The Beagle Editor, Back in 2009 the Lands Department called for expressions of interest to take over and redevelop the site on the Batemans Bay Foreshore where the Innes Boatshed stands. The department was looking for the site redevelopment to include a restaurant with a seafood focus; replacement and incorporation of the existing public toilets into the building; and inclusion of a wharf and jetty to accommodate outdoor seating and eating areas. Nothing came of it and the toilet block remains along with Innes Boatshed that is on an ongoing, month by month rental. But we now have the newly formed Batemans Bay foreshore committee looking at the foreshore again on both sides of the Clyde. As a consequence of the new bridge we are going to see a major change on the foreshore adjacent to Clyde Street. First up will be the removal of off ramps so you can't get into the foreshore direct from the highway. Want to go to the toilet? Then turn down North Street and into Clyde Street, find a park and then find the dunny. Better still stay on the highway and call into Macdonalds. Clyde Street west toilets are going. Council is going to try to get new toilets out of the RMS to put somewhere east of the new bridge and the toilets up near the boatshed are destined to go. But hang on !!!! Why destroy a perfectly good dunny block. Why not keep unisex toilets there in one half of the building and have the information centre booth in the other half with nice glass windows and doors. That way the information centre is exactly where you want it to be, right beside the buses and in the middle of the town where tourists expect to find it. Having the information centre in a swimming pool on the other side of town is just plain silly.
An "artist" view of a transformed toilet block into an Information booth with the boatshed returned to open space
If Councillors and the Mayor and the Batemans Bay Chamber of Commerce think that getting rid of the off ramps will have no effect on local business maybe the Innes Boatshed should relocate to the western end where they can build a new takeaway and jetty for their MV Merinda. Why should they have the only option on prime crown land in the middle of a CBD where their competitors pay $100,000's of thousand in rents and they pay a pittance by comparison. No wonder the Lands Department wanted to look at this again in 2009. It just isn't equitable. The new bridge is going to be 12m high that will let the MV Merinda under it but not much else. Why did the RMS design the bridge to 12m? Tom Ugly’s Bridge over one of Sydney's busiest waterways is only 5.6 metres. The existing Batemans Bay Bridge was built in 1956 to replace a ferry, with a lift span to accommodate commercial marine traffic. The normal vertical clearance for marine traffic is 3.6 metres when the lift span is not raised and the deck height is 4m but can be increased to a maximum clearance of about 23 metres when the lift span is operating.
No off ramps for Batemans Bay in this RMS artist impression of the planned Batemans Bay bridge
If you talk to the foreshore committee fellows and you will discover they are not allowed to reveal any opinion about what is being said about the foreshore and say they are token box-tickers and only able to give input into where garbage bins might go and what colour they should be and are gagged from disclosing where or how many might be installed. Name and address supplied
