The coastal strategy will not accept beach erosion discovered in 1976 was caused by dredging the shipping channel in 1973 and since dumping over 2,000,000 m3 of mostly beach replenishment sand to waste at outer dump zones.
In my view, this erosion did not take 45 years to appear or have anything to do with climate change.
Climate change is real but the coastal strategy constantly portraying the demise of seaside dwellings at the northern end of Te Awanga Beach being due to climate change is inexcusable.
Erosion on the Cape Coast has been an issue since 1960 because the land subsided 0.8m during the 1931 earthquake and limited uplifted gravel is collapsing from the Cape cliffs.
In 2005, the $80,000 246 page Prof Komar report made 14 recommendations for both councils to further investigate the cause of Westshore Beach erosion.
They ignored his expert advice and blamed the sudden loss of mostly silt and mud flowing from the old Ahuriri Lagoon and a perceived collapse of a sand delta.
If both councils had not refused to answer my simple question between 2009 and 2013 "Why is nourishment with loose stones to replace eroded sand the best long-term solution for Westshore Beach?" there would be no need to debate 'who pays'.
Instead, they provided a meeting with Prof Komar in 2013 when he suggested a coastal strategy.
Evidence for the strategy making no real progress was included in a HB Today article (December 31, 2018) 'Westshore's battle for its beach'.
The regional council chief engineer (who is steering the trategy) somehow decided "Westshore Beach is sinking" and the port chief engineer added an insult (also on video) "Dallimore is playing the blame game".
Unfortunately, these late-arriving key players are short on local history and prefer to overlook coastal processes determined by coastal scientists, as listed in my earlier Talking Point.
The coastal strategy stalled because the cause of coastal erosion and the distinctly different causal factors between the north and south Littoral Cells were conveniently disregarded.
In 2017, the council finally conceded their 'cheap fix' solution at Westshore Beach has failed to 'hold the coastline' and agreed to secure a resource consent to place dredged sand where it can benefit all beaches north to Tangoio.
After four years, the ultimate solution is no closer because the application for the sand disposal permit sits on a desk.
In 2015, scientists advised the coastal strategy that sea-level rise due to climate change will be 1.0m in 100 years.
They now advise 1.5m in 100 years. The shingle spit between Hardinge Rd and Tangoio was high and dry and inhabited before the 1931 earthquake raised this area by 2.0m.
Therefore in 100 years, providing nothing impedes natural replenishment and the beach grows in height, as per the 2019 Govt Manual on Climate Change, the entire spit would be resilient to predicted SLR.
The coastal strategy provided community panels with technical reports and presentations on remedial projects and how much it will cost.
The Napier Port chief engineer on the Westshore community panel insisted all or any sand dredged from the shipping channel would be unsuitable to replenish, restore or reinstate Westshore Beach because the material will not stay on the beach.
This was proved utter nonsense, in my view, by coastal scientists at a port consent hearing in 2018 which ended with the port agreeing to provide dredged sand for the southern end of the beach.
However, Napier City management rejected an amendment to an agreement with the port which insisted the council is responsible for all extra costs to have dredged sand placed in the 'surf zone' at the southern end, where beach erosion cannot be addressed by land-based solutions.
Restoring this nearshore sand seabed is simply replicating the natural northerly sediment drift that transports sand via the Marine Parade so all beaches north to Tangoio will benefit.
I believe this unforeseen expense for ongoing erosion due to vital port development belongs to Napier Port – not city ratepayers.
