By Bonny Burrows
It was touted as an “unprecedented weather event” where “farms would turn into lakes”, but Melbourne’s South-East was spared the worst of the weekend’s torrential downfall.
While the state’s North-East experienced devastating flooding as a month of rain fall within three days, Melbourne’s South-East was a lot drier than predicted.
On Friday morning, residents were stockpiling sandbags and local emergency services were on standby, ready to attend to calls of help.
Community and sporting events were cancelled as a precaution and residents were advised to stay off the roads via a series of texts from the Victorian Government.
Fortunately, the local forecast fell short of the expected 100mm.
The Bureau of Meteorology’s Cranbourne Botanic Gardens recorded 7.2mm of rainfall on Friday, 41mm on Saturday and 28mm on Sunday.
The agency’s Warragul radar detected 40.4mm for the 24-hour period ending 9am Saturday 2 December, 22.2mm for the 24 hours ending 9am Sunday 3 December and 0.6mm for the 24 hours ending 9am Monday 4 December.
Despite being told to prepare for the “unprecedented” weather, the SES said that from Friday to 10.30am Monday 4 December, there were just 13 calls for assistance in Pakenham, nine of which involved building damage.
There were reports of some minor flooding along Pakenham’s Racecourse Road, and in the Kooweerup area.
A minor flood warning was also issued for the Bunyip River Catchment at Cora Lynn and Iona, with levels expected to at 2.10 metres at Iona and 3.10 metres at Cora Lynn peak on Monday afternoon.
State-wide outrage and claims there was a government “over-reaction”, saw Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews defend the severe weather warnings.
Mr Andrews said the Bureau of Meteorology correctly predicted the amount of rain, but indicated he might have phrased the warnings differently.
“We can look back on whether some comments were words I would have used but ultimately the bureau and emergency services, myself included, we’ve been very clear with the Victorian community,” Mr Andrews said.
“The total of rainfall was absolutely accurate – the intensity of it was different and the exact location if it was a bit different, that’s something we all should be happy about.”
