Original source · versioned page text
2019-07-09 P&E Agenda - Item 10 - Attachment 1 - Coastal Hazards Risk, Vulnerability and Adaptation Assessment
Text sections have not been matched to the original PDF pages. Use the original document to check page numbers.
Planning & Environment Committee Agenda
9 July 2019
Item 10 - Attachment 1
Noosa Shire Council Coastal Hazards
Risk, Vulnerability and Adaptation
Assessment
Coastal Hazard Mapping Refinement
www.qcoast2100.com.au
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.
Full text of the other 70 sections
Section 2
26th April 2018
| @.| NOOSA yey) Queensland WE
mm mi ReOeNe LGAQ ase Government ‘x7 BMT WBM
(eal iSection 3
Document Control Sheet
Document: R.B22613.002.04.NSC_CHAP_Mapping.d
BMT WBM Pty Ltd ocx
Level 8, 200 Creek Street
Brisbane Qld 4000 Title: Noosa Shire Council Coastal Hazard
Australia Mapping
PO Box 203, Spring Hill 4004
Project Manager: Matthew Barnes
Tel: +61 7 3831 6744
Fax: + 61 7 3832 3627 Author: Matthew Barnes
ABN 54 010 830 421 Client: Noosa Shire Council
www.bmtwbm.com.au Client Contact: Grant Hinner
Client Reference:
Synopsis:
REVISION/CHECKING HISTORY
Revision Number Date Checked by Issued by
0 3 August 2017 LCM MPB
1 15 January 2018 LCM MPB
2 23 February LCM MPB
2018
3 Unknown LCM MPB
4 26 April 2018 LCM MPB
DISTRIBUTION
Destination Revision
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Noosa Shire Council PDF PDF PDF PDF PDF
BMT WBM File PDF PDF PDF PDF PDF
BMT WBM Library PDF PDF PDF PDF PDF
G:\Admin\B22613.g.mpb.Noosa_CHAS\R.B22613.002.04.NSC_CHAP_Mapping.docx
Section 4
Noosa Shire Council Coastal Hazard Mapping I
Executive Summary
Executive Summary
Priority gap studies identified by the Noosa Shire Council Coastal Hazard Adaptation Plan (CHAP) Scoping
Report (BMT WBM 2017) have been completed, namely:
• Development of storm tide hazard mapping for the CHAP planning horizons (present-day, 2040, 2070
and 2100); and
• Coastal erosion prone area assessment and mapping for the CHAP planning horizons.
BMT WBM (2017) discusses the three ‘categories’ of storm tide hazard that are relevant to the region:
(1) ‘Open coast storm tide’ which can lead to inundation of nearshore areas adjacent to beaches. For
these locations the combination of tide, surge and wave breaking processes contribute to the
observed water level.
(2) ‘Lower Noosa River catchment storm tide’ which can lead to flooding of areas within the tidal extent of
the lower river system. For these locations and in the absence of significant rainfall and catchment
flooding, the combination of tide and surge contribute to the observed water level.
(3) ‘Coincident catchment flooding and storm tide’ which can lead to flooding of areas within the tidal
extent of the lower river system. For these locations the combination of river flow, tide and surge
contribute to the observed water level.
Hazard areas related to each of the above storm tide categories have been developed using a combination
of existing information and inundation modelling tools (Aurecon 2013; WMA Water 2017a; WMA Water
2017b). For land adjacent to the lower Noosa River both inundation depth and velocity hazard information
has been determined.
In accordance with the Queensland Government Coastal Hazard Technical Guide (DEHP, 2013), the open
coast calculated erosion distance has been refined through consideration of the design storm conditions,
dune slumping, long term recession and the shoreline response to sea-level rise. In addition, and for
consistency with the State-defined erosion prone areas, the permanent tidal inundation due to sea-level rise
hazard area has also been established.
These hazard maps will be used to support future consultation with the community and a risk assessment
process; in combination, these will then inform the consequences of these hazards to assets and future
strategic planning in response.
G:\Admin\B22613.g.mpb.Noosa_CHAS\R.B22613.002.04.NSC_CHAP_Mapping.docx
Section 5
Noosa Shire Council Coastal Hazard Mapping II
Contents
Contents
Executive Summary i
1 Background 1
1.1 Noosa Shire Climate Change Adaptation Plan 1
1.2 QCoast2100 Program 1
1.3 Coastal Hazard Adaptation Plan Scoping Study 2
2 Storm Tide Hazard Assessment 4
2.1 Background 4
2.2 Open Coast & Lower Noosa River Storm Tide Inundation 5
2.2.1 Open Coast Storm Tide Assessment 6
2.2.2 Lower Noosa River Storm Tide Assessment 7
2.3 Coincident Catchment Flooding & Storm Tide 8
3 Erosion Prone Area Assessment 9
3.1 Background 9
3.1.1 Erosion Prone Area Definition & Mapping 9
3.2 Calculated Erosion Distance Assessment 10
3.2.1 Open Coast Calculated Erosion Distance Formula 10
3.2.1.1 Application of the Calculated Erosion Distance Formula 13
3.3 Planning Period (N) 14
3.4 Rate of Long Term Erosion (R) 14
3.5 Storm Erosion (C) 17
3.5.1 Design Event Erosion Assessment 17
3.5.1.1 Background Information and Datasets 17
3.5.1.2 Design Erosion Events Modelling Results 18
3.5.1.3 Wave Runup & Overtopping Potential 21
3.6 Shoreline Response to Sea Level Rise (S) 23
3.6.1 Background Information 23
3.6.2 Equilibrium Profile (Bruun Rule) Concept 23
3.6.3 Shoreline Response to Sea Level Rise Assessment Results 25
3.7 Factor of Safety (F) 28
3.8 Dune Slumping (D) 28
3.9 Assessment Results 31
4 Permanent Inundation due to Sea Level Rise 33
4.1 Hazard Assessment Approach 33
G:\Admin\B22613.g.mpb.Noosa_CHAS\R.B22613.002.04.NSC_CHAP_Mapping.docx
Section 6
Noosa Shire Council Coastal Hazard Mapping III
Contents
4.2 Assessment Results 33
5 Hazard Classification 34
5.1 Introduction 34
5.2 Storm Tide inundation 34
5.3 Permanent Inundation from Sea-level Rise 34
5.4 Coastal Erosion 34
6 References 36
Appendix A Open Coast & Lower Noosa River Storm Tide Hazard Extent A-1
Appendix B Coincident Catchment Flooding & Storm Tide Hazard Extent B-1
Appendix C Storm Erosion Estimates C-1
Appendix D Calculated Erosion Distance Hazard Extent D-1
Appendix E Permanent Inundation due to Sea-Level Rise Extent E-1
List of Figures
Figure 1-1 QCoast2100 Phases 2
Figure 2-1 100 year ARI surge plus tide boundary condition applied at the entrance to the
Noosa River (Aurecon 2013) 7
Figure 3-1 Erosion Assessment Locations 12
Figure 3-2 Conceptual Illustration of the Open Coast Calculated Erosion Distance
Formula 14
Figure 3-3 Example Design Erosion Setback at North Shore Beach (ETA 626 shown in
Figure 3-1) 19
Figure 3-4 Bruun (1962) Concept of Recession due to Sea Level Rise 24
Figure 3-5 Schematic Beach/Dune Cross Section Showing Pre and Post Erosion Dune
Face and Dune Stability Profiles (from DECCW, 2010; after Nielsen et al.,
1992) 29
Figure 5-1 Flood Hazard Classification and Curves2 35
Figure C-1 Storm Erosion Estimate: ETA 578 (top), ETA 582 (middle) and ETA 596
(bottom) C-2
Figure C-2 Storm Erosion Estimate: ETA 602 (top), ETA 621.2 (middle) and ETA 622
(bottom) C-3
Figure C-3 Storm Erosion Estimate: ETA 626 (top), ETA 628 (middle) and ETA 630
(bottom) C-4
Figure C-4 Storm Erosion Estimate: ETA 632 (top), ETA 634 (middle) and ETA 636
(bottom) C-5
Figure C-5 Storm Erosion Estimate: ETA 638 (top), ETA 636 (middle) and ETA 642
(bottom) C-6
G:\Admin\B22613.g.mpb.Noosa_CHAS\R.B22613.002.04.NSC_CHAP_Mapping.docx
Section 7
Noosa Shire Council Coastal Hazard Mapping IV
Contents
Figure C-6 Storm Erosion Estimate: ETA 638 (top), ETA 642 (middle) and ETA 646
(bottom) C-7
Figure C-7 Storm Erosion Estimate: ETA 650 (top), ETA 654 (middle) and ETA 658
(bottom) C-8
Figure C-8 Storm Erosion Estimate: ETA 662 (top), ETA 666 (middle) and ETA 670
(bottom) C-9
Figure C-9 Storm Erosion Estimate: ETA 674 (top) and ETA 678 (bottom) C-10
List of Tables
Table 2-1 Summary of CHAP Storm Tide Hazard Mapping Approach 5
Table 2-2 100 year ARI Open Coast Storm Tide Levels (mAHD) 6
Table 3-1 Summary of Long Term Recession Results (m) 16
Table 3-2 Summary of Design Storm Erosion Assessment Results 20
Table 3-3 Summary of Wave Runup & Overtopping Potential 22
Table 3-4 Summary of Response to Sea Level Rise Assessment Results 27
Table 3-5 Summary of Dune Slumping Assessment Results 30
Table 3-6 Beach Compartment Summary of Open Coast Calculated Erosion Distances 32
Table 4-1 Permanent inundation due to Sea Level Rise mapping assumptions 33
Table 5-1 Flood Hazard Classification Description 35
G:\Admin\B22613.g.mpb.Noosa_CHAS\R.B22613.002.04.NSC_CHAP_Mapping.docx
Section 8
Noosa Shire Council Coastal Hazard Mapping 1
Background
1 Background
1.1 Noosa Shire Climate Change Adaptation Plan
To help the Noosa Shire adapt to potential effects of climate change over time, Noosa Council is
responding to potential climate change risks by undertaking a two-year project to develop a Climate
Change Adaptation Plan (CCAP) to build adaptive capacity within Council and across the
community.
The core objectives for the CCAP are to:
• Improve Noosa Council and the community’s understanding of current & future risks from
coastal hazards and how they might change through time as a result of climate change;
• Consult with the community clearly and sensitively throughout key stages of the project so the
community understands the implications and contributes to the decision making;
• Identify what actions are required to avoid, reduce or adapt to these risks to people, property,
assets and the environment;
• Provide mapping & visual products and deliverables that are useful for a range of purposes
across Council departments and functions and within the community (e.g. planning scheme,
asset management, community awareness, disaster management and financial planning); and
• Provide direction for a coordinated approach for Council and the community to adapt to climate
change and coastal hazards.
The coastal hazards component of the CCAP will be informed by the development of a Coastal
Hazards Adaptation Plan (CHAP). The CHAP is funded by a grant agreement with the Local
Government Association of Queensland (LGAQ), under the Queensland Department of
Environment and Heritage Protection’s (DEHP) QCoast2100 initiative. Coastal Hazard Mapping, the
subject of this report, is required to understand the extent of current and future coastal hazard
areas so that potentially impacted assets and values can be identified.
1.2 QCoast2100 Program
The QCoast2100 program is governed by a Board comprising members from the LGAQ, DEHP and
Department of Infrastructure, Local Government and Planning (DILGP). The program has been
designed to assist Queensland coastal local governments with funding and technical support to
progress the preparation of plans and strategies to address climate change related coastal hazard
risks. The program is intended to guide decision-making across key areas of local government
planning and operations, including:
• Corporate and operational planning and financial planning;
• Land use planning and development assessment;
• Infrastructure planning and management including roads, stormwater and foreshores;
• Asset management and planning including nature conservation, recreation, cultural heritage
values and other public amenities;
G:\Admin\B22613.g.mpb.Noosa_CHAS\R.B22613.002.04.NSC_CHAP_Mapping.docx
Section 9
Noosa Shire Council Coastal Hazard Mapping 2
Background
• Community planning; and
• Emergency management.
The QCoast2100 Minimum Standards & Guidelines (MS&G) provide guidance to local government
wishing to prepare a CHAP. The guidelines set minimum requirements that are to be included in a
CHAP as well as providing information on leading practices to facilitate continuous improvement.
The minimum standards set a benchmark for undertaking such studies in Queensland so that
coastal hazard adaptation decision-making is approached in a consistent and systematic manner.
The MS&G are structured to address the key phases of a CHAP which are illustrated in Figure 1-1.
This report is a key output of Phase 3 – the identification of areas exposed to current and future
coastal hazards.
Figure 1-1 QCoast2100 Phases
This report and mapping are just one tool that will be used to support future consultation with the
community and a risk assessment process; in combination, these will then inform the
consequences of these hazards to assets and future strategic planning in response.
1.3 Coastal Hazard Adaptation Plan Scoping Study
A review of existing information relevant to the Noosa CHAP has been completed (BMT WBM
2017). The review identified the necessary additional studies to address key knowledge gaps and
establish a basis for a risk assessment process in accordance with the Australian Standard for Risk
Management (AS/NZS ISO 31000:2009).
Regarding coastal hazard mapping, two priority gap studies were identified:
G:\Admin\B22613.g.mpb.Noosa_CHAS\R.B22613.002.04.NSC_CHAP_Mapping.docx
Section 10
Noosa Shire Council Coastal Hazard Mapping 3
Background
(1) Developing storm tide hazard mapping for the planning horizons of interest
(2) Coastal erosion prone area assessment and mapping
The planning horizons agreed for the Noosa CHAP are present-day, 2040, 2070 and 2100 and
therefore hazard mapping representative of these years is required. The CHAP adopts the 100
year Average Recurrence Interval (ARI) as the base planning horizon for land use planning
decision making, consistent with Queensland Government approach to assessing future climate
coastal hazards. It is noted that climate change considerations for coastal engineering design
should follow best practice guidelines (e.g. Harper 2012, 2017) and relevant standards and in some
cases may require consideration of different planning horizons, likelihoods and climate change
assumptions for internal purposes and progressive planning, therefore additional hazard maps
have been produced.
The Queensland Flood Commission of Inquiry for the Brisbane floods recommended consideration
be given to a wide range of flood severities up to the probable maximum flood for considering flood
risk. A similar approach has been undertaken for the CHAP, with a range of coastal hazard event
probabilities being modelled. However to ensure this report remains concise, only the 1% AEP
(approximately 100 ARI) are discussed.
The assessments and methods for developing the necessary mapping products for the Noosa
CHAP are described in Chapter 2 and Chapter 3 of this report. Plans illustrating the coastal hazard
mapping results are presented in the Appendices.
G:\Admin\B22613.g.mpb.Noosa_CHAS\R.B22613.002.04.NSC_CHAP_Mapping.docx
Section 11
Noosa Shire Council Coastal Hazard Mapping 4
Storm Tide Hazard Assessment
2 Storm Tide Hazard Assessment
2.1 Background
The Noosa CHAP Scoping Study Report (BMT WBM 2017) discusses the three ‘categories’ of
storm tide hazard that have been considered as part of previous local government scale
assessments:
(1) ‘Open coast storm tide’ which can lead to inundation of nearshore areas adjacent to
beaches. For these locations the combination of tide, surge and wave breaking processes
contribute to the observed water level.
(2) ‘Lower Noosa River catchment storm tide’ which can lead to flooding of areas within the tidal
extent of the lower river system. For these locations and in the absence of significant rainfall
and catchment flooding, the combination of tide and surge contribute to the observed water
level.
(3) ‘Coincident catchment flooding and storm tide’ which can lead to flooding of areas within the
tidal extent of the lower river system. For these locations the combination of river flow, tide
and surge contribute to the observed water level.
Aurecon (2013) assessed ‘storm tide only’ (i.e. categories 1 and 2 above) for the present-day and
2100 planning horizons and range of exceedance probabilities. The other planning horizons
relevant to the CHAP (2040 and 2070) were not previously assessed. The method for producing
outputs for the other planning horizons of interest is summarised in Table 2-1 and further described
in Section 2.2. Table 2-1 also indicates the sea-level rise (SLR) allowance adopted for the Noosa
CHAP. Further details regarding the Noosa CHAP SLR assumptions are provided in BMT WBM
(2017).
The likelihood of peak storm tide conditions coinciding with peak catchment flooding (storm tide
category 3) within the lower Noosa River is expected to be a rare event, that whilst valuable to
understand, would be an extreme event and not preferred as a basis for making planning
decisions. The coincident rainfall, river flooding and storm tide hazard was recently assessed by
WMA Water (2017a) for the present-day and 2100 planning horizons. The 2040 and 2070 planning
horizons were subsequently assessed to provide the additional hazard information required for the
CHAP (WMA Water 2017b).
G:\Admin\B22613.g.mpb.Noosa_CHAS\R.B22613.002.04.NSC_CHAP_Mapping.docx
Section 12
Noosa Shire Council Coastal Hazard Mapping 5
Storm Tide Hazard Assessment
Table 2-1 Summary of CHAP Storm Tide Hazard Mapping Approach
Mapping product Present-day 2040 2070 2100
Open coast storm Developed Developed Developed Developed
tide inundation using present- using present- using present- using 2100
day open coast day open coast day open coast open coast
levels reported levels + 0.2 m levels + 0.5 m levels reported
by Aurecon SLR reported SLR reported by Aurecon
(2013) and by Aurecon by Aurecon (2013) (which
bathtub (2013) and (2013) and included 0.8m
mapping bathtub bathtub SLR) and
mapping mapping bathtub
mapping
Lower Noosa River Previously Developed Developed Previously
catchment storm tide completed by using existing using existing completed by
inundation Aurecon (2013) TUFLOW model TUFLOW model Aurecon (2013)
+ 0.2 m SLR + 0.5 m SLR (which included
boundary boundary 0.8m SLR)
condition condition
adjustments adjustments
Coincident Noosa Previously Previously Previously Previously
River flooding and completed by completed by completed by completed by
storm tide conditions (WMA Water, (WMA Water, (WMA Water, (WMA Water,
2017a) 2017b) 2017b) 2017a)
2.2 Open Coast & Lower Noosa River Storm Tide Inundation
The open coast and lower Noosa River storm tide hazard depth and extent for the CHAP planning
horizons are presented in Appendix A. The method for deriving the ‘storm tide only’ coastal hazard
area is described in this section.
Current climate open coast storm tide levels for the Noosa local government area are reported in
Aurecon (2013). For return periods up to the 100 year ARI, the levels are based on the following:
• Analysis of tidal residual data recorded at Mooloolaba Harbour Entrance by fitting a Generalised
Extreme Value (GEV) distribution to the data.
• Generation of a synthetic record of surge plus tide level by independent sampling of the tidal
residual distribution and a derived high tide distribution (based on published tidal constituent
data for Mooloolaba).
• Analysis of the synthetic surge plus tide record at Mooloolaba by fitting a GEV distribution to the
data.
• Extrapolation of the surge plus tide levels at Mooloolaba to other Sunshine Coast locations with
reference to the spatial distribution of storm tide levels reported by Connell Wagner (2005) and
Hardy et al. (2004).
• An allowance for wave setup (discussed further below)
G:\Admin\B22613.g.mpb.Noosa_CHAS\R.B22613.002.04.NSC_CHAP_Mapping.docx
Section 13
Noosa Shire Council Coastal Hazard Mapping 6
Storm Tide Hazard Assessment
Future climate 2100 scenarios were also reported by Aurecon (2013). These assessments simply
added a 0.8 m SLR allowance to the current climate design water levels. This approach has been
followed, using the SLR allowances summarised in Table 2-1, to estimate the 2040 and 2070 open
coast 100 year ARI water levels. Current climate and future climate open coast design water levels
adopted for the Noosa CHAP storm tide hazard mapping are provided in Table 2-2.
Table 2-2 100 year ARI Open Coast Storm Tide Levels (mAHD)
Location Current 2040 2070 2100
Peregian Beach 2.97 3.17 3.47 3.77
Marcus Beach 3.01 3.21 3.51 3.81
Sunshine Beach 3.17 3.37 3.67 3.97
Noosa Head 3.17 3.37 3.67 3.97
Noosa Main Beach 2.62 2.82 3.12 3.42
Noosa River Entrance* 1.63 1.83 2.13 2.43
Noosa North Shore 2.73 2.93 3.23 3.53
Teewah Beach 3.18 3.38 3.68 3.98
*wave setup not included within river entrance
The current and 2100 climate design water levels reported by Aurecon (2013) and reproduced in
Table 2-2 included an allowance for wave setup; however, it is noted that Aurecon (2013) did not
provide details of how wave setup was derived other than to reference the NDRP Storm Tide
Hazard Interpolation Study (GHD 2014). The NDRP study adopted wave setup estimates reported
by Hardy et al. (2004), noting that this study only considered surge and wave conditions generated
by tropical cyclone events. For the Sunshine Coast region, design water level and wave statistics
are likely to be dominated by non-cyclonic weather systems up to at least the 100 year ARI.
Consequently, there is some concern that the wave setup allowances reported by Aurecon (2013)
are not representative of actual wave conditions that occur along the Sunshine Coast, particularly
for return periods up to and including the 100 year ARI. For storm erosion hazard assessment
discussed in Section 3.5, the wave setup contribution to the design water level at the shoreline has
been estimated following an alternative approach.
2.2.1 Open Coast Storm Tide Assessment
Open coast storm tide hazard mapping has been produced using a ‘bathtub’ mapping approach.
The mapping methodology involved extrapolating the point location output summarised in Table
2-2 across the adjacent coastal land. The open coast shoreline throughout the Noosa region is
characterised by either an established dune system or rocky headland. These natural features
provide the adjacent land areas a degree of protection from open coast storm tide inundation and
therefore this hazard area is confined to a relatively narrow strip along open coast beaches. The
influence of storm tide conditions on catchment flooding (i.e. land adjacent to the lower Noosa
River) has been mapped separately and is described in Section 2.2.2.
It is noted that the water levels in Table 2-2 are considered representative of the ‘sustained peak’
level during a storm tide event. These levels do not account for wave runup, the intermittent
G:\Admin\B22613.g.mpb.Noosa_CHAS\R.B22613.002.04.NSC_CHAP_Mapping.docx
Section 14
Noosa Shire Council Coastal Hazard Mapping 7
Storm Tide Hazard Assessment
process of advancement and retreat of the instantaneous shoreline position on a timescale that is
of the order of the incoming wave period (~12 s for large swell conditions). A preliminary wave
runup assessment is presented in Section 3.5.1.3, noting that wave runup and overtopping are key
considerations when designing coastal structures and may need further assessment during the
options analysis stage of the Noosa CHAP.
2.2.2 Lower Noosa River Storm Tide Assessment
Aurecon (2013) produced storm tide hazard mapping throughout the tidal extent of the Noosa River
catchment using inundation modelling techniques. In summary, this involved the application of
representative ‘surge plus tide’ boundary conditions at the entrance to the Noosa River and
simulation of the resulting lower river floodplain inundation. The current climate 100 year ARI
boundary condition is shown in Figure 2-1.
Figure 2-1 100 year ARI surge plus tide boundary condition applied at the entrance to the
Noosa River (Aurecon 2013)
Future climate 2100 scenarios involved adding a 0.8 m SLR allowance offset to the boundary
condition shown in Figure 2-1. In addition, a morphological response to SLR across the lower
Noosa River and flood tide delta was represented by raising the bathymetry elevation by an
amount equivalent to the SLR allowance. Full details of the modelling approach are provided in
Aurecon (2013).
To develop lower Noosa River storm tide mapping for the additional 2040 and 2070 planning
horizons required by the CHAP, the modelling approach described by Aurecon (2013) has been
adopted. This simply involved application of the existing inundation modelling tools with surge plus
tide and bathymetry boundary condition adjustments using the methodology described in Aurecon
(2013). The SLR assumptions for each planning horizon are summarised in Table 2-1.
It is noted that the assessment mapping presented in Appendix A classify the inundation hazard in
terms of depth only. Other hazard definition information, such as inundation velocity, is also
available to the Noosa CHAP and may be considered as part of the risk and vulnerability
assessment (QCoast2100 Phase 5).
G:\Admin\B22613.g.mpb.Noosa_CHAS\R.B22613.002.04.NSC_CHAP_Mapping.docx
Section 15
Noosa Shire Council Coastal Hazard Mapping 8
Storm Tide Hazard Assessment
2.3 Coincident Catchment Flooding & Storm Tide
The coincident Noosa River catchment flooding and storm tide hazard depth and extent for the
CHAP planning horizons are presented in Appendix B. As described in Section 2.1, coincident
rainfall river flooding and storm tide hazard was recently assessed by WMA Water (2017a; 2017b).
Their report describes the 1 in 100 AEP as a combination of flow, rainfall and tide conditions, of
which the probability of occurrence is unknown, but likely to be rarer than the 1 in 100 AEP. The
maps provided in Appendix B are simply a presentation of the WMA Water peak inundation depth
assessment results. As noted above, inundation velocity information is also available and may be
used to inform the Noosa CHAP risk and vulnerability assessment.
G:\Admin\B22613.g.mpb.Noosa_CHAS\R.B22613.002.04.NSC_CHAP_Mapping.docx
Section 16
Noosa Shire Council Coastal Hazard Mapping 9
Erosion Prone Area Assessment
3 Erosion Prone Area Assessment
3.1 Background
These assessments have been undertaken with the key objective of developing maps suitable for
the Noosa CHAP and to better understand the erosion hazard and associated risk to assets and
values within the local government area in order to progress consultation with the community about
the consequences of these risks. In addition to the CHAP, the outcomes of these assessments
may be used to support an amendment to the State-declared erosion prone area plans, if desired.
Details of the State-declared erosion prone areas for Noosa are provided in BMT WBM (2017).
3.1.1 Erosion Prone Area Definition & Mapping
The State Erosion Prone Area plans are intended to assist development assessment and to inform
the preparation of planning instruments, such as planning schemes and regional plans under the
Planning Act 2016.
Erosion prone areas have been declared for all coastal local government areas in Queensland. The
Noosa Shire Plan NOS3A is available online via DEHP website:
https://www.ehp.qld.gov.au/coastal/development/assessment/pdf/noosa-erosion-prone-area-
plan.pdf
The EPAs apply to land subject to inundation by the Highest Astronomical Tide (HAT) by the year
2100 or at risk from sea erosion. On land adjacent to tidal water the EPA is defined by whichever of
the following methods gives the greatest width:
(1) 40 m buffer from the present-day HAT contour
(2) Calculated erosion distance shown in Table 1 of the statutory plan
(3) Permanent inundation due to SLR in 2100 (defined by present-day HAT plus 0.8 m).
The 40 m buffer from present-day HAT (component 1) generally applies within estuarine areas not
exposed to open coast processes. This approximate method is intended to account for the
migration of channels within tidal waterways with natural (undeveloped) shorelines.
The calculated erosion distance (component 2) is intended to cater for the potential loss of land for
open coast locations. Both short term (storm-related) and longer term (gradual) trends are included
in the assessment together with an allowance for potential sea level rise associated with climate
change. Provision is also included for a factor of safety on the estimates and an allowance made
for slumping of the dune scarp that is often observed after significant storm erosion has occurred.
For the Noosa CHAP this component has been reassessed and is discussed further in Section 3.2.
The Noosa Shire Plan NOS3A (NOS3A, Table 1) provides a summary of the calculated erosion
distance for open coast locations. Consideration of the potential presence of bedrock is included
however it is noted that the State plans do not capture all local-scale natural and/or manmade
features that may limit the landward extent of shoreline erosion.
The permanent inundation due to SLR (component 3) represents the HAT coastline (or elevation
contour) in 2100 in the absence of any adaptation response to treat the risk, such as filling land to
G:\Admin\B22613.g.mpb.Noosa_CHAS\R.B22613.002.04.NSC_CHAP_Mapping.docx
Section 17
Noosa Shire Council Coastal Hazard Mapping 10
Erosion Prone Area Assessment
an elevation above the threshold water level. This component has also been reassessed for the
planning horizons relevant to the Noosa CHAP (see Chapter 4).
The EPAs determined by the State define a hazard extent at a single specified planning horizon
(the year 2100) and probability (representative 100 year ARI). The erosion prone areas are
therefore useful for ‘first-pass risk screening’ however do not provide sufficient information
regarding likelihood and consequence to undertake a more detailed risk assessment in accordance
AS/NZS ISO 31000:2009, the SPP or other State guideline documents (such as the QCoast 2100
Minimum Standards and Guidelines). This issue has been addressed through the erosion prone
area hazard assessments described in this Chapter.
3.2 Calculated Erosion Distance Assessment
The potential coastal erosion hazard throughout the study area arises from a combination of:
• The physical processes that are causing (or threatening to cause) erosion;
• The assets and values potentially affected by the erosion; and
• The timeframe over which the threat may act upon the assets and values.
In order to assess the erosion hazard for the open coast beaches throughout the Noosa region, it is
necessary to understand which areas are presently within the short term storm erosion zone and
areas that may become threatened in the future.
To effectively assess the coastal erosion hazard a vulnerable zone is typically determined for a
specific planning period. The erosion vulnerability zone should include the following components,
consistent with the Queensland Government Coastal Hazard Technical Guide (DEHP, 2013):
• Short term storm erosion;
• Continuation of the long term historical shoreline position trend (if this can be identified);
• Cyclic morphological change observed at river and creek mouths (not a significant issue at this
location due to training of the southern shoreline of Noosa River); and
• Additional future effects of climate change induced sea level rise.
The selected planning period influences:
• The design event characteristics adopted for the short term erosion assessment;
• The duration that the long term erosion component is applied; and
• The choice of an appropriate sea level rise projection.
3.2.1 Open Coast Calculated Erosion Distance Formula
The open coast erosion hazard areas are determined to cater for potential erosion of the dune
system over a specified planning period. Both short term (storm-related) and longer term (gradual)
trends are included in the assessment together with an allowance for potential sea level rise
associated with climate change. Provision is also included for a factor of safety on the estimates
and an allowance made for slumping of the dune scarp that is often observed after significant storm
G:\Admin\B22613.g.mpb.Noosa_CHAS\R.B22613.002.04.NSC_CHAP_Mapping.docx
Section 18
Noosa Shire Council Coastal Hazard Mapping 11
Erosion Prone Area Assessment
erosion has occurred. The following relationship was originally used by the former Beach
Protection Authority (BPA) for determining erosion hazard area widths throughout Queensland.
This formula continues to be recognised by DEHP (2013) as a reasonable method of assessing the
erosion hazard on sandy coastlines.
𝐸 = [(𝑁 × 𝑅 ) + 𝐶 + 𝑆] × (1 + 𝐹) + 𝐷
Equation 3-1
Where E = Calculated erosion distance or width (metres)
N = planning period (years)
R = rate of long term erosion (metres per year)
C = short term erosion from the design storm event (metres)
S = erosion due to sea level rise (metres)
F = factor of safety
D = dune scarp component
In the assessments for the Noosa region described in this Section, the values of C, S and D have
been determined for individual beach compartments using existing beach profile survey data, site
specific modelling and SLR projections adopted for the CHAP (refer BMT WBM 2017). As
described below in Section 3.4, insufficient data is available to accurately assess R on an individual
beach basis. Previous studies and the limited data that is available suggests that most beaches
within the region are ‘dynamically stable’ and are not displaying trends of long term recession that
can be linked to a deficit in sand supply. The notable exceptions are Noosa Main Beach and Dog
Beach, where coastal structures and an ongoing sand replenishment program (via back-passing
using a sand shifter or dredging) are used to maintain the beach profile. The localised erosion
issues at Dog Beach are related to channel migration (rather than sand supply) and appear to be
linked to the dynamic morphology of the Noosa River entrance. For the CHAP, the potential for
channel migration is accounted for through the State-defined EPA erosion component 1 (i.e. 40 m
buffer on present-day HAT). This buffer is applied consistently across all planning horizons.
The open coast calculated erosion distance has been assessed at 25 existing beach and offshore
profile locations indicated in Figure 3-1. These monitoring locations, commonly known as ‘ETA’
profiles, were originally established by the former BPA and surveyed at semi-regular intervals
between 1970s and early 2000s. The assessments described in this Chapter focus on the locations
shown in Figure 3-1.
G:\Admin\B22613.g.mpb.Noosa_CHAS\R.B22613.002.04.NSC_CHAP_Mapping.docx
Section 19
a : F Google™earth
i t Data SIO, NOAA, U.S. Navy,
ag fi, y NGA, GEBCO
ee | ’ Ter NRA eel
f aed . } Pp Image © 2017 CNES / Airbus
\ pa ’
= €©6=— 3 Bob 7 ETA 678)
Ney Mi, eS if
w ETA_674 /
LEGEND akelComo) ETA 670
=| Noosa Shire /)
LGA Boundary ‘/
Noosa River ETA 666 i
— ETA Survey Lines b }
5 ETA 662)
FY i
ETA_658 Hy
in ake i
' Cootharaba ETA 654 f
, : mee Boreen a
Ae ETA _646h
i
pa Era
. va
ETA_640
¥ ETA_638)4
ae be SyMNETA 636 -
: & ETA_6345
? aa: ETA 632h
oe bi omer
ees a a ETA 630h
o.* ¢ ETA 628)
i 2 : i
re pas ETA_626 iaguna}
res wey,
a. ON i
an: a |: BE, ae i
ie —s | : et i se eA >, Oe A
~ s r “3 aS anes ns Ab ea ot eo bi A AY N yu
hea”, Se Lf ‘x Nee a ON a
, ae <8 , Ps iL rakes Z A eS o »Sunshine) | SER
weet Se: > aimee Viel Beach'
. - . peed ; = A ca y Pig s Ms a
“ae A , Ca
; See i: ; ios ci ETA_596
: +e % _ Wey ba) y
Be . Peregianieeach | ETA_582
3 oN
, vel | ETA_578
f % , eet}
Ae |
Title: Figure: Rev:
Erosion Assesment Locations 3-1 A
BMT WBM endeavours to ensure that the information i in thi soe
provided in this Le
map is correct at the time of publication. BMT WBM does not warrant, N Okm 4 8 if
accuracy of information contained in this map. MX» SS ae ‘Yau BMT WB Mi
guarantee or make representations regarding the currency and iy
www.bm m.com.au
Filepath: 1:\B22613.i.mbp.Noosa_CHAS\DRG\COA_007_170802_ETA_Survey_Line_Locations.worSection 20
Noosa Shire Council Coastal Hazard Mapping 13
Erosion Prone Area Assessment
3.2.1.1 Application of the Calculated Erosion Distance Formula
DEHP (2013) guidelines require that the open coast erosion hazard area distance is measured
landward from the seaward toe of the frontal dune. This is normally approximated by the seaward
limit of terrestrial vegetation or, where this cannot be determined, the level of present day HAT. The
coastal zone is highly dynamic and significant fluctuations can occur in the dune profile and
correspondingly the location of the seaward toe of the frontal dune. At some locations and times
there can be a large height (and therefore volume) difference between the higher hind dune areas
and the low foredunes which can be quite wide.
The calculation of the short term erosion component (C) is volumetric based and where there is a
broad low foredune, the calculated distance from the seaward toe of that dune can be large. The
adopted formula for calculating the overall erosion hazard area width also includes a factor of
safety that is applied to the short term erosion component (C). In situations with a broad low frontal
dune, this can lead to an unrealistic overestimation of the width of the short term erosion threat as
measured from the seaward toe of the frontal dune. Accordingly, for the present study, this short
term erosion component has been split into two sections (C1 and C2) with the revised calculated
erosion distance formula as follows:
𝐸 = [(𝑁 × 𝑅 ) + 𝐶1 + 𝑆] × (1 + 𝐹) + 𝐷 + 𝐶2
Equation 3-2
Where C1 = short term erosion from the design storm event, measured from the location where
the design water level intersects the pre-storm beach profile (metres)
C2 = distance from the seaward toe of the frontal dune to the location where the design
water level intersects the pre-storm initial beach profile (metres)
The modified calculated erosion distance formula is illustrated conceptually in Figure 3-2 using an
example beach profile. The C1 term in the current study is the modelled short term erosion setback
distance based on the volume eroded from the main pre-storm dune above the design water level.
This is the primary short term erosion component to which the factor of safety is applied. The C2
term is the distance between the seaward toe of the frontal dune and the location where the design
water level intersects the pre-storm profile. This covers the short term erosion of the low foredune
area to which the factor of safety is not applied. As outlined above, this minimises the potential
overestimation of the total short term erosion component when using the standard formula on
beaches with a broad low dune terrace. The approach for assessing short term erosion is
discussed further in Section 3.5.
For the present study, the Department of Natural Resources and Mines (DNRM) state coastline
definition has been used to estimate the frontal dune toe position along Noosa open coast beaches
for erosion hazard area assessment and mapping purposes. The DNRM coastline was digitised
manually, guided by several references including aerial imagery and HAT contours generated from
LiDAR survey data. A review of the DNRM coastline definition along Noosa beaches indicates that
digitised coastline is at an elevation above HAT and close to the seaward edge of dune vegetation.
G:\Admin\B22613.g.mpb.Noosa_CHAS\R.B22613.002.04.NSC_CHAP_Mapping.docx
Section 21
Noosa Shire Council Coastal Hazard Mapping 14
Erosion Prone Area Assessment
Figure 3-2 Conceptual Illustration of the Open Coast Calculated Erosion Distance Formula
3.3 Planning Period (N)
The present-day, 2040, 2070 and 2100 planning horizons have been assessed. For each
timeframe, it has been assumed that the storm erosion component (C1 + C2), the rate of long term
erosion (R) and the dune slumping component (D) remains consistent. For example, the short term
erosion associated with a storm event is the same for all planning horizons.
The erosion due to an increase to mean sea level (S) for each timeframe is ultimately based on a
SLR projection of 0.8 m by 2100, as adopted by the Queensland Government for land use planning
purposes. SLR benchmarks for the intervening planning horizons have been determined from
projections that are consistent with the current literature. This has been previously summarised as
part of the CHAP Scoping Study (BMT WBM 2017).
3.4 Rate of Long Term Erosion (R)
The rate of long term erosion can be estimated by extrapolating past trends from analysis of
historical survey data and/or determining any deficit in the local sediment budget, typically via a
combination of data analysis and longshore sediment transport modelling. In instances when there
is insufficient data is available to accurately assess (R) on an individual beach basis, the
component is simply accounted for by adopting an allowance of 10 m (the minimum allowance for
N x R required by DEHP 2013).
Changes to the beach profile in response to wave events can be clearly detected in the historical
survey datasets, with volumetric changes of ±30,000 m3/year common at Noosa Main Beach (e.g.
G:\Admin\B22613.g.mpb.Noosa_CHAS\R.B22613.002.04.NSC_CHAP_Mapping.docx
Section 22
Noosa Shire Council Coastal Hazard Mapping 15
Erosion Prone Area Assessment
Beach Protection Authority 1998). Despite this annual variation, periods of erosion are generally
followed by accretion and therefore the Noosa region beaches would appear to be ‘dynamically
stable’ in the short to medium term. Persistent erosion at Noosa Main Beach has been an issue
since the 1970s and has been somewhat mitigated through a combination of coastal protection
structures (groynes and seawalls) and a permanent sand replenishment program. While this beach
remains vulnerable to the impacts of short term storm erosion, shoreline recession due to long term
trends is currently managed.
There is no strong indication of shoreline recession along the Noosa Eastern Beaches based on an
analysis of historical aerial imagery (e.g. BMT WBM 2013). However, it should be noted that only a
relatively short period of historical records exists and it begins at a time when the beaches were
known to be recovering from severe cyclonic erosion in the early 1970’s. Furthermore, periodic
exposure of coffee rock at many locations throughout the wider Sunshine Coast region may be
anecdotal evidence of a receding shoreline on a geological timescale (e.g. Lord and Burgess
1987).
Due to the difficulties in determining long term trends from intermittent historical datasets, BMT
WBM (2013) estimated the rate of long term shoreline trends using wave and longshore sediment
transport modelling techniques. A minor rate in long term recession was identified by dividing the
annual sediment loss per metre of shoreline (averaged over the Sunshine Coast study area and
taken to be 0.55 m3/m/year) by an estimate of the active profile height at each location. The active
profile is defined as the vertical distance from the dune crest to the depth of the closure. The dune
crest was obtained from the measured beach profile data and the depth of closure was estimated
from the local wave conditions. The depth of closure is the theoretical depth limit for sediment
transport and is discussed further in Section 3.6.2.
Adopting the average annual sediment deficit per metre of shoreline and the approach described
by BMT WBM (2013), the annual rate of long-term erosion (R) for the Noosa CHAP planning
horizons has been estimated and are presented in Table 3-1. These results, together with
consideration of the available historical data, suggest that the rate of long term shoreline recession
is very low.
For the Noosa CHAP, an allowance of 10 m to account for long-term erosion (N x R) has been
adopted for all planning horizons, since the annual rates of long-term erosion presented in Table
3-1 (obtained using modelling techniques described in BMT WBM 2013) and are less than the 10
m minimum allowance required by DEHP.
G:\Admin\B22613.g.mpb.Noosa_CHAS\R.B22613.002.04.NSC_CHAP_Mapping.docx
Section 23
Noosa Shire Council Coastal Hazard Mapping 16
Erosion Prone Area Assessment
Table 3-1 Summary of Long Term Recession Results (m)1
Beach Profile Active Annual 2040 (m) 2070 (m) 2100 (m)
Compartment Location Height (m) Recession (m) N = 23 N= 53 N= 83
Peregian Beach ETA 578 18 0.031 0.7 1.6 2.6
Peregian Beach ETA 582 17 0.033 0.8 1.7 2.7
Peregian Beach Compartment – Modelled Long Term Recession (m) 0.8 1.7 2.7
Castaways Beach ETA 596 21 0.026 0.6 1.4 2.1
Sunshine Beach ETA 602 19 0.030 0.7 1.6 2.5
Sunshine Beach Compartment – Modelled Long Term Recession (m) 0.7 1.7 2.7
Noosa Main Beach ETA 621.2 17 0.031 0.7 1.7 2.6
Noosa Main Beach ETA 622 17 0.032 0.7 1.7 2.7
Noosa Main Beach ETA 623 19 0.029 0.7 1.5 2.4
Noosa Main Beach Compartment – Modelled Long Term Recession (m) 0.7 1.6 2.6
Noosa North Shore ETA 626 21 0.027 0.6 1.4 2.2
Noosa North Shore ETA 628 18 0.030 0.7 1.6 2.5
Noosa North Shore ETA 630 16 0.034 0.8 1.8 2.8
Noosa North Shore ETA 632 16 0.035 0.8 1.9 2.9
Noosa North Shore ETA 634 18 0.030 0.7 1.6 2.5
Noosa North Shore ETA 636 17 0.032 0.8 1.7 2.7
Noosa North Shore ETA 638 17 0.032 0.7 1.7 2.7
Noosa North Shore ETA 640 17 0.032 0.7 1.7 2.6
Noosa North Shore ETA 642 19 0.030 0.7 1.6 2.5
Noosa North Shore Compartment – Modelled Long Term Recession (m) 0.7 1.7 2.6
Teewah Beach ETA 646 18 0.031 0.7 1.6 2.5
Teewah Beach ETA 650 18 0.031 0.7 1.7 2.6
Teewah Beach ETA 654 21 0.026 0.6 1.4 2.2
Teewah Beach ETA 658 18 0.030 0.7 1.6 2.5
Teewah Beach ETA 662 18 0.030 0.7 1.6 2.5
Teewah Beach ETA 666 19 0.029 0.7 1.5 2.4
Teewah Beach ETA 670 14 0.038 0.9 2.0 3.2
Teewah Beach ETA 674 21 0.026 0.6 1.4 2.2
Teewah Beach ETA 678 21 0.026 0.6 1.4 2.2
Teewah Beach Compartment – Modelled Long Term Recession (m) 0.7 1.6 2.5
1
The minimum allowance for N x R required by DEHP (2013) is 10 m and has been adopted in the Erosion Hazard Area Width formula
for all Noosa CHAP planning horizons.
G:\Admin\B22613.g.mpb.Noosa_CHAS\R.B22613.002.04.NSC_CHAP_Mapping.docx
Section 24
Noosa Shire Council Coastal Hazard Mapping 17
Erosion Prone Area Assessment
3.5 Storm Erosion (C)
Storm erosion occurs when increased wave heights and water levels result in the erosion of sand
from the upper beach ridge. The eroded sand is taken offshore where it is deposited as a sand bar
located near the wave break area. After the storm event the sediment is slowly transported
onshore, often over many months or several years, rebuilding the beach.
The potential for short term storm erosion due to severe wave and elevated sea water levels (storm
tide conditions) has been predicted using the simple cross-shore equilibrium profile model of
Vellinga (1983). This empirical model calculates upper beach and dune erosion volume associated
with the given storm induced extreme water level and wave conditions. The amount of shoreline
recession is determined from the input parameters and the initial (pre-storm) beach profile shape.
The model assumes the volume of material eroded from the upper beach/dune system and
deposited offshore is balanced by a setback of the shoreline. This assessment approach is
described further below.
3.5.1 Design Event Erosion Assessment
3.5.1.1 Background Information and Datasets
As discussed in Chapter 2, Aurecon (2013) recently assessed and updated storm tide levels
throughout the Noosa region. The present-day 100 year ARI ‘surge plus tide’ levels have been
adopted for the short term storm erosion assessments.
BMT WBM (2013) assessed design wave heights for the Sunshine Coast region which included the
Noosa Eastern Beaches. Inputs to the wave modelling was based on the statistical analysis of the
Brisbane Waverider buoy data (Allen & Callaghan 2001)2 that considered waves generated by
cyclonic and non-cyclonic conditions. The 100 year ARI significant wave height has been used as
input to the erosion hazard assessments. In addition, the wave setup contribution to the sustained
water level at the shoreline has been estimated following Stockdon et al (2006):
S shoreline 0.35 f H 0 L0
1/ 2
Equation 3-3
Where βf is the foreshore slope (approximately 1V:25H throughout the study area), H0 is the deep
water significant wave height and L0 is the deep-water wave length (L0 = gT/2π where T is the
wave period = 12s).
The setup allowance has been added to the ‘surge plus tide’ levels reports by Aurecon (2013) and
used as input to the Vellinga (1983) storm erosion model. This is considered a conservative
approach since the erosion model only requires input of the ‘surge plus tide’ level and the
additional contribution of wave setup to the extreme water level leads to an increase in the
predicted erosion volume.
An assumed beach sediment median grain size of 0.22 mm (220 µm) was adopted throughout the
study area (e.g. Delft Hydraulics Laboratory 1970; Jones 1992). This grain size is typical for south
2
Shand et al. (2011) also report extreme value analysis of Brisbane waverider buoy recordings using approximately 10 years of
additional data. Their results are consistent with Allen & Callaghan (2001) with the 100 year ARI significant wave height Hs ≈ 8 m.
G:\Admin\B22613.g.mpb.Noosa_CHAS\R.B22613.002.04.NSC_CHAP_Mapping.docx
Section 25
Noosa Shire Council Coastal Hazard Mapping 18
Erosion Prone Area Assessment
east Queensland beaches; however, it is noted that the Vellinga model is relatively sensitive to the
assumed sediment grain size with the erosion volume and setback distance increasing with
decreasing grain size.
The pre-storm upper beach profile for the assessments was obtained from topographic LiDAR
survey acquired in 2016 and provided by Council. The upper beach profile data typically extended
offshore to an elevation between 0 and -1.0 m Australian Height Datum (AHD). Below this
elevation, the nearshore and offshore beach profile information used in this assessment was
extracted from a bathymetric LiDAR survey captured in 2011 (Queensland Government, 2012).
The combined 100 year ARI ‘surge plus tide’ level, wave height and wave setup allowance that
define the ‘design event’ for the Noosa CHAP short term storm erosion assessments are
summarised in Table 3-2.
It is noted that the likelihood of the 100 year ARI storm tide event coinciding with the 100 year ARI
wave conditions throughout the Noosa region remains uncertain however is considered a rare
event and appropriate for planning periods of at least 100 years.
3.5.1.2 Design Erosion Events Modelling Results
The predicted storm erosion profile at each assessment location is provided in Appendix C and the
model inputs and assessment results are summarised in Table 3-2.
An example storm erosion modelling result at North Shore beach is presented in Figure 3-3. The
position of the design water level and the DNRM coastline on the surveyed beach profile is also
shown in Figure 3-3. As discussed in Section 3.2.1.1and illustrated conceptually in Figure 3-2, the
DNRM coastline definition has been used to estimate the dune frontal toe position and is the
seaward reference for the storm erosion assessment and the overall open coast calculated erosion
distance (E in Equation 3-2). Both the C1 and C2 components of the short term erosion are
provided in Table 3-2. In situations where the DNRM coastline reference is landward of the design
water level, the C2 term has been set to zero.
The short-term setback distances varied significantly throughout the region, with the range between
7 m and 63 m (n = 25, mean = 25 m, SD = 16 m) relative to the seaward toe of the frontal dune.
The variation is primarily due to differences in the height and volume of the coastal barrier and the
nearshore slope. Relatively subtle changes in the design storm characteristics also contribute to
alongshore variation in the erosion estimates.
It is also important to note that the Vellinga storm erosion estimates do not account for erosion
controls, such as the presence of bedrock behind the beach or man-made coastal erosion
protection structures. Consideration of the seawall at Noosa Main Beach is discussed further in
Section 3.9.
G:\Admin\B22613.g.mpb.Noosa_CHAS\R.B22613.002.04.NSC_CHAP_Mapping.docx
Section 26
Noosa Shire Council Coastal Hazard Mapping 19
Erosion Prone Area Assessment
Figure 3-3 Example Design Erosion Setback at North Shore Beach (ETA 626 shown in
Figure 3-1)
G:\Admin\B22613.g.mpb.Noosa_CHAS\R.B22613.002.04.NSC_CHAP_Mapping.docx
Section 27
Noosa Shire Council Coastal Hazard Mapping 20
Erosion Prone Area Assessment
Table 3-2 Summary of Design Storm Erosion Assessment Results
Beach Compartment Profile Peak Input Wave Modelled Modelled
Locati Surge Peak setup Erosion Landward
on plus Height, (m) Volume Setback
Tide Hs (m) (m3/m)
C1 C2
(mAHD)
(m) (m)
Peregian Beach ETA 578 1.72 5.9 0.38 43 16 0
Peregian Beach ETA 582 1.72 5.9 0.38 61 12 35
Peregian Beach Compartment – Adopted C1 Setback Distance (m) = 14; Adopted C2 Distance (m) = 18
Castaways Beach ETA 596 1.74 6.2 0.46 77 21 0
Sunshine Beach ETA 602 1.74 6.2 0.46 103 52 0
Sunshine Beach Compartment – Adopted C1 Setback Distance (m) = 37; Adopted C2 Distance (m) = 0
Noosa Main Beach ETA 1.53 0.52 207 53 0
6.2
621.2
Noosa Main Beach ETA 622 1.53 6.2 0.52 163 63 0
Noosa Main Beach ETA 623 1.53 6.2 0.52 21 11 0
Noosa Main Beach Compartment – Adopted C1 Setback Distance (m) = 42; Adopted C2 Distance (m) = 0
Noosa North Shore ETA 626 1.63 6.2 0.39 120 36 9
Noosa North Shore ETA 628 1.63 6.2 0.39 95 27 3
Noosa North Shore ETA 630 1.63 6.2 0.39 81 25 10
Noosa North Shore ETA 632 1.63 6.2 0.39 69 30 4
Noosa North Shore ETA 634 1.63 6.2 0.39 48 16 0
Noosa North Shore ETA 636 1.63 6.2 0.35 60 15 0
Noosa North Shore ETA 638 1.63 6.2 0.35 47 7 0
Noosa North Shore ETA 640 1.63 6.2 0.35 48 13 0
Noosa North Shore ETA 642 1.63 6.2 0.35 36 8 0
Noosa North Shore Compartment – Adopted C1 Setback Distance (m) = 20; Adopted C2 Distance (m) = 3
Teewah Beach ETA 646 1.74 6.2 0.37 44 9 4
Teewah Beach ETA 650 1.74 6.2 0.37 47 12 3
Teewah Beach ETA 654 1.74 6.2 0.37 69 25 6
Teewah Beach ETA 658 1.74 6.2 0.37 72 22 0
Teewah Beach ETA 662 1.74 6.2 0.37 52 25 3
Teewah Beach ETA 666 1.74 6.2 0.37 41 9 0
Teewah Beach ETA 670 1.74 6.2 0.37 59 21 0
Teewah Beach ETA 674 1.74 6.2 0.37 63 19 1
Teewah Beach ETA 678 1.74 6.2 0.37 10 7 0
Teewah Beach Compartment – Adopted C1 Setback Distance (m) = 17; Adopted C2 Distance (m) = 2
G:\Admin\B22613.g.mpb.Noosa_CHAS\R.B22613.002.04.NSC_CHAP_Mapping.docx
Section 28
Noosa Shire Council Coastal Hazard Mapping 21
Erosion Prone Area Assessment
3.5.1.3 Wave Runup & Overtopping Potential
A preliminary assessment of the contribution of wave runup processes to the extreme water level
has been considered at the open coast locations. Within estuaries the contribution of wave driven
processes to the extreme water level is assumed to be much smaller.
Wave runup is the intermittent process of advancement and retreat of the instantaneous shoreline
position on a timescale that is of the order of the incoming wave period. Wave runup can be a
significant contributor to the peak water levels and inundation associated with the overtopping of
coastal barriers. Furthermore, the large quantity of energy contained in individual wave runup can
pose a serious risk to coastal barriers (natural or man-made) within the wave runup zone.
The wave setup and runup contribution to shoreline water levels within the coastal zone has been
estimated using an empirical formulation based on 10 dynamically diverse field experiments
described in Stockdon et al (2006). The runup height predicted with this formula is the level above
the offshore mean water level that is exceeded by 2% of runup events (R2). The general
expression for wave setup and wave runup on beaches provided in Stockdon et al. (2006):
Wave setup
S shoreline 0.35 f H 0 L0
1/ 2
Equation 3-4
Wave runup
H 0 L0 0.563 f2 0.004
1/ 2
R2 1.1 S shoreline
2
Equation 3-5
Where βf is the foreshore slope, H0 is the deep water significant wave height and L0 is the deep
water wave length (L0 = gT/2π where T is the wave period).
Adopting a representative regional 100 year ARI design wave height of 6.2 m (see Table 3-2), an
associated wave period of 12 seconds and foreshore slope of 1V:25H in Equation 3-5 gives a 2%
runup height of 1.77 m.
Table 3-3 provides a summary of the present-day runup elevation (mAHD) associated with the
adopted design storm definition. Table 3-3 also indicates the primary frontal dune height at each
assessment location and the potential for overtopping of the dune (or coastal barrier). Overtopping
is predicted to occur at Noosa Main Beach and Teewah Beach, with the latter considered being of
little consequence due to the well-established hind dune area.
The consequence of overtopping would be greater at Noosa Main Beach and may significantly
influence the coastal hazard at this location. Furthermore, since the landward migration of the
shoreline in response to SLR is constrained by development at this location, the wave overtopping
potential will increase with SLR if left unmitigated. Overtopping at Noosa Main Beach may need
further assessment during the options analysis stage of the Noosa CHAP.
G:\Admin\B22613.g.mpb.Noosa_CHAS\R.B22613.002.04.NSC_CHAP_Mapping.docx
Section 29
Noosa Shire Council Coastal Hazard Mapping 22
Erosion Prone Area Assessment
Table 3-3 Summary of Wave Runup & Overtopping Potential
Beach Profile Dune Height Surge plus Surge, Tide plus 2%
Compartment Location (mAHD) Tide (mAHD) Runup* (mAHD)
Peregian Beach ETA 578 6.9 1.72 3.27
Peregian Beach ETA 582 6.4 1.72 3.27
Castaways Beach ETA 596 7.2 1.74 3.43
Sunshine Beach ETA 602 4.9 1.74 3.43
Noosa Main Beach ETA 621.2 3.2 1.53 3.30
Noosa Main Beach ETA 622 3.0 1.53 3.30
Noosa Main Beach ETA 623 5.8 1.53 3.30
Noosa North Shore ETA 626 5.6 1.63 3.22
Noosa North Shore ETA 628 5.5 1.63 3.22
Noosa North Shore ETA 630 6.8 1.63 3.22
Noosa North Shore ETA 632 4.2 1.63 3.22
Noosa North Shore ETA 634 4.5 1.63 3.22
Noosa North Shore ETA 636 5.7 1.63 3.16
Noosa North Shore ETA 638 7.1 1.63 3.16
Noosa North Shore ETA 640 5.5 1.63 3.16
Noosa North Shore ETA 642 5.8 1.63 3.16
Teewah Beach ETA 646 5.5 1.74 3.29
Teewah Beach ETA 650 4.8 1.74 3.29
Teewah Beach ETA 654 4.5 1.74 3.29
Teewah Beach ETA 658 4.3 1.74 3.29
Teewah Beach ETA 662 3.7 1.74 3.29
Teewah Beach ETA 666 3.6 1.74 3.29
Teewah Beach ETA 670 3.0 1.74 3.29
Teewah Beach ETA 674 4.9 1.74 3.29
Teewah Beach ETA 678 4.6 1.74 3.29
*shading indicates potential overtopping of the primary frontal dune or coastal barrier
G:\Admin\B22613.g.mpb.Noosa_CHAS\R.B22613.002.04.NSC_CHAP_Mapping.docx
Section 30
Noosa Shire Council Coastal Hazard Mapping 23
Erosion Prone Area Assessment
3.6 Shoreline Response to Sea Level Rise (S)
3.6.1 Background Information
As discussed in BMT WBM (2017), the Noosa CHAP adopts the following sea level rise allowances
(relative to present-day mean sea level):
• 2040: 0.2 m
• 2070: 0.5 m
• 2100: 0.8 m
These allowances are based on consideration of the following key studies:
• IPCC (2014) suggest global mean increases to sea level of approximately 0.3 m by 2050 and
0.8 m by 2100;
• DOE, CSIRO & BOM suggest regional mean increases to sea level of approximately 0.14 m by
2030 and 0.65 m by 2090;
• Analysis of east coast Australia tide gauge data suggests 3 mm/year increase in mean sea level
(e.g. CSIRO-ARECRC 2012; Wainwright and Lord 2014); and
• State planning policy and guidelines that adopt 0.8 m by 2100.
3.6.2 Equilibrium Profile (Bruun Rule) Concept
The mean sea level has remained at or near the present level for about 6,500 years. During this
period the shoreline throughout the study area has evolved to a condition of ‘dynamic equilibrium’,
noting that relatively short-term fluctuations in shoreline position occur (typically in response to
storm events). In theory, the dynamic equilibrium shape will be maintained as the shoreline moves
landward in response to SLR. This shoreline response assumes that no significant sediment
sources or sinks emerge and that the landward migration of the shoreline is not obstructed by
natural or man-made features.
The equilibrium profile concept can be simulated by the Bruun Rule (Bruun 1962) which is
illustrated in Figure 3-4. As SLR gradually occurs, wave, tide and wind related sand transport
processes influence a higher position on the beach profile, with the shoreline evolving to a more
landward position to return to equilibrium with the new sea level. There is an upward and landward
translation of the profile to maintain equilibrium with the prevailing condition at the new SLR
position.
G:\Admin\B22613.g.mpb.Noosa_CHAS\R.B22613.002.04.NSC_CHAP_Mapping.docx
Section 31
Noosa Shire Council Coastal Hazard Mapping 24
Erosion Prone Area Assessment
Figure 3-4 Bruun (1962) Concept of Recession due to Sea Level Rise
Application of the Bruun Rule has been highly contested within the coastal science community (e.g.
Ranasinghe et al., 2007), often relating to the method for estimating the depth of closure. The
depth of closure is the theoretical depth limit at which there is little or no potential for significant
cross-shore exchanges of sand. Recession estimates can vary by around 500% depending on the
method used to calculate the depth of closure (Ranasinghe and Stive, 2009). This compounds the
already high level of uncertainty associated with the future rate of SLR and highlights the
appropriateness of a risk-based approach to future climate shoreline recession assessments.
As noted by Woodroffe et al. (2012), the wide application of the Bruun Rule probably reflects its
simplicity rather than its proven accuracy and recession rate estimates based on the method
should be considered as only broadly indicative. More robust numerical methods to assess future
climate shoreline recession exist; however, such methods require extensive historical datasets to
underpin the modelling assumptions and, despite significant additional effort, will not always reduce
the level of uncertainty for decision makers over long planning periods.
The ‘Standard’ Bruun Rule Approach
The simplified Bruun Rule as shown in Figure 3-30 for the linear recession distance r (in metres) is:
𝐵𝑎
𝑟=
𝐷
Equation 3-6
Where: B = horizontal distance offshore from the top of the dune to the depth of closure (d); a = the
rise in sea level, and D = the vertical distance (height) from the top of the dune to the depth of
closure (d).
Depth of Closure
Hallermeier (1981) divides the nearshore zone into three zones, namely:
• The littoral zone, which “extends to the seaward limit of intense bed activity”;
G:\Admin\B22613.g.mpb.Noosa_CHAS\R.B22613.002.04.NSC_CHAP_Mapping.docx
Section 32
Noosa Shire Council Coastal Hazard Mapping 25
Erosion Prone Area Assessment
• The shoal zone, which “extends from the seaward edge of the littoral zone to a water depth
where expected surface waves are likely to cause little sand transport” and “waves have neither
strong nor negligible effects on the sand bed” ; and
• The offshore zone, which is seaward of the shoal zone and water depths are relatively deep
with respect to surface wave effects on the sea bed.
Hallermeier (1981) stresses that sediment motion can and does occur seaward of the shoal zone,
however the seaward boundary (di) defined by Hallermeier (1981) aims to provide “a physically
meaningful seaward limit to the usual wave-constructed shoreface”.
Hallermeier (1981) then identifies two depths that define the landward and seaward boundaries of
the shoal zone:
• Depth dl which is the “maximum water depth for sand erosion and seaward transport by an
extreme yearly wave condition”; and seaward of this; and
• Depth di which is the “maximum water depth for sand motion by the median wave condition”,
corresponding to the seaward limit of the usual wave-constructed profile.
Patterson (2012; 2013) identified that the time-scale of profile response, the time required for the
profile to achieve equilibrium, increases with depth and needs to be considered in determining
closure depth. Nicholls et al. (1996, 1998) and Cowell et al. (2001) both refer to the closure depth
in terms of the time scale considered. That is, they note that profile “closure” occurs at greater
depth as the time scale increases. Nicholls et al. (1998) adopt a version of the Hallermeier (1977;
1981) relationship for depth of closure of the form:
𝑑𝑙,𝑡 = 2.28 𝐻𝑒,𝑡 − 68.5 (𝐻𝑒,𝑡2 / 𝑔𝑇𝑒,𝑡 2 )
Equation 3-7
Where dl,t = the predicted depth of closure over t years, referenced to Mean Low Water; He,t = non-
breaking significant wave height exceeded 12 hours per t years; and Te,t = associated wave period.
Following Equation 3-7, the depth of closure to cater for SLR over a planning period of 100 years
will be greater than that adopted for shorter durations. Adopting a representative regional 1% AEP
design wave height of 6.2 m (see Table 3-2) and an associated wave period of 12 seconds in
Equation 3-7 suggests a 100 year planning period depth of closure around 11-12 m for Noosa
beaches. However, it should be noted that this does not provide for the concept of accumulation at
the lower part of the equilibrium profile translation to balance upper profile erosion on which the
Bruun Rule is based.
Considering the above, the horizontal distance offshore to the depth of closure varies between
approximately 525 m and 950 m throughout the study area. Considering the variation in dune
heights and offshore bathymetry, the measured Bruun Rule slope factor ranges from 1:32 to 1:56.
3.6.3 Shoreline Response to Sea Level Rise Assessment Results
The shoreline response to SLR assessment results are presented in Table 3-4. It must be
recognised that the Bruun Rule does not account for the influences of longshore sand transport
processes on the profile response to sea level, nor does it consider the potential changes to
G:\Admin\B22613.g.mpb.Noosa_CHAS\R.B22613.002.04.NSC_CHAP_Mapping.docx
Section 33
Noosa Shire Council Coastal Hazard Mapping 26
Erosion Prone Area Assessment
sediment sinks and sources (e.g. rivers and creeks) that may influence the future sediment budget.
As noted by DEHP (2013), SLR projections are expected to be refined and updated in line with
future IPCC publications. Should this refinement occur, Noosa Shire Council may wish to consider
a review of the assumptions that underpin the SLR assessments described in this report.
G:\Admin\B22613.g.mpb.Noosa_CHAS\R.B22613.002.04.NSC_CHAP_Mapping.docx
Section 34
Noosa Shire Council Coastal Hazard Mapping 27
Erosion Prone Area Assessment
Table 3-4 Summary of Response to Sea Level Rise Assessment Results
Profile Bruun Rule Recession Estimate (m)
Profile Profile
Beach Slope
Locat- Width 2040 2070 2100
Compartment (1V:
ion (m) (0.2m SLR) (0.4m SLR) (0.8m SLR)
XH)
Peregian Beach ETA 578 630 35 7 18 28
Peregian Beach ETA 582 620 36 7 18 29
Peregian Beach Compartment – Adopted 7 18 29
Castaways Beach ETA 596 595 32 6 16 26
Sunshine Beach ETA 602 525 32 6 16 26
Sunshine Beach Compartment – Adopted 6 16 26
Noosa Main Beach ETA 621.2 800 55 11 27 44
Noosa Main Beach ETA 622 800 55 11 28 44
Noosa Main Beach ETA 623 800 46 9 23 37
Noosa Main Beach Compartment – Adopted 10 26 42
Noosa North Shore ETA 626 950 56 11 28 45
Noosa North Shore ETA 628 750 44 9 22 35
Noosa North Shore ETA 630 790 43 9 22 35
Noosa North Shore ETA 632 750 48 10 24 38
Noosa North Shore ETA 634 725 46 9 23 36
Noosa North Shore ETA 636 725 42 8 21 34
Noosa North Shore ETA 638 720 39 8 19 31
Noosa North Shore ETA 640 715 42 8 21 34
Noosa North Shore ETA 642 715 42 8 21 33
Noosa North Shore Compartment – Adopted 9 22 36
Teewah Beach ETA 646 715 42 8 21 34
Teewah Beach ETA 650 750 46 9 23 37
Teewah Beach ETA 654 735 46 9 23 37
Teewah Beach ETA 658 750 48 10 24 38
Teewah Beach ETA 662 750 50 10 25 40
Teewah Beach ETA 666 760 50 10 25 40
Teewah Beach ETA 670 720 50 10 25 40
Teewah Beach ETA 674 735 45 9 23 36
Teewah Beach ETA 678 765 48 10 24 38
Teewah Beach Compartment - Adopted 9 24 38
G:\Admin\B22613.g.mpb.Noosa_CHAS\R.B22613.002.04.NSC_CHAP_Mapping.docx
Section 35
Noosa Shire Council Coastal Hazard Mapping 28
Erosion Prone Area Assessment
3.7 Factor of Safety (F)
A 40% factor of safety has been applied to the erosion hazard area calculations for this study, as a
conservative provision to acknowledge the uncertainties and limitations of the adopted methods
and assumptions. In addition, there are many other conservative assumptions that underpin
erosion prone area width assessment, including:
• The design storm erosion event being characterised by coincident 100 year ARI storm tide and
100 year ARI wave conditions. It is assumed that the probability of this event occurring in any
given year is less than one percent;
• The assumption that the coastal barrier only contains erodible sands;
• No recognition of existing (or possible future) shoreline erosion management activities such as
dune revegetation, beach nourishment, revetment seawalls and/or other man-made structures
designed to limit shoreline recession; and
• Accurate cross-shore profiles, measured from the 2016 topography LiDAR survey and the 2012
bathymetric LiDAR survey.
3.8 Dune Slumping (D)
Immediately following storm erosion events on sandy beaches, a near vertical erosion scarp of
substantial height can be left in the dune or beach ridge. An area of reduced bearing capacity can
exist on the landward side of sand escarpments. This can impact on structures founded on sand
within this zone and the sand escarpments pose a hazard associated with sudden collapse.
Over time the near vertical erosion scarp will slump to the natural angle of repose of the sand.
Nielsen et al. (1992) outlined the zones within and behind the erosion escarpment on a dune face
that is expected to slump or become unstable following a storm erosion event (see Figure 3-5),
namely:
• Zone of Slope Adjustment (ZSA): the area landward of the vertical erosion escarpment crest
that may be expected to collapse after the storm event; and
• Zone of Reduced Foundation Capacity (ZRFC): the area landward of the zone of slope
adjustment that is unstable being in proximity to the storm erosion and dune slumping.
Amongst other factors, the width of the dune slumping and reduced bearing capacity behind the top
of an erosion escarpment is dependent upon the angle of repose of the dune sand and the height
of the dune above mean sea level.
G:\Admin\B22613.g.mpb.Noosa_CHAS\R.B22613.002.04.NSC_CHAP_Mapping.docx
Section 36
Noosa Shire Council Coastal Hazard Mapping 29
Erosion Prone Area Assessment
Figure 3-5 Schematic Beach/Dune Cross Section Showing Pre and Post Erosion Dune
Face and Dune Stability Profiles (from DECCW, 2010; after Nielsen et al., 1992)
For the current assessment, the dune slumping component provides for the horizontal distance
between the vertical erosion scarp and zone of reduced bearing capacity. A typical angle of repose
of 34 degrees for dune sands, and scour level of -1m AHD, was applied to the Nielsen et al (1992)
schema, in addition to the dune crest heights measured from the available 2016 LiDAR topography
for each beach profile. The results of the assessment are summarised below in Table 3-5).
G:\Admin\B22613.g.mpb.Noosa_CHAS\R.B22613.002.04.NSC_CHAP_Mapping.docx
Section 37
Noosa Shire Council Coastal Hazard Mapping 30
Erosion Prone Area Assessment
Table 3-5 Summary of Dune Slumping Assessment Results
Beach Compartment Profile Location Dune Height (mAHD) Dune Slumping (m)
Peregian Beach ETA 578 6.9 18
Peregian Beach ETA 582 6.4 17
Peregian Beach - Adopted = 18
Castaways Beach ETA 596 7.2 19
Sunshine Beach ETA 602 4.9 13
Sunshine Beach – Adopted = 16
Noosa Main Beach ETA 621.2 3.2 9
Noosa Main Beach ETA 622 3.0 9
Noosa Main Beach ETA 623 5.8 15
Noosa Main Beach – Adopted = 11
Noosa North Shore ETA 626 5.6 15
Noosa North Shore ETA 628 5.5 15
Noosa North Shore ETA 630 6.8 18
Noosa North Shore ETA 632 4.2 12
Noosa North Shore ETA 634 4.5 12
Noosa North Shore ETA 636 5.7 15
Noosa North Shore ETA 638 7.1 18
Noosa North Shore ETA 640 5.5 15
Noosa North Shore ETA 642 5.8 15
Noosa North Shore – Adopted = 15
Teewah Beach ETA 646 5.5 15
Teewah Beach ETA 650 4.8 13
Teewah Beach ETA 654 4.5 13
Teewah Beach ETA 658 4.3 12
Teewah Beach ETA 662 3.7 11
Teewah Beach ETA 666 3.6 10
Teewah Beach ETA 670 3.0 9
Teewah Beach ETA 674 4.9 13
Teewah Beach ETA 678 4.6 13
Teewah Beach – Adopted = 12
G:\Admin\B22613.g.mpb.Noosa_CHAS\R.B22613.002.04.NSC_CHAP_Mapping.docx
Section 38
Noosa Shire Council Coastal Hazard Mapping 31
Erosion Prone Area Assessment
3.9 Assessment Results
Open coast erosion hazard distances have been calculated following the methodology and formula
described in Section 3.2.1 and 3.2.1.1 for locations throughout the study area where sufficient data
is available. The results (beach compartment averages) presented in Table 3-6 include the 40%
factor of safety that is assumed to account for the uncertainties associated with the assessments
(see Section 3.7).
As previously discussed, the calculated erosion distances do not account for local erosion controls,
such as the engineered coastal protection structures or erosion resistant bedrock slopes. Properly
designed and maintained seawalls are expected to limit the landward extent of the erosion. The
design standard of the Noosa Main Beach seawall, concealed within the sand dune, remains
uncertain. It has been assumed the existing structure may not withstand a design storm event but
would be sufficient to limit long term recession and the shoreline response to sea level rise. This
assumption has been incorporated to the coastal hazard mapping produced for Noosa Main Beach.
As noted in Section 3.4, it has been difficult establishing a clear long-term trend in shoreline
recession from the available historical datasets but it is assumed to be very low and/or mitigated
through ongoing management activities. The adopted value of R = 10 m for all planning horizons is
based on the minimum allowance required by DEHP.
The short-term erosion component (see Section 3.5) varies between 7 m and 63 m (n = 25, mean =
25 m, SD = 16 m) relative to the seaward toe of the frontal dune. The alongshore variation is
primarily due to differences in the height and volume of the coastal barrier and the nearshore slope.
The short term erosion component accounts for approximately 30% of the coastal erosion hazard
area under the 2100 timeframe.
Considering the SLR projection of 0.8 m by the year 2100 adopted by the Queensland Government
for planning purposes (DEHP 2015), the shoreline response to sea level rise (S, see Section 3.6)
component accounts for approximately 35% of the coastal erosion hazard area by 2100.
The coastal erosion hazard area also considers slumping of the dune scarp (D, see Section 3.8)
and this component accounts for approximately 15% of the total erosion prone area under the 2100
timeframe. Dune instability was estimated using the zone of reduced foundation capacity zone
schema by Nielsen et al (1992).
G:\Admin\B22613.g.mpb.Noosa_CHAS\R.B22613.002.04.NSC_CHAP_Mapping.docx
Section 39
Noosa Shire Council Coastal Hazard Mapping 32
Erosion Prone Area Assessment
Table 3-6 Beach Compartment Summary of Open Coast Calculated Erosion Distances
Long term Short term storm Dune Shoreline response to sea level Calculated erosion distance Notes
recession erosion component slumping rise E
Beach component component SxF (m)
Compartm (m)
ent
(N x R) x F C1 x F C2 D 2040 2070 2100 Present 2040 2070 2100
(m) (m) (m) (m) (0.2m SLR) (0.5m SLR) (0.8m SLR) -day2
Peregian
14 20 18 18 10 25 41 56 80 95 111
Beach
Castaways
Beach to
14 52 0 16 8 22 36 68 90 104 118
Sunshine
Beach
Noosa Seawall controls
Main 14 59 0 11 14 36 59 70 98 120 143 expected to limit
Beach3 erosion
Noosa Possible bedrock
North 14 28 3 15 13 31 50 46 73 91 110 control may limit
Shore erosion
Possible bedrock
Teewah
14 24 2 12 13 34 53 38 65 86 105 control may limit
Beach erosion
1 The calculated erosion distances are measured landward from the frontal dune toe. These estimates do not consider local erosion controls where present (i.e. bedrock or engineered
coastal protection structures). They also do not apply to coastal waterway entrances.
2 Short term erosion and dune slumping components only (C1 x F + C2 + D)
3 Noosa Main Beach seawall expected to limit long term recession and shoreline response to sea level rise. Mapping assumes the erosion hazard area is limited to the short term
erosion and dune slumping components only (i.e. the present-day width) landward of the seawall.
G:\Admin\B22613.g.mpb.Noosa_CHAS\R.B22613.002.04.NSC_CHAP_Mapping.docx
Section 40
Noosa Shire Council Coastal Hazard Mapping 33
Permanent Inundation due to Sea Level Rise
4 Permanent Inundation due to Sea Level Rise
4.1 Hazard Assessment Approach
As discussed by BMT WBM (2017), the State EPA mapping defines permanent tidal inundation
due to SLR at 2100 as:
• Present-day Highest Astronomical Tide (HAT) plus 0.8 m SLR.
The hazard area is then obtained by extrapolating the water level across land. Areas adjacent to
tidal waters where the ground elevation falls below the threshold water level are deemed to be
within the hazard area.
The SLR hazard information provided by the State is useful for ‘first-pass risk screening’ only and
does not provide sufficient information regarding likelihood and consequence to undertake a more
detailed risk assessment. To address this issue, SLR hazard mapping including depth classification
has been developed for the Noosa CHAP planning horizons. The adopted approach generally
follows the State definition, whereby a threshold water level (mAHD) is defined by consideration of
HAT plus an appropriate SLR allowance. The water level mapping assumptions are summarised in
Table 4-1. These thresholds for different locations throughout the study area consider Maritime
Safety Queensland published tidal planes (MSQ 2017) along the open coast and within the lower
Noosa River. Linear interpolation of the water level between the sites has been adopted with the
Munna Point and Tewantin levels extending into Lake Cooroibah/Cootharaba and Lake Weyba
respectively.
Table 4-1 Permanent inundation due to Sea Level Rise mapping assumptions
Planning SLR Noosa Head HAT Munna Point HAT Tewantin HAT
Horizon allowance (m) (mAHD) (mAHD) (mAHD)
Present-day 0 1.16 0.68 0.55
2040 0.2 1.36 0.88 0.75
2070 0.5 1.66 1.18 1.05
2100 0.8 1.96 1.48 1.35
4.2 Assessment Results
The projected impact of inundation due to SLR is presented in Appendix E and is moderate across
the Noosa region, primarily impacting land adjacent to the lower Noosa River. Based on current
forecasts, and in the absence of an adaptation response, this impact would be realised between
2060 and 2080 and significantly escalate by 2100.
G:\Admin\B22613.g.mpb.Noosa_CHAS\R.B22613.002.04.NSC_CHAP_Mapping.docx
Section 41
Noosa Shire Council Coastal Hazard Mapping 34
Hazard Classification
5 Hazard Classification
5.1 Introduction
To inform the Noosa CHAP risk assessment, it will be necessary to classify coastal hazard areas
presented in this report. A short discussion on some key considerations is presented below.
5.2 Storm Tide inundation
In terms of defining inundation hazards, floodplain and emergency management guidelines
consider both velocity and depth of flows. The flood hazard classification as defined by Handbook 7
- Australian Emergency Management Handbook Series is summarised in Table 5-1 and Figure 5-1.
As part of risk and vulnerability assessments for the Noosa CHAP, the temporary inundation
hazard associated with storm tide (and coincident catchment flooding and storm tide) may need to
be further defined based on this or another similar classification.
5.3 Permanent Inundation from Sea-level Rise
Tidal inundation is slowly emerging and characterised by very low flow velocities (less than 0.5
m/s). Therefore, when defining the potential hazard associated with permanent inundation due to
SLR, it is important to note the significance or consequence of the low velocity HAT plus SLR
inundation hazard and its relationship to depth, frequency and duration of inundation.
Multiple locations within the study area may experience frequent – possibly even daily – inundation
by tidal waters under future climate scenarios. This inundation (even for areas subject to less
frequent inundation) may result in a range of effects such as sediment deposition, salinization of
soils, and/or reduced functionality of buried infrastructure services. These effects to both built and
natural environments will gradually develop (over many decades) and are distinct in nature from
more rapid onset hazards such as storm tide inundation. Therefore, the potential consequence and
risk associated with permanent inundation from SLR will be assessed separately in subsequent
CHAP phases3.
Future climate performance analysis of affected infrastructure, services and natural environments
adjacent to tidal waterways will need to be considered in conjunction with lower catchment and
riverine flood and drainage assessments.
5.4 Coastal Erosion
The open coast calculated erosion distances presented in this report may also require further
consideration as part of ongoing work for the Noosa CHAP, in the event hazard reduction
measures are undertaken in the future at a given location.
3
It is noted that the Noosa CHAP storm tide and erosion prone area assessments and mapping described in this report include an
allowance for SLR.
G:\Admin\B22613.g.mpb.Noosa_CHAS\R.B22613.002.04.NSC_CHAP_Mapping.docx
Section 42
Noosa Shire Council Coastal Hazard Mapping 35
Hazard Classification
Table 5-1 Flood Hazard Classification Description4
Hazard Vulnerability Classification Description
H1 Generally safe for vehicles, people and buildings.
H2 Unsafe for small vehicles.
H3 Unsafe for vehicles, children and the elderly.
H4 Unsafe for vehicles and people.
Unsafe for vehicles and people. All building types
H5 vulnerable to structural damage. Some less robust
building types vulnerable to failure.
H6 Unsafe for vehicles and people. All building types
considered vulnerable to failure.
Figure 5-1 Flood Hazard Classification and Curves2
4
Handbook 7: technical flood risk management guideline: Flood Hazard
G:\Admin\B22613.g.mpb.Noosa_CHAS\R.B22613.002.04.NSC_CHAP_Mapping.docx
Section 43
Noosa Shire Council Coastal Hazard Mapping 36
References
6 References
Allen, M. and Callaghan, J. (2001). Extreme Wave Conditions for the South Queensland Coastal
Region, Environmental Technical Report 32, Queensland Environmental Protection Agency.
Aurecon (2013) Sunshine Coast Storm Tide Study – Storm Tide Definition, prepared for Sunshine
Coast Regional Council, April, 21pp.
BMT WBM (2017) Coastal Hazards Risk, Vulnerability and Adaptation Assessment Scoping
Report, prepared for Noosa Shire Council, 62 pp.
Beach Protection Authority (1998). Noosa Beach Technical Report: Conservation Technical Report
No. 9. Department of Environment (Queensland Government). March 1998.
Bruun P. (1962). Sea level rise as a cause of shoreline erosion. Journal of Waterways and Harbors
Division, American Society Civil Engineering, Vol. 88: pp117-130.
DEHP (2013). Coastal hazard technical guide, Determining coastal hazard areas, prepared by
Environmental Planning, Queensland Department of Environment and Heritage Protection, April
2013. https://www.ehp.qld.gov.au/coastalplan/pdf/hazards-guideline.pdf
Delft Hydraulics Laboratory (1970). Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia – Coastal erosion and
related problems. Delft Hydraulics Laboratory, Netherlands, Report R 257.
GHD (2014). NDRP Storm Tide Hazard Interpolation Study, prepared for Department of Science,
Information Technology, Innovation and the Arts, 97 pp. https://data.qld.gov.au/dataset/ndrp-storm-
tide-hazard-interpolation-series
Griffith University Centre for Coastal Management and GHD Pty Ltd (2012). Coastal Hazard
Adaptation Options – A Compendium for Queensland Coastal Councils, prepared for the
Queensland Department of Environment and Heritage Protection
Hallermeier, R.J. (1977). Calculating a yearly limit depth to beach erosion. Proc. 16th Coastal
Engineering Conf., Hamburg, Germany, pp 1493-1512.
Hallermeier R.J. (1981). A profile zonation for seasonal sand beaches from wave climate. Coastal
Engineering, 4(3), pp253-277.
Harper B.A. (2012). Guidelines for responding to the effects of climate change in coastal and ocean
engineering – 3rd Edition May 2012. Engineers Australia, National Committee on Coastal and
Ocean Engineering, EA Books, 74pp. Revised June 2013. [Available online at:
https://www.engineersaustralia.org.au/sites/default/files/shado/Learned%20Groups/National%20Co
mmittees%20and%20Panels/Coastal%20and%20Ocean%20Engineering/vol_1_web.pdf ]
Harper B.A. (2017). Guidelines for responding to the effects of climate change in coastal and ocean
engineering – 4th Edition (in prep). Engineers Australia, National Committee on Coastal and Ocean
Engineering.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2014). Climate Change 2014 Synthesis Report.
Jones, M.R. (1992). Quaternary Evolution of the Woorim-Point Cartwright Coastline, Volumes 1 &
2, Department of Minerals and Energy, Marine and Coastal Investigations Project Report MA49/2.
G:\Admin\B22613.g.mpb.Noosa_CHAS\R.B22613.002.04.NSC_CHAP_Mapping.docx
Section 44
Noosa Shire Council Coastal Hazard Mapping 37
References
Lord, D. B. and Burgess, A. L. (1987). The Erodibility of Indurated Sands, Eighth Australasian
Conference on Coastal and Ocean Engineering, 1987.
MSQ (2017). Queensland Tide Tables 2017. Maritime Safety Queensland.
Nielsen, A.F., Lord, D.B., and H.G. Poulos, (1992). Dune Stability Considerations for Building
Foundations , Institution of Engineers, Civil Engineering Transactions Vol CE34, No.2, June 1992,
pp. 167-173.
Queensland Government (2012). Queensland coastal risk and bathymetric LiDAR: a pilot study for
collecting near-shore bathymetry. Queensland Department of Science, Information Technology,
Innovation and the Arts, Brisbane, Australia.
Shand, T.D., Wasko, C.D., Goodwin, I., Carley, J.T., You, Z.J., Kulmar, M. and Cox, R.J. (2011)
Long-term trends in NSW coastal wave climate and derivation of extreme design storms, NSW
Coastal Conference Tweed Heads.
Stockdon, H.F., Holman, R.A., Howd, P.A. and Sallenger, Jr., A.H. (2006). Empirical
parameterization of setup, swash, and runup, Coastal Engineering 53, 573-588.
Vellinga, P. (1983). Predictive computation model for beach and dune erosion during storm surges.
Delft Hydraulics Laboratory, Publication No. 294.
WMA Water (2017a) Noosa River Flood Study Upgrade Volume 4, Design Event Modelling Report,
prepared for Noosa Shire Council, 92 pp.
WMA Water (2017b) Noosa River Flood Study Future Climate Scenarios, prepared for Noosa Shire
Council, 5 July 2017.
G:\Admin\B22613.g.mpb.Noosa_CHAS\R.B22613.002.04.NSC_CHAP_Mapping.docx
Section 45
Noosa Shire Council Coastal Hazard Mapping A-1
Open Coast & Lower Noosa River Storm Tide Hazard Extent
Appendix A Open Coast & Lower Noosa River Storm Tide
Hazard Extent
G:\Admin\B22613.g.mpb.Noosa_CHAS\R.B22613.002.04.NSC_CHAP_Mapping.docx
Section 46
; ; hi Google™ earth
x Data SIO, NOAA, U.S. Navy,
ae fi, NGA, GEBCO
ee oy fj image © 2017 DigitalGlobe
acted : i image © 2017 CNES/ Airbus
ae, Sh ad )
" oo Sf he Ve,
Coe Ci 5
ng - F
w ee i}
f oe “— | i
ny SE LakelCoolcolayay
LEGEND Hake) oe. i
Noosa Shire a? a ee? j
LGA Boundary ‘ y ‘
ri “ j
——— Noosa River ore ek
Uo a re oo : a
Peak Flood Depth (m) & » i
, J ]
fd i
| 0.0 to 0.5 y t
: 0.5 to 1.0 E pane Ss |
1.0 to 1.5 F Fee
1.5 to 2.0 ‘ e *
2.0 to 2.5 * eewan
2.5 to 3.0 i |
3.0 to 3.5 5 ye B
3.5 to 4.0 ? , a . !
4.0 to 4.5 4 P
4.5 to 5.0 , i;
>5.0 a
“eo X h
Hazard extentderived ae ba as = !
using methods described ; k ; Fs *
in Aurecon (2013) and : ma
Airborne Laser Scanning : Bye 7 “
data captured in 2010. : pod \
inundation depths are Ye” oe ee - 1 ‘
derived from water levels ee) panscooroibah Zz i
that do not include any : 2 ce . Ss , ‘
freeboard allowance. / a h 4 a
oe Tn en re pag uD a)
es ti ES
: NS pe Bay)
aN Paine <)( Saee- | Sey :
) eg ee we ae
~ - 2 ss eer} Ey Pass ee ay = f 4 Sr i
‘ - fem, * he & Tee ae
2 a. : Te Me Ie LON ton Ein MR
GO ER. 5 wind PO SD Sunshine”
S Cooroy, | oon eua) ea? on eee {
f Bee ey. Pal? aS —— <s
sé so : . ; ; f . 3 1 Sy
eT “¢ os
. * seal ¢ : a = a ¥
eri ; ee
ae : . id $ Peregian Beach *
a Hy, 2
, : = Bie eee PS
; oe |
Title: Figure: Rev:
Present Day 100 year ARI Storm Tide Inundation Peak A-1 A
Depth
i
BMT WBM endeavours to ensure that the information provided in this We
map is correct at the time of publication. BMT WWBM does not warrant, N Okm 4 8 tf =
guarantee or make representations regarding the currency and i,
accuracy of information contained in this map. Scale - Main Map nS BMT WBM
curacy of i i /* - au,
www.bmtwbm.com.au
Filepath: 1:\B22613.i.mbp.Noosa_CHAS\DRG\COA_010_170802_Storm_Tide_Present_Day.worSection 47
; ; hi Google™ earth
) AR : Data SiO, NOAA, U.S. Navy,
ae fi, NGA, GEBCO
ee De / fi image © 2017 DigitalGlobe
eel : i image © 2017 CNES/ Airbus
f . | e
_ sy et j
ae ay St ‘I ; . F
ng - F
ww : 7 a “ “ i
> a ] i
7 a wae ae “a 1
5 ae Ref @ocbata |
LEGEND nepoeen Wht
Noosa Shire “4 eae i j
oe |
LGA Boundary be =
——— Noosa River ie Cl ee.
ae ey ae 4 “oz
Peak Flood Depth (m) , ) |
_ .
Fr i
7 0.0 to 0.5 Pe L i
: 0.5 to 1.0 . Lake Di )
4.0 to 1.5 i a }
en os, ee
. . “Hp. 7 f a ‘ Sa E * i
2.5 to 3.0 Po oo ‘Boreen) ie
3.0 to 3.5 a, ae a
3.5 to 4.0 , e . i
4.0 to 4.5 , ell |
>5.0 7 ae
4.5 to 5.0 , , oh
Ae
: 8 TN a iN
Hazard extentderived _ es _— ae te i
using methods described : -th es ‘ i
in Aurecon (2013) and vii &: Pe 3
Airborne Laser Scanning bls a ee | = \
data captured in 2010. af, a | we i
inundation depths are Le oe alas , 7 f
derived from water levels . eae pamescooroibah ae i
that do notinclude any : ro A ‘, y:] i
freeboard allowance. ; oe 4) a7,
¥ e FS
E © SE ANE Ga Bays
r aes a @ 4 : ¥,
: a : om ee b 3 / 4 Fi a “at oe
A . " ie ( ae | ee ‘
h i” 9 Sp egiapeg oF.) ies
rs. : gas oh Wee A + ere een
3 m hy Fe SRN Pr beg ee
: i . ean : ‘ me Pe CO } r » & SegSunshine)
eet oe Pin es ar Memmbeach
Re corey : mara. ame, <a.
A ; <a Fe ’ a ‘ é Pa 5 e |
lay a : "D
: Aim 9s
eer : re)
ae : . d $ Peregian: Beach *
a a
= Le
Title: Figure: Rev:
2040 Planning Horizon 100 year ARI Storm Tide A-2 A
Inundation Peak Depth
if
BMT WBM endeavours to ensure that the information provided in this (ee
map is correct at the time of publication. BMT WWBM does not warrant, N Okm 4 8 tf Oy
accuracy of information contained in this map. nN eT ua BMT WBM
guarantee or make representations regarding the currency and “
www.bmtwbm.com.au
Filepath: 1:\B22613.i.mbp.Noosa_CHAS\DRG\COA_010_170802_Storm_Tide_Present_Day.worSection 48
; : fi Google™ earth
} x Data SIO, NOAA, U.S. Navy,
S j An NGA, GEBCO
ee “ve / f image © 2017 DigitaiGlobe
act . x | image © 2017 CNES/ Airbus
{ , i
\ , if
ve Ss it ;
—_—- a. ff 5 . i
‘ ng . : - i
wy e sy j ao
’ ms ror ~“
roan A Wake[Cooloola
LEGEND Wakelcome —
Noosa Shire ame ps Fy f
LGA Boundary ai)
——— Noosa River aT — ae 4 s |
fy zs : 1 . q oe
- a 4 '
Pp at ' }
eak Flood Depth (m) < | i
0.0 to 0.5 yi }
7 0.5 to 1.0 F eke }
1.0 to 1.5 H
1.5 to 2.0 Ae ht
2.0 to 2.5 are Bere
2.5 to 3.0 Fe Boreen| rs i
3.0 to 3.5 a PY . i
3.5 to 4.0 —aor a }
4.0 to 4.5 Po ne |
4.5 to 5.0 a i
75.0 a
| A mayan es |
Hazard extentderived - 7 ae
using methods described , ah A - 3 }
in Aurecon (2013) and if : Fe :
Airborne Laser Scanning NN , dee = I
data captured in 2010. i ii | \
inundation depths are Ye” oe te Fon i" ‘
derived from water levels ee a paar eo Pa ;
that do notinclude any : * A , “" ; "
freeboard allowance. se + aA
bee Zt) 8 3 pN g
aa A eee a ‘
, tak = i ;
- : ve ie Sy) | (je
A ye bl wey Ne er 5.
soe ya , nt i Me
me. OTD LS , 5 a " BS poe *)@ Sunshine)
PS SBF 2 aap eee Ge
PP si s : ; ; . 7 F 4 ‘ a
ee Ee - >, 4 :
os i oe i
y oad eae : F oF
er : re
- 2 : . Wg : Peregian) Beach ©
min Co :
a a > a
“ WeAE oi
Title: Figure: Rev:
2070 Planning Horizon 100 year ARI Storm Tide A-3 A
Inundation Peak Depth
; : : ; sie
BMT WBM endeavours to ensure that the information provided in this We. cy
map is correct at the time of publication. BMT WBM does not warrant, N Okm 4 8 ty -
guarantee or make representations regarding the currency and ee ™ wa
accuracy of information contained in this map. Scale - Main Map a BMT WBM
curacy of i i i / \ - aa,
www.bmtwbm.com.au
Filepath: |:\B22613.i.mbp.Noosa_CHAS\DRG\COA_009_170802_Storm_Tide_2070.worSection 49
; : hi Google™ earth
‘ i , Data SIO, NOAA, U.S. Navy,
S j An NGA, GEBCO
ee “ve / fi image © 2017 DigitaiGlobe
acta I 4 image © 2017 CNES/ Airbus
ry a ]
- . a i,
Coe A ,
ng , - ih
w pe, Ay }
7 aL se Fr “ if . a I
ro a ake\coclen [
LEGEND Wake\Comoy, )
Noosa Shire bem 4
LGA Boundary nt ¥
1 eo r, A }
Noosa River ae 7 re fe f Re
ee F 3 ;
aan bd a 7
yi. { , }
Peak Flood Depth (m) 2 7 5
r /
7 0.0 to 0.5 a f
; 0.5 to 1.0 Po peaks) J |
1.0 to 1.5 Pp }
1.5 to 2.0 Pm =
2.0 to 2.5 Oe eS ee
2.5 to 3.0 we Boreen) |
3.0 to 3.5 p oe i
3.5 to 4.0 —— 3 |
4.0 to 4.5 } Pt
4.5 to 5.0 , £, — i
>5.0 ‘al ee a
he a ‘ 7
Hazard extentderived -— . ‘cue fi i
using methods described ae 1 ia a . |
in Aurecon (2013) and i | , a)
Airborne Laser Scanning bls & Be | S
data captured in 2010. oe ie | | \
inundation depths are ae pe 4 F ] y
derived from water levels Y _ belo amelie ‘
that do notinclude any : a a ) i
freeboard allowance. ee 4) Cat
i Ps \= bs
et se %
| o aero : oe Es Ps a
: pct “Sr
Pty Be) eNO
vA . = Bi i ree / = bey ¢ << ;
; i to’, | an eet (abi ; a a ’ Sas is
Mt: fem se See Be aD pmsensine)
pomet + P y, a ae ee SSIe Eee i
. x F . Pi , o A i a 4 —,
er na Se) : ; : f ‘ ’ Ny
= F | P "D d ‘ :
- y - i. 1 ri
; : et a
} ; bly cow
- 2 : . Wg : Peregian) Beach ©
: a Hy, 2
= . ~ ; ee ;
fa A f
Title: Figure: Rev:
2100 Planning Horizon 100 year ARI Storm Tide A-4 A
Inundation Peak Depth
i
BMT WBM endeavours to ensure that the information provided in this Wee
map is correct at the time of publication. BMT WBM does not warrant, N Okm 4 8 ty -
guarantee or make representations regarding the currency and a ™ wa
accuracy of information contained in this map. Scale - Main Map a BMT WBM
curacy ofi i i /- - ae,
www.bmtwbm.com.au
Filepath: 1:\B22613.i.mbp.Noosa_CHAS\DRG\COA_011_170802_Storm_Tide_2100.worSection 50
Noosa Shire Council Coastal Hazard Mapping B-1
Coincident Catchment Flooding & Storm Tide Hazard Extent
Appendix B Coincident Catchment Flooding & Storm Tide
Hazard Extent
G:\Admin\B22613.g.mpb.Noosa_CHAS\R.B22613.002.04.NSC_CHAP_Mapping.docx
Section 51
5 : i k ( Google™earth
i rs . Data SIO, NOAA, U.S. Navy,
~P 3 Py P tat NGA, GEBCO
f Dye / re ah image © 2017 DigitalGlobe
ped . 7 = be i F image © 2017 CNES / Airbus
\ ‘ a is
plas i ' |
4 : atl x 4
2 ff y | q ] . A :
Ce A . 7 ‘a > ;
“eg bf n
7 a s = r
rl q
LEGEND Hake\Como}
Noosa Shire ‘vag |
LGA Baundaly a pe" bs q :
———— Noosa River x ae 4
= a q *
— Urban Model Extent y ™ 1
ys “a 5
a |
Peak Flood Depth (m) ; ey
i F flake!
0 tes ‘Cootharaba
= 0.5 to 1.0 ay
ie - a i ov DS sTeewah
-5 to 2. 3
2.0 to 2.5 ge Se Doreen) “ed
Pe ee
2.5 to 3.0 — al
3.0 to 3.5 ae dl |
3.5 to 4.0 = aa al
4.0 to 4.5 5 rt y
4.5 to 5.0 pepe ote
>5.0 ie "aa
Hazard extentderived if s. ay |
using methods described a.) ir 3 :
in WMA Water (2017) and pete Cea et iy
Airborne Laser Scanning 7 che cae | - is
data captured in 2010. a Fer Pail 3
inundation depths are a a Beano ocr ar) ' die
derived from water levels eae : a
that do notinclude any a oe *, a
freeboard allowance. Pe ar a. er
Phy an ae
p— 6h iO
STA Taek. tt tal and
WA ‘ ’ , ar AY eS ae a a a N
vr 4 Fader HO rN om I ee
Meg? dh Ip Sk r — en ON a
et ; eos fag % Ba lek ity
x ; re ek eee BES ieewe _\, os
ee paige ps, fr Pa ae
' er ie [Dooneliate | 2 i SeBeach |
Tie AS eae ce te, a
ee ; Pe ak - re
Oh RY te
tet ta a aa . ake) g a
epee gy Pee iN, ee
: me wt ‘War : iWeyba’ i ‘
ae. . : ft, Peregian Beach |
. i ; a A al k
4 2 * d ee = hs]
4 : 2 ae 8
Title: Figure: Rev:
Present Day Planning Horizon Coincident Catchment B-1 A
Flooding & Storm Tide Inundation Peak Depth
if
BMT WBM endeavours to ensure that the information provided in this We
map is correct at the time of publication. BMT WBM does not warrant, N Okm 4 8 ty =
guarantee or make representations regarding the currency and ——_ ip,
accuracy of information contained in this map. Scale - Main Map ‘a BMT WBM
>curac’ i / \ zi eZ
www.bmtwbm.com.au
Filepath: 1\B2261 3.i.mbp.Noosa_CHAS\DRG\COA_015_170802_Coincident_StormTide_and_Flooding_Present_Day.worSection 52
: = rahe bi Googie™earth
K ey : PCRS OM ey) MERCM EInY
2 ae fi, Pst NGA, GEBCO
f Del rm image © 2017 DigitalGlobe
acta ‘ ; mt “4 F image © 2017 CNES/ Airbus
& F el ;
§ Fe
4 1 ail a oF
\ we ra . ‘ ,
— © af f a \ 4
Ae ie :
j oe a 4 7 P
Wa co a
9g : .
LEGEND ake!Como} 1
Noosa Shire ie d
LGA Boundary Pe ,
——— Noosa River x a i re { »
s oe {
= a m
— Urban Model Extent e “ 7
, , J
Peak Flood Depth (m) , Wey !
i , lake /
0.0 to 0.5 |
0.5 to 1.0
ie - a fi a ! »»leewah
gion 1
2.0 to 2.5 P&S Boreen! 4
-5 to 2. a eo
2.5 to 3.0 ig . P nd Ps eo
3.0 to 3.5 1 ‘ |
3.5 to 4.0 : a -
4.0 to 4.5 + Pe a
4.5 to 5.0 ern po
>5.0 i ale a
Hazard extentderived di 4 / } 4 '
using methods described ; _ , il { |
in WMA Water (2017) and pa? gg ee |
Airborne Laser Scanning 5 cs ee oe if
data captured in 2010. | gh Sia Pn ;
inundation depths are ’ + ate 4 Beer oroibay i
derived from water levels a akan
that do not include any t 4 r * i ~
freeboard allowance. Pe rar et a 4
(ite Tak) * a eee
is ra ¢ P, Set + ey va 4 -
yy: P Peed. 110) 6 bie |
‘ Ota. Sy eae) nek :
> ea i (he Pe See
ae oe p OPP yan Wie Lowey re io MEM ne
ec ae Pr
F ee) Fe ae ay ~~ C5 — = - me
- Fe A . e om F V ? n ’ id ui z rf
ats oe i. ‘
ry Se ae . Ping a am Y
f . 1 | Ne “
ie. . . & Peregian|Beach
‘ = Py < > ba k']
. Eo ee
a aes Nai a
e A Ae
Title: Figure: Rev:
2040 Planning Horizon Coincident Catchment Flooding B-2 A
& Storm Tide Inundation Peak Depth
if
BMT WBM endeavours to ensure that the information provided in this (ee
map is correct at the time of publication. BMT VWBM does not warrant, N Ok 4 8 ty ies
guarantee or make representations regarding the currency and a Ney, - BMT WBM
accuracy of information contained in this map. / \ Scale - Main Map ‘a
www.bmtwbm.com.au
Filepath: |:\B22613.i.mbp.Noosa_CHAS\DRG\COA_014_170802_Coincident_StormTide_and_Flooding_2040.worSection 53
" = P ~ b Googie™earth
i Si ; Data SIO, NOAA, U.S. Navy,
a ~Z fi, Pt NGA, GEBCO
é ed Re Image © 2017 DigitalGlobe
acest * ; = i I F image © 2017 CNES / Airbus
& , . Pee Al ig
\ wy al . 4 ;
‘ Pf eur P
” *y os eh ai a
——- A i ) P +
eg aan Ss bs A
a 4 ae i
LEGEND Ecc a
Noosa Shire »: “hes ;
LGA Boundary i ™
——— Noosa River - —_e .
—— Urban Model Extent g ~~ 4
- a? 5 *
n , ,
Peak Flood Depth (m) a Bey
0.0 to 0.5 ce
i ,
0.5 to 1.0 Sy. ‘
1.0 to 1.5 i a
1.5 to 2.0 b en bs,
2.0 to 2.5 ee coreen rl
2.5 to 3.0 =a pd
3.0 to 3.5 i ‘
3.5 to 4.0 . att a
4.0 to 4.5 + a! e
4.5 to 5.0 Pe Qa!
>5.0 ee “ie
Hazard extentderived yo Boa 5
using methods described a. or.
in WMA Water (2017) and pote _ i oe roe
Airborne Laser Scanning sy Tk a , ape | if
data captured in 2010. —) FF oa Ps ;
inundation depths are . P ste és Meek Cooccibaty Pac
derived from water levels “sais sh ys a: ?
that do notinclude any 3 a i we me
freeboard allowance. ra “G a) eh
Sasa tii rg TON agurial
je 73 Stk com
a ES VG —§. eos
oe? tele Sey Ne
: eee eee, aa a
5 Ves YE Ooe sb oe act
ee ae ee pe | Saaibeach |
ee ae 2 , ES ae
4 a = ' Fs ae } ay mv we ao = 5 5
en ao! , p - : a ° ‘ FS
: =...
Be. . . 5 Peregian Beach |
‘ = Py < > ba k']
- Eo ee
7 ; oe . i
& ate sy Sas | i
~ LA
Title: Figure: Rev:
2070 Planning Horizon Coincident Catchment Flooding B-3 A
& Storm Tide Inundation Peak Depth
4
BMT WBM endeavours to ensure that the information provided in this We
map is correct at the time of publication. BMT VWBM does not warrant, N Okm 4 8 tg o>
guarantee or make representations regarding the currency and ———_ fr)
accuracy of information contained in this map. / \ Scale - Main Map ‘a BMT WBM
scurac i - ay SF
www.bmtwbm.com.au
Filepath: 1:\B22613.i.mbp.Noosa_CHAS\DRG\COA_013_170802_Coincident_StormTide_and_Flooding_2070.worSection 54
5 = FE i, Google™earth
i a ; Data SIO, NOAA, U.S. Navy,
a ag fi, } : NGA, GEBCO
é De F ei ola image © 2017 DigitalGlobe
at x ; im. 4 Fd F image © 2017 CNES / Airbus
& F . a it ‘
4 - | ae P
\ 4 ts x el ¥ 3 :
” * Sy ai 6 he
Lola i ; - i Pe
ng ors ;
: od :
LEGEND MakelComo) 1
Noosa Shire a ae d
LGA Boundary y.” ™ d
——— Noosa River Me Ne { S
— Urban Model Extent e ha 4
i b 4 *
Peak Flood Depth (m) F. ’ /
i a iakel
v0 toa ‘Cootharaba
aan |
0.5 to 1.0 aA
1.0 to 1.5 vo s
1.5 to 2.0 r ion
2.0 to 2.5 ze #55 Boreen) a
2.5 to 3.0 —— a’
3.0 to 3.5 - i al
3.5 to 4.0 : a! f
4.0 to 4.5 + | “d
= ra J
4.5 to 5.0 ys ‘te X.,
>5.0 al ee
Hazard extentderived y a L hte E
using methods described L — . if :
in WMA Water (2017) and Po cl oe Pe f
Airborne Laser Scanning SJ ce Soa, oe ‘fi
data captured in 2010. oe . eae ae : Ss
inundation depths are a. Bee oor ibaly Pd oar
derived from water levels pe ae 3
that do not include any a F i sp N
rs ae Tey i » Begum
freeboard allowance. ce i wa: a
en ee RN B2y2
iererk
vr 4 Fale AW Weer we Ce ef
s ey, OUR Ee oe. '
25s “a eae EG ele My
2 $ ere i Hake! 300 SS ge Sunshine)
\ awk ; ‘Doonelfa’ -_ i 3 al Beach
: ; sa e ff er,’ : oe: aa ees it * , Re:
: hy Fak. ag 4
ee ! Par i ee
; . ’ : Pier ieee
, ; : batiel f Ne 3
ae . : CS Peregian Beach |
‘ i Py < Ps ba k']
. fC eer
‘ " 4 ce ee rs]
Re ee :
. Ee,
Title: Figure: Rev:
2100 Planning Horizon Coincident Catchment Flooding B-4 A
& Storm Tide Inundation Peak Depth
BMT WBM endeavours to ensure that the information provided in this (We
4
map is correct at the time of publication. BMT WBM does not warrant, N Okm 4 8 ty =
guarantee or make representations regarding the currency and | ve
accuracy of information contained in this map. Scale - Main Map ‘a BMT WBM
>curac i / \ Fi wel
www.bmtwbm.com.au
Filepath: |:\B22613.i.mbp.Noosa_CHAS\DRG\COA_012_170802_Coincident_StormTide_and_Flooding_2100.worSection 55
Noosa Shire Council Coastal Hazard Mapping C-1 Storm Erosion Estimates Appendix C Storm Erosion Estimates G:\Admin\B22613.g.mpb.Noosa_CHAS\R.B22613.002.04.NSC_CHAP_Mapping.docx
Section 56
Noosa Shire Council Coastal Hazard Mapping C-2
Storm Erosion Estimates
Figure C-1 Storm Erosion Estimate: ETA 578 (top), ETA 582 (middle) and ETA 596 (bottom)
G:\Admin\B22613.g.mpb.Noosa_CHAS\R.B22613.002.04.NSC_CHAP_Mapping.docx
Section 57
Noosa Shire Council Coastal Hazard Mapping C-3
Storm Erosion Estimates
Figure C-2 Storm Erosion Estimate: ETA 602 (top), ETA 621.2 (middle) and ETA 622 (bottom)
G:\Admin\B22613.g.mpb.Noosa_CHAS\R.B22613.002.04.NSC_CHAP_Mapping.docx
Section 58
Noosa Shire Council Coastal Hazard Mapping C-4
Storm Erosion Estimates
Figure C-3 Storm Erosion Estimate: ETA 626 (top), ETA 628 (middle) and ETA 630 (bottom)
G:\Admin\B22613.g.mpb.Noosa_CHAS\R.B22613.002.04.NSC_CHAP_Mapping.docx
Section 59
Noosa Shire Council Coastal Hazard Mapping C-5
Storm Erosion Estimates
Figure C-4 Storm Erosion Estimate: ETA 632 (top), ETA 634 (middle) and ETA 636 (bottom)
G:\Admin\B22613.g.mpb.Noosa_CHAS\R.B22613.002.04.NSC_CHAP_Mapping.docx
Section 60
Noosa Shire Council Coastal Hazard Mapping C-6
Storm Erosion Estimates
Figure C-5 Storm Erosion Estimate: ETA 638 (top), ETA 636 (middle) and ETA 642 (bottom)
G:\Admin\B22613.g.mpb.Noosa_CHAS\R.B22613.002.04.NSC_CHAP_Mapping.docx
Section 61
Noosa Shire Council Coastal Hazard Mapping C-7
Storm Erosion Estimates
Figure C-6 Storm Erosion Estimate: ETA 638 (top), ETA 642 (middle) and ETA 646 (bottom)
G:\Admin\B22613.g.mpb.Noosa_CHAS\R.B22613.002.04.NSC_CHAP_Mapping.docx
Section 62
Noosa Shire Council Coastal Hazard Mapping C-8
Storm Erosion Estimates
Figure C-7 Storm Erosion Estimate: ETA 650 (top), ETA 654 (middle) and ETA 658 (bottom)
G:\Admin\B22613.g.mpb.Noosa_CHAS\R.B22613.002.04.NSC_CHAP_Mapping.docx
Section 63
Noosa Shire Council Coastal Hazard Mapping C-9
Storm Erosion Estimates
Figure C-8 Storm Erosion Estimate: ETA 662 (top), ETA 666 (middle) and ETA 670 (bottom)
G:\Admin\B22613.g.mpb.Noosa_CHAS\R.B22613.002.04.NSC_CHAP_Mapping.docx
Section 64
Noosa Shire Council Coastal Hazard Mapping C-10
Storm Erosion Estimates
Figure C-9 Storm Erosion Estimate: ETA 674 (top) and ETA 678 (bottom)
G:\Admin\B22613.g.mpb.Noosa_CHAS\R.B22613.002.04.NSC_CHAP_Mapping.docx
Section 65
Noosa Shire Council Coastal Hazard Mapping D-1 Calculated Erosion Distance Hazard Extent Appendix D Calculated Erosion Distance Hazard Extent G:\Admin\B22613.g.mpb.Noosa_CHAS\R.B22613.002.04.NSC_CHAP_Mapping.docx
Section 66
‘ Google™ earth
inn 'é ' , Data SIO, NOAA, U.SfNavy,
fang A. NGA, GEBCO
af a a Image © 2017 DigitafSlobe
al x Image © 2017 CNEB/Airbus
he 3 ‘on
¥ e )
\ “i
! > — 7 Hohe P .
_ “Dy | hee Mu, 7 /
_ J
w ~
Pe. bie
LEGEND
[ ] Noosa Shire [Uake|Cooloola)
LGA Boundary it'ake}Como)
Noosa River
— Coastline %
—— 2100 Calculated k
Erosion Distance a.) :
2070 Calculated
Erosion Distance /
2040 Calculated KiniKin) Vake
i '
Erosion Distance ; e Cootharaba
. Teewah
——— Present Day Calculated ‘ ; Boreen
Erosion Distance . ,
Le :
~ | J 7 m7
\Cooran!
P : aE
4 +e os \ake\Cooroibah, P \
. \
, \
ome \
") See INSET Jy
was yn [Bayj ] P
pe PON :
3 = C ff! ae !
q = ; ‘ grr e ; re a Po Ai = aa ee
ie ~\ 5 “ ; a ok o> “> eae oe i i
\ > if Me 2 GSS) ae. Sunshine
fae Re ie
. wen Lake: ota oa Ae Boach|
- Doonellays Ls fas
a> ‘
- _ «# a" |
i sw iz , ? 5 c a Weyba}
“i A , ake) ;
" ’ be p -
| i ae », 3 :
5 if A. 7 ; | M
Pe, * 4 SS
SS j se :
i _ y - " = ~ & “ e , iio eceecoocas Fi
{ cry ip ee ee ee i
’ 4 Tell Pale id he a Ae
cD ne ta a py
. x | 5 : : _ eee Nooo ae “ike
vcomep. | i ar ee ee se INSET oe wo
: te u > es ‘ ;
Title: Figure: Rev:
Calculated Erosion Distance D-1 B
BMT WBM endeavours to ensure that the information provided in this Okm 0.5 1 (er
map is correct at the time of publication. BMT WBM does not warrant, N SS i@
guarantee or make representations regarding the currency and / Approx. Scale %, B MT
accuracy of information contained in this map. L X Okm 4 8 jo
= a aE |
Scale - Main Map www.bmt.org
Filepath: 1:\B22613.i.mbp.Noosa_CHAS\DRG\COA_016B_180104_Calculated_Erosion_Distance.worSection 67
Noosa Shire Council Coastal Hazard Mapping E-1
Permanent Inundation due to Sea-Level Rise Extent
Appendix E Permanent Inundation due to Sea-Level Rise
Extent
G:\Admin\B22613.g.mpb.Noosa_CHAS\R.B22613.002.04.NSC_CHAP_Mapping.docx
Section 68
- Google™ earth
‘ R Data SIO, NOAA, U.S. Navy,
~Z A. NGA, GEBCO
ee wy Image © 2017 DigitaiGlobe
f cet ‘ a j image © 2017 CNES/ Airbus
\ P ad :
a NE Sy \ 4
_ , A _—
‘ sean ate ns ; i
LEGEND akelCoro * ‘oofocla
se ae } fi
a Noosa Shire ’ te i
LGA Boundary se fH
on / ii
Noosa River Pee ) i \ @
tad {
ot ii
d A :
: ~ . |
Peak Flood Depth (m) Ca i
= b ed
: a i
2 0.0 to 0.5 Fs
: 0.5 to 1.0 1 Bae
1.0 to 1.5 : ‘Cootharaba om
1.5 to 2.0 EN 3 a x
2.0 to 2.5 oa pd "eee
2.5 to 3.0 = Boreen i !
3.0 to 3.5 Pea < gf « '
3.5 to 4.0 ; 4 {
4.0 to 4.5 ; "7d
4.5 to 5.0 x na t
>5.0 a fe » Joel 4
Hazard extentderived -_. = eas ae
using published tidal a S ea:
planes, sea-levelrise a ‘ a
allowance and Airborne ' | di ns 2 :
Laser Scanning data : gi \
captured in 2016. Le 2. gaa Pag t
Inundation depths are y ees) eatery KE. |
derived from water levels : : ne x 7 ; 7
that do notinclude any 3 ae Se, \
freeboard allowance. fa By aN \
a) * een 4
A f . Gy
Wy ao i ie SS.
oe Ae oD Sh omer Laan Y
rae : | Cy aes mo Ss |
‘ fe eee A See ee Montel oe
ean [Dooneliap= | hig maceech
coool i ee Of She ay,
? Cass , ea) ae ve =e e t
2 “sS io! ; ci y 2 A Cae \ i
; . ; 3 :
Sf * : en ed a
- ) \ “ac Ps
N : 3 a wr, rai
; } ; ees
A |
Title: Figure: Rev:
2040 Planning Horizon Permanent Inundation due to Sea E-1 A
Level Rise
: ' shred sie
BMT WBM endeavours to ensure that the information provided in this Le,
map is correct at the time of publication. BMT WBM does not warrant, N Okm 4 8 if
guarantee or make representations regarding the currency and a % :
accuracy of information contained in this map. Scale - Main Map vias BMT WBM
www.bmtwbm.com.au
Filepath: 1\B22613.i.mbp.Noosa_CHAS\DRG\COA_017_170803_SLR_2040.worSection 69
- Google™ earth
} x Data SIO, NOAA, U.S. Navy,
~Z A. NGA, GEBCO
ee | image © 2017 DigitalGlobe
f naa 7 x . image © 2017 CNES/ Airbus
\ P ew ,
a NE Sy a.
_ ot os
x ay } x j h
coe. WA My LakelCoolcolaam |
LEGEND Hake\Gomo, < L ;
a Noosa Shire ¥ Ae Y i
LGA Boundary Sg a)
Noosa River Pee ee 4 4 y I
: es J " i
ions /
ot i
: ’ |
Peak Flood Depth (m) a |
a .
i 0.0 to 0.5 ' f on j
0.5 to 1.0 ELD .
4.0 to 1.5 ‘Cootharaba i
1.5 to 2.0 ’ *
2.0 to 2.5 “a :
2.5 to 3.0 5 Boreen a
3.0 to 3.5 es eee £
3.5 to 4.0 7 F 4
4.0 to 4.5 F er
4.5 to 5.0 9 oe ’
>5.0 an / ae .
Hazard extentderived a, UT OF
using published tidal ; Sa. Sie » ‘
planes, sea-levelrise in: ae P ¥ ‘ ’
allowance and Airborne ie Far oe:
Laser Scanning data ee ac)
captured in 2016. Le 2g gaa C ran
Inundation depths are J ee a aa gibah ; ;
derived from water levels : : i . See 3
that do notinclude any sh ny 7G ‘
freeboard allowance. ie} | * Cy ecune
. rom % oe ; es § q Bays ,
4 eT) a Be ’ BS
Si Cet a
: as Dek Fos [Gaerne irs. ean
Ne aicocroy Dooneliage cc ees
OP NSS : A >: Ge
y Ree Seg) Sma 8 ant i
a SS 4 . : 5 ‘ ; ; oe
. > “ , )
| pipe | ey) i
nea OD: : ae i
Ad |
Title: Figure: Rev:
2070 Planning Horizon Permanent Inundation due to Sea E-2 A
Level Rise
; ; shred sie
BMT WBM endeavours to ensure that the information provided in this Le
map is correct at the time of publication. BMT WBM does not warrant, N Okm 4 8 if
guarantee or make representations regarding the currency and | % :
accuracy of information contained in this map. Scale - Main Map vias BMT WBM
www.bmtwbm.com.au
Filepath: 1\B22613.i.mbp.Noosa_CHAS\DRG\COA_018_170803_SLR_2070.worSection 70
; ; h Google™ earth
) A ; Data SiO, NOAA, U.S. Navy,
e j \, i NGA, GEBCO
ee Se / 5 i image © 2017 DigitalGlobe
a : 7 } image © 2017 CNES/ Airbus
f rang y
4 . vd f
> 6! ard ‘ |
= Dre - 7 ad
‘ ae } * \ {
ry Te " c R) . fo ™,
| i OY ok
mt WA . LakelCoolcola)
LEGEND Hake}Como, ee cng
Noosa Shire art. r
LGA Boundary kak
: yeni | ae :
——— Noosa River oe Pe te es i
: aA
—s z , ri 4
wk , [
Peak Flood Depth (m) Pr i
fe A , fF
a 0.0 to 0.5 A /
) 0.5 to 1.0 eek sae ;
1.0 to 1.5 a
1.5 to 2.0 | ae
2.0 to 2.5 * yg vee
2.5 to 3.0 - Boreen, oo
3.0 to 3.5 a os ;
3.5 to 4.0 —_ ,
4.0 to 4.5 - ; yl il |
4.5 to 5.0 5 — ae: © ,
>5.0 A 2 co oo aga |
Hazard extentderived -. hl oe /
using published tidal —— 86; in, SY
planes, sea-leveirise ie ne ees \
allowance and Airborne v ee oe
Laser Scanning data ” > ae ;
captured in 20176. Le oC isa C ie
Inundation depths are era eke ooroibaly he :
derived from water levels : “ nc x = ;
that do notinclude any 3 a \ -.
freeboard allowance. ot neath :
es
i an . = ieee. ies .
re 9 Sine eey qe a! a re
‘ Bes ep ete aro PRRs ee Oe ™
. 2g ep? Oe A ot “|
: Ma <ee 3 aarp is 7a SeeSunshine
1 Cooroyls ; : ee a a may:
: 7. es = > a ay - #4 »@ Beach”
y Bo “ ’ F 7 - eS te aa br NG i:
er : a
; ae 3 : 1g ¢ Peregian Beachi 4)
eC ee
; os oO el AF i
~ A
Title: Figure: Rev:
2100 Planning Horizon Permanent Inundation due to Sea E-3 A
Level Rise
. : ; sie
BMT WBM endeavours to ensure that the information provided in this We oo
map is correct at the time of publication. BMT WBM does not warrant, N Okm 4 8 iy =
guarantee or make representations regarding the currency and A
accuracy of information contained in this map. / \ Scale - Main Map ‘a BMT WBM
>curac i ri wal
www.bmtwbm.com.au
Filepath: 1\B2261 3.i.mbp.Noosa_CHAS\DRG\COA_019_170803_SLR_2100.worSection 71
BMT WBM Bangalow 6/20 Byron Street, Bangalow 2479
Tel +61 2 6687 0466 Fax +61 2 66870422
Email [email protected]
Web www.bmtwbm.com.au
BMT WBM Brisbane Level 8, 200 Creek Street, Brisbane 4000
PO Box 203, Spring Hill QLD 4004
Tel +61 7 3831 6744 Fax +61 7 3832 3627
Email [email protected]
Web www.bmtwbm.com.au
BMT WBM Denver 8200 S. Akron Street, #B120
Centennial, Denver Colorado 80112 USA
Tel +1 303 792 9814 Fax +1 303 792 9742
Email [email protected]
Web www.bmtwbm.com
BMT WBM London International House, 1st Floor
St Katharine’s Way, London E1W 1AY
Email [email protected]
Web www.bmtwbm.com
BMT WBM Melbourne Level 5, 99 King Street, Melbourne 3000
PO Box 604, Collins Street West VIC 8007
Tel +61 3 8620 6100 Fax +61 3 8620 6105
Email [email protected]
Web www.bmtwbm.com.au
BMT WBM Newcastle 126 Belford Street, Broadmeadow 2292
PO Box 266, Broadmeadow NSW 2292
Tel +61 2 4940 8882 Fax +61 2 4940 8887
Email [email protected]
Web www.bmtwbm.com.au
BMT WBM Perth Level 4, 20 Parkland Road, Osborne, WA 6017
PO Box 1027, Innaloo WA 6918
Tel +61 8 9328 2029 Fax +61 8 9486 7588
Email [email protected]
Web www.bmtwbm.com.au
BMT WBM Sydney Suite G2, 13-15 Smail Street, Ultimo, Sydney 2007
Tel +61 2 8960 7755 Fax +61 2 8960 7745
Email [email protected]
Web www.bmtwbm.com.au
BMT WBM Vancouver Suite 401, 611 Alexander Street
Vancouver British Columbia V6A 1E1 Canada
Tel +1 604 683 5777 Fax +1 604 608 3232
Email [email protected]
Web www.bmtwbm.com