- Aims to assess approaches and identify how to manage sand on Adelaide’s beaches in a way that minimises disruption for communities, avoids environmental harm, and maximises sand staying on beaches. These are the goals of the review.
- Includes community engagement to ensure a clear understanding of the Adelaide community’s views on sand management approaches, and on the impact of the current sand management approaches including trucking and pipelines.
- Will consider lessons from international examples of sand management of metropolitan beaches, and what can be learned from the most up to date analysis of climate science about future management of Adelaide’s beaches.
- Mark Searle, former Chief Executive Officer for the City of Marion
- Kaurna representatives Les Wanganeen and Sarah Smith
- Professor Beverley Clarke, social science expert from Flinders University
- Professor Emeritus Nick Harvey, coastal science expert from the University of Adelaide
- Professor Emeritus Mike Young, environmental science expert from the University of Adelaide.
- Seeking input about what outcomes and values are important to the community for how sand is managed on beaches, and to add any new approaches to the long list that will be assessed. The feedback received will be used to inform the shortlisting of the long list of sand management approaches.
- Seeking community and stakeholder feedback on the shortlisted sand management approaches – what is liked or not liked about them.
- Undertaking a high-level technical assessment to identify a shortlist of feasible sand management approaches from the longlist. The assessment will follow an evidence-based approach using information and data from previous coastal monitoring, studies and research on Adelaide's beaches, as well as results of the community engagement about what values matter most to community. The assessment will evaluate the effectiveness and practicality of the approaches on the longlist to filter out least feasible approaches.
- Undertaking a detailed assessment of shortlisted sand management approaches to determine how well each approach (or combination of) can meet the goals of the review. This assessment will use the Shortlist Consultation Report and technical information to evaluate how each approach would be expected to perform in delivering the project objectives and desired social and environmental outcomes.
What is the Adelaide Beach Management Review?
Adelaide’s coast is a much loved and visited part of our city and holds significant community, environmental and economic values. However, these values are at risk from coastal erosion and without active management we will see the build-up of sand in some areas, and the loss of sandy beaches in other areas.
The Adelaide Beach Management Review (the review) is a 12-month project, facilitated by the Department for Environment and Water (DEW) and overseen by the Attorney-General. The review involves an independent scientific review of coastal (sand) management approaches to determine the best long-term approach for managing Adelaide’s metropolitan beaches.
The review has been initiated in accordance with the State government’s commitment to undertake a review of coastal sand management approaches for Adelaide’s managed metropolitan beaches. The review will explore all approaches for sand management which will include community input and transparency of process, and consideration of climate change impact.
In accordance with the State government’s commitment, the review:
Why is the review needed?
The sand on Adelaide’s beaches naturally moves from south to north, driven by wind and waves. This causes erosion at the southern and central sections of the coastline, such as at Seacliff, West Beach and Henley Beach South, and a build-up of sand on other parts of the coastline, such as at Glenelg, Semaphore and Largs Bay.
Maintaining Adelaide’s sandy beaches currently involves active management to move sand and bring in sand from external sources. However, recent years have seen more storm events and increased erosion of beaches. At West Beach, access and amenity has been impacted. Without intervention, these impacts will only increase with climate change.
Construction of a pipeline to move sand from Semaphore South to West Beach was previously proposed as a long term response for sand management. This initiative was halted in line with the State government’s commitment to undertake a review to explore all approaches for sand management. Externally sourced sand will continue to be brought into West Beach while the review is completed.
How is sand on beaches managed now?
The State government has been actively managing Adelaide’s coastline for the last 50 years to protect property, the foreshore and infrastructure from storms while also providing sandy beaches for community enjoyment. Sand has been moved from where it builds up to where it is needed. As necessary, additional sand has also been brought into the system from external sources such as quarries and offshore deposits. Generally, works are planned in the cooler months when beaches are less busy or to avoid Plover nesting seasons.
Community volunteer groups play a significant role in managing Adelaide’s coastline. These groups, with support from Councils and State government, work to restore native vegetation, provide habitat and stabilise dunes.
You can read more about this in the Beach Management Review Information Sheet..
How is the review being undertaken?
The review involves an independent scientific review supported by community and stakeholder engagement. These processes will be iterative, informing each other to support the identification of sand management approaches that are feasible and best meet environmental needs while acknowledging community expectations.
The engagement is being led by URPS. The scientific review is being led by Bluecoast Consulting Engineers.
The review is being overseen by an Independent Advisory Panel (IAP).
What is the Independent Advisory Panel?
The review is being overseen by an Independent Advisory Panel (IAP), which will inform the review approach and examine the outcomes of each stage of the review. The IAP will attend a stakeholder workshop to observe input from stakeholders early in the review. Community and stakeholders will also have the opportunity attend a meeting of the IAP to speak to submissions made to the Review during the consultation on shortlisted approaches.
Advisory Panel members are:
How can people have their say?
It is very important to the success of the review that it is informed by an understanding of what matters most to the community and the community’s views on the different sand management approaches.
There are two key steps in the review process at which community and stakeholders can provide input:
URPS will lead the engagement and prepare a report of the results of each step of engagement. Reports will be made public on the review webpage and provided to the IAP for review.
How will approaches be assessed?
Sand management approaches will be independently assessed by Bluecoast. Bluecoast will consider how well the approaches meet the goals of the review using the consultation reports prepared by URPS as well as technical data.
There are two key steps in the review process at which the approaches will be independently assessed:
Bluecoast will undertake the technical assessments and prepare a report of the results of each assessment step. Reports will be made public on the review webpage and provided to the IAP for review.
How is Kaurna cultural heritage being considered?
The review will meet with Kaurna representatives so that Kaurna cultural values and important sites inform the assessment of sand management approaches.
Who makes a decision on the review?
The ultimate decision for the sand management approach(es) that will be adopted resides with the State government (Cabinet).
The role of the IAP is to oversee the review process which will inform the review approach and examine the outcomes of each stage of the review.
Bluecoast are assessing sand management approaches to determine how well each approach (or combination of) can meet the goals of the review. They are not making a recommendation.