Integrating Hydrodynamic and Hydraulic Modeling for Evaluating Future Flood Mitigation in Urban Environments
We present an integrated flood modelling tool that is able to evaluate different mitigation solutions for areas that are prone to floods from storm surge and heavy rainfall. Our model integrates catchment and coastal flood modelling (spatio-temporally dynamic), including sea level rise, to provide a holistic inundation model for future flooding. Additionally, the model aims to enable simulation of a combination of flood mitigation and adaptation options. To date, the practice has been to model either drainage augmentation solutions alone, or (for coastal inundation) single coastal adaptation solutions. This tool aims to deliver the capacity to model a range of both coastal and drainage adaptation solutions to understand what combination of solutions might be effective. The model is demonstrated for example cases in the City of Port Phillip, Melbourne. Three mitigation strategies involving the use of a hypothetical off-shore reef and the combination of a single valve systems and retention/detention measures are evaluated for the region around Elwood canal for current and future scenarios.
Keywordsmodular mitigation analysis drainage augmentation local councils evidence based cost-benefit analysis land-use planning
- 1.AECOM, City of Port Phillip – Case Study for the Elwood Canal, Port Phillip Bay Coastal Adaptation Pathways Project (September 19, 2012). Google Scholar
- 3.Neelz, S., Pender, G.: Benchmarking the latest generation of 2D hydraulic modeling packages, Report SC12000, Environmental Agency UKGoogle Scholar
- 4.Workspace, A.: scientific workflow platform, http://dx.doi.org/10.4225/08/544E4FF7B67B0 (accessed November 6, 2014)
- 5.Hoang, T.: Frequency analysis of tide levels for St Kilda marina (Site No: 229670) (Melbourne Water, 2011)Google Scholar
- 6.McInnes, K.L., O’Grady, J., Macadam, I.: The effect of climate change on extreme sea levels in Port Phillip Bay, Dept. of Sustainability and Environment, VIC report (2009)Google Scholar