Original source · versioned page text
2021-11-15 General Committee Meeting Agenda
Text sections have not been matched to the original PDF pages. Use the original document to check page numbers.
GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 15 NOVEMBER 2021
Community comments Proposed response
range of 2.1 and 2.7, not the 10m that has been changes, and further localised studies of sand
applied to the modelling. dynamics and sand volumes.
The short term erosion component is wrong, The methodology for mapping the erosion prone
using the 1 in 100-year estimates for both surge area is set by the State Government and will still
tide and wave height, despite the recognition need to be adhered to in any updates to the State
that the combination was "rare" - resulting in a erosion prone area mapping.
significant overstatement of the area actually at
The CHAP and the coastal hazard mapping will
risk of erosion.
continue to be updated over time as new local
Clear disclaimers needed for coastal hazard information, technology and modelling methods
mapping on Council’s interactive mapping are made available. This includes the State’s
system, noting the range of inputs and erosion prone area mapping and the inundation
uncertainty inherent in the modelling. mapping layers.
Given that enhancing dune vegetation is Additional disclaimers were added to the CHAP
accepted as the best option for managing as a result of community feedback to clarify the
erosion risk, the existence of significant purpose of the maps. These disclaimers will be
vegetation all along the Eastern Beaches should expanded upon for the online mapping to more
properly be taken into account when determining clearly explain the various data inputs into the
the area actually at risk. modelling. These disclaimers will be included on
the interactive mapping as clear ‘pop up’ notices
Council has made no allowance for the sand
for readers.
trapping role of the Sunshine Beach headland.
Council should commit to further localised
studies that accurately measure and monitor the
nature and extent of erosion prone areas.
Need further modelling to better understand the
potential outcomes from best case to worst case
scenarios (low, medium, high) so we can
understand the risk envelope we are looking at
for 2040, 2070 and 2100.
Object to use of RCP8.5 global emissions
scenario for climate change as it presents a
‘worse-case scenario’. Should use more
updated IPCC or preferably CSIRO data and
where possible Queensland data e.g.
Mooloolaba, Noosa, Rosslyn Bay and Cape
Ferguson. There is such a wide range of
forecast sea level rises around the world that it
almost becomes meaningless in some respects
if we do not start using local data sets.
Any attempt to derive justification for planning
changes from erroneous modelling would be
unreasonable, irrational and unwise.
Support the enhanced emphasis in the revised Agree that local monitoring is a critical adaptation
CHAP on a flexible adaptation pathway response to better understand localised changes
approach that includes local monitoring of the including sand transport processes, sand
dunes and beaches and the gathering of factual, volumes, beach profiles, vegetation changes and
empirical data over time to inform future tide levels. Local monitoring is a key priority for
modelling and assessments and subsequent the CHAP implementation.
updating of the CHAP.
Council will work with Federal and State agencies,
This modelling data also needs to be made research institutions and other coastal experts to
available to the community. ensure the data is publicly accessible where
possible so that the community can also make
use of the information if they wish.
Page 28 of 58
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.