Flood levy still a no-go

By Bianca Hall

Nov 7, 2022

Flash flooding: A recent scene at the Whiteheads Creek crossing of the Goulburn Valley Hwy just north of Seymour. Photo by Ray Sizer

First considered in 2006, the Seymour flood levy was put to bed at a June 2020 Mitchell Shire Council meeting after proving an unpopular option in community surveys.

Hold tight - we’re checking permissions before loading more content

With flood mitigation strategies receiving renewed focus, a recent article in The Age newspaper titled ‘Rejected Seymour levee could have averted flooding disaster’ considers that the levy “would have protected hundreds of homes and businesses from the devastating impact of the current flood.”

St Mary’s College Seymour principal Wayne Smith is one person who has no objection to a levee bank, which could potentially protect his school from the flash flooding of Whiteheads Creek.

On Thursday, October 13, Whiteheads Creek flooded, causing St Mary’s to be evacuated.

At the time, Mr Smith said he believed the Upper Catchment Authority and Mitchell Shire Council needed to take action to mitigate the flooding of Whiteheads Creek.

“What’s it going to take with that creek? Is it going to take a fatality?” Mr Smith said.

He is now looking at putting a fence between the creek and his school because of the danger it poses to his students.

“I’ve lived in towns were they have put in levee banks. Wagga is an example ... and the levee bank has saved the north side of Wagga many times,” he said.

“Not only that, it becomes a bit of a tourist attraction because you put bike paths, trees, barbecues — it becomes a real feature of the town.”

However, Peter Clarey, a volunteer at Kings Park, said a levee had the potential to exacerbate the flooding problem in other areas of town.

“Kings Park drains into Deep Creek, which goes across Emily St near Seymour Trailers. Our main drain goes into there, so if they have a levee, where does that water go?” Mr Clarey said.

“What they need to do is clean out Whiteheads Creek and South Creek.”

Mitchell Shire Council chief executive officer Brett Luxford said the cost of the proposed levee falling on ratepayers was a major point of contention during the 2019 consultation.

“Council is focused on supporting our communities to recover from these floods and has not discussed revisiting the proposed flood levee or further flood mitigation options at this stage,” he said.

“However, council is not afraid of making difficult decisions and when the time is right, the issue of the flood levee can be discussed again.

“This discussion will involve the community feedback from 2019, where a majority of the community did not want the flood levee.

“But council will evaluate new information and will continue to listen to the community about the flood levee issue.”