Original source · versioned page text
2014-11-17 General Committee Agenda
Text sections have not been matched to the original PDF pages. Use the original document to check page numbers.
GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 17 NOVEMBER 2014
Page 10 of 49
GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA 17 NOVEMBER 2014
e checking the detailed design of the culverts with respect to gradients, inverts, inlet and outlet
aprons, etc.
e checking of the fish passage proposal.
| would like to note that upon reviewing my files it appears likely that | had in fact inspected this
culvert during a general site inspection of various waterways in the Noosa Council area in the
company of council officer Dave Burrows on 4 December 2013. The culvert and creek
conditions on that date are presented in figures 1 and 2.
Tee Ta CO aces se ‘ P
: ee : ‘ mS,
ee SF ee.
’ woes pieuter ane" : an . Ponies wt.
o Vi Fagg eee) ee 0 eee eae
; rt REE Bf Be ee
¥ We = SRR ASA ge meee eee,
y F ¢ bers Ws MONG PO ee eee > | ca
\ Pr eg oe Th LPG vs ae a ee vi
, EPP a Baus Weed era 7 ae As \
Poi Sta . = iy LS RS: ee fe See ee q
Figure 1 — Culvert inlet Figure 2 — Looking upstream from culvert
Relevance of my experience to this subject
| believe it to be relevant at this point to outline aspects of my work experience that allows me
to conduct this review and provide the enclosed recommendations.
e |am the principal author of the revised Queensland Urban Drainage Manual (QUDM)
editions of 2007 and 2013.
e |am one of the primary authors of the Australian Rainfall and Runoff, Project 11 Stage 2
report, ‘Blockage of Hydraulic Structures’, and the author of the ‘Scheme B’ method of
assessing design blockage conditions.
e | was a development assessment officer (stormwater) for Brisbane City Council during
the periods 1991 to 1994, and 1995 to 1997.
Recommendations on the selection of a ‘design’ blockage factor
There are several blockage conditions that should be considered at this site, those being:
e A ‘design’ blockage condition applied to the design of the culvert and road floodway
(overtopping flows). This blockage condition should represent the ‘AEP neutral’ condition,
that is, the ‘average’ blockage condition expected during the nominated design storm.
e A ‘severe’ blockage condition that may be applied to a lesser design storm. This blockage
condition represents an extreme blockage condition that is considered possible, but unlikely
to occur on a regular basis during a particular design storm (i.e a non AEP-neutral
condition). For example, if a 20% blockage condition is adopted as the ‘design’ blockage
condition for a 10% AEP (1 in 10 year) design storm, then it may be considered reasonable
to check the flow conditions for a ‘severe’ blockage condition during the 63% AEP (1 in 1
year) storm.
e A ‘severe’ blockage condition can also be used to check the suitability of the nominated
freeboard of habitable floor levels. However, it should be noted that currently it is not normal
practice for this design check to be performed. In any case, this design philosophy is based
Printed: 06 November 2014 CREEKS: CORRIDORS OF OPPORTUNITY Page 2.
Page 10 of 49See the original
The page text is free to read. Viewing or downloading an original file needs an account.
Log in to see the originalLog in to download the original file
Large file: the download may take up to a minute.
Searchable page text hides email addresses. Original files are unchanged and may show email addresses.