Randwick Local Government Area€¦ · Coastal Public Safety Risk Assessment: Randwick Local Government Area Page 5 of 81 Executive Summary This report contains findings and recommendations

Funded by the NSW Government under the NSW Water Safety

Black Spots Fund watersafety.nsw.gov.auA NSW Government water safety initiative

Coastal Public Safety Risk Assessment Randwick Local Government Area

June 2013

Coastal Public Safety Risk Assessment: Randwick Local Government Area

Page 2 of 81

© Surf Life Saving New South Wales, Belrose 2013 All Rights Reserved. Disclaimer While Surf Life Saving New South Wales endeavours to provide reliable analysis and believes the contents of this report to be accurate, it will not be liable for any claim by any party acting on such information. All rights are reserved and no part of this publication covered by copyright may be reproduced or copied in any form or by any means except with the written permission of Surf Life Saving New South Wales. We accept no duty of care or liability to you or any third party for any loss suffered in connection with the use of this document.


Page 3 of 81

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..................................................................................................................................... 5

SUMMARY OF KEY RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................................................ 7

1. INTRODUCTION, SCOPE & CONTEXT .......................................................................................................... 11

1.1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................... 11 1.2 SCOPE AND CONTEXT ....................................................................................................................................... 12 1.3 LIMITATIONS .................................................................................................................................................. 13 1.4 DEFINITION OF TERMS ..................................................................................................................................... 13 1.5 PROJECT TEAM ............................................................................................................................................... 15

2. ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................................... 16

2.1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................... 16 2.2 SITE IDENTIFICATION ........................................................................................................................................ 16 2.3 SITE INSPECTION ............................................................................................................................................. 18 2.4 HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT ................................................................................................... 19 2.5 DATA ANALYSIS .............................................................................................................................................. 19 2.6 BEACH HAZARD RATINGS AND OVERVIEW ............................................................................................................ 20 2.7 ABSAMP BEACH TYPES AND RATINGS................................................................................................................ 21 2.8 ABSAMP BEACH TYPE CHARACTERISTIC OVERVIEW AND HAZARDS .......................................................................... 23 2.9 FACILITY VISITATION RATES (FVR)...................................................................................................................... 25 2.10 FACILITIES AUDIT .......................................................................................................................................... 29 2.11 BEACH USAGE & INCIDENT STATISTICS .............................................................................................................. 30 2.12 COMMUNICATION AND CONSULTATION ............................................................................................................. 35

3. RISK ASSESSMENT FINDINGS ...................................................................................................................... 38

3.1 ACTION PLANNING PRIORITY (GROSS RISK) .......................................................................................................... 38 3.1.1 Action Planning Priority Index ............................................................................................................ 38 3.1.2 Australian Beach Safety and Management Program ......................................................................... 39 3.1.3 Local Population Rating ..................................................................................................................... 40 3.1.4 Human/Activity Interaction Rating .................................................................................................... 41 3.1.5 Access Rating ..................................................................................................................................... 43 3.1.6 Action Planning Priority Score ............................................................................................................ 45

3.2 OVERVIEW OF PRINCIPAL RISK TREATMENTS ........................................................................................................ 49 3.2.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................ 49 3.2.2 Hierarchy of Risk Treatments (Controls)............................................................................................. 49 3.2.3 Educate and Inform ............................................................................................................................ 50 3.2.4 Safety Signage .................................................................................................................................... 55 3.2.5 Emergency Marker System ................................................................................................................. 60 3.2.6 Access Infrastructure and Ongoing Capital Works/Maintenance Programmes ................................ 61 3.2.7 Public Rescue Equipment.................................................................................................................... 63 3.2.8 System of Supervision ......................................................................................................................... 65

4. EMERGENCY RESPONSE ............................................................................................................................. 73

4.1 EMERGENCY COMMUNICATIONS/REPORTING - TRIPLE ZERO (000) .......................................................................... 73 4.2 EMERGENCY RESPONSE BEACONS ...................................................................................................................... 74 4.3 EMERGENCY SERVICE RESPONSE ........................................................................................................................ 75 4.4 RANDWICK EMERGENCY TASKING ....................................................................................................................... 77 4.5 SYDNEY EMERGENCY TASKING DETAILS ............................................................................................................... 78

5. MONITOR AND REVIEW ............................................................................................................................. 80

6. REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................................... 81


Page 4 of 81

APPENDIX A: ACCESS AND SIGNAGE SCHEDULE APPENDIX B: RISK REGISTER AND TREATMENT PLAN APPENDIX C: PUBLIC RESCUE EQUIPMENT APPENDIX D: COVERAGE MAPS APPENDIX E: SURVEY RESULTS


Page 5 of 81

Executive Summary This report contains findings and recommendations specific to current International and Australian standards, guidelines and best practice risk management processes. The report contains information specific to locations under the authority of Randwick City Council and the National Parks and Wildlife Service (NPWS) – Office of Environment and Heritage. 1. Shark Point 2. Clovelly 3. Clovelly Pool Car Park 4. Gordon's Bay 5. Dunningham Reserve Rock Platform 6. Dolphin Point 7. Coogee 8. Grant Reserve Rock Platform 9. Trenerry Reserve Rock Platform 10. South Coogee Rock Platforms 11. Lurline Bay 12. Mahon Pool Rock Platform 13. The Stake Rock Platform 14. Maroubra 15. South Maroubra 16. Little Greenie 17. Shooting Range Rock Platform

18. Yellow Rock 19. Malabar/Long Bay 20. Julieann Rocks 21. Little Bay 1 22. Little Bay 2 23. The Gutter 24. The Trap 25. Jolong Rocks 26. Cape Banks - North 27. Cape Banks - East 28. Cape Banks - West 29. Cruwe Cove 30. Henry Head 31. Little Congwong Bay 32. Congwong Bay 33. Bare Island

Activities/Facilities The Randwick Local Government Area (LGA) is a popular destination and sees year round public usage and recreational activity, including swimming, surfing (including all surfcraft), rock fishing, snorkelling/diving, boating, and walking/sight-seeing. A number of facilities support coastal usage and activities including well maintained car parks and key beach access, lifeguard and lifesaving supervision, holiday accommodation options, coastal walks, a number of public toilets/changing rooms, BBQ’s, picnic tables and playgrounds. Hazards/Risks Though outlined in more detail within the report and appendices, the Randwick LGA holds a number of consistent hazards due to the geography and high energy nature of the area. Based on the risk assessment in Appendix B, these are the hazards that have been rated with the greatest inherent risk for the Randwick LGA: Strong ocean currents/rip currents: As a result of wave action and beach type Strong tidal current/river mouth: As a result of wave action and tidal conditions Waves/waves over washing: As a result of model wave height and exposure to ocean swells Inshore holes/deep water: As a result of coastal processes, wave action and beach type Slippery rocks/surface: As a result of coastal geography/break walls and wave action Shallow sandbanks/shore dump: As a result of coastal process, wave action and beach type Submerged rocks: As a result of coastal geography and sand movement Cliffs: As a result of coastal geography Rock shelves/platforms/reefs: As a result of coastal geography Surfing collision: As a result of human interaction Dangerous access/uneven surface: As a result of coastal geography Based on the risk analysis of these hazards, it has been identified that they pose risk to the following types of recreational users: Strong ocean currents/rip currents: Swimmers, surf craft users, fishermen, rock platform users


Page 6 of 81

Strong tidal current/river mouth: Swimmers, surf craft users, fishermen, break wall users, boaters Waves/waves over washing: Swimmers, surf craft users, fishermen, rock platform users Inshore holes/deep water: Swimmers, fishermen Slippery rocks/surface: Fishermen, rock platform users, walkers Shallow sandbanks/shore dump: Swimmers, surf craft users Submerged rocks: Swimmers, surf craft users, fishermen Cliffs: Fishermen, walkers, sight seers Rock shelves/platforms/reefs: Surf craft users, fishermen, rock platform users Surfing collision: Swimmers, surf craft users, boaters Dangerous access/uneven surface: Swimmers, surf craft users, fishermen, rock platform users Existing Risk Treatments Randwick City Council in partnership with a number of other organisations have implemented a number of effective risk treatment initiatives within the area, these include: o Safety signage o Public rescue equipment o System of supervision o Education collateral o School education


Page 7 of 81

Summary of Key Recommendations

Please note:

o The below recommendations are provided as options for guidance only and will not be binding to the Land Manager

o The below recommendations are in no particular order in regards to prioritisation

o Further explanation to the recommendations should also be referenced and can be found on the corresponding pages

Recommendation 1 Randwick City Council should consider implementing the following treatment options: Strategic Coordination:

1.1 Beach usage and incident data (drowning incidents, emergency callouts, lifesaving and lifeguard statistics

should be used when making informed decisions about the implementation of risk treatments for coastal public safety. (p.34)

1.2 Randwick City Council and Surf Life Saving Sydney should continue to hold regularly scheduled surf liaison

meetings as an effective forum to raise safety issues and implement strategies in the Randwick coastal environment. The committee should have a standing item on all future meeting agendas titled ‘coastal risk management – status and issues’, or similar. Recommendations found in this report can be addressed in this agenda item. There is also the opportunity for a member of National Parks and Wildlife to be represented at this group. (p.37)

1.3 Treatment options in this report should be implemented using a staged/prioritisation approach, based on

evidence. (p.48) Education: 1.4 Existing education and awareness programmes within the Randwick Local Government Area should

continue to be implemented and reviewed. (p.53)

1.5 Education and awareness programmes should include standardised key safety messages which are recognised by the aquatic industry (NSW Water Safety website, ‘watersafety.nsw.gov.au’). (p.53)

1.6 Display safety information (e.g. posters) which promotes key water safety messages at amenity blocks

and visitor information displays directly located around coastal beach access. (p.54)

1.7 Peak coastal water safety agencies currently provide surf education to local schools and community groups. It is recommended that Randwick City Council work with these agencies to promote these programmes and encourage enhanced participation at a local level. (p.54)

1.8 Continue to promote and encourage rock fishermen and recreational boaters to wear lifejackets. (p.54) Signage: 1.9 Standardised water safety signage that aligns to Australian standards and best-practice ‘style’ should be

implemented by Land Managers at the locations listed in Appendix A. This may include maintenance and upgrade of existing signage through planned works schedules, the consolidation of multiple existing signs into a single sign (less signs) or the removal of unnecessary signage. (p.58)

1.10 Randwick City Council in partnership with peak water safety bodies should investigate the use of

temporary signage (Appendix A) at key locations on the Randwick coast to display Bureau of Meteorology (BOM) issued dangerous surf warnings - warning the public of large/hazardous waves. (p.59)


Page 8 of 81

Access: 1.11 Formal access tracks identified in Appendix A should continue to be regularly maintained through

ongoing infrastructure and capital works programmes. This will encourage formal access use (rather than informal), enhance the effectiveness of water safety signage and minimise the quantity of signage needed. (p.62)

Surveillance and Supervision: 1.12 Lifeguard and lifesaving hours should continue to be reviewed on an ongoing basis with the view of

providing the most extensive service available. (p.72) 1.13 Explore the means to fund an additional lifeguard to do roving patrols of rock fishing locations. (p.72) Emergency Response:

1.14 Randwick City Council are encouraged to advise people to call Triple Zero (000) in the case of an

emergency and update their website accordingly. (p.73) 1.15 An emergency response training scenario should be conducted with Sydney Branch Duty Officers/Support

Operations, Randwick lifeguard supervisors and local emergency services once a year before the commencement of the surf life saving season. (p.77)

Monitor and Review:

1.16 In consultation with relevant stakeholders this document should be reviewed annually to measure the

effectiveness of any risk mitigation strategies and drowning prevention initiatives that have been implemented. (p.80)

1.17 All drowning prevention strategies should be documented and incorporated into the relevant strategic

and management plans. This will ensure consistency throughout the management area and a structured approach to maintenance. (p.80)

Recommendation 2 The National Parks and Wildlife Service - Office of Environment and Heritage should consider implementing the following treatment options: Strategic Coordination: 2.1 Beach usage and incident data (drowning incidents, emergency callouts, lifesaving and lifeguard statistics)

should be used when making informed decisions about the implementation of risk treatments for coastal safety. (p.34)

2.2 There is the opportunity for a member of National Parks and Wildlife to be represented at the local beach safety liaison committee currently organised with Randwick City Council and Surf Life Saving Sydney. This committee would be an effective forum which raises coastal safety issues and implements drowning prevention strategies in the Randwick coastal environment. It is recommended that the committee have a standing item on all future meeting agendas titled ‘coastal risk management – status and issues’, or similar.(p.37)

2.3 Treatment options in this report should be implemented using a staged/prioritisation approach, based on

evidence. (p.48) Education:

2.4 Existing education and awareness programmes within the Randwick Local Government Area should

continue to be implemented and reviewed. (p.53)


Page 9 of 81

2.5 Education and awareness programmes should include standardised key safety messages which are

recognised by the aquatic industry (NSW Water Safety website, ‘watersafety.nsw.gov.au’). (p.53) 2.6 Display safety information (e.g. posters) which promotes key water safety messages, at amenity blocks

and visitor information displays directly located around coastal beach access. (p.54)

2.7 Continue to promote and encourage rock fishermen and recreational boaters to wear lifejackets. (p.54) Signage: 2.8 Standardised water safety signage that aligns to Australian standards and best-practice ‘style’ should be

implemented by Land Managers at the locations listed in Appendix A. This may include maintenance and upgrade of existing signage through planned works schedules, the consolidation of multiple existing signs into a single sign (less signs) or the removal of unnecessary signage.(p.58)

Access: 2.9 Formal access tracks identified in Appendix A should continue to be regularly maintained through

ongoing infrastructure and capital works programmes. This will encourage formal access use (rather than informal), enhance the effectiveness of water safety signage and minimise the quantity of signage needed.(p.62)

Monitor and Review:

2.10 In consultation with relevant stakeholders this document should be reviewed annually to measure the

effectiveness of any risk mitigation strategies and drowning prevention initiatives that have been implemented. (p.80)

2.11 All drowning prevention strategies should be documented and incorporated into the relevant strategic and management plans. This will ensure consistency throughout the management area and a structured approach to maintenance. (p.80)

Recommendation 3 Australian CoastSafe and Surf Life Saving New South Wales should consider implementing the following treatment options: Strategic Coordination: 3.1 Research currently being conducted by the University of Melbourne, University of Wollongong and Surf

Life Saving Australia into a rocky coast classification model and hazard rating system for rocky coast should be commended and supported. Once this research is completed the calculations related to rocky coasts in this report should be reviewed. (p.22)

Recommendation 4 The Water Safety Advisory Committee should consider implementing the following treatment options: Strategic Coordination: 4.1 A review be commissioned to analyse the historical environmental conditions at the time of recorded

drowning deaths where the Bureau of Meteorology (BOM) is able to supply data. Such a report should identify the relevant trends and causal factors. (p.34)

Education: 4.2 Develop relationships with tourism agencies to expand on the coastal accommodation network program

with the aim of distributing standardised surf safety collateral e.g. brochures, flyers, pamphlets etc. to all coastal accommodation providers in the Randwick Local Government Area. (p.53)


Page 10 of 81

4.3 Identify the relevant user groups and related resources/websites (including multilingual) that promote

rock fishing in the Randwick Local Government, and target safety messaging to those groups/resources. This research may also provide the opportunity for targeted education campaigns. (p.54)

Emergency Marker Signage: 4.4 With guidance from the NSW Government – ‘Ministry for Police and Emergency Services’ and ‘Land and

Property Information’ a state-aligned emergency marker programme at all identified access locations should be implemented once such a programme is established. (p.60)

Public Rescue Equipment:

4.5 The New South Wales Water Safety Advisory Council should explore the means to fund the expansion and

continued maintenance of the ‘Angel Ring Project’ in consultation with the Australian National Sports Fishing Association (NSW Branch) and the Recreational Fishing Alliance of NSW at the locations outlined in Appendix C. Final positioning should be determined by ANSA NSW. (p.64)

Recommendation 5 Surf Life Saving Sydney should consider implementing the following treatment options: Strategic Coordination: 5.1 Randwick City Council and Surf Life Saving Sydney should continue to hold regularly scheduled surf liaison

meetings as an effective forum to raise safety issues and implement strategies in the Randwick coastal environment. The committee should have a standing item on all future meeting agendas titled ‘coastal risk management – status and issues’, or similar. Recommendations found in this report can be addressed in this agenda item. There is also the opportunity for a member of National Parks and Wildlife to be represented at this group. (p.37)

Emergency Response: 5.2 Surf Life Saving Support Operations (e.g. offshore rescue boat, RWC (jet-ski) and helicopter) resources

could formally monitor and record usage patterns on rock fishing locations as part of their normal surveillance patrols and report that information back to Surf Life Saving SurfCom or the local lifeguards to improve the knowledge and data quality for coastal usage patterns. This information could also be used to advice available resources of locations at higher risk of an incident occurring. (p.72)

5.3 An emergency response training scenario should be conducted with Sydney Branch Duty Officers/Support

Operations, Randwick lifeguard supervisors and local emergency services once a year before the commencement of the surf life saving season. (p.77)


Page 11 of 81

1. Introduction, Scope & Context 1.1 Introduction This document is a coastal public safety risk assessment and treatment plan specific to water safety related issues identified at every beach, rock platform assessed on the coastline of the Randwick LGA. The Land Managers of this area include the Randwick City Council, the National Parks and Wildlife Service (NPWS) -Office of Environment and Heritage and Crown Lands. Tragically, New South Wales (NSW) accounts for 50% of the national coastal drowning toll annually. As of 31 June 2013, there have been 340 coastal drowning deaths in NSW since 1 July 2004. The vast majority of these can be attributed to swimming/rip-currents and rock-fishing, with almost all occurring at unpatrolled locations/times, where no expert assistance is immediately available. Accidental drowning deaths in the coastal aquatic environment can be accounted for through a number of causal factors known as the ‘drowning chain’. These are: o Lack of knowledge, disregard or misunderstanding of the hazard o Uninformed or unrestricted access to the hazard o Lack of supervision or surveillance o An inability to cope once in difficulty The strategies that have been identified to address the drowning chain are: o Education and information o Denial of access, improvement of infrastructure and/or provision of warnings o Provision of supervision o Acquisition of survival skills Figure 1.1.1: The International Life Saving Federation Drowning Chain (Source: ILSF Drowning Prevention Strategies, 2008)


Page 12 of 81

This report will be fundamental in addressing the coastal drowning issue in NSW both in the short, mid and long term. The report will do this by providing a sustainable and effective drowning prevention strategy with clear evidence/data, engagement of relevant stakeholders and the application of effective risk mitigation and drowning prevention initiatives where and when they are required. It is acknowledged that land managers have many competing priorities and limited resources. Land managers should balance their water safety land management activities within the context of their broader role to provide services and facilities to meet the current future needs of their local communities as a whole, all within a limited budget. This report recognises that there are many inherent risks associated with the NSW coastline and that in most instances these risks associated with the NSW coastline cannot be eliminated and can only be managed within the operations contexts of the land manager, taking into account all of their responsibilities and available resources. This report also recognises that visitors to these areas also have a personal responsibility for their own safety and those they are responsible for. The recommendations found in the report are representative of Australian CoastSafe’s opinion in relation to risk management at the locations assessed.

1.2 Scope and Context Surf Life Saving New South Wales recently received funding as part of a NSW Government water safety initiative through the Water Safety Black Spot Fund to commence coastal public safety risk assessments on the NSW coastline (beaches and rock platforms). The program will be staged over several years with phase one to include the top ten drowning locations by (Local Government Area) in NSW. The report provides risk treatment recommendations about how to improve risk and safety management in line with current industry standards: o AS/NZS ISO 31000:2009 Risk management – Principles and Guidelines o AS2416 – 2010 Water Safety Signs and Beach Safety Flags o AS 2899(.1&.2) – 1986 Public Information Symbols Part 1 and 2 o ISO 7001:2007 Graphical symbols - Public information symbols o AS2342 – 1992 Development, Testing and Implementing of Information and Safety Symbols and Symbolic

Signs o ISO9001:2000 Quality Management Systems This coastal public safety risk assessment and treatment plan has been prepared following an on-site risk assessment undertaken by Australian CoastSafe of the Randwick LGA which commenced on Wednesday 3rd October 2012 and concluded on Thursday 11th October 2012. The assessment covered all coastal locations within the area. The assessment identifies hazards and the associated risks of the coastal environment, including but not limited to; signage, car parks, access tracks, service provision, geographical hazards, geological hazards, user groups, conflicting activities and usage. The report also identifies facilities and activities that encourage people to visit the location. The geographical scope of this assessment has been determined by the northern and southern boundaries of the Randwick LGA. All accessible coastal environments within these boundaries have been included in this report. Aquatic areas which are excluded from this assessment include all bodies of water which are not ‘coastal’ in nature under SLSA definitions, and all hazards not directly associated with the use and immediate access to the coastal aquatic environment. While recreational and commercial boating may occur in these waters the detailed assessment of hazards and their treatments specific to boating activities falls outside the scope of this report. Boat ramps and bars at river mouths that fall within the assessed areas identified in Appendix D have been assessed within the framework of the coastal public safety risk assessment process.


Page 13 of 81

Information on boating safety can be found at www.maritime.nsw.gov.au The engagement of Land Managers and other key local stakeholders was also a vital part of this risk assessment. Australian CoastSafe assessed the following in detail:

o Access locations, classifying these as formal or informal access tracks and recommending treatment

options. Signage that should be implemented, in conjunction with an audit of current signage Appendix A.

o Hazards, their potential risks, risk groups, risk scores and treatment options Appendix B.

o Public rescue equipment that should be implemented, in conjunction with an audit of current public rescue equipment Appendix C.

Other appendices include: o Coverage maps of assessed locations Appendix D.

o Survey Results Appendix E. At no time during the inspection was the water entered, they were performed from the land, along the edges of the water, along rocky outcrops, headlands, access tracks and car park access points. 1.3 Limitations The following are acknowledged as limitations of this coastal public safety risk assessment. o The absence of an agreed and recognised methodology for rating the hazardousness of rock platforms. o Difficulty in gaining feedback from all identified stakeholders. o Limited timeframes allowed for stakeholders to provide feedback on consultative draft versions of the

report as a result of the project timeframes.

1.4 Definition of Terms The following are definitions of key terms used within this report. Table 1.4.1: Glossary of terms and acronyms used in this report.

ABSAMP Australian Beach Safety And Management Program

Attendance A snapshot of the on-beach and in-water attendance taken every two hours on a daily basis

ATV All Terrain Vehicle used by lifeguards and lifesavers to patrol the beach

Coastal Waterway A coastal body of water e.g. river/creek opening

Consequence Outcome or impact of an event

Control An existing process, policy, device, practice or other action that acts to minimise negative risk or enhance positive opportunities

Emergency Action Plan A plan that outlines the procedures to be used in the event of an emergency


Page 14 of 81

Frequency A measure of the number of occurrences per unit of time

First Aid A lifesaver/lifeguard treating either a minor or major first aid incident, which may require further assistance from NSW Ambulance e.g. broken bones or stings/bites

Formal Access Formal, well maintained access ways are effective in promoting and facilitating the use of a generally safer ‘track’, effectively exposing people to the relevant safety signage/information, reducing the quality of signage required and enhancing emergency reporting/location identification.

Geomorphology Is the scientific study of landforms and the processes that shape them

Hazards A source of potential harm

Hazard Symbols A graphical symbol used together with a safety colour and safety shape to form a safety sign

Informal Access Informal access ways may create higher risk through use (uneven ground/hazards), may expose people to dangerous locations (cliffs/sink-holes), may require duplicate/multiple signage (inefficient/costly) and may make emergency location reporting difficult (location awareness).

Inherent Risk The risk that an activity would pose if no controls or other mitigating factors were in place

Lifesaving Service An organised and structured service comprised of paid lifeguards and/or volunteer lifesavers and appropriate rescue and first aid equipment supported by a coordinated backup team

Likelihood Used as a general description of probability or frequency

Modal The conditions that occur most frequently, or more often than other conditions.

Monitor To check, supervise, observe critically or measure the progress of an activity, action or system on a regular basis in order to identify change from the performance level required or expected

Peak Water Safety Agencies

A peak body is defined as a state, territory or national non-profit organisation established to cater for the needs, interests and aspirations of its members. Members may include individuals or organisations, but they will all have a common interest. Peak bodies in the water safety sector may include agencies such as Surf Life Saving, Royal Life Saving, Surf Educators Australia, Austswim, Australian Professional Ocean Lifeguard Association, Surfing NSW and the Office of Boating Safety who represent the NSW Water Safety Advisory Council as a committee member.

PRE Public Rescue Equipment (e.g. life rings)

Prevailing The conditions existing in a particular place or at a particular time

Probability A measure of the chance of occurrence expressed as a number

Preventative Action A lifesaver/lifeguard simply providing proactive direction or advice to beachgoers in a ‘preventative action’ for the beachgoer to avoid finding themselves in a position beyond their capability


Page 15 of 81

Rescue A lifesaver/lifeguard rendering direct assistance to a beachgoer in difficulty in the water

Residual Risk Risk remaining after implementation of risk treatments

Rip Current Channelled currents of water flowing away from shore, typically extending from the shoreline, through the surf zone, and past the line of breaking waves

Risk Standards Australia defines risk as the effect of uncertainty on objects (AS/NZS 31000:2009)

Risk Analysis Systematic process to understand the nature of and to the level of risk

Risk Assessment Standards Australia defines a risk assessment as the overall process of risk identification, risk analysis and risk evaluation (AS/NZS 31000:2009)

Risk Evaluation Process of comparing the level of risk against criteria

Risk Identification The process of determining what, where, when, why and how something should happen

Risk Treatment Process of selection and implementation of measures to modify risk

Risk Management Standards Australia defines risk management as coordinated activities to direct and control and organisation with regard to risk (AS/NZS 31000:2009).

Risk Register A table summarising the identified risks, the location, why it has been identified as a risk, and what current treatments are in place to lessen the risk and an overall hazard rating.

Risk Treatment Plan A table summarising how to deal with the identified risks, including a list of potential risk treatments, the risk treatments currently and any residual risk.

RWC Rescue Water Craft used by lifeguards and lifesavers. More commonly known as jetskis

Stakeholders Those people and organisations who may affect, be affected, or perceive themselves to be affected by a decision, activity or risk

1.5 Project Team Adam Weir – Coastal Risk Manager Australian CoastSafe Surf Life Saving New South Wales Ph: 02-9471 8000 | F: 02-9471 8001 E: [email protected] W: www.coastsafe.org.au/blueprint Coastal Risk Officers: Stuart Massey, Coastal Risk Officer, 0406 353 344, [email protected] Luke Stigter, Coastal Risk Officer, 0409 075 620, [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.coastsafe.org.au/blueprint




Page 16 of 81

2. Assessment Methodology 2.1 Introduction The methodology included site identification, site inspection, hazard identification, data analysis, beach hazard ratings, beach identification, facility visitation ratings, facilities, beach usage, incident data, communication and consultation. 2.2 Site Identification The map on the next page provides an overview of the locations within the Randwick LGA subject to the coastal risk assessment. The specific locations can be referenced in Appendix D. The area includes locations and/or facilities under the administration of: o Randwick City Council o NPWS

Kamay Botany Bay National Park o Crown Lands The assessment identifies hazards and the associated risks of the coastal environment and includes signage, car parks, access tracks, service provision, geographical hazards, geological hazards, user groups, conflicting activities and usage. The report also identifies facilities and activities that encourage people to visit the location. The geographical scope of this assessment has been determined by the northern and southern boundaries of the Randwick LGA. All accessible coastal environments within these boundaries have been included in this report. Aquatic areas which are excluded from this assessment include all bodies of water which are not ‘coastal’ in nature under SLSA definitions, and all hazards not directly associated with the use and immediate access to the coastal aquatic environment.


Page 17 of 81

Figure 2.2.1: Randwick City Council overview of beach locations


Page 18 of 81

2.3 Site Inspection Site visits were completed on the following dates. Table 2.3.1: Site locations and the dates of assessment:

Location Date

Shark Point Wednesday 3rd October 2012

Clovelly Wednesday 3rd October 2012

Clovelly Pool Car Park Wednesday 3rd October 2012

Gordon's Bay Wednesday 3rd October 2012

Dunningham Reserve Rock Platform Wednesday 3rd October 2012

Dolphin Point Wednesday 3rd October 2012

Coogee Wednesday 3rd October 2012

Grant Reserve Rock Platform Thursday 4th October 2012

Trenerry Reserve Rock Platform Thursday 4th October 2012

South Coogee Rock Platforms Thursday 4th October 2012

Lurline Bay Friday 5th October 2012

Mahon Pool Rock Platform Thursday 4th October 2012

The Stake Rock Platform Thursday 4th October 2012

Maroubra Wednesday 3rd October 2012

South Maroubra Thursday 4th October 2012

Little Greenie Monday 8th October 2012

Shooting Range Rock Platform Monday 8th October 2012

Yellow Rock Tuesday 9th October 2012

Malabar/Long Bay Tuesday 9th October 2012

Julieann Rocks Tuesday 9th October 2012

Little Bay 1 Wednesday 10th October 2012

Little Bay 2 Wednesday 10th October 2012

The Gutter Wednesday 10th October 2012

The Trap Wednesday 10th October 2012

Jolong Rocks Wednesday 10th October 2012

Cape Banks - North Wednesday 10th October 2012

Cape Banks - East Wednesday 10th October 2012

Cape Banks - West Wednesday 10th October 2012

Cruwe Cove Wednesday 10th October 2012

Henry Head Wednesday 10th October 2012

Little Congwong Bay Wednesday 10th October 2012

Congwong Bay Wednesday 10th October 2012

Bare Island Thursday 11th October 2012


Page 19 of 81

2.4 Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment During the site inspection hazards were identified within the area inspected and assessed in terms of their individual risk to public safety (extreme, high, medium, low) using a risk assessment matrix Appendix B. The risk assessment matrix considers both the type of harm that could be sustained as a result of an individual hazard and the likelihood of this harm actually occurring. Hazards/Risks Though outlined in more detail within the report and appendices, the Randwick LGA holds a number of consistent hazards due to the geography and high energy nature of the area. Based on the risk assessment in Appendix B, these are the hazards that have been rated with the greatest inherent risk for the Randwick LGA: Strong ocean currents/rip currents: As a result of wave action and beach type Strong tidal current/river mouth: As a result of wave action and tidal conditions Waves/waves over washing: As a result of model wave height and exposure to ocean swells Inshore holes/deep water: As a result of coastal processes, wave action and beach type Slippery rocks/surface: As a result of coastal geography/break walls and wave action Shallow sandbanks/shore dump: As a result of coastal process, wave action and beach type Submerged rocks: As a result of coastal geography and sand movement Cliffs: As a result of coastal geography Rock shelves/platforms/reefs: As a result of coastal geography Surfing collision: As a result of human interaction Dangerous access/uneven surface: As a result of coastal geography Based on the risk analysis of these hazards, it has been identified that they pose risk to the following types of recreational users: Strong ocean currents/rip currents: Swimmers, surf craft users, fishermen, rock platform users Strong tidal current/river mouth: Swimmers, surf craft users, fishermen, break wall users, boaters Waves/waves over washing: Swimmers, surf craft users, fishermen, rock platform users Inshore holes/deep water: Swimmers, fishermen Slippery rocks/surface: Fishermen, rock platform users, walkers Shallow sandbanks/shore dump: Swimmers, surf craft users Submerged rocks: Swimmers, surf craft users, fishermen Cliffs: Fishermen, walkers, sight seers Rock shelves/platforms/reefs: Surf craft users, fishermen, rock platform users Surfing collision: Swimmers, surf craft users, boaters Dangerous access/uneven surface: Swimmers, surf craft users, fishermen, rock platform users 2.5 Data Analysis Data relevant to this risk assessment has been considered in the production of the report. These include: o Australian Beach Safety and Management Program (ABSAMP) o Australian Bureau of Statistics –Census data o Volunteer lifesaving and paid lifeguard statistics o BeachSafe (2012) www.beachsafe.org.au o NSW Tourism Statistics o Rock Fishing Review - Bradstreet et al, (2012) – Research Review of Rock Fishing in New South Wales. Surf

Life Saving Australia: Sydney). o SLSA Incident Reporting Database (IRD)


Page 20 of 81

2.6 Beach Hazard Ratings and Overview The ABSAMP (Australian Beach Safety and Management Programme) was developed by Professor Andrew Short from the University of Sydney - Coastal Studies Unit in conjunction with Surf Life Saving Australia. The programme has identified coastal hazards that affect members of the public and rates the safety of the beach on a scale of one to ten, where one (1) is the least hazardous and ten (10) is the most hazardous. The beach hazard ratings and definitions are provided in the following table. Table 2.6.1: ABSAMP Beach Hazard Ratings

The beach hazard rating is calculated by determining the beach type and wave height. This can be done under either modal (average) or prevailing (current) conditions. The beach hazard rating is then calculated by using the following table: Table 2.6.2: Beach hazard rating calculation matrices for wave dominate beaches.

Wave Height

Beach Type

< 0.5 (m)

0.5 (m) 1.0 (m) 1.5 (m) 2.0 (m) 2.5 (m) 3.0 (m) > 3.0 (m)

Dissipative 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 10

Long Shore Bar Trough

4 5 6 7 7 8 9 10

Rhythmic Bar Beach

4 5 6 6 7 8 9 10

Transverse Bar Rip

4 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Low Tide Terrace 3 3 4 5 6 7 8 10

Reflective 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10

The beach hazard ratings presented in this report relate to modal beach conditions and as such the hazard rating of a beach may increase when conditions alter e.g. with increasing wave height, winds, strong tides and high tide. Furthermore, a hazard rating is also applied to an average person and therefore depending upon an individual's own skill, understanding and competence in relation to a certain area the hazard may in fact be greater or less. The ABSAMP hazard ratings for the inspected areas of Randwick LGA are detailed within the next section of the report.

Hazard Rating Details

1 - 3

Least Hazardous: Low danger posed by water depth and/or weak currents; however, supervision still required, in particular for children and poor swimmers.

4 - 6

Moderately Hazardous: The level of hazard depends on wave and weather conditions, with the possibility of strong rips and currents posing a moderate risk.

7 - 8

Highly Hazardous: Experience in strong surf, rips and currents required, with beaches in this category considered dangerous.

9 - 10

Extremely Hazardous: Identifies beaches that are considered extremely dangerous due to strong rips and currents, and large breakers.


Page 21 of 81

2.7 ABSAMP Beach Types and Ratings The ABSAMP hazard rating for the assessed beaches and rock platforms is listed in table 2.6.1. The table provides an ABSAMP rating and descriptive label/name type for each specific beach location. Table 2.7.1: ABSAMP Beach Hazard Ratings – Randwick Local Government Area.

Location Name ABSAMP No. Rating Type

Shark Point nsw323rp 3* Rock Platform

Clovelly nsw324 2 Reflective

Clovelly Pool Car Park nsw324rp 3* Rock Platform

Gordon's Bay nsw325 3 Reflective

Dunningham Reserve Rock Platform nsw325rpa 4* Rock Platform

Dolphin Point nsw325rpb 4* Rock Platform

Coogee nsw326 4 Reflective

Grant Reserve Rock Platform nsw326rpa 6* Rock Platform

Trenerry Reserve Rock Platform nsw326rpb 6* Rock Platform

South Coogee Rock Platforms nsw326rpc 6* Rock Platform

Lurline Bay nsw326rpd 6* Rock Platform

Mahon Pool Rock Platform nsw326rpe 6* Rock Platform

The Stake Rock Platform nsw326rpf 6* Rock Platform

Maroubra nsw327a 7 Transverse Bar And Rip

South Maroubra nsw327b 6 Transverse Bar And Rip

Little Greenie nsw327brpa 5* Rock Platform

Shooting Range Rock Platform nsw327brpb 5* Rock Platform

Yellow Rock nsw327brpc 5* Rock Platform

Malabar/Long Bay nsw328 3 Reflective

Julieann Rocks nsw328rp1 3* Rock Platform

Little Bay 1 nsw329 2 Reflective

Little Bay 2 nsw330 2 Reflective

The Gutter nsw330rp1 3* Rock Platform

The Trap nsw330rp2 3* Rock Platform

Jolong Rocks nsw330rp3 3* Rock Platform

Cape Banks - North nsw330rp4 3* Rock Platform

Cape Banks - East nsw330rp5 3* Rock Platform

Cape Banks - West nsw330rp6 3* Rock Platform

Cruwe Cove nsw330rp7 3* Rock Platform

Henry Head nsw330rp8 3* Rock Platform

Little Congwong Bay nsw331 3 Reflective

Congwong Bay nsw332 3 Reflective

Bare Island nsw332rp1 3* Rock Platform


Page 22 of 81

* Randwick City Council Local Government Area Rock Platform Ratings Currently there is no method of rating the hazardousness of the rocky coast, in an equivalent manner to the ABSAMP beach hazard rating system for sandy beaches. Research is currently underway; Dr. David Kennedy has utilised a grant from Melbourne University to pilot the methods for the development of a risk classification study on rocky coasts. The results from this pilot are being used for an Australian Research Council grant application this month. Prof. Colin Woodroffe (University of Wollongong) has recently presented the methodology for this project at the NSW Coastal Conference in Kiama (November, 2012). As an interim method of providing an indication of the hazardousness of rock platforms the ABSAMP beach hazard ratings for the beaches on either side of the each rock platform have been averaged. Since the beaches on either side of a rock platform would be exposed to similar prevailing and modal wind, wave and weather conditions and these sandy beaches have a recognised and accepted method of rating the associated hazardousness taking the average of the beaches bordering a rock platform will provide an indication as to the potential hazard associated with the modal conditions affecting the rock platform. It is a limitation of the report that there is no available method of calculating the specific hazard rating of a rock platform. However, in order to allow the risk calculations used in this report to be processed an interim solution has been applied which takes into account the local conditions and geomorphology. Due to the history of drownings in the assessed area CoastSafe acknowledges the limitations of rating rock platforms with protected low rated beaches either side giving them an averaged low rating. Once the research being conducted by Dr. David Kennedy and Prof. Colin Woodroffe is completed then these calculations should be revisited.

Treatment Option 3.1 Research currently being conducted by the University of Melbourne, University of Wollongong and Surf Life Saving Australia into a rocky coast classification model and hazard rating system for rocky coast should be commended and supported. Once this research is completed the calculations related to rocky coasts in this report should be reviewed.


Page 23 of 81

2.8 ABSAMP Beach Type Characteristic Overview and Hazards Each location and their beach characteristics and associated hazards are as follows. Transverse Bar and Rip o Maroubra o South Maroubra Figure 2.8.1: Transverse Bar and Rip

Transverse bar and rip type is the most common and extensive of Australia’s wave-dominated beach types. They occur primarily on beaches composed of fine to medium sand (0.3 mm) and exposed to waves averaging 1.5m. This beach type received its name from the fact that the bars are transverse or perpendicular to and attached to the beach, separated by deeper rip channels. Waves tend to break more on the bars and move shoreward as wave bores. This water flows both directly into the adjacent rip channel and, closer to the beach, into the rip feeder channels located at

the base of the beach. The water in the rip feeders converge and return seaward as a strong rip current. Reflective o Clovelly o Gordon's Bay o Coogee o Malabar/Long Bay o Little Bay 1 o Little Bay 2 o Little Congwong Bay o Congwong Bay Figure 2.8.2: Reflective

Reflective sandy beaches lie at the lower energy end of the wave-dominated beach spectrum. They are characterised by relatively steep, narrow beaches usually composed of coarser sand (0.4 mm). On the open Australian coast, sandy beaches require waves to be less than 0.5 m to be reflective. For this reason they are also found inside the entrance to bays, at the lower energy end of some ocean beaches and in lee of the reefs and islets that front many beaches. Reflective beaches are Australia's most common beach type occurring in every state though they are more common around the southern half of the

continent. Reflective beach morphology consists of the steeper, narrow beach and swash zone, with beach cusps commonly present in the upper high tide swash zone. They have no bar or surf zone as waves move unbroken to the shore, where they collapse or surge up the beach face.

Rock Platform o Henry Head o Shark Point o Clovelly Pool Car Park o Dunningham Reserve Rock Platform o Dolphin Point o Grant Reserve Rock Platform o Trenerry Reserve Rock Platform o South Coogee Rock Platforms o Lurline Bay o Mahon Pool Rock Platform


Page 24 of 81

o The Stake Rock Platform o Little Greenie o Shooting Range Rock Platform o Yellow Rock o Julieann Rocks o The Gutter o The Trap o Jolong Rocks o Cape Banks - North o Cape Banks - East o Cape Banks - West o Cruwe Cove o Bare Island


Page 25 of 81

2.9 Facility Visitation Rates (FVR) The Facility Visitation Rate (FVR) is a term, which has been developed to provide a quantitative assessment that can be used to determine the most appropriate signage schedule for a facility (venue or location). The FVR is calculated using data collected during the assessment process and includes site population use and frequency of use. As the FVR calculation is used to determine aquatic recreational warning signage requirements the figures used are those of the peak period of beach usage. The following calculation is derived using: 1. Stakeholder observation, consultation and feedback relative to the table values outlined 2. Historical statistical data, and; 3. Utilisation of the Facility Visitation Rate (FVR) formula, where:

Facility Visitation Rate = (Development Rating x Population) + Frequency Facility Visitation Rating (FVR) Reference Tables Table 2.9.1: Typical Development and Natural Hazards Rating for Reserves – non beach environments

Rating Development Natural Hazards

1 Virginal bush, cleared land, no infrastructure No hazardous features

2 Cleared land, static infrastructure e.g. grass area with tables and chairs, toilet block, lookout

Sloping ground; no natural water; walking track around reserve

3 Cleared land with mobile infrastructure e.g. grassed area with play equipment, cycleway, market, leash free

dog areas

Reserve contains natural waterway that runs during wet weather, drops less

than 1 metre

4 Land manager owned infrastructure with no artificial lighting e.g. golf course, football field, recreational

ground, caravan park

Creeks, ponds and ledges between 1 metre and 3 metres

5 Extensively developed infrastructure with artificial lighting e.g. sporting complex, artificially lit courts

Contains rivers, dams and cliffs greater than 3 metres

Table 2.9.2: Typical development ratings for beaches.

Rating Development

1 Beach hazard rating 1 and 2





Table 2.9.3: A typical population use within a facility provided by Land Managers.

Rating Population Use

1 Less than 5 people at a time

2 5 to 50 people at a time



5 Greater than 500 people at a time

Table 2.9.4: Suggested Frequency of use rating for a Facility

Rating Frequency of Use

1 An annual activity or event in held at the facility

2 An activity event takes place in the facility on a monthly basis

3 An activity event takes place in the facility on a weekly basis

4 An activity event takes place in the facility on a daily basis

5 The facility is in continuous use for the majority of the day


Page 26 of 81

Table 2.9.5: Facility visitation rate calculations for the assessed locations.

Location Name DEVELOPMENT RATING

* POPULATION + FREQUENCY = FVR

Shark Point 3 * 2 + 3 = 9

Clovelly 1 * 4 + 4 = 8

Clovelly Pool Car Park 2 * 2 + 3 = 7

Gordon's Bay 2 * 4 + 4 = 12

Dunningham Reserve Rock Platform 2 * 2 + 3 = 7

Dolphin Point 2 * 2 + 3 = 7

Coogee 2 * 5 + 4 = 14

Grant Reserve Rock Platform 3 * 2 + 3 = 9

Trenerry Reserve Rock Platform 3 * 2 + 3 = 9

South Coogee Rock Platforms 3 * 2 + 3 = 9

Lurline Bay 3 * 2 + 3 = 9

Mahon Pool Rock Platform 3 * 2 + 3 = 9

The Stake Rock Platform 3 * 2 + 3 = 9

Maroubra 4 * 5 + 4 = 24

South Maroubra 3 * 5 + 4 = 19

Little Greenie 3 * 2 + 3 = 9

Shooting Range Rock Platform 3 * 2 + 3 = 9

Yellow Rock 3 * 2 + 3 = 9

Malabar/Long Bay 2 * 3 + 3 = 9

Julieann Rocks 2 * 2 + 3 = 7

Little Bay 1 1 * 2 + 3 = 5

Little Bay 2 1 * 3 + 3 = 6

The Gutter 2 * 2 + 3 = 7

The Trap 2 * 2 + 3 = 7

Jolong Rocks 2 * 2 + 3 = 7

Cape Banks - North 2 * 2 + 3 = 7

Cape Banks - East 2 * 2 + 3 = 7

Cape Banks - West 2 * 2 + 3 = 7

Cruwe Cove 2 * 2 + 3 = 7

Henry Head 2 * 2 + 3 = 7

Little Congwong Bay 2 * 3 + 3 = 9

Congwong Bay 2 * 3 + 3 = 9

Bare Island 2 * 2 + 3 = 7

Given the FVR scores, shown in the above table, listed below is an outline of the most appropriate sign characteristics pertinent to each location: FVR Score between 7 and 10 Locations include: o Shark Point o Clovelly o Clovelly Pool Car Park o Dunningham Reserve Rock Platform o Dolphin Point o Grant Reserve Rock Platform o Trenerry Reserve Rock Platform o South Coogee Rock Platforms o Lurline Bay o Mahon Pool Rock Platform o The Stake Rock Platform o Little Greenie


Page 27 of 81

o Shooting Range Rock Platform o Yellow Rock o Malabar/Long Bay o Julieann Rocks o The Gutter o The Trap o Jolong Rocks o Cape Banks - North o Cape Banks - East o Cape Banks - West o Cruwe Cove o Henry Head o Little Congwong Bay o Congwong Bay o Bare Island This score would generally indicate that where access cannot be controlled, entrances to the beach provided by Land Managers have signage spaced no greater than 500 metres apart around the beach perimeter. Additionally the signage should contain the following: o The name of the facility o A general warning message o Ordinances that apply to the facility should appear on the sign as prohibition pictograms o All potential hazards identified within the facility that have a risk rating of high should appear on the sign as

warning symbols. If no highs then the top hazard should appear o Any information symbols relevant to the facility

FVR Score between 7 and 15 Locations include: o Gordon's Bay o Coogee This score would generally indicate that where access cannot be controlled, entrances to the beach provided by council have signage and spaced no greater than 500 metres apart around the beach perimeter. Additionally the signage should contain the following: o The name of the facility o A general warning message o All Council's Ordinances that apply to the facility should appear on the sign as prohibition pictograms o All potential hazards identified within the facility that have a risk rating of HIGH should appear on the sign

as warning symbols. If no highs then the top hazard should appear o Any information symbols relevant to the facility Signage should appear at all entrances provided by Council to the facility. Consideration should be given to placing signs in other areas of high use. FVR Score between 16 and 20 Locations include: o South Maroubra This score would generally indicate that where access cannot be controlled, entrances to the beach provided by council have signage and spaced no greater than 250 metres apart around the beach perimeter. Additionally the signage should contain the following: o The name of the beach o All council ordinances that apply to the venue should appear on the sign as prohibition pictograms o Hazards rated from medium to high should be identified on the sign and listed in order from highest to

lowest hazardous


Page 28 of 81

Signage should appear at all entrances provided by Council to the facility. Consideration should be given to placing signs in other areas of high use. FVR Score between 21 and 25 Locations include: o Maroubra This score would generally indicate that where access cannot be controlled, entrances to the beach provided by council have signage and spaced no greater than 100 metres apart around the beach perimeter. Additionally the signage should contain the following: o The name of the beach o All council ordinances that apply to the venue should appear on the sign as prohibition pictograms o Hazards rated from medium to high should be identified on the sign and listed in order from highest to

lowest hazardous Signage should appear at all entrances provided by Council to the facility. Consideration should be given to placing signs in other areas of high use.


Page 29 of 81

2.10 Facilities Audit Facilities in the coastal risk management process are any item of infrastructure which is situated close to the beach/access points. These include but are not limited to: o Picnic areas o BBQ’s o Playgrounds o Benches o Showers/water taps o Amenities o Car parks o Caravan parks o Art infrastructure o Rubbish bins o Boat Ramps Why do we record facilities? Facilities are recorded because it is important for the Land Manager to recognise that by providing the above facilities it is expected that there will be an increase in people visiting these areas. This increase can correlate to the likelihood of a risk occurring in a coastal environment. Treatment plans identified in the report should be implemented in these areas to reduce the risk of a particular event occurring. Facilities as well as other local attractions are included in risk management and while these facilities or local attractions may, in isolation, increase the likelihood of a particular risk occurring, they may be offset by other factors such as the type of visitor who is going to a particular location. All factors relating to a risk are assessed as a whole and not in isolation when determining the level of risk. It is the level of risk and not the type of facilities (in isolation to other factors) that is used when determining if a risk treatment is required A breakdown of facilities at the assessed locations within the Randwick LGA can be requested by the Land Managers if required.


Page 30 of 81

2.11 Beach Usage & Incident Statistics Beach Statistics The following statistics have been taken from the lifesaving and lifeguard services operating in the Randwick LGA. Figures are the statistics over the last 3 seasons (2011/12, 2010/11, 2009/10). Surf Life Saving Clubs Table 2.11.1: Surf Life Saving Club statistics for 2009 to 2012 (SurfGuard, 2013)

Season Activity Clovelly Coogee Maroubra South Maroubra

Total

2009-2010 Rescues 10 12 109 101 232

Preventions 39 656 4130 4991 9816

First aid 563 457 568 301 1889

Attendance 43822 219987 188044 55017 506870

2010-2011 Rescues 11 177 222 216 626

Preventions 54 1422 5746 2872 10094

First aid 329 1957 2296 1336 5918

Attendance 38444 210235 206184 54491 509354

2011-2012 Rescues 4 53 386 273 716

Preventions 48 2090 9951 3039 15128

First aid 237 429 208 129 1003

Attendance 40566 268897 232654 57807 599924

Randwick City Council Lifeguards Table 2.11.2: Lifeguard statistics for 2009 to 2012 (RCC, 2013)

Season Activity Clovelly Coogee Maroubra Total

2009-2010 Rescues 28 70 129 254

Preventions 2124 5503 5045 21784

First aid 1334 2144 1202 5055

Attendance 1841651 4014665 3220575 8194491

2010-2011 Rescues 28 88 356 472

Preventions 2561 6086 9473 18120

First aid 1404 3198 2205 6807

Attendance 2234870 4144575 2940496 9319941

2011-2012 Rescues 15 53 290 358

Preventions 1981 5874 10879 18734

First aid 928 2813 2266 6007

Attendance 1396662 4051050 2669950 8117662

Table 2.11.3: Lifeguard staffing levels for 2009 to 2012 (RCC, 2013)

Season Fulltime Casuals Total

2009-2010 6 10 16

2010-2011 8 8 16

2011-2012 8 8 16


Page 31 of 81

The above table is based on the figures entered into the SurfGuard system and figures supplied by Randwick City Council. CoastSafe is not liable for the accuracy of the data entered. Definitions and recording of rescues versus preventative actions may vary between lifesavers and lifeguards. Population Statistics This table shows that over a ten year period, population in the Randwick Local Government Area has grown by 10,022 (8.24%). Population growth in the LGA is expected to continue to increase (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2011). Table 2.11.4: Population growth over time within the Randwick LGA (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2011).

Randwick LGA Population Growth

2001 Census 2006 Census 2011 Census

Total Persons Males Females Persons Males Females Persons Males Females Persons

59,448 62,049 121,497 60,080 62,094 122,174 64,466 67,053 131,519

Drowning Incidents Below are the coastal drowning deaths that have occurred in the Randwick City Council LGA between 1 July 2004 and 15

th January 2013 (SLSNSW Incident Reporting Database).

Table 2.11.5: Coastal drowning deaths that have occurred in the Randwick City Council LGA between 1 July 2004 and 15

th January 2013 (SLSNSW Incident Reporting Database)

Date Location Time Month Age / Gender

Ethnicity Residential Status

Activity

27/07/04 Lurline Bay 17:30 Jul 60 / M Australian Resident Rock Fishing

16/10/04 Henry Head 15:00 Oct 21 / M Unknown Resident Rock Fishing

18/10/04 La Perouse Unknown Oct 21 / M Unknown Unknown Rock Fishing

28/10/05 Maroubra Unknown Oct 24 / M Iraq Resident Unknown

1/02/06 Cape Banks 10:00 Feb 45 / M Japan Resident Rock Fishing

25/02/06 South Maroubra 14:10 Feb 70 / F Ukraine Resident Swimming

8/09/06 Coogee 17:20 Sep 27 / M Australian Resident surfcraft

7/10/06 Malabar 14:55 Oct 36 / M Vietnamese Resident Rock Fishing

29/10/06 Coogee 19:30 Oct 22 / M Irish Tourist (int.) Swimming

14/11/06 Maroubra 13:00 Nov 52 / M Australian Resident Rock Related

1/01/07 Little Bay 18:45 Jan 7 / M Australian Resident Swimming

13/04/07 La Perouse 8:00 Apr 60 / M Australian Resident Rock Fishing

28/11/07 Gordon's Bay 9:00 Nov 49 / F Malaysian Resident Unknown

15/12/07 Clovelly 14:30 Dec 35 / M Unknown Resident Rock Related

20/01/08 Lurline Bay 18:30 Jan 22 / F Australian Resident Rock Related

20/01/08 Lurline Bay 18:30 Jan 25 / M Australian Resident Rock Related

5/02/08 Maroubra Unknown Feb 20 / M Tongan Resident Swimming

7/04/08 Mahon Pool 14:25 Apr 51 / M Ethnic Resident Rock Fishing

2/05/08 Malabar 15:45 May 25 / M Chinese Resident Rock Fishing

7/07/08 Yellow Rock 10:20 Jul 25 / M Chinese Resident Rock Fishing

1/02/09 Gordon's Bay 10:00 Feb N/A / M Chinese Resident Rock Fishing

27/05/09 Little Bay 13:00 May 44 / M European Resident Rock Fishing

19/05/10 Coogee 14:00 May 47 / F Pacific Islander Resident Swimming

25/01/11 Maroubra 20:15 Jan 28 / F Indian Resident Swimming

1/02/11 South Maroubra 15:00 Feb 20 / M Lebanese Resident Swimming

13/09/11 Long Bay 7:45 Sep 20's / M Asian Resident Rock Fishing

28/01/12 Maroubra 16:30 Jan 40's / M Asian Resident Rock Fishing

25/02/12 Maroubra 18:00 Feb 26 / M Unknown Unknown Diving/Snorkelling

31/03/12 Little Bay 9:00 Mar 49 / M Asian Resident Rock Fishing

6/05/12 Clovelly 0:00 May 50 / F Middle Eastern Unknown Unknown

18/07/12 La Perouse 10:49 Jul 25 / M Middle Eastern Resident Rock Fishing

26/07/12 Coogee 13:16 Jul NA/ F Unknown Unknown Unknown


Page 32 of 81

Date Location Time Month Age / Gender

Ethnicity Residential Status

Activity

11/11/12 Little Bay 9:45 Nov 39 / M Asian Resident Rock Fishing

18/11/12 Bare Island 10:05 Nov 27 / M Australian Resident Diving/Snorkeling

10/01/13 Little Bay 15:39 Jan 60 / M Asian Unknown Rock Fishing

Notes to table: o 49% of drowning deaths were a result of rock fishing o 20% of drowning deaths were a result of swimming/rip currents o The average age for drowning deaths is 35.5 years. o 86% of the victims were males. o 73% of drownings were during lifeguard / lifesaving hours of operation Environmental Risk Factors (Variable) The nature of the coastal environment in the assessment area, combined with recreational activity types and locations has identified specific location ‘black spots’ for emergency incidents and drowning deaths. While data surrounding incident location/time has been referenced, specific environmental conditions at the time of incidents have not been adequately assessed to identify causal factors and specific trends. This information exists and is held in raw format by the Bureau of Meteorology (BOM), including wave height/direction, tides, wind speed/direction, temperature, and visibility. Review and assessment of this data, may identify environmental trends which may encourage/discourage recreational activities, impact hazard/risk perception and risk taking behaviour, identify higher-risk conditions for types of localities and specific ‘black spot’ locations themselves. Improvements to Dangerous Surf Warnings and education/awareness programs may be improved as a result. Emergency Callouts There have been 87 Emergency callouts through the Surf Rescue Emergency Response System (SRERS) since 1 January 2008. This system involves callout/response teams (lifesavers/lifeguards) responding to emergencies in the assessment area, at the request and under the direction/control of the NSW Police (SLSNSW State Operations Centre). Table 2.11.6: SRERS call outs within Randwick LGA since 1 January 2008 to 30 Jan 2013 (SLSA Incident Reporting Database, 2013)

Randwick LGA Emergency Call Outs

Date Location Month Season Day Time Activity

15/01/2008 Sth Maroubra Beach January Summer Tue 20:01 Surfcraft

20/01/2008 Maroubra Beach January Summer Sun 18:00 Swimming

19/04/2008 Wedding Cake Island April Autumn Sat 17:55 Rock Related

21/04/2008 Wileys Bathes, Coogee Beach April Autumn Mon 18:55 Other

6/05/2008 Lurline Bay May Autumn Tue 15:50 Diving/Snorkeling

18/09/2008 Offshore Maroubra Beach September Spring Thu 13:10 Vessel

26/10/2008 Coogee Beach October Spring Sun 15:33 Diving/Snorkeling

14/12/2008 Gordan's Bay, nth of Coogee December Summer Sun 20:07 Swimming

1/02/2009 Gordon's Bay February Summer Sun 13:39 Diving/Snorkeling

9/02/2009 Coogee Beach February Summer Mon 18:16 Swimming

27/04/2009 Rock Pools, Coogee April Autumn Mon 9:05 Swimming

25/04/2009 South Coogee April Autumn Sat 13:48 Surfcraft

27/05/2009 Little bay in vicinity of Golf Course May Autumn Wed 13:15 Rockfishing

19/05/2009 Gordon's Bay May Autumn Tue 10:53 Self-harm

27/06/2009 Coogee, Wedding Cake Island June Winter Sat 17:40 Surfcraft

13/07/2009 Coogee July Winter Mon 11:26 Swimming

20/09/2009 Clovelly September Spring Sun 18:30 Self-harm


Page 33 of 81



24/09/2009 Gordons Bay September Spring Thu 14:32 Self-harm

27/09/2009 1km sth of Bare Island, La Perouse September Spring Sun 12:52 Other

8/12/2009 Offshore Maroubra Rifle Range December Summer Tue 15:39 Diving/Snorkeling

21/12/2009 Shark Point, Clovelly December Summer Mon 15:02 Rock Related

2/02/2010 Clovelly February Summer Tue 13:43 Swimming

10/02/2010 Clovelly February Summer Wed 17:34 Swimming

20/03/2010 Bear Island Foot Bridge, La Perouse March Autumn Sat 19:01 Diving/Snorkeling

4/04/2010 Coogee April Autumn Sun 15:33 Surfcraft

8/05/2010 Wedding Cake Island May Autumn Sat 11:16 Rock Related

19/05/2010 Coogee Beach May Autumn Wed 13:45 Self-harm

23/05/2010 Weeding Cake Island May Autumn Sun 16:54 Rock Related

25/06/2010 Wylies Baths, Coogee June Winter Fri 13:32 Diving/Snorkeling

16/07/2010 Offshore Maroubra Beach July Winter Fri 23:44 Vessel

27/07/2010 Cape Banks, Botany Bay July Winter Tue 15:19 Vessel

25/09/2010 Malabar September Spring Sat 6:43 Rockfishing

25/09/2010 Wedding Cake Island September Spring Sat 17:08 Surfcraft

2/01/2011 South Maroubra January Summer Sun 16:17 Rockfishing

25/01/2011 Maroubra January Summer Tue 20:32 Swimming

29/01/2011 Coogee January Summer Sat 20:32 Rock Related

29/01/2011 Coogee January Summer Sat 20:41 Swimming

3/04/2011 Botany Bay April Autumn Sun 16:40 Vessel

19/03/2011 Little Bay March Autumn Sat 13:50 Swimming

3/04/2011 Coogee April Autumn Sun 14:45 Diving/Snorkeling

26/04/2011 Bushland, La Perouse April Autumn Tue 1:50 Rockfishing

29/04/2011 Yellow Rock, Sth Maroubra April Autumn Fri 15:00 Rockfishing

30/04/2011 Coogee April Autumn Sat 15:57 Self-harm

7/05/2011 Clovelly May Autumn Sat 8:17 Vessel

19/05/2011 Coogee Beach May Autumn Thu 18:22 Rock Related

26/06/2011 Coogee June Winter Sun 9:53 Vessel

17/09/2011 Bay Parade, Malabar September Spring Sat 10:56 Swimming

13/09/2011 Long Bay September Spring Tue 7:53 Rockfishing

18/09/2011 Coogee Bay September Spring Sun 17:12 Swimming

18/09/2011 Little Bay September Spring Sun 11:53 Vessel

15/12/2011 Clovelly December Summer Thu 13:55 Self-harm

1/01/2012 Little Bay January Summer Sun 16:37 Rockfishing

15/01/2012 Wedding Cake Island January Summer Sun 20:37 Surfcraft

28/01/2012 Maroubra January Summer Sat 16:38 Swimming

6/02/2012 Coogee February Summer Mon 17:33 Swimming

12/03/2012 Malabar March Autumn Mon 20:13 Rockfishing

4/04/2012 Long Bay April Autumn Wed 14:50 Vessel

7/04/2012 La Perouse April Autumn Sat 11:27 Diving/Snorkeling

8/04/2012 Port Botany April Autumn Sun 20:21 Swimming

17/04/2012 Little Bay April Autumn Tue 13:30 Other

22/04/2012 Coogee Bombora April Autumn Sun 17:15 Surfcraft

22/04/2012 Maroubra April Autumn Sun 8:26 Vessel

25/04/2012 Gordons Bay April Autumn Wed 10:12 Self-harm

26/04/2012 Maroubra April Autumn Thu 19:01 Self-harm

28/04/2012 Coogee Beach April Autumn Sat 14:45 Diving/Snorkeling

1/05/2012 South Maroubra May Autumn Tue 13:58 Rockfishing

9/06/2012 Bear Island June Winter Sat 12:31 Diving/Snorkeling

16/06/2012 Rock Pool Maroubra June Winter Sat 10:50 Rockfishing

16/06/2012 Coogee June Winter Sat 23:03 Swimming

5/07/2012 Northern Headland, Coogee July Winter Thu 14:01 Self-harm


Page 34 of 81



18/07/2012 La Perouse July Winter Wed 10:49 Rockfishing

26/07/2012 Coogee South Headland July Winter Thu 13:16 Self-harm

20/08/2012 Maroubra Beach August Winter Mon 18:26 Self-harm

21/10/2012 Maroubra October Spring Sun 2:50 Other

24/10/2012 Coogee October Spring Wed 12:07 Swimming

4/11/2012 Cape Banks November Spring Sun 18:50 Other

18/11/2012 Bare Island November Spring Sun 10:05 Diving/Snorkeling

25/11/2012 Maroubra - 3NM East November Spring Sun 1:29 Vessel

4/12/2012 Malabar Golf Course December Summer Tue 15:10 Diving/Snorkeling

5/12/2012 Cape Banks December Summer Wed 14:41 Vessel

27/12/2012 Bare Island, Botany Bay December Summer Thu 18:27 Diving/Snorkeling

10/01/2013 Little Bay January Summer Thu 15:39 Rockfishing

15/01/2013 Little Bay January Summer Tue 8:58 Rockfishing

20/01/2013 Bare Island, Botany Bay January Summer Sun 9:08 Vessel

26/01/2013 Giles Rock Baths January Summer Sat

26/01/2013 Gordons Bay January Summer Sat

28/01/2013 Lurline Bay January Summer Mon

Notes to table: o 19.5% of call outs were a result of rockfishing / rock related o 36% Autumn, 31% Summer 18% Spring 15% Winter o 20% of call outs were a result of swimming/rip currents o 29% of call outs were outside of normal operating hours

Treatment Options 1.1 & 2.1 Beach usage and incident data (drowning incidents, emergency callouts, lifesaving and lifeguard statistics should be used when making informed decisions about the implementation of risk treatments for coastal public safety.

Treatment Options 4.1 A review be commissioned to analyse the historical environmental conditions at the time of recorded drowning deaths where the Bureau of Meteorology is able to supply data. Such a report should identify the relevant trends and causal factors.


Page 35 of 81

2.12 Communication and Consultation Communicating with stakeholders about risk perception and tolerance plays a central role in the risk management process. During the onsite visit consultation with a number of stakeholders was undertaken to ensure the report process was transparent and to gain local knowledge, background and evidence based data on the areas inspected. Stakeholder meetings were conducted with: o Reece Heddle, Manager Aquatic Services, Randwick City Council. o Stan Konstantaris, ANSA NSW o Stephen Leahy, CEO Southern Region SLSA Helicopter Rescue Services Pty Ltd o Robert Newton and Adrain Johnstone, National Parks & Wildlife The process of communicating risk estimates from the assessment process to decision-makers and ultimately to the public, sometimes referred to as risk education, is only one part of the communication process. In getting those affected by risk to accept risk mitigation measures, and in providing decision-makers and communities with the information they need to tolerate and deal with risks, there needs to be two-way communications that includes those affected by risk, the public, into the decision-making process. Randwick City Council and Surf Life Saving Sydney meet 4 times per year to discuss lifesaving issues in the Randwick LGA. This meeting is an effective working group and includes the following stakeholders: o Randwick City Council o President – Clovelly SLSC o President – Coogee SLSC o President – Maroubra SLSC o President – South Maroubra SLSC

The committee meets quarterly and reviews recent incidents, issues and opportunities relating to coastal public safety. The consultation process has been aided in the following ways: o Open community forums and workshops o Print, Radio and Television media announcements of workshops and consultation o Written and verbal follow ups post workshops o Use of social media - Twitter o Web based surveys o Web based information submissions o On-site communication and distribution of flyers o On-site one-to-one surveying o Draft reports circulated to the NSW Water Safety Advisory Council Figure 2.12.1: Project Blueprint Flyer


Page 36 of 81

Consultation Workshop A public forum was held on Thursday 4th April 2013 in the South Maroubra SLSC to discuss drowning prevention. This public forum was advertised in local print media and through pre-identified stakeholders (via email and letter). Public forums were open to any member of the public such as surf lifesavers, lifeguards, fishing groups, surfing associations, emergency services personnel etc. The public forum was attended by: o Keith Harris, Maroubra Seals Fishing Club o Gerry Stephenson, North Bondi SLSC / Offshore Rescue Boat o Trent Thomas, SLS Sydney (Duty Officers) / Maroubra SLSC o Gary Pracy, SLS Sydney (Duty Officers) / Offshore Rescue Boat o Karl Solomonson, Offshore Rescue Boat o David Winkle, Coogee SLSC (Club Captain) o Richard Lissenden, Offshore Rescue Boat / Maroubra SLSC Consultation Survey The consultation process has also involved the introduction of an online survey which has been useful to capture input from a wide range of key stakeholders, at local/regional level. Survey 1 The first survey was sent to both internal and external stakeholders. Questions focused on drowning identification and prevention. Survey Questions: o In your opinion, what are the (top three) factors contributing to drowning / coastal related incidents at this

location? o In your opinion, are there any particular risk factors at this location which may contribute to drowning at

this location? o If you believe age to be a contributing factor to drowning at this location, which age groups are most at

risk? o If you believe gender to be a contributing factor to drowning at this location, which gender is most at risk? o If you believe socio economic status to be a contributing factor to drowning at this location, which socio

economic groups are most at risk? o If you believe ethnicity to be a contributing factor to drowning at this location, which ethnic groups are

most at risk? o If you believe residency to be a contributing factor to drowning at this location, which residential groups

are most at risk? o Are there particular activities or types of behaviour that people engage in that you think places them at a

greater risk of drowning or other coastal related injury? o Are there any physical attributes or other factors relevant to the area that you think may place people at

greater risk of drowning or water related injury? (e.g. beach characteristics, parking/access points, tourism facilities on beach etc.)

o What are the current key strategies (top three) addressing the issue of drowning prevention / coastal safety? Please evaluate the effectiveness of these current strategies at this location?

o In your opinion, what key strategies (top 3) do you think should be implemented to address the issue of drowning / coastal related incidents at this location?

Survey 2 The second survey was sent to internal stakeholders only e.g. lifesavers and lifeguards. Questions focused on visitation numbers and incidents. Survey Questions: o To the best of your knowledge, what would be the maximum number of people at the location (on the

beach/rock platform/in water) at any one time? o To the best of your knowledge, how often would the visitation numbers identified in the previous question

occur at the location? o In your opinion, which of the following risk groups are present at the location?


Page 37 of 81

o To the best of your knowledge is there a lifesaving service at this location (i.e. Council Lifeguards or Volunteer Surf Life Saving Club)?

o To the best of your knowledge, how many incidents have occurred at this location in the past 5 years? o To the best of your knowledge, how many incidents have occurred at this location in the past 12 months? o How quickly can an emergency or lifesaving service respond to an emergency incident at this location (in

minutes)?

Treatment option 1.2, 2.2 & 5.1 Randwick City Council and Surf Life Saving Sydney should continue to hold regularly scheduled surf liaison meetings as an effective forum to raise safety issues and implement strategies in the Randwick coastal environment. The committee should have a standing item on all future meeting agendas titled ‘coastal risk management – status and issues’, or similar. Recommendations found in this report can be addressed in this agenda item. There is also the opportunity for a member of National Parks and Wildlife to be represented at this group.


Page 38 of 81

3. Risk Assessment Findings 3.1 Action Planning Priority (Gross Risk) 3.1.1 Action Planning Priority Index The Action Planning Priority Index can be viewed as the gross risk score for a beach. The index seeks to identify the risks associated with the broader coastal environment under assessment, rather than specific hazards and risks present at a particular location or site. The majority of information detailed in this section of the report will be identified through pre exiting data (where available), with new data sourced where gaps are present or the data is not reliable. The total score for the Action Planning Priority Index, displayed on pages 42 & 43, is intended to be used for the purpose of prioritising risk mitigation strategies provided for consideration in this report. The individual components of the Action Planning Priority Index should not be considered in isolation from the total scores outlined in table 3.1.6.2. The information is based on modal data for peak visitation during the busiest season(s). The Action Planning Priority Index uses the following risk identification information: 1. Australian Beach Safety & Management Program (ABSAMP Rating) 2. Local Population Rating (LPR) 3. Human/Activity Interaction Rating (HAIR) 4. Access Rating (AR)


Page 39 of 81

3.1.2 Australian Beach Safety and Management Program Table 3.1.2.1: ABSAMP and Indicative ratings applied to assessed locations.

Location Name ABSAMP No. ABSAMP Rating ABSAMP Type

Shark Point Nsw323rp 3* Rock Platform

Clovelly Nsw324 2 Reflective

Clovelly Pool Car Park Nsw324rp 3* Rock Platform

Gordon's Bay Nsw325 3 Reflective

Dunningham Reserve Rock Platform

Nsw325rpa 4* Rock Platform

Dolphin Point Nsw325rpb 4* Rock Platform

Coogee Nsw326 4 Reflective

Grant Reserve Rock Platform Nsw326rpa 6* Rock Platform

Trenerry Reserve Rock Platform

Nsw326rpb 6* Rock Platform

South Coogee Rock Platforms Nsw326rpc 6* Rock Platform

Lurline Bay Nsw326rpd 6* Rock Platform

Mahon Pool Rock Platform Nsw326rpe 6* Rock Platform

The Stake Rock Platform Nsw326rpf 6* Rock Platform

Maroubra Nsw327a 7 Transverse Bar And Rip

South Maroubra Nsw327b 6 Transverse Bar And Rip

Little Greenie Nsw327brpa 5* Rock Platform

Shooting Range Rock Platform Nsw327brpb 5* Rock Platform

Yellow Rock Nsw327brpc 5* Rock Platform

Malabar/Long Bay Nsw328 3 Reflective

Julieann Rocks Nsw328rp1 3* Rock Platform

Little Bay 1 Nsw329 2 Reflective

Little Bay 2 Nsw330 2 Reflective

The Gutter Nsw330rp1 3* Rock Platform

The Trap Nsw330rp2 3* Rock Platform

Jolong Rocks Nsw330rp3 3* Rock Platform

Cape Banks - North Nsw330rp4 3* Rock Platform

Cape Banks - East Nsw330rp5 3* Rock Platform

Cape Banks - West Nsw330rp6 3* Rock Platform

Cruwe Cove Nsw330rp7 3* Rock Platform

Henry Head Nsw330rp8 3* Rock Platform

Little Congwong Bay Nsw331 3 Reflective

Congwong Bay Nsw332 3 Reflective

Bare Island Nsw332rp1 3* Rock Platform


Page 40 of 81

3.1.3 Local Population Rating The Local Population Rating (LPR) expands on the information obtained from the Facility Visitation Rating. This additional population rating identifies the population of residents and/or non-residents located within 2km’s of a coastal location under assessment. The highest figure (resident or non-resident) will be recorded. Table 3.1.3.1: Local population rating descriptors

Population Rating Qualifying Description (all staying/living within 2km of beach)

1 < 50 residents and/or < 20 non-residents (domestic or overseas tourists)

2 50 – 250 residents and/or 21 – 100 non-residents (domestic or overseas tourists)



5 2500 + residents and/or 1000 non-residents (domestic or overseas tourists)

Table 3.1.3.2: Local population ratings applied to assessed locations

Location LPR Total

Shark Point 5

Clovelly 5

Clovelly Pool Car Park 5

Gordon's Bay 5

Dunningham Reserve Rock Platform 5

Dolphin Point 5

Coogee 5

Grant Reserve Rock Platform 5

Trenerry Reserve Rock Platform 5

South Coogee Rock Platforms 5

Lurline Bay 5

Mahon Pool Rock Platform 5

The Stake Rock Platform 5

Maroubra 5

South Maroubra 5

Little Greenie 5

Shooting Range Rock Platform 5

Yellow Rock 5

Malabar/Long Bay 5

Julieann Rocks 5

Little Bay 1 5

Little Bay 2 5

The Gutter 5

The Trap 5

Jolong Rocks 5

Cape Banks - North 5

Cape Banks - East 5

Cape Banks - West 5

Cruwe Cove 5

Henry Head 5

Little Congwong Bay 5

Congwong Bay 5

Bare Island 5


Page 41 of 81

3.1.4 Human/Activity Interaction Rating The Human/Activity Interaction Rating (HAIR) identifies any conflicts present in the coastal environment between the number of people and activities taking place. Activities include both those in the water and those on the beach. Table 3.1.4.1: Human/Activity Interaction descriptors.

Population (in-water)

Conflicting activities Population (on beach)

Conflicting activities

100+ 5 Persistent and dangerous 5 1000+ 5 Persistent and dangerous 5

75-100 4 Persistent 4 750-1000 4 Persistent 4

50-75 3 Regular 3 500-750 3 Regular 3

25-50 2 Isolated conflicts 2 250-500 2 Isolated conflicts 2

1-25 1 No conflicts reported 1 1-250 1 No conflicts reported 1

Table 3.1.4.2: Human/Activity Interaction ratings applied to assessed locations.

Location Population (in water)

Conflict Population (on beach)

Conflict HAI Total

Henry Head 1 1 1 1 4

Shark Point 1 1 1 1 4

Clovelly 3 2 2 2 9

Clovelly Pool Car Park 1 1 1 1 4

Gordon's Bay 3 1 2 1 7

Dunningham Reserve Rock Platform 1 1 1 1 4

Dolphin Point 1 1 1 1 4

Coogee 5 2 5 2 14

Grant Reserve Rock Platform 1 1 1 1 4

Trenerry Reserve Rock Platform 1 1 1 1 4

South Coogee Rock Platforms 1 1 1 1 4

Lurline Bay 1 1 1 1 4

Mahon Pool Rock Platform 1 1 1 1 4

The Stake Rock Platform 1 1 1 1 4

Maroubra 5 3 5 3 16

South Maroubra 5 3 5 3 16

Little Greenie 1 1 1 1 4

Shooting Range Rock Platform 1 1 1 1 4

Yellow Rock 1 1 1 1 4

Malabar/Long Bay 1 1 1 1 4

Julieann Rocks 1 1 1 1 4

Little Bay 1 1 1 1 1 4


Page 42 of 81

Location Population (in water)

Conflict Population (on beach)

Conflict HAI Total

Little Bay 2 2 1 1 1 5

The Gutter 1 1 1 1 4

The Trap 1 1 1 1 4

Jolong Rocks 1 1 1 1 4

Cape Banks - North 1 1 1 1 4

Cape Banks - East 1 1 1 1 4

Cape Banks - West 1 1 1 1 4

Cruwe Cove 1 1 1 1 4

Little Congwong Bay 2 1 1 1 5

Congwong Bay 2 1 2 1 6

Bare Island 1 1 1 1 4


Page 43 of 81

3.1.5 Access Rating Coastal environments that have increased accessibility (i.e. near major roads, cities, public transport, car parks, boat ramps, maintained access paths etc.) increase the likelihood of users at that location. This directly increases the level of risk of drowning and or injury and should be assessed as part of a wider risk assessment. Table 3.1.5.1: Access rating descriptors

Table 3.1.5.2: Access ratings applied to assessed locations.

Location Access Rating

Shark Point 5

Clovelly 5


Gordon's Bay 5

Dunningham Reserve Rock Platform 2

Dolphin Point 5

Coogee 5

Grant Reserve Rock Platform 5

Trenerry Reserve Rock Platform 2

South Coogee Rock Platforms 2

Lurline Bay 5

Mahon Pool Rock Platform 5

The Stake Rock Platform 2

Maroubra 5

South Maroubra 5

Little Greenie 2

Shooting Range Rock Platform 2

Yellow Rock 2

Malabar/Long Bay 5

Julieann Rocks 2

Little Bay 1 5

Little Bay 2 5

The Gutter 2

The Trap 2

Access Rating Qualifying Description

1 No identifiable access via road or track, no facilities, car parking or obvious access points

2 Access via un-maintained track with no facilities and/or via water access

3 Access via any form of track or walkway (either maintained or un-maintained) AND any provision of facilities or services including (but not limited to) public transport, shower,

public toilet, payphone, kiosk, significant roadway, parking

4 Access via maintained tracks with clearly identified parking area AND/OR provision of basic facilities (i.e. public toilets, public shower/ wash down area) AND/OR within 10km of

moderate sized town or city (population greater than 5,000)

5 Clearly evident, marked or signposted and maintained access points AND/OR within 10km of major town or city (population greater than 25,000) AND / OR car parking for 50 or

more vehicles/boat trailers. Public transport provided within 250m of a beach access point


Page 44 of 81

Location Access Rating

Jolong Rocks 4


Cape Banks - East 4

Cape Banks - West 4

Cruwe Cove 2

Henry Head 2


Congwong Bay 5

Bare Island 5


Page 45 of 81

3.1.6 Action Planning Priority Score The action planning priority score provides an indicator for the overall level of risk of the location. The scores range from 0 to 60. These scores can be used to prioritise the order in which risk treatments described in the next section of this report are implemented. Table 3.1.6.1: Summary of action planning priority calculations for each assessed location.

Location

ABSAMP

X 2 (Out of 20)

Population Support

X 2 (Out of 10)

Human Activity/

Interaction (Out of 20)

Access

X 2 (Out of 10)

Total Score

(Out of 60)

Shark Point 10 10 4 10 34

Clovelly 4 10 9 10 33

Clovelly Pool Car Park 6 10 4 10 30

Gordon's Bay 6 10 7 10 33


8 10 4 4 26

Dolphin Point 8 10 4 10 32

Coogee 8 10 14 10 42

Grant Reserve Rock Platform

10 10 4 10 34


10 10 4 4 28

South Coogee Rock Platforms

10 10 4 4 28

Lurline Bay 10 10 4 10 34

Mahon Pool Rock Platform 10 10 4 10 34

The Stake Rock Platform 10 10 4 4 28

Maroubra 14 10 16 10 50

South Maroubra 12 10 16 10 48

Little Greenie 10 10 4 4 28

Shooting Range Rock Platform

10 10 4 4 28

Yellow Rock 10 10 4 4 28

Malabar/Long Bay 6 10 4 10 30

Julieann Rocks 6 10 4 4 24

Little Bay 1 4 10 4 10 28

Little Bay 2 4 10 5 10 29

The Gutter 6 10 4 4 24

The Trap 6 10 4 4 24

Jolong Rocks 6 10 4 8 28

Cape Banks - North 6 10 4 8 28

Cape Banks - East 6 10 4 8 28

Cape Banks - West 6 10 4 8 28

Cruwe Cove 6 10 4 4 24

Henry Head 6 10 4 4 24

Little Congwong Bay 6 10 5 4 25

Congwong Bay 6 10 6 10 32

Bare Island 6 10 4 10 30

Three beaches have an action planning priority score greater than 40. Scores of 41 or higher indicate a high overall level of risk. Where limited resources prohibit the implementation of all risk treatments recommended in this report, those beaches that have received a high action planning priority score should be treated first, then beaches with a medium score should be treated and so on (see next page).


Page 46 of 81

Table 3.1.6.2: Action Planning Priority scores for each location to assist in the prioritisation for risk mitigation strategies identified in this report.

Priority

Priority Location

Priority Action & Total Score

Comments

1

Maroubra 50 High – this location should be considered as

a priority for implementation of identified

risk treatment options

2

South Maroubra 48 High – this location should be considered as



3

Coogee 42 High – this location should be considered as



4

Shark Point 34

Medium – this location should be considered

for implementation of identified risk

treatment options after locations rated as

high or as funding becomes available

4


34





4

Lurline Bay 34





4

Mahon Pool Rock Platform

34





8

Clovelly 33





8

Gordon's Bay 33





10

Dolphin Point 32





10

Congwong Bay 32





12


Low – this location should be considered for

implementation of identified risk treatment

options after locations rated as medium or

as funding becomes available

12

Malabar/Long Bay 30






Page 47 of 81

Priority

Priority Location


Comments

12

Bare Island 30





15

Little Bay 2 29





16

Trenerry Reserve

Rock Platform 28





16

South Coogee Rock

Platforms 28





16

The Stake Rock

Platform 28





16

Little Greenie 28





16

Shooting Range Rock

Platform 28





16

Yellow Rock 28





16

Little Bay 1 28





16

Jolong Rocks 28





16






16

Cape Banks - East 28





16

Cape Banks - West 28






Page 48 of 81

Priority

Priority Location


Comments

16

Dunningham Reserve

Rock Platform 26





28






29

Julieann Rocks 24





29

The Gutter 24





29

The Trap 24





29

Cruwe Cove 24





29

Henry Head 24





Key to Action

Planning Priority High 41+ Medium 31-40 Low 21-30 Very Low 0-20

Treatment option 1.3 & 2.3 Treatment options in this report should be implemented using a staged/prioritisation approach, based on evidence.


Page 49 of 81

3.2 Overview of Principal Risk Treatments

3.2.1 Introduction There are a range of risk treatment options that can be considered in the context of coastal public safety risk management. The selection of the most appropriate option involves balancing the financial, social and environmental impacts of implementing each against the benefits derived from each. These may include any combination of the following: o Spread (share) risk – insurance o Engineer (structural and technological) risk treatment – include modified practices o Regulatory and institutional – change through revised regulations and planning o Avoid – isolate the risk, move people away o Research to better understand o Educate and inform stakeholders

3.2.2 Hierarchy of Risk Treatments (Controls) In determining the most appropriate and cost effective option, it is important to consider the hierarchy of risk treatments (controls). The hierarchy is a sequence of options which offer a number of ways to approach the hazard control process. o Hard controls deal with the tangible such as:

Eliminate the hazard which in a coastal context is often difficult to achieve Isolate the hazard which in a coastal context can be difficult due to the dynamic nature of

environmental and weather conditions Use engineering controls such as design of access paths, installation of appropriate signage, and

revegetation Use administrative controls such as supervision, emergency action plans, other documented policies,

practices and procedures o Soft controls deal with human behaviour such as:

Use of effective leadership, management, trust, ethics, integrity, and building relationships Education programmes

Outlined below are principal risk treatment solutions that expand upon those listed within the Risk Register and Treatment Plan (Appendix B). The solutions outlined endeavour to provide specific and detailed information relative to the beach locations; however due to the diverse nature of location characteristics, Recommendations are at times mainly generic in nature. Randwick City Council should endeavour to adopt the most appropriate treatments specific to their organisations capabilities and in consultation with all relevant stakeholders. The principal risk treatments expanded on below.


Page 50 of 81

3.2.3 Educate and Inform Public education and awareness initiatives are a fundamental component of any drowning prevention strategy, and target both pre-arrival and early arrival periods - before a person/s are exposed to hazards. Key factors pertaining to effective education and awareness programmes include: o Consistency in safety messaging (elimination of confusing/unclear or dissipative information) o Consistency in the method of provision (ongoing information provided at regular locations/times) o Longevity in the provision of information (ongoing, not a one-off) During the course of the assessment and throughout the consultation process Australian CoastSafe were made aware of various education and awareness programmes that are currently, or have been previously in place to educate and inform the public. These initiatives include: o The distribution of surf safety flyers and brochures to coastal accommodation providers such as resorts,

hotels/motels, self-contained apartments and caravan parks. o Nipper/surf groms programmes encouraging local children to be active, providing the fundamentals of surf

safety. o The Randwick City Council Lifeguard Service provides surf education to primary schools. o Local media and promotional opportunities to deliver key safety messages and dangerous surf warnings i.e.

local newspapers, local radio and local television networks. o ANSA (NSW) & RFA NSW education campaigns targeting rock fishers, running workshops and handing out

lifejackets on the rock platforms. o Surfing NSW with support of the NSW Government are giving all surfers in NSW the opportunity to do a

free CPR and Board Rescue Course – ‘Surfers Rescue 24/7’. Public education and safety awareness programmes outlining known and commonly occurring hazards within and around the Randwick LGA should continue to be implemented and reviewed. Educational Messages Land Managers should continue to provide public education/awareness programmes which include standardised key safety messages and align/reference to peak coastal water safety agency websites such as: NSW Water Safety Advisory Council: http://www.watersafety.nsw.gov.au/beach-safety/ Together with the following referenced websites of the NSW Water Safety Advisory Council for beach safety: o BeachSafe: www.beachsafe.org.au o Rip Currents: www.ripcurrents.com.au Expanding on the distribution of public education resources to coastal accommodation providers, there is an opportunity to display posters which promote water safety at public amenity blocks located at coastal beaches. Coastal Accommodation According to lifeguard statistics the beaches in the Randwick LGA attracted more than 25 million visitors over the last 3 years. The distribution of surf safety information to coastal accommodation providers should be continued and expanded. The distribution of surf safety collateral (e.g. brochures, flyers, and pamphlets) to all coastal accommodation providers in the Randwick LGA should be implemented. Safety messages and information provided to tourists, visitors and migrants is integral for the education of this high target group. School Education Surf safety education is not a core responsibility for land managers, however they are still encouraged to assist with school participation levels. This type of promotion could include joint media releases, website promotion or written communication from council to local schools. Surf education (theory and application) can be very beneficial in coastal towns. This type of education can include but is not limited to: o Class room based surf safety presentations o Swim and survive


Page 51 of 81

o Surf education programmes at the beach Randwick City Council should be commended for the ‘Surf Safe Programme’ that is run throughout the Randwick LGA and beyond. Randwick City Council proactively seeks to deliver this program into local and regional schools. The programme is aimed at primary school students in years 3 & 4. The programme is run through September and October in readiness for the approaching surf season and is delivered to over 20 schools in the LGA reaching over 2500 students each year. Randwick City Council extends the ‘Surf Safe Programme’ to four schools in the Temora district (south western NSW) encouraging safety when visiting the coast. Learn to Swim: Swim and Survive is a comprehensive swimming and water safety initiative of Royal Life Saving that seeks to increase the swimming and water safety skills of all Australian children in order to prevent drowning and increase participation in safe aquatic activity. Learn to swim, swimming lessons and infant aquatics are all terms commonly used across the aquatic industry for programs that seek to build swimming skills. Swim and Survive is all of these, but most importantly it ensures that the essential components of personal survival and water safety are provided, in addition to a process of developing strong and effective swimming technique. Swim and Survive is delivered in pools, schools and other aquatic locations across the country by qualified swimming and water safety instructors. Randwick City Council operates The Des Renford Aquatic Centre located at the corner Jersey Road and Robey Street. The centre has a number of swimming programs available including: o Learn to swim program (babies to adults) o Squad training program o Adult and junior casual fitness lap training sessions and o Intensive Holiday Swim Program Surfers Rescue 24/7 Surfing NSW with support of the NSW Government are giving all surfers in NSW the opportunity to do a free CPR and Board Rescue Course – ‘Surfers Rescue 24/7’. The course will educate and provide a skill set, that hopefully you will never have to use, but if found in a tough situation, may just save a life. Surfing has been part of the Australian society since the late 50's and during this time, recreational surfers from all walks of life have been instrumental in helping to keep our beaches safe. These board riders have conducted and assisted in thousands of rescues, the majority of which go unheralded. Be it a patrolled or unpatrolled beach across NSW, all recreational Surfers are on the beach from dawn until dusk, 365 days a year. A lot of them are responsible for hundreds of thousands of unsung rescues. In conjunction with pro-surfers who are currently working as lifeguards, Surfing NSW identified board rescue techniques that may prove to be crucial in times of need. Overall Surfing NSW will be rolling out the free course for all surfers educating on certain situations, which could benefit themselves, family, friends and fellow surfers throughout their lifetime. Personal Protective Equipment Water safety agencies actively promote the use of lifejackets for fisherman and recreational boaters. Educational and awareness programmes in the Randwick LGA should continue to be reviewed and developed to promote and encourage fisherman and recreational boaters to wear lifejackets.

Rockfishing Websites During the course of the assessment, Australian CoastSafe were made aware that non English speaking websites (e.g. Korean, Chinese and Vietnamese etc.) exist amongst ethnic groups which promote rock fishing


Page 52 of 81

specifically in the Munmorah State Conservation Area. Further investigation of these websites could provide an opportunity to engage a targeted educational campaign to specific user groups. Rock Fishing Survey Randwick City Council recently conducted a survey of rock fisherman within the Randwick LGA. The results of this survey have recently been published. Survey results should be considered alongside this document to guide drowning prevention strategies within the Randwick LGA. Education Summary The following table provides examples of a range of education and awareness programmes that can be adopted by Land Managers within the Randwick LGA. Table 3.2.3.1 is not intended to be a comprehensive list of all education and awareness programmes available to land managers, it is intended to provide examples of a range of programmes that are available and delivered within the context of coastal aquatic safety. Land managers are not limited to the organisations listed in the table below, however they should ensure that any provider engaged to act on their behalf is adequately licensed, qualified and insured. Table 3.2.3.1: Examples of education and awareness programmes.

Programme Target audience Location Delivery (Who)

School based water safety programmes

Local primary and high school students All locations Peak water safety agencies

Surf Safe Primary school students years 3 & 4 Randwick Randwick City Council

Coastal Accommodation Network

Tourists, visitors and migrants (TVM) All locations Peak water safety agencies

Local Media Residents and TVM All locations Local media outlets

Learn to Swim / Swim and Survive

Young Children All locations Royal Life Saving Society Australia

Learn to Swim All ages All Locations AUSTSWIM accredited swim schools

Learn to swim programmes All ages Des Renford Aquatic Cent

Randwick City Council

Nippers Children All locations Surf Life Saving NSW

Surf Ed. All ages All locations Surf Life Saving NSW

Surf Groms Children All locations Surfing NSW

Surfers Rescue 24/7 Local surfing associations All locations Surfing NSW

Let’s Go Surfing Children Surf Educate Australia

Kids Academy of Surf (KAOS)

Children All locations Surf Educate Australia

School surfing and surf education

Children All locations Surf Educate Australia

Corp Surf 18 years + All locations Surf Educate Australia

Get hooked – it’s fun to fish

Schools All locations NSW DPI (Fisheries)

Rock fishing safety information

Rock fishers

Break wall and rock platforms

Peak water safety agencies

Boating safety information Boaters Bar crossings Roads & Maritime Services

QR codes

The use of QR codes on signage and other infrastructure to link to location based beach safety information.

All locations Randwick City Council


Page 53 of 81

The images shown in the figures below are not intended as a comprehensive display of all education and awareness collateral available to land managers, it is intended to provide examples of a range of collateral that are available and can be provided to land managers upon request. Land managers are not limited to the education collateral shown in the figures below, however they should ensure that any education collateral distributed or displayed is aligned to the key water safety messages promoted by the NSW Water Safety Advisory Council. Figure 3.2.3.1: Don’t put our life on the line Figure 3.2.3.2: Survive a rip current Figure 3.2.3.3: Beach safety for tourists/migrants Figure 3.2.3.4: Swim between flags

Treatment Option 4.2 Develop relationships with tourism agencies to expand on the coastal accommodation network program with the aim of distributing standardised surf safety collateral e.g. brochures, flyers, pamphlets etc. to all coastal accommodation providers in the Randwick Local Government Area.

Treatment Option 1.4 & 2.4 Existing education and awareness programmes within and around the Randwick Local Government Area should continue to be implemented and reviewed.

Treatment Option 1.5 & 2.5 Education and awareness programmes should include standardised key safety messages which are recognised by the aquatic industry (NSW Water Safety website, ‘watersafety.nsw.gov.au’).


Page 54 of 81

Treatment Option 1.6 & 2.6 Display safety information (e.g. posters) which promotes key water safety messages at amenity blocks and visitor information displays directly located around coastal beach access

Treatment Option 1.7 Peak coastal water safety agencies currently provide surf education to local schools and community groups. It is recommended that Randwick City Council work with these agencies to promote these programmes and encourage enhanced participation at a local level.

Treatment Option 4.3 Land managers and water safety stakeholders should identify the relevant user groups and related resources/websites (including multilingual) that promote rock fishing in the Randwick Local Government, and target safety messaging to those groups/resources. This research may also provide the opportunity for targeted education campaigns.

Treatment Option 1.8 & 2.7 Land Managers and key stakeholders should continue to promote and encourage rock fishermen to wear lifejackets.


Page 55 of 81

3.2.4 Safety Signage Safety signage is a fundamental component of any drowning prevention strategy, and targets the in-transit and on-arrival periods pertaining to a person/s arriving at a hazardous location. Key factors relating to effective safety signage includes: o A risk assessment process used in the identification of priority information to display o Alignment to Australian Standards for signage content (ANZS 2416:2010) o Consistency in signage layout/display (National Aquatic and Recreational Signage Style Manual, 3rd Edition,

July 2006’) o Consistency in the appropriate positioning of signage, to optimise exposure to the members of the public,

prior to arriving in a hazardous location o A consistent process of signage maintenance as part of the land managers annual planning It is important to note that at most locations, an improved safety signage system usually results in an overall reduction in the quantity of signage due to the elimination of duplicate or ineffectual signs and the consolidation of key information into other signs. For Land Managers this may see a reduction in implementation and maintenance costs related to signage and a reduction in the visual pollution of a site. Randwick City Council and NPWS have implemented a commendable system of safety signage at many of the access points in the Randwick LGA. In general, the pictograms on signs are current with AS/NZS 2416:2010, although some pictograms have been taken from an earlier version of the Standard and should be amended through the use of stickers and natural attrition of signs

1 (see Appendix A for pictograms). Signage in the

Randwick LGA does not currently meet the style/layout recommended in the ‘National Aquatic and Recreational Signage Style Manual, 3rd Edition, July 2006’ Figure 3.2.4.1: Council Signage

There is an opportunity to provide further aquatic and recreational safety signage as part of an ongoing management plan at the locations identified in (Appendix A). A staged/prioritisation approach is recommended as 34 additional signs have been proposed throughout the Randwick LGA. These locations provide a list of associated hazards and the GPS position of where the sign should be placed. Table 3.2.4.1: Summary table of existing and proposed signage for assessed locations:

Combined Beach Locations

Existing Signs

Possible Consolidation

Proposed Level 2

Proposed Level 3

Total Proposed

Signs

Net Signage

Shark Point 16 0 0 2 2 2

Clovelly 42 8 0 1 1 -7

Clovelly Pool Car Park 1 0 0 0 0 0

Gordon's Bay 24 4 0 1 1 -3

Dunningham Reserve 12 1 0 0 0 -1

1 State-wide Mutual – NSW Councils Beach Safety Information Signage


Page 56 of 81

Combined Beach Locations

Existing Signs


Proposed Level 2

Proposed Level 3

Total Proposed

Signs

Net Signage

Rock Platform

Dolphin Point 11 2 0 1 0 -1

Coogee 48 5 0 0 0 -5


21 0 0 0 0 0


16 0 0 3 3 3


9 1 0 2 2 1

Lurline Bay 10 0 0 2 2 2

Mahon Pool Rock Platform

25 5 0 4 4 -1

The Stake Rock Platform

4 0 0 1 1 1

Maroubra 30 5 0 0 0 -5

South Maroubra 58 0 0 8 8 8

Little Greenie 2 0 0 2 2 2


1 0 0 0 0 0

Yellow Rock 8 0 0 0 0 0

Malabar/Long Bay 51 0 0 0 0 0

Julieann Rocks 0 0 0 0 0 0

Little Bay 1 0 0 0 0 0 0

Little Bay 2 8 0 0 1 1 1

The Gutter 0 0 0 1 1 1

The Trap 0 0 0 0 0 0

Jolong Rocks 10 0 0 1 1 1

Cape Banks - North 3 0 0 0 0 0

Cape Banks - East 0 0 0 0 0 0

Cape Banks - West 0 0 0 0 0 0

Cruwe Cove 0 0 0 0 0 0

Henry Head 16 0 0 1 1 1

Little Congwong Bay 10 0 0 1 1 1

Congwong Bay 15 0 0 2 2 2

Bare Island 7 0 0 0 0 0

Total 437 31 0 34 34 3

Note: Net signage = proposed signage minus consolidated signage. For example, even though 34 signs have been proposed in the Randwick LGA, 31 existing signs have the opportunity to be consolidated, leaving a net change to overall signage of 3 additional signs. When implementing future signage, the following points are recommended: 1. Safety signs as recommended in this report should meet Australian Standard ‘AS/NZS 2416 – 2010: Water

Safety Signs and Beach Safety Flags’ and align signage style/layout with the ‘National Aquatic and Recreational Signage Style Manual, 3rd Edition, July 2006’ or the State-wide Mutual - Sings as Remote Supervision. It is the recommendation of this report that style is aligned to the former.

2. Signage layout (top-down order) consists of the following:

a) Location name and emergency marker (if/when applicable) or street address b) Hazards and warnings within the designated area c) Safety information or general location/area details d) Regulations


Page 57 of 81

e) Facility / Land Manager

3. Safety signs should meet the size/height/placement specifications outlined in ‘AS/NZS 2416.3.2010 Water safety signs and beach safety flags’.

4. ‘Diamond’ hazard symbols should be utilised (not triangle). Context: AS/NZS2416:2010 provides for the

use of either ‘diamond’ or ‘triangle’ hazard symbols. For consistency with existing signage and across local government areas the more effective diamond symbols should be utilised.

5. Effective placement of aquatic and recreational safety signage in a public reserve cannot be

underestimated. Location, height and existing visual distractions are major factors which contribute to the effectiveness of a sign when installed.

6. Signs positioned in car parks should be placed central to the parking area and where parked vehicles will

not obscure the sign.

7. Signs that are positioned in relation to open access areas should be spaced at regular intervals, with the distance between individual signs dependent upon the calculated Facility Visitation Rate (FVR).

8. Signs that are positioned in relation to defined access points should be sited as close as practical to the access point, or other appropriate location, and need to be consistently applied where possible e.g. on the left of the track entrance.

9. To effectively capture the attention of visitors, improve overall visual amenity and avoid confusion as a

result of too many signs, those signs that are repetitive and/or display unnecessary information should be removed. Further, any non-essential signage (not related to location, safety, hazard, prohibition information) that is present at a location should be considered for removal or re-located as appropriate so as not to impact on the recognition of the safety orientated priority signage.

Level 2 Car Park Signs (Primary access sign) This type of signage can be an option for the Land Manager to be places at the main entrances to an aquatic environment. The recommended content includes location name, emergency contact information, safety hazards/prohibitions and lifesaving/lifeguard service information. See below for an example. Figure 3.2.4.2: An example of a Level 2 Car Park sign QR Codes QR codes involve the use of smart phone technology to provide location based safety messaging. The system works by scanning a smart phone over the QR Code. These codes are included on signage (i.e. a sticker) and linked to specific water related safety information, with the potential for multilingual messages.


Page 58 of 81

There are numerous online providers that allow for the creation of a QR code. This stage of the process is cost effective and the only expense is printing. Certain online providers also allow customers to be able to track the number of people who have scanned the QR code. Randwick City Council currently utilises QR codes on beach information signs as shown in images below. The QR code sends users to ‘My Randwick App’ and gives current beach conditions including photo. This site is updated daily. Temporary Signage Temporary individual hazard signs may be used where a hazard is localised, has been identified at a level of risk that warrants a sign posting and is not permanent in nature. In the context of this assessment temporary hazard signs have been identified as an option when a dangerous surf warning has been issued by the Bureau of Meteorology (BOM). The BOM release a dangerous surf warning when the swell reaches a certain height and swell period. Dangerous surf warnings will appear on the official BOM forecast. The most appropriate locations of these signs have been identified as the main vehicle entry points where access to popular rock fishing locations at Cape Banks is achieved. The locations of these signs have been identified in (Appendix A). In the context of this assessment individual temporary hazard signs have been identified for possible use at locations where the hazards of debris, erosion and dangerous access are at a high risk. These locations should be monitored and necessary appropriate warnings put in place. Temporary warning signage has been recommended for use to address the following hazards: o Beach closed o Beach information Figure 3.2.4.3: Beach information QR code (Coogee) Figure 3.2.4.4: Beach Closed (Maroubra)

Treatment option 1.9 & 2.8 Standardised water safety signage that aligns to Australian standards and best-practice ‘style’ should be implemented by Land Managers at the locations listed in Appendix A. This may include maintenance and upgrade of existing signage through planned works schedules, the consolidation of multiple existing signs into a single sign (less signs) or the removal of unnecessary signage.


Page 59 of 81

Treatment option 1.10 Randwick City Council in partnership with peak water safety bodies should investigate the use of temporary signage (Appendix A) at key locations on the Randwick coast to display Bureau of Meteorology (BOM) issued dangerous surf warnings - warning the public of large/hazardous waves.


Page 60 of 81

3.2.5 Emergency Marker System When an incident occurs at a specific street address, it is relatively simple for emergency services to identify the location of the caller/incident. However, when an incident occurs at locations such as open-space parkland, walking trails, beaches or rocks (where no cross-street or other reference point is available) it can delay the identification of a location and the subsequent emergency service response. Emergency location markers enable triple zero call takers to immediately and accurately verify the location of an emergency triple zero call (through existing ‘Computer Aided Dispatch Systems’ - CAD). Below is an example template of an emergency marker sign. Figure 3.2.5.1: An example of an emergency marker sign.

Emergency markers display a unique number to a specific location, most commonly on existing access/safety signage. These emergency marker displays could be a sticker placed over already existing signage. For an optimal Emergency Marker System to be effective, a standardised state-wide programme is required, that engages Police and other emergency service CAD systems and land management authority signage plans. No current programme exists in NSW. Australian CoastSafe is working with key government departments and emergency services to develop a best practice emergency marker system which can be rolled out on a state-wide basis in the near future. Australian CoastSafe is currently working with key government and emergency service stakeholders in the to develop a best practice approach which can be rolled out on a state wide basis in the near future, improving emergency response.

Treatment option 4.4 With guidance from the Ministry for Police and Emergency Services and Surf Life Saving New South Wales, Land Managers should implement a state-aligned emergency marker program at all identified access locations (incl. safety signage) once such a program is established.


Page 61 of 81

3.2.6 Access Infrastructure and Ongoing Capital Works/Maintenance Programmes How the coast is accessed is a significant factor in the management of coastal risk. While preventing public access/use to the coastal environment is not desired, a number of options exist to minimise the risks associated with the access way itself and the hazards that may be encountered on the coast (via that access way). In reference to the assessment process, access points have been broken down into formal (defined), and informal (undefined) access. Access issues are interrelated to other risk management initiatives/options such as water safety signage, emergency access numbering/reporting, supervision (lifeguard) information and public rescue equipment. An effective access plan for an area may optimise the effectiveness and efficiency of other initiatives. Figure 3.2.6.1: Formal access at Maroubra Figure 3.2.6.2: Informal access at Shark Point

In the Randwick LGA the majority of formal access tracks are well maintained. Periodic inspections take place due to vegetation overgrowth, degraded footings and unattached fence posts. A number of informal access tracks also exist. Formal, well maintained access ways are effective in promoting and facilitating the use of a generally safer ‘track’, exposing people to the relevant safety signage/information, reducing the quantity of signage required and enhancing emergency reporting/location identification. Informal access ways may create higher risk through use (uneven ground/hazards), may expose people to dangerous locations (cliffs/unstable ground), may require duplicate/multiple signage (inefficient/costly) and may make emergency location reporting and response difficult (location awareness). Options for formalising/redirecting or consolidating informal access use may include man-made barriers, vegetation growth and fencing. It is noted that for some locations/situations it may be difficult to formalise access and/or discourage the use of informal access. Table 3.2.6.1: The table below shows a summary of access provision within the assessed locations.

Location Open Access

Formal Pedestrian

Formal Vehicle

Informal Pedestrian


Total

Shark Point 0 4 0 4 0 8

Clovelly 0 22 2 0 0 24

Clovelly Pool Car Park 2 0 0 0 0 2

Gordon's Bay 0 6 0 7 0 13


0 3 0 2 0 5

Dolphin Point 0 2 0 1 0 3


Page 62 of 81

Location Open Access

Formal Pedestrian

Formal Vehicle

Informal Pedestrian


Total

Coogee 2 10 0 0 0 12

Grant Reserve Rock Platform 0 10 0 2 0 12


0 3 0 5 0 8


0 6 0 0 0 6

Lurline Bay 0 4 0 2 0 6

Mahon Pool Rock Platform 0 2 1 3 0 6

The Stake Rock Platform 0 1 0 5 0 6

Maroubra 3 4 2 0 0 9

South Maroubra 0 10 0 0 0 10

Little Greenie 0 0 0 5 0 5


0 0 0 1 0 1

Yellow Rock 0 0 0 2 0 2

Malabar/Long Bay 0 8 0 7 0 15

Julieann Rocks 0 1 0 4 0 5

Little Bay 1 0 1 0 3 0 4

Little Bay 2 0 3 0 0 0 3

The Gutter 0 0 0 2 0 2

The Trap 0 1 0 6 0 7

Jolong Rocks 0 5 0 6 0 11

Cape Banks - North 0 1 0 0 0 1

Cape Banks - East 0 1 0 1 0 2

Cape Banks - West 0 0 0 1 0 1

Cruwe Cove 0 3 0 0 0 3

Henry Head 0 4 0 6 0 10

Little Congwong Bay 0 2 0 2 0 4

Congwong Bay 0 3 0 0 0 3

Bare Island 0 3 0 1 0 4

Total 7 123 5 78 0 213

Treatment option 1.11 & 2.9 Formal access tracks identified in Appendix A should continue to be regularly maintained through ongoing infrastructure and capital works programmes. This will encourage formal access use (rather than informal), enhance the effectiveness of water safety signage and minimise the quantity of signage needed.


Page 63 of 81

3.2.7 Public Rescue Equipment The table below provides an overview of Public Rescue Equipment (PRE) currently in or suggested for use in Australia. Table 3.2.7.1: An overview of Public Rescue Equipment (PRE) (Research Review of Rock Fishing Safety in New South Wales, 2012)

PRE Type Morphology of current

installations

Advantages Disadvantages Extensive Training Required

Recommended uses in NSW

Rescue Tube Sandy beaches and

rock pools

Can be thrown short distances

Requires the patient to enter the water

themselves

Yes None

Throw Bag Not in use Distance of deployment

Risk of theft, risk of using the line to

return the patient towards the rocks, not strong/tough

enough to be resilient from

environmental conditions

No May be used on a case by case basis.

Further

effectiveness investigation

required.

Throw Sticks (Stormy

grenades)

Personal device

(mobile)

Mobility – easily deployed to

incident locations

Effective mid-range (thrown)

Requires 2 to off-set ‘miss-throw’ of the

first

No Yes. Relevant personnel /staff

(emergency services/SLS

/rangers)

Life Ring (Angel ring)

Steep rampart rock

platforms

Ease of use. Rugged design.

Awareness campaign

established.

Single use device. Distance of

deployment. Requires rescuer to

approach the platform edge.

Weight.

No Steep (>1:1) rampart rock

platforms

Silent Sentry Sloping platforms

EPIRB unit immediately alerts

emergency services. Multiple balls can be rolled down slopes to the patient keeping the

rescuer at a safer distance

EPIRB units were vulnerable to

vandalism and disabled

No Sloping (<1:1) rampart rock

platforms.

Recommended redesign to

remove EPIRB housing.

Life Rings Through the implementation of the ‘Angel Ring Project’™

2, 116 life rings have been installed in NSW and 47

rescues have been confirmed as of August 2012. (Australian National Sports Fishing Association) Life rings are an instantly recognised and international life saving mechanism and are easily understood by the vast majority of people, both as a rescuer and as the casualty. There are currently 13 life rings in the Randwick Local Government Area as listed in Appendix C. The locations of proposed life rings are below:

2 Angel Ring is a registered trade mark of the Australian National Sportfishing Association.


Page 64 of 81

Table 3.2.7.2: Locations of proposed life rings. Error

Priority Location Responsible Authority

1 Clovelly Pool Car Park ANSA

2 Dolphin Point ANSA

3 The Trap ANSA

4 Jolong Rocks ANSA

5 Cruwe Cove ANSA

According to a document

3 published on the Angel Ring Project

4 website the following sites are currently under

investigation by ANSA NSW for life ring installations. o South Malabar (by South Sydney AFA) o North Malabar (by South Sydney AFA) o The Blessings (by South Sydney AFA) o Little Bay North (by South Sydney AFA) Also published

5 on the Angel Ring Project

6 website the following sites which have been approved for the

installation of life rings: o Clovelly Pool – relocation South Sydney AFA Life ring positioning should be undertaken in consultation with ANSA (NSW Branch). Global Positioning Satellite (GPS) GPS technology is available to be used within public rescue equipment such as life rings. Recreational fishing bodies have already trialled certain tracking devices in some areas and should be consulted with in relation to this matter. This technology may be beneficial by the way of a daily audit that can record when a life ring has been washed away or stolen as part of an asset management system.

Treatment Option 4.5 The New South Wales Water Safety Advisory Council should explore the means to fund the expansion and continued maintenance of the ‘Angel Ring Project’ in consultation with the Australian National Sports Fishing Association (NSW Branch) and the Recreational Fishing Alliance of NSW at the locations outlined in Appendix C. Final positioning should be determined by ANSA NSW.

3 http:// http://www.angelrings.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/AngelRingLocationsUnderInvestigationJan2012.pdf

(accessed May, 2013) 4 Angel Ring is a registered trade mark of the Australian National Sportfishing Association.

5 http://www.angelrings.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/AngelRingApprovalsApplicationsJan2012.pdf (accessed May,

2013) 6 Angel Ring is a registered trade mark of the Australian National Sportfishing Association.

http://www.angelrings.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/AngelRingLocationsUnderInvestigationJan2012.pdf

http://www.angelrings.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/AngelRingApprovalsApplicationsJan2012.pdf


Page 65 of 81

3.2.8 System of Supervision The supervision of aquatic coastal locations by trained lifesavers/lifeguards is often required to manage the risk of the location and is arguably the most effective risk mitigation strategy. The primary decision to be made by the Randwick City Council before establishing a lifesaving/lifeguard service is to determine which areas will be patrolled or unpatrolled. A patrolled beach is one at which a trained lifesaver and/or lifeguard is stationed during prescribed times and designated by the flying of red and yellow flags. A mobile lifesaver/lifeguard or lifeguard vehicle that periodically visits or checks a location may be effective as a proactive education initiative but should not be considered as providing a patrolled swimming location. The decision whether to provide supervision or not to provide supervision can be difficult to establish because of the following: o The provision of a service may encourage attendance at a non suitable location, such as when the beach

topography and morphology create a highly hazardous location. This factor would be reflected in the ABSAMP beach hazard rating

o Deemed too cost prohibitive and therefore not provided by the responsible Land Manager o The patronage of the location is too low and the assessed risk level is minimal There are a range of aquatic supervisory services that should be considered, as it is not “one size fits all”. They include: o Full time comprehensive lifesaving/lifeguard service with appropriate levels of trained personnel, fixed and

portable facilities, equipment, craft, vehicles and links to central command and emergency services. o Seasonal lifesaving/lifeguard service with appropriate levels of trained personnel, portable facilities,

equipment, craft, vehicles and links to central command and emergency services. o Seasonal lifesaving/lifeguard Service with trained personnel, portable facilities, some equipment and craft,

and links to a command centre. o A flexible demand based service with trained personnel provision which allocates resources to where they

are most needed. o Surveillance cameras. o No service, but the provision of safety signs and controlled access. International Best Practice The International Life Saving Federation (ILSF) is the peak body for lifeguard and water safety organisations internationally. Lifeguard/lifesaving uniforms The ILSF recommends the colours for uniforms be red & yellow

7. Lifeguards/lifesavers throughout the world

are called upon to provide safety services at a range of water environments that include swimming pools, beaches, lakes, river front and other waterfronts. In providing these aquatic safety services, it is important that the people using these environments for aquatic activity can readily identify the lifeguards/lifesavers for: o Guidance on safety issues, and o Assistance in times of need

As such the lifeguards should be readily distinguishable against the many people and colours they may be wearing while in, on or around these aquatic environments. The red and yellow colours have been used by a number of International Lifesaving Member Federations for many years to such an extent and with much success that red and yellow has become synonymous with lifesavers and lifeguards in these countries. Red and yellow flags: The use of red & yellow feathered flags is undertaken to provide the maximum visual effect to identify a designated swimming area. The flags used in Randwick City Council comply with ‘ANZS 2416.2:2010 Water

7 Lifesaving Position Statement - LPS 05 - Lifesaver And Lifeguard Uniforms


Page 66 of 81

safety signs and beach safety flags. Part 2: Specifications for beach safety flags – Colour shape meaning and performance (ISO 20712-2:2007, MOD)’ Lifesaving Service Level Calculator The lifesaving service level calculator takes into consideration the ABSAMP beach hazard ratings, visitation levels, frequency of use, residency of visitors, incident history and remoteness of location to determine best practice lifesaving service levels. The first decision that needs to be made by a Land Manager is whether or not a location should be patrolled. The Action Planning Priority Index (p.53-55) should be used to guide decision making on which locations are of greater risk and therefore a higher priority for a lifesaving service. The lifesaving service level calculations should not be used in isolation to determine whether or not a lifesaving service should be provided, however once a decision has been made to provide a service the calculations should be referred to for guidance on the minimum service level required. The following lifesaving service level descriptors provide the recommended lifesaving service level for the scores/ratings. The scores are not absolute and are to be used as a guide in determining the actual levels. Table 3.2.8.1: lifesaving service level descriptors provide the recommended lifesaving service level for the scores/rating as calculated in the sections that follow.

Rating Lifesaving Service Level Description

</= 10 Warning signage e.g. Aquatic & Recreational Signage Style Guide

11-14 Emergency beacons and/or camera surveillance or swimming enclosure (where applicable)

Routine monitoring/surveillance patrols (land, sea, air) to also be considered

15-19 Lifesaving service = 1 x Lifeguard personnel during period assessed (refer to note 2)

20-25 Lifesaving service = 2 x Lifeguard personnel during period assessed

26-30 Lifesaving service = 3 x Lifeguard personnel during period assessed

31 and > Lifesaving service = more than 3 Lifeguard personnel during period assessed

Notes to table: Note 1: When visitations and frequencies are low yet rating is high, consideration should be given to some form of surveillance patrols or IT solutions to overcome variations of population/visitation numbers. Note 2: The option to have one lifeguard on a beach is only permissible under specific circumstances, these being: o The ABSAMP beach hazard rating is less than 4, or o Access to other rescue services is less than 5 minutes, direct communication with services is in place, and a

Rescue Water Craft is in place. Otherwise the minimum number of lifeguards at a given location would be two.

Where the number of people in the patrolled area is over 1,000 the lifesaving service provider should increase the number of lifesaving personnel in line with the following table. Table 3.2.8.2: Impact of beach attendance on lifesaving service levels

No. of People on Beach No. of additional lifeguards

1,000 - 5,000 2

5,000 - 10,000 4

> 10,000 6

Crowds can become in themselves hazardous as a result of difficulties of surveillance and heightened crowd interaction


Page 67 of 81

Reference Tables: The tables below provide definitions for the scores used in the Lifesaving Service Level Calculator. The definitions are range based to allow for a margin of error where detailed recorded data may be lacking. In such cases information has been gathered through consultation with local experts and beach users. Table 3.2.8.3: Visitation Rating - visitation levels can be determined by (but not limited to) SLS patrol log books, tourism visitation statistics, local knowledge of the area (interviews with users and stakeholders)

Rating Description

1 Less than 50 people in the water and on the beach during peak period of day

2 51 to 249 people in the water and on the beach during peak period of day

3 250 to 500 people in water and on the beach during peak period of day

4 500 to 1,000 people in the water and on the beach during peak period of day

5 Greater than 1,000 people in the water and on the beach during peak period of day

Table 3.2.8.4: Frequency Rating – relating to the frequency with which the visitation rating (Table 3.2.8.3) occurs

Rating Description

1 Peak visitation occurs once in a month

2 Peak visitation levels occur once a week

3 Peak visitation levels occur every weekend (Saturday/Sunday)

4 Peak visitation levels occur every day

5 Peak visitation levels continuously every day

Table 3.2.8.5: Type of User – Residency Rating (>10% of the peak visitation)

Rating Beach visitor residency and assumed level of beach safety knowledge

1 General knowledge of local beaches and related beach safety issues, including awareness of rips and general beach hazards and role of lifesavers/lifeguards.

2 General knowledge of beach safety issues relevant to their state/region, awareness of rips and role of lifesavers/lifeguards, limited or no knowledge of beach in question

3 General knowledge of beach safety issues and role of lifesavers/lifeguards, limited or no knowledge of rips, limited or no knowledge of beaches and issues relating to beaches in state being visited, including biological hazards in northern Australia.

4 Limited or no knowledge of beach safety issues and role of lifeguards. Ability to read signs and converse with lifeguards. No knowledge of Australia beach conditions and general Australian beach hazards, especially rips in south and biological hazards (crocodiles & stingers) in northern Australia.

5 No knowledge of beach safety issues and role of lifeguards. Unable to read beach signage or converse with lifeguards. No knowledge of Australia beach conditions and general Australian beaches hazards, especially rips in south and biological hazards (crocodiles & stingers) in northern Australia.

Table 3.2.8.6: Incident History Rating – for beaches where there is not currently a service. Consideration should be given to incidents occurring over the previous 5 years.

Rating Description

1 Less than 5 minor incidents / first aid treatments reported

2 5 or more minor incidents / first aid treatments reported

3 Less than 3 major incidents/first aid treatments reported

4 Between 4 and 6 major incidents/first aid treatments reported

5 7 or more major incidents/first aid treatments, OR 1 or more preventable fatalities in the previous 5 years


Page 68 of 81

Table 3.2.8.7: Incident History Rating - for beaches where there is currently a service. Consideration should be given to incidents occurring over the previous 12 months / 1 year.

Rating Description

1 1 minor incident or preventative action per day

2 More than 1 minor incident or preventative action per day

3 1-3 major incidents/first aid treatments per month

4 Between 4 and 6 major incidents/first aid treatments per month

5 7 or more major incidents/first aid treatments per month, OR 1 or more fatalities in the previous 12 months

Table 3.2.8.8: Remoteness Rating – an indication of the proximity of support when responding to an incident in the water. This support could be from a neighbouring lifesaving/lifeguard service or a local emergency service such as Police, Fire or Ambulance.

Rating Description

1 Access to other rescue services/or assistance less than 3 minutes

2 Access to other rescue services/or assistance 3-5 minutes



5 Access to other rescue services/or assistance more than 15 minutes

Lifesaving Service Level Calculations: The tables and information below provide guidance on the appropriate level of lifesaving service required at Randwick LGA beaches once a decision to provide lifesaving / lifeguarding service has been made. The decision to provide a lifesaving/lifeguarding service is not dependant upon the outcome of the lifesaving service level calculations in the table below. Table 3.2.8.9: Clovelly Lifesaving Service Level Calculator

Dates ABSAMP

Rating

Visitation

Rating

Frequency

Rating

Residency

Rating

Incident History

Rating

Remoteness

Rating

Total

LSSL

Score New Existing

Summer 2 4 4 1 0 3 3 17

Autumn 2 3 3 1 0 3 3 15

Winter 2 2 3 1 0 3 3 14

Spring 2 3 3 1 0 3 3 15

These calculations support the current service level provided. Table 3.2.8.10: Gordon’s Bay Lifesaving Service Level Calculator

Dates ABSAMP

Rating

Visitation

Rating

Frequency

Rating

Residency

Rating

Incident History

Rating

Remoteness

Rating

Total

LSSL

Score New Existing

Summer 3 3 3 3 3 0 2 17

Autumn 3 1 2 3 3 0 2 15

Winter 3 1 2 3 3 0 2 15

Spring 3 1 2 3 3 0 2 15

If a lifeguard service were to be provided during the summer period the lifesaving service level scores in the table above indicate that a service level of 1 lifeguard should be considered. However, a service has not been recommended at this location during summer due to the difficulties in establishing a service at this location given the geography and usage of the bay and limited accessibility. Surveillance should be continued through RWC and ORB patrols.


Page 69 of 81

Table 3.2.8.11: Coogee Lifesaving Service Level Calculator

Dates ABSAMP

Rating

Visitation

Rating

Frequency

Rating

Residency

Rating

Incident History

Rating

Remoteness

Rating

Total

LSSL

Score New Existing

Summer 4 5 4 5 0 5 3 26

Autumn 4 5 2 5 0 4 3 23

Winter 4 3 2 5 0 4 3 21

Spring 4 5 2 5 0 4 3 23

These calculations support the current service level provided.

Table 3.2.8.12: Maroubra Lifesaving Service Level Calculator

Dates ABSAMP

Rating

Visitation

Rating

Frequency

Rating

Residency

Rating

Incident History

Rating

Remoteness

Rating

Total LSSL

Score

New Existing

Summer 7 5 4 5 0 5 3 29

Autumn 7 4 4 5 0 4 3 27

Winter 7 3 2 5 0 4 3 24

Spring 7 4 4 5 0 4 3 27

These calculations support the current service level provided. Table 3.2.8.13: South Maroubra Lifesaving Service Level Calculator

Dates ABSAMP

Rating

Visitation

Rating

Frequency

Rating

Residency

Rating

Incident History

Rating

Remoteness

Rating

Total

LSSL

Score New Existing

Summer 6 5 4 5 0 5 3 28

Autumn 6 4 4 5 0 4 3 26

Winter 6 3 2 5 0 4 3 23

Spring 6 4 4 5 0 4 3 26

These calculations support the current service level provided. If a lifeguard service were to be provided during the winter period the lifesaving service level scores in the table above indicate that a service level of 2 lifeguards should be considered. However, a service has not been recommended at this location during winter due to the lifeguard provision provided at Maroubra and their roving patrols. Table 3.2.8.14: Malabar/Long Bay Lifesaving Service Level Calculator

Dates ABSAMP

Rating

Visitation

Rating

Frequency

Rating

Residency

Rating

Incident History

Rating

Remoteness

Rating

Total

LSSL

Score New Existing

Summer 3 2 3 4 1 0 3 16

Autumn 3 1 2 1 1 0 3 11

Winter 3 1 2 1 1 0 3 11

Spring 3 12 2 1 1 0 3 12

If a lifeguard service were to be provided during the summer period the lifesaving service level scores in the table above indicate that a service level of 1 lifeguard should be considered. However, a service has not been recommended at this location during summer based on the continuation of roving patrols by RWC and ORB. The beach has a low ABSAMP hazard rating and historical incidents indicate that there is a low risk of injury or death in the area under immediate supervision of a lifeguard at this location.


Page 70 of 81

Table 3.2.8.15: Little Bay Lifesaving Service Level Calculator

Dates ABSAMP

Rating

Visitation

Rating

Frequency

Rating

Residency

Rating

Incident History

Rating

Remoteness

Rating

Total

LSSL

Score New Existing

Summer 2 2 2 1 5 0 3 15

Autumn 2 2 2 1 5 0 3 15

Winter 2 1 2 1 5 0 3 14

Spring 2 2 2 1 5 0 3 15

If a lifeguard service were to be provided during the spring, summer and autumn periods the lifesaving service level scores in the table above indicate that a service level of 1 lifeguard should be considered. However, a service has not been recommended at this location during the spring, summer and autumn periods due to the ABSAMP rating & lower visitation numbers than in other areas. This score is reflective of recent fatalities in the area that were rock fishing related. Due to the location of the fatalities a lifeguard service at Little Bay would most likely not have altered the outcome. Little Bay had a gross risk ranking of 29 (p.48) which indicates that it is a lower priority than other locations assessed in the Randwick LGA. Table 3.2.8.16: Little Congwong Bay Lifesaving Service Level Calculator

Dates ABSAMP

Rating

Visitation

Rating

Frequency

Rating

Residency

Rating

Incident History

Rating

Remoteness

Rating

Total

LSSL

Score New Existing

Summer 3 2 2 1 1 0 4 13

Autumn 3 2 2 1 1 0 4 13

Winter 3 1 2 1 1 0 4 12

Spring 3 2 2 1 1 0 4 13

These calculations support that a service is not required at this location at this point in time. Table 3.2.8.17: Congwong Bay Lifesaving Service Level Calculator

Dates ABSAMP

Rating

Visitation

Rating

Frequency

Rating

Residency

Rating

Incident History

Rating

Remoteness

Rating

Total LSSL

Score

New Existing

Summer 3 2 2 1 1 0 4 13

Autumn 3 2 2 1 1 0 4 13

Winter 3 1 2 1 1 0 4 12

Spring 3 2 2 1 1 0 4 13

These calculations support that a service is not required at this location at this point in time. The level of lifeguard provision by Randwick City Council is consistent with or exceeds the recommendations of the lifesaving service level calculator. No additional services need be provided by Randwick City Council lifeguards on existing beaches with the exception of treatment option 1.13.


Page 71 of 81

Randwick City Council Lifeguard Service The Randwick City Council has a very commendable lifeguard service. The following section examines the lifeguard services at each location within the Randwick City Council. The recommendations outlined may be useful to council when seeking advice for future lifeguard needs. Currently there are 8 fulltime lifeguards, 8 seasonal lifeguards and casuals are employed as required. Table 3.2.8.18: Current Randwick City Council Lifeguards hours of operation.

Beach Time of the year Patrol time Staffing level

Clovelly

Summer (daylight saving) 8:30 am to 6:00 pm 2

Summer (non-daylight saving) 7:30 am to 5:00 pm 2

Winter (late April - late September) No patrol 0

Coogee



Winter (late April - late September) 7:00 am to 5:00 pm 2

Maroubra



Winter (late April to late September) 7:00 am to 5:00 pm 2

Surf Life Saving Sydney Branch The table below shows the current volunteer lifesaving service dates and times for the previous 2012-2013 season. Table 3.2.8.19: Current SLSC patrol hours and season dates.

Club / Service Season 2012-13 Saturdays Sundays & Public

Holidays

Clovelly SLSC

22/09/12 to 21/10/12 10am - 4pm 9am - 4pm

27/10/12 to 24/03/13 9am - 6pm 9am - 6pm

29/03/13 to 28/04/13 10am - 4pm 10am - 4pm

Coogee SLSC

22/09/12 to 21/10/12 9am - 4pm 9am - 4pm

27/10/12 to 24/03/13 9am - 6pm 8am - 6pm

29/03/13 to 28/04/13 9am - 4pm 9am - 4pm

Maroubra SLSC

22/09/12 to 21/10/12 9am - 4pm 9am - 4pm

27/10/12 to 24/03/13 9am - 6pm 9am - 6pm

29/03/13 to 28/04/13 9am - 4pm 9am - 4pm

South Maroubra SLSC

22/09/12 to 21/10/12 10am - 4pm 9am - 4pm

27/10/12 to 24/03/13 9am - 6pm 8:30am - 6pm

29/03/13 to 28/04/13 10am - 4pm 10am - 4pm

Randwick City Council currently undertakes surveillance patrols via RWC to rock fishing locations within the LGA. These patrols are done on an adhoc basis. Formalised patrols, based from Maroubra, should provide a RWC on water at all times to improve response times and identify locations with high usage. These patrols would take place at times that SLS Support Operations are not operational (e.g. mid-week). During these patrols they can monitor fishermen numbers and locations to update their base. Sydney Branch has the services of one Offshore Rescue Boat. This craft is an integral part of Sydney Branch's Support Operations Group and are on call 24 hours a day, all year round. Offshore boats perform patrols on the Sydney beaches during the summer months to further assist the regular beach patrols. The ORB is backed up by an extensive 24 hour communications network, four wheel drive support vehicle and access to other


Page 72 of 81

emergency services including all Surf Life Saving Australia, Westpac Lifesaver Helicopters, Water Police and Marine Rescue. Offshore 3 is located in the Randwick District “Offshore 3” and patrols the coastline between Botany Bay and Sydney Harbour and beyond if required. The group is based at Malabar in the Randwick District with water access to Long Bay with and within a close proximity to Botany Bay and Sydney Harbour which is within the patrolling area and also provides alternative launching options during large seas. The recording of information gathered during the roving patrols should be collected and centralised so the information can be utilised by lifesavers and lifeguards.

Treatment option 1.12 Lifeguard and lifesaving hours should continue to be reviewed on an ongoing basis with the view of providing the most extensive service available.

Treatment option 1.13 Explore the means to fund an additional lifeguard to do roving patrols of rock fishing locations.

Treatment option 5.2 Surf Life Saving Support Operations (e.g. offshore rescue boat, RWC (jet-ski) and helicopter) resources could formally monitor and record usage patterns on rock fishing locations as part of their normal surveillance patrols and report that information back to Surf Life Saving SurfCom or the local lifeguards to improve the knowledge and data quality for coastal usage patterns. This information could also be used to advice available resources of locations at higher risk of an incident occurring.


Page 73 of 81

4. Emergency Response The relatively high rate of critical emergency incidents in the Randwick LGA in previous years makes ‘emergency response’ considerations very relevant to a drowning prevention strategy for the area. Emergency response considerations include but are not limited to: o Emergency communications/reporting Triple Zero (000) o Emergency service response o Location identification o Emergency service site access o Emergency service communications (internal and joint service) Randwick City Council currently has in place formal procedures for lifeguards & staff regarding emergency reporting and response. These should be reviewed and updated to reflect any changes/improvements as a result of this risk assessment. 4.1 Emergency Communications/Reporting - Triple Zero (000) The ability of members of the public to request assistance in an emergency is an important component of a drowning prevention strategy. Triple Zero (000) remains and should be promoted as the sole method for reporting an emergency on all relevant signage/safety information and facilitated through any (specific) emergency communication devices. Due to the prevalence of mobile telephones across all demographics of society, additional emergency communications devices (beacons/radio phones/alarms) are less relevant where adequate mobile phone coverage exists. It has been noted that the Randwick City Council website advises people to call lifeguards directly. “Randwick City Council Lifeguards respond to emergency calls from Clovelly to La Perouse. Ring 02 9349 6767 in emergencies such as water rescues, cliff rescues and searches.”

8

In any emergency the correct number to call is Triple Zero (000) and ask for Police so as to put in action the Surf Rescue Emergency Response System (NSW). This area is addressed in section 4.5 of this report.

Treatment option 1.14 Randwick City Council are encouraged to advise people to call Triple Zero (000) in the case of an emergency and update their website accordingly.

8 http://www.randwick.nsw.gov.au/Places_for_people/Recreation_and_leisure/Beaches/#BeachSafety

(accessed May, 2013)

http://www.randwick.nsw.gov.au/Places_for_people/Recreation_and_leisure/Beaches/#BeachSafety


Page 74 of 81

4.2 Emergency Response Beacons Emergency Response Beacons (ERB) Emergency Response Beacons can be positioned in high use / high risk areas. They are highly visible and once activated, link via radio to lifesaving/lifeguard services. The two main types of ERB are: Mobile: A movable unit which can be placed at a designated location for a limited period (usually daylight hours) before being removed for security/monitoring reasons. They usually complement an existing on-beach lifesaving service (nearby) or on-duty staff hours (non lifesaving). Fixed/permanent: A unit which is permanently or semi-permanently positioned (secured) at a location, and provides 24/7 capacity. Such an ERB should fit within a coordinated emergency communications system, whereby the unit is monitored 24/7 and complemented with specific procedures for emergencies by those monitoring the ERB. Fixed ERB are generally only considered for use in a high risk location, where no or limited mobile phone coverage exists and where a service can ensure, show and maintain 100% coverage/monitoring of the beacon and have in place a consistent process of equipment checking/testing (daily). More information about ERB can be provided by Surf Life Saving New South Wales. In the Randwick LGA there has only been one fixed ERB in place in recent times. This unit was located at Little Bay next to the amenities block. Due to constant vandalism this unit was removed. With no guarantees of the unit working due to continued vandalism the ERB will not be replaced at this point in time. Yarra Bay was not considered by Australian CoastSafe as it was not assessed as part of the overall risk assessment. There are currently no recommendations for ERB use in the Randwick LGA. Figure 4.2.1: A mobile Emergency Response Beacon in place at a beach.


Page 75 of 81

4.3 Emergency Service Response The relatively high rate of coastal emergency incidents in the Randwick City Council compared with other coastal councils in NSW makes the considerations for ‘emergency response’ very relevant to a drowning prevention strategy for the area. Emergency services and support organisations play a vital role in responding to coastal emergencies within the Randwick City Council. Resources that may respond include: o Police (including Water Police) o Ambulance (including the CHC Helicopter) o Randwick City Council Lifeguards o Surf Life Saving Sydney (Branch Callout Teams & SLSCs) o State Emergency Service (SES) o Rural Fire Service o Marine Rescue NSW o Westpac Rescue Helicopter The map on the next page outlines the locations of emergency services on the Randwick LGA coastline. Below is a summary of these locations. Table 4.3.1: Summary of Emergency services locations in Randwick LGA

Emergency Services – Randwick LGA

Emergency Service Street Address Suburb

NSW Police Force LAC Cnr Bruce Bennetts Pl & Maroubra Rd Maroubra

NSW Police Force 196 Alison Road Randwick

NSW Ambulance Station Mons Ave Maroubra

NSW Ambulance Station High St Randwick

NSW Fire Brigade Station 4 The Avenue Randwick

NSW Fire Brigade Station Cnr Maroubra Road & Flower Street, Maroubra

NSW Fire Brigade Station Cnr Beauchamp & Bunnerong Roads, Matraville

Marine Rescue Cnr Prince Charles Parade and Ward St Solander

Off Shore Rescue Boat (SLS) 1 Fishermans Rd Malabar

Westpac Life Saver Helicopter Cape Banks Road, Botany Bay National Park La Perouse

Water Police N/A Botany Bay

SES 192 Storey Street Maroubra

Emergency Service Communications (internal / joint) Radio coverage for surf life saving communications is strong with Randwick City Council; however there are a few locations where radio coverage is limited/average (maps below). During the assessment and consultation it was noted that radio coverage in Malabar, Little Bay & Cape Banks was not as good as in other areas. A back to back repeater, running off the back of the Bondi repeater, may improve coverage if located at Prince Henry Hospital. The map is of the Bondi repeater coverage area. Whilst coverage in the areas is good further radio tests in these areas should be conducted to analyse the need for upgrades in radio infrastructure.


Page 76 of 81

Key:

No coverage

(black spot) Signal strength (limited)

Signal strength

(average)

Signal strength

(strong)


Page 77 of 81

4.4 Randwick Emergency Tasking Surf rescue agencies in the often work together when emergency incidents occur. There is an opportunity for these agencies to improve relations and these improvements relate to information sharing, communication and the formalisation of emergency response procedures. Surf Rescue Emergency Response System The Surf Rescue Emergency Response System (NSW) was established in January 2008 and provides a single point of contact for emergency services when there is a need to utilise surf rescue assets in coastal incidents. The emergency number can be contacted 24/7 and operators (State Duty Officers) can task/notify any surf rescue asset in NSW. The following page lists the calls in order for an emergency response. The procedures laid out on the following pages are for Surf Life Saving Sydney Branch and may contain some information not relevant to the Randwick City Council LGA. Emergency Action Plans Coastal emergencies can vary between land and water, and can be the result of natural processes or human action. A well planned and rehearsed emergency action plan (EAP) can greatly minimise the extent of injury and damage if an incident does occur. It was noted the Randwick City Council has well developed Emergency Action Plans in place for its Lifeguard operations. Surf Life Saving Sydney should work together, as per SLSNSW Standard Operating Procedures, with Randwick City Council lifeguards to further develop procedures for emergencies. By having set protocols and reviewing these on a regular basis an improved response should be achieved by all emergency responders.

Extract from SLSNSW Standard Operating Procedures LS11.1: “Joint-Response Situations (volunteer and paid services) Where both volunteer lifesaving services and ALS services are co-responding they shall initially fall under the operational command of their own Incident Commander (Branch Duty Officer, Lifeguard Supervisor) respectively, until such time a coordinated command structure is agreed between both services. Where volunteer lifesaving services, ALS and Council services may be undertaking joint operations, command of their services shall fall to their own Patrol Captain, Branch Duty Officer, Lifeguard Supervisors respectively, until such time a coordinated command structure is agreed between all services (if appropriate).”

Emergency Scenario Training Communications and emergency response could be enhance by conducting an annual emergency response scenario training day for lifesaving and lifeguarding services and Surf Life Saving Support Operations. Such exercises help to establish and cement the chain of command, cooperation and adherence operational procedures in the event of an emergency response. Local media and emergency services should be notified prior to the running of emergency response scenarios to minimise any public confusion as a matter of courtesy, and an invitation to attend should also be extended.

Treatment option 1.15 & 5.3 An emergency response training scenario should be conducted with Sydney Branch Duty Officers/Support Operations, Randwick lifeguard supervisors and local emergency services once a year before the commencement of the surf life saving season.


Page 78 of 81

4.5 Sydney Emergency Tasking Details

Specific Callout Procedures: The Sydney Pager System is a message bank service which provides an SMS to all the Sydney Duty Officers. This pager system is the primary contact for tasking Sydney SLS resources. The call will be answered ‘Emergency Surf Rescue is you call an emergency? You should always answer ‘Yes’.

Then say your message: o Person logging the call (State Duty Officer Name and Number) – e.g. John Restuccia, State Duty Officer, o The location of the incident e.g. Bondi or Maroubra o Type of incident Table 4.5.1: Sydney Branch Callout List

Branch Callout List

Priority Call Point of Call Mobile Other Call Sign

1st Call SurfCom Sydney - - SurfCom Sydney

2nd Call Sydney Pager Number - - N/A

3rd Call George Shales - - Sydney 10

4th Call Ben Inglis - - Sydney 11

5th Call Ron Camilleri - - Sydney 12

Table 4.5.2: Sydney Branch Duty Officers

Branch Duty Officers

Randwick

Matt Evans - - Randwick 10

Clive Stiff - - Randwick 11

Trent Thomas - - Randwick 12

John Restuccia - - Randwick 13

Table 4.5.3: Lifeguard Contacts

Lifeguard Contacts

Randwick Council – Non ALS (Clovelly to Maroubra) – Call 24/7

1st Call Peter Halcro - Randwick 1

2nd Call Daryl Pierce - Randwick 2

3rd Call Paul Moffat - Randwick 3

Table 4.5.4: Sydney Branch Support Operations

Support Operations

Support Operation Service Contact Call Sign

Sydney Westpac Helicopter - Lifesaver 1

Offshore Rescue Boat 3 Matt Evans – Offshore 3

RWC Service 2 & 3 Kym Pennell – Sydney Support Ski 2/3


Page 79 of 81

Table 4.5.5: Water Police / Marine Rescue Contacts

Water Police/Marine Rescue MR Botany Bay 1 - Marine Rescue Botany Bay 1

MR Botany Bay 2 - Marine Rescue Botany Bay 2

MR Port Hacking - Marine Rescue Port Hacking

Sydney Operations Manual (Ambulance)

- N/A

Sydney Water Police - N/A

Table 4.5.6: Sydney Branch Club After Hours Contacts

Club After Hour Contacts

Clovelly Jim King -

Coogee David Winkle -

Maroubra Trent Thomas -

South Maroubra Paul Fownes -


Page 80 of 81

5. Monitor and Review The monitor and review process ensures that risk treatment options are meeting their objectives, new hazards and risks are identified in a timely manner and evolving strategies are in line with community expectations. Randwick City Council and the NPWS should ensure that a process of regular review is in place for the effectiveness of any risk mitigation strategies that have been implemented. This should include the collection of data regarding any incidents affecting public safety at the locations assessed as well as the use of public rescue equipment. The Randwick City Council and the NPWS may determine to further engage service providers such as Australian Coast Safe to assist with or even lead this task. Treatment option 1.16 & 2.10 In consultation with relevant stakeholders this document should be reviewed annually to measure the effectiveness of any risk mitigation strategies and drowning prevention initiatives that have been implemented.

Treatment option 1.17 & 2.11 All drowning prevention strategies should be documented and incorporated into the relevant strategic and management plans. This will ensure consistency throughout the management area and a structured approach to maintenance.


Page 81 of 81

6. References Angel Ring Project, 2012, ‘NSW Angel Ring Update – 17

th June 2012’, Australian National Sports fishing

Association (NSW Branch)’, Sydney, viewed on 7TH

January, 2013 <http://www.angelrings.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/NewsBulliten17thJune2012.pdf> Barns, R 2012, ‘NSW Councils Beach Safety Information Signage’, Statewide Mutual, Sydney Bradstreet A, Sherker S, Brighton B, Weir A, Thompson, M 2012, ‘Research Review of Rock Fishing in New South Wales’, Surf Life Saving Australia, Sydney. Census Data, 2011, ‘Quick Stats – Randwick Local Government Area’, Australian Bureau of Statistics, Canberra, viewed on 12 April, 2013 International Life Saving Federation, 2008, ILSF Drowning Prevention Strategies Life Saving Victoria, 2006, ‘National Aquatic and Recreational Signage Style Manual’, 3rd edition, State Government of Victoria, Melbourne McCarthey, A 2012, ‘Advice – Liability of Council when installing Water Safety Signage & Personal Rescue Equipment’, State of New South Wales (Crown Solicitor’s Office), Sydney NSW Division of Local Government, 2012, ‘Practice Note No. 15 – Water Safety’, Department of Premier and Cabinet, Nowra Short, A 2006, ‘Australian Beach Safety Management Program’, Coastal Studies Unit, University of Sydney, Sydney Standards Australia, 2009, ‘AS/NZS ISO 31000:2009 Risk Management Principles and Guidelines’, 4th edition, Standards Australia, Sydney Standards Australia, 2010, ‘AS/NZS 2416:2010 Water safety signs and beach safety flags: Part 1: Specifications for water safety signs used in workplaces and public areas’, Standards Australia, Sydney Standards Australia, 2010, ‘AS/NZS 2416:2010 Water safety signs and beach safety flags: Part 2: Specifications for beach safety flags – “colour, shape, meaning and performance’, Standards Australia, Sydney Standards Australia, 2010, ‘AS/NZS 2416:2010 Water safety signs and beach safety flags: Part 3: Guidance for use’, Standards Australia, Sydney Statewide Mutual, 2007, ‘Best Practice Manual, Signs As Remote Supervision’, V.3, Statewide Mutual, Sydney Surf Life Saving Australia, 2010, ‘The Australian Coastal Public Safety Guidelines’, 2nd edition, Surf Life Saving Australia, Sydney Surf Life Saving Australia, 2011, ‘Coastal Public Safety Risk Assessor Learner Guide’, V.3, Surf Life Saving Australia, Sydney Surf Life Saving NSW, 2012 ‘Standard Operating Procedures, Lifesaving Services, LS11 SAR Operations, Surf Life Saving New South Wales, Belrose

Documents

Randwick Local Government Area€¦ · Coastal Public Safety Risk Assessment: Randwick Local Government Area Page 5 of 81 Executive Summary This report contains findings and recommendations