We’re all entitled to exclusive ocean access
IT comes as no surprise that a group of people called the Surfers Beachfront Protection Association (SBPA) has popped up to threaten the council and state government with legal action over the next section on the Oceanway path between Surfers Paradise and Broadbeach.
One can understand the reticence of some to have a pathway at the end of their properties bordering the beach when for years they’ve had nothing there at all.
In fact, this easy access together with the large sum of money they would have paid for their property may have encouraged a feeling of entitlement, if not ownership, of the beach and their unfettered view.
The fact is, however, the beach is public property and belongs to us all.
As for claims about “beachfront protection”, one could argue that any significant damage to dunes has already been done by the buildings themselves and a pathway is unlikely to make much difference.
To make the case for more protection, SBPA would need to campaign against all further beachside building, particularly of high-rises, not just the Oceanway. They might like to add to the list anything that would jut out into the sea like a cruise ship terminal or occupy a sandy stretch such as a beachside bar.
It appears SBPA is not deterred by the fact that the Tugun to Bilinga stretch of Oceanway has been a great success and has had none of the dire consequences they predict.
Currently, it’s not just locals who use it but a number of hotels mention it as a way of attracting visitors, something much needed given the current slump in the tourist industry. A letter in Saturday’s paper described the Oceanway as a ‘road’ with hoons and others tearing across it, knocking over children as they go.
Does that mean it’s OK for this to happen on the other side of their building where they’re less likely to see them? On the street side there are real roads with real cars and plenty of opportunities to hit pedestrians because of the many driveways serving the buildings in question.
What’s worse, the pathways are narrow and often damaged, providing more potential for people to stray on to the road. For those with mobility issues, in wheelchairs or pushing prams or strollers, this can be a nightmare.
It goes without saying, of course, that these paths lack an ocean view. Why? Because the buildings are in the way. It seems, however, the owners would rather you struggle along the side of the road rather than pass in front of them on a much safer and uninterrupted path. The SBPA is taking legal action against the council but it’s quite possible that legal action could arise if someone is injured or killed on a substandard path.
Meanwhile, a new term was coined by Saturday’s letter writer – ‘No Roads On Our Beaches’ (NOROOB). This might be useful in places like Rainbow Beach where beaches literally have been turned into highways with many large vehicles using them.
On the Gold Coast, however, where one group with beachside dwellings want to maintain their relatively exclusive access to the ocean, I have another term: ‘NOFY’ – ‘Not Only For You’.