The Future of Fremantle Report - ‘A wider foreshore reserve is required to safeguard our beaches’

The report to Government of the Jane Bennett chaired Future of Fremantle Committee, bearing date November 2024 – the Bennett report – was, as exclusively reported on Fremantle Shipping News, finally released last week.

The Leighton Action Coalition is pleased this important document is out and we look forward to further discussions with the next government about it.

There was much to commend the earlier overall Future of Fremantle process, however, by the time it considered the Port Beach and south Leighton sections, it felt rushed, constrained, unimaginative and under-baked.

The resultant Future of Fremantle indicative scenarios for this section were underwhelming, to be diplomatic, all showing versions of heavy engineering, like groynes and seawalls, across this much-loved natural beach, and a narrow coastal setback, with very little public space and parking areas.

Unsurprisingly, this caused widespread and growing concern across the community at that stage of the planning process. We need a much wider coastal foreshore reserve than the images showed, for public recreation and parking, given it’s already very hard for families to access the beach now, let alone in future. The best way to respond to erosion is restoring the dunes which will then do the heavy lifting, naturally.

While the latest Bennett report lacks detail, it is notable that the images do not show any groynes or seawalls. This is somewhat reassuring and probably indicates the government’s accurate reading of community sentiment on this retrograde and counterproductive approach to coastal management in a setting like this. However, the reality is that avoiding seawalls and groynes will require the restoration of coastal dunes, and that means Port and Leighton needs a much wider foreshore reserve than the report shows, also because car parking and public facilities need to be provided behind the dunes.

Bottom line: If we want to protect and retain natural, beautiful beaches and provide public open
space – to serve beachgoers from 100 suburbs – the area needs a much wider foreshore reserve than
the current proposal shows. However, we know this proposal is indicative and so we are optimistic
that the government will engage with the community in good faith to get this right.

The rubber will hit the road when the government undertakes an analysis to determine the setback
distance that is required to establish the foreshore reserve requirements, that is, where the
boundary should be between parks and recreation and urban zoning in the area where the old oil
tanks stood, now owned by developers. That, along with the resolution of the Future of Fremantle
project, confirmation of transport and road requirements, needs to be done before the developers can start planning for the remaining urban zone. That’s the formal stipulation of the WA Planning Commission.

So there’s a long way to go but we’re hopeful the government planners are going to engage broadly
and focus on the greater good. After all, Port Beach and south Leighton will be the only wide, natural beach and coastal environments for the tens of thousands of people who would live in the
renovated port, and the hundreds of thousands of people who rightfully consider this coast to be
their local beach.

The Port-Leighton precinct will only become more precious over time, particularly as beaches
elsewhere on our coast are sadly lost or severely damaged by erosion and armouring. A wider foreshore reserve will also enhance the amenity of the still vast urban development area that would
lie between the current Bracks St and the railway line.

We don’t get second chances here.

By Paul Gamblin, spokesperson for the Leighton Action Coalition

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

~ For more FSN reports on the Future of Fremantle project look here

~ If you’d like to COMMENT on this or any of our stories, don’t hesitate to email our Editor.

~ WHILE YOU’RE HERE –