Flood blame game.
Predictably, and quite rightly, the havoc caused by the week’s torrential rainfall has shone the searchlight on just who is to blame for the widespread damage..and in particular the hapless victims alongside Brownhill Creek…
The whole question of the need for the evasive action needed for a once-in-1oo year flood has been around a decade, and if the progess in that time is anything to go by, will be around in the year 2026…
Going against the general flow, to NOT mix a metaphor, Grumpy, in his role as an Unley Councillor, has always plumped for a retention dam, rather that a wholesale cleanout of the creek bed (and sides) in the suburbs. I doubt very much that the supported solution of a cleanout IS a solution.
One thing is sure, given the horrendous cost of the idea. That I won’t be around as an Elected Member when things actually HAPPEN and ratepayers in the Councils encompassed by the “solution” face the multi-million dollar rates hike needed…
Or (perhaps a vain hope) will the eventual price tag be met from North Terrace?
grumpyinunley.wordpress.com 
The major rain event was in the hills catchment and steady rain in the urban area. Obvious that the extent of this water flow from the hills would have been controlled in the suburban area with a detention dam. The Councils and BHKC Project should consider what would have been the impact if the major event had have occurred over the hills area AND the urban area at the same time. We were lucky this time. The “preferred” solution is not the best solution, but it was the solution proffered by BHKC Project under instruction not to consider a dam solution.
Interesting to see if BHKC Project will be quick, this time, to issue an explanatory statement noting the reduction in the water flow and impact in the suburbs that a dam would have had IN THIS RAIN EVENT which was mainly in the hills catchment.
LikeLike