Original source · versioned page text
16-001014-01A (Swmp)
Attached to the e-mail Operational Works Application OPW16/0203 - 3 of 4.
Very large file: it may take a few minutes
The original of this document is very large (13.4 MB). Opening the original or downloading it may take a few minutes. Please be patient and don't click again. The page text is quick to read. If you are on mobile data, it is best to wait until you are on Wi-Fi.
Cooroy Retirement Community, Trading Post Road, Cooroy
Stormwater Management Plan (SWMP)
Prepared by Calibre Consulting
Prepared for Palm Lake Resorts
September 2016
16-001014-01A
Original
Water & Environment
See 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
Very large file: the download may take a few minutes. If you are on mobile data, it is best to wait until you are on Wi-Fi.
Searchable page text hides email addresses. Original files are unchanged and may show email addresses.
Full text of the other 79 pages
Page 2
COMMERCIAL IN CONFIDENCE All intellectual property rights, including copyright, in Calibre Consulting designs developed and documents created by Calibre Ground Floor, 545 Queen Street Consulting (Qid) Pty Ltd remain the property of this BRISBANE QLD 4000 company. Any use made of such design or document without the prior written approval of Calibre Consulting (Qld) Pty Ltd will constitute an infringement of the rights of Ph: (07) 3895 3444 the company which reserves all legal rights and remedies © 2016 in respect of any such infringement The information, including any intellectual property, contained in this proposal is confidential and proprietary to the Company. It may only be used by the person to whom it is provided for the stated purpose for which it is provided and must not be imparted to any third person without the prior written approval of the Company. The Company reserves all legal rights and remedies in relation to any infringement of its rights in respect of its confidential information DOCUMENT CONTROL 16-001014-01 Issue | Date Issue Details Checked Approved 12/08/16 For Council Approval eee CM MS RPEQ 9485
Page 3
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Scope of this report ................................................................................................. 2
1.2 Previous Documentation ......................................................................................... 2
1.3 Response to Approval Conditions ........................................................................... 3
2 SITE CHARACTERISTICS ................................................................................................ 5
2.1 Location .................................................................................................................. 5
2.2 Topography and Site Drainage ............................................................................... 6
2.3 Site Discharge locations ......................................................................................... 6
3 PEAK FLOW INVESTIGATION ......................................................................................... 7
3.1 Existing Scenario .................................................................................................... 7
3.1.1 Catchment Characteristics ........................................................................ 7
3.1.2 Infiltration Loss & Lag Parameters ............................................................ 8
3.1.3 Channel Routing ........................................................................................ 8
3.1.4 Rainfall Data .............................................................................................. 8
3.1.5 Existing Peaks Flow .................................................................................. 8
3.1.6 Model Verification Check - Rational Method ............................................. 9
3.2 Developed Mitigated Scenario ................................................................................ 9
3.2.1 Catchment Characteristics ........................................................................ 9
3.2.2 Infiltration Loss & Lag Parameters .......................................................... 10
3.2.3 Channel Routing ...................................................................................... 10
3.2.4 Rainfall Data ............................................................................................ 10
3.2.5 Proposed Mitigation Strategy .................................................................. 10
3.2.6 Developed Mitigated Peaks Flow Results ............................................... 12
3.2.7 Extreme Event Sensitivity Check ............................................................. 13
3.2.8 Internal Drainage Strategy ....................................................................... 14
4 STORMWATER QUALITY .............................................................................................. 15
4.1 Pollutants of Concern ............................................................................................ 15
4.2 Water Quality Objectives ...................................................................................... 15
4.3 Stormwater Quality Management Strategy ........................................................... 15
4.3.1 Utilised Treatment Systems ..................................................................... 16
4.3.2 Proposed End-of-Line Systems ............................................................... 16
4.4 MUSIC Modelling .................................................................................................. 17
4.4.1 Meteorological Data ................................................................................. 18
4.4.2 Source Nodes .......................................................................................... 18
4.4.3 Primary and Secondary Drainage Links .................................................. 18
4.4.4 Treatment Nodes ..................................................................................... 19
4.5 MUSIC Modelling Results ..................................................................................... 21
5 WATERWAY STABILITY MANAGEMENT ...................................................................... 21
6 CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................. 22
7 RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................................... 22
8 DISCLAIMER ................................................................................................................... 23
9 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................ 23
Page 4
TABLES
Table 1-1: Summary of Responses to Approval Conditions Relating to Stormwater
Management ........................................................................................................ 3
Table 3-1: Existing Scenario Catchment Details ................................................................... 7
Table 3-2: XP-RAFTS Calibration Parameter Summary ....................................................... 8
Table 3-3: Existing Peak Flow Results .................................................................................. 8
Table 3-4: Existing Peak Flow Comparison at Discharge Location B ................................... 9
Table 3-5: Developed Mitigated Scenario Catchment Details ............................................... 9
Table 3-6: Stormwater Detention Basin Concept Details .................................................... 11
Table 3-7: Northern Basin Stage Storage Discharge Relationship ..................................... 11
Table 3-8: Central Basin Stage Storage Discharge Relationship ........................................ 12
Table 3-9: Developed Mitigated Scenario Peak Flow Comparison ..................................... 12
Table 3-10: Developed Mitigated Scenario Basin Water Surface Levels .............................. 13
Table 3-11: Extreme Storm Event Weir Assessment ............................................................ 13
Table 4-1: Load Reduction Water Quality Objectives .......................................................... 15
Table 4-3: Bioretention Basin Modelled Parameters ........................................................... 19
Table 4-4: Pond Node Configuration ................................................................................... 20
Table 4-5: 20th Percentile Hydraulic Residence Time Results (Simplistic Approach) ......... 20
Table 4-6: MUSIC Modelling Results .................................................................................. 21
FIGURES
Figure 2-1: Approximate Location of Site (Source: UBD 2006) .............................................. 5
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A CONCEPT MASTERPLAN LAYOUT
APPENDIX B RATIONAL METHOD CALCULATION
APPENDIX C DETENTION BASIN CALCULATIONS
APPENDIX D XP-RAFTS LAYOUT SUMMARY
APPENDIX E STORMWATER DESIGN CALCULATIONS
APPENDIX F MUSIC MODELLING DETAILS
APPENDIX G CONCEPT DRAWINGS
APPENDIX H OPERATIONAL WORKS DRAWINGS
Page 5
1 INTRODUCTION
Calibre Consulting (QLD) Pty Ltd has been commissioned by Palm Lake Resort to prepare a Stormwater Management
Plan (SWMP) to support the Operational Works Application for Stage 2 and subsequent stages of the Palm Lakes
Retirement Community. The development is located on 2 & 4 Lamonts Road and 19 & 20 Trading Post Road Cooroy,
within the Noosa Shire Council (NSC) Local Government Area. This Operational Works submission follows the MCU
Development Approval (MCU 15/0111 & REC15/0031) for the site.
This project has an extensive history, involving an interim reduced site layout (excludes property on 20 Trading Post
Road/Lot 4 on RP215922), numerous submissions to and correspondence with Council to achieve approval of the
stormwater management strategy. The following outlines the key submissions and milestones achieved. Further
references to past documentation are provided in Section 1.2.
MCU Development Approval for Reduced Site Layout - Calibre Consulting previously provided a Concept
Stormwater Management Report (No. B07056.W-02A dated June 2008) for the MCU application and Concept
Stormwater Quality Management Plan Report (No. B14158.W-01A dated December 2014) for the Change to an
Existing Approval application. The stormwater management strategy (involving two Bioretention Basins, a
Constructed Wetland and Water Quality Control Pond with integrated detention storage) outlined in these reports
were subsequently approved by Council.
Operational Works – Bulk Earthworks Decision Notice Approval for Reduced Site Layout - Following various letter
submissions of stormwater construction management and maintenance details (refer to Section 1.2 below), Council
issued an Operational Works - Bulk Earthworks Decision Notice Approval (dated 15 October 2015) for the Palm
Lakes development. In the process of gaining approvals, a framework for the SMCMP Report (incorporating design
checklists, construction and operation maintenance) was developed with Council and approved. This was
documented in Letter Report (No. B14158.W.07L dated 8 October 2015).
Operational Works – Internal Stormwater and Drainage Works Approval for Stage 1A of the Reduced Site Layout –
Calibre Consulting provided Stormwater Management Plan Report No. B14158.W-05B dated December 2015 and
Stormwater Management Construction & Maintenance Plan (SMCMP) Report No. B14158.W-06A dated November
2015 was issued to Council. Following various requests for information and responses from Calibre Consulting
regarding stormwater management (refer to Section 1.2 for references for this documentation), Council granted
approval for Internal Stormwater and Drainage Works in Stage 1A.
MCU Development Approval for Overall Site Layout – During the above processes for gaining approvals for the
reduced site layout, a MCU Development Application (MCU 15/0111 & REC15/0031) was submitted for the overall
site layout (including the property on 20 Trading Post Road/Lot 4 on RP215922). A revised stormwater management
strategy (involving three major Bioretention Basins, one small Bioretention Pod, a Central Water Quality Control
Pond with central and northern integrated detention systems) was developed based on the previous approved
strategy for the reduced site layout. This was documented in the Concept Stormwater Management Plan Report (No.
B14158.W-03A dated November 2015). Following various requests for information (RFI’s) and responses from
Calibre Consulting, Council granted MCU & REC approvals in Decision Notice (dated 22 July 2016) with conditions
of approval.
This report has been provided to support the Operational Works Approval for Stage 2 and subsequent stages of the
overall site layout by demonstrating compliance with the approved Concept SWMP (No. B14158.W-03A dated November
2015) and by addressing Council’s Decision Notice approval conditions. The following documents have also been
provided to Council together with this submission and should be read in conjunction with this report:
Response to Stormwater Management Approval Conditions Letter (No. 16-001014.01L.ms.cm.docx dated 12
September 2016) – provides a summary of responses to Council’s Approval Conditions regarding stormwater
management.
16-001014-01 | STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN (SWMP) COOROY RETIREMENT COMMUNITY, TRADING POST
| PALM LAKE RESORTS ROAD, COOROY |1
Page 6
Stormwater Management Construction & Maintenance Plan (SMCMP) Report (No. 16-001014-02A dated September
2016) – provides design checklists, construction management and operation maintenance procedures for proposed
stormwater devices.
The design, management and maintenance procedures for stormwater management devices detailed in these
documents, also address previous concerns from Council and are in accordance with past approvals.
This report provides details on peak flow, stormwater quality and water stability management to demonstrate compliance
with the relevant local and state guidelines and Council’s requirements. The site development layout is generally in
accordance with the approved layout and the stormwater management strategies remains consistent with previously
approved documentation.
1.1 SCOPE OF THIS REPORT
The scope of this report includes the following:
Peak flow (or hydrological) analysis using XP-RAFTS software to determine existing peak flows and developed
mitigated peak flows from the site, to ensure no adverse impact as a result of the development;
Stormwater quality analysis using MUSIC software to determine the adequacy of the proposed SQIDs to meet the
Water Quality Objectives (WQO’s) required under the State Planning Policy (SPP, 2014); and
Management of Waterway Stability required under SPP (2014).
While a flood investigation has not been undertaken in this report, it is noted that flood information was previously
provided to Council in Letter No. B14158.W.10LA.AMcP.ms.docx dated 21 April 2016. This document demonstrated no
loss of regional floodplain storage and therefore no increase in the severity of flooding or interference with the existing
watercourse. The peak flow investigation and internal drainage strategy detailed in Section 3.2 demonstrates no
worsening in peak flows discharging from the site, also demonstrating that the development will not adversely impact
flood conditions downstream. Since the site strategy is generally in accordance with concept designs previously provided
to Council (i.e. earthworks, drainage and stormwater management solutions) the above outcomes are maintained.
1.2 PREVIOUS DOCUMENTATION
The following documentation has been previously prepared by Calibre Consulting (Qld) for the Cooroy Retirement
Community development:
Reduced Site Layout - MCU Development Application
Concept Stormwater Management Report (No. B07056.W-02A dated June 2008) – in support of the DA;
Concept Stormwater Quality Management Plan (SWQMP) Report (No. B14158.W-01A dated December 2014) in
support of the permissible change application;
Reduced Site Layout – Bulk Earthworks Approval
Stormwater Management Construction and Maintenance Plan (SMCMP) Report (No. B14158.W-04A dated
September 2015) – in support of the Operational Works - Bulk Earthworks Application; and
Framework Letter Report (No. B14158.W.07L dated 8 October 2015) – Addressing Council’s Change to Existing
Approval Condition Item 72 (dated 2 March 2015).
Reduced Site Layout - Stage 1A Operational Works Application
Stormwater Management Plan (SWMP) Report (No. B14158.W-05B dated 2015);
Stormwater Management Construction and Maintenance Plan (SMCMP) Report (No. B14158.W-06A dated
November 2015);
Response to Information Request Letter No. B14158.W-11A dated 22 April 2016; and
Queries Clarification Letter (No. B14158.W.14 RFI.AMcP.lms Response to RFI.docx dated 6 June 2016) –
Addressing Council Officer Cherie O’Sullivan’s further queries in email dated 27 May 2016.
16-001014-01 | STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN (SWMP) COOROY RETIREMENT COMMUNITY, TRADING POST
| PALM LAKE RESORTS ROAD, COOROY |2
Page 7
Overall Site Layout - MCU Development Application
Concept Stormwater Management Plan Report (No. B14158.W-03A dated November 2015);
Concept Stormwater Management Construction and Maintenance Plan (Concept SMCMP) Report (No. B14158.W-
09A dated January 2016)
Response to Information Request Letter No. B14158.W.10A-Response to RFI.docx dated 5 February 2016.
Outstanding Information Request Response Letter No. B14158.W.10LA.AMcP.ms.docx dated 21 April 2016.
The above reports have been considered in the latest analysis.
1.3 RESPONSE TO APPROVAL CONDITIONS
A summary of the responses to Council’s Approval Conditions relating to stormwater management are provided in
Table 1-1 below. Some responses have been addressed in other submissions, such as the SMCMP Report
(No. 16-001014-02A dated September 2016).
Table 1-1: Summary of Responses to Approval Conditions Relating to Stormwater Management
Item Brief Summary of Item Response to Item
59 Adequate flood immunity maintained Design of roadworks and drainage network throughout the site ensures
during local and regional events. adequate management of local flows. Refer to Roadworks and
Drainage Plans. Section 3.2.6 in this report indicates basin water
surface levels provide adequate freeboard to allotment levels.
Section 1.1 in this report provides details of regional flood levels below
developed lots.
60 Site earthworks does not adversely Section 1.1 in this report provides details of regional flood levels
impact flood conditions on adjacent or and site filling well outside of regional flood extents.
downstream properties Furthermore, Section 3.2.6 indicates a reduction of peak flows back to
or below existing levels discharging from the site, which demonstrates
no adverse impact to flooding downstream.
61 Design of stormwater drainage and Stormwater drainage and basin detailed design drawings have been
management devices to be certified by certified by RPEQ. Refer to Drawing No. 16-001014-400 series for
RPEQ specialising in hydraulics. details.
62 Minor Drainage System Capacity – 10% Stage 2 Operational Works drainage has been designed accordingly.
AEP storm, Major Drainage System Refer to Stage 2 Operational Works Design Package for details. Future
Capacity – 1% AEP storm stages will also be designed accordingly. Details are also provided in
Section 3.2.8 of this report.
63 No adverse impact to downstream peak Section 3.2.6 in this report demonstrates that proposed detention
flows up to and including the 1% AEP basins are adequate in reducing peak flows to meet this requirement.
Storm
64 Demonstrate the Stormwater Quality Section 4 in this report provides stormwater quality analysis, outlining
Management Strategy meets Water the proposed Stormwater Quality Management Strategy, which
Quality Objectives as per the SPP, 2014. demonstrates compliance with WQO’s for the site. Discussion of the
treatment of external catchment runoff and modelling methodology is
provided in Section 4.
65.1 Letter from Water By Design or eWater In the proposed modelling (refer to Section 4 in this report), there has
where MUSIC modelling deviates from been no deviation from specifications provided in the MUSIC Modelling
MUSIC Modelling Guidelines (2010). Guidelines (2010). Therefore, a letter is not required. As per previous
correspondence with Council, the pond node has not been modelled in
MUSIC. This is a conservative assumption considering that the pond
will capture suspended solids through a process of sedimentation and
provide some reduction of nutrients.
65.2 Contingency plan with costs to be A contingency plan has been provided in Appendix A of the SMCMP
provided to Council. Stormwater runoff Report. Stormwater runoff is to receive primary treatment from
from roads and car parking areas to be proprietary GPT’s that can remove grease and oil, and tertiary
pre-treated for grease and oil. treatment from Bioretention Basins before discharge into the Pond.
Note that all areas likely to generate significant amounts of grease and
16-001014-01 | STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN (SWMP) COOROY RETIREMENT COMMUNITY, TRADING POST
| PALM LAKE RESORTS ROAD, COOROY |3
Page 8
Item Brief Summary of Item Response to Item
oil will be pre-treated by GPT’s. Since the catchment to the Northern
Bioretention Basin is smaller than 5ha and does not contain significant
areas of car parking or road, a sediment forebay is proposed.
66 Stormwater Quality Treatment Devices to Bioretention Basins and the Pond have been designed accordingly.
be designed in accordance with Healthy Details are provided in Section 2.1 and Section 3.1 of the SMCMP
Waterway and Water By Design Report.
guidelines.
67 Stormwater design and maintenance The criteria and framework for design, construction and operational
strategy in accordance with Council’s maintenance for stormwater devices is in accordance with the
approved Framework Letter Report (No. Framework Letter Report approved by Council. Refer to the SMCMP
B14158.W.07L dated 8 October 2015) Report for details.
68 The SMCMP Report to be in accordance The SMCMP Report has been written in accordance with this approved
with Council’s approved Framework document.
Letter Report (No. B14158.W.07L dated
8 October 2015)
69 Owner responsibility for construction, This condition is stipulated in this report.
maintenance and repair costs of
stormwater management devices.
70 Calculations to demonstrate runoff to Energy dissipaters (i.e. rock scour protection) have been provided at
northern swale within the site will not drainage outlets into the northern site swale. Energy Dissipation
cause scour. Calculations and Manning’s Sections (comparing existing and
developed conditions of the swale) are provided in Appendix A of the
SMCMP Report.
71 Any waters captured to be plumbed and The capture of all water for external uses was not proposed as part
used for external or non-potable uses. of the previously approved MCU submission. The capture of all
water on site is not required for the site to meet both Stormwater
Quality and Quantity Objectives to be achieved and is therefore not
proposed or required.
72 Developed peak flows from the site As per response to Condition 63, Section 3.2.6 of this report
during the 63% AEP storm event to be demonstrates that proposed detention basins are adequate in reducing
reduced back to or below existing levels. peak flows to meet this condition.
73 Performance bond to be provided to Monitoring and maintenance costs are detailed in Appendix A of the
Council equivalent to 150% of the value SMCMP Report. A performance bond will be provided to Council for the
of monitoring and maintenance of the first 5 years of full operation of the pond.
water bodies.
16-001014-01 | STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN (SWMP) COOROY RETIREMENT COMMUNITY, TRADING POST
| PALM LAKE RESORTS ROAD, COOROY |4
Page 9
2 SITE CHARACTERISTICS
2.1 LOCATION
The 15.83ha development site is located on four existing properties in the NSC local government area. The site is
bounded by Trading Post Road and rural zoned area (Noosa Plan, 2013) to the east, rural zoned area to the north,
Pearson’s Rd to the south and Cooroy Connection Road (Elm Street) to the west. The property description are:
1/RP215922 - 19 Trading Post Road;
4/RP215922 - 20 Trading Post Road;
2/RP165418 - 4 Lamonts Road, Cooroy; and
1/RP165418 - 2 Lamonts Road, Cooroy.
Figure 2.1 below indicates the approximate location of the site.
SITE
COOROY CONNECTION ROAD
Figure 2-1: Approximate Location of Site (Source: UBD 2006)
16-001014-01 | STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN (SWMP) COOROY RETIREMENT COMMUNITY, TRADING POST
| PALM LAKE RESORTS ROAD, COOROY |5
Page 10
2.2 TOPOGRAPHY AND SITE DRAINAGE
The majority of the site falls from its western boundary (Cooroy Connection Road) to the eastern boundary (Trading Post
Road). There are two existing gullies traversing the site which discharge to two separate existing dams (central and
southern). These two dams then join to a larger “combined” dam downstream on property Lot 4RP215922. The
“combined” dam then discharges to an existing swale along the north-eastern boundary of the Lot before discharging to
the lawful point of discharge (Central Discharge Point B). There are two external catchments discharging to the site from
Cooroy Connection Road via two existing box culverts below the road.
To the north of the site a smaller catchment discharges to the existing northern dam before discharging downstream
(Northern Discharge Point A).
The highest point on the site is near the intersection of Cooroy Connection Road and Pearsons Road at RL 111 m AHD.
The lowest point at the eastern corner of the site at the base of an existing swale is approximately at RL 97 m AHD
adjacent to Central Discharge Point B. The average grade of the central gully is approximately 2% and the southern gully
is approximately 4%, as measured from the western boundary to the eastern boundary.
Refer to Drawing No. B14158.W-SK100 in Appendix G for existing stormwater catchments, existing gullies and dam
locations.
2.3 SITE DISCHARGE LOCATIONS
The site has two main discharge locations as detailed below:
Northern Discharge Point A – A small portion of the site to the north and external catchment (approximately 2.4ha)
is directed towards the northern boundary.
Central Discharge Point B – A large portion of the site and external catchment (approximately 16.2ha) is directed to
the west via an existing swale located within the site.
Refer to Drawing No. B14158.W-SK100 in Appendix G for discharge locations.
16-001014-01 | STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN (SWMP) COOROY RETIREMENT COMMUNITY, TRADING POST
| PALM LAKE RESORTS ROAD, COOROY |6
Page 11
3 PEAK FLOW INVESTIGATION
Hydrological analysis using XP-RAFTS was undertaken to demonstrate that the development of the site with mitigation
measures would not result in adverse impact downstream. The methodology undertaken in this analysis is consistent with
the past approvals. The following scenarios were undertaken in this analysis.
Existing Scenario represents the hydrology for the catchment under existing conditions. Catchment parameters (i.e.
infiltration loss and lag parameter values) were adopted as per Water Technology’s Cooroy Flood Study (Report No.
J2835-01_R02v01 dated 26 July 2013) which is the adopted hydrological modelling for the area and was prepared
specifically for the Sunshine Coast Regional Council. The report and corresponding models were supplied by Noosa
Shire Council.
Peak flow results determined in this scenario were compared with developed peak flow results to assess the change
in peak flows at site discharge locations.
Developed Mitigated Scenario represents the hydrology for the catchment under proposed development conditions
with mitigation. This scenario was undertaken to determine the adequacy of the proposed mitigation measures to
reduce peak flows back to or below existing conditions, therefore demonstrate no adverse impact.
The Existing and Developed Mitigated Scenario were modelled using the computer package XP-RAFTS. XP-RAFTS
analysis enables the hydrological modelling of the site for numerous design storm events and land uses. The subsequent
sections indicates the various assumptions and procedures used in developing each XP-RAFTS model.
3.1 EXISTING SCENARIO
The Existing Scenario was undertaken to determine peak flows discharging from the site under existing conditions.
3.1.1 CATCHMENT CHARACTERISTICS
Existing Catchments were delineated based on existing survey and aerial information. Existing catchments provided are
in accordance with the Concept SWMP Report (No. B14158.W-03A dated November 2015), only the Fraction impervious
value for Catchment D1 (Trading Post Road) has been updated to reflect the latest survey information. Catchments were
also split into various sub-catchments for modelling purposes. Fraction impervious values have been determined using
detailed survey and aerial information. Vectored slope has also been measured from the survey.
A summary of the existing catchment details are provided in Table 3-1 below.
Table 3-1: Existing Scenario Catchment Details
Downstream Sub-
Overall Sub- Fraction
Sub- Catchment Vectored Slope (%)
Catchment catchment Impervious
Catchment Area (ha)
Northern A1 A2 0.78 0.12 0.7%
A2 A_OUTLET 1.62 0.10 2.9%
Central B1 B2 1.38 0.23 1.7%
B2 B3 3.66 0.01 2.5%
B3 B4 2.32 0.03 7.1%
B4 D2 0.55 0.25 4.0%
South C1 C2 0.93 0.32 0.8%
C2 C3 5.14 0.02 2.6%
C3 D 0.64 0.00 6.0%
Central & South D1 D2 0.35 0.44 4.4%
D2 D_OUTLET 1.20 0.09 4.0%
16-001014-01 | STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN (SWMP) COOROY RETIREMENT COMMUNITY, TRADING POST
| PALM LAKE RESORTS ROAD, COOROY |7
Page 12
3.1.2 INFILTRATION LOSS & LAG PARAMETERS
Infiltration Loss and Lag Parameter values were adopted as per Water Technology’s Cooroy Flood Study (Report No.
J2835-01_R02v01 dated 26 July 2013), which covers the Cooroy region and site area. A parameter summary is provide
in Table 3-2 below.
Table 3-2: XP-RAFTS Calibration Parameter Summary
XP-RAFTS Model Parameter Value From Cooroy Flood Study
Storage multiplication co-efficient Bx 1
Pervious Initial Rainfall Loss (mm) 10
Pervious Continuing Rainfall Loss (mm/hr) 2.5
Impervious Initial and Continuing Loss values were conservatively assumed as 0mm.
3.1.3 CHANNEL ROUTING
Channel Routing (XP-RAFTS Link Routing) was modelled as per Water Technology Cooroy Flood Study (2013). The ‘k’
lag values were determined directly based on flowpath length and average channel velocity of 0.9m/s for natural overland
flowpaths and 2.0m/s for runoff conveyed through drainage or road network. A constant ‘x’ coefficient of 0.2 was adopted
as per the Cooroy Flood Study (2013).
3.1.4 RAINFALL DATA
Rainfall data was generated based on rainfall IFD parameters provided by Water Technology’s Cooroy Flood Study
(Report No. J2835-01_R02v01 dated 26 July 2013) for the Cooroy Region.
3.1.5 EXISTING PEAKS FLOW
Modelling was undertaken for the all recurrence interval storm events up to and including the 100-year ARI storm event
with storm durations ranging from 30 to 120 minutes (these were considered the critical durations). Peak flow results for
the Existing Scenario have been provided in Table 3-3 below at the site discharge locations (i.e. Discharge Location A
and B as discussed in Section 2.3).
Table 3-3: Existing Peak Flow Results
Peak Flow at Discharge Peak Flow at Discharge
AEP
Location A North (m3/s) Location B Central (m3/s)
63% 0.17 1.14
39% 0.26 1.71
18% 0.36 2.54
10% 0.43 3.02
5% 0.55 3.69
2% 0.66 4.28
1% 0.77 4.95
16-001014-01 | STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN (SWMP) COOROY RETIREMENT COMMUNITY, TRADING POST
| PALM LAKE RESORTS ROAD, COOROY |8
Page 13
3.1.6 MODEL VERIFICATION CHECK - RATIONAL METHOD
A verification check of the XP-RAFTS model was undertaken by comparing model generated peak flows with Rational
Method calculations. A Rational Method calculation was undertaken for the overall catchment to Discharge Location B.
Refer to Appendix B for Rational Method details. A comparison is provided in Table 3-4 below.
Table 3-4: Existing Peak Flow Comparison at Discharge Location B
Rational Method XP-RAFTS Peak Difference
AEP
Peak Flow (m3/s) Flow (m3/s) (%)
63% 1.32 1.14 -14%
39% 1.80 1.71 -5%
18% 2.55 2.54 0%
10% 2.96 3.02 2%
5% 3.69 3.69 0%
2% 4.82 4.28 -11%
1% 5.27 4.95 -6%
As indicated in the table above, XP-RAFTS peak flows vary from QRM, but are generally lower than the QRM peak flows.
The average variance is 5%. Therefore the model parameters adopted from the council report in Section 3.1.2 are
considered appropriate.
3.2 DEVELOPED MITIGATED SCENARIO
The Developed Mitigated Scenario was undertaken to demonstrate no adverse impact as a result of the proposed
mitigation measures.
3.2.1 CATCHMENT CHARACTERISTICS
Developed catchments were delineated and split based on preliminary earthworks. A Fraction Impervious value of 70%
was adopted for all sub-catchment areas as per the Concept SWMP Report (No. B14158.W-03A dated November 2015).
Catchment details have been updated to reflect minor changes undertaken during detailed design. The vectored slope
remains consistent with the corresponding existing catchment, as no significant changes under developed conditions
were expected. A summary of the developed catchment details are provided in Table 3.5 below.
Table 3-5: Developed Mitigated Scenario Catchment Details
Downstream Sub-
Overall Sub- Fraction
Sub- Catchment Vectored Slope (%)
Catchment catchment Impervious
Catchment Area (ha)
North A1 A2 0.98 0.70 0.7%
A2 A_OUTLET 1.51 0.70 2.9%
Central B1 B2 2.13 0.15 1.7%
B2 B3 2.38 0.70 2.5%
B3 B4 2.06 0.70 7.1%
B4 D 1.05 0.38 4.0%
South C1 C2 1.32 0.22 0.8%
C2 C2 2.02 0.80 2.6%
C3 D 2.93 0.70 6.0%
Central & D1 D2 0.27 0.63 4.4%
South D2 D_OUTLET 1.25 0.70 4.0%
D3 D_OUTLET 0.58 0.70 4.0%
16-001014-01 | STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN (SWMP) COOROY RETIREMENT COMMUNITY, TRADING POST
| PALM LAKE RESORTS ROAD, COOROY |9
Page 14
3.2.2 INFILTRATION LOSS & LAG PARAMETERS
The same Infiltration Loss and Lag Parameter values were adopted as per the Existing Scenario (refer to Section 3.1.2),
which are consistent with Water Technology’s Cooroy Flood Study.
3.2.3 CHANNEL ROUTING
Channel Routing (XP-RAFTS Link Routing) was modelled as per Water Technology’s Cooroy Flood Study (2013), by
determining ‘k’ lag values based on flowpath lengths and average channel velocities, with a constant ‘x’ coefficient of 0.2.
Refer to Section 3.1.3 for details.
3.2.4 RAINFALL DATA
Rainfall data was generated as per the Existing Scenario in Section 3.1.4.
3.2.5 PROPOSED MITIGATION STRATEGY
The following detention basins (incorporated with stormwater quality treatment) are proposed as part of the stormwater
mitigation strategy to reduce peak flows back to or below existing levels. This is consistent with the Concept SWMP
Report (No. B14158.W-03A dated November 2015) and other past approved documentation.
Northern Basin consists of a combined bioretention and detention basin to mitigate peak flows from the northern
portion of the site (i.e. Sub-Catchments A1 and A2). This basin is consistent with the previously proposed basin in
the past DA approval and only been slightly updated to account for the new development layout and the use of a Bio-
Retention system rather than a water quality control pond for treatment.
Central Basin is a water quality control pond (WQCP) which incorporates both detention storage for peak flow
mitigation and water quality components. The WQCP will mitigate peak flows from the central and southern portion of
the site (i.e. Sub-Catchments B1, B2, B3, B4, C1, C2 and C3). This concept is different from the previously approved
Central Basin as the wetland has been replaced with a WQCP and the basin has been upsized to mitigate runoff
from the southern portion of the site.
Southern Catchment Diversion – Minor flows from the southern portion of the site are to be directed from the
proposed South Bioretention Basin towards the Central Basin for flow attenuation. This flow diversion will be sized for
the minor design storm (63% AEP), which is a flow of 1.25m3/s. Runoff that exceeds this capacity will overtop the
bioretention basin and be conveyed to the eastern corner of the site. The southern bioretention basin has been
modelled in XP-RAFTS to ensure that the outlet configuration is adequate to convey runoff as proposed.
Details of the proposed detention basins are presented in Table 3-6. For details of the proposed South Bioretention Basin
outlet configuration (sized for diversion of 63% AEP peak flows), refer to Drawing No. B14158.W-SK105 in
Appendix G.
16-001014-01 | STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN (SWMP) COOROY RETIREMENT COMMUNITY, TRADING POST
| PALM LAKE RESORTS ROAD, COOROY | 10
Page 15
Table 3-6: Stormwater Detention Basin Concept Details
Basin Details Northern Basin2 Central Basin3
Detention Volume to 1% AEP
1,030m3 4,620m3
Basin Level
1% AEP Basin WSL (m AHD) RL 100.5 RL 101.03
Minimum Embankment Level (m
RL 100.8 RL 101.30
AHD)
Normal Operating Level (m
RL 99.1 (Filter Level) RL 99.2
AHD)
1.2m x 1.2m Riser Pit at RL 100.45m
Primary Outlet Pit 0.9m x 0.9m pit at RL 100.0m AHD
AHD
Primary Front Orifice 2 x 250mm Dia at RL 99.4m AHD 2 x 400mm at RL 99.6m AHD
Primary Side Orifice - 2 x 400mm at RL 99.6m AHD
Balance Orifice (between pits) 1 x 300mm Dia at RL 98m AHD -
Secondary Outlet Pit 0.9m x 0.9m pit at RL 100.15m AHD -
Outlet Pipe 1 x 375mm at RL 98m AHD 1 x 825mm at RL 98.3m AHD
Major Overflow Weir
4m Wide1 Weir at RL 100.4m AHD 10m Wide1 Weir at RL 100.9m AHD
(Major Storm Events)
Note: Further Basin Configuration Details are provided in Appendix C
1
Width refers to the base width of the weir; refer Calibre Consulting’s Operational Works Drawings within Appendix H for details
2
For further configuration details of the Northern Basin, refer to Drawing No. 16-001014-415, 416 and 417.
3
For further configuration details of the Central Basin, refer to Drawing No. 16-001014-402, 409 and 410.
The storage utilised for Stormwater Quality (i.e. the 300mm of temporary extended ponding depth above the bioretention filter media and the
400mm above the normal operating level in the pond) has not been included in the detention volume. This is considered a conservative
assumption.
The following stage-storage discharge relationship provided in Table 3-7 and Table 3-8 was modelled for each detention
basin.
Table 3-7: Northern Basin Stage Storage Discharge Relationship
Accumulated Discharge
Stage (m AHD) Basin Control/Structure
Storage (m3) (m3/s)
99.4 0 0.00 Primary Front Orifice (2 x 250mm Dia)
99.5 70 0.02
99.6 144 0.06
99.7 222 0.11
99.8 306 0.14
99.9 394 0.16
100.0 487 0.18 Primary Outlet Pit (RL 100.0m AHD)
100.1 585 0.28
100.2 688 0.35 Secondary Outlet Pit (RL 100.15m AHD)
100.3 796 0.45
100.4 910 0.46 Major Overflow Weir (RL 100.4m AHD)
100.5 1,030 0.70
100.6 1,156 1.20
100.7 1,287 1.95
100.8 1,424 2.92 Top of Embankment (RL 100.8m AHD)
16-001014-01 | STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN (SWMP) COOROY RETIREMENT COMMUNITY, TRADING POST
| PALM LAKE RESORTS ROAD, COOROY | 11
Page 16
Table 3-8: Central Basin Stage Storage Discharge Relationship
Accumulated
Stage (m AHD) Discharge (m3/s) Basin Control/ Structure
Storage (m3)
99.6 0 0.00 Primary Front & Side Orifices
99.7 237 0.06
99.8 485 0.17
99.9 744 0.33
100.0 1,013 0.53
100.1 1,293 0.77
100.2 1,583 0.87
100.3 1,884 0.96
100.4 2,196 1.04 Primary Outlet Pit Weir Level (RL100.45mAHD)
100.5 2,517 1.21
100.6 2,885 1.66
100.7 3,265 2.01
100.8 3,658 2.06
100.9 4,069 2.12 Major Overflow Weir (Major & Extreme Events)
101.0 4,489 2.98
101.1 4,919 4.60
101.2 5,359 6.77
101.3 5,808 9.43 Minimum Top of Embankment (RL 101.3m AHD)
3.2.6 DEVELOPED MITIGATED PEAKS FLOW RESULTS
Modelling was undertaken for the all recurrence interval storm events up to and including the 1% AEP storm event with
storm durations ranging from 30 to 120 minutes (these were considered the critical durations). A comparison between
peak flows for the existing and developed mitigated scenarios has been provided at each discharge location in Table 3-9
below.
Table 3-9: Developed Mitigated Scenario Peak Flow Comparison
Existing Peak Developed Peak Percentage
AEP Discharge (m3/s) Discharge (m3/s) Difference
Discharge Location A (North)
63% 0.17 0.16 -5%
39% 0.26 0.23 -8%
18% 0.36 0.34 -4%
10% 0.43 0.41 -4%
5% 0.55 0.46 -17%
2% 0.66 0.59 -12%
1% 0.77 0.77 0%
AEP Discharge Location B (Central)
63% 1.14 1.13 -1%
39% 1.71 1.54 -10%
18% 2.54 2.35 -7%
10% 3.02 2.76 -9%
5% 3.69 3.60 -2%
2% 4.28 4.13 -4%
1% 4.95 4.65 -6%
As indicated in the results, peak flows have been reduced below existing levels at both discharge locations. Therefore,
the results demonstrate that the proposed detention basins are adequate to reduce peak flows to ensure no adverse
impact due to the development.
16-001014-01 | STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN (SWMP) COOROY RETIREMENT COMMUNITY, TRADING POST
| PALM LAKE RESORTS ROAD, COOROY | 12
Page 17
The Water Surface Levels (WSL’s) determined in each basin have been indicated in Table 3-10 below.
Table 3-10: Developed Mitigated Scenario Basin Water Surface Levels
AEP Northern Basin Central Basin
WSL (m AHD) Depth (m)1 WSL (m AHD) Depth (m)1
63% 99.92 0.52 100.28 0.68
39% 100.06 0.66 100.50 0.90
18% 100.19 0.78 100.65 1.05
10% 100.26 0.86 100.77 1.17
5% 100.37 0.97 100.90 1.30
2% 100.45 1.05 100.97 1.37
1% 100.51 1.11 101.03 1.43
Depth noted is the height above the stormwater quality temporary ponding level, which is 99.4m AHD and 99.2m AHD for the
Northern and Central Basin respectively.
The results above indicate that 300mm freeboard has been achieved to the top of each basin’s minimum embankment
level. Results also indicate that the major overflow weirs are only overtopped during the major storm events (i.e. during
the 2% and 1% AEP storms). During the 1% AEP storm, discharge across the major overflow weir is limited to a depth of
200mm. The depth velocity (dV) products reaches a maximum of 0.15m2/s for the major overflow weirs, which is lower
than the QUDM requirements.
3.2.7 EXTREME EVENT SENSITIVITY CHECK
The major overflow/emergency weir for each detention basin has been designed to cater for extreme events, i.e. extreme
storms (i.e. 0.2% AEP storm event) and extreme blockage (100% blockage of basin pits/outlet pipes). To be conservative
the extreme 0.2% AEP storm event has been modelled with 100% blockage of the pits (considering weir flow only). The
0.2% AEP storm for 15 to 4320 minute durations has been modelled in XP-RAFTS with rainfall hyetographs generated
using the IFD parameters for Cooroy specified in Section 3.1.4. Results have been cross-checked with the 0.2% AEP
regional rainfall hyetograph for the 1440 minute storm duration adopted in Water Technology’s Cooroy Flood Study
(2013) model. The highest basin WSL was adopted from all these scenarios. Other than the rainfall parameters and basin
discharge values, all other modelling parameters remain the same as per the Developed Mitigated Scenario.
Table 3-11 below indicates 0.2% AEP basin WSL’s determined in XP-RAFTS.
Table 3-11: Extreme Storm Event Weir Assessment
Parameter Northern Basin Central Basin
Minimum Top of Embankment Level (m AHD) 100.8 101.30
Critical 0.2% AEP Storm Duration (minute) 45 minute 120 minute
0.2% AEP Basin WSL (m AHD) 100.72 101.22
As indicated in the above table, basin WSL’s indicated above are below top of the embankment levels.
16-001014-01 | STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN (SWMP) COOROY RETIREMENT COMMUNITY, TRADING POST
| PALM LAKE RESORTS ROAD, COOROY | 13
Page 18
3.2.8 INTERNAL DRAINAGE STRATEGY
An internal stormwater drainage strategy is required to ensure that runoff is managed effectively through the site during
minor and major storm events. The following is proposed:
Management of Internal Site Runoff -The proposed site stormwater network and road system is proposed to
convey the major and minor storm events through the site. Typically, road drainage is designed to convey the
minor storm only as per Council’s requirements. However, drainage has been upsized due to the limited
overland flow or road capacity. This will decrease the frequency of runoff conveyed over the road, which
promotes safety. As a minimum the minor drainage design capacity will be the 10% AEP storm event with road
network or overland flowpaths to convey 1% AEP storm event.
Management of External Catchment Runoff - As indicated in Drawing No. B14158.W-SK101 provided in
Appendix G, stormwater drainage through the site will be upsized to convey major storm runoff from the
external catchments (Sub-Catchment C1 and C2) through the site.
Drainage Easements – Drainage easements are indicated on Drawing No. B14158.W-SK110 & SK111 provided
in Appendix G.
Discharge to Existing Swale on Site – Manning’s calculations were undertaken to compare peak flows and
velocities through the existing swale located along the boundary of Lot 4 on RP215922. Results indicate that
flood levels are less in the swale under existing conditions due to the proposed peak flow mitigation measures
(i.e. detention basins). Refer to Appendix E for details. Furthermore scour protection has been designed based
on QUDM (2013) at pipe outlets discharging to the swale to prevent scour and erosion. Refer to the SMCMP
Report (No. 16-001014-02A dated September 2016).
Basin Scour Protection – Rock scour protection has been designed at each basins inflows and outflows. Energy
dissipater calculations for each basin are provided in Appendix E. To protect from vegetation damage velocity
checks within each basin have also been undertaken with details provided in Appendix E.
16-001014-01 | STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN (SWMP) COOROY RETIREMENT COMMUNITY, TRADING POST
| PALM LAKE RESORTS ROAD, COOROY | 14
Page 19
4 STORMWATER QUALITY
It is expected that the proposed development will increase the export of pollutants in runoff from the subject site. A
treatment train of a suitable Stormwater Quality Improvement Devices (SQID’s) have been proposed to intercept and
capture the pollutants. The methodology adopted in this analysis is generally consistent with the past approvals.
However, the proposed Water Quality Control Pond has conservatively not been modelled. This section discusses:
The identification of key stormwater pollutants associated with the proposed development;
The Water Quality Objectives (WQO’s) identified for the catchment;
The stormwater quality management strategy to mitigate the increase in pollutant export; and
The modelling of the proposed measures and comparison to the identified WQOs.
4.1 POLLUTANTS OF CONCERN
Typical key pollutants expected to be generated during the operational (post-construction) phase of the planned
development are listed as follows, with those presented in capitals being the key pollutants to be targeted for treatment:
LITTER HEAVY METALS (associated with fine sediments)
SEDIMENT Surfactants
Oxygen demanding substances (possibly present) Organochlorines & organophosphates
NUTRIENTS (N & P) Thermal pollution
Pathogens / Faecal coliforms pH altering substances
Hydrocarbons
Only the key pollutants will be further addressed in this report; however, the treatment train developed will adequately
mitigate the other pollutant loads. As heavy metals will predominately be associated with fine sediment, controls
proposed to reduce total suspended solids will also adequately reduce loads of heavy metals.
4.2 WATER QUALITY OBJECTIVES
Healthy Waterways WSUD Technical Guidelines (2006) outlines stormwater pollutant load reduction objectives required
for all developments within South East Queensland. These objectives have been adopted as the WQOs for conceptual
modelling of the development site and are summarised in Table 4-1 below.
Table 4-1: Load Reduction Water Quality Objectives
Total Suspended Total Phosphorus Gross Pollutants
Pollutant Total Nitrogen (TN)
Solids (TSS) (TP) (GP)
Load Reduction
80% 60% 45% 90%
Target
It should be noted that the above load-based objectives are consistent with those specified in the SEQ Regional Plan
Guideline No. 7, required under the SPP 2014.
4.3 STORMWATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT STRATEGY
A treatment train of suitable SQIDs has been proposed to mitigate the potential increase of stormwater pollutant loads.
Three SQIDs have been provided for the development to treat stormwater runoff before discharging downstream. The
locations of these devices are shown on Drawing No. B14158.W-SK102 in Appendix G.
As presented in Drawing No. B14158.W-SK102 in Appendix G some minor external catchment runoff flows through the
site and will be treated by the SQIDs. Treatment of stormwater runoff from external catchment areas of the railway
corridor and Cooroy Connection Road adjacent to the site is not an obligation of the developer. Not treating these
16-001014-01 | STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN (SWMP) COOROY RETIREMENT COMMUNITY, TRADING POST
| PALM LAKE RESORTS ROAD, COOROY | 15
Page 20
external areas would be difficult in practice as they drain through the site and could not practically be diverted around
treatment measures. Therefore, opportunity to treat stormwater runoff from these areas has been taken to benefit the
water quality of downstream systems. The treatment of external catchments is consistent with the strategy previously
approved by Council (Report No. B14158.W-01A dated December 2014). Refer to Section 4.4 for further details of the
modelling methodology.
As per the approval conditions, grease and oil generated from road and car parking areas, shall be generally managed by
proprietary GPT’s before discharge to Bioretention Basins. This requirement will be identified and incorporated if
necessary during detailed design.
4.3.1 UTILISED TREATMENT SYSTEMS
A treatment train of Gross Pollutant Traps (or sediment forebays), Bioretention systems and a Water Quality Control
Pond (WQCP) is proposed for the site’s stormwater quality management strategy. The details of the treatment systems
are provided below.
Proprietary Gross Pollutant Trap (GPT) Devices (Primary Treatment) – While GPT’s have not been
modelled in MUSIC, GPT’s are proposed upstream of the Central Bioretention Basin, Northern Bioretention
Basin and Bio-Pod D2 (these secondary treatment devices receive runoff from a significant catchment, above
5ha, and/or large car parking areas). As discussed in Section 4.3.2 below, GPT’s will be sufficient for capturing
oil and grease from car parking areas prior to discharge to the downstream Bioretention System.
Bioretention Systems (Secondary Treatment) – These systems utilise a sandy loam soil based media to filter
runoff. Sediment particles and suspended solids are trapped on the surface of the filter media, while
microorganisms and vegetation planted in the filter removes dissolved nutrients (nitrogen and phosphorus)
through biological uptake processes. Subsoil drainage provided below the filter media allows the treated runoff to
discharge from the bioretention basin.
Water Quality Control Pond (WQCP) (Tertiary Treatment) –The WQCP reduces stormwater pollutants
associated with fine particulates such as TSS, metals, nutrients and toxicants as well as soluble contaminants.
The water bodies/ponds will have enhanced nutrient removal by incorporating macrophyte planting areas and
open water zones. They will ensure that adequate pollutant retention is achieved before discharging offsite to
adjacent properties. WQCP have a permanent water storage volume.
4.3.2 PROPOSED END-OF-LINE SYSTEMS
Three end-of-line stormwater quality systems are proposed for the development and are summarised below.
Northern Basin (Bioretention System) - Catchment A is to be treated by a bioretention system. The system
has no permanent water. Refer to Drawing No. 16-001014-415 in Appendix G for system details.
Central Basin (Bioretention System and WQCP) - The Central Basin will treat Catchment B and C of the
development. The central basin is proposed to be an open water feature. The basin comprises of a bioretention
system and WQCP. The open water body will be topped up with treated stormwater from the Southern Basin
during rainfall events. It is proposed that the macropyhtes are to cover a minimum of 20% of the water surface.
Due to larger catchment a proprietary Gross Pollutant Trap (GPT) will be included upstream of the Bioretention
Basin. Refer to Drawing No. 16-001014-405 in Appendix G for system details.
At Council’s request the WQCP has not been modelled in MUSIC, i.e. the treatment resulting from the WQCP
has not been modelled or included in the results contributing to the overall reduction in pollutant loads. This is
conservative, considering that the WQCP will provide treatment by reducing suspended solids through
sedimentation and is designed to capture some nutrients.
16-001014-01 | STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN (SWMP) COOROY RETIREMENT COMMUNITY, TRADING POST
| PALM LAKE RESORTS ROAD, COOROY | 16
Page 21
Southern Basin (Bioretention System) – Catchment C is to be treated by a bioretention system. 63% AEP
peak flows will be directed from this basin into the Central WQCP for additional treatment and detention. The
system has no permanent water. Refer to Drawing No. 16-001014-400 in Appendix G for system details.
Bioretention Pod D2 – A small Bioretention system is proposed to treat the car parking area.
Note that runoff from Catchment D3 is conveyed to Site Discharge Location B and therefore has been included in the
overall MUSIC model. An estimated breakdown of road, roof and ground area based on Table 3.3 of WBD’s MUSIC
Modelling Guidelines (2010) has been conservatively assumed for this catchment. A Bioretention Pod sized at 0.9% of
the catchment is proposed for this catchment area when it is developed. Further details are provided in Section 4.4.5.
As per Condition 65.2, Council specify that runoff from all road and car parking areas is to be pre-treated for grease and
oil prior to discharging to the downstream Bioretention Devices. According to WBD Bioretention Technical Design
Guidelines (2014), Bioretention Devices are suitable for treating runoff from roof, ground and road areas. Table 14 of the
guidelines outlines pre-treatment measures typically proposed upstream of Bioretention Devices based on catchment
size (i.e. for catchments between 2ha and 5ha vegetated swales, coarse sediment forebays, inlet pond or GPT’s are
recommended). The condition to pre-treat all runoff from road and car parking area specifically for oil and grease prior to
discharge into Bioretention Devices is considered to be conservative given the nature of the Bioretention treatment
device. There are also many examples of urban, commercial and industrial developments that propose Bioretention
Devices without pre-treatment of oil and grease.
It is also noted that the Bioretention Device will not be a Council asset. Hence it will be the responsibility of the developer
to manage and replant the basin in the very unlikely event that extreme oil spillages damage the Bioretention Devices
vegetation.
Apart from the Northern Bioretention Basin, GPT’s are proposed upstream of all Bioretention Devices and subsequently
the proposed pond. GPT’s have the capability of trapping floating oil and grease pollutants and are considered to be an
appropriate pre-treatment to Bioretention Devices, albeit conservative where the catchment is small. Since Catchment A
(Northern Bioretention Basin) is only 2.45ha with no significant areas of car parking a sediment forebay has been sized.
The HumeGard GPT’s proposed upstream of the proposed Bioretention Devices have the capability of trapping floating
oil and grease pollutants. As demonstrated on Page 2 of the HumeGard GPT Technical Manual provided in Appendix C,
the application of a floating boom provides separation at the surface of the waters between the sediment storage
chamber and the outlet chamber. This effectively captures pollutants such as oils and greases that float to the surface.
Based on laboratory and field testing, Table 1 on Page 3 of the Technical Manual indicates 90% removal efficiency of
Hydrocarbons during emergency spill events.
4.4 MUSIC MODELLING
Water quality modelling of the proposed development has been undertaken using the Model for Urban Stormwater
Improvement Conceptualisation (MUSIC) Version 6 developed by the Cooperative Research Centre for Catchment
Hydrology (CRCCH). MUSIC enables the user to conceptualise the transfer of pollutants through a stormwater drainage
system and provides an aid in quantifying the effectiveness of the proposed stormwater quality management strategy.
MUSIC only provides quantitative modelling for Total Suspended Solids (TSS), Total Phosphorous (TP), Total Nitrogen
(TN), and Gross Pollutants (GP).
The MUSIC model was setup generally in accordance with Water by Design MUSIC Modelling Guidelines (2010). The
subsequent sections discuss the model configurations adopted for the analysis.
Two models have been undertaken to determine whether site will meet objectives, the “Developed Site Only” model and
the “Developed Site with External - Mitigated” model. The methodology for demonstrating that WQOs for the site have
been met is summarised below.
The Load Retention Target (in kg/yr) for the site was determined using the “Developed Site Only” model, estimating
the pollutants generated from the developed site only.
16-001014-01 | STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN (SWMP) COOROY RETIREMENT COMMUNITY, TRADING POST
| PALM LAKE RESORTS ROAD, COOROY | 17
Page 22
The Load Retention Achieved (in kg/yr) was determined using the “Developed Site with External - Mitigated” model,
estimating the amount of pollutants removed from site and External Catchment B1 and C1 as a result of the
stormwater quality improvement devices.
Catchment B1 and C1 as shown on Drawing No. B14158.W-SK102 are external and are not part of the site area. While
External Catchment B1 and C1 have been included in the stormwater quality analysis (as runoff from these areas enter
the site and into proposed stormwater quality treatment devices), these areas are not considered a “part of the
development” or identified as ‘site area’. As such, determining the amount pollutant reduction required to meet objectives
for the site (i.e. Load Retention Target) does include the pollutants generated from the external catchment areas. The
Load Retention Achieved has been determined by the total pollutants removed by the proposed SQID’s prior to discharge
from the site.
4.4.1 METEOROLOGICAL DATA
Six-minute pluviographic data was sourced from the Bureau of Meteorology (BOM) for Cooroy Composite (Station No.
40059). In accordance with Table 3.1 from MUSIC Modelling Guidelines (2010), the 10-year period from 1st January
1973 to 31st December 1983 has been adopted for the rainfall duration. The mean annual rainfall for this period is
1,600mm. The mean annual evapotranspiration for the modelled period is 1,629mm.
4.4.2 SOURCE NODES
Source nodes are sub-catchments that are defined for MUSIC modelling purposes. The site was divided into
sub-catchments as shown in Drawing No. B14158.W-SK102 in Appendix G.
The split catchment approach has been used to set up all source nodes in MUSIC. The MUSIC Modelling Guidelines
(2010) have been used to configure three types of surfaces, Roof, Road and Ground, to be modelled for each sub-
catchment. All sub-catchments within the model extent were assigned either Urban Residential or Commercial
Residential dependent on land use. Refer to Appendix F for MUSIC node configurations for the site. Split sub-catchment
node areas were calculated based on Concept Master Plan presented in Appendix A.
Rainfall runoff parameters for all nodes were assigned as residential land-use, in accordance with Table 3.7 of the
MUSIC Modelling Guidelines (2010). Pollutant export properties for source nodes have been configured according to the
industrial land use category in accordance with Table 3.8 of the MUSIC Modelling Guidelines (2010).
Stochastic generation estimation and serial autocorrelation set to zero has also been adopted.
4.4.3 PRIMARY AND SECONDARY DRAINAGE LINKS
A combination of primary and secondary drainage links have been used in MUSIC to model minor flow diversions
adopted in the site’s internal drainage strategy. Primary and secondary drainage links have been applied in two areas of
the site as indicated below:
Minor runoff from Southern Basin directed to Central WQCP – 63% AEP peak flows from the Southern Bioretention
Basin (will be directed to the Central WQCP to increase turnaround time (Hydraulic Residence Time) of the Pond and
for peak flow attenuation. This has been modelled in MUSIC by using primary drainage link to direct runoff below the
63% AEP storm event (<1.25m3/s) to the “Central WQCP” (not modelled in MUSIC) and a secondary drainage link to
direct runoff high-flows downstream of the Pond.
Minor runoff (63% AEP peak flow) from Catchment B1 and B2 to Central Bioretention Basin – peak flows in the 63%
AEP storm event will be directed towards the GPT and Central Bioretention Basin for stormwater quality treatment
before discharging to the proposed WQCP (not modelled in MUSIC). High flows bypassing the Central Bioretention
Basin will be directed into the WQCP. This has been modelled in MUSIC by using primary drainage link to direct
16-001014-01 | STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN (SWMP) COOROY RETIREMENT COMMUNITY, TRADING POST
| PALM LAKE RESORTS ROAD, COOROY | 18
Page 23
runoff below the 63% AEP storm event (<0.29m3/s) to the Central Bioretention Basin and a secondary drainage link
to direct high-flows to the towards the proposed WQCP (not modelled in MUSIC).
A layout of the primary and secondary drainage links modelled is indicated on the MUSIC configuration layout provided in
Appendix F. Drawing No. B14158.W-SK102 also provides further details of the site’s internal drainage strategy.
No routing was adopted for drainage links within MUSIC model in accordance with Section 4.17 of the MUSIC Modelling
Guidelines (2010). This assumes flows and associated pollutants from all parts of the catchment arrive at the treatment
nodes at the same time. This is conservative as it means that MUSIC may overestimate the overflow volumes.
4.4.4 TREATMENT NODES
4.4.4.1 BIORETENTION TREATMENT NODE
Bioretention treatment nodes were used to model the proposed bioretention filter in the northern and southern basin and
bio-pod. Default K and C* values were adopted for these treatment nodes. These treatment nodes were set up generally
in accordance with the MUSIC Modelling Guidelines (2010) and Interim MUSIC Bioretention Treatment Node (2013).
Refer to Table 4-2 for the bioretention treatment node configuration. All other parameters have been adopted from
MUSIC Modelling Guidelines (2010).
Table 4-2: Bioretention Basin Modelled Parameters
Parameter Northern Basin Central Basin Southern Basin Pod D2 Pod D3
2
Filter Media Area (m ) 525 200 305 25 50
Surface Area (m2) 525 220 340 25 50
Extended Detention Depth (m) 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2
Filter Depth (m) 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4
Sandy Sandy
Filter Media Type Sandy Loam Sandy Loam Sandy Loam
Loam Loam
Saturated Hydraulic
Conductivity of Filter Media 200 200 200 200 200
(mm/hr)
TN Content of Filter Media
400 400 400 400 400
(mg/kg)
Orthophosphate Content of
30 30 30 30 30
Filter Media (mg/kg)
Overflow Weir Width Modelled
4 5 6 2.4 2.4
(m)1
1The width of the major overflow weir was conservatively modelled.
Refer to Drawing No. B14158.W-SK102 and SK113 in Appendix G for further treatment train details.
4.4.4.2 POND NODE
A separate MUSIC model was configured, including the WCQP to determine Hydraulic Residence Time (HRT), which is
an important feature of the pond required for avoiding outbreaks of algae (as discussed below). Table 4-3 indicates the
pond node configuration adopted in MUSIC. Further details of the WQCP are indicated on the Drawing No. 16-001014-
402 in Appendix G.
16-001014-01 | STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN (SWMP) COOROY RETIREMENT COMMUNITY, TRADING POST
| PALM LAKE RESORTS ROAD, COOROY | 19
Page 24
Table 4-3: Pond Node Configuration
Pond Parameter Central Basin
Surface Area (m²) 1,940
Extended Detention Depth (m) 0.40
Permanent Pool Volume (m³) 1,845
Notional Detention Time (hrs) 48.4
Equivalent Pipe Diameter (mm) 55
Hydraulic Residence Time/Turnover Period
An important factor in determining pond sustainability is the turnover period, or Hydraulic Residence Time (HRT). Ponds
with high residence times are considered to be at risk of algal bloom and poor water quality.
Water By Design’s Urban Lakes Discussion Paper-Managing the Risk of Cyanobacterial Blooms dated Febuary 2012
recommends 10 to 15 days Hydraulic Residence Time for a lake. Other Queensland publication recommend 20 days
maximum hydraulic retention time. As such, we have recommended a Performance Indicator of a maximum Hydraulic
Residence Time of 15 days for the Central Basin / WQCP.
Using a simplistic approach as detailed in WSUD Engineering Principles – Stormwater (2005), the 20th percentile
Hydraulic Residence Time of 14 days was determined over a 30-year period (1973-2003) based on available data. Refer
to Table 4-4 below.
Table 4-4: 20th Percentile Hydraulic Residence Time Results (Simplistic Approach)
Parameter 30-Year Period (1973-2003)
Impervious Area (ha)* 8.8
Lake Volume (m3) 1,845
Pond Area (m2) 1,940
All Year Rainfall (mm) 678
Catchment Inflow (m3) 59,956
Yearly Evaporation (mm) 1,629
Net Evaporation (m3) 1,844
Net Inflow (ML) 58
Net Yearly Inflow / Lake Volume Ratio 31
Probabilistic Residence Time (No. of days) 12
*The catchment impervious area to the central pond is consistent with MUSIC modelling areas and Fi values.
A continuous modelling approach was also undertaken using daily output from MUSIC modelling over the same 30-year
period. Using the more detailed approach, the 20th percentile HRT was determined to be 9 days, which also achieves the
required objective.
Therefore based on both the simplistic and continuous modelling approaches the Hydraulic Residence Time for the pond
will be below 15 days. This demonstrates that the required performance objective will be met.
If the water quality of the pond is found to be poor, recirculation of flows through the WQCP could be provided to increase
the turnover of water within the pond.
4.4.4.3 PROPRIERTY GROSS POLLUTANT TRAP (GPT)
A propriety (GPT) is proposed upstream of large catchments (above 5ha) or significant areas of car parking areas before
discharging to the proposed Bioretention Basins. While GPT’s are proposed upstream of the Central Basin, Southern
16-001014-01 | STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN (SWMP) COOROY RETIREMENT COMMUNITY, TRADING POST
| PALM LAKE RESORTS ROAD, COOROY | 20
Page 25
Basin and Bio-Pod D2 they have not been modelled. This will make the results more conservative, as GPT’s will capture
gross pollutants and some sediments.
4.5 MUSIC MODELLING RESULTS
Results for the proposed stormwater quality management strategy (without modelling the WQCP) is presented in
Table 4-5 below.
Table 4-5: MUSIC Modelling Results
TSS TP TN Gross Pollutants
Description
(kg/yr) (kg/yr) (kg/yr) (kg/yr)
Developed Site Only (Without
29,700 65 425 4,270
Mitigation)
WQOs (Percentage Reduction) 80% 60% 45% 90%
Load Retention Target 23,760 39 191 3,843
Developed Site plus External Catchment
36,500 77 480 4,630
(Without Mitigation)
Developed Site plus External Catchment
12,700 33 289 488
(With Mitigation)
Load Retention Achieved 23,800 44 191 4,142
Load Retention Achieved as % of
80% 68% 45% 97%
Developed Site Load
Objective Achieved? YES YES YES YES
Two models have been provided to Council, the “Developed Site Only” model and the “Developed Site with External -
Mitigated” model. The methodology for demonstrating that WQOs for the site have been met is summarised below.
The Load Retention Target (in kg/yr) for the site was determined using the “Developed Site Only” model, estimating
the pollutants generated from the developed site only.
The Load Retention Achieved (in kg/yr) was determined using the “Developed Site with External - Mitigated” model,
estimating the amount of pollutants removed from site and External Catchment B1 and C1 as a result of the
stormwater quality improvement devices.
A comparison between the targets and pollutant retention achieved demonstrate that WQO’s for the site have been
met. This approach is consistent with past DA approvals (for the interim layout) and earlier discussions with Council.
The above results indicate that the proposed strategy is effective in treating pollutant loads from the proposed
development to achieve the WQO’s as required under SPP 2014.
5 WATERWAY STABILITY MANAGEMENT
The SPP 2014 waterway stability requires the limiting of the 63% AEP post-development peak flows within the receiving
waters to be below a minimum of pre-development peak flows.
Section 3.2.6 of this report includes analysis of peak flows for a 63% AEP rainfall event in which developed peak flows
have been mitigated back to existing conditions in all recurrence intervals. Therefore, the waterway stability management
objectives has been met.
16-001014-01 | STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN (SWMP) COOROY RETIREMENT COMMUNITY, TRADING POST
| PALM LAKE RESORTS ROAD, COOROY | 21
Page 26
6 CONCLUSION
This Stormwater Management Plan has been prepared to support the Operational Works Application for Stage 2 and
subsequent Stages of the Palm Lakes Cooroy Retirement Community. The outcomes of the stormwater investigations
are listed below:
Stormwater Quantity – Hydrological analysis demonstrates that no actionable nuisance to adjoining properties can be
provided as peak flows at each discharge location from the site have been reduced below existing conditions for all
storm events up to and including the 1% AEP storm. The proposed peak flow mitigation strategy (involving the
Northern and Central Detention Basins, integrated with stormwater quality devices) is therefore adequate.
Stormwater Quality – MUSIC modelling demonstrates that water quality objectives required by Noosa and the SPP
(2014) can be met for the proposed development. The proposed Stormwater Quality Management Strategy involving
Gross Pollutant Trap devices (GPT’s), Bioretention Basins and a Water Quality Control Pond (WQCP, not modelled
in MUSIC) is therefore adequate. Construction and operational management and maintenance of the GPT’s,
Bioretention Basins and WQCP is provided in the SMCMP Report.
Waterway Stability Management - Results determined in the hydrological analysis demonstrate the waterway stability
management requirements will be achieved, as there is a reduction in peak flows during the 63% AEP storm event.
Following MCU approval from Council, this report also addresses the Approval Conditions relating to stormwater
management. This has been summarised in Section 1.3 of this report.
7 RECOMMENDATIONS
It is recommended that this Operational Works design for Stage 2 (including Central Basin and Southern Basin) be
approved on the basis that acceptable outcomes will be provided for stormwater management.
With this submission we seek overall strategy approval for the balance stormwater management works (including the
Central Basin and Southern Basins). We also seek the approval for the Northern Bioretention Basin design however
inflow pipes are subject to future Civil Drainage Operational Works approval. Bio-Pod D2 and D3 are subject to future
Civil Drainage Operational Works approvals.
16-001014-01 | STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN (SWMP) COOROY RETIREMENT COMMUNITY, TRADING POST
| PALM LAKE RESORTS ROAD, COOROY | 22
Page 27
8 DISCLAIMER
This report has been prepared on behalf of and for the exclusive use of Palm Lake Resorts, is subject to, and issued in
accordance with the agreement between Calibre Consulting (QLD) Pty Ltd.
Our investigation and analysis has been specifically catered for the particular requirements of Palm Lake Resorts and
may not be applicable beyond this scope. For this reason, any other third parties are not authorised to utilise this report
without further input and advice from Calibre Consulting (QLD) Pty Ltd.
Calibre Consulting (QLD) Pty Ltd accepts no liability or responsibility whatsoever for the report in respect of any use of or
reliance upon this report by any third party.
The investigation and analysis has relied on information provided by others. We accept no responsibility for accuracy of
material supplied by others. The accuracy of the investigation, analysis and report is dependent upon the accuracy of this
information.
9 REFERENCES
Bureau of Meteorology (2001), Climatic Atlas of Australia (Evapotranspiration).
Engineers Australia (2006), Australian Runoff Quality. A guide to Water Sensitive Urban Design.
Environmental Protection Agency (QLD) (2006). Environmental Protection (Water) Policy 1997. Noosa River
Environmental Values and Water Quality Objectives.
Healthy Waterways (2006). Water Sensitive Urban Design – Technical Design Guidelines for South East
Queensland (2006).
Noosa Council (2006). The Noosa Plan. Planning Scheme Policy.
Queensland Government (2006), Queensland Water Quality Guidelines 2006. Environmental Protection Agency
(QLD).
Queensland Urban Drainage Manual (QUDM 2013).
Queensland Water Commission (QWC) (2008). South East Queensland Water Strategy – Draft. Queensland Water
Commission.
Water by Design (2011), Construction & Establishment Guidelines.
Water by Design (2012), Urban Lakes Discussion Paper - Managing the Risk of Algal Blooms.
FAWB Guidelines for Filter Media Biofiltration Systems (Version 301, 2009).
Water by Design, MUSIC Modelling Guidelines (2010).
Water Technology’s Cooroy Flood Study (Report No. J2835-01_R02v01 dated 26 July 2013)
SEQ Regional Plan 2009-2031 Implementation Guideline No. 7.
Qld State Government, State Planning Policy (2014).
16-001014-01 | STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN (SWMP) COOROY RETIREMENT COMMUNITY, TRADING POST
| PALM LAKE RESORTS ROAD, COOROY | 23
Page 28
CALIBRE CONSULTING APPENDICES [OCR of page images] APPENDICES
Page 29
CALIBRE CONSULTING APPENDIX A CONCEPT MASTERPLAN LAYOUT [OCR of page images] CALIBRE CONSULTING APPENDIX A CONCEPT MASTERPLAN LAYOUT
Page 30
CALIBRE CONSULTING APPENDIX B RATIONAL METHOD CALCULATION [OCR of page images] CALIBRE CONSULTING APPENDIX B RATIONAL METHOD CALCULATION
Page 31
Catchment B - Existing Rational Method Calcs
File: H:\B14\150-199\B14158.W\01 Final Layout Op Works\SW_Quantity\[B14158.W_Rational Method Calculations.xlsx]Existing_B
Date: 26/08/2016
Job: B14158.W
By: CM
Locality: NSC Plateau
IFD Ref: IFD_NSC Plateau
IFD Source: Derived from Noosa Shire Council Rainfall Intensity Curves Tinbeerwah to Black Mountain (Plateau) STD. DRG. 9232 (1991)Bureau of Meteorology Chart Noosa Heads (1987)
Time of Concentration Calculations
Av. Pipe Wetted Roughness
Velocity Wetted Area Hydraulic Sub Total
Reference Equation Type / Method Area (ha) Length (m) Slope Diameter Perimeter (Mannings/H tc (min)
(m/s) (m2) Radius R (mins)
(%) (mm) (m) ortons)
4.06.6 QUDM Overland Sheet Flow - Friends Equation 16.08 200 0.5 0.045 32
4.06.8 QUDM Concentrated Overland / Channel Flow 340 1.5 4 36
Adopted tc 36
C10 VALUE
Enter Fraction Impervious Development Category fi 1I10 (mm/hr) C10
Table 5.04.2 QUDM 0.08 70 0.72
Adopted C10 0.72
Flow Calculations (QUDM 4.03.1)
tc (min) 36
tc
ARI Cy Iy A (ha) Q (m3/s)
1 0.57 52 16.08 1.32
2 0.61 66 16.08 1.80
5 0.68 84 16.08 2.55
10 0.72 93 16.08 2.96
20 0.75 110 16.08 3.69
50 0.82 131 16.08 4.82
100 0.86 138 16.08 5.27
Page 32
CALIBRE CONSULTING APPENDIX C DETENTION BASIN CALCULATIONS [OCR of page images] CALIBRE CONSULTING APPENDIX C DETENTION BASIN CALCULATIONS
Page 33
Northern Basin: CONCEPT DETENTION BASIN DESIGN CALCULATIONS
File: H:\B14\150-199\B14158.W\01 Final Layout Op Works\SW_Quantity\[B14158.W_Detention Basin Design (Master Layout).xls]NthBasinA
Date: 12/08/2015
User: CM
Note: Storage and outlet calcs for Detention Basin
STAGE - STORAGE RELATIONSHIP FOR WBNM
Stage areas taken from ACAD model
Accumulated
RL Area. (m2) Vol. (m3) Vol. (m3)
99.1 0
99.2 0
99.3 0
99.4 0 Primary Front Orifice
99.5 70
99.6 144
99.7 222
99.8 306
99.9 394
100 487 Primary Outlet Pit
100.1 585
100.2 688
100.3 796
100.4 910
100.5 1,030 Secondary Outlet Pit
100.6 1,156
100.7 1,287 Emergency Weir
OUTLET CALCULATIONS
Bio
Circular Primary Front Primary Outlet Secondary Major Overflow
Filtration Balance Orifice Outlet Pipe
Inlet 1 Orifice Pit Outlet Pit Weir
Type Basin
Length 0.9 0.9 20
Width 0.9 0.9
No. 2 1 1
Dia (m) 0.25 0.3 0.375
Height (m)
Area (m2) 0.81 0.81 0.110
Invert Level (R.L) 99.4001 100.0 98 100.15001 98 100.4001
Inflow Level (R.L) 99.4001 100.0 99.4 100.15001 99.4
D/S HGL (R.L) 0.000
f (Fig 1.6) 0.029
Pit Loss (K) 1
Hyd Cond. (k) (m/hr)
Depth Media d (m)
Perimeter (m) 2.7 3.6 4
% Opening Clear * 75% 75%
STAGE - DISCHARGE RELATIONSHIP FOR WBNM
Accum. Bio Filtration
RL Circular Inlet 1 Primary Front Orifice Primary Outlet Pit Balance Orifice Secondary Outlet Pit Outlet Pipe Major Overflow Weir Discharge (m3/s)
Vol. (m3) Basin
99.4 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
99.5 70 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.23 0.00 0.34 0.00 0.02
99.6 144 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.23 0.00 0.36 0.00 0.06
99.7 222 0.00 0.00 0.11 0.00 0.24 0.00 0.37 0.00 0.11
99.8 306 0.00 0.00 0.14 0.00 0.25 0.00 0.38 0.00 0.14
99.9 394 0.00 0.00 0.16 0.00 0.26 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.16
100 487 0.00 0.00 0.18 0.00 0.27 0.00 0.41 0.00 0.18
100.1 585 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.14 0.28 0.00 0.42 0.00 0.28
100.2 688 0.00 0.00 0.22 0.40 0.29 0.07 0.44 0.00 0.35
100.3 796 0.00 0.00 0.23 0.74 0.30 0.35 0.45 0.00 0.45
100.4 910 0.00 0.00 0.25 1.13 0.30 0.75 0.46 0.00 0.46
100.5 1030 0.00 0.00 0.26 1.27 0.31 1.07 0.47 0.23 0.70
100.6 1156 0.00 0.00 0.28 1.40 0.32 1.21 0.48 0.72 1.20
100.7 1287 0.00 0.00 0.29 1.51 0.33 1.34 0.50 1.45 1.95
100.8 1424 0.00 0.00 0.31 1.61 0.33 1.45 0.51 2.41 2.92
Note:
The following equations have been used to calculate flow capcaties for the
outlet types for each stage:
Sand Filter Equation (NSW EPA 1997) Q = A x k(h+d) / d
Pipe Flow (M.J.Boyd 1972) Q = 0.421 x g0.5 x Dia0.87 x HW 1.63 (where HW/Dia < 1.2)
Q = 0.53 x g0.5 x Dia1.87 x HW 0.63 (where HW/Dia > 1.2)
where g = 9.81m/s2
Weir Equation (AR&R Equ. 14.5) Qi = 1.66 x P x d1.5
Orifice Equation (AR&R Equ. 14.6) Qi = 0.67 x A x (2g x d)0.5
HGL Calculation (as per Section 5.21 QUDM)
Page 34
Central Basin: CONCEPT DETENTION BASIN DESIGN CALCULATIONS
File: H:\B14\150-199\B14158.W\01 Final Layout Op Works\SW_Quantity\[B14158.W_Detention Basin Design (Master Layout).xls]CentralBasinOpWorks
Date: 12/08/2015
User: CM
Note: Storage and outlet calcs for Detention Basin
STAGE - STORAGE RELATIONSHIP FOR WBNM
Stage areas taken from ACAD model
Accumulated Vol.
RL Area. (m2) Vol. (m3) (m3)
99.2 0
99.3 0
99.4 0
99.5 0
99.6 0 Primary Front Orifice
99.7 237
99.8 485
99.9 744
100 1,013
100.1 1,293
100.2 1,583
100.3 1,884
100.4 2,196
100.5 2,517 Primary Outlet Pit
100.6 2,885
100.7 3,265
100.8 3,658
100.9 4,069 Major Overflow Weir
101 4,489
101.1 4,919
101.2 5,359
101.3 5,808 Min. Embankment Level
OUTLET CALCULATIONS
Primary Side Primary Front Major Overflow
Bio Filtration Basin Primary Outlet Pit Outlet Pipe
Type Orifice Orifice Weir
Length 1.2 20
Width 1.2
No. 2 2 1
Dia (m) 0.4 0.4 0.825
Height (m)
Area (m2) 1.44 0.53
Invert Level (R.L) 99.6 99.6 100.45 98.3 100.9
Inflow Level (R.L) 99.6 99.60 100.45 99.6
D/S HGL (R.L) 0.000
f (Fig 1.6) 0.022
Pit Loss (K) 1
Hyd Cond. (k) (m/hr)
Depth Media d (m)
Perimeter (m) 4.8 10
% Opening Clear * 75%
STAGE - DISCHARGE RELATIONSHIP FOR WBNM
Total
Accum.
RL Bio Filtration Basin Circular Inlet 1 Circular Inlet 2 WEIR 1 PIPE 1 WEIR Overflow Discharge
Vol. (m3)
(m3/s)
99.6 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
99.7 237 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.00 1.43 0.00 0.06
99.8 485 0.00 0.09 0.09 0.00 1.50 0.00 0.17
99.9 744 0.00 0.17 0.17 0.00 1.56 0.00 0.33
100 1013 0.00 0.27 0.27 0.00 1.62 0.00 0.53
100.1 1293 0.00 0.39 0.39 0.00 1.68 0.00 0.77
100.2 1583 0.00 0.43 0.43 0.00 1.74 0.00 0.87
100.3 1884 0.00 0.48 0.48 0.00 1.79 0.00 0.96
100.4 2196 0.00 0.52 0.52 0.00 1.85 0.00 1.04
100.5 2517 0.00 0.56 0.56 0.09 1.90 0.00 1.21
100.6 2885 0.00 0.60 0.60 0.46 1.96 0.00 1.66
100.7 3265 0.00 0.64 0.64 1.00 2.01 0.00 2.01
100.8 3658 0.00 0.67 0.67 1.65 2.06 0.00 2.06
100.9 4069 0.00 0.71 0.71 2.15 2.12 0.00 2.12
101 4489 0.00 0.74 0.74 2.38 2.17 0.81 2.98
101.1 4919 0.00 0.77 0.77 2.58 2.22 2.38 4.60
101.2 5359 0.00 0.80 0.80 2.78 2.27 4.50 6.77
101.3 5808 0.00 0.84 0.84 2.96 2.31 7.12 9.43
101.4 6278 0.00 0.87 0.87 3.12 2.36 12.34 14.70
Note:
The following equations have been used to calculate flow capcaties for the
outlet types for each stage:
Sand Filter Equation (NSW EPA 1997) Q = A x k(h+d) / d
Pipe Flow (M.J.Boyd 1972) Q = 0.421 x g0.5 x Dia0.87 x HW 1.63 (where HW/Dia < 1.2)
Q = 0.53 x g0.5 x Dia1.87 x HW 0.63 (where HW/Dia > 1.2)
where g = 9.81m/s2
Weir Equation (AR&R Equ. 14.5) Qi = 1.66 x P x d1.5
Orifice Equation (AR&R Equ. 14.6) Qi = 0.67 x A x (2g x d)0.5
HGL Calculation (as per Section 5.21 QUDM)
Page 35
CALIBRE CONSULTING APPENDIX D XP-RAFTS LAYOUT SUMMARY [OCR of page images] CALIBRE CONSULTING APPENDIX D XP-RAFTS LAYOUT SUMMARY
Page 36
CALIBRE CONSULTING
Existing Scenario Layout
Developed Mitigated Scenario Layout
[OCR of page images]
CALIBRE CONSULTING
Existing Scenario Layout
Al
Oe
OUT
B4 B2 B3 B4 D2
O- O— ~ O-
C1 C2 c 1
O..—_
Developed Mitigated Scenario Layout
Al A2
Ore BasinA
in a ec A OUT
lin!
B1 B2 Tt
2
in ink'
In D2 D_OUT
eS link28 ink10
CA C3 =
> SthBasii node L
c i ~ rid vue fas
link4™
3
\ D1
Divert @
{ Pipe
In}
“Diver
Page 37
CALIBRE CONSULTING APPENDIX E STORMWATER DESIGN CALCULATIONS E1: Existing Swale – Manning’s calculations E2: Energy Dissipater Calculations (Bioretention Basins and WQCP) E3: Design Velocity Check (WQCP and Bioretention Basin)
Page 38
Appendix E1: Existing Swale Manning's Calculations
Section Location Sketch
Manning’s Sections
Assumptions
Manning’s n value = 0.06 (site information)
Longitudinal Slope = 0.6% (average slope measured from survey)
Proposed Development
Overtops Embankment
Page 39
Proposed Development
Overtops Embankment
Proposed Development
Overtops Embankment
[OCR of page images]
Height (m AHD)
100.5
100
98
97.5
97
96
Manning's Section B - Existing & Developed Flood Comparison
Proposed Development
Overtops Embankment ~
\/
5 10 15 20 25 30
Chainage (m)
Existing Surface === Existing 1% AEP === Developed 1% AEP |
{ ——— Design Surface
35
Height (m AHD)
99.5
99
98.5
o
@
©
N
a
©
Sg
96.5
96
Manning's Section C - Existing & Developed Flood Comparison
waco
Overtops Embankment =
5 10 15 20 25 30
Chainage (m)
[ = Design Surface Existing Surface = = = Existing 1% AEP = = = Developed 1% AEP ]
35
Page 40
Overtops Embankment
Summary
Table A and B below indicate a comparison between existing and developed flood levels and
velocities within the existing channel on site.
Table A – Flood Level Comparison
Cross Section Ex WSL (m AHD) Dev WSL (m AHD) Difference (m)
A 98.77 98.67 -0.09
B 98.58 98.57 -0.01
C 98.30 98.30 0.00
D 97.97 97.95 -0.02
As indicated in Table A there are reductions in flood levels at each cross section location within the
existing swale due to the peak flow mitigation measures proposed. It is also noted that flood levels
will be significantly lower since they overtop the left channel embankment and sheet flows across
the site boundary (under both existing and developed conditions).
Table B –Velocity Comparison
Cross Section Ex Velocity (m/s) Des Velocity (m/s) Difference (m)
A 0.68 0.95 0.26
B 0.73 0.87 0.14
C 0.72 0.94 0.22
D 0.69 0.68 -0.01
While velocities within the existing swale have been slightly increased. The design velocity is less
than 1.0m/s which is not expected to cause scour.
Page 41
Proposed Channel Capacity Immediately Downstream of Culvert Outlet A check of the capacity of the proposed channel immediately downstream of the proposed culverts was determined using Manning’s calculations (refer to the section below). Results indicate that flood levels during the 1% AEP storm are well below the proposed level of the Caretakers building (by more than 2m). Therefore, in the instance that Caretaker’s building floor levels are adjusted slightly for detailed design, the building will not be impacting by flooding from the WQCP outflows.
Page 42
WQCP ‐ Energy Dissipater Calculations (Derived From QUDM, 2013)
Pipe Outlets
Sizing of the scour rock protection for pipes was determined using calculations specified in Section
8.7 of QUDM, 2013. Below indicates rock protection requirements and the adopted outlet rock
protection configuration at each pipe outlet.
Central Bioretention Basin South Discharge into Central Pond Outlet into
Location
Outflow into Pond (375) Central Pond (900) Existing Swale (825)
Q (m3/s) 0.23 1.275 2.2
Area (m2) 0.1 0.6 0.5
Outlet Velocity (m/s) 2 2.0 4.1
Pipe Diameter 0.375 0.9 0.825
Multiple Cells? NO NO NO
Multiplication Factor for Multiple Cells N/A N/A N/A
Length Ratio D:L 3 3 5
Width (m) 1.4 2.6 3.1
Length (m) 1.125 2.7 4.125
d50 (mm) 200 200 300
Thickness of Rock Protection (mm) 400 400 600
Page 43
Multi‐Pipe Outlet
Sizing of the scour rock protection for the proposed multiple pipe outlet was determined using
calculations specified in Section 10.4.15 of QUDM, 2013. Below indicates rock protection
requirements and the adopted outlet rock protection configuration at each pipe outlet.
Central Basin Overflows
Location
(2 x 1050)
Catchments B1, B2
Q (m3/s) 1.5
Area (m2) 1.7
Outlet Velocity (m/s) 0.87
Diameter (m) 1.05
No of Cells 2
Equivalent Diameter (m) 1.45
Multiplication Factor for Multiple Cells N/A
Length Ratio D:L 3
Width (m) 1.45
Length (m) 4.35
d50 (mm) 200
Thickness of Rock Protection (mm) 400
Page 44
Bioretention Basin ‐ Energy Dissipater Calculations (Derived From QUDM, 2013)
Pipe Outlets
Sizing of the scour rock protection for pipes was determined using calculations specified in Section
8.7 of QUDM, 2013. Below indicates rock protection requirements and the adopted outlet rock
protection configuration at each pipe outlet.
Northern Bioretention Basin Outflow Central Bioretention Basin
Location
(375) Outflow (375)
Q (m3/s) 0.48 0.23
Area (m2) 0.1 0.1
Outlet Velocity (m/s) 4 2
Pipe Diameter 0.375 0.375
Multiple Cells? NO NO
Multiplication Factor for Multiple Cells N/A N/A
Length Ratio D:L 3 3
Width (m) 1.4 1.4
Length (m) 1.125 1.125
d50 (mm) 200 200
Thickness of Rock Protection (mm) 400 400
Page 45
Box Culvert or Multiple Pipe Outlets
Sizing of the scour rock protection for box culvert outlets were determined using calculations
specified in Section 10.4.15 of QUDM, 2013. Below indicates rock protection requirements and the
adopted outlet rock protection configuration at each culvert outlet.
Central Bioretention Basin Inflow (1500 Southern Bioretention Basin
Location
x 600) Inflow (2 x 750)
Q (m3/s) 1.67 2.08
Area (m2) 0.9 0.88
Outlet Velocity (m/s) 1.9 2.35
Diameter or Width (m) 1.5 0.75
Cell Height (m) 0.6 ‐
Multiple Cells? NO Yes
Length Ratio D:L 3 3
Width ‐ Equivalent Pipe Dia (m) 1.5 1.05
Length (m) 4.5 3.2
d50 (mm) 200 200
Thickness of Rock Protection (mm) 400 400
Page 46
WQCP Design Velocity Check
Since the pond has not been modelled in MUSIC and therefore isn’t ‘required’ for stormwater quality
treatment, the re‐suspension of suspended solids is not critical (i.e. WQOs will still be met for the
site if the amount of total suspended solids pollutant loads discharging into the pond is the same of
that discharging from the pond). The treatment that the pond will contribute to the site has not
been modelled in the stormwater quality management strategy.
Notwithstanding this, velocity checks were undertaken to ensure no scouring of macrophyte plants
and to demonstrate that re‐suspension of TSS is unlikely to occur.
First Assessment Criterion
For Macrophyte Zone Resuspension Protection, Equation 6.3 in WSUD Technical Design Guidelines
(2006) indicates the objective for velocities within typical wetland to ensure that stored pollutants
are not resuspended or remobilised. Figure A indicates Equation 6.3.
Figure A – Equation 6.3 from WSUD Technical Design Guidelines (2006)
As per the Constructed WQCP Design Calculations Summary provided in this Appendix, velocities
based on this first criterion are 0.001m/s, which is below the minimum requirement and meets the
design objective.
Qmax riser is typically determined by the outlet conditions (i.e. riser pit), which is low due to retention
features of the wetland. This is the frequent flow check resulting from drainage of the extended
detention depth.
Second Assessment Criterion
For events greater than frequent flow ponding, the detention basin will have near zero velocity. We
have undertaken a check based on the total basin ponding. For flows greater than frequent flows we
have adopted Qmax riser using peak inflows derived from XP‐RAFTS, i.e. peak flows entering the basin
without considering backwater effects. This is conservative and will result in higher velocities than
what will actually occur in operation.
Velocities were determined at the critical section of the WQCP as indicated in the Figure A.
Page 47
Critical Section
Figure A – Critical Section Through WQCP
Cross Sectional Area (A) was determined at the critical section using the basin water levels
determined in XP‐RAFTS for each storm event (63% to 1% AEP). Results are indicated in Table 1
below.
Page 48
Design Velocity Check Through Critical Section of WQCP
Filename: H:\B14\150-199\B14158.W\01 Final Layout Op Works\Checklists\[B14158.W_Riser Calc.xlsx]Crit. Section
Date: 5/09/2016
By: CM
Critical Section Through WQCP
1 to102.5
100 Y ARI
WSL (m) 100.28 m3/s
102
Basin Water Depth Above Extended Detention Depth (m) Cross Sectional Area (m2)
101.5 1 0.43 100.28 14.25
2 0.54 100.50 19.86
5 0.66 100.65 23.97
101
10 0.73 100.77 27.42
20 0.82 100.90 31.39
100.550 0.89 100.97 33.50
100 0.96 101.03 35.41
100
Extended Detention Depth
99.5 WSL (m) Design Channel
99
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Basin Water Depth Above Extended
AEP (%) Qin at B2 (m3/s) Cross Sectional Area (m2) Velocity (m/s)
Detention Depth (m)
63% 2.58 0.43 14.25 0.18
39% 2.97 0.54 19.86 0.15
18% 3.52 0.66 23.97 0.15
10% 3.96 0.73 27.42 0.14
5% 4.30 0.82 31.39 0.14
2% 4.64 0.89 33.63 0.14
1% 5.07 0.96 35.41 0.14
As indicated in the results, velocities range from 0.14m/s to 0.18m/s at the critical section. This is
only slightly above the velocity re‐suspension objective of 0.05m/s, but is well below the velocity
limits of 0.5m/s and 2.0m/s to protect against vegetation scour, as provided in Section 2.3.5 of the
WSUD Technical Design Guidelines (2006).
The following should also be considered:
As mentioned the velocity check equation indicated in WSUD Technical Design Guidelines
(2006) is determined based on outflow conditions. Our calculations have conservatively
considered basin inflow conditions.
The velocities determined do not take into account backwater effect caused by the outlet
that has been designed to restrict flows for detention. This will reduce velocities.
The velocities do not take into account the coincidence of flows from both that is expected
to reduce velocities further.
The results above demonstrate that the velocities through the WQCP are appropriate to avoid scour
and are unlikely to cause re‐suspension of stored pollutants.
Page 49
Bioretention Basin Velocity Checks
Velocity checks were undertaken at the critical section through the Bioretention Basins (i.e. section
with the shortest width). Note that these calculations do not take into account backflow effect and
ponding, since the outflow of the Bioretention Basins is limited by the outlet pit and weir
configuration. These calculations are therefore considered to be conservative.
Northern Bioretention Basin
Critical Section
CROSS SECTION DETAILS 10% AEP 1% AEP
POINT CH Z n wA wP n x wA wA wP n x wA
1 ‐9 100.1 0.060
2 ‐9 100.1 0.060
3 ‐6 99.1 0.060 0.07 0.67 0.00 0.10 0.82 0.01
4 6 99.1 0.060 2.54 12.00 0.15 3.10 12.00 0.19
5 9 100.1 0.060 0.07 0.67 0.00 0.10 0.82 0.01
wA wP n x wA wA wP n x wA
TOTAL 2.678832 13.34081 0.16073 3.295692 13.63174 0.197742
S
0.005 R n Q R n Q
0.2008 0.060 1.08 0.241766 0.060 1.51
Flow 1.08 1.51
WSL 99.312 99.358
Calculated by Manning's Equation 1.08 1.51
Vel (m/s) 0.40 0.46
Basin Section
100.2
100
99.8
Height (m)
99.6
99.4
99.2
99
-10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10
Width (m)
Existing Sur face 10 % AEP 1% A EP
As indicated in the results above, velocity is below 0.5m/s during both the major and minor storm
events. The potential for scour or damage to vegetation is therefore low and below requirements
specified in WSUD Technical Design Guidelines (2006)
Page 50
Central Bioretention Basin
Critical Section
CROSS SECTION DETAILS 10% AEP 1% AEP
POINT CH Z n wA wP n x wA wA wP n x wA
1 ‐4.2 100.95 0.060
2 ‐4.2 100.35 0.060 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.00
3 ‐3 100.05 0.060 0.23 1.24 0.01 0.29 1.24 0.02
4 3 100.05 0.060 2.06 6.00 0.12 2.36 6.00 0.14
5 6.6 100.95 0.060 0.24 1.42 0.01 0.31 1.62 0.02
wA wP n x wA wA wP n x wA
TOTAL 2.533472 8.69928 0.152008 2.958498 8.950312 0.17751
S
0.005 R n Q R n Q
0.291228 0.060 1.31 0.330547 0.060 1.67
Flow 1.31 1.67
WSL 100.394 100.443
Calculated by Manning's Equation 1.31 1.67
Vel (m/s) 0.52 0.56
Basin Section
101
100.9
100.8
100.7
Height (m AHD)
100.6
100.5
100.4
100.3
100.2
100.1
100
-6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8
Width (m)
Existing Sur face 10 % AEP 1% A EP
As indicated in results above velocities are only slightly above 0.5m/s (by 0.02m/s and 0.06m/s
during the major storm). This is within the requirements for the major storm (less than 2m/s) but
only slightly above for the minor storm. However, scour or damage of vegetation is unlikely as the
results do not take into account the backflow effect caused by the outlet pit and weir which will
reduce velocities through the basin. Therefore the design of the basin is appropriate to cater for
inflow velocity.
Page 51
South Bioretention Basin
Critical Section
CROSS SECTION DETAILS 10% AEP 1% AEP
POINT CH Z n wA wP n x wA wA wP n x wA
1 ‐11.2 101.2 0.060
2 ‐11.2 101 0.060
3 ‐10 100.7 0.060 0.11 0.95 0.01 0.14 1.11 0.01
4 10 100.7 0.060 4.62 20.00 0.28 5.37 20.00 0.32
5 12 101.2 0.060 0.11 0.95 0.01 0.14 1.11 0.01
wA wP n x wA wA wP n x wA
TOTAL 4.833444 21.90487 0.290007 5.658369 22.21411 0.339502
S
0.005 R n Q R n Q
0.220656 0.060 2.08 0.25472 0.060 2.68
Flow 2.08 2.68
WSL 100.931 100.9685
Calculated by Manning's Equation 2.08 2.68
Vel (m/s) 0.43 0.47
Basin Section
101.4
101.2
101
Height (m AHD)
100.8
100.6
100.4
100.2
100
-15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15
Width (m)
Existing Sur face 10 % AEP 1% A EP
As indicated in the results above, velocity is below 0.5m/s during both the major and minor storm
events. The potential for scour or damage to vegetation is therefore low and below requirements
specified in WSUD Technical Design Guidelines (2006)
Page 52
CALIBRE CONSULTING APPENDIX F MUSIC MODELLING DETAILS [OCR of page images] CALIBRE CONSULTING APPENDIX F MUSIC MODELLING DETAILS
Page 53
Developed Site Only Model
MUSIC Source Node Configuration
SOURCE NODE INPUTS
SUB-CATCHMENT AREA (ha) IMPERVIOUS % PERVIOUS % Surface Type
A1 ROAD 0.265 80 20 Urban_Road
A1 ROOF 0.495 100 0 Urban_Roof
A1 GROUND 0.225 50 50 Urban_Ground
A2 ROAD 0.300 80 20 Urban_Road
A2 ROOF 0.641 100 0 Urban_Roof
A2 GROUND 0.421 50 50 Urban_Ground
A2 PARK 0.146 0 100 Urban_Ground
B2 ROAD 0.648 80 20 Urban_Road
B2 ROOF 1.011 100 0 Urban_Roof
B2 GROUND 0.724 50 50 Urban_Ground
B3 ROAD 0.594 80 20 Urban_Road
B3 ROOF 0.925 100 0 Urban_Roof
B3 GROUND 0.541 50 50 Urban_Ground
B4 ROOF 0.300 100 0 Commercial_Roof
B4 GROUND 0.100 50 50 Commercial_Ground
B4 PARK 0.649 10 90 Urban_Ground
C2 ROAD 0.308 80 20 Commercial_Road
C2 ROOF 1.065 100 0 Commercial_Roof
C2 GROUND 0.651 50 50 Commercial_Ground
C3 ROAD 0.750 80 20 Urban_Road
C3 ROOF 1.398 100 0 Urban_Roof
C3 GROUND 0.781 50 50 Urban_Ground
D2 ROAD 0.249 80 20 Urban_Road
D2 ROOF 0.369 100 0 Urban_Roof
D2 GROUND 0.433 50 50 Urban_Ground
D2 CAR PARK 0.200 100 0 Urban_Road
D3 ROAD 0.174 80 20 Urban_Road
D3 ROOF 0.291 100 0 Urban_Roof
D3 GROUND 0.090 50 50 Urban_Ground
D3 GROUND BYPASS 0.026 0 100 Urban_Ground
TOTAL 14.768 - - ‐
[OCR of page images]
Developed Site Only Model
MUSIC Source Node Configuration
SOURCE NODE INPUTS
SUB-CATCHMENT AREA (ha) __|IMPERVIOUS %| PERVIOUS % _|surface Type
A1 ROAD 0.265 80 20 Urban_Road
A1 ROOF 0.495 100 0 Urban_Roof
A1 GROUND 0.225 50 50 Urban_Ground
A2 ROAD 0.300 80 20 Urban_Road
A2 ROOF 0.641 100 0 Urban_Roof
A2 GROUND 0.421 50 50 Urban_Ground
A2 PARK 0.146 0 100 Urban_Ground
B2 ROAD 0.648 80 20 Urban_Road
B2 ROOF 1.011 100 0 Urban_Roof
B2 GROUND 0.724 50 50 Urban_Ground
B3 ROAD 0.594 80 20 Urban_Road
B3 ROOF 0.925 100 0 Urban_Roof
B3 GROUND 0.541 50 50 Urban_Ground
B4 ROOF 0.300 100 0 Commercial_Roof
B4 GROUND 0.100 50 50 Commercial_Ground
B4 PARK 0.649 10 90 Urban_Ground
C2 ROAD 0.308 80 20 Commercial_Road
C2 ROOF 1.065 100 0 Commercial_Roof
C2 GROUND 0.651 50 50 Commercial_Ground
C3 ROAD 0.750 80 20 Urban_Road
C3 ROOF 1.398 100 0 Urban_Roof
C3 GROUND 0.781 50 50 Urban_Ground
D2 ROAD 0.249 80 20 Urban_Road
D2 ROOF 0.369 100 0 Urban_Roof
D2 GROUND 0.433 50 50 Urban_Ground
D2 CAR PARK 0.200 100 0 Urban_Road
D3 ROAD 0.174 80 20 Urban_Road
D3 ROOF 0.291 100 0 Urban_Roof
D3 GROUND 0.090 50 50 Urban_Ground
D3 GROUND BYPASS 0.026 0 100 Urban_Ground
TOTAL 14.768 a 2
Page 54
MUSIC Layout Configuration – Developed Site Only Model
[OCR of page images]
MUSIC Layout Configuration — Developed Site Only Model
A2 Ground D3 Roof
D3 Ground’ D3 Road D2 Ground
A2 Root a2 A2 Road A2 Park
D3 Ground Bypass.
a @-
‘At Ground At Junction A Receiving Node D Junction D2 Car Park
82 Roof
C2 Root
F1 High Flow
cz C2 Road
lunctio Bc Junction
C3 Road 3 Ground
B3 Roof B3 Ba 84 Ground
B4 Park
B3 Road 83 Ground B4 Roof
C3 Roof
Page 55
Developed Mitigated (With External Catchments) Model
MUSIC Source Node Configuration
Source Node Input
Sub‐Catchment Area (ha) Impervious Percent Pervious Percent Surface Type
A1 Road 0.265 80 20 Urban_Road
A1 Roof 0.495 100 0 Urban_Roof
A1 Ground 0.225 50 50 Urban_Ground
A2 Road 0.300 80 20 Urban_Road
A2 Roof 0.641 100 0 Urban_Roof
A2 Ground 0.421 50 50 Urban_Ground
A2 Park 0.146 0 100 Urban_Ground
EXT B1 Road 0.372 100 0 Urban_Road
EXT B1 Ground 1.760 0 100 Urban_Ground
B2 Road 0.648 80 20 Urban_Road
B2 Roof 1.011 100 0 Urban_Roof
B2 Ground 0.724 50 50 Urban_Ground
B3 Road 0.594 80 20 Urban_Road
B3 Roof 0.925 100 0 Urban_Roof
B3 Ground 0.541 50 50 Urban_Ground
B4 Roof 0.300 100 0 Commercial_Roof
B4 Ground 0.100 50 50 Commercial_Ground
B4 Park 0.649 10 90 Urban_Ground
EXT C1 Road 0.342 80 20 Urban_Road
EXT C1 Ground 0.975 20 80 Urban_Ground
C2 Road 0.308 80 20 Commercial_Road
C2 Roof 1.065 100 0 Commercial_Roof
C2 Ground 0.651 50 50 Commercial_Ground
C3 Road 0.750 80 20 Urban_Road
C3 Roof 1.398 100 0 Urban_Roof
C3 Ground 0.781 50 50 Urban_Ground
D2 Road 0.249 80 20 Urban_Road
D2 Roof 0.369 100 0 Urban_Roof
D2 Ground 0.433 50 50 Urban_Ground
D2 Car Park 0.200 100 0 Urban_Road
D3 ROAD 0.174 80 20 Urban_Road
D3 ROOF 0.291 100 0 Urban_Roof
D3 GROUND 0.090 50 50 Urban_Ground
D3 GROUND BYPASS 0.026 0 100 Urban_Ground
Total 18.217 ‐ ‐ ‐
[OCR of page images]
Developed Mitigated (With External Catchments) Model
MUSIC Source Node Configuration
Source Node Input
Sub-Catchment Area (ha) Impervious Percent Pervious Percent Surface Type
Al Road 0.265 80 20 Urban_Road
Al Roof 0.495 100 0 Urban_Roof
A1 Ground 0.225 50 50 Urban_Ground
A2 Road 0.300 80 20 Urban_Road
A2 Roof 0.641 100 0 Urban_Roof
A2 Ground 0.421 50 50 Urban_Ground
A2 Park 0.146 0 100 Urban_Ground
EXT B1 Road 0.372 100 0 Urban_Road
EXT B1 Ground 1.760 0 100 Urban_Ground
B2 Road 0.648 80 20 Urban_Road
B2 Roof 1.011 100 0 Urban_Roof
B2 Ground 0.724 50 50 Urban_Ground
B3 Road 0.594 80 20 Urban_Road
B3 Roof 0.925 100 0 Urban_Roof
B3 Ground 0.541 50 50 Urban_Ground
B4 Roof 0.300 100 0 Commercial_Roof
B4 Ground 0.100 50 50 Commercial_Ground
B4 Park 0.649 10 90 Urban_Ground
EXT C1 Road 0.342 80 20 Urban_Road
EXT C1 Ground 0.975 20 80 Urban_Ground
C2 Road 0.308 80 20 Commercial_Road
C2 Roof 1.065 100 0 Commercial_Roof
C2 Ground 0.651 50 50 Commercial_Ground
C3 Road 0.750 80 20 Urban_Road
C3 Roof 1.398 100 0 Urban_Roof
C3 Ground 0.781 50 50 Urban_Ground
D2 Road 0.249 80 20 Urban_Road
D2 Roof 0.369 100 0 Urban_Roof
D2 Ground 0.433 50 50 Urban_Ground
D2 Car Park 0.200 100 0 Urban_Road
D3 ROAD 0.174 80 20 Urban_Road
D3 ROOF 0.291 100 0 Urban_Roof
D3 GROUND 0.090 50 50 Urban_Ground
D3 GROUND BYPASS 0.026 0 100 Urban_Ground
Total 18.217 2 2 2
Page 56
MUSIC Layout Configuration – Developed Mitigated (With External Catchments) Model
[OCR of page images]
MUSIC Layout Configuration — Developed Mitigated (With External Catchments) Model
A2 Ground 3 Root
D3 Ground
A2 Root A2 Road A2 Park ™
CA D2 Roof
At Road
@
D3 Ground Bypass. Bio Pod D3
At Gr At thern Basin A Receiving Node. D
Ground Northern Basi 9 X Bio Pod D2 02 Car Park
el @ -
ey N
m2 foot \
82 Ground XN Al
‘ XN
S 2 Ground
~
N
se Eee N
N
82 Road @ Ft High Flow (rena) N
N
2 C2 Rood
NX
_
NX
N
- e
ExT B1 Ground ExT 1
Southern Basin Bio EXT Ct EXT C4 Ground
comtral Basin Big Bc
C3 Rosa 3 Ground
EXT Bt Road 83 Roof BS Bt B4 Ground ° EXT C1 Road
4 Park C3 Root
B3 Road 83 Ground B4 Roof
Page 57
Results Comparison
Site Only (No Mitigation)
Source Residual Reduction
Flow (ML/yr) 187 187 0
Total Suspended Solids (kg/yr) 29700 29700 0
Total Phosphorus (kg/yr) 64.8 64.8 0
Total Nitrogen (kg/yr) 425 425 0
Gross Pollutants (kg/yr) 4270 4270 0
Site + External Catchments with Mitigation
Source Residual Reduction
Flow (ML/yr) 214 213 1
Total Suspended Solids (kg/yr) 36500 12700 65
Total Phosphorus (kg/yr) 77.1 33 58
Total Nitrogen (kg/yr) 480 289 40.6
Gross Pollutants (kg/yr) 4630 488 92.9
Music Modelling Results
Description TSS TP TN Gross Pollutants
(kg/yr) (kg/yr) (kg/yr) (kg/yr)
Developed Site Only (Without
Mitigation) 29700 64.8 425 4270
WQOs (Percentage Reduction) 80% 60% 45% 90%
Load Retention Target 23760 38.88 191.25 3843
Developed Site plus External Catchment
(Without Mitigation) 36500 77.1 480 4630
Developed Site plus External Catchment
(With Mitigation) 12700 33 289 488
Load Retention Achieved 23800 44.1 191 4142
Load Retention Achieved as % of
Developed Site Load 80% 68% 45% 97%
Objective Achieved? YES YES YES YES
Page 58
CALIBRE CONSULTING APPENDIX G CONCEPT DRAWINGS [OCR of page images] CALIBRE CONSULTING APPENDIX G CONCEPT DRAWINGS
Page 59
EXISTING SWALE
NORTHERN
EXISTING HOUSES
AND SHEDS
EXISTING DAM \
»
EXISTING HOUSES \ J /
AND SHEDS EXISTING Z 300 EXISTING 300 //
PIPE RCP /
LOT 2 .
RP 165418 \ EXISTING SHED . J Lf LY
9b J JnW
ot god / Y \
~\y Tamers
EXISTING B450 RCP —_
EXISTING HOUSES ¥ 4
AND SHEDS
Pad SOUTHERN
CENTRAL EXISTING DAM
EXISTING DAM I
7 LoT 1
4 RP165418 J S XN l
0 / LOT 1
7 J N RP215922 l
\ ? 7 4 \
\ J
\ 7 A ~N
SS 7 ~ ,
Bt { N ~ \
ey . ~“
% ON ” N \ EXISTING B375 \
vgn x RCP ~“
ae ON . S
AN XQ N \,
YN 1 — ae a _— a a a a = =
\ \s ~ aN ~~ ee — ~ ——
: COOROY CONNECTION ROAD
\ = a aks ee ee ee
EXISTING 900x300 — a a
~ BOX CULVERT =a EXISTING 1350x300 a
— aoe BOX CULVERT
ee
APPROXIMATE ALIGNMENT OF ELEVATED RAILWAY
CORRIDOR (TOP OF CATCHMENT).
SOURCE; MAPVIEW - QLD GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT
OF NATURAL RESOURCES AND MINES (2006) SS
LEGEND
APPROXIMATE SITE BOUNDARY (MCU) » FLOW DIRECTION
EXISTING SCENARIO, EXISTING CONTOURS
CATCHMENT BOUNDARY
EXISTING SCENARIO @ DISCHARGE LOCATION
CATCHMENT LABEL NOTES:
FLE: BUs1S8.W-SK100.dwg_DATE: 12-11-2015 TIME: 08:47
iref's
X_BIA158.W_BASE X_BI4158.W_EXISTING X_B14158.W_TITLE USR: Sam Linde
FLOW PATH
1. THIS DRAWING IS TO BE READ IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE
LATEST ISSUE OF CALIBRE CONSULTING REPORT No.
16-001014-01.
CONCEPT PLAN ONLY
NOT TO BE USED FOR
CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES
‘DRAWING TITLE
rast [ous ane] on Ue SRE TEST TRG Te Sr
AMM BETA SURVEYOR: KEN HICKS & ASSOCIATES
—————e 49 THE ESPLANADE MAROOCHYDORE PALM LAKES RESORT EXISTING SCENARIO
a ‘moe et Ph (07) S463 2864 Fox (07) 3663 7146 | Cc CATCHMENT PLAN
O4zmE0zm=E>
mo] oe] >|
DRAWN CHECK
PROJECT No.
123500 3
B14158.W
"APPROVED, ANDREW McPHAIL RPEQ 6921
MATTHEW HILL RPEQ 11578
FOR & ON BEHALF OF CALIBRE CONSULTING (QLD) PTY L10
PALM LAKES - COOROY
RETIREMENT COMMUNITY
Callore
CONSULTING
Biss Caber Usboma Spdwy Shgpom SumineCoat L404
TSSUE
B14158,W-SK100 B
‘DRAWING NUMBER
Page 60
-
CC___
BBQ AREA
DECK
POOL
SPA
__
CC___
[OCR of page images]
LEGEND:
NORTHERN BASIN
PROVIDES PEAK
FLOW MITIGATION
CENTRAL BASIN
PROVIDES PEAK
FLOW MITIGATION
EXISTING SWALE
63% AEP PEAK
FLOW PIPE DIVERSION
ai
\ SOUTHERN BASIN
63% AEP PEAK FLOWS TO
BE DIRECTED TO POND
DIF TRADING POST ROAD:
Ce PEPETIT
\ T
\
~_
SITE BOUNDARY i —
a —
DEVELOPED CATCHMENT BOUNDARY
PROPOSED STORMWATER DRAINAGE
UPSIZED SITE DRAINAGE NETWORK AND STORMWATER EASEMENT
TO CATER FOR UPSTREAM EXTERNAL CATCHMENT FLOWS
WATER QUALITY CONTROL POND
OR BIORETENTION BASIN >
FLOW DIRECTION
63% AEP PEAK FLOW DIVERSION
SITE DISCHARGE LOCATION
EXISTING SWALE
PROPOSED EASEMENT (STORMWATER/SERVICES)
—
—_
—_
—
COOROY CONNECTION ROAD
—_
SITE DRAINAGE AND ROAD NETWORK
DESIGNED TO CONVEY 1% AEP PEAK FLOWS
OF UPSTREAM EXTERNAL CATCHMNET
\
— —
NOTES:
* oR FURTHER BASIN CONFIGURATION REFER
TO DETAILS PROVIDED ON SUBSEQUENT
PLANS, SIZING SUBJECT TO DETAILED DESIGN.
1. THIS DRAWING IS TO BE READ IN CONJUNCTION WITH
LATEST ISSUE OF CALIBRE CONSULTING REPORT No.
16-001014-01.
2. SPLIT FLOW PIT TO DIVERT 63% AEP FLOWS FROM
CATCHMENT B2 TO GPT AND BIORETENTION BASIN
7 GSTTSILY
ESPRPEPET
ie fenena rena plent
Egeeronrren fo
Fa bbobeb Detaled bled
Pa
MINOR DESIGN STORM CONVEYED
THROUGH SITE DRAINAGE. MAJOR
OVERFLOWS DIRECTED TOWARDS
TRADING POST ROAD
CONCEPT PLAN ONLY
NOT TO BE USED FOR
CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES
=|
z
8
2
=
DATE
"SCALE (METRES 7 MIGROFIM No,
DESIGN CHECK
“CLIENT
10.15
AMENDMENT DETAILS.
OzmzozmE>
[leo @]>
=
2.10.15
MINOR LAYOUT AMENDMENT
A
MINOR LAYOUT AMENDMENTS
1250 25 0 25
50 Al
05.02.16
LAYOUT AMENDMENTS:
4.2500
DRAWN CHECK|
26.08.16
MINOR” AMENDMENTS
AB
PROJECT No.
B14158.W
SURVEYOR: KEN HICKS & ASSOCIATES
49 THE ESPLANADE MAROOCHYDORE
Ph (07) 5443 2844 Fax (07) 5443 7146
APPROVED ANDREW McPHAIL RPEQ 6921
MATTHEW HLL RPEQ 11578
FOR & ON BEHALF QF CALIBRE CONSULTING (QLD) PTY LTO
PALM LAKES RESORT
Cc
PROECT
PALM LAKES - COOROY
RETIREMENT COMMUNITY
calibre
CONSULTING
Callbre Consulting (QLD} Pty Ltd
| Queen
(CONSULT AUSTRALIA
QLD Aurtraia 4000 eared
Ground Foy, Siders Company
Talphone 07 3895 2444 Facamile 073895 9400 iso bon
Racin Caton tabom fyity Sean Beninecoat 164084
‘DRAWING TITLE
DEVELOPED MITIGATED
CATCHMENT PLAN
‘DRAWING NUMBER
B14158.W-SK101
Page 61
-
CC___
BBQ AREA
DECK
POOL
SPA
__
CC___
[OCR of page images]
STORMWATER DRAINAGE EASEMENT
AND SERVICES CORRIDOR
BlOPOD D2 \
WOODWORKING/GOLF ROOM aE eer wil oe
AND TENNIS COURTS FILTER AREA, 25m? BIOPOD D3
FILTER DEPTH: Om FUTURE DEVELOPMENT TO HAVE OWN
NORTHERN BASIN (SW QUALITY & DETENTION) TEMP. PONDING DEPTH: 0.2m ea ER ae AMEN
CONTROLS (0.9% FILTER AREA PER
BIORETENTION SYSTEM WITH SEDIMENT FOREBAY CATCHMENT AREA REQUIRED)
FILTER AREA: 525m? CARETAKER'S
FILTER DEPTH: 0.4m
TEMP. PONDING DEPTH: 0.3m
SOUTHERN BASIN.
BIORETENTION SYSTEM WITH UPSTREAM GPT (TREATED
FLOWS TO DISCHARGE INTO CENTRAL WQCP)
FILTER AREA: 305m?
FILTER DEPTH: 0.4m
TREATMENT TRAN CLUDES WO, ere 0 STAGE? DoERATIONAL WORKS DRAWINGS
BIORETENTION BASIN AND UPSTREAM GPT FOR FURTHERDETAILS
REFER TO STAGE 2 OPERATIONAL WORKS
DRAWINGS FOR DETAILS BOWLING MINOR DESIGN STORM CONVEYED
PPK Ses THROUGH SITE DRAINAGE. MAJOR
GREENS
SPLIT FLOW PIT (63% AEP PEAK OVERFLOWS DIRECTED TOWARDS
FLOWS TO SOUTHERN BASIN) TRADING POST ROAD
Mae) TRADING POST
= SWIMMING ROAD
POOL
CLUBHOUSE
s/o lt
'
l T 1
1 CENTRAL
BIORETENTION
BASIN ,
‘A1 ;
120 BED AGE
CARE FACILITY
B3}
%G
% S op a
BX S =
%,
%— \
\ COOROY CONNECTION ROAD XN
je —
LEGEND: — aw A
SITE BOUNDARY
MUSIC CATCHMENT LABELS MUSIC _CATCHMENT PLAN
—— = MUISIC CATCHMENT BOUNDARY SCALE 11250 (At)
LOW FLOW DIRECTION SCALE 12500 (A3)
wo PROPOSED STORMWATER DRAINAGE
MODELLED AS AREAS
a PROPOSED FLOW PATH BYPASSING TREATMENT NOTES:
CARPARKING AREA CATCHMENT D2 =—
WATER QUALITY CONTROL POND igaseaatestasseatead TO BE TREATED BY BIOPOD D 1. THIS DRAWING IS TO BE READ IN CONJUNCTION
OR BIORETENTION BASIN > WITH CALIBRE CONSULTING REPORT No.
16-01014-01 CONCEPT PLAN ONLY
K<XEZ MODELLED AS COMMERCIAL FOR FURTHER BASIN CONFIGURATION REFER 2. SPLIT FLOW PIT TO DIVERT 63% AEPI FLOWS NOT 10 BE USED FOR
TO DETAILS PROVIDED ON SUBSEQUENT FROM CATCHMENT B2 10 GPT AND CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES
PLANS, SIZING SUBJECT TO DETAILED DESIGN. BIORETENTION BASIN
FILE: B14158.W-SK102.dwg DATE: 12-11-2015 TIME: 15:31 *
Xref's: X_B14158.W_TITLE X_B14158.W_BASE USR: chris mok
Se ee SOE TEES T TEEROET he oy RNR TE
AMENOMENT DETAILS DESIGN CHECK SURVEYOR: KEN HICKS & ASSOCIATES a
| a 49 THE ESPLANADE MAROOCHYDORE PALM LAKES RESORT ‘CONSULT AUSTRALIA MUSIC CATCHMENT
te Se 11250 25 0 2 so Al Ph (07) 5443 2864 Fax (07) 5443 7166 | C = whi PLAN
nN 1:2500 AZ [.-AO0“DC~S<S;<S;7 Sd |
sic DRAWN CHECK PROJECT Wo APPROVED ANDREW MCPHAL RED 692 Calle Consutng (QLD) Pty id
ip 814158, W wrt fa sn? © PALM LAKES - COOROY Callore feLienae heme) Sa bee aa
sir FOR & ON BEHALF OF CALIBRE CONSULTING (ALO) PTY L1D RETIREMENT COMMUNITY CONSULTING Dace Cetrt bow tytn Capon bueno ‘TSE B14158.W-SK102 B
Page 62
-
CC___
BBQ AREA
DECK
OL
PO
A
SP
__
CC___
[OCR of page images]
NORTHERN BASIN
®
2S
CENTRAL BASIN
PROPOSED GPT
Be 63% AEP PEAK
FLOW DIVERSION
Y
lal /V
PROPOSED 6m WID! Y L
DRAINAGE EASEMENT Al/ 4
4
Y
i //
PLUNGE POOL / 4//%
ENERGY ‘a/7
DISSIPATER “Ny
7
EXISTING SWALE JNJ
7 ,
S BIOPOD D2
/ nV
fe \
7 L =\
7 / 2
J 7 Aaé~
y v7 \
C/N \
/ 7
7 la \ \
& \ \
Y V\y\ \
\ 1
CONCEPT ROAD AND DRAINAGE
LAYOUT SHOWN IS SUBJECT TO
FUTURE STAGE 4 OPERATIONAL] \
WORKS DESIGN AND APPROVAL
v
\
|/— PROPOSED SWIMMING POOL
REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL FOR
LANDSCAPING AND FENCING
Ld
« [elel=]
5m WIDE
63% AEP PEAK FLOW
DIVERSION © 900
STORMWATER
EASEMENT
PEAK FLOWS ABOVE THE 1
ARI STORM TO BE DIRECTED
TOWARDS SWALE
PROPOSED GPT
UPSTREAM OF
BASIN
\
LEGEND:
\ SITE BOUNDARY
— \ sw>_— PROPOSED STORMWATER DRAINAGE
\ CLAW PROPOSED STORMWATER EASEMENT
- \
a 2 RETAINING WALLS
a \ FLOW DIRECTION
\ 7 63% AEP PEAK FLOW DIVERSION
\ = \
\ a DISCHARGE LOCATION
a a> 4-2-4 3 EXISTING SWALE
\
\
\
\
\ \ \ — \ \
\ \ — - \ 7
—\ a - »
\ = a — \
J a
L 7
\ L a \ \
2 a
_ c
\ \ \
\ \ a
a \ <
a“ \ \ — \
- \ ~
\ \
\ \ \ a“
\ \ a
YEAR \ \, a \ —
\ — a \e
(_ EASEMENT
3m WIDE DRAINAGE
\
SPLITTER MANHOLE TO DIRECT 63% AEP
PEAK FLOWS TO BASIN AND MAJOR FLOWS TO
THE PROPOSED SWALE & DRAINAGE EASEMENT PROPOSED STORMWATER DRAINAGE
| DESIGNED TO CONVEY MINOR FLOWS.
(10% AEP) TOWARDS SOUTHERN BASIN.
MAJOR OVERFLOWS TO BE DIRECTED
TOWARDS TRADING POST ROAD
SPLITTER MANHOLE TO DIRECT 63%
AEP PEAK FLOWS TO PROPOSED
GPT AND OVERFLOWS TO BASIN
UPSTREAM OF BASIN
FILE: B14158.W-SKNI0.dwg_ DATE: 12-11-2015 TIME: 08:49
Pxref's: X_B1\158.W_BASE X_B1\158.W_MODIFIED ARCH X_B14158.W_TITLE ADAM DTM Layer Copy USR: Sam Linde
NOTES:
1. THIS DRAWING IS TO BE READ IN CONJUNCTION WITH
LATEST ISSUE OF CALIBRE CONSULTING REPORT No.
16-001014-01.
CONCEPT PLAN ONLY
NOT TO BE USED FOR
CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES
Tar [acs taw] OAT ao TRCROTTN Ne STENT SRRWRG TT
AMENDMENT DETAILS DESIGN CHECK SURVEYOR: KEN HICKS & ASSOCIATES rn
ne 49 THE ESPLANADE MAROOCHYDORE PALM LAKES RESORT ‘CONSULT AUSTRALIA CONCEPT STORMWATER
. Ph (07) 5443 2844 Fax (07) 5443 7146 DRAINAGE PLAN
Fe [OF | 01.08.16 | MINOR AMENDMENTS 1500 10 o 2° 20 1 TIORET 4
Nic caaw onsen] 17200 8 PROJECT No. THROES rf SHEET 1 OF 2
0 B14158,.W AMITHEW HL PED TT PALM LAKES - COOROY Call re ee | _
NIE . Te 07 3895 2444 Focumile 07 3895 $400
br fo OW SEALE OF CALBRE CONSULTING LD PTY LT RETIREMENT COMMUNITY CONSULTING tsen tort tases ew oa tere “BERL B14158.W-SK110 B
Page 63
-
CC___
BBQ AREA
DECK
OL
PO
A
SP
__
CC___
[OCR of page images]
A | | , \ LEGEND:
PROPOSED SWIMMING POOL Ss PEAK FLOWS ABOVE THE 63% AEP =—_—
REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL FOR STORM DIRECTED TOWARDS DISCHARGE
LANDSCAPING AND FENCING LOCATION B SITE BOUNDARY
| sw PROPOSED STORMWATER DRAINAGE N
(CONCEPTUAL ONLY) \
\ e (=Jel=] Gj CLAW PROPOSED STORMWATER EASEMENT
RETAINING WALLS
MAJOR FLOW DIRECTION
Z.
900 STORMWATER 63% AEP
PEAK FLOW DIVERSION PIPE
63% AEP PEAK FLOW DIVERSION
»>
=»
@® DISCHARGE LOCATION
ina a+ 2-44-45 EXISTING SWALE
Dla aaa +) Ub3m WIDE DRAINAGE
| | see ea] | EASEMENT
leas | EE SPLITTER MANHOLE TO DIRECT 63% AEP
; | PEAK FLOWS TO BASIN AND MAJOR FLOWS
i \ TOWARDS SITE DRAINAGE NETWORK
/ os
SOUTHERN BASIN
63% AEP LOW FLOWS | ™.
TO BIORETENTION BASIN
PROPOSED GPT \ Oo I \ 0 *
UPSTREAM OF BASIN SPLITTER MANHOLE TO DIRECT 63%
AEP PEAK FLOWS TO PROPOSED
GPT AND OVERFLOWS TO BASIN
4
Xe ane |
Sm WIDE
5m WIDE STORMWATER
STORMWATER EASEMENT
LL ase
f
C00 0Y CONNECTION ROAD
NOTES:
1. THIS DRAWING IS TO BE READ IN CONJUNCTION WITH CONCEPT PLAN ONLY
LATEST ISSUE OF CALIBRE CONSULTING REPORT No.
bee suey sce.ug_ oar. 1-28. ony ie ont ot CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES
Xref's: X_B14158.W_ BASE X_B14158.W_MODIFIED ARCH X_B14158.W_TITLE ADAM DTM Layer Copy USR: Sam Linde a
sar [ones oom OE SEE TEST TRO Te ar TaN TE
AMENOMENT DETAR DesIw cHECK SURVEYOR: KEN HICKS & ASSOCIATES , mn
rr 49 THE ESPLANADE MAROOCHYDORE PALM LAKES RESORT CONSULT AUSTRALIA CONCEPT STORMWATER
als 1500 5 ‘0 wat Ph (07) 5443 2844 Fax (07) 5463 7166 | SW DRAINAGE PLAN
nN 1:1000 AB lapPROuD nl 7 H
Kle caawn Gnox PROJECT No, APPROVED SHEET 2 OF 2
ip Bdi58 Ww wesaagat | PALM LAKES - COOROY Calibre Se pene 28 barman oa
. ore
A FOR & ON BERALF OF CALBRE CONSULTNG (LD) PTY LTO RETIREMENT COMMUNITY CONSULTING taowe Gate tare fy Boren Benntnt Tes B14158,W-SK111 A
Page 64
-
CC___
BBQ AREA
DECK
L
POO
SPA
__
CC___
[OCR of page images]
SOURCE NODE INP!
MNOR AMENDMENTS:
FILE: B14158.W-SKNI0.dwg_DATE: 12-11-2015 TIME: 08:49
Pxref's: X_Bt\158.W_BASE X_B14158.W_MODIFIED ARCH X_B14158.W_TITLE ADAM DTM Layer Copy USR: Sam Linde
‘SUB-CATCHMENT AREA (ha) [IMPERVIOUS %| LEGEND
At_ROAD 0.265 80
‘At ROOF 0.495 100
Ai GROUND 0.225 50 -——_— = =
‘A2 ROAD 0.300 80
‘A2 ROOF 0.641 700. |
A2 GROUND 0.421 50
‘A2 PARK 0.146 0
B2 ROAD 0.648 80
B2 ROOF 1.011 100
B2 GROUND 0.724 50
B3 ROAD 0.594 80
B3 ROOF 0.925 100
B3 GROUND 0.541 50
B4 ROOF 0.300 100
B4 GROUND 0.100 50
B4 PARK 0.649 10
C2 ROAD 0.308 80
C2 ROOF 1.065 100
€2. GROUND 0.651
C3 ROAD 0.750
C3 ROOF 1.398
€3 GROUND 0.781
D2 ROAD 0.249
D2 ROOF 0.369
D2 GROUND 0.433
D2 CAR PARK 0.200
D3 ROAD 0.174
D3 ROOF 0.291
D3 GROUND 0.090
D3 GROUND BYPASS 0.026
TOTAL 14.768
SITE BOUNDARY
MUSIC CATCHMENT
DESIGN CONTOURS
BOUNDARY
EXISTING CONTOURS
IMPERVIOUS AREA
ROOF AREA
CENTRAL
BASIN
SOUTHERN
BASIN
bidslasiaslaid
Eee
pldlastablasla
APPLET EPrer
——COOROY CONNECTION ROAD
NOTES:
1. THIS DRAWING IS TO BE READ IN CONJUNCTION WITH LATEST ISSUE OF
CALIBRE CONSULTING REPORT No. 16-001014-01.
2. WHILE NOT SHOWN ON PLAN, EACH PROPOSED LOTS WILL HAVE IMPERVIOUS
ROOF AREA (COVERING A MAJORITY PORTION OF TOTAL LOT AREA). AN
AVERAGE ROOF AREA OF 215m? PER LOT WAS MODELLED AS PER TABLE
3.3 OF WATER BY DESIGN'S MUSIC MODELLING GUIDELINES (2010).
=
CONCEPT PLAN ONLY
NOT TO BE USED FOR
CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES
FRST [CALCS [DRAWN] _OATE
vesue [cw | 05.02.16
AMENDMENT DETAILS.
H_[-o [109.16 MNOR AMENDMENTS
DESIGN CHECK
1000 1 010
"SCALE (METRES 7
30.4050 Al
=] eo @]>
O4zmzozmE>
4.2000
DRAWN CHECK|
AB
MIGROFIUM No,
PROJECT No.
B14158.W
SURVEYOR: KEN HICKS & ASSOCIATES
49 THE ESPLANADE MAROOCHYDORE
Ph (07) 5443 2844 Fax (07) 5443 7146
APPROVED ANDREW McPHAIL RPEQ 6921
MATTHEW HLL RPEG 11578
FOR & ON BEHALF QF CALIBRE CONSULTING (QLD) PTY LTO
PALM LAKES RESORT C
~~ calibre
PALM LAKES - COOROY
RETIREMENT COMMUNITY CONSULTING
Callbre Consulting (QLD} Pty Ltd
| Queen
‘Ground Fer, Sere
‘Toephone 07 3895 2444 Facsimile 073895400 shoot
Recere Cuber Hetomw fay Sayre SenheCoat 1c 4004
= ERENT
‘CONSULT AUSTRALIA.
wD
ntact
IMPERVIOUS AREA
PLAN
QD Awtcasoon Exes! Saawine NOMBER
B14158.W-SK112
Page 65
²
[OCR of page images]
7 BIORETENTION BASIN
PROPOSED 6m WIDE
DRAINAGE EASEMENT
4 WEIR AT
GPT TO BE PROVIDED
7 UPSTREAM OF
a
RL 98.50
oo [FINAL ROAD AND
DRAINAGE DETAILS TO
CARPARK
RL 98.82
BE CONFIRMED DURING | ™
DETAILED DESIGN
EXTENDED
DETENTION
DEPTH
=11
1 3
g \
§
3
ag BIORETENTION
3 LAYERS
TYPICAL BIOPOD DETAIL
SCALE 1:25 (A1)
SCALE 1:50 (A3)
z ENERGY DISSIPATER SUBJECT
TO DETAILED DESIGN
BIOPOD D
FILTER AREA: 25m?
FILTER DEPTH: 0.4m
TOTAL BASIN SURFACE AREA: 100m?
EXTENDED DETENTION DEPTH: 0.2m
0.50m MIN.
EXISTING SURFACE
— oS [
3 a
LEGEND:
NOTES:
1. THIS DRAWING IS TO BE READ IN CONJUNCTION WITH
LATEST ISSUE OF CALIBRE CONSULTING REPORT No.
16-001014-01,
SITE BOUNDARY
PROPOSED STORMWATER DRAINAGE
PROPOSED STORMWATER EASEMENT
EXISTING SWALE
BIORETENTION FILTER
CONCEPT PLAN ONLY
NOT TO BE USED FOR
CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES
ALCS,
[DRAW]
DATE
@
SC
05.02.16
AMENDMENT DETAILS.
OzmzozmE>
DESIGN CHECK
=m Sole] >
DRAWN CHECK|
150
1100
1100
4200
ee 43
ee.
"SCALE (METRES 7
MIGROFIM No.
1 2M
PROJECT No.
B14158.W
203 46 5
SURVEYOR: KEN HICKS & ASSOCIATES
49 THE ESPLANADE MAROOCHYDORE
Ph (07) 5443 2844 Fax (07) 5443 7146
"APPROVED.
ANDREW McPHAIL RPEQ 6921
MATTHEW HILL RPEQ 11578
FOR & ON BEHALF OF CALISRE CONSULTING (QLD) PTY LTO
“CLIENT
PALM LAKES RESORT
PROECT
PALM LAKES - COOROY
RETIREMENT COMMUNITY
Cc
calibre
CONSULTING
(CONSULT AUSTRALIA
NY
Callbre Consulting (QLD} Pty Ltd
Grovrd | i
545 Queen 9 QLD Aurtraia 4000
‘Teophone 07 3895 2444 Facsimile 07 3895 3400
Recers Coburn Katou fay Sep Senscomt 104004
E ‘DRAWING TITLE
‘a0 boot
BIOPOD D2
DETAILS PLAN
‘DRAWING NUMBER
B14158.W-SK113
Page 66
CALIBRE CONSULTING APPENDIX H OPERATIONAL WORKS DRAWINGS [OCR of page images] CALIBRE CONSULTING APPENDIX H OPERATIONAL WORKS DRAWINGS
Page 67
BIO_RETENTION BASIN CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE NOTES:
THE CONSTRUCTION AND ESTABLISHMENT OF BIO RETENTION BASINS IS TO BE STAGED AS FOLLOWS:
1.
FUNCTIONAL INSTALLATION - ONCE THE MAJORITY OF THE SUBDIVISION WORKS ARE COMPLETE, THE
BASIN CONSTRUCTION INCLUDING EARTHWORKS, INLETS, OUTLET STRUCTURES, SUBSOIL DRAINAGE,
TRANSITION LAYERS, FILTER MATERIAL, PROTECTIVE LAYERS AND EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL
MEASURES ARE TO BE UNDERTAKEN BY THE CIVIL CONTRACTOR. THE FILTER MEDIA WITHIN THE BIO
RETENTION BASIN IS TO BE COVERED WITH A PROTECTIVE GEOFABRIC LAYER (BIDIM A12 OR
EQUIVALENT), THEN COVERED WITH 75mm OF TOPSOIL AND TURFED OR GRASS SEEDED TO THE
SATISFACTION OF COUNCIL. SILT FENCES ARE TO BE ERECTED AROUND THE OUTSIDE OF THE BASIN.
ACCEPTANCE OF THE COMPLETED SUBDIVISION WORKS ON AND OFF MAINTENANCE BY COUNCIL IS TO
EXCLUDE THE PROTECTIVE LAYERS WITHIN THE BIO BASINS.
BUILDING CONSTRUCTION - THE PROTECTIVE GEOFABRIC AND GRASS LAYER AND THE EROSION AND
SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURES ARE TO REMAIN IN PLACE DURING THE BUILDING CONSTRUCTION PHASE.
THE BUILDING CONSTRUCTION PHASE IS TO BE THE TIME FOR COMPLETION OF 75% OF THE BUILDING
CONSTRUCTION AND SITE ESTABLISHMENT WORKS ON ALLOTMENTS OR 12 MONTHS FOLLOWING
COMPLETION OF THE SUBDIVISION WORKS, WHICHEVER IS SHORTER. THE MAINTENANCE OF THE BASINS
INCLUDING INLETS, OUTLETS AND EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURES IS TO BE UNDERTAKEN
BY THE CIVIL CONTRACTOR FOR THE DURATION OF THE BUILDING CONSTRUCTION PHASE.
OPERATIONAL ESTABLISHMENT - FOLLOWING COMPLETION OF THE BUILDING CONSTRUCTION PHASE, THE
TURF, TOPSOIL AND PROTECTIVE GEOFABRIC IS TO BE REMOVED AND THE BASIN RE-PLANTED WITH
VEGETATION AND LANDSCAPING AS PER THE LANDSCAPE DESIGN DRAWINGS. WORKS UNDERTAKEN FOR
OPERATIONAL ESTABLISHMENT ARE TO BE UNDERTAKEN BY OTHERS AND WILL BE SUBJECT TO A
SEPARATE ACCEPTANCE BY COUNCIL FOR ON AND OFF MAINTENANCE.
IN-SITU_INFILTRATION TEST - AN IN-SITU INFILTRATION TEST WILL BE REQUIRED PRIOR TO
ON-MAINTENANCE BEING GRANTED BY COUNCIL. THE TEST WILL NEED TO ACHIEVE AN AVERAGE RATE
OF 180mm/h INFILTRATION (WITHIN APPROPRIATE TOLERANCES) WITH AT LEAST 4 SAMPLE LOCATIONS
AROUND THE BASIN. ANOTHER IN-SITU INFILTRATION TEST WILL BE REQUIRED FOR OFF-MAINTENANCE.
BIO RETENTION PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION AND PROPERTIES GUIDE:
BIO_RETENTION INSTALLATION NOTES:
THE PLACEMENT OF DRAINAGE, TRANSITION AND FILTER MEDIA
LAYERS MUST BE UNDERTAKEN CAREFULLY TO ENSURE CORRECT
DEPTH, SLOPE AND COMPACTION:
DEPTH: FILTER MEDIA SHOULD BE INSTALLED AND COMPACTED IN
TWO LIFTS FOR DEPTHS OVER 500mm.
SLOPE: THE TOP SURFACE OF THE DRAINAGE LAYER, TRANSITION
LAYER AND FILTER MEDIA LAYER SHOULD BE FLAT. A
SPREADER BAR SHOULD LEVEL THE SURFACE OF EACH LAYER.
COMPACTION: THE FILTER MEDIA MUST BE LIGHTLY COMPACTED
DURING INSTALLATION TO PREVENT THE MIGRATION OF FINE
PARTICLES. THIS CAN BE ACHIEVED WITH A SINGLE PASS OF A
LIGHT ROLLER SUCH AS A DRUM LAWN ROLLER. A VIBRATING
PLATE CAN ALSO BE USED TO COMPACT SMALL BIO RETENTION
SYSTEMS OR ‘POZITRACK’ BOBCATS CAN BE USED FOR LARGE
SYSTEMS. ENSURE ONLY ONE COMPACTING PASS IS MADE OVER
THE MEDIA FOR LIGHT COMPACTION.
ROCK ARMOURING NOTES:
14. ROCKS TO BE DURABLE BLUE STONE OR OTHERWISE
APPROVED BY SUPERINTENDENT.
2. EACH ROCK SHALL BE:
- ANGULAR IN SHAPE (PROMOTES INTERLOCKING)
- FREE FROM OVERBURDEN, SPOIL, SHALE AND
ORGANIC MATERIAL.
3. NEITHER BREADTH NOR THICKNESS OF A SINGLE ROCK SHALL
BE LESS THAN ONE HALF ITS LENGTH {ie THE ROCK SHALL
BE CHUNKY RATHER THAN FLAT).
4. ROCKS TO BE PLACED AND INTERLOCKED INTO POSITION AND
150 SUBSOIL DRAIN CLEANOUT
- PVC PIPE (NON SLOTTED) AND
CONNECTOR CLEANOUTS AT HEAD
GRAVEL DRAINAGE LAYER -
DEPTH 200mm. (NO FINES)
SOURCE: (BIOFILTRATION MEDIA GUIDELINES (VERSION 3.01), PREPARED BY THE FACILITY FOR ADVANCING
WATER BIOFILTRATION (FAWB), JUNE 2009.) & (BIO-RETENTION TECHNICAL DESIGN GUIDELINES (VERSION 1)
PREPARED BY ‘WATER BY DESIGN’ (OCTOBER 2012)
MATERIAL COMPOSITION RANGE GUIDE:
CLAY AND SILT <3% (<0.05mm)
VERY FINE SAND 5-30% (0.05-0.1Smm)
FINE SAND 10-30% (0.15-0.25mm)
MEDIUM TO COARSE SAND 40-60% (0.25-1.0mm)
COARSE SAND 71-10% (1.0-2.0mm)
FINE GRAVEL <3.0% (2.0-3.4mm)
WHILE TOTAL CLAY AND SILT CONTENT OF 3% IS RECOMMENDED, A CLAY AND SILT CONTENT UP TO 6%
IS ACCEPTABLE PROVIDED:
THE SATURATED HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY IS BETWEEN 100mm/hr & 300mm/hr AND
THE REMAINING MATERIAL MEETS THE COMPOSITION RANGE SPECIFIED ABOVE.
SOIL_SPECIFICATIONS:
FOREBAY SLAB - 125mm THICK
ENDWALL
CONCRETE, SL62 REINFORCING, 50 TOP COVER ee
SLEEVES AT 0.5m CENTRES
m —— 100 AG PIPE
REFER DETAIL A 100% ROCK SCOUR PROTECTION OVER
1 | ti) __ GEOFABRIC TO PERIMETER OF
dh L SRR FOREBAY WEIR AT 1.0m CENTERS.
z ZG Z
YSIS SSSPS SY <| g
USINSITU SOIL TO REMAIN UNDER SAAS \ g|
COARSE, SEDIMENT, FOREBAY, RRR, L= NO FINE CONCRETE
TOTAL NITROGEN CONTENT - <1000mg/kg
ORTHOPHOSPHATE CONTENT - <80mg/kg SOILS WITH TOTAL PHOSPHORUS CONCENTRATIONS >100mg/kg
SHOULD BE TESTED FOR POTENTIAL LEACHING. WHERE PLANTS WITH MODERATE PHOSPHORUS
SENSITIVITY ARE TO BE USED, TOTAL PHOSPHORUS CONCENTRATIONS SHOULD BE <20mg/kg)
ORGANIC MATTER CONTENT - AT LEAST 3% (w/w). AN ORGANIC CONTENT LOWER THAN 3% IS
LIKELY TO HAVE TOO LOW A WATER HOLDING CAPACITY TO SUPPORT HEALTHY PLANT GROWTH. IN
ORDER TO COMPLY WITH BOTH THIS AND THE TOTAL NITROGEN AND ORTHOPHOSPHATE CONTENT
REQUIREMENTS, A LOW NUTRIENT ORGANIC MATTER WILL BE REQUIRED.
pH - AS SPECIFIED FOR ‘NATURAL SOILS AND SOIL BLENDS’ 5.5-7.5 (pH 1:5 IN WATER)
ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY - AS SPECIFIED FOR ‘NATURAL SOILS AND SOIL BLENDS’ <1.2 dS/m.
NOTE: LAY GEOFABRIC OVER INSITU SOIL.
(EXTEND MINIMUM 300mm UNDER FOREBAY)
PIN GEOFABRIC TO INSITU SOIL AND FORM
CONCRETE ONTO GEOFABRIC.
BUILT UP TO FINAL LEVELS SHOWN, ENSURING COVERAGE OF
GEOFABRIC.
GAPS BETWEEN THE ROCKS ARE TO BE FILLED BY DROPPING
SMALL ROCKS INTO GAPS AND LOCKING INTO POSITION WITH
A CROWBAR.
Cl. CAP. EXTEND CAP TO
APPROX. 50-100mm ABOVE
BIORETENTION SURFACE. SCREW
CAP FIXED USING 3 ~\
OF SUBSOIL DRAIN AND AS
SHOWN ON PLAN
5-7mm AGGREGATE
UPVC JOINT FOR
RISER CONNECTION
TO SLOTTED PIPE
EPOXY SADDLE JOINT
TO TRUNK MAIN
200m W x 150m D CONCRETE
SURROUND TO CLEANOUT RISER
YW
COLLECTOR PIPE MAX 2.5m SPACINGS
BIO RETENTION BASIN SUBSOIL DRAIN
CLEANOUT AND FILTER MEDIA SPECIFICATIONS
PROVIDE 300mm THICK CONCRETE
INFILL ENDWALL AROUND PPE)
SCALE: 1:20(A1)
0.15m_ MIN ALL AROUND
FILTER MEDIA LOAM -
400mm DEPTH CONSISTENT WITH
CURRENT FAWB SPECIFICATIONS.
FILTER MEDIAN PARTICLE DIA
0.45m MIN. HYDRAULIC
maf CONDUCTIVITY 200mm/hr
|
COARSE SAND TRANSITION
LAYER - 100mm DEPTH
(imm PARTICLE DIA.)
PROVIDE BIDUM A12 OR
i Cievennenieeiel EQUIVALENT TO EXTENTS
SMOOTH WALLED SLOTTED PVC
PIPE- MIN 0.5% GRADE AND
NOTE:
I
| yt
OT
APPROPRIATENESS OF GEOTEXTILE LINER AS
AN ALTERNATIVE TO HDPE LINER TO BE
ASSESSED BY GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER AT
CONSTRUCTION STAGE FOLLOWING TESTING OF
6. ALL ROCKWORK TO BE PLACED OVER BIDIM A24 OR
EQUIVALENT.
7. FOR ROCK SIZED SPECIFIED AS Dso ON THE DRAWINGS, THIS
CORRESPONDS TO THE MEDIAN DIAMETER OF WHICH HALF OF
THE ROCK SIZES SHALL BE GREATER AND HALF OF THEM
SHALL BE SMALLER. THE ROCK SHALL BE WELL GRADED
AND HAVE A MAXIMUM SIZE NO GREATER THAN 30% AND A
MINIMUM SIZE NO LESS THAN 30% SMALLER THAN Dso. FOR
EXAMPLE IF Dso = 400mm IS SPECIFIED, THE EQUIVALENT
ROCK DIAMETER RANGES FROM 280 to 520mm.
TURF REINFORCED WITH ENKAMAT OR
APPROVED EQUIVALENT INSTALLATION NOTES:
1. PREPARE AND COMPACT BASE SURFACE. EXCAVATE ANCHOR
TRENCHES AT TOE AND SHOULDER OF BANK, TO BE
BACKFILLED AFTER LAYING TURF.
2. LAY ENKAMAT OR APPROVED EQUIVALENT AND PIN TO
MANUFACTURERS SPECIFICATIONS.
3. LAY TOPSOIL AND PLACE TURF.
SAFETY FENCE TO
LANDSCAPE ;
ARCHITECTS DETAIL————~—
PERMEABLE
GEOTEXTILE
MEMBRANE
GRANULAR FILL:
1.0m WIDE, 0.45m DEEP, 0.20m INSITU_ SOILS.
THICK CONCRETE (SL81 MESH
CENTRAL) SUPPORT UNDER PIPE
TYPICAL OUTLET THROUGH ROCKWALL DETAIL
SCALE 1:50 (A)
REFER DRG. 16-001014-105
FOR FURTHER ROCK
BOULDER WALL DETAILS
300mm
TEMP. PONDING LEVEL
BASE OF
BIO RETENTION
FILTER MATERIAL
SAFETY FENCE TO
LANDSCAPE y
ARCHITECTS DETAIL.
REFER
PERMEABLE
GEOTEXTILE
MEMBRANE
300mm
GRANULAR FILL:
100D AG PIPE
NO FINE CONCRETE:
DRG. 16-001014-105
FOR FURTHER ROCK
BOULDER WALL DETAILS
TEMP. PONDING LEVEL
BASIN SL: 100.05m AHD
BASE OF
BIO RETENTION
FILTER MATERIAL
WOOE
Ee
SOUTHERN BIO-RETENTION BASIN TYPICAL
w
Ss
Ss
3
3
CENTRAL BIO-RETENTION BASIN TYPICAL
TYPICAL SECTION THROUGH FOREBAY DETAIL A RETAINING WALL SECTION
SCALE 150 (41) SCALE 120 (A1) RETAINING WALL SECTION SCALE: N.T.S.
SCALE: N.T.S.
N.S.C. REF NO. MCU15/0111 & REC15/0031
fst [ccs oem] _oaTE [AMENDMENT DETAILS DesIGN CHECK sous (ems) menor SURVEYOR: ML SURVEYS oer a —
afk $ 7 oo ISSUED FOR CONSTRUCTION — PENOING COUNCIL APPROVAL cM to 1 0s 1 aM 78, Leybourne TBE [email protected] _PAM LAKE WORKS PTY LTD " CONSULT AUSTRALIA eae ortAIe
fe eam cnr] 1° 2) meget, [ame 1 PALM LAKE RESORT ih core cnaig (0 Py ny
é D 16-001014 y ANDREW MCPHAIL RPEQ 6921 COOROY Ca I re Grae Fr, 55 Quen Sr, Bore, GL Ain 400 ESOS FSS area pease roy
8 F cM 6-0010 ron » ov bout caste YnsieTHG (ato) PTY LT STAGE 2 CONSULTING Ce sts nos tn Se snc ‘oi 16-001014-400 A
Page 68
—=
NOTE, 4 aa eee / LEGEND
REFER TO LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT 7 —_aN a Ne sbo—____ EXISTING SURFACE CONTOUR
DRAWINGS FOR BIO-RETENTION BASIN / _ ~ a <=} \. \. EXISTING SURFACE CONTOUR
~
BATTER TREATMENTS AND BASIN PLANTING / ea wee RN \ . BATTERS (GRADE AS SPECIFIED)
// pRoPOsED 1200 x 1200 FIELD INLET EXISITNG 900 STORMWATER PIPE TO CONVEY . \ PROPOSED ROCK RETAINING WALL
“PRIMARY OUTLET PIT TO DIVERT PEAK FLOWS OF THE 63% ARP STORM EVENT, ,
NOTE: 63% ARP PEAK FLOWS TOWARDS TO BE EXTENDED APPROX. 3.8m EXACT \ CONCRETE SLEEPER RETAINING WALL
REFER TO DRG. 16-001014-110 FOR CARPARKY »” CENTRAL BASIN (RL 102.0mAHD) LOCATION TO BE DETERMINED ON SITE 7 PROPOSED STORMWATER PIPE
SETOUT AND DETAILS.
NOTE:
REFER TO DRG. 16-001014-400 FOR TYPICAL
WATER QUALITY NOTES AND DETAILS
RL 103.00
RL 102.00
1 h
PROPOSED 1200 x 1200 FIELD INLET
\
‘
EXISITNG @900 STORMWATER PIPE
\ TO CONVEY PEAK FLOWS ABOVE
\ THE 63% ARP STORM EVENT
225® SUBSOIL COLLECTOR
100@ SUBSOIL AND CLEANOUT POINTS
SAFETY FENCE - REFER LANDSCAPE
ARCHITECT PLANS FOR DETAILS.
ROCK ARMOURING SCOUR PROTECTION
TURF REINFORCED WITH ENKAMAT
OR APPROVED EQUIVALENT
Q100 OVERLAND FLOW
BIORETENTION BASIN FILTER MEDIA
REFER DRG. 16-001014-400 FOR DETAIL
/- BOW SECONDARY OUTLET PIT TO CONVEY \
PEAK FLOWS ABOVE 63% AEP
, STORM EVENT (RL 102.3mAHD) » BASIN SETOUT TABLE
/ \ \\ : \\> an POINT No, | EASTING | NORTHING | RL
, 4 805.831 872.253 703.000
/'m WALL HEIGHT) SAFETY FENCING TO eek 802533876855 104.710
im —
BE PROVIDED ALONG RETAINING WALL F orene sone teoo
= 794.697 887.000 102.000
793.148 885.735 101.700
781.694 887.842 102.000
TOW = RL 103.30 783.067 886.388 101.700
ow = fu ass OUTHERN BASIN (BIORETENTION SYSTEM ROCK PROTECTION nae ees ee
y FLIER AREA = 310m® Vx, so = 100mm T4246 878.146 102.550
~ SURFACE LEVEL = 101.7m AWD 778.613 (875.306 101.700
~ FILTER DEPTH = 0.4m Wy 782.073 871.642 101.700
Wo TEMPORARY PONDING DEPTH . 789.155 868.824 101.700
VSN PROVIDE 0.5m WIDE MIN. ROCK SCOUR th 789.149 868.344 101.750
\ Te Pe STON OF MALE TERGENCY 5 792.109 867.858 107.750
\ OF NL = : Dep = 200mm 16 788.792 866.168 101.900
>a row LOW SALE 256 PIPE TO OUTLET THROUG THICKNESS = 300mm ” 191.752 865.683 ‘101.870
/ REFER TO DRG. NO. ASE OF WALL I.L.101.710, 8 785.565 859.057 103.117
7 ¢ ~001014- ERER DRG. 1e—001014-600 FOR 9 788.469 857.904 103.102
JON 16-001014-402 FOR
\ / “ SS TYPICAL SECTION 20 784.287 857.690 103.254
2.5m WIDE KERB” 2 786.346 855.509 103.299
BREAKOUT FOR = /y 22 783.900 857.325 103.262
OVERLAND FLOW ~ Rt_101.70 B 785.959 _ 855.143 103.307
EXISTING 900% PIPE TO
CONVEY MINOR DESIGN
STORM (Q10) FROM FUTURE
1
1
1
\
7
“
uv
HUMEGARD GPT
_-REFER TO DRG |
<< NO, 16-001014-115 |
FOR DETAILS \
A
XN 1
\ !
se!
SPLITTER MANHOLE TO
DIRECT 3 MONTH ARI PEAK
, FLOWS INTO GPT AND
7 LARGER EVENTS DIRECTLY
INTO SOUTHERN BASIN
.
ia 4 e
‘e@
<
TO BE CONFIRMED ON SITE —’
i
I
CUSTOM CONCRETE
HEADWALL EXACT LOCATION ®
RL 103.65 '
RL 102.875 Hy
PAD RL 103.65m AHD
!
3.0m WIDE BASIN \ fo
| ACCESS TRACK.
'
\
(
'
\
l
l
1
MAINTENANCE ACCESS GATE
TO BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH 7
POOL SAFETY GUIDELINES I
TOW
BOW
RL 103.65
RL 102.20
1
\
1
{ | /
1
1
I
: /
STORMWATER DRAINAGE SIZED
FOR 63% AEP STORM EVENT ~~
/
HUMEGARD GPT
REFER TO DRG
NO. 16-001014-116
FOR DETAILS
SPLITTER MANHOLE TO DIRECT 1
YEAR ARI PEAK FLOWS INTO
SOUTHERN BASIN AND LARGER
EVENTS NORTH
\
N.S.C.
7
~
. REF NO. MCU15/0111 & REC15/0031
a one a TATTERED WERANI—ve cr San TIE
A Fe mest CRETE ins 38 Leybourne Street, Chelmer OLD 4068 PALM LAKE WORKS PTY LTD contenu SOUTHERN BIORETENTION
ae a: : CM [wt 0 1 2 3 as Hob: 0412 744 223 E: [email protected] | BASIN LAYOUT PLAN
ie poe oe a vee ne PALM LAKE RESORT Calibre «—«-_- RS 22 ems
Ne cM 16-001014 ( COOROY TWephine 07 3895 3444 Focsinfe 07 3895 200 Samany | PRAWO a
SIF FOR & OW BEHALF OF CALIBRECONSULTING (QLD) PTY LTD STAGE 2 CONSULTING ane Cat tates Syn Sgn Stina 48 16-001014-401 A
Page 69
LEGEND
63% AEP BASIN WATER
SURFACE LEVEL R.L. 102.30m AHD
TEMPORARY PONDING
DEPTH R.L. 102.00m AHD
DESIGN SURFACE
STRUCTURE 5/R CUSTOM GRATE
FOR 1200mm x 1200mm INLET.
REFER |.P.W.E.A.Q. STD. DRG.
D-0050 FOR ADDITIONAL DETAILS.
PRIMARY OUTLET PIT SIZED
FOR 63% AEP STORM
TEMPORARY PONDING DEPTH
BIO-RETENTION FILTER MEDIA AND
DRAINAGE LAYERS. REFER DETAIL
ON DRG. 16-001014-400
STRUCTURE 1/Q CUSTOM GRATE
FOR 1200mm x 1200mm INLET.
REFER |.P.W.E.A.Q. STD. DRG.
D-0050 FOR ADDITIONAL DETAILS.
RL_102.30m_ AHD
4
— SECONDARY OUTLET PIT
SIZED TO CONVEY STORM
EVENTS ABOVE 63% AEP.
1200mm x 1200m FIELD INLET.
SECONDARY 900 OUTLET PIPE TO
CONVEY PEAK FLOWS ABOVE 63% AEP
STORM EVENT TO GULLY PIT IN
TRADING POST ROAD CUL-DE-SAC
PRIMARY 900 OUTLET PIPE TO———_|
CONVEY 63% AEP DESIGN
FLOWS TO CENTRAL BASIN
INFILTRATED FLOWS
BIO-RETENTION BASIN SPECIFICATIONS DIRECTED INTO
4. FILTER SURFACE LEVEL - RL 101.70m PRIMARY PIT S/R
2. FILTER MEDIA AREA - 310m?
3. EXTENDED DETENTION DEPTH - 300mm
4. TOP OF WALL LEVEL - RL 103.00m (MIN.) TYPICAL BASIN DETAILS ©
5. SPILLWAY - RL 102.70m SCALE: N.T.S.
SAFETY FENCE 0.30m MIN.
TO LANDSCAPE - SITE 1 -
S
ARCHITECTS DETAILS. jae aha 1 REFER DRG. 16-001014~105 Bi 103.65m_ AHD
FOR FURTHER CONCRETE
~ CARPARK - Al SLEEPER WALL DETAILS
oS x
=
NOTES: BASIN RETAINING WALL ot x =, x5 a5
REFER TO DRG. 16-001014-105 AND 16-001014-400 REFER TYPICAL DETAIL i
FOR TYPICAL BOULDER WALL CONSTRUCTION DETAILS ON DRG. 16-001014-400
LOW FLOW CHANNEL (ROCK)
Dsp = 100mm, 100mm THICK,
200mm DEEP KEYS,
LONGITUDINAL GRADE AT 0.5%
PB
°
a
3
50mm
Dsp_NOTE:
Ds) ON THE ENGINEERING PLANS SHOW ROCK WORKS DENOTED AS HAVING
SIZES OF Dsp. Ds9 CORRESPONDS TO THE MEDIAN DIAMETER OF WHICH
HALF OF THE ROCK SIZES SHALL BE GREATER AND HALF OF THEM SHALL
BE SMALLER. THE ROCK SHALL BE WELL GRADED AND HAVE A MAXIMUM
SIZE NO GREATER THAN 30% SMALLER THAN Dso AND A MINIMUM SIZE
NO SMALLER THAN Dsp. FOR EXAMPLE IF Dsp = 200mm IS SPECIFIED, THE
EQUIVALENT ROCK DIAMETER RANGES FROM 140mm TO 240mm.
ROCK ARMOURING BEHIND WALL
ROCK SIZE: Dsp = 200mm, 300mm THICK.
SEE Dsp NOTE ASIDE.
Om MIN.
- SITE 1-
TOP OF
RL_103.65m_AHD
pe te.bom AND
WALL
9.00m MIN. LOWERED SECTION OF WALL
RL_103.00m_AHD
BIO-RETENTION —“
LAYERS
RL_102.70m_ AHD
>
L GEOTEXTILE FABRIC
TYPICAL LOW FLOW
(8 " SECTION DETAIL
SCALE: N.T.S.
TOP OF WALL
2.5m WIDE BREAK IN RL 103.00
SAFETY FENCE
TO LANDSCAPE
ARCHITECTS DETAILS.
KERB FOR OVERFLOW REFER LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS DRAWINGS FOR DETAIL IN THIS AREA
EXISTING CONCRETE
DRIVEWAY CONSTRUCTED
AS PART OF STAGE 1A
WORKS
—
2.00m_ TYP
~ CARPARK - 2.0% MIN.
1.0m MAX
+ BASIN RETAINING WALL
REFER TYPICAL DETAIL
ON DRG. 16-001014-400
REINFORCED TURF WITH ENKAMAT
OR APPROVED EQUIVALENT
Sar ese
SCALE (A3):1:100
N.S.C. REF NO. MCU15/0111 & REC15/0031
we escieiiand “ 38 Leybouene Street. Chelmer QLD 4068 PALM LAKE WORKS PTY LTD a SOUTHERN BIORETENTION
4 A ISSUED FOR CONSTRUCTION ~ PENDING COUNCIL APPROVAL cM to 10s 0 1 a Mob: 0412 744 223 E: [email protected] —_ ) iy u BASIN SECTIONS
Nic prawn cueck | 1° 43 PROMECT Wo, ‘APPROVED PALM LAKE RESORT | Calibre Consuting (QLD) Pty Ltd a
é D 7 La ANDREW MCPHAIL RPEQ 6921 COOROY calibre he es ee Company | DRAWING NUMBER Te8ue
8 f cM 16-001014 FOR & ON LJ OF CALIBRE CONSULTING (QLD) PTY LTD STAGE 2 CONSULTING oe tales Eason oe vot 16-001014-402 A
Page 70
WQCP_(POND) SPECIFICATIONS
NORMAL OPERATING LEVEL: RL 99.20
NORMAL OPERATING AREA: 1940m?
PERMANENT PONDED VOLUME: 1,845m?
TEMPORARY PONDING SURFACE LEVEL: RL 99.60
EXTENDED DETENTION DEPTH: 400mm
DEEP WATER ZONE SURFACE AREA: 1,400m?
MACROPHYTE PLANTING AREA: 540m?
NOTIONAL DETENTION TIME: 48.4 hrs
EQUIVALENT PIPE DIAMETER: 55mm
all | LU
TENNIS COURTS
RETAINING WALL
(SLEEPERS)
ROCK RETAINING WALL
10m OVERFLOW WEIR
RL 100.90
Ne
warnaunfune
ACCESS GATE FOR —%4
MAINTENANCE
'
ee
!
ROCK RETAINING WALL
CARETAKERS
SHED
WATER QUALITY CONTROL POND
(INCLUDING DETENTION STORAGE)
‘a:
Swo:
CARPARK DESIGN TO BE
CONFIRMED DURING
DETAILED DESIGN PHASE
——| REFER TO STAGE 1A
7——| OPERATIONAL WORKS
DRAWINGS FOR ROAD AND
DRAINAGE LAYOUT
0s.
x RETAINING WALL ‘
PROPOSED SAFETY 5 (SLEEPERS)
LEGEND:
FENCE
DESIGN SURFACE CONTOUR
{0.2m INTERVALS)
BATTERS (GRADE AS SPECIFIED)
Ley
fe ast PROPOSED BOULDER RETAINING WALL
; \
I
x i= y Vw f PROPOSED SLEEPER RETAINING WALL
GROSS POLLUTANT SWIMMING POOL PROPOSED FENCE
TRAP (GPT) " EXISTING STORMWATER PIPE
AND SPA
=
PROPOSED STORMWATER PIPE
FUTURE STORMWATER PIPE
100@ SUBSOIL AND CLEANOUT PITS
SUBSOIL COLLECTOR
CENTRAL
erties ROCK SCOUR PROTECTION
\ ING CUT
4 FILL
CENTRAL BASIN NST : ahd MACROPHYTE ZONE
1. FOR THE ENTIRE NEW EMBANKMENT AREA STRIPPING OF VEGETATION AND ANY HIGHLY ORGANIC TOP SOILS AND
ANY SOFT CLAYS TO DEPTHS OF APPROXIMATELY 0.3m IS REQUIRED. Faas, REINFORCED TURF
2. THE STRIPPED SURFACE AND EMBANKMENT FOUNDATION IS TO BE INSPECTED AND TESTED BY A GEOTECHNICAL
ENGINEER. TSE MAINTENANCE ACCESS TRACK
3. SUBJECT TO THE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER INSPECTION EXCAVATION OF A CUTOFF KEY ALONG THE NEW (REINFORCED TURF)
EMBANKMENT CENTRELINE AT LEAST 0.5m - 1.0m INTO THE FOUNDATION MATERIALS SHALL BE REQUIRED.
CLUB HOUSE 4. POND TO BE LINED WITH IMPERVIOUS SURFACE, ie: CLAY OR OTHER APPROVED MATERIAL, i.e. BELOW NOL RL NOTES:
21.200. ee
1. REFER TO LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS DRAWINGS FOR PLANTING
5. THE CLAY FILLING FOR THE WETLAND SHOULD BE PLACED IN TWO HORIZONTAL LAYERS OF 150mm THICKNESS.
CLAY LINER SHOULD HAVE A MINIMUM THICKNESS OF 300mm AND COMPACTED TO A DENSITY RATIO WITHIN THE:
RANGE 98% - 102% STANDARD COMPACTION (AS 1289.5.1.1). PLACEMENT MOISTURE CONTENTS SHOULD BE
WITHIN THE RANGE OMC - 1% TO OMC + 2% (WHERE OMC = OPTIMUM MOISTURE CONTENT FOR STANDARD
COMPACTION).
6. CLAY LINER SHOULD HAVE A MAXIMUM HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY OF 1x10"? m/s.
7. NON-DISPERSIVE CLAYS ARE DESIRABLE.
8. TOPSOIL MUST BE TESTED BY N.A.T.A. ACCREDITED LABORATORY IN ACCORDANCE WITH A.S. 4419 (SOILS FOR
\ LANDSCAPING AND GARDEN USE) AND SHOULD BE PLACED TO A MINIMUM DEPTH OF 300mm.
DETAILS.
‘ /
BIORETENTION BASIN SPECIFICATIONS
1. FILTER MEDIA AREA: 200m?
2. FILTER DEPTH: 0.4m
3.
4,
2. THIS DRAWING IS TO BE READ IN CONJUNCTION WITH LATEST
ISSUE OF CALIBRE CONSULTING REPORT No. 16-001014-01,
3. REFER TO DRG No. 16-001014-403 TO 16-001014-406 FOR
EXTENDED DETENTION DEPTH: 0.3m BASIN SETOUT DATA.
BASIN SURFACE LEVEL: 100.05m AHD
4, REFER TO DRG No. 16-001014-400 FOR GENERAL NOTES AND
9. TOPSOIL MAY BE TREATED WITH GYPSUM OR LIME.
10. TOPSOIL LAYER (OVER CLAY LAYER) REQUIRED FOR MACROPHYTE PLANTING AREAS. DETAILS.
N.S.C. REF NO. MCU15/0111 & REC15/0031
ad pesian cree aussie? tweroreu"® | suRVEYOR: ML_SURVEYS os y | mane rms
a ote Lees —==="" 38 Leybourne Street, Chelmer QLD 4068 PALM LAKE WORKS PTY LTD _ oan , CENTRAL BASIN
it 00 2 0 2 6 6 8 oo At Mob: 0612 744 223 E: [email protected] | = >) wih q] LAYOUT PLAN
PROJEC' a ab
ble peawn cneck| 0° “% T Wo. ‘APPROVED PALM LAKE RESORT H Calibre Consuing (QLD) Pty Lid |
¥p 16-001014 1Q, ANDREW MCPHAL RPE 6921 COOROY C re cee aan See bas ae =e
N = in 3400
3 E ex FOR_& ON BEHALF OF CALIBRE CONSULTING (LD) PTY LTD STAGE 2 CONSULTING ‘Mahe Cer Mbourss Spdeey Shywpre Qemnhine Coat ‘tie 16-001014-403
Page 71
fog Sf fs Jf Us ; / 2 P io : ~ = TYPICAL RETAINING WALL DETAIL ~ PROVIDED ON DRG NO. 16-001014-400 — cf awe Lor fo “ / RL_97.20m AHD REFER TO OPERATIONA\ WORKS DRAWINGS FOR ROAD ~.~ AND DRAINAGE DETAILS t GENERAL _NOTES: 1. REFER TO LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS DRAWINGS FOR PLANTING DETAILS. THIS DRAWING IS TO BE READ IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE LATEST ISSUE OF CALIBRE CONSULTING REPORT No. 16-001014-01. REFER TO DRG No. 16-001014-403 AND 16-001014-407 FOR LEGEND AND BASIN SETOUT DATA. REFER TO ORG No. 16-001014-400 FOR GENERAL NOTES AND DETAILS. N.S.C. REF NO. MCU15/0111 & REC15/0031 —_ -406 ae verans ewan cose — norms" SURVEYOR: ML_SURVEYS “ Pr owe" CENTRAL BASIN an C2) ow nen Fe PLE AE asreyeuicaveystoncy |__PALM LAKE WORKS PTY LTD Cc» ~~ FE SETOUT PLAN HG Dnawn cneox| ‘20° ” PROJECT Wo APPROVED PALM LAKE RESORT alibi CalbreConsuing (LD) Pty Li 2 SHEET 1 OF 4 D RE _ E 16-001 1a ANDREW MCPHAIL RPEQ 6921 COOROY C | re Gains rt n,Q fot sara aia -_ if cM B-001014 a har fal Pere STAGE 2 CONSULTING Ihe 7 SU Fine 7500 16-001014-404
Page 72
ROCK SCOUR PROTECTION
WIDTH = 1.5m MIN. FROM BASE OF WALL
Dsp = 300mm
THICKNESS = 600mm ROCK SCOUR PROTECTION N
Dso = 300mm \
THICKNESS = 600mm
—_ FLOWS TO EXISTING SWALE
~ BASE WIDTH = 3m
REINFORCED TURF
+ ¥> + + %
=MAJOR OVERFLOW WEIR FOR DETAILS
“REFER TO ORG No. 16-001014-410
CARETAKERS BUILDING
FINAL LEVELS OF CARETAKERS BUILDING
AND CAR PARK TO BE CONFIRMED
DURING DETAILED DESIGN PHASE
oS
WS
7 N
. SOs S
oN a
\
SSS TURNING AREA FOR) \
\ MAINTENANCE
\ VEHICLE
\ \
\ \
MAINTENANCE
ACCESS TRACK
(REINFORCED TURF) \
BOWLING GREENS
RL 102.30m AHD
GENERAL NOTES: _
1. REFER TO LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS DRAWINGS FOR PLANTING =
DETAILS.
2. THIS DRAWING IS TO BE READ IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE
LATEST ISSUE OF CALIBRE CONSULTING REPORT No. 16-001014-01....
3. REFER TO DRG No. 16-001014-403 AND 16-001014-407 FOR
LEGEND AND BASIN SETOUT DATA.
4. pee go ORG No. 16-001014-400 FOR GENERAL NOTES AND N.S.C. REF NO. MCU15/0111 & REC15/0031
cer DRAWING TITLE
‘cauce [omawe] _ DATE pasion creck “SCALE METRES) THCROFEM No.
AMENOMENT DETAILS SURVEYOR: ML_SURVEYS i CENTRAL BASIN
M foe 38 Leybourne Street, Chelmer QLD 4068 PALM LAKE WORKS PTY LTD coun
Ce Mob: 0412 744 223 E: [email protected] t > wD | SETOUT PLAN
snow ue FRONT ml HEET 2 OF 4
mn * ha | ANOREW HCPHAIL RPEA. 6921 PALM GORE AESORT Soe Sant ei ey s
108001
Pet ge Ee pd
Ground Flor, 545 Queen Steet, Bsbon, QLD Asoka 4000 THAWING WOMGER ry
“
FOR & ON BEHALF OF CALIBRE CONSULYING (QLD) PTY LTO STAGE 2 CONSULTING ikem Car Mw ay Seppe teat Li 4084 16-001014-405
eM 16-001014
(a4zmEOZmE>
p>] olo[=] >|
Page 73
/ /
—ROCK SCOUR PROTECTION
Dsp = 200mm
ROCK SCOUR PROTECTION
Dsp = 200mm
THICKNESS = 400mm
\t /
i \
AL SWIMMING POOL \
7
SON
UPSTREAM GPT
REFER TO STAGE 1A
OPERATIONAL
WORKS DRAWINGS
REFER TO STAGE 1A
OPERATIONAL WORKS DRAWINGS
FOR DRAINAGE INFORMATION
SURFACE LEVEL: 100.05m AHD
FILTER AREA: 200m?
\ CENTRAL BIORETENTION BASIN
FILTER DEPTH: 0.4m '
©)| TEMPORARY PONDING DEPTH: 0.3m
MAITENANCE ACCESS <
TRACK (REINFORCED TURF)
/ 4 y
SS FOR ROAD AND
a DRAINAGE DETAILS
‘ REFER TO STAGE 1A
\ OPERATIONAL WORKS
DRAWINGS
CLUBHOUSE
PAD RL 102.60m AHD DETAILS.
GENERAL _NOTES:
1. REFER TO LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS DRAWINGS FOR PLANTING
2. THIS DRAWING IS TO BE READ IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE
LATEST ISSUE OF CALIBRE CONSULTING REPORT No. 16-001014-01.
3. REFER TO DRG No. 16-001014-403 AND 16-001014-407 FOR
LEGEND AND BASIN SETOUT DATA.
N.S.C. REF NO. MCU15/0111 & REC15/0031
er eee eel AMENOMENT DETALS besian creck vous sees tenormw™s” | SURVEYOR: ML_SURVEYS o“ ijn ™= CENTRAL BASIN
zi VEE |v op a Latest Se celew e | PALM LAKE WORKS PTY LTD C= oS SeTOUT PLAN
ge pez cnc] 7° OC) mosrie Pere | PALM LAKE RESORT alibr Cele ning (OLD) Py ay SHEET 3 OF 4
é D 7 1 A./\ La, ( ANDREW MCPHAIL RPEQ 6921 COOROY C | re Cn 5 Gm Set QD A 0 SAS WR i
iF Ch 16-0010 14 | crs ofine wShrt arm STAGE 2 CONSULTING Tobe OM Fe 7D 16-001014-406
Page 74
CENTRAL BASIN SETOUT
CENTRAL BASIN SETOUT
CENTRAL RETENTION BASIN SETOUT
MACROPHYTE ZONE SETOUT
SOPs [EASTING [NORTHING [LEVEL (m AHD) SOPs [EASTING [NORTHING [LEVEL (m AHD) SOPs [EASTING [NORTHING [LEVEL (m AHD) SOPs [EASTING [NORTHING [LEVEL (m AHD)
01 676.026 | 1026.912 107.850 a7 681.064 | 1015.283 99.250 100 (679.419 [990.678 100.800 128__[697.520 [963.288 99.250
02 683.624 | 1038.789 102.00 48 681.340 |1015.231 98.950 101 (688.234 | 984,488 100.800 730 ~(681.130 [102.471 98.950
3 702.246 | 1040.004 101.675 9 705.910 __|1029.457 99.250 102 [690.662 [981.215 100.800 131 [683.629 __| 015.862 98.700
0% 734.818 __|1036.687 101.300 50 705.809 | 1029.175 98.950 103 [691.552 ___ | 979.385 100.500 132__[705.137___|1027.290 98.700
05 746.794 [109.794 101.300 51 715.583 | 1025.627 99.250 104 [695.585 | 976.429 100.500 133___-([714.815 __[1023.458 98.700
06 767.537 ___|1034.193 107.300 52 715.483 [102.346 98.950 105 [697.598 | 976.131 100.800 134 [739.765 | 1026.502 98.700
07 767.412 __|1031.267 100.900 53 738.574 __|1028.470 99.250 106 [701.830 | 973.470 100.800 135 [748.793 [1029.48 98.700
08 770.631 |1022.548 100.900 5h 738.729 __|1028.213 98.950 107___ [703.379 _ [970.909 100.800 136 [754.396 _|1027.787 98.700
09 712.777 |1019.142 101.300 55 748.570 |1031.737 99.250 108 [705.089 | 954.086 102.200 137___ [758.705 _[1024.979 98.950
10 772.454 __|1017.227 101.500 56 748.599 [1031438 98.950 109 __1703.895 | 951.242 102.200 138 [758.753 ___|1078.864 98.950
11 771.435 __|[1014.276 101.500 57 758.718 | 107.921 99.250 110 [700.019 [947.582 102.125 139 [754.934 _[1016.574 98.700
12 765.554 __|1007.671 101.580 58 758.447 |1018.050 98.950 m (698.510 [947.677 102.100 140 [751.987 | 104.450 98.700
B 738.880 | 100.026 101.850 59 756.054 | 1015.064 99.250 112 689.215 [978.843 100.050 11 [ 739.481 _[1073.555 98.700
1% 719.842 __ [988.062 102.000 60 752.872 __ | 1012.324 98.950 113___|693.328 | 975.848 100.050 142___|725.340 _[1014.601 98.700
5 715.032 __| 976.761 102.000 a 752.157 | 1012.601 99.250 Te 695.988 [972.959 100.050 143 [706.032 | 986.456 98.950
6 707.991 __ | 965.091 101.400 6 739.009 __|1011.304 98.950 15 697.335 {970.742 100.050 144 [695.607 [987.962 98.950
7 708.814 | 956.996 102.200 83 739.071 | 1011.598 99.250 16 (698.891 __~| 968.177 100.050 145 [681.351 __|1007.666 98.950
8 709.655 | 956.681 102.200 6h 711.963 __ | 996.379 98.950 117 {700.637 [965.312 100.050
9 712.281 [959.161 102.200 65 711.682 [996.484 99.250 118 (695.972 _ | 961.753 100.050
20 714.341 [956.980 102.300 66 707.303 | 987.431 98.950 119, 681.954 [976.601 100.050
21 702.079 [945.401 102.200 67 707.056 [987.601 99.250 120__| 683.917 __| 977.361 100.050
2 701.921 | 944.139 102.180 68 694.540 | 989.659 98.950 121 (682.871 [980.065 100.050
B 107.167 __ [973.199 100.800 69 694.827 | 989.745 99.250 122 {680.804 | 979.281 100.050
2 709.441 [974.599 100.800 70 690.899 | 994.332 98.950 123 680.739 __ [977.675 100.050
5 707.585 | 976.962 100.800 71 691.033 | 994.603 99.250 124 (678.856 | 985.361 100.050,
2% 698.189 | 976.938 100.800 R 682.262 | 1002.074 98.950 125 678.716 | 987.677 100.050
21 697.299 [978.768 100.500 B 682.541 |1002.188 97.200 126 685.338 | 983.690 100.050
28 693.266 | 981.724 100.500 Th 690.603 _|1012.455 97.200 127 692.225 | 976,095 100.350 (TOP)
29 691.253 [982.022 100.800 5 703.450 [1019.89 97.200
30 688.737 [984.616 100.800 76 707.098 |1016.763 97.200
1 679.423 [991.178 100.800 71 701.962 | 1010.759 97.200
32 765.353 | 1041.386 107.300 78 694.552 | 1008.826 97.200
3 770.060 |1035.816 101.300 79 Tou.580 | 1020.595 97.200
3h 772.641 __|1034.623 100.900 80 749.689 [021.935 97.200
35 776.833 |1023.160 100.900 81 760.960 __|1023.347 100.450
36 775.762 __|1019.437 101.300 82 782.352 |1031.576 98.300
37 783.226 _|1020.173 101.300 83 677.163 | 1008.564 99.600
38 783.864 | 1013.704 101.400 8h 677.112 |1011.623 99.600
39 781.884 __|1013.509 107.450 85 783.022 __ | 1033.789 98.220
40 719.904 | 1013.31% 101.500 86 784.102 | 1030.970 98.220
ia 780.172 __|1010.599 101.600 87 788.020 __ | 1035.907 98.200
2 785.430 __|1005.123 101.600 88 789.368 | 1032.575 98.200
3 796.896 | 1001.475 100.400 89 791.711 |1027.928 99.200
hb 197.737 |998.586 100.400 90 704.762 __| 985.217 99.250
45 783.261 | 1003.050 101.700 7 702.489 | 982.804 99.560
46 772.537 ___|1014.218 101.560
N.S.C. REF NO. MCU15/0111 & REC15/0031
Tan [eas fan] oe mn oo One SORE aT rs Tune ar ——T
mL ots [pee 38 Leybourne Street Thetmer aLD 4068 PALM LAKE WORKS PTY LTD ¢ cn Panvun aes CENTRAL BASIN
ae wo 1 0 1 2-3 6 at Mob: 0412 744 223 E: [email protected] wi” 4 SETOUT PLAN
is meme "| goo | te vex PALM LAKE RESORT Calibre Mena Bt
= a m1 18!
iE cM wos wll dome enn ism STAGE 2 CONSULTING he Ei 7985300 16-001014-407
Page 75
DESIGN SURFACE BASIN EDGE
BASIN EDGE /,o SURFACE
SECTION
00
Ss
DESIGN SURFACE
[ BASIN EDGE
/ BASIN EDGE
re roa
=== 7 2 ee ~ ane rasa - 7 ==
EXISTING SURFACE = = s a =
SECTION (8
SCALE (All 100 \G03/
SCALE (A3):1:200
BOWLING GREENS
MAINTENANCE ACCESS BASIN EDGE
BASIN EDGE
DESIGN SURFACE
TENNIS COURTS
t—// —
SECTION (<\
LEGEND
MACROPHYTE TOPSOIL TO PLANTING ZONE (300mm)
ZONE PLANTING
RL 99.25 RL 98.70
CLAY LAYER (300mm)
INDICATIVE MACROPHYTE PLANTING AREA
; TO
a nnn nn nnn NORMAL OPERATING LEVEL (RL 99.20)
0.30m (VARIES)
—++—-:—-++— WATER QUALITY TREATMENT LEVEL (RL 99.60)
MACROPHYTE EDGE TREATMENT DETAIL em 1% AEP WATER LEVEL (RL 101.03)
SCALE 1:50 (A1)
SCALE 1:100 (A3) N.S.C. REF NO. MCU15/0111 & REC15/0031
ee T DETARS pene vues "| SURVEYOR: ML_SURVEYS al P~ jy" CENTRAL BASIN
Aa ME. oy i setae ye sarayeeicateyseonoy |__PALM LAKE WORKS PTY LID C= oman SECTIONS
ae ave vec 1° O) pmomer te PALM LAKE RESORT calibre Cab Cn (OL) ya om SHEET 1 OF 2
i : cM 16-001014 | ‘. ANDREW MCPHAIL RPEQ 6921 COOROY | re Saar ec ea SRW OEE wz
SIF FOR & ON BEHALF OF CALIBRE CONSULTING (OLD) PTY LTD STAGE 2 CONSULTING eben Cuter lihearm Spey Singyen Senin Cent Lc 4084 16-001014-408
Page 76
EMBANKMENT CONSTRUCTION AS PER
NOTES ON DRG NO 16-001014-403
Ds» = 300mm
THICKNESS = 600mm
KEY DEPTH = 900mm
OVERFLOW WEIR DESIGN SURFACE
EXISTING SURFACE J
RISER OUTLET PIT (REFER
TO DRG NO. 16-001014-410
FOR DETAILS
SECTION
BASIN END
ROCK SCOUR PROTECTION
Dsp = 200mm
THICKNESS = 400mm
LEVELS TO TIE IN TO
EXISTING SWALE
SWIMMING POOL
BEYOND
DESIGN SURFACE
SECTION
RETAINING WALL REFER TO ORG
NO. 16-001014-400 FOR DETAILS
CENTRAL BIORETENTION BASIN
DESIGN SURFACE
375
ROCK SCOUR PROTECTION
Dsp = 200mm
BIORETENTION FILTER &
THICKNESS =
DRAINAGE LAYERS
4.88m_MIN.
DESIGN SURFACE \
CAP
1050 AT MIN 1%
ROCK SCOUR PROTECTION
Dsp = 200mm THICKNESS = 400mm
EXISTING SURFACE
MAJOR OVERFLOW WEIR (RL
100.50m AHD) AND EMBANKMENT
BEYOND
CENTRAL WQCP
400mm
LEGEND
ROCK SCOUR PROTECTION
TOPSOIL TO PLANTING ZONE (300mm)
CLAY LAYER (300mm)
INDICATIVE MACROPHYTE PLANTING AREA
NORMAL OPERATING LEVEL (RL 99.20)
WATER QUALITY TREATMENT LEVEL (RL 99.60)
1% AEP WATER LEVEL (RL 101.03)
SECTION (G\
0 03)
N.S.C. REF NO. MCU15/0111 & REC15/0031
oe bestow cvcx sens Cams tecrormm™® | SURVEYOR: ML_SURVEYS omer manne = CENTRAL BASIN
i genre avet Sige un tet | PALM LAKE WORKS PTY LTD C= <= & = secon
ile oom ome rocer me [RTT PALM LAKE RESORT ibre tet. Py a
: D cM 16-001014 \ ANOREW MCPHAIL RPE. 6921 EKER Cali re Seti can bn QD = CEXWGS HORSE 014-409 ae
3 t FOR & ON BEHACF OF CALIBRE CONSULTING (QLD) PTY LTD STAGE 2 CONSULTING Wiehame Cater Rebouwe ydany Rapipen Destine Coast — Lc 4084 16-001 =
Page 77
STRUCTURAL NOTES:
1, DESIGNED FOR LIVE LOAD SkPa
2. REINFORCEMENT STEEL:
21. ABBREVIATIONS FOR STEEL GRADE
AND TYPE:-"N" -
GRADE D500N DEFORMED BAR TO AS/NZS 4671.
mort 2.2. REINFORCEMENT IS REPRESENTED DIAGRAMMATICALLY
| LTT I 2x 400 SIDE ORIFICE AND NOT NECESSARILY SHOWN IN TRUE PROJECTION.
| ON EACH SIDE AT IL 2.3. ENSURE THE CORRECT SPACING OF BARS |S
| I 99.6 480 1200 180 MAINTAINED AND ALL REINFORCEMENT IS SUPPORTED
, | IN ITS CORRECT POSITION BY APPROVED PLASTIC BAR
(3 Hl 4 | s CHAIRS, SPACERS OR SUPPORT BARS AT 800 MAX
CT [/ ly S| ° . CENTRES IN BOTH DIRECTIONS.
| fi 2.4. TIE ALL INTERSECTIONS OF BARS WITH 1.25mm MIN.
H f 7 . DIA. ANNEALED WIRE.
r : . 2.5. DO NOT WELD REINFORCEMENT WITHOUT APPROVAL
t-F Ho | OF THE ENGINEER.
Hoty Is : 1 N16-200-EW 3. FORMWORK TO BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH AS3610.
SE ror = CENTRAL I n12-600 TIES 4. COVER TO BE 50mm U.N.O.
lo q
J
i N16-200-EW 7 } -
H| CENTRAL :
| 1 g 300 STRUCTURAL CERTIFICATION
f 7 3/L11-TM BTM PUMP STATION STRUCTURAL DETAILS
i 50 COVER
| SL92 MESH TOP AND fp
LCT EL CLERC BTM. 50mm COVER vot? Mi Ae
! RL_98.30 RPEQ 17233
oT ol 7. For & on behalf of
a == =f — Se Z| TYPICAL OVERFLOW WEIR EDGE DETAIL Calibre Consulting (QLD) PTY LTD
LU = SCALE 1:10 (A1)
1200 ae SCALE 1:20 (A3)
N16-200 ‘L’ BARS (TO MATCH 25mm BLINDING LAYER
VERT. BARS COG 500 TYP. SECTION (8) 10MPa CONCRETE
SCALE (Atl: 1:20 (J
SCALE (A31:1:40 RL 100.45
WATER LEVEL CONTROL PIT DETAIL S30 R950 ©
Sze -—
SCALE 1:20 (A1) _| |_| =
SCALE 1:40 (A3) 2x400 SIDE ORIFICES
AT IL 99.60 EACH SIDE © f30 Rt 99.40
—_—
NJ
S.S. CHAIN BOLTED ——_|
TO THREADED CAPS r B30 RL 99.30
180 1200 180 1200 180 ~( I~ iz. Anchor Re Oo
RL 100.45 | | RL_99.10 >) al 99.00
: 7 fs |. A RL 98.90 5) -4 ease O fio Rt 99.20
7 , B —T —
. : : 2x 400 SIDE ORIFICE RL_98.70 -4 ==
— LON EACH SIDE AT IL aes | —P _ _|_ fb 28.60
: | ° 99.6 ae - —_© Q RL 98.40
7 cS : ea N16-200-EW CENTRAL = | _|_ © —|-4~—£ ===
: | «|| ow
— mH 100 CLASS SNé uPVC STUBS PIPE
. : FOR WATER LEVEL CONTROL, WITH
7 a THREADED CAP STUBS TO EXTEND eae Le
r TO A MINIMUM OF 50mm INTO PIT SCALE (A3l 1-40
s >
a SJ ops 1.80m
g .
t6-200-EW 1.80m 0.50m
CENTRAL . ej—s RL 100.80, _ Ru 100.80
| =—- ~— REFER TO TYPICAL
EDGE DETAIL
. — : |200| CENTRAL BIORETENTION OVERFLOW WEIR DETAIL
al | 4 L N16-200 'L’ BARS (TO MATCH ot ad a)
150 — Slo VERT. BARS COG 500 TYP. ,
elZ| 4
| d S| | | [200 SL92 MESH TOP AND BTM. 4.00m 2.40m 10.00m 3.60m 4.00m
RL_97.20 Fo | - 50mm COVER RL_101.80
r RL_101.50 ——
i as = ! ohare |
SS eT EET eT - I soo Key MIN.
SL92 MESH TOP AND BTM.— 25mm BLINDING LAYER REFER TO
50mm COVER 10MPa CONCRETE 150 THICK CONCRETE TYPICAL EDGE
10m OVERFLOW WEIR DETAIL F72 MESH 50 FROM TOP DETAIL
SCALE 1:50 (At)
SCALE 1100 (A3) N.S.C. REF NO. MCU15/0111 & REC15/0031
Fat [cas [ean oe SORE Tene T THCTOFEN We TENT Daw TE
eran SURVEYOR: ML_SURVEYS
oe TW foe a0 020 02 04 06 08 1 Mt 38 Leybourne Street, Chelmer QLD 4068 PALM LAKE WORKS PTY LTD C . CONSULT AUSTRALIA WATER QUALITY RISER
ue —— ee A Mob: 0412 744 223 E: [email protected] 4 OUTLET PIT DETAILS
Nie PROJECT No. |
q D pravevowsex! 150 1 oss 0 i 2 A ANOREW MCPHAIL RPEQ 6921 PALM cake oF SORT Call re Ca oS oan 010 Eas SRAWaG OER ase]
EP YH) —————— an 16-001014 Tale 073695 344 Fosinde 07 3895 400 soo! 16-001014-410
SIF FOR & ON BEHALF OF CALIBRE CONSULTING (QLD) PTY LTO STAGE 2 CONSULTING items Chere Mabowns Say hype Semaine Cont Lc 4084 6-001014-
Page 78
BASIN 1. EXTENDED DETENTION DEPTH: 400mm 2. FILTER AREA: 525m? 3. 1% AEP DETENTION VOLUME: 1,030m? 4. 1% AEP BASIN WSL: RL 100.5M SPECIFICATIONS / LEGEND: DESIGN SURFACE CONTOUR T T BATTERS (GRADE AS SPECIFIED) PROPOSED FENCE / eee PROPOSED STORMWATER PIPE | in 4.5), sw FUTURE STORMWATER PIPE ax ROCK SCOUR PROTECTION a REINFORCED TURF ae 100% SUBSOIL AND CLEANOUT PITS seeeeeeeeeen== SUBSOIL COLLECTOR PROPERTY BOUNDARY V\\ VA 4m OVERFLOW WEIR AT RL 100.40 FOR DETAILS REFER DRG No. 16-001014-412 SETOUT POINT TABLE SOP No. | EASTING | NORTHING [LEVEL (m AHD) Bens TTT Te SCOUR PROTECTION AND o 700.4% | 133.448 102.30 Hee ATER 02 700.420 | _1132.439 102.30 THICKNESS = 400mm 03 714.158 | _1131.676 100.80 04 714.022 1130.686 100.80 05 737.1462 | 1128.21 100.80 06 737.575 | 127.235 100.80 07 751.249 | 112.419 100.80 08 750.264 | 112.247 100.80 TS 09 751.621 | 1111434 100.80 10 750.436 | _ 1111.262 100.80 1 753.016 | 1109.276 100.40 12 749.659 1108.690 100.40 B 753.704 | _1105.336 100.40 1 750.347 | _1104.750 100.40 15 752.934 | 102.765 100.80 SEDIMENT FOREBAY 16 751.949 102.593 100.80 MIN SURFACE AREA: 6m? 17 753.106 | _1101.780 100.80 FOREBAY DEPTH: 0.3m 18 752.121 1101.608 100.80 REFER 16-00-001014 DWG 9 754.592 | 1093.272 100.80 FOR TYPICAL DETAIL 20 753.607 | 1093.10 100.80 a 754.739 | 092.427 100.80 22 753.754 | 1092.255 100.80 OUTLET CONTROL PIT FOR DETAILS B 752.477 | _1083.916 100.80 co REFER TO DRG No. 16-001014-416. 2 750.971 | 1083764 100.80 ! “| 30 117.545 1125.015 99.10 | SL 31 736.712 | 122.207 99.10 ' 32 74.685 | 116.483 99.10 | REFER TO FUTURE OPERATIONAL 3 7T41.571_| 1098.020 99.10 ' WORKS PLANS FOR FINAL eNO 34 745.270 | _1093.489 99.10 | 35 41.249 | _1093.635 99.10 ' 36 715.308 1119.401 99.10 | 37 740.405 | 1085.475 100.45 ' 38 736.201 | 1087.812 100.45 | CARPARKING SPACES NOTES: 39 737.606 | _1084.591 100.71 ' 4. REFER TO LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS DRAWINGS FOR PLANTING 40 734.695 | 1087.567 100.71 DETAILS. a 727.575 | _1084.508 100.35 | “2 727.550 | 1087.508 100.35 2. THIS DRAWING IS TO BE READ IN CONJUNCTION WITH LATEST iB 766.112} 109.396 98.00 iL) | ISSUE OF CALIBRE CONSULTING REPORT No. 16-001014-01. 4b 761.942 | _1101.782 97.90 i is T6007} Teo 5B ooo 3. REFER TO DRG No. 16-001014-400 FOR GENERAL NOTES AND 46 762.192 113.315 97.68 ! ( : \ 47 764.373 | 110.336 97.77 j \ N.S.C. REF NO. MCU15/0111 & REC15/0031 vast [cas [one] ote Seoun Gneoe TORE TIETREST THORP Wa aT aR TE AMENDMENT DETAILS SURVEYOR: ML SURVEYS me orf fe 38 Leybourne Street Chelmer QLD 4068 PALM LAKE WORKS PTY LTD co nnun NORTHERN BASIN ut 02 0 2 46 6 8 wm Mob: 0412 744 223 E: [email protected] [| ——— LAYOUT PLAN NTe 1:400 AR PROJECT No. a D eran 16-001014 ‘ANDREW MCPHAIL RPEQ 6921 PALM CAKE RESORT Call re Ca aS (OP en md tote! TaAWNG HOGER resus] Sle =! Te 07 3895 3444 Facsimile 07 3895 3400 a cM CONSULTING fo) FT LO STAGE 2 CONSULTING Se eee ee 16-001014-411
Page 79
PROPERTY BOUNDARY DESIGN SURFACE EXISTING SURFACE SECTION (“A NY, ACCESS TRACK DESIGN SURFACE REFER OPERATIONAL WORKS CIVIL SCOUR PROTECTION PACKAGE FOR DRAINAGE DETAILS Dso = 200 THICKNESS = 400mm SECTION 5 (8 DESIGN SURFACE EXISTING SURFACE 4m WIDE OVERFLOW WEIR AT 100.4 (BEYOND) RL_99.00m_ AHD <— LEGEND REFER TO DRG NO ------------- TEMPORARY PONDING LEVEL (RL 99.40) 16-001014-411 FOR. Rock ae PROTECTION ‘50 = OUTLET PIT DETAILS SECTION 7 () THICKNESS = 400mm — a 5% AEP WATER LEVEL (RL 100.37) -_—--o 1% AEP WATER LEVEL (RL 100.51) BIORETENTION FILTER AND DRAINAGE LAYERS REFER TO LLZLZA,.-RG No. 16-001014-400 FOR TYPICAL BIORETENTION s ECTION N.S.C. REF NO. MCU15/0111 & REC15/0031 om or To [ans sctven pease OL’ | 30 Leyboune Sires Chelmer OLD 4068 PALM LAKE WORKS PTY LTD C —_—, con uum NORTHERN BASIN é 4 400 1 20244 #2 3 & 5 At Mob: 0412 744 223 E: [email protected] hg DP SECTIONS sc exw cnzox] *270 3] proner ne Pm T(r | PALM dake RESORT all Cale Cont (LD) Py Ls a : D 7 ANDREW MCPHAIL RPEQ 6921, OOROY C I re Ground For, $45 Quen Sed, Bsbore, QLD Asia 4000 Cony | DRAWNG WOMEN SSCSC*dC BO 8 = cM“ 16-001014 FOR & ON pi cw ( (QLD) PTY LTD STAGE 2 CONSULTING Sree nee aoe ee = Res 16-001014-412
Page 80
OUTLET PIT TO BE
DESIGNED BY OTHERS
900x900 PRIMARY 900x900 SECONDARY
OUTLET CONTROL PIT OUTLET CONTROL PIT
RL_100.15m_AHD
———————
RL_100.00m AHD
3
2x O250 ORIFICE :
AT IL 99.40 “
RL_99.40m AHD
oF
y Vy
—|
1
RL _98.00m AHD | . I\
FILTER MEDIA REFER DWG SUBSOIL DRAINAGE 1 x G300 ORIFICE
16-001014-400 FOR TYPICAL
BIORETENTION DETAIL
NORTHERN BASIN OUTLET PIT DETAIL
SCALE 1:20 (At)
SCALE 1:40 (A3)
2.40m 4.00m 2.40m 1.00m
RL 100.80 RL_100.80
= Te -
\\ soe KEY REFER TO TYPICAL
150 THICK CONCRETE EDGE DETAILS PROVIDED ON
F712 MESH 50 FROM TOP DRG. NO. 16-001014-410
NORTHERN BASIN OVERFLOW WEIR DETAIL
SCALE 1:25 (A1)
SCALE 1:50 (A3)
N.S.C. REF NO. MCU15/0111 & REC15/0031
TAGROFLNT Ros Daawana THLE
fen [use bowel eras escn creo Sea TEST mine T surveyor: ML_SURVEYS =“ P~
= M | 6.09.56 420 0.2 0 0.2 04 06 08 1 AL 38 Leybourne Street, Chelmer QLD 4068 PALM LAKE WORKS PTY LTD CONSULT AUSTRALIA NORTHERN BASIN
aE Of, Mob: 0412 744 223 E: [email protected] fd <2 iP 4 DETAILS
Nic PROJECT Wo. APPROVED a , . - a
a PRAWN CHECK) 4950.25 0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1.0 1.25 At ANDREW MCPHAIL RPEQ 6921 PALM COG RESORT calibre nce cr aa = awe “ae
HE “ls == .| 16-0104 V4 Teephne 07 38953444 Facsimile 073895 3400 SO 16-001014-413
if For _& ON-GEHALF OF CALIBRE CONSULTING (QLD) PTY LTO STAGE 2 CONSULTING ee — -