warning sign at the
Windy Harbour boat ramp warning of the dangers and risks and attach to the sign
a 6m length limit for boats using the ramp; and
3 Note that the ramp does not extend
600mm below the lowest expected tide and may be unusable during low tides.
|
COUNCIL RESOLUTION: Moved: DeCampo,
W
Seconded: Tapley, D 24791 That Council: 1 Accept the risk of the proposed
refurbishment of the Windy Harbour boat ramp in accordance with the
attachment, noting that the ramp does not comply with Australian Standard
3962:2001 in that there is no shielding from the expected frequent waves exceeding
0.2m in height; 2 Maintain a warning sign at the
Windy Harbour boat ramp warning of the dangers and risks; and 3 Note that the ramp does not
extend 600mm below the lowest expected tide and may be unusable during low
tides. MOTION carried 7/2
Reasons: · If want no risk, remove ramp. · More larger boats to Windy Harbour due to exclusion zones introduced on South Coast. · No technical reason cannot launch. · Many boats in Windy Harbour over 6m. · Will create animosity if no law to enforce. · Sea Rescue boat above 6m – Not acceptable to approve some
6m but not others. · Advocates
for 6m restriction in the Windy Harbour Management Plan merely wished to
discourage use at Windy Harbour. |