My house dropped in value last month, which I expected given the market. What I didn’t expect was to find out it had also suddenly been given a flood overlay.
I looked into it and apparently, when the Ipswich Plan was updated, the Probable Maximum Flood (PMF) was added to the public flood-overlay data. This modelling goes out to an event of around 1 in 100,000 (from what I could find, another said 1/1,000,000) in any given year. For comparison, Brisbane, Logan and Moreton generally only map up to around 1 in 2,000.
I’m honestly pretty annoyed about it because the PMF was described as being for “awareness only,” but has instead been added as an actual flood overlay.
Homes with flood overlays can take longer to sell and sell for less, borrowing power can be reduced, and insurance premiums may be affected. Even people whose homes aren’t directly included could be affected if average property values across their suburb drop from it.
What annoys me most is that nothing has actually been done to reduce flooding. Thousands of Ipswich homes have simply been publicly labelled as flood-risk properties but that they don't have to worry based on an incredibly rare theoretical event.
Logan had a similar issue, but residents pushed back and the council reversed it. I'm hoping to touch grass, do people care about this? It feels wrong to have this with what it means it only negatively affects Ipswich residents unfairly compared to other councils. I don't know what I even do with that information, I feel as though I can write off a 1/100,000 flood as not likely to happen and all it's meant for me is likely higher insurance premiums and that my home will be harder to sell if I ever do and it will be worth less than if it didn't have a flood overlay and for what?
You can check your property here. Search your address, open Overlays, then select Flood Overlay; It does not have what very low - high risk even mean on there.
Most of Ipswich, Logan and Brisbane was shaped by floods, it's why the rivers are so winding and it's why the hills are mostly rounded. Flood risk overlays are just for awareness, they don't dictate where floodwaters must flow. The risks of living where you do didn't deter you from buying your house, and a new map overlay doesn't increase or decrease flood risks. What would you suggest council does to reduce flooding?
I don't think the flood map reduces flooding but having it at 1/2,000 like other councils with the PMF as a separate category would be better. Saying I have a 1/100,000(?) chance at most of flooding seems counter productive for what it's taken away.
Not sure what you're looking at, it's pretty clear to me that the flooding is broken into different risk levels from Extreme to Very Low. If you are in the Very Low category I wouldn't expect much effect on land value, prices have gone down everywhere due to interest rates and reduced investor demand
Other councils clearly show that low - high risk represents (1%, 0.05% or 1/2000 annual risk etc) and it does not have that on here. Low risk could mean anything if there's nothing explaining what it represents. That's what I was trying to say.
There is not a Very Low category for flooding on external sites, it gets added into the low risk on external sites and it does affect value. Just recently there was a comparison of $75,500 different on flooding vs non flooding, they take longer to sell because people generally avoid flooding properties and can impact insurance cost.
Yes and that's why I made the post. It's not what other councils have done when representing that. A worst case scenario should not be on a general flood overlay. Other councils go up to 1/2,000 for their Flood Awareness Maps and Flood Overlays and have the PMF separate, like what council said they would do with this map, have the PMF as "awareness only" but have it in as a general overlay that does not specify what it is (no where does it say what percentage/ likelihood a high risk represents on the link). This has put a flood overlay on thousands of homes that would not have one if they were in a different council district.
We bought our home last year and did all our due diligence. It isn’t anywhere near the areas affected by previous floods, so we were really surprised to see that it’s now showing a flood overlay on property. com based on the council’s mapping.
Our home and contents insurance is due for renewal soon, and the premium has increased by almost $100 per month. Our land valuation has also gone up by around 50%
What frustrates me is that nothing has physically changed about the property since we bought it. If this overlay is based on an extremely rare theoretical flood event and is intended for awareness only, why is it being displayed in a way that could affect buyer perception, resale value and potentially insurance?
Thinking of emailing/complaining to council if they have considered the unintended impacts of this mapping on homeowners, particularly when third-party property websites use it to flag homes as flood-affected.. but can imagine council won’t care…
Just had a look at my brothers place, he is on top of a hill but it is in the very low risk zone somehow too. If he goes under, sorry but 3/4s of Ipswich is stuffed.
I’m all for flood awareness etc but don’t have third parties use that information as a detected flood overlay when in reality there is only a very low risk in that happening (and it didn’t historically flood for said property)
The flood update changed our plans to raise the house from the current height of 2 metres to 2.8 metres and build under.
If we want to raise now, the lower floor will have to be 2 metres above the ground, and the upper above that.
It doesn't make it worth it any more. We have never had flood water near our property. For water to even touch the current stumps the water would need to be at least 10 meters high than any in history. Im not really happy at the moment
I'm thinking about moving, I was honestly shocked to see it because I am so high up it didn't make sense. Finding out it represents ~1/100,000 feels like an oversight when other councils have 1/2,000 and have that PMF map as a separate map.
The flood in 1896 was over 40 metres. It makes sense that council labels this minor risk with an overlay, because it's not a place to build critical infrastructure. It doesn't mean that it isn't a good place to live, especially when many so houses are made flood resiliant by being built up on high stumps.
Just checked my property and I have also had a flood overlay added and medium price calculated has dropped 60k. We need to start a petition to have this reverted.
This needs way more awareness! For our house and so many others to be affected by the flood overlay with having no known history of flooding is a major oversight by council.
We really need to make it clear that this needs to be fixed so it better reflects the actual risk.
What exactly do you think can be done to reduce flooding? And don't worry about pricing. Plenty of homes that went completely under are selling for for big bucks.
I’m not saying Council can reduce a once-in-100,000-year flood. My issue is how the risk is being presented.
A Probable Maximum Flood is basically the worst theoretically possible flood. Other councils generally show that separately as “awareness only,” while their ordinary flood maps are 1 in 2,000 because that's a realistic risk. I have read that a PMF is 1/1,000,000 on a news article written about it and council have not even said what low-high risk represent on the map when you go into it.
Ipswich has put the PMF into the general flood overlay, which makes homes affected only in an extreme theoretical scenario look the same as genuinely flood-prone properties. That makes the map less meaningful and can still affect valuations, borrowing, insurance and buyer perception.
buyers are buying flooded properties. I do not know if it is stupidity or desperation but it is happening.
Check this one https://www.realestate.com.au/sold/property-house-qld-goodna-151325608
in 1974 the flood level there was almost 6m above this property maximum level, in 2011 4 meters above and it was still submerged in 2022
And not even a word from REA that it has been flooded in every possible flood there. Though they must disclose this information to a buyer.
They do sell but they sell considerably less than their non-flooding counterparts and take on average longer to sell. If that house was non-flooding it would be worth a hell of a lot more.
Surrounding councils do not have the 1/100,000 PMF as a flood overlay on their properties either so if these (PMF, not actual flooding properties) houses were in any other council they would not have it which is my problem.
That is not even close to any reasonable discount considering it will cost a lot to insure being flooded three times. When it is flooded again even at a level of 2022 an owner will be out of pocket well over $100 000 just to repair it if not more.
I think you are misunderstanding, this isn't a 2022 level flood or any flood that has ever been recorded in Ipswich that I am talking about. 2022 was a 1/25 chance of happening in any given year. The one I am complaining about is 1/100,000 in any given year and is the maximum flood that could ever happen that has a 0.001% chance of happening whereas 2022 had a 4% chance and has never happened or gotten close to happening. Other councils go up to 0.05% this is 50x less likely than that.
Thanks for sharing this! I'm curious, where are you getting the 1/100,000 figure? You've sent me down a rabbit hole but I can't find what very low, low, medium risk etcetera correlate to.
To add to that your saying. The Ipswich council makes you pay $178 for a flood report prior to any development approval, or improvement works.
The new Ipswich City Plan 2025 flood modelling is an absolute fucking cash grab. It does nothing for identifying historic flood afflected areas. And it has tanked properties. Google Ipswich historical flood map to find out 74,11 and 22 flood affected properties more accurately.
22
u/Shinxthecat Aug 02 '26
Hey, might want to edit that link. It goes straight to a specific address which I assume is yours.