Liability at heart of battle for pathway
THE final battle on the Oceanway is being fought. D-day on the future of Gold Coast beaches will be next week. Every beachfront property owner, every walker and cyclist – stop and take in this view.
Council officers have prepared a report in response to a petition signed by almost 4000 residents demanding city hall stops building the concrete path at Tugun and Bilinga.
The proposed 1.7km pathway, just 3.5m wide, has been arguably the southern Coast’s widest environmental battleground for several years.
The project was initially rejected by council in 2012 after a report found 64 per cent of residents were opposed to it. A review by environmental consultants prepared by Friends of Currumbin (FOC) found faults in the sampling.
FOC ramped up its campaign, a petition signed by 9000 residents was lodged in late 2015, and in the following year it became an election issue with winning candidate Gail O’Neill supporting the Oceanway.
The Save Our Tugun and Bilinga Local Environment group followed up with the latest petition, a complaint was made to the Ombudsman about the handling of consultation and a threat of court action accusing council of failing to undertake a proper Aboriginal cultural heritage study.
The officer’s report to be delivered at full council next Friday recommends to keep moving forward with the path. Councillors will almost certainly tick off on it.
Officers in the report referred back to 1989 when working with property owners to build a boulder wall in front of their beachfront homes.
“At time of establishing the boulder wall, residents were encouraged to fence and maintain the area between their properties and the boulder wall. However, the ownership of this land has not changed and remains the property of the State Government,” the report said.
In 1996, the council sought to establish the status of the area in dispute. They found that public access “cannot be legally limited” over the Crown land and the property owners did not have exclusive use.
The council’s responses to the latest petition from those property owners raises more questions than answers, including some serious ones about future legal liability.
Several beachfront property owners say they were granted exclusive land rights for maintaining the areas and building the boulder walls, not all property owners built the walls, and those who did still have to maintain them.
Accidents have occurred due to several large sink holes, they say.
“I think that if the path collapses due to negligence and maintenance issues of the boulder walls in front of beachfront properties, then the beachfront residents may be liable,” a resident said.
“However, there is an argument that the path in most cases will prevent owners from inspecting the walls so they don’t know if the maintenance is required until something goes wrong.”
Some residents are high-profile lawyers. Their learned opinion is council is legally liable for what occurs on the new path.
“I believe the owners may have an argument to wash their hands of any liability regarding the boulder walls since the Queensland Government has told them the general public cannot be denied access to the road reserve under which of these walls lie,” the resident said.
So let’s pause – we have concrete path being built, in some sections. It’s on dunes without boulder protection.
More community storms are guaranteed about this pathway. Other storms too. They threaten to cause the worst damage.