Last Wednesdays extreme weather event left me scrambling to out of the car park at work, in hindsight this was a minor inconvenience.When debating and reading expert opinion on the causes and solutions to flooding in the Brown Hill Creek catchment we were always told that a dam would only be useful if the rain fell in the hills and not on the plains or just in the hills. Given that very little has been done so far in the catchment and the last flood of this consequence was in 2005 it is more than likely a 1:10 event and a far cry from what a 1:100 event might look like. As I watch the news footage of Brown Hill Creek it was flooding in the caravan park and at Mitcham reserve. Was it flooding because the channel was too narrow or the amount of water coming from the hills was simply overwhelming? In my opinion, it is time for the state government to overturn the Council's agreement and do what needs to be done, and that is to build a dam. Until this is completed and the creek bed cleared resident's home will continue to be flooded. I read the transcripts of what Mayor Clyne and Spears had to say; they were trying hard to justify what in my opinion is indefensible.
Well said Jennie. This recent major rain event was centred in the hills catchment and caused unnecessary havoc in the urban area. If the event had been accompanied by a similar event over the urban area the impact on Unley, Mitcham etc would have been much worse.
ReplyDeleteIt is obvious that a dam is essential for the 1-100 event to provide some control over the quantity of water in the creek course. Unley Council /SA Govt. certainly need to rethink the plan and have a dam included in the solution. Mitcham should consider it's flood-affected residents and not be influenced by the various lobby groups who are largely not affected by floods in the totally uncontrolled Brownhill Creek.