Griffith City Council - Griffith Major Overland Flow Floodplain Risk Management Study and Plan For CBD Catchments
공공데이터포털
The recommended Floodplain Risk Management Plan for the Griffith CBD catchments has been prepared in accordance with the NSW Floodplain Development Manual (Reference 6) and: * Is based on a comprehensive and detailed evaluation of all factors that affect and are affected by the use of flood prone land; and * Provides a long-term path for the future development of the community. Griffith is located approximately 450 km north of Melbourne and 560 km west of Sydney in the heart of the Murrumbidgee Irrigation Area (MIA). The CBD and residential areas of Griffith are located at the base of the McPherson Ranges (see Figure 1). Griffith and its surrounding villages of Yenda, Yoogali, Hanwood, Bilbul and Beelbangera lie within the Main Drain “J” catchment, which together with its network of drainage channels delivers runoff to Mirrool Creek. The Griffith CBD catchment has an area of approximately 9 km2. The upper part of the catchment is steep and covered in scattered timber and bushland. South of the bushland area the urban area begins and continues south to Wakaden St and the Temora-Roto Railway Line. This area is predominantly low density residential development. Griffith CBD lies to the south of the railway line, and is characterised by commercial and light industrial land uses. At the downstream extents of the CBD is the Main Canal which is raised above normal ground levels and is consequently a substantial obstruction to overland flow. The City of Griffith is not located on the banks of a major river system and therefore does not experience mainstream flooding as occurs at other centres within the Murrumbidgee River catchment for example Wagga Wagga. However, Griffith and its surrounding areas are affected by high volume rainfall events and also from flooding from the Main Drain J system. In the past, frequent flooding has occurred throughout the commercial areas of Griffith including Yambil Street, even in small rainfall events less than the 6 month ARI for example. Studies have indicated that this flooding has been due to a combination of catchment runoff, blockage and/or insufficient capacity of the sub-surface drainage systems and the associated siphon drainage systems, as well as the elevated railway and canal embankments that impede downstream overland flow paths. Within the study area flows are predominantly distributed and shallow at the upstream or northern sections of the CBD catchment and runoff generally ponds behind the various embankments that tend to be aligned normal to general flow direction such as the Main Canal and railway line, before being gradually discharged through the siphon outlets located under the Main Canal at the downstream boundary of the study area. The Flood Study (Reference 1) also found that the actual flow at the siphons was largely restricted by the upstream drainage system.
Lake Macquarie City Council - Stony Creek Floodplain Risk Management Plan
공공데이터포털
This Floodplain Risk Management Study investigates what can be done to reduce or manage the effects of flooding in the catchment. The Floodplain Risk Management Plan recommends a mix of strategies to manage the risks of flooding. Using the merits-based approach advocated in the NSW State Government’s Floodplain Development Manual (2005) and in consultation with the community, Council and state agency stakeholders, a number of potential options for the management of flooding were identified. These options included: • flood modification measures; • property modification measures; and • emergency response measures. An extensive list of options was assessed against a range of criteria (technical, economic, environmental and social). Hydraulic modelling of some of the flood modification options was undertaken to provide a comprehensive analysis of those options that would involve significant capital expenditure.
Bayside Council - Floodplain Management Study Spring Street Drain, Muddy Creek and Scarborough Ponds - Volume 1
공공데이터포털
Objective This Floodplain Management Study defines the nature and extent of the flood hazard in the three catchments. It also identifies and assesses strategies and measures aimed at reducing the impact of flooding on both existing and future development, and measures to prevent future development from making flooding worse. The results of this Floodplain Management Study are being used to prepare a Floodplain Management Plan (FPMP). The objective of the FPMP is to establish a cost-effective floodplain management strategy for the area and to recommend a programme for implementation of the Plan. The Study Brief is attached as Appendix A. What is in the Study The Floodplain Management Study and Plan will not totally eliminate flooding. Flooding is a natural phenomenon which cannot be fully controlled by human works. In fact, excessive artificial controls are likely to be very costly and to have adverse environmental effects. Therefore the Floodplain Management Study and Plan aim to provide a package of best management practices which give a balance between reducing flood hazard and flood damages, allowing appropriate development, and protecting and enhancing the environment of the floodplain. This Report has been divided into the following sections: Section 1: Introduction (page 1) Establishes the context and basis for the plan. Section 2: Background (page 5) Describes the study process, including previous studies, and the background technical information which is available. It includes a review of the previous Muddy Creek Flood Studies. Section 3: Existing Flood Behaviour (page 15) Summarises the available data and modelling results concerning flood behaviour. Section 4: Social and Economic Impacts of Flooding (page 23) Examines the potential flood damages and other social and economic effects of flooding for a range of flood events, including an extreme flood. Section 5: Choosing the Designated Flood (page 28) Discusses the issued to be considered by Council in choosing a designated flood for Rockdale, and recommends that the 1% AEP flood be adopted. Section 6: Available Floodplain Management Options (page 35) Describes in broad terms the range of flood mitigation and other management works and other measures available to address the existing, future and residual flooding problems in the study area. Sections 7, 8 and 9: Options for Management Areas (page 48) These three sections describe in detail, for the Muddy Creek, Spring St Drain and Scarborough Ponds catchments respectively, the feasible options and their likely benefits and costs. Section 10: Assessment of Management Options (page 86) Reviews the financial aspects and the justification for the proposed management measures, identifies priorities and possible sources of funding. These issues will be further addressed in the future Floodplain Management Plan. Section 11: References (page 90) Technical detail which supports the main report is provided in the Appendices, in Volume 2.