Logan approves review of flood map modelling after thousands complained
Logan City Council has approved a $100,000-plus independent review into the city’s latest flood mapping in an effort to appease thousands of furious ratepayers who claim the data is inaccurate.
Logan City Council has voted to commission a $100,000-plus independent review of its controversial draft flood mapping, after months of angry backlash from ratepayers who say the modelling is inaccurate, harming property values and driving up insurance premiums.
The review, which Logan chief executive Darren Scott expected to cost $100,000, was given the green light despite repeated warnings that it could be wasted ratepayer money and may ultimately deliver the same mapping result and leave homeowners waiting until next year to learn if the maps will change.
At a special council meeting on Wednesday, the councillors approved a motion to put the review out to tender for a specialist consultant, who has never worked on the city’s highly unpopular existing flood studies, rejecting an earlier proposal to re-use engineers involved in past modelling.
Mayor Jon Raven told the chamber the review was driven by unprecedented community pressure.
He said residents had repeatedly questioned whether the data was correct, whether the mapping was “ground-truthed”, and whether extreme-event predictions were realistic.
“Overwhelmingly, people have told me they want an independent review of the flood maps,” he said.
“They ask for this because they do not trust the current mapping compared to their lived experience.
“They’re sceptical that it is fit for purpose.”
The study will focus on the Logan and Albert Rivers Flood Study, including the probable maximum flood (PMF) and one-in-2000-year predictions that residents argue are ridiculous and unnecessarily inflating insurance premiums.
Councillor Mindy Russell, who voted against the review, warned it may not deliver the outcomes homeowners are hoping for and said the results would still be computer driven not based on site surveying.
“I think we need to stop pretending … I think it’s unlikely that our action today will actually change insurance companies’ behaviour,” she said.
“Council does not have that much power. One of the concerns that’s been raised a lot by the community is that they’re saying they don’t believe in this computer program (that’s been used to calculate the flood levels).
“They want people to come out to their homes.
“But the proposal that’s put forth for the review is a review of the study, not an infield investigation.”
Other concerns were that the cost of the review would rise above $100,000 with the results limited to the existing modelling and not accurately predicting “acts of God”.
Logan director of Transport and Water Services Daryl Reilly, who drafted the parameters, criteria and scope for the initial flood mapping report, confirmed the process would be handled at arm’s length with the review taking into account thousands of community submissions.
“The procurement will be handled independently … Councillors will not be involved in contractor selection. This is a technical review – not a rewrite of legislation,” he said.
Cr Lisa Bradley, who abstained from voting, said she had serious reservations about the review’s value and said there were many documents that remained confidential.
“I believe today’s review is smoke and mirrors for political optics, distracting from possibly inaccurate data,” she said.
“(This review) is unlikely to deliver the outcomes many in our community are hoping for and appears poised to result in significant costs and delays without benefits.”
Fears sand linked to asbestos sent home in school artwork
