Flooding In Regional Victoria

Flooding is an ongoing challenge in regional Victoria and it is expected to affect Victoria every 10-20 years. Victoria consists of 39 drainage basins and each of the basins comprises of rivers and streams (Comrie, 2011, pp.17). These rivers and streams are susceptible to flooding, which may impact various regional towns and communities within close proximity to water courses (Comrie, 2011, pp.17). The discussion of flooding is vital, as it is the most frequent occurring natural hazard, which affects approximately 520 million people per year Moore et al.2012, pp.1). Additionally, flooding is responsible for the lives of approximately 25,000 people every year and cost the global economy approximately $50- 60 billion per year (Moore et al.2012,

pp.1). The issue of flooding had also affected Victoria in 2010/11, which affected one third of the state and resulted in significant costs to the rural, regional and urban communities. This paper explores the issue of flooding in regional Victoria and discusses the response of land use planning to flood mitigation. Firstly, it provides an overview of the 2010/11 floods in Victoria. Next, it discusses the role land use planning plays in flood risk minimisation. Subsequently, this paper focuses on the Victoria Floods Review and discusses the issues it identified in land use planning processes. Next, this paper focuses on the Central Goldfields Flood Emergency Plan, in response to the Victorian Floods Review. This section critically discusses the emergency plan and identifies the Victorian Flood Review issues it failed to address
Context
In 2010/11 Victoria experienced the highest summer rainfall, particularly in the west and the north-east Victorian region (Department of Human Services, 2011, pp.5).

The Victorian floods recovery report states that high rainfall caused swelling of major rivers and flash flooding in various regional towns (Moore et al.2012, pp.5). The floods caused significant damage to infrastructure, properties and businesses. It is noted that approximately 4000 residential properties were damaged and approximately 4000 businesses were affected (Moore et al.2012, pp.5). The total damages were approximately $1.3 billion, of which $176 million was lost in tourism value and $269 million in agricultural sector (Moore et al.2012, pp.5). Victorian 2010/11 floods not only caused physical damage, but also had long term personal impacts on the various communities (Department of Human Services, 2011, pp.5). The damages created a great deal of anxiety for the local communities, over the fear of personal safety and concerns about the future damages such events could create (Department of Human Services, 2011, pp.5). The damages caused by 2010/11 floods varied and were place specific (Department of Environment, 2013, pp.34). Hence, land use planning plays a critical role in the identification processes of medium-high risk regions (Department of Environment, 2013,

pp.34).
Land use planning and Flood Mitigation
Land use planning operations have the ability to minimise the risk to life, property damage, infrastructure and the natural environment caused by natural hazards (Department of Environment and Primary Industries, 2012, pp.4). Section 6(e) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 allows planning schemes to ‘regulate or prohibit any use or development in hazardous areas, or areas likely to become hazardous’. In accordance to the legislation, the Victorian Planning Provisions clause 13 seeks to ensure that environmental risks such as flooding are minimised through best practices. However, in spite of planning controls, the 2010/11 flooding damages were not minimised.
Victorian Flood Review Findings and Land use planning
In response to the floods, the Victorian government undertook a review and conducted a detailed examination of the emergency managements of Victoria in relation to flooding (Comrie, 2011). The review findings stated that approximately 80% of Victoria lacked adequate flood maps, which could have provided guidance on the depth of flood and provide assessment of the like hood of affected properties and infrastructure (Comrie, 2011, pp.62). In addition, the report states that flood mapping of towns and rural areas that do exist, only 70 percent of the mapped areas are included within the planning scheme (Comrie, 2011, pp.195). The report further discusses that planning scheme overlays such as land subject to inundation (LSIO) were outdated and its estimations proved to be inadequate during the floods. It is estimated that 11.5% of the landmass in Victoria is prone to 1% AEP flood and 4% of that landmass is not covered by any appropriate flooding overlays (Department of Environment and Primary Industries, 2014, pp.3). The VFR recommends that the minimum floor levels in the LSIO overlay, which is currently based on the 1 in 100 annual exceedance probability estimation, is updated to minimise the risk of flood inundation in future (Comrie, 2011, pp.197). In addition to the technical shortcomings of planning schemes, The VFR states that there was a lack of local community involvement in the hazard identification processes and during the emergency response phase.
The VFR findings revealed that local communities and its knowledge was not utilised by the state government in preparation of previous emergency management flooding frameworks (Comrie, 2011, pp.62). The review further stated that, local community knowledge regarding flood behaviour was often ignored by emergency response authorities (Comrie, 2011, pp.64). The involvement of locals in flood planning and management meant that the wider community would have a greater understanding of flood behaviour. Horsham Rural City Council and Wimmera catchment management authority had actively involved locals in flood awareness and hazard identification processes. Wimmera CMA has proposed to provide public access to land use planning resources such as flood induration maps, which will enable local property owners to identify to what extent a flood, may affect their property and prepare locals for individual responses (Comrie, 2011, pp.195). However, there were a number of local government regions including Central Goldfields, which had not even conducted flood studies and had outdated maps (Comrie, 2011, pp.192). As a result, the regions prone to flooding within the Shire including Carisbrook and Dunolly suffered serious property damage (Scuffle, 2011). In response to the floods and VFR findings, Central Goldfields updated its flood emergency plan to address the identified issues.
The Central Goldfields flood emergency plan seeks to create arrangements for the planning, preparedness and response to the flood incidents within the Shire. The plan seeks to identify the flood risk within the Shire and support implementation processes that minimise the impacts and reasons of flood incidents within the Shire (Central Goldfields, 2013, pp.3). The VFR review advised that most towns including Carisbrook within the Central Goldfields Shire had inadequate and unreliable maps (Comrie, 2011, pp.194). In response, Central Goldfields Shire in partnership with North Central Catchment Management Authority (NCMA) has undertaken extensive flooding studies and produced a series of flood inundation maps for Carisbrook (Central Goldfields, 2013, pp.23). The flood emergency management plan addresses a number of issues identified in the Victorian flood review. However, there are shortcomings which have not been addressed adequately.
Issues- Flood maps
The Central Goldfields emergency management plan states that since 2010/11 floods, NCMA and the Shire has undertaken studies and produced flood inundation maps for Carisbrook.

However, there are a number of other towns including Dunolly, where the proposed studies and inundation maps are yet to be completed (Central Goldfields, 2013, pp21). The properties within these towns are still at considerable risk, as information on the like hood of over flooding is not yet available (Central Goldfields, 2013, pp.21). Although the flood inundation maps provide vital information on the depth and extent of floods, however these maps are yet to be incorporated into the planning scheme. The knowledge and identification of flood hazards is of minimal relevance if it is not translated into relevant scheme controls and mechanisms dealing with them (Comrie, 2011,

pp.195).
Issues- Planning scheme controls
The Central Goldfields emergency management also fails to consider the issue of outdated flooding controls within the Shire scheme. The land subject to inundation overlay is based on the 1 in 100 year event, however the January 2011 flood events were in excess of the 1 in 100 year 1 % AEP and continuously inundated the areas covered by the overlay (Scuffle, 2011, pp.4) . The field trip discussions with Macedon Ranges Council officers revealed that these outdated controls allow planners to make subjective decisions on sites prone to flooding. Hence, increased involvement of expertise bodes like a catchment authority is vital in mitigating the flooding impacts on properties.
Issues- CMA authorities
The North Central CMA states in the VFR review that, new developments in Central Goldfields particularly in the towns of Carisbrook had not been referred to them for advice. As a consequence, during the 2010/11 floods these properties experienced repeated flooding inundation (Comrie, 2011, pp.195). The state government policy seeks to minimise the role of CMA in determining the outcomes of planning applications or to impose specific permit conditions (Comrie, 2011, pp.192). The state government seeks to reduce the role of CMAs as bodies who only provided non-binding advice. These arrangements would create poor planning outcomes in flood risk mitigation (Comrie, 2011, pp.192). For the reason that, Councils do not expertise in understanding the implications of development in areas prone to high flood risk. Furthermore, councils are increasingly focused on short term economic gains such as property tax revenue and pressure groups (Comrie, 2011, pp.192). These proposed changes would only be applicable to CMA groups and not Melbourne Water. Hence, it will lead to inconsistency between regional Victoria and Melbourne, in concern with flood risk and management (Comrie, 2011, pp.192). The VFR review highlights a number of land use planning issues and makes a number of recommendations, which would minimise the impacts of flooding in future. However, there are overseas examples of best practices and strategies, which could be implemented within the Victorian planning framework to mitigate flooding damages.
Best practices- UK, Eden District Council
The local Council of Eden District, in England made amendments within its planning scheme to minimise flooding risks (Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, 2014, pp.1). The local planning department removed permitted development rights within one of the flood zones. The amendments to the flood zone require property owners to obtain permission, for any extensions or alterations to private properties which would normally not require a permit (Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, 2014, pp.1). The incorporation of this strategy within the Central Goldfields Shire planning scheme would allow planning departments to review common property improvements that may affect flood flows if inappropriately located and increase inundation risks (Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, 2014, pp.1).
The 2010/11 Victorian floods affected approximately one third of Victoria and caused significant damage to infrastructure, properties and communities. The floods particularly caused significant damage to the towns of Central Goldfields Shire, within the North-Central Victorian region. The Victorian Flood Response review states that appropriate land use planning within the flood prone regions, may have minimised the flooding damage. In response to the review and its recommendations, Central Goldfields Shire updated its flood emergency management plan and produced a series of flood hazard maps for Carisbrook. However, these maps are yet to be incorporated within the planning scheme and are of little relevance if they are not translated into relevant controls. The VFR review identified a number of issues and provided a series of recommendations. However, they are international best practices and strategies which could also be incorporated within the Victorian planning framework to mitigate flooding damage.