Jean Aquinde
Hi Peter,
Please refer to my answer to Shaun regarding more details on the marine infrastructure. According to this publication: Construction Work in Remote Islands in North Queensland Challenges and Solutions, the required materials for the Saibai Sea Wall and Bund Wall Project could not be supplied locally. Suppliers from Cairns needed to be engaged.
Due to the island’s remoteness, lack of local manufacturing capacity and resources, this is more likely a similar case when the pier was first constructed. I would say it’s generally safe to assume that construction materials are transported into the island from various sources in mainland Australia and are subject to Commercial and Construction Waste Restrictions.
On TSIRC’s website, Priority Area One – Marine infrastructure and equitable access, it explicitly says that ‘Poruma, Saibai, Masig, Boigu and Erub each require dredging on the marine access channel for barges and pocket dredging to facilitate barge and essential freight provision at approximately $26M for all five communities.’ Note that the other islands mentioned are also rated as ‘severe’, and that trend may be worth investigating.
According to this TSIRC document, the berthing dolphins and jetty at Saibai are damaged. In the risk rating’s definition, severe means ‘less than 3 years useful life left’. Saibai Island’s marine infrastructure may aesthetically look ‘okay’ in photos because it’s still technically functional, but given the risk rating, expect that the the structural features will likely reach its end of life in a year or so.
I agree with your assessment regarding the seawall. While the seawall is part of the marine infrastructure, its risk rating is likely different from the rest because of its recent reconstruction. Despite the reconstruction of the seawall, it’s important to remember that the village by default is highly susceptible to coastal flooding during high tides and storm surges.
I hope this helps.
Regards,
Jean
Jean Aquinde.
Jean Aquinde.
Jean Aquinde.