Council archive · source document
Attachment 7 - Flood Impact Assessment - Covey · 132005.638.06
Very large file (68.6 MB): the whole original can take several minutes to open, especially on a phone. Text is quick to read.
Flood Impact Assessment
Client: Noosa Shire Council
Project: Doonan Landfill
Location: 561 Noosa-Eumundi Rd, Doonan
covey.com.au
M25-0479Rpt Issue A Lawrence Mills Allister Gaffney January 2026
Project No 244035 | Ref No M25-0479Rpt – Issue A
January 2026
dress
See the original
The page text is free to read. Viewing or downloading an original file needs an account.
Log in to see the originalFull text of the other 82 pages
Page 2
Report Review
Document No. Revision Prepared By Reviewed By Date Issued
M25-0479Rpt Issue A Lawrence Mills Allister Gaffney January 2026
Report Review
Document Revision Method of Issued To
Delivery
M25-0479Rpt Issue A Electronic Noosa Shire Council
© Copyright Covey Associates Pty Ltd (2026).
This document is the property of Covey Associates Pty Ltd. This document and the information contained
in it are solely for the use of the authorised recipient and this document may not be used, copies of
reproduced in whole or part for any purpose other than that for which it was supplied by Covey Associates
Pty Ltd. Covey Associates Pty Ltd makes no representation, undertakes no duty and accepts no
responsibility to any third party who may use or rely upon this document or the information contained in
it.
COPYRIGHT NOTICE: Parts of this document contain material originally prepared by:
This material is the intellectual property and copyright of Covey Associates Pty Ltd.
L Mills A Gaffney
Author: Lawrence Mills Review: Allister Gaffney
Water Resources Engineer Senior Civil Engineer / Team Lead
BEng (Civil) Beng (Civil), MEng, RPEng, RPEQ-24345
Flood Impact Assessment Page 1 of 25
Project No 244035| Ref No M25-0479Rpt – Issue A – January 2026
Page 3
CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION 4
2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION 4
2.1 Site Location 4
2.2 Existing Land-use, Topography and Drainage 5
2.3 Proposed Land-use 5
3.0 FLOOD IMPACT ASSESSMENT 7
3.1 Flood Modelling 7
3.2 Hydrology 7
3.3 Temporal Patterns and Rainfall Intensity 8
3.4 Rainfall Durations 8
3.5 Rainfall Losses 8
3.6 Pre-Burst Rainfall 9
3.7 Areal Reduction Factor 9
3.8 Manning`s Values 9
3.9 Fraction Impervious 10
3.10 Topography 10
3.11 Grid Cell Size 11
3.12 Tailwater Conditions 11
3.13 Hydraulic Structures 11
3.14 Developed Case Scenario 14
3.15 Results 15
3.15.1 Onsite Impacts 15
3.15.2 Offsite Impacts 16
4.0 CONCLUSION 19
5.0 REFERENCES 20
Flood Impact Assessment Page 2 of 25
Project No 244035| Ref No M25-0479Rpt – Issue A – January 2026
Page 4
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2-1 – Site Locality (Image Courtesy of Nearmap) ........................................................................ 4
Figure 2-2 – Proposed Development Masterplan ................................................................................... 5
Figure 2-3 – Development Site Topography with Surrounding 0.5m Existing Contours ........................ 6
Figure 3-1 – Model Extent with 1 meter Contours ................................................................................. 8
Figure 3-2 – Existing Site Topography with 0.5m Contours .................................................................. 10
Figure 3-3 – Hydraulic Structures Locations - North ............................................................................. 12
Figure 3-4 – Hydraulic Structures Locations - South ............................................................................. 12
Figure 3-5 – Water Surface Levels Locations with the 1%AEP CC WSL Extent ..................................... 16
Figure 3-6 – Offsite Impacts Reporting Locations ................................................................................. 17
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2-1 - Development Staging ............................................................................................................ 6
Table 3-1 - Areal Reduction Factors ........................................................................................................ 9
Table 3-2 - Existing Hydraulic Structures .............................................................................................. 13
Table 3-3 - Developed Hydraulic Structures ......................................................................................... 14
Table 3-4 - Water Surface Levels for Design Events ............................................................................. 16
Table 3-5 - Peak Afflux for all Stages and Design Events ...................................................................... 17
List of Appendices
Appendix A SITE PLANS
Appendix B MANNING`S N ROUGHNESS COEFFICIENT MAPS
Appendix C FLOOD MAPS
Flood Impact Assessment Page 3 of 25
Project No 244035| Ref No M25-0479Rpt – Issue A – January 2026
Page 5
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This Flood Impact Assessment (FIA) has been prepared to quantify the overland flow flood impacts for
the proposed development at 561 Noosa-Eumundi Rd, Doonan. This assessment has been prepared for
each development stage outlined as part of the Master Plan. The FIA will ensure appropriate methods
and designs are implemented to suitably mitigate overland flow risks and/or flood hazards and will
provide information and guidance to support the outcomes required by Noosa Shire Council (NSC). NSC
requires that stormwater runoff be appropriately managed prior to discharge from the site.
The development application is for the Doonan Resource and Recovery Redevelopment and associated
infrastructure (e.g., roads, carparks, etc.) to support this use. Refer to the site plans in Appendix A for
further detail. The engineering plans are current at the time of writing this report, if the plans are changed
it is recommended that the plans be provided to Covey Associates for reassessment.
This FIA describes the flooding characteristics of the proposed development site under existing and
proposed conditions to understand what impact, if any, the proposed development may have on the
existing flooding regime within the site and surrounding properties.
2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION
2.1 Site Location
The site's real property description is Lot 77 SP298776. The total area of the site is approximately 192
ha. The area of work is approximately 42 ha. Refer to Figure 2-1 for further details.
Figure 2-1 – Site Locality (Image Courtesy of Nearmap)
Flood Impact Assessment Page 4 of 25
Project No 244035 | Ref No M25-0479Rpt – Issue A – January 2026
Page 6
2.2 Existing Land-use, Topography and Drainage
The site in its existing state is the Noosa Resource Recovery Centre, which is mainly covered with
maintained bushland in the northern portion of the site and existing buildings and landfill areas in the
southern portion. The site is surrounded by bushland to the east, west and south. There are residential
lots and a golf course to the north.
The site slope is approximately 1.5%, with gradual changes in elevation from 30 m AHD to 16 m AHD. The
site slopes from south to north and discharges over the northern boundary to the northern road reserve
before flowing through the golf course. Note that the site also has an external upstream catchment to
the south, which has been considered in the assessment.
2.3 Proposed Land-use
The Masterplan development is inclusive of a Recycle and Transfer Station Centre and associated
infrastructure, which is replacing the Solid Waste Depot and Reviva Noosa Reuse Shop buildings. Further,
a proposed HES basin and future stockpile and concrete crushing areas to replace the existing waste areas,
a future compost facility area, a proposed solar farm, multiple landfill cells and associated infrastructure
(access road, parking areas, etc.). Refer to Figure 2-2 for the development layout.
Figure 2-2 – Proposed Development Masterplan
Flood Impact Assessment Page 5 of 25
Project No 244035 | Ref No M25-0479Rpt – Issue A – January 2026
Page 7
The proposed development will be implemented in six stages. The components for each stage as shown
in Figure 2-2 are described in Table 2-1. The stage boundaries are shown in Figure 2-3.
Table 2-1 - Development Staging
Stage Description
RRA Expansion Project
1 Northern and Eastern Capping (including solar panels) & Compost facility
2 Resource and Recovery Precinct Project
3 Expansion cell 1.1 and 1.2
4 Future landfill cell 3.1
5 Future landfill cell 3.2
6 Future landfill cell 3.3 (ultimate case)
Figure 2-3 – Development Site Topography with Surrounding 0.5m Existing Contours
Flood Impact Assessment Page 6 of 25
Project No 244035 | Ref No M25-0479Rpt – Issue A – January 2026
Page 8
Earthworks have been proposed to accommodate the development of the site and to facilitate efficient
drainage. Appropriate drainage infrastructure has been proposed in the design, including overland flow
swales to discharge local flows from the site and to convey runoff from external catchments around the
site.
3.0 FLOOD IMPACT ASSESSMENT
3.1 Flood Modelling
Flood modelling of the site was undertaken using TUFLOW, a 1D/2D hydraulic modelling software
package, to ensure stormwater flows from upstream catchments external to the site can be conveyed
through the site and to demonstrate that no unacceptable impacts will occur on surrounding properties
as a result of the proposed development.
Scenarios modelled as part of this investigation include:
• Existing Case Scenario – modelling the undeveloped conditions.
• Developed Case Scenario – modelling the site with an updated Digital Elevation Model (DEM) for
each design stage, upgraded hydraulic structure at the road crossing the large clean water drain
and updated Manning’s roughness coefficients and soil infiltration rates to represent the
proposed development layout.
Modelling was undertaken for the 50%, 10%, and 1% and 1% climate change Annual Exceedance
Probability (AEP) events for all existing and developed case scenarios. The current climate events rainfall
depths were scaled up to consider 1.0 degree of warming up to the year 2025 (relative to 1961-1990
rainfall depths). The climate change event rainfall depths were scaled up based on 3.6 degrees of
warming, equivalent to SSP3-7.0 in the year 2100.
Rare events such as 0.5%, 0.2% and 0.1% AEP storm events have also been modelled for the ultimate
developed case scenario (Stage 6). The rare events were also scaled up to consider 1.0 degree of warming.
3.2 Hydrology
A “Rain on Grid” modelling approach was adopted for this overland flow study and as such, no traditional
hydrological modelling was required. The total catchment area adopted for this assessment was
approximately 287 ha. Refer to Figure 3-1 for the overall extent of the 2D flood model and the quadtree
extent for the model. This is discussed further in Section 3.11.
Flood Impact Assessment Page 7 of 25
Project No 244035 | Ref No M25-0479Rpt – Issue A – January 2026
Page 9
Figure 3-1 – Model Extent with 1 meter Contours
3.3 Temporal Patterns and Rainfall Intensity
Temporal patterns are based on Australian Rainfall and Runoff (ARR) 2019 Ensemble Storm Temporal
Patterns and have been sourced directly from ARR data hub. Rainfall intensities are typical for this area
and have been sourced directly from the Bureau of Meteorology (BOM).
3.4 Rainfall Durations
Initially, flood modelling was undertaken for all rainfall durations ranging from 10 minutes to 720 minutes.
This range of durations was simulated to ensure the critical durations for the catchment were captured.
From reviewing the results, it was determined that the critical durations experienced at the proposed
development site and immediately surrounding the site ranged from 20 minutes up to 360 minutes and
therefore these were the durations adopted for this analysis.
3.5 Rainfall Losses
Adopted rainfall losses were sourced from ARR Data Hub. Rainfall losses for this region are as follows:
• Initial Losses – 27.2 mm; and
• Continuing Losses – 2.8 mm/hr.
The losses were scaled up to consider 1.0 degree of warming.
Flood Impact Assessment Page 8 of 25
Project No 244035 | Ref No M25-0479Rpt – Issue A – January 2026
Page 10
3.6 Pre-Burst Rainfall
Rainfall losses adopted for the model are for complete storms. As such, pre-burst depths have been
subtracted from the adopted initial losses to get the correct storm burst initial losses.
From a review of the median and 75% pre-burst depths, it was concluded that the median pre-burst
depths were not appropriate for this investigation, particularly given that the outcome of this
investigation will determine minimum floor levels for residential properties. As such, adopting the 75%
pre burst depths was considered more appropriate for this investigation.
3.7 Areal Reduction Factor
ARR 2019 guidelines recommend adopting Areal Reduction Factors (ARFs) for catchments greater than 1
km2. Given that the associated catchment area modelled as part of this simulation is approximately 2.87
km2, ARFs were adopted for this analysis. Refer to Table 3-1 for adopted ARFs.
Table 3-1 - Areal Reduction Factors
Dur AEP (%)
(min) 50 10 1 0.5 0.2 0.1
20 0.957 0.955 0.948 0.946 0.944 0.943
25 0.962 0.958 0.952 0.951 0.948 0.947
30 0.965 0.96 0.955 0.954 0.951 0.95
45 0.972 0.969 0.961 0.959 0.956 0.954
60 0.976 0.973 0.964 0.962 0.959 0.957
90 0.981 0.977 0.966 0.965 0.96 0.958
120 0.984 0.98 0.967 0.965 0.961 0.958
180 0.987 0.983 0.969 0.966 0.962 0.959
270 0.99 0.986 0.975 0.972 0.969 0.966
360 0.991 0.989 0.982 0.981 0.978 0.977
3.8 Manning`s Values
Manning’s n roughness coefficients have been manually delineated for the entire contributing catchment.
Refer to Appendix B for the Manning’s Roughness Coefficient Maps. Land uses and corresponding
Manning’s roughness coefficients for the hydraulic model are as follows:
• 0.018 – Roads
• 0.075 – Trees / Bushland
• 0.050 – Grassland
• 0.300 – Roof
• 0.030 – Unsealed road
• 0.015 – Water body
• 0.018 – Compost
• 0.020 – Solar Panels
• 0.030 – Landfill
Flood Impact Assessment Page 9 of 25
Project No 244035 | Ref No M25-0479Rpt – Issue A – January 2026
Page 11
3.9 Fraction Impervious
The fraction impervious values adopted for each land use are as follows:
• Roads – 100%
• Trees / Bushland - 0%
• Grassland – 0%
• Roof– 100%
• Unsealed road – 50%
• Water body – 100%
• Compost – 80%
• Solar Panels – 100%
• Landfill – 75%
3.10 Topography
The existing surface topography is shown in Figure 3-2. Topography for the full extent of the 2D hydraulic
model was created using 2015/2023 LIDAR and survey within the development site (grey area on Figure
3-2).
Figure 3-2 – Existing Site Topography with 0.5m Contours
Flood Impact Assessment Page 10 of 25
Project No 244035 | Ref No M25-0479Rpt – Issue A – January 2026
Page 12
3.11 Grid Cell Size
A 16-metre hydraulic grid cell size was adopted for the model generally. A one metre hydraulic grid cell
size was adopted for the area of work within the site and a four to eight-metre grid cell size for the
surrounding areas using the TUFLOW Quadtree add on which precisely simulates hydraulics of
stormwater runoff within the area of interest. Refer to Figure 3-1 for the Quadtree extent. The adopted
hydraulic grid cell sizes have been deemed sufficient to accurately represent flood flows and levels
throughout the hydraulic model.
3.12 Tailwater Conditions
A tailwater condition with an average downstream slope of 0.5% has been adopted at the outlet of the
hydraulic model. The downstream boundary of the model is approximately 500 m downstream from the
outlet of the site. This ensures negligible influence from the downstream tailwater condition.
3.13 Hydraulic Structures
Hydraulic structures adopted for this assessment have been modelled as 1D elements in the hydraulic
model. All 1D element locations are shown in Figure 3-3 and Figure 3-4. The existing culvert information
(e.g., size, length, material and invert levels) was based on available survey information. However, the
survey information for the culverts on Eumundi-Noosa Rd and Emu Mountain Rd only included
downstream invert levels. Therefore, the upstream invert levels were estimated by assuming a culvert
grade of approximately 0.5%. If there are any major discrepancies, it is recommended that the culverts
be surveyed and the information provided to Covey Associates for determination. Refer to Table 3-2 for
further details of the existing hydraulic structures. Refer to Table 3-3 for further details on the proposed
hydraulic structures.
The 1D elements included a 30% blockage factor in accordance with QUDM (2017) and a Manning’s n of
0.013 was applied. The hydraulic model did not include on-site detention tanks.
Flood Impact Assessment Page 11 of 25
Project No 244035 | Ref No M25-0479Rpt – Issue A – January 2026
Page 13
Figure 3-3 – Hydraulic Structures Locations - North
Figure 3-4 – Hydraulic Structures Locations - South
Flood Impact Assessment Page 12 of 25
Project No 244035 | Ref No M25-0479Rpt – Issue A – January 2026
Page 14
Table 3-2 - Existing Hydraulic Structures
Type Upstream
Downstream Size
Invert No. of
ID C=circular Invert Level
Level (mm) Pipes
R=box culvert (m AHD)
(m AHD)
A01 C 15.464 15.262 600 1
B1 C 15.538 15.291 600 2
C1 C 15.526 15.394 600 1
E1 C 14.185 12.849 450 1
G1 C 13.393 13.363 500 1
G2 C 13.716 13.652 450 1
T1 C 20.05 19.86 600 1
T2 C 21.384 21.234 525 1
T3 C 18.722 18.572 900 2
T4 R 18.41 18.262 900 x 300 1
T5 C 18.033 17.883 375 1
T6 C 17.164 17.014 375 1
T7 C 15.15 14.993 375 1
T11 C 23.05 22.247 450 2
T12 C 23.156 23.589 500 1
T13 C 23.84 23.59 375 1
H1 R 16.798 16.735 1200 x 400 1
R1 C 13.419 13.382 500 1
R4 C 13.217 13.089 450 1
R41 C 13.645 13.513 450 1
R6 R 13.772 13.633 450 1
R9 C 14.381 14.28 430 1
R10 C 16.362 16.264 600 1
R11 C 15.732 15.102 600 1
R12 C 15.179 15.11 600 1
R13 C 19.34 19.331 650 1
R14 C 18.457 18.34 725 1
R15 C 17.769 17.679 750 1
R16 C 22.959 22.486 135 2
R23 C 13.391 12.878 375 1
Z1 C 12.932 12.568 450 4
Z2 C 12.07 12.005 375 2
Z3 C 12.932 12.568 525 2
Z4 C 14.01 14.001 500 2
P1 C 13.583 12.823 300 1
P3 C 13.922 13.594 300 1
P2 C 14.219 13.926 225 1
P4 C 13.998 13.62 150 1
P5 C 13.6 13.309 300 1
P6 C 13.298 12.897 300 1
Flood Impact Assessment Page 13 of 25
Project No 244035 | Ref No M25-0479Rpt – Issue A – January 2026
[OCR of page images]
Table 3-2 - Existing Hydraulic Structures
600
600
600
450
500
450
600
525
900
900 x 300
375
375
375
450
500
375
1200 x 400
500
450
450
450
430
600
600
600
650
725
750
135
375
450
375
525!
500
300
300
225
150
300
300
Cc
Cc
Cc
Cc
Cc
Cc
Cc
Cc
Cc
R
Cc
Cc
Cc
Cc
Cc
Cc
R
Cc
Cc
Cc
R
Cc
Cc
Cc
Cc
Cc
Cc
Cc
Cc
Cc
Cc
Cc
Cc
Cc
Cc
Cc
Cc
Cc
Cc
Cc
Pl BP} PTE] PI RPI NI RIN BT REIN RJ RB] Ry Pye] By Py eye] Py Bye] Ry RIM Ry RT By RIN | By Ry RB] RB] Ry RIN] eB
Flood Impact Assessment Page 13 of 25
Project No 244035 | Ref No M25-0479Rpt — Issue A — January 2026
Page 15
Table 3-3 - Developed Hydraulic Structures
Type Upstream Downstream
C=circular Invert Level Invert Level Size No. of
ID
R=box culvert (m AHD) (m AHD) (mm) Pipes
DEV01 R 12.310 12.200 2100 x 1500 6
3.14 Developed Case Scenario
The changes to the developed case scenario included:
• A design TIN to represent finished elevation levels for the proposed development site at each
stage of the development. Refer to Figure 2-3 for the developed case topography adopted
for each development stage in the model;
• Added a set of culverts for the road crossing at the existing clean water drain;
• Update the impervious area to represent the proposed development site; and
• Updated Manning’s n roughness coefficients and soil infiltration rates based on values shown
in the developed model Manning’s maps in Appendix B.
Flood Impact Assessment Page 14 of 25
Project No 244035 | Ref No M25-0479Rpt – Issue A – January 2026
Page 16
3.15 Results
Results from all modelled scenarios were exported and peak water surface levels have been mapped to
demonstrate conveyance within the overland flow paths. A comparison between the existing and
developed peak water surface levels, velocities and hazards was undertaken for all scenarios. The change
in water surface level was mapped to ensure no unacceptable offsite impacts were experienced and
ensure risk and flood hazard will be appropriately managed. Refer to the Flood Maps in Appendix C for
further detail.
Generally, it was demonstrated that the existing and developed overland flow paths have an adequate
conveyance of overland flow from upstream external catchments for all simulated events.
3.15.1 Onsite Impacts
In the developed scenario, during the 1% AEP climate change event, the water surface level on the
western internal roadways and drains increased between by up to 300 mm. However, this flow is safely
conveyed through the site without inundating the proposed buildings. In addition, the hazard (depth x
velocity) on the internal roads is acceptable (< 0.6 m2/s). This increase is also noted immediately upstream
of the proposed culverts (DEV01). This is expected as the proposed road crossing the channel will cause
head loss at this location as the flow enters the culverts. However, the results also demonstrated that the
road crossing has an immunity up to the 1% AEP climate change event. Similarly, within the drains on the
eastern side of the site, flows which are contained within the existing drains demonstrated increases of
up to 250 mm.
The northern section of the site, downstream of the area of works, contains vegetation and existing
overland flow paths. Increased in water surface level of 20-50 mm were noted in these areas. However,
these areas are part of the subject site and are unlikely to be developed, therefore the impacts are not
deemed an actionable nuisance.
The water surface levels in the vicinity of the HES basin and proposed buildings have been provided as
shown in Figure 3-5 and Table 3-4. The levels can be used to set the minimum floor levels as required.
Flood Impact Assessment Page 15 of 25
Project No 244035 | Ref No M25-0479Rpt – Issue A – January 2026
Page 17
Table 3-4 - Water Surface Levels for Design Events
Point ID / Location
AEP
A B C D
50% 13.63 13.10 11.92 11.63
10% 13.89 13 .39 12.06 11.75
1% 14.12 13.67 12.21 11.87
1% CC 14.39 14.00 12.35 11.98
0.50% 14.17 13.73 12.23 11.89
0.20% 14.27 13.85 12.29 11.93
0.10% 14.35 13.95 12.33 11.96
Figure 3-5 – Water Surface Levels Locations with the 1%AEP CC WSL Extent
3.15.2 Offsite Impacts
Offsite impacts were observed to occur at three locations as labelled in Figure 3-6. A summary of the peak
afflux is shown in Table 3-5.
Flood Impact Assessment Page 16 of 25
Project No 244035 | Ref No M25-0479Rpt – Issue A – January 2026
Page 18
Table 3-5 - Peak Afflux for all Stages and Design Events
Region ID / Peak Afflux (mm)*
AEP
Location Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3 Stage 4 Stage 5 Stage 6
50%AEP 21 21 43 43 43 75
10%AEP 0 0 58 58 58 105
1
1%AEP 0 0 51 51 51 125
1%AEPCC 0 0 62 62 62 147
50%AEP 6 6 15 15 15 67
10%AEP 0 0 9 9 9 65
2
1%AEP 1 1 13 13 13 82
1%AEPCC 1 1 18 18 18 90
50%AEP 12 9 11 5 8 35
10%AEP 5 3 5 0 2 32
3
1%AEP 5 0 0 0 2 21
1%AEPCC 0 0 0 0 0 19
*Orange highlighting denotes afflux greater than 20mm
Figure 3-6 – Offsite Impacts Reporting Locations
Increases in water surface level of 20-150 mm were noted within and in the vicinity of the easement
adjacent the south-western boundary (Location 1). Under the 50%AEP event increases in water surface
level of 21-75mm occur throughout all development stages within the easement. For 10%, 1% and 1%
AEP events, the water level increases from Stage 3 onwards, with affluxes ranging from 51mm-147mm
and the largest increase occurring in the 1%AEPCC event. During these events the largest impacts occur
in a single isolated point, within the Emu Mountain Road reserve as opposed to the easement itself.
Flood Impact Assessment Page 17 of 25
Project No 244035 | Ref No M25-0479Rpt – Issue A – January 2026
Page 19
There is an existing valley in this area which conveys overland flow through this easement. However, as
the increase in water surface level is contained within this valley and the valley conveys flow in the existing
case it is not considered to be an actionable nuisance.
Increases in peak water surface levels also occurred just outside the south-eastern boundary within
Walter Hay Drive (Location 2), a Transport and Main Roads (TMR) administered road reserve. Increases
in water surface levels were relatively minor at this location, not exceeding 18mm, up until Stage 5. The
impact was greater for Stage 6, with increases in water surface level of up to 82mm. In Stages 1 and 2,
increases in peak water surface level were slightly more prominent for the 50% AEP whilst in Stage 3-5
the increase was notably largest for the 1% AEP CC event. No inundation of Walter Hay Drive roadway
occurs under any scenario and the impacts are contained within the vegetation and existing valley. It is
expected that under the developed case scenario, the existing valley will continue to convey flows safely
to the north-west back through the subject site, and would not pose an actionable nuisance.
Similarly, in the vicinity of the road crossing at Hollett Road (Location 3), increases in water surface levels
were also relatively minor up until Stage 5, not exceeding 12mm, with larger increases occurring after
Stage 6. Increases in peak water surface levels ranged between 19-35 mm for the 50%, 10% and 1% AEP
events. Notably at this location, the maximum increase occurred in the 50% AEP for all design stages as
opposed to the 1%AEPCC event. In the existing scenario the maximum hazard is 2.26 m2/s, which has a
hazard classification of H4 and is considered to be unsafe for vehicles and people (AIDR, 2017). In the
developed case the hazard increases slightly to 2.31 m2/s however it remains in the same hazard category.
Therefore, the impact is not considered to be an actionable nuisance as the road crossing maintains the
same hazard category and is not safe to use for the simulated design events.
Excluding the impacts noted above, the flood mapping demonstrated that there were no other offsite
increases in peak water surface level, depth, velocity or hazard as a result of the proposed development.
Further, as the proposed additional impervious areas are much smaller than the overall catchment, the
minor increase in the fraction impervious has a negligible effect on the overall catchment peak discharges,
as demonstrated by the flood mapping. Further, as the majority of the impervious areas of the proposed
development are located closer to the downstream boundary (outlet) the peak discharge will arrive at
the outlet much sooner than the overall catchment. Therefore, no detention is required for the proposed
development.
Based on a review of the results shown in the flood maps in Appendix C, it can be concluded that the
proposed development will not create a nuisance or interfere with the use or enjoyment of any land
surrounding the proposed development site.
Flood Impact Assessment Page 18 of 25
Project No 244035 | Ref No M25-0479Rpt – Issue A – January 2026
Page 20
4.0 CONCLUSION
Covey Associates has been engaged by Noosa Shire Council to provide a Flood Impact Assessment for the
staged development of the proposed Doonan Landfill redevelopment and its facilities and associated
infrastructure at 561 Noosa-Eumundi Rd, Doonan.
Ensemble storm hydraulic (TUFLOW) flood modelling in accordance with ARR 2019 guidelines was
undertaken for all existing and developed case scenarios for the 50%, 10%, 1% and 1% climate change
Annual Exceedance Probability (AEP) events. For the ultimate developed case scenario (Stage 6),
additional modelling was undertaken for the 0.5%, 0.2%, and 0.1% AEP events to determine future
building floor levels.
The flood mapping demonstrated that generally the on-site overland flow paths adequately conveyed
both internal and external catchment flows. Increases in water surface level were noted in the developed
case scenarios, however, all increases were contained within existing flow paths and at road crossings
there was no worsening of the existing hazard category for these areas. Further, as a result of the
proposed development, there is no actionable nuisance due to the change in peak water level, depth,
velocity and hazard on the surrounding properties for all modelled AEPs.
Through this assessment, it has been demonstrated that the proposed development and associated
infrastructure will not result in any actionable nuisance to any of the surrounding properties or
infrastructure with regards to overland flow. Further, based on the results of this study, on-site detention
is not required for the development.
Sufficient consideration of stormwater quantity controls has been demonstrated by:
• Compliance with the requirements of the Noosa Plan (2020);
• Queensland State Planning Policy (2017); and
• Compliance with QUDM (2017).
Flood Impact Assessment Page 19 of 25
Project No 244035 | Ref No M25-0479Rpt – Issue A – January 2026
Page 21
5.0 REFERENCES
Australian Institute for Disaster Resilience (AIDR) (2017), Australian Disaster Resilience Handbook – Flood
Hazard.
Department of State Development, Infrastructure and Planning (2017), State Planning Policy. Brisbane,
Queensland.
Institute of Public Works Engineering Australia, Queensland Division Ltd (2017), Queensland Urban
Drainage Manual, Fourth Edition.
Noosa Shire Council (2020), Noosa Plan
Flood Impact Assessment Page 20 of 25
Project No 244035 | Ref No M25-0479Rpt – Issue A – January 2026
Page 22
APPENDIX A
SITE PLANS
Flood Impact Assessment Page 21 of 25
Project No 244035 | Ref No M25-0479Rpt – Issue A – January 2026
Page 23
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE
CONTRACTOR TO CONTACT THE RELEVANT
AUTHORITIES TO CONFIRM THE LOCATION OF
ALL EXISTING SERVICES PRIOR TO THE
FUTURE GRAVEL COMMENCEMENT OF EXCAVATION
HARDSTAND, CLEANAWAY
VEHICLE PARKING AREA
CURRENT GREEN
PROP WASTE AREA,
O
HES B SED FUTURE SCRAP
REVIVA ASIN
CENTRE METAL STOCKPILE CURRENT GREEN
AREA WASTE AREA,
FUTURE CONCRETE
CLEANAWAY CRUSHING AREA
DEPOT
CURRENT CONCRETE
CRUSHING AND SCRAP
METAL STOCKPILE AREA,
SITE ENTRANCE PROPOSED FUTURE
COMPOST FACILITY AREA
TRANSFER FUTURE
STATION LANDFILL
BUILDING CELL 3.1
ACCESS ROAD
EXISTING
PROPOSED SOLAR FARM LANDFILL
CELL 2.1
EUMUNDI-NOOSA ROAD
RU
TC EXISTING
HR
OA LANDFILL EXISTING FUTURE
D
CELL 1.1 LANDFILL LANDFILL
CELL 2.2 CELL 3.2
DRIVE
R HAY
E
WALT
FUTURE HES BASIN
LANDFILL
EXPANSION CELL 1.1 EXPAN CELL 3.3
SION C
ELL 2.2
EMU MOUNTAIN ROAD
SCALE 1:2000 (A1) - 1:4000 (A3)
CLEAN WATER
DIVERSION DRAIN Check all dimensions before commencement of work.
Check Site boundary dimensions from the Title plans
Check Building Boundary clearances by set out.
Notwithstanding the information supplied on this drawing,
the location, depth and extent of underground or overhead
services are to be confirmed and protected on site by the
contractor prior to commencement of works.
Approved
Checked - CJT Drawing title - Project - DOONAN RESOURCE Site - Project No. 244035 Sheet No. C1001
Design - CJT Drawn - KR
COMPLETE SITE MASTERPLAN RECOVERY REDEVELOPMENT 561 EUMUNDI-NOOSA ROAD, Digital Ref : C1000 SITE MASTERPLAN Issue : B
Scales - AS SHOWN B 22.04.2025 INCLUSION OF CLEANAWAY PARKING HARDSTAND KR COVEY ASSOCIATES PTY LTD 124 DUPORTH AVENUE Client -
NOOSA SHIRE COUNCIL DOONAN This Document is copyright and shall not be copied
A 24.02.2025 PRELIMINARY ISSUE CJT
ABN 59 137 305 992 PO BOX 16 without written approval, nor shall it be used except
Document Stage - PRELIMINARY (07) 5443 7777 MAROOCHYDORE QLD 4558 for the Development and the Site Specified.
Issue Date Description By [email protected]
C:\12dS\data\12DSERVER\244035_3605\Design (Covey)\Drawings - Concept Design\Uncontrolled\C1000 SITE MASTERPLAN.dwg Plot 3 June 2025 - 4:27 PM
Page 24
APPENDIX B
MANNING`S N ROUGHNESS COEFFICIENT MAPS
Flood Impact Assessment Page 22 of 25
Project No 244035 | Ref No M25-0479Rpt – Issue A – January 2026
Page 25
covey Doonan Landfill Existing Case Manning's n Roughness Coefficients Map Legend Oo Site Boundary Cadastral Boundary Manning's n Roughness Coefficients O Bo B Bo Oo Oo O Oo B O Default Grassland (n=0.050) Road Pavement (n=0.018) Trees and Bushland (n=0.075) Roof (n=0.300) Unsealed Road (n=0.030) Water Body (n=0.015) Landfill (n=0.030) Grassland (n=0.050) Compost (n=0.018) Solar Panels (n=0.020) 0 100
Page 26
covey Doonan Landfill Developed Case Manning's n Roughness Coefficients Map Legend Oo Site Boundary Cadastral Boundary Manning's n Roughness Coefficients Default Grassland (n=0.050) Road Pavement (n=0.018) Trees and Bushland (n=0.075) Roof (n=0.300) Unsealed Road (n=0.030) Water Body (n=0.015) 030) Grassland (| Compost (n=0.018) Solar Panels (n=0.020) O Bo B Bo Oo Oo O Oo B O 0 100
Page 27
APPENDIX C
FLOOD MAPS
Flood Impact Assessment Page 23 of 25
Project No 244035 | Ref No M25-0479Rpt – Issue A – January 2026
Page 28
Landfill Existing Case Scenario 50% AEP Water Surface Level Map Legend Oo Site Boundary Cadastral Boundary Water Surface Level (mAHD) i <=4 i +-6 i c-s 8-10 10-12 12-14 14-16 16-18 18 - 20 20 - 22 22 - 24 24-26 26 - 28 28 - 30 30 - 32 32 - 34 34 - 36 36 - 38 38-40 Oo O O o oH a Oo O O Oo Oo O a o a o BH v & 0 100
Page 29
Landfill Existing Case Scenario 10% AEP Water Surface Level Map Legend Oo Site Boundary Cadastral Boundary Water Surface Level (mAHD) i <=4 i +-6 i c-s 8-10 10-12 12-14 14-16 16-18 18 - 20 20 - 22 22 - 24 24-26 26 - 28 28 - 30 30 - 32 32 - 34 34 - 36 36 - 38 38-40 Oo O O o oH a Oo O O Oo Oo O a o a o BH v & 0 100
Page 30
Doonan Landfill Existing Case Scenario 1% AEP Water Surface Level Map Legend Oo Site Boundary Cadastral Boundary Water Surface Level (mAHD) <=4 4-6 6-8 8-10 10-12 12-14 14-16 16-18 18 - 20 20 - 22 22 - 24 24-26 26 - 28 28 - 30 30 - 32 32 - 34 34 - 36 36 - 38 38-40 a a a Oo O O o oH a Oo O O Oo Oo O a o a o BH v & 0 100
Page 31
Doonan Landfill Existing Case Scenario 1% AEP Climate Change Water Surface Level Map Legend Oo Site Boundary Cadastral Boundary Water Surface Level (mAHD) <=4 4-6 6-8 8-10 10-12 12-14 14-16 16-18 18 - 20 20 - 22 22 - 24 24-26 26 - 28 28 - 30 30 - 32 32 - 34 34 - 36 36 - 38 38-40 a a a Oo O O o oH a Oo O O Oo Oo O a o a o BH vo & 0 100
Page 32
Doonan Landfill Developed Case Scenario Stage 1 - 50% AEP Water Surface Level Map | Legend © site Boundary Cadastral Boundary Water Surface Level (mAHD) i <=4 HB +-6 i c-s 8-10 10-12 12-14 14-16 16-18 18-20 20-22 22 - 24 24-26 26 - 28 28 - 30 30-32 32 - 34 34 - 36 36 - 38 38-40 Oo O O o oH a Oo O O Oo Oo O a o a o a vo é 0 100
Page 33
Doonan Landfill Developed Case Scenario Stage 1 - 10% AEP Water Surface Level Map Legend © site Boundary Cadastral Boundary Water Surface Level (mAHD) <=4 4-6 6-8 8-10 10-12 12-14 14-16 16-18 18-20 20-22 22 - 24 24-26 26 - 28 28 - 30 30-32 32 - 34 34 - 36 36 - 38 38-40 a a a Oo O O o oH a Oo O O Oo Oo O a o a o a vo é 0 100
Page 34
Doonan Landfill Developed Case Scenario Stage 1 - 1% AEP Water Surface Level Map Legend © site Boundary Cadastral Boundary Water Surface Level (mAHD) <=4 4-6 6-8 8-10 10-12 12-14 14-16 16-18 18-20 20-22 22 - 24 24-26 26 - 28 28 - 30 30-32 32 - 34 34 - 36 36 - 38 38-40 a a a Oo O O o oH a Oo O O Oo Oo O a o a o a vo é Emu|Mountain Rd 0 100
Page 35
Doonan Landfill Developed Case Scenario Stage 1 - 1% AEP Climate Change Water Surface Level Map Legend © site Boundary Cadastral Boundary Water Surface Level (mAHD) <=4 4-6 6-8 8-10 10-12 12-14 14-16 16-18 18-20 20-22 22 - 24 24-26 26 - 28 28 - 30 30-32 32 - 34 34 - 36 36 - 38 38-40 a a a Oo O O o oH a Oo O O Oo Oo O a o a o a vo é 0 100
Page 36
Doonan Landfill Developed Case Scenario Stage 2 - 50% AEP Water Surface Level Map | Legend © site Boundary Cadastral Boundary Water Surface Level (mAHD) i <=4 HB +-6 i c-s 8-10 10-12 12-14 14-16 16-18 18-20 20-22 22 - 24 24-26 26 - 28 28 - 30 30-32 32 - 34 34 - 36 36 - 38 38-40 Oo O O o oH a Oo O O Oo Oo O a o a o a vo é 0 100
Page 37
Doonan Landfill Developed Case Scenario Stage 2 - 10% AEP Water Surface Level Map Legend © site Boundary Cadastral Boundary Water Surface Level (mAHD) <=4 4-6 6-8 8-10 10-12 12-14 14-16 16-18 18-20 20-22 22 - 24 24-26 26 - 28 28 - 30 30-32 32 - 34 34 - 36 36 - 38 38-40 a a a Oo O O o oH a Oo O O Oo Oo O a o a o a vo é 0 100
Page 38
Doonan Landfill Developed Case Scenario Stage 2 - 1% AEP Water Surface Level Map Legend © site Boundary Cadastral Boundary Water Surface Level (mAHD) <=4 4-6 6-8 8-10 10-12 12-14 14-16 16-18 18-20 20-22 22 - 24 24-26 26 - 28 28 - 30 30-32 32 - 34 34 - 36 36 - 38 38-40 a a a Oo O O o oH a Oo O O Oo Oo O a o a o a vo é Emu|Mountain Rd 0 100
Page 39
Doonan Landfill Developed Case Scenario Stage 2 - 1% AEP Climate Change Water Surface Level Map Legend © site Boundary Cadastral Boundary Water Surface Level (mAHD) <=4 4-6 6-8 8-10 10-12 12-14 14-16 16-18 18-20 20-22 22 - 24 24-26 26 - 28 28 - 30 30-32 32 - 34 34 - 36 36 - 38 38-40 a a a Oo O O o oH a Oo O O Oo Oo O a o a o a vo é 0 100
Page 40
Doonan Landfill Developed Case Scenario Stage 3 - 50% AEP Water Surface Level Map | Legend © site Boundary Cadastral Boundary Water Surface Level (mAHD) i <=4 HB +-6 i c-s 8-10 10-12 12-14 14-16 16-18 18-20 20-22 22 - 24 24-26 26 - 28 28 - 30 30-32 32 - 34 34 - 36 36 - 38 38-40 Oo O O o oH a Oo O O Oo Oo O a o a o a vo é 0 100
Page 41
Doonan Landfill Developed Case Scenario Stage 3 - 10% AEP Water Surface Level Map Legend © site Boundary Cadastral Boundary Water Surface Level (mAHD) <=4 4-6 6-8 8-10 10-12 12-14 14-16 16-18 18-20 20-22 22 - 24 24-26 26 - 28 28 - 30 30-32 32 - 34 34 - 36 36 - 38 38-40 a a a Oo O O o oH a Oo O O Oo Oo O a o a o a vo é 0 100
Page 42
Doonan Landfill Developed Case Scenario Stage 3 - 1% AEP Water Surface Level Map Legend © site Boundary Cadastral Boundary Water Surface Level (mAHD) <=4 4-6 6-8 8-10 10-12 12-14 14-16 16-18 18-20 20-22 22 - 24 24-26 26 - 28 28 - 30 30-32 32 - 34 34 - 36 36 - 38 38-40 a a a Oo O O o oH a Oo O O Oo Oo O a o a o a vo é 0 100
Page 43
Doonan Landfill Developed Case Scenario Stage 3 - 1% AEP Climate Change Water Surface Level Map Legend © site Boundary Cadastral Boundary Water Surface Level (mAHD) <=4 4-6 6-8 8-10 10-12 12-14 14-16 16-18 18-20 20-22 22 - 24 24-26 26 - 28 28 - 30 30-32 32 - 34 34 - 36 36 - 38 38-40 a a a Oo O O o oH a Oo O O Oo Oo O a o a o a vo é 0 100
Page 44
Doonan Landfill Developed Case Scenario Stage 4 - 50% AEP Water Surface Level Map | Legend © site Boundary Cadastral Boundary Water Surface Level (mAHD) i <=4 HB +-6 i c-s 8-10 10-12 12-14 14-16 16-18 18-20 20-22 22 - 24 24-26 26 - 28 28 - 30 30-32 32 - 34 34 - 36 36 - 38 38-40 Oo O O o oH a Oo O O Oo Oo O a o a o a vo é 0 100
Page 45
Doonan Landfill Developed Case Scenario Stage 4 - 10% AEP Water Surface Level Map Legend © site Boundary Cadastral Boundary Water Surface Level (mAHD) <=4 4-6 6-8 8-10 10-12 12-14 14-16 16-18 18-20 20-22 22 - 24 24-26 26 - 28 28 - 30 30-32 32 - 34 34 - 36 36 - 38 38-40 a a a Oo O O o oH a Oo O O Oo Oo O a o a o a vo é 0 100
Page 46
Doonan Landfill Developed Case Scenario Stage 4 - 1% AEP Water Surface Level Map Legend © site Boundary Cadastral Boundary Water Surface Level (mAHD) <=4 4-6 6-8 8-10 10-12 12-14 14-16 16-18 18-20 20-22 22 - 24 24-26 26 - 28 28 - 30 30-32 32 - 34 34 - 36 36 - 38 38-40 a a a Oo O O o oH a Oo O O Oo Oo O a o a o a vo é 0 100
Page 47
covey Doonan Landfill Developed Case Scenario Stage 4 - 1% AEP Climate Change Water Surface Level Map Legend © site Boundary Cadastral Boundary Water Surface Level (mAHD) <=4 4-6 6-8 8-10 10-12 12-14 14-16 16-18 18-20 20-22 22 - 24 24-26 26 - 28 28 - 30 30-32 32 - 34 34 - 36 36 - 38 38-40 a a a Oo O O o oH a Oo O O Oo Oo O a o a o a vo é 0 100
Page 48
Doonan Landfill Developed Case Scenario Stage 5 - 50% AEP Water Surface Level Map | Legend © site Boundary Cadastral Boundary Water Surface Level (mAHD) i <=4 HB +-6 i c-s 8-10 10-12 12-14 14-16 16-18 18-20 20-22 22 - 24 24-26 26 - 28 28 - 30 30-32 32 - 34 34 - 36 36 - 38 38-40 Oo O O o oH a Oo O O Oo Oo O a o a o a vo é 0 100
Page 49
Doonan Landfill Developed Case Scenario Stage 5 - 10% AEP Water Surface Level Map Legend © site Boundary Cadastral Boundary Water Surface Level (mAHD) <=4 4-6 6-8 8-10 10-12 12-14 14-16 16-18 18-20 20-22 22 - 24 24-26 26 - 28 28 - 30 30-32 32 - 34 34 - 36 36 - 38 38-40 a a a Oo O O o oH a Oo O O Oo Oo O a o a o a vo é 0 100
Page 50
Doonan Landfill Developed Case Scenario Stage 5 - 1% AEP Water Surface Level Map Legend © site Boundary Cadastral Boundary Water Surface Level (mAHD) <=4 4-6 6-8 8-10 10-12 12-14 14-16 16-18 18-20 20-22 22 - 24 24-26 26 - 28 28 - 30 30-32 32 - 34 34 - 36 36 - 38 38-40 a a a Oo O O o oH a Oo O O Oo Oo O a o a o a vo é 0 100
Page 51
covey Doonan Landfill Developed Case Scenario Stage 5 - 1% AEP Climate Change Water Surface Level Map Legend © site Boundary Cadastral Boundary Water Surface Level (mAHD) <=4 4-6 6-8 8-10 10-12 12-14 14-16 16-18 18-20 20-22 22 - 24 24-26 26 - 28 28 - 30 30-32 32 - 34 34 - 36 36 - 38 38-40 a a a Oo O O o oH a Oo O O Oo Oo O a o a o a vo é 0 100
Page 52
Doonan Landfill Developed Case Scenario Stage 6 - 50% AEP Water Surface Level Map Legend © site Boundary Cadastral Boundary Water Surface Level (mAHD) <=4 4-6 6-8 8-10 10-12 12-14 14-16 16-18 18-20 20-22 22 - 24 24-26 26 - 28 28 - 30 30-32 32 - 34 34 - 36 36 - 38 38-40 a a a Oo O O o oH a Oo O O Oo Oo O a o a o a vo é 0 100
Page 53
Doonan Landfill Developed Case Scenario Stage 6 - 10% AEP Water Surface Level Map Legend © site Boundary Cadastral Boundary Water Surface Level (mAHD) <=4 4-6 6-8 8-10 10-12 12-14 14-16 16-18 18-20 20-22 22 - 24 24-26 26 - 28 28 - 30 30-32 32 - 34 34 - 36 36 - 38 38-40 a a a Oo O O o oH a Oo O O Oo Oo O a o a o a vo é 0 100
Page 54
covey Doonan Landfill Developed Case Scenario Stage 6 - 1% AEP Water Surface Level Map Legend © site Boundary Cadastral Boundary Water Surface Level (mAHD) <=4 4-6 6-8 8-10 10-12 12-14 14-16 16-18 18-20 20-22 22 - 24 24-26 26 - 28 28 - 30 30-32 32 - 34 34 - 36 36 - 38 38-40 a a a Oo O O o oH a Oo O O Oo Oo O a o a o a vo é 0 100
Page 55
covey Doonan Landfill Developed Case Scenario Stage 6 - 1% AEP Climate Change Water Surface Level Map Legend © site Boundary Cadastral Boundary Water Surface Level (mAHD) <=4 4-6 6-8 8-10 10-12 12-14 14-16 16-18 18-20 20-22 22 - 24 24-26 26 - 28 28 - 30 30-32 32 - 34 34 - 36 36 - 38 38-40 a a a Oo O O o oH a Oo O O Oo Oo O a o a o a vo é 0 100
Page 56
covey Doonan Landfill Developed Case Scenario Stage 6 - 0.5% AEP Water Surface Level Map Legend © site Boundary Cadastral Boundary Water Surface Level (mAHD) <=4 4-6 6-8 8-10 10-12 12-14 14-16 16-18 18-20 20-22 22 - 24 24-26 26 - 28 28 - 30 30-32 32 - 34 34 - 36 36 - 38 38-40 a a a Oo O O o oH a Oo O O Oo Oo O a o a o a vo é 0 100
Page 57
covey Doonan Landfill Developed Case Scenario Stage 6 - 0.2% AEP Water Surface Level Map Legend © site Boundary Cadastral Boundary Water Surface Level (mAHD) <=4 4-6 6-8 8-10 10-12 12-14 14-16 16-18 18-20 20-22 22 - 24 24-26 26 - 28 28 - 30 30-32 32 - 34 34 - 36 36 - 38 38-40 a a a Oo O O o oH a Oo O O Oo Oo O a o a o a vo é 0 100
Page 58
covey Doonan Landfill Developed Case Scenario Stage 6 - 0.1% AEP Water Surface Level Map Legend © site Boundary Cadastral Boundary Water Surface Level (mAHD) <=4 4-6 6-8 8-10 10-12 12-14 14-16 16-18 18-20 20-22 22 - 24 24-26 26 - 28 28 - 30 30-32 32 - 34 34 - 36 36 - 38 38-40 a a a Oo O O o oH a Oo O O Oo Oo O a o a o a vo é 0 100
Page 59
Doonan Landfill Stage 1 - 50% AEP Afflux Map Legend © site Boundary Cadastral Boundary Afflux (m) MB <=-01 -0.1 - -0.05 0.05 - -0.02 -0.02 - 0.02 0.02 - 0.05 0.05 - 0.1 >O1 Was Dry Now Wet Was Wet Now Dry Oo O O O Oo oH a a 0 100
Page 60
covey Doonan Landfill Stage 1 - 10% AEP Afflux Map Legend © site Boundary Cadastral Boundary Afflux (m) MB <=-01 -0.1 - -0.05 0.05 - -0.02 -0.02 - 0.02 0.02 - 0.05 0.05 - 0.1 >O1 Was Dry Now Wet Was Wet Now Dry 0 100
Page 61
covey Doonan Landfill Stage 1 - 1% AEP Afflux Map Legend © site Boundary Cadastral Boundary Afflux (m) MB <=-01 -0.1 - -0.05 0.05 - -0.02 -0.02 - 0.02 0.02 - 0.05 0.05 - 0.1 >O1 Was Dry Now Wet Was Wet Now Dry 0 100
Page 62
covey Doonan Landfill Stage 1 - 1% AEP Climate Change Afflux Map Legend © site Boundary Cadastral Boundary > 3 = x > 3 2 <= -0.1 - -0.05 0.05 - -0.02 -0.02 - 0.02 0.02 - 0.05 0.05 - 0.1 >O1 Was Dry Now Wet Was Wet Now Dry m a Oo O O O Oo oH a a 0 100
Page 63
Doonan Landfill Stage 2 - 50% AEP Afflux Map Legend © site Boundary Cadastral Boundary Afflux (m) MB <=-01 -0.1 - -0.05 0.05 - -0.02 -0.02 - 0.02 0.02 - 0.05 0.05 - 0.1 >O1 Was Dry Now Wet Was Wet Now Dry Oo O O O Oo oH a a 0 100
Page 64
covey Doonan Landfill Stage 2 - 10% AEP Afflux Map Legend © site Boundary Cadastral Boundary Afflux (m) MB <=-01 -0.1 - -0.05 0.05 - -0.02 -0.02 - 0.02 0.02 - 0.05 0.05 - 0.1 >O1 Was Dry Now Wet Was Wet Now Dry 0 100
Page 65
covey Doonan Landfill Stage 2 - 1% AEP Afflux Map Legend © site Boundary Cadastral Boundary Afflux (m) MB <=-01 -0.1 - -0.05 0.05 - -0.02 -0.02 - 0.02 0.02 - 0.05 0.05 - 0.1 >O1 Was Dry Now Wet Was Wet Now Dry 0 100
Page 66
covey Doonan Landfill Stage 2 - 1% AEP Climate Change Afflux Map Legend © site Boundary Cadastral Boundary > 3 = x > 3 2 <= -0.1 - -0.05 0.05 - -0.02 -0.02 - 0.02 0.02 - 0.05 0.05 - 0.1 >O1 Was Dry Now Wet Was Wet Now Dry m a Oo O O O Oo oH a a 0 100
Page 67
Doonan Landfill Stage 3 - 50% AEP Afflux Map Legend © site Boundary Cadastral Boundary Afflux (m) MB <=-01 -0.1 - -0.05 0.05 - -0.02 -0.02 - 0.02 0.02 - 0.05 0.05 - 0.1 >O1 Was Dry Now Wet Was Wet Now Dry Oo O O O Oo oH a a 0 100
Page 68
covey Doonan Landfill Stage 3 - 10% AEP Afflux Map Legend © site Boundary Cadastral Boundary > 3 = x > 3 2 <= -0.1 - -0.05 0.05 - -0.02 -0.02 - 0.02 0.02 - 0.05 0.05 - 0.1 >O1 Was Dry Now Wet Was Wet Now Dry m a Oo O O O Oo oH a a 0 100
Page 69
covey Doonan Landfill Stage 3 - 1% AEP Afflux Map Legend © site Boundary Cadastral Boundary > 3 = x > 3 2 <= -0.1 - -0.05 0.05 - -0.02 -0.02 - 0.02 0.02 - 0.05 0.05 - 0.1 >O1 Was Dry Now Wet Was Wet Now Dry m a Oo O O O Oo oH a a 0 100
Page 70
covey Doonan Landfill Stage 3 - 1% AEP Climate Change Afflux Map Legend © site Boundary Cadastral Boundary > 3 = x > 3 2 <= -0.1 - -0.05 0.05 - -0.02 -0.02 - 0.02 0.02 - 0.05 0.05 - 0.1 >O1 Was Dry Now Wet Was Wet Now Dry m a Oo O O O Oo oH a a 0 100
Page 71
Doonan Landfill Stage 4 - 50% AEP Afflux Map Legend © site Boundary Cadastral Boundary Afflux (m) MB <=-01 -0.1 - -0.05 0.05 - -0.02 -0.02 - 0.02 0.02 - 0.05 0.05 - 0.1 >O1 Was Dry Now Wet Was Wet Now Dry Oo O O O Oo oH a a 0 100
Page 72
covey Doonan Landfill Stage 4 - 10% AEP Afflux Map Legend © site Boundary Cadastral Boundary > 3 = x > 3 2 <= -0.1 - -0.05 0.05 - -0.02 -0.02 - 0.02 0.02 - 0.05 0.05 - 0.1 >O1 Was Dry Now Wet Was Wet Now Dry m a Oo O O O Oo oH a a 0 100
Page 73
covey Doonan Landfill Stage 4 - 1% AEP Afflux Map Legend © site Boundary Cadastral Boundary Afflux (m) MB <=-01 -0.1 - -0.05 0.05 - -0.02 -0.02 - 0.02 0.02 - 0.05 0.05 - 0.1 >O1 Was Dry Now Wet Was Wet Now Dry 0 100
Page 74
covey Doonan Landfill Stage 4 - 1% AEP Climate Change Afflux Map Legend © site Boundary Cadastral Boundary > 3 = x > 3 2 <= -0.1 - -0.05 0.05 - -0.02 -0.02 - 0.02 0.02 - 0.05 0.05 - 0.1 >O1 Was Dry Now Wet Was Wet Now Dry m a Oo O O O Oo oH a a 0 100
Page 75
Doonan Landfill Stage 5 - 50% AEP Afflux Map Legend © site Boundary Cadastral Boundary Afflux (m) MB <=-01 -0.1 - -0.05 0.05 - -0.02 -0.02 - 0.02 0.02 - 0.05 0.05 - 0.1 >O1 Was Dry Now Wet Was Wet Now Dry Oo O O O Oo oH a a 0 100
Page 76
covey Doonan Landfill Stage 5 - 10% AEP Afflux Map Legend © site Boundary Cadastral Boundary > 3 = x > 3 2 <= -0.1 - -0.05 0.05 - -0.02 -0.02 - 0.02 0.02 - 0.05 0.05 - 0.1 >O1 Was Dry Now Wet Was Wet Now Dry m a Oo O O O Oo oH a a 0 100
Page 77
covey Doonan Landfill Stage 5 - 1% AEP Afflux Map Legend © site Boundary Cadastral Boundary > 3 = x > 3 2 <= -0.1 - -0.05 0.05 - -0.02 -0.02 - 0.02 0.02 - 0.05 0.05 - 0.1 >O1 Was Dry Now Wet Was Wet Now Dry m a Oo O O O Oo oH a a 0 100
Page 78
covey Doonan Landfill Stage 5 - 1% AEP Climate Change Afflux Map Legend © site Boundary Cadastral Boundary > 3 = x > 3 2 <= -0.1 - -0.05 0.05 - -0.02 -0.02 - 0.02 0.02 - 0.05 0.05 - 0.1 >O1 Was Dry Now Wet Was Wet Now Dry m a Oo O O O Oo oH a a 0 100
Page 79
covey Doonan Landfill Stage 6 - 50% AEP Afflux Map Legend © site Boundary Cadastral Boundary Afflux (m) 0.05 - -0.02 -0.02 - 0.02 0.02 - 0.05 0.05 - 0.1 >O1 Was Dry Now Wet Was Wet Now Dry 0 100
Page 80
covey Doonan Landfill Stage 6 - 10% AEP Afflux Map Legend © site Boundary Cadastral Boundary Afflux (m) MB <=-01 -0.1 - -0.05 0.05 - -0.02 -0.02 - 0.02 0.02 - 0.05 0.05 - 0.1 >O1 Was Dry Now Wet Was Wet Now Dry 0 100
Page 81
covey Doonan Landfill Stage 6 - 1% AEP Afflux Map Legend © site Boundary Cadastral Boundary Afflux (m) MB <=-01 -0.1 - -0.05 0.05 - -0.02 -0.02 - 0.02 0.02 - 0.05 0.05 - 0.1 >O1 Was Dry Now Wet Was Wet Now Dry 0 100
Page 82
covey Doonan Landfill Stage 6 - 1% AEP Climate Change Afflux Map Legend © site Boundary Cadastral Boundary > 3 = x > 3 2 <= -0.1 - -0.05 0.05 - -0.02 -0.02 - 0.02 0.02 - 0.05 0.05 - 0.1 >O1 Was Dry Now Wet Was Wet Now Dry m a Oo O O O Oo oH a a 0 100
Page 83
Flood Impact Assessment Page 24 of 25 Project No 244035 | Ref No M25-0479Rpt – Issue A – January 2026
Used in these records
Attachment 7 - Flood Impact Assessment - Covey.pdfRelated documentApplication case desk ↗
About this file
- File size
- 68.6 MB (very large file)
- File type
No other editions are linked here.
Original file
Log in to download the original file
The download may take a few minutes. On mobile data, it is best to wait for Wi-Fi.