But he lost his push to have a five-year trial of a reinstated St Clair groyne included as a way to manage options while the popular beach is the subject of ongoing council consultation.
"The suggestion of this is that a groyne is being precluded from being considered," Cr Radich said at yesterday’s full council meeting.
Long-time residents had seen with their "own eyes" how different the beach had been in the past.
While reinstating the groyne was not a "be-all and end-all" proposition, it could be a simple and inexpensive trial to run.
"And everyone can see in living colour, right in front of them, what the effect of those poles’ reinstatement would be."
There were more modern devices and a range of options. But previous discussions from the council had focused on "retreat".
And the last 15 years had been "a fiasco of failure".
"The dunes have continued to recede, eaten away by winter storms on an annual basis."
The only thing that had proved to increase sand on the beach at St Clair were the groynes, he said.
Cr David Benson-Pope took exception to Cr Radich’s proposal to have the groyne trial and "supporting information" included in the management options consulted on in September.
Council staff had been given a chance at yesterday’s meeting to provide support for the groyne plan.
"We haven’t got any," Cr Benson-Pope said.
"Our expert staff are saying that this is more complicated than some would have us believe".
Cr Radich said a diagram included in the report from staff showing a groyne could lead to localised erosion at the beach was "simply incorrect".
The first stage of consultation on the future of the St Clair-St Kilda coast closes on August 17.
The second stage of consultation on management options runs from September 1 to November 3.
Related Stories
Comments
Unfortunately there is far too much 'scare money' involved in letting the beach errosion get worse than it is, why fix it up with an inexpensive option when we could have the 'oppotunity' to spend untold millions on retreat of south dunedin.
Well that is very disappointing. Have the 'expert council staff' actually read the report that Cr Radich put forward? Yes, there are more modern devices and methods, and I'd be the first to action those devices, however, after reading the report in depth, I changed my view of the effectiveness of the wooden groynes. Especially at such a small cost. Compare that to childish dots on the road, a crazy George St trial and failed the cycleways! The history proves, many times over, those groynes do in fact preserve the coastline to a very great degree. Almost a century of evidence, weighed up against the past few years of hit and miss management of that coastline. Benson-Pope, it was a no-brainer. Why is it that virtually anything to do with infrastructure and services turns to crap with the DCC? Even when presented with facts. It's a fiasco alright!
"Our expert staff are saying that this is more complicated than some would have us believe".
Ah okay, so you're basically saying that compared to the councillors who were in power when the groynes first got put in, that you - the current council, are completely and utterly hopeless and shouldn't be in your jobs?
If it was as complicated as you predict decades ago when they were put in, then logic would say it'll be insanely easier to put them back in these days with advances in technology. But yet you're saying the opposite...
The war against erosion can still be won. Simply make a submission to the DCC Coastal Plan on their website.
Groynes put 2-3 metres of extra sand on St Clair for 100 years and could do so again. Let's test it out by repairing our iconic poles - then we'll know for sure.
DCC has wasted ~$4 million fixing damage in recent years and it's only getting worse. $100k to reinstate a proven sand saver that everyone loves seems like common sense to me.
Here's my report fyi: https://bit.ly/32GOce6
The problem with saying that it must be the groynes that increase the amount of sand on the beach is that it isn't a scientific, evidence-based opinion and it ignores the possibility of other factors that affect the sand levels.
For example, it is well known that St Clair and St Kilda beaches are high-energy beaches that are exposed to the strong, cold ocean currents from the south. A number of big winter storms can strip the beach of a lot of sand and deposit it in sandbars just offshore.
It seems obvious that if we are lucky enough to have a few winters without big storms the beach will have a chance to recover, and further increase sand levels with the gentler swells and waves during the springs, summers and autumns.
I believe there is an opening for somebody to research the number of big storms during the last, say 50 winters and determine if a lower number of big storms coincides with increased levels of sand on the beach.
Also, the opinion that dams on the Clutha affect the amount of sand on St Clair beach ignores the fact that there are plenty of other beaches between the Clutha River and the end of Otago Peninsula that do not appear to have lost a lot of sand.
Hi Peter, I respect what you are suggesting in terms of a research into 50 years of storms. However, there is already ample 'evidence-based' examples based on a very long history of groyne use.
I would be the first to suggest a better way of preserving our beaches based on the many examples around the world. However, having read in detail through the report put forward by Cr Radich, I would say, for the cost, and the timely manner in which the Groynes could be reinstated, I think we'd be fool hardy to sit on our hands as the erosion continues unchecked. A proposition well worth considering Peter. History, speaks to us in volumes...
Hi Buzz. If I wrote that again I would remove the words: "it isn't a scientific, evidence-based opinion and". My main point was that there are often multiple factors to consider in an investigation. I actually agree with the proposal to have a trial of a proper groyne. Of course, that wouldn't just be a double row of poles!
peter_y, can you please explain your definition of " scientific, evidence-based opinion" ?
i'm thinking that you may need a dictionary so you can choose the appropriate words to fit your prerogative, as 100 years of evidence has been served up right in front of us all, so wondering if you have an interest in consulting on beach erosion ?
Typical woolly thinking from a fiasco council.
I have lost the feeling of hope that I had when I thought there was a reasonable chance that the groynes would be installed. Now I am backing to living in St Clair and worrying about erosion. Surely the relatively minor cost of the groynes makes this a 'no brainer' to trial. But there again, I am talking about a council that happily fritters away thousands of dollars on silly street dots and temporary speed signs without any obvious sign of fiscal sense. This is so disappointing. Please reconsider and just get this done!!