Some elderly residents evacuated their retirement village, at night after the power was cut, stoically scrambling down blacked-out fire escape stairs with their walking frames.
They were the lucky ones.
Others who waited until the next day had to be lifted into rubber dinghies and floated out through the flooodwaters by soldiers.
Next door, at the aged care home, flood waters blocked the front stairs and the main wheelchair ramp.
The home's bedridden patients — some of whom had severe dementia — were left in rooms in the higher floors for more than 24 hours without electricity before they could be evacuated.
That those events unfolded at The Village Yeronga and at the Regis Aged Care home during the recent Brisbane floods raises questions about how the development was ever approved on a flood plain and why it continued to expand, despite flood evacuation issues being raised during the 2011 flood commission of inquiry.
"[The council] allowed more buildings and [put] more people at risk with inappropriate approvals."
Minutes from a 2006 record of Brisbane City Council's (BCC) then-planning committee recommended the planning scheme be overridden to build the complex, which consisted of 230 independent living units, a 135-bed care facility and 80 serviced apartments
The minutes record that the only planning committee member who excluded themselves from the process was then-The Gap ward LNP councillor Geraldine Knapp.
Ms Knapp — who retired from council in 2015 — this week said she likely absented herself due to the fact the development was undertaken by her brother-in-law, Michael Harrison, and his nephew, Justin Harrison.
During the pre-lodgement negotiations between the council and the developer's team, flooding was quickly raised as an issue, with council experts noting the site — which is separated from the Brisbane River by some sporting fields — was affected by both local and backwater flooding from the river.
Despite the issues of overland flow, river flooding and where stormwater connected to drains, the BCC recommended there be "in-principle support" for residential use of the site.
They noted flood issues were addressed by conditions that increased the floor level to the Q100 flood level plus an additional 500mm.
Upgrades were also made to stormwater systems on all four boundaries of the site.
The complex went on to collect numerous awards and was featured in a Brisbane City Council best practice promotional video for senior's living development.
However, in 2011, nearly the entire site — which, at the time, included two multi-storey independent living, retirement village buildings and the then-under construction aged care home — flooded.
Pictures taken at the time show all but the top corner of the aged care home being flooded.
Then-Village resident Ken Smith raised concerns with the flood commission of inquiry that followed.
He noted that residents were evacuated the day before flood waters rose, impacting the basement car parks and reaching 1 metre into the ground floor of the complex — destroying electrical switchboards and other infrastructure.
Dr Smith called for better evacuation plans and practice drills, although he noted that management did their best during the flood event and provided excellent service.
History repeats
This year, as the floodwaters rose across Brisbane, a more unpredictable scenario played out at the village, which did not get water into the living areas but was surrounded and had basements inundated.
The Village Retirement Group's chief executive, Brett Christ, said the evacuation was delayed by the need for it to be overseen and assisted by emergency services and associated personnel, such as the military.
He confirmed that, due to emergency services dealing with more-urgent issues, they were unable to immediately evacuate the complex before the water peaked on February 28.
This was despite the complex losing power on the afternoon of February 27, halting the lifts in the multi-storey complex that is home to about 400 residents with an average age of 80.
Mr Christ confirmed the delay meant that, by the time the evacuation occurred, the emergency lighting in the stairwells had shut down as their batteries had, by then, run out of power.
He said management distributed torches to residents and some used the torch function on their phones.
Mr Christ said communication became an issue as residents' phone batteries could not be recharged.
He confirmed that a wooden panel from a fence was removed to allow the military to drive a vehicle through the water to extract some residents by boat.
But he said the water was only about shin deep and the panel was designed to be removed.
Next door at the Regis Aged Care home, which was also developed by the same company as the retirement village, there was similar uncertainty, with ground-floor residents evacuated but those in higher floors reportedly left behind.
Pat O'Keeffe — whose brother is a high-care dementia patient in Regis — said the "whole thing must have been very frightening for the residents".
Mr O'Keeffe said his brother was not evacuated from the building until Tuesday, despite the power being cut on Sunday.
He said Regis told them they were keeping residents in their rooms for their own safety.
Mr O'Keeffe said that, when they moved his brother into the facility, they were never told about possible flooding issues.
Flood risks were clear
The situation may have come as a shock to current residents, but for the commissioner of the 2011 flood commission of inquiry, Justice Catherine Holmes, and her counsel assisting, Nicola Kefford, the flood risks were clear.
Justice Holmes and Ms Kefford repeatedly queried council's Development Assessment South regional manager Rory Kelly about the development's approval process and what level of "flood immune access" had been required under the Storm Water Management section of the council's then-planning requirements.
Mr Kelly had previously given a statement to the inquiry that noted "no conditions were imposed in relation to flood access or evacuation routes in the event of flooding".
Ms Kefford asked Mr Kelly about a request the council made to the developer as to whether the development complied with the Storm Water Management code.
Mr Kelly said the fact the code had been mentioned would mean that all aspects of it should be followed.
"The fact that they have gone on and described it a bit more doesn't remove the fact that the applicant would go back, look at P3 [the section in the code], and it indicates, quite clearly, there that it 'must reduce property damage, provide flood immune access to the property'," he said.
Justice Holmes asked Mr Kelly whether the developer had dealt with the issue and "made sure they had access routes?"
Mr Kelly said he understood that "[council] did look at it, but that will have been assessed by our hydraulic person".
Justice Holmes asked whether a record was kept of the council taking this action.
Mr Kelly said he would "have to go back and have a look today to see if we complied with it?"
"They may not have recorded it in their notes," he said.
Justice Holmes responded saying it was "extraordinary that a question as important as that would not be … recorded".
This week the ABC asked the BCC if Mr Kelly later provided this information to the inquiry.
A BCC spokesperson said Mr Kelly had provided the information to the satisfaction of the inquiry when Commissioner Holmes raised further questions.
When the ABC asked the BCC to provide the relevant section of the transcript of evidence where this occurred, no information was provided.
The BCC this week confirmed the stage five building in the precinct had been approved after the 2011 flood, "but under the City Plan 2000".
"This approval required a flood risk management plan certified by a registered professional engineer of Queensland that included an evacuation procedure and disaster management plan,'' the spokesperson said.
"Under the City Plan 2014, stricter requirements were introduced for flood-prone properties that impacted basement design and the location of services, as well as higher flood immunity levels, based on new data and even higher flood immunity levels [500-year level] 'for vulnerable uses, such as residential care facilities'."
Flood protection improvements
As developer and co-owner of the complex, Justin Harrison this week defended the complex, saying it was a "really great facility for people to live in the inner-city".
Mr Harrison said the development had "met all the requirements when they got the initial approval from the council".
He said that, during 2011, when it flooded, they had not anticipated that Wivenhoe Dam would be "unleashed" on Brisbane.
Mr Harrison said the other four buildings that were constructed on the Yeronga site after 2011 were all built higher.
He said the council's old policy about basements had caused problems because developers had to ensure these were sited underground, otherwise they would be treated as an extra floor that would impact the size of the buildings.
However, Mr Harrison said, having them underground made them vulnerable to flooding.
Mr Harrison said he and his partners would probably spend another $1.5 to $1.8 million addressing all the issues relating to flood-proofing services in the basement so they would not be as impacted if floods happened again.
He said the only way to improve flood access was to "pick up" Cansdale Street, which is the street in front of The Village that flooded.
A spokesperson for Regis did not provide specifics about the exact route that residents had been evacuated from the complex, other than to say the process had been undertaken "safely".
She said Regis employees had used the home's emergency management plan and worked closely with emergency services, government agencies, the ambulance service and the defence force.
Residents would be back at the complex next month, she said, after rectification works were completed.
The BCC's response since the 2011 flood is being reviewed by former Queensland governor and chief justice Paul de Jersey.
