Public misled say protesters

Stop The Boardwalk Action Group, which has been fighting the proposal since the idea was first floated in 2005, conducted a letter-drop through the Scarborough and Trigg area last week.

It accused the council of deceiving ratepayers in the way the public consultation ” closing on April 22 ” has been advertised.

Spokesperson Robyn Murphy said the lack of an option to refuse the 800-metre boardwalk between Scarborough and Trigg, in addition to a lack of height and material indicators, was deliberately misleading.

‘The City are trying to portray the boardwalk as a little wander through the dunes,’ Ms Murphy said.

‘It looks like it’s at ground level the whole way and there’s nothing that tells us that it’s actually going to be an elevated, aluminium boardwalk.

‘We think it is deliberately misleading.

‘The City’s pictures in the newspaper advertisements and their Stirling Scene community magazine only gives one of the three boardwalk options.

‘They’re putting forward three different routes, but they’re only really advertising option C, which is their preferred option.

‘It doesn’t show their elevations, and we know it has to be quite high because there are seven lookouts and they have to be at high points on the walk.’

Mrs Murphy’s group has dropped 2000 letters in the last week, and she said its supporter group was growing.

‘There’s no demand for it, nobody has asked for it and it’s just been presented by the council as a fait accompli,’ she said.

But City of Stirling special projects and support engineer Jon Offer stressed the plan that was out for public comment was far from the finished product.

‘The City would like to make it very clear that this is an unfunded project that is in the concept design stage only,’ Mr Offer said.

‘For the project to proceed, it would require significant state and or federal funding.’

He also said that the option to object to a proposal was always available during public consultation, but added the boardwalk development option C had been backed by Tourism WA and the City believed it was required.

‘There is only one paved pathway between Trigg and Scarborough with the existing shared path having no on-road alternative for fast-moving cyclists and running directly alongside a major arterial road,’ he said.

‘The only alternative for pedestrians is to walk along the beach, which cannot be considered an inclusive option.

‘It does not provide suitable access for people with impairments/disabilities.

‘Or for people using prams, wheelchairs and gophers, or families with small children on bicycles,’ he said.