Original source · versioned page text
2021-01-27 Special Meeting Agenda
Text sections have not been matched to the original PDF pages. Use the original document to check page numbers.
SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA 27 JANUARY 2021
Natural Hazards and Natural Resources Overlay Code
Assessment Benchmark Assessment
In even the 50%AEP flood event, the majority of the
site is mapped as flood hazard category H3 or
greater – which corresponds to unsafe conditions for
children and the elderly.
There are higher areas of the site which are
proposed to be filled to be flood free in the 1% AEP
event. However, these higher areas are surrounded
by floodwaters (i.e. isolated) in only the 20% AEP
event and at risk of being inundated in extreme
events, so are not an appropriate location to shelter
in place.
An evacuation plan and emergency management
procedures have been submitted by the applicant,
however are completely reliant on visitors identifying
the hazard and taking logical and appropriate steps
to self-evacuate within a short space of time. The risk
is further compounded by the possibility of visitors
sheltering within higher areas of the site and
becoming isolated (cut-off) by rising flood waters.
Conditions are provided aimed at reducing these
risks by requiring an active warning system plus
eliminating areas of potential isolation.
In addition to the safety issues, there may be
significant whole-of-lifecycle costs associated with
the impact to park infrastructure from this frequency
of flood inundation that have not been quantified by
the applicant. The applicant has however stated they
are prepared to budget for these costs.
O19 Development is undertaken in a manner Filling of the site to achieve an appropriate level of
that ensures— flood immunity is not possible and has not been
proposed, due to the likelihood of causing
a) natural hydrological systems are protected;
unacceptable off-site flood impacts.
b) natural landforms and drainage lines are
As such, relatively minor earthworks only are
maintained to protect the hydraulic
proposed. Cut/fill is generally limited to around 0.5m
performance of waterways; and
except for a significant mound (fill >2.0m) for the
c) development integrates with the natural facilities block.
landform rather than modifying the landform
to suit the development
O20 Development does not compromise the safety Conditions within the site are unsafe for children in
of people resulting from residual flood risk even the most frequently occurring events, so are
associated with events that exceed the defined only higher hazard in rarer events. Again, safety in
flood event, up to and including the probable these flood events relies entirely on evacuation.
maximum flood. No actual mapping or assessment of the PMF event
has been provided in the Flood Assessment Report.
Conditions are provided aimed at reducing these
risks by requiring an active warning system plus
eliminating areas of potential isolation.
Flood impacts Minor impacts are predicted external to the site –
O22 Development does not directly, indirectly or mostly in the range of 10-50mm increases in peak
cumulatively alter the flood characteristics external flood depths (though higher localised impacts on
to the development site for all flood events up to road reserve were noted).
and including the defined flood event based on— The most concern is in relation to increases in the
a) current climate conditions; and flood level of over-floor flooding at buildings adjacent
to the park. Complete elimination of impacts is not
Page 21 of 41
See the original
The page text is free to read. Viewing or downloading an original file needs an account.
Log in to see the originalLog in to download the original file
Large file: the download may take up to a minute.
Searchable page text hides email addresses. Original files are unchanged and may show email addresses.