Original source · versioned page text
RFI - stormwater report
Stormwater Management Plan 30 Pottery Street, Pomona TOD Consulting Pty Ltd [OCR of page images] aquainte Intelligent Water Management Solutions Stormwater Management Plan 30 Pottery Street, Pomona TOD Consulting Pty Ltd
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 (RFI - stormwater report.pdf)
Searchable page text hides email addresses. Original files are unchanged and may show email addresses.
Full text of the other 31 pages
Page 2
AquaIntel Pty Ltd
m: 0400 436 391
e: [email protected]
w: www.aquaintel.com.au
ACN: 153 875 953 ABN: 83 572 946 845
Document Information
Report Title Stormwater Management Plan – 30 Pottery Street, Pomona
Version Rev 0
Author(s) Scott Roy
Approved by Brendon Bolt (RPEQ 11523)
Date 28 July 2020
Doc No 2020023_PotterySt_SMP_rev0.docx
Distribution TOD Consulting Pty Ltd
H:\19\19-0155 Aquaintel Project
Document Path:
Work\2020023_30PotteryStreetSWMP\Report\2020023_PotterySt_SMP_rev0.docx
Page 3
Executive Summary AquaIntel Pty Ltd was commissioned by Tod Consulting Pty Ltd to prepare a Stormwater Management Plan to support the Reconfiguration of Lot Approval for proposed residential use (10 Lots) at 30 Pottery Street, Pomona (Lot 496 MCH 591). The site is currently undeveloped and is consistent with a rural residential area with the existing lot having a dwelling, shed and most of the site is vegetated with trees. The site is formed by a ridge to the north and falls south to the adjoining properties and Pottery Street to the east. Environmental best management practices are proposed for treatment of stormwater flowing from the site. Stormwater will pass through a treatment device prior to discharge to the receiving environment. The stormwater treatment strategy for the site will include collection of runoff from roofed, roads and allotted areas being treated via a single bioretention basin located at the south-east corner of the site. It is proposed that the outlet from the site will be diverted (piped) to the natural waterway approximately 100m south of the developed site. The piped outlet will divert the change in peak flow from the proposed site in order to prevent nuisance runoff from affecting downstream private properties and the road reserve. No nuisance flooding has been has been demonstrated, as differences in peak flow times in the regional sub-catchments do not coincide to create a significant change in peak flow associated with the change in impervious characteristics from the developed site.
Page 4
Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY I 1 INTRODUCTION 4 1.1 SITE CHARACTERISTICS 4 2 STORMWATER QUALITY 6 2.1 DESIGN OBJECTIVES 6 2.2 STORMWATER QUALITY TREATMENT 6 2.2.1 STRATEGY 6 2.3 MODELLING APPROACH 6 2.3.1 MUSIC PARAMETERS 6 2.3.2 CATCHMENT AREAS 7 2.3.3 MUSIC MODEL LAYOUT 8 2.4 TREATMENT MEASURES 9 2.4.1 BIORETENTION SYSTEM 9 2.5 RESULTS 10 3 STORMWATER QUANTITY 11 3.1.1 SITE EXISTING SCENARIO 11 3.1.2 SITE RATIONAL METHOD VALIDATION (A01) 12 3.1.3 SITE DEVELOPED SCENARIO 12 3.1.4 REGIONAL EXISTING SCENARIO 14 3.1.5 REGIONAL RATIONAL METHOD VALIDATION (C1 OUTLET) 14 3.1.6 REGIONAL DEVELOPED SCENARIO 15 3.1.7 LAWFUL POINT OF DISCHARGE 16 4 CONSTRUCTION PHASE MANAGEMENT 17 4.1 EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL 17 5 ESTABLISHMENT AND OPERATIONAL PHASE MANAGEMENT 18 5.1 ESTABLISHMENT 18 5.2 OPERATIONAL 18 6 CONCLUSIONS 19 7 REFERENCES 20 APPENDICIES Appendix 1: Site Layout 21 Appendix 2: Site Rational Method and WBNM Outputs 22 Appendix 3: Regional Rational Method and WBNM Outputs 23 FIGURES Figure 1-1: Locality Plan 5 Figure 1-2: Flood Hazard Overlay Map 5 Figure 2-1: WSUD Catchment and Locality Plan 8 Figure 2-2: MUSIC Model Layout 8 Figure 3-1: Existing WBNM Site Catchment Plan 11
Page 5
Figure 3-2: Post-Development Change in Peak Flow Diversion 13
Figure 3-3: Existing WBNM Regional Catchment Plan 14
Figure 3-4: Lawful Point of Discharge (Source, Noosa Intramaps 2020) 16
TABLES
Table 2-1: Site stormwater quality objectives (operational phase) 6
Table 2-2: MUSIC Base and Storm Flow Concentration Parameters – Urban 7
Table 2-3: MUSIC Runoff Generation Parameters – Urban 7
Table 2-4: Catchment Areas 7
Table 2-5: Bioretention Design Parameters 9
Table 2-6: MUSIC Results – Load-Based Pollutant Outputs 10
Table 3-1: WBNM Sub-Catchment Fraction Impervious Values – Site Existing Scenario 11
Table 3-2: Site Rational Method Validation Summary (A01) 12
Table 3-3: Site Existing Rational Method Peak Flows Versus WBNM Peak Flows (A01) 12
Table 3-4: WBNM Sub-Catchment Fraction Impervious Values – Site Developed Scenario12
Table 3-5: Site Developed Scenario WBNM Outlet Peak Flows (A01) 13
Table 3-6: WBNM Sub-Catchment Fraction Impervious Values – Regional Existing Scenario
14
Table 3-7: Regional Rational Method Validation Summary (C1 Outlet) 15
Table 3-8: Regional Existing Rational Method Peak Flows Versus WBNM Peak Flows (C1
Outlet) 15
Table 3-9: WBNM Sub-Catchment Fraction Impervious Values – Regional Developed
Scenario 15
Table 3-10: Regional Developed Scenario WBNM Outlet Peak Flows (A3) 16
Page 6
1 Introduction
AquaIntel Pty Ltd was commissioned by Tod Consulting Pty Ltd to prepare a Stormwater
Management Plan to support the Reconfiguration of Lot Approval for proposed
residential use (10 Lots) at 30 Pottery Street, Pomona (Lot 496 MCH 591).
The proposed outcome of this document is to identify stormwater management options
that could be implemented within the development in order to achieve the
requirements and targets of Noosa Shire Council Planning Scheme “Drainage Code”
(NSC, 2018a), “Flood Hazards Overlay Code” (NSC, 2018b) as well as the relevant
provisions of State Planning Policy – Appendix 2. The intent of the codes associated with
these documents will be achieved through the appropriate integration of stormwater
management options within the proposed residential land-use. The objectives of this
SMP are to:
• Ensure the proposed development maintains or improves the environmental
values of the receiving waters within the receiving catchment throughout the
operational phase;
• Consider suitable Stormwater Quality Improvement Devices (SQID’s) based on
Water Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD) principles;
• Recommend an appropriate stormwater treatment strategy for the proposed
development that complies with Noosa Shire Council (NSC) and State Planning
Policy water quality objectives;
• Ensure the development does not result in nuisance flooding from stormwater
flows downstream of the site; and
• Ensure the site complies with the lawful point of discharge.
1.1 Site Characteristics
The location of the proposed development site is shown in Figure 1-1 and covers an area
of approximately 1.256ha. The site fronts Pottery Street and is bounded by private
properties to the north, south and west.
The site is formed by a ridge to the north and falls south to the adjoining properties and
Pottery Street to the east. The site is unaffected by regional flooding or overland flow,
refer to Council’s regional flood mapping in Figure 1-2.
The proposed development layout is provided in Appendix 1.
4
Page 7
SITE
Figure 1-1: Locality Plan
SITE
Figure 1-2: Flood Hazard Overlay Map
5
[OCR of page images]
aquaintel
Chureh St
Red st
Chureh st
Pottery sy
SITE
Signai st
&
>
s
5
g
«
Pon]
x |
>
=
5 Red s
=
Figure 1-1: Locality Plan
Ba
— ¥ )
Jampotilane. %
0 Me i
<
1. w & wi
)
? : i
Stan Topper
Park 3)
BI
@
rve Stieet!
i oO
Figure 1-2: Flood Hazard Overlay Map
ibition Steet Exhibitiay, «
Page 8
2 Stormwater Quality
2.1 Design Objectives
This report identifies the stormwater quality management objectives for the operational
phase (post-construction phase) of the proposed development. Construction based
stormwater quality management objectives will need to be addressed as part of
operational works documentation.
The load based Water Quality Objectives (WQO’s) stipulated in the State Planning Policy
(DILGP, 2017) for the South East Queensland region will be adopted for the site. The
applicable water quality design objectives for the site are shown in Table 2-1 below.
Table 2-1: Site stormwater quality objectives (operational phase)
Minimum reductions in mean annual loads from unmitigated development (%)
Total Suspended Total Phosphorous Total Nitrogen Gross pollutants
Solids (TSS) (TP) (TN) >5 mm
80 60 45 90
2.2 Stormwater Quality Treatment
2.2.1 Strategy
The objective of this report is to assess the stormwater quality measures required based
on the development layout prepared in order to support the development application.
The treatment train for the proposed development consists of runoff from the
development being discharged to bioretention basins prior to discharging from the site.
2.3 Modelling Approach
2.3.1 MUSIC Parameters
An assessment of stormwater runoff quality from the proposed development site has
been assessed using the Model for Urban Stormwater Improvement Conceptualisation
(MUSIC) – Version 6.30, released in 2017.
Climate data for the catchment was sourced from the MUSIC model database. The
rainfall and evaporation data template for this site has been based on data from Cooroy
from 1/1/1973- 31/12/1983 with six (6) minute rainfall duration. Table 2-2 and Table
2-3 outline the adopted source node parameters from MUSIC Modeling Guidelines
(Water By Design, 2010) that were used in the MUSIC model.
6
Page 9
Table 2-2: MUSIC Base and Storm Flow Concentration Parameters – Urban
Total Suspended Total
Total Nitrogen
Solids Phosphorous
(Log10 mg/L)
Land Use Parameter (Log10 mg/L) (Log10 mg/L)
Storm Base Storm Base Storm Base
Flow Flow Flow Flow Flow Flow
Mean 2.18 1.0 -0.47 -0.97 0.26 0.20
Ground
Std Deviation 0.39 0.34 0.31 0.31 0.23 0.20
Mean 2.43 1.0 -0.30 -0.97 0.26 0.20
Road
Std Deviation 0.39 0.34 0.31 0.31 0.23 0.20
Mean 1.30 N/A -0.89 N/A 0.26 N/A
Roof
Std Deviation 0.39 N/A 0.31 N/A 0.23 N/A
Table 2-3: MUSIC Runoff Generation Parameters – Urban
Parameter Urban
Rainfall Threshold (mm) 1
Soil Capacity (mm) 500
Initial Storage (%) 10
Field Capacity 200
Infiltration Capacity Coefficient a 211
Infiltration Capacity Coefficient b 5
Initial Depth (mm) 50
Daily Recharge (%) 28
Daily Drainage (%) 27
Daily Deep Seepage Rate (%) 0
2.3.2 Catchment Areas
The development site has been divided into three source nodes (road, roof and ground)
representing the areas of the site. The area reporting to the bioretention basin
represents the developable area associated with the subdivision. Table 2-4 outlines the
catchment areas and imperviousness represented within the MUSIC model. The
stormwater quality catchments are provided in Figure 2-1.
Table 2-4: Catchment Areas
Catchment Road Roof Ground Total
Catchment A01 (ha) 0.188 0.250 0.818 1.256
Impervious % 80 100 25 -
7
Page 10
Catchment
A01
Figure 2-1: WSUD Catchment and Locality Plan
2.3.3 MUSIC Model Layout
As the management of urban stormwater needs to take a holistic approach, specific
management measures need to be implemented in series to form a treatment train. The
correct utilisation of various devices within the treatment train is imperative to target
the desired pollutants, from the gross solids to the fine colloidal partials. Figure 2-2
shows the MUSIC model layout for the development.
Figure 2-2: MUSIC Model Layout
8
Page 11
2.4 Treatment Measures
Runoff from the development will be treated via a single end-of-line bioretention basins.
The locality of the treatment device is shown in Figure 2-1.
2.4.1 Bioretention System
Bioretention systems use ponding above a treatment surface to maximise the volume of
runoff flowing through the filtration media. They typically convey flows above the design
event through overflow pits or a weir. The treatment system operates by firstly filtering
surface flows through surface vegetation and then percolating runoff through prescribed
filtration media. This media provides treatment through fine filtration, extended
detention and biological uptake of nutrients.
As these systems take approximately 12-24hrs to drain, the maximum depth of pondage
allowed to occur over the filter area has been limited to 300mm, with a minimum filter
media depth of 500mm. Table 2-5 summarises the proposed design parameters for each
bioretention system for this development. It is to be noted that the Orthophosphate
content of the filter media has been reduced to 30mg/kg in line with recent advice from
Healthy Waterways.
(http://healthywaterways.org/initiatives/waterbydesign/stormwater).
Table 2-5: Bioretention Design Parameters
Parameter Bio Basin
Extended Detention Depth (m) 0.30
2
Storage Surface Area (m ) 125
2
Filter Media Area (m ) 125
Unlined Filter Media Perimeter (m) 0.01
Saturated Hydraulic Conductivity (mm/hr) 200
Filter Depth (m) 0.5
TN Content of Filter Media (mg/kg) 400
Orthophosphate Content of Filter Media (mg/kg) 30
Exfiltration Rate (mm/hr) 0.0
Overflow Weir (m) 0.5
9
Page 12
2.5 Results
MUSIC modelling of the proposed treatment train for the developable area of the
development at 30 Pottery Street, Pomona was performed to ensure the load based
Water Quality Objectives was achieved. Table 2-6 presents the load-based outputs that
are represented by this Reconfiguration application.
Table 2-6: MUSIC Results – Load-Based Pollutant Outputs
Unmitigated Mitigated Reduction Target
Pollutant Compliance
(kg/yr) (kg/yr) Achieved (%) Reduction
Flow 12.5 12.1 2.9 - -
TSS 2,240 405 81.9 80% ✓
TP 4.53 1.13 74.9 60% ✓
TN 25.7 12.1 53.1 45% ✓
GP 265 0 100 90% ✓
10
Page 13
3 Stormwater Quantity
The objective of this component of the study is to investigate the potential impact that
the proposed development will have on peak flows discharging downstream of the site.
Where any increases of peak flows are found, potential mitigation options will be
investigated in the form of a detention system.
Hydrologic modelling of the catchment has been carried out using WBNM software
(Boyd et al, 2019), developed jointly by the University of Wollongong, Rienco Consulting
and Balance R&D. The September 2019 version has been used for this investigation,
which utilizes ARR2019 hydrology.
Modelling has been carried out for the 1, 2, 5, 10, 20, 50 and 100 year ARI storm events
in both the local (site) and regional catchments. The following scenarios have been
investigated:
1. Existing Scenario
2. Developed Scenario
3. Mitigation Analysis
3.1.1 Site Existing Scenario
Sub-catchment fraction impervious values have been calculated based on aerial imagery
data and consistent to with existing rural residential land-use. The existing scenario sub-
catchment areas and fraction impervious values for each sub-catchment are tabulated
below in Table 3-1. The existing catchment plan is shown below in Figure 3-1.
Table 3-1: WBNM Sub-Catchment Fraction Impervious Values – Site Existing Scenario
Existing Scenario
WBNM Sub-Catchment Area (ha)
Impervious (%)
A01 1.256 5
TOTAL 1.256 -
Catchment
A01
Figure 3-1: Existing WBNM Site Catchment Plan
11
Page 14
3.1.2 Site Rational Method Validation (A01)
The WBNM model has been validated to the Rational Method derived peak flows at the
outlet of the catchment (WBNM catchment node ‘Outlet’). Validation has been achieved
by the catchment lag parameter.
A summary of the Rational Method calculation is provided below in Table 3-2 and
additional details of the Rational Method calculation are provided in Appendix 2 of this
report. Time of concentration was obtained from Table 4.6.3 of QUDM (Recommended
roof drainage travel times). The C10 value was obtained from Table 4.5.3 of QUDM and
the site was determined to be 5% impervious with I10 rainfall intensity between 60-64
mm/hr.
Table 3-2: Site Rational Method Validation Summary (A01)
Parameter Value
Time of Concentration (tc) 6 minutes
Catchment Area 1.256 hectares
C10 Value 0.59
A comparison of peak Rational Method flow rates compared with peak WBNM model
flow rates are provided in Table 3-3 below.
Table 3-3: Site Existing Rational Method Peak Flows Versus WBNM Peak Flows (A01)
1yr ARI 2yr ARI 5yr ARI 10yr ARI 20yr ARI 50yr ARI 100yr ARI
Catchment
(m3/s) (m3/s) (m3/s (m3/s) (m3/s) (m3/s) (m3/s)
Rational 0.173 0.207 0.311 0.383 0.459 0.583 0.670
WBNM 0.198 0.228 0.319 0.382 0.441 0.513 0.569
% Difference 14.4% 10.3% 2.5% -0.3% -3.8% -11.9% -15.1%
The above results show that a reasonable peak flow validation has been achieved from
the WBNM model when compared to a Rational Method calculation and is considered
acceptable in assessing non-increasing in nuisance flooding from stormwater flows.
3.1.3 Site Developed Scenario
The proposed development has been incorporated into the WBNM model by adjusting
the site sub-catchments and the fractions impervious values to represent the
development. The catchment is represent by the surface contours and the existing
discharge locations. Fraction impervious values of the existing and proposed scenarios
are provided in Table 3-4 below. The impervious percentage of the new development
has been calculated from the layout and represented as 48% impervious for catchment
A01.
Table 3-4: WBNM Sub-Catchment Fraction Impervious Values – Site Developed Scenario
Existing Scenario Developed Scenario
WBNM Sub-Catchment Area (ha)
Impervious (%) Impervious (%)
A01 1.256 5 48
TOTAL 1.256
12
Page 15
Peak flows tabulated in this report represent the peak values extracted from the
modelled range of storm events presented in Table 3-5 (A01).
Table 3-5: Site Developed Scenario WBNM Outlet Peak Flows (A01)
Existing Peak Flow Developed Peak Flow Change in Peak Flow
(m3/s) (m3/s) (m3/s)
1 year 0.198 0.254 0.056
2 year 0.228 0.289 0.061
5 year 0.319 0.398 0.079
10 year 0.382 0.484 0.101
20 year 0.441 0.554 0.113
50 year 0.513 0.628 0.115
100 year 0.569 0.693 0.124
It can be seen that the peak flows have increased to the catchment A01 outlet. This is a
result of the development site increasing the impervious area. It is proposed that the
outlet from the site will be diverted (piped) to the natural waterway approximately 100m
south of the developed site (Refer Figure 3-2 and Figure 3-4). The piped outlet will divert
the change in peak flow from the proposed site (up to 124L/s) in order to prevent
nuisance runoff from affecting downstream private properties and the road reserve.
The change in peak flow diverted from the site has been assessed in relation to the
regional catchment, refer to Sections 3.1.4 and 3.1.6 below.
Catchment
A01
Piped
Outlet
Diversion
Figure 3-2: Post-Development Change in Peak Flow Diversion
13
Page 16
3.1.4 Regional Existing Scenario
Sub-catchment fraction impervious values have been calculated based on aerial imagery
data and consistent to with existing rural residential land-use. The existing scenario sub-
catchment areas and fraction impervious values for each sub-catchment are tabulated
below in Table 3-6. The existing catchment plan is shown below in Figure 3-3.
Table 3-6: WBNM Sub-Catchment Fraction Impervious Values – Regional Existing Scenario
Existing Scenario
WBNM Sub-Catchment Area (ha)
Impervious (%)
A1 4.371 0
A2 4.694 5
A3 4.298 5
B1 3.499 0
B2 4.991 1
C1 11.805 15
TOTAL 33.658 -
Figure 3-3: Existing WBNM Regional Catchment Plan
3.1.5 Regional Rational Method Validation (C1 Outlet)
The WBNM model has been validated to the Rational Method derived peak flows at the
outlet of the catchment (WBNM catchment node ‘Outlet’). Validation has been achieved
by the catchment lag parameter.
14
Page 17
A summary of the Rational Method calculation is provided below in Table 3-2 and
additional details of the Rational Method calculation are provided in Appendix 3 of this
report. Time of concentration was obtained from Table 4.6.3 of QUDM (Recommended
roof drainage travel times). The C10 value was obtained from Table 4.5.3 of QUDM and
the site was determined to be 6.8% impervious with I10 rainfall intensity between 60-64
mm/hr.
Table 3-7: Regional Rational Method Validation Summary (C1 Outlet)
Parameter Value
Time of Concentration (tc) 29 minutes
Catchment Area 33.658 hectares
C10 Value 0.59
A comparison of peak Rational Method flow rates compared with peak WBNM model
flow rates are provided in Table 3-3 below.
Table 3-8: Regional Existing Rational Method Peak Flows Versus WBNM Peak Flows (C1 Outlet)
1yr ARI 2yr ARI 5yr ARI 10yr ARI 20yr ARI 50yr ARI 100yr ARI
Catchment
(m3/s) (m3/s) (m3/s (m3/s) (m3/s) (m3/s) (m3/s)
Rational 2.653 3.066 4.540 5.528 6.511 7.550 8.493
WBNM 2.404 2.879 4.335 5.334 6.374 8.083 9.308
% Difference 10.4% 6.5% 4.7% 3.6% 2.1% -6.6% -8.8%
The above results show that a reasonable peak flow validation has been achieved from
the WBNM model when compared to a Rational Method calculation and is considered
acceptable in assessing non-increasing in nuisance flooding from stormwater flows.
3.1.6 Regional Developed Scenario
The proposed development has been incorporated into the WBNM model by adjusting
the site sub-catchments and the fractions impervious values to represent the
development. The catchment was split into six sub-catchments in order to represent the
surface contours and the existing discharge locations. Fraction impervious values of the
existing and proposed scenarios are provided in Table 3-4 below. The impervious
percentage of the new development has been calculated from the layout and
represented as 5% impervious for catchment B2.
Table 3-9: WBNM Sub-Catchment Fraction Impervious Values – Regional Developed Scenario
Existing Scenario Developed Scenario
WBNM Sub-Catchment Area (ha)
Impervious (%) Impervious (%)
A1 4.371 0 0
A2 4.694 5 5
A3 4.298 5 5
B1 3.499 0 0
B2 4.991 1 5
C1 11.805 15 15
TOTAL 33.658 - -
15
Page 18
Peak flows tabulated in this report represent the peak values extracted from the
modelled range of storm events for reporting to sub-catchment A3 (all catchments
upstream of C1) presented in Table 3-5.
Table 3-10: Regional Developed Scenario WBNM Outlet Peak Flows (A3 – Pottery Street)
Existing Peak Flow Developed Peak Flow Change in Peak Flow
(m3/s) (m3/s) (m3/s)
1 year 2.149 2.153 0.004
2 year 2.492 2.493 0.001
5 year 3.566 3.577 0.011
10 year 4.219 4.224 0.005
20 year 4.911 4.916 0.005
50 year 5.737 5.737 0.000
100 year 6.414 6.436 0.022
3.1.7 Lawful Point of Discharge
Runoff from the proposed development site will be maintained south to the adjoining
properties and east to Pottery Street. A new piped outlet from the south-east of the site
will discharge the change in peak flow directly to the natural waterway approximately
100m south of the site (Figure 3-4).
The existing discharge locations and the new piped diversion are considered to be the
lawful points of discharge for the site. It is also considered that both the minor and major
flows from the site have been managed. The modeled mitigation evaluation confirms
that non-increasing in nuisance flooding from stormwater flows is achieved.
A01
Piped
Outlet
Figure 3-4: Lawful Point of Discharge (Source, Noosa Intramaps 2020)
16
Page 19
4 Construction Phase Management
4.1 Erosion and Sediment Control
The management of the site during the construction phase is an important step in
ensuring water quality standards are achieved. Implementation of best practice
Erosion and Sediment Control techniques is imperative to managing the quality of
runoff affected by construction works.
The following points provide general guidance on the management of stormwater
during the construction phase. Detailed Erosion and Sediment Control Management
Plans should be developed in conjunction with the Operational Works design prior to
construction works commencing in accordance with the International Erosion Control
Association (IECA) - “Best Practice Erosion and Sediment Control (BPESC) document”
and overseen by a Certified Professional in Erosion and Sediment Control (CPESC) or
Registered Professional Engineer Queensland (RPEQ).
1. Establish a single stabilised entry/exit point for the site works;
2. Construct a shake-down grid at the entrance to facilitate the removal of
sediment from trucks leaving the site. The access road extending from the end
of existing road or kerb to the grid should comprise a 150-200mm deep pad of
40mm crushed rock;
3. Install sediment fences along the lower boundaries of the site;
4. Construct one or more strategically placed sediment basins in the proposed
natural waterway and construct contour drains / bunds to direct disturbed
runoff to the sediment basins;
5. Install bins and/or wind-proof litter areas on-site to minimise the dispersion of
gross pollutants;
6. Maintain on site sufficient materials necessary for the emergency repair of all
erosion control devices. This includes silt fences, clean crushed rock for
reapplication to the entrance road and for replacement of rock within
temporary drainage channels, and flocculants for settling sediment basins;
7. Following each days construction works, ensure that any material on road
surfaces is swept from the road, and not permitted to be washed down the
gutters and piped drainage systems.
8. Quality of pooled water within sediment basins are to be monitored prior to
dewatering, sufficient time should be given to allow sediment to settle
(possible with the assistance of a suitable flocculent if necessary) &/or filtering
during pumping operations.
9. Final establishment of bioretention basin should not occur until full
stabilisation of upstream catchment has occurred; preferably these should be
temporarily turfed during the maintenance period while dwelling construction
is occurring.
It shall be the responsibility of the developer, through their principal contractor, to
ensure that temporary sediment and erosion controls are installed and maintained
correctly.
17
Page 20
5 Establishment and Operational Phase Management
5.1 Establishment
Experience shows that the critical periods in the life of WSUD vegetated stormwater
systems are the construction and establishment phases. The timing and approach to
these systems must be carefully considered to ensure successful establishment and
long-term performance. Bioretention systems are now common stormwater
treatment devices for new urban developments in South East Queensland. Successful
construction and allowing adequate time for the systems to establish is critical to their
long-term performance and function. Construction of the system is also linked to
having suitable bioretention designs in place to ensure, civil contractors have
appropriate plans to construct to. Applying due care in the design and construction
phase will ensure the function of the system whilst also keeping on-going
maintenance to a minimum. It is highly recommended that the constructed activities
be completed in accordance with the Construction and Establishment Guidelines:
Swales, Bioretention Systems and Wetlands (Apr 2010). This will require a sacrificial
turf layer to be installed to protect the filter media from the building phase.
5.2 Operational
It is not proposed for water quality monitoring of the bioretention system to be
undertaken during the operational phase of its life. The “Maintaining Vegetated
Asset” guideline highlights that water quality monitoring is not recommended to
determine the performance of every vegetated stormwater asset, as it is a specialized
field that is complex and costly. In line with this guideline the on-going monitoring of
water quality from this device is not considered necessary considering the small size
of the development.
The bioretention system will be dedicated to Council, who as the asset custodian, will
be responsible for the on-going maintenance of the water quality device.
Maintenance for the bioretention basin may involve the following:
1. Scheduled inspections;
2. Removal of noxious plants or weeds;
3. Maintaining the desired vegetation;
4. Repairing erosion;
5. Unblocking inlets and outlets;
6. Removing litter and debris;
7. Managing algal or moss growth;
8. Maintaining the permeability of the filtration.
Operations and maintenance should be conducted in accordance with the
Maintaining Vegetated Stormwater Assets (Feb 2012) guideline.
18
Page 21
6 Conclusions
It can be seen from the results, presented in Table 2-6 that the treatment proposed
for the development site achieves the performance criteria set by the NSC. Annual
Load Reductions of Total Suspended Solids (TSS), Total Phosphorus, Total Nitrogen
(TN) and Gross Pollutants (GP) between the Mitigated and Unmitigated Scenarios
have been achieved.
It is proposed that a diversion pipe be introduced between the south-east corner of
the site and the existing natural waterway approximately 100m south. The proposed
diversion pipe will redirect the change in peak flows to prevent nuisance flow from
affecting adjoining private properties and the road reserve, refer Section 3.1.7.
It has been determined from WBNM regional hydraulic routing analysis that the time
of peak flows in the local sub-catchments do not coincide to create any significant
change in peak flows associated with the change in impervious characteristics from
the developed site. Council’s non-increasing in nuisance flooding from stormwater
flows. criteria has been achieved , Table 3-5 provides a comparison of the existing and
developed (no mitigation) flows from the hydrologic model.
This plan demonstrates that effective treatment of stormwater at the proposed
development can be achieved through the integration of Water Sensitive Urban
Design (WSUD) principles. Through the incorporation of a bioretention, the plan
successfully demonstrates:
• Compliance with the requirements of NSC’s Load Based Objectives;
• Ecological sustainability in terms of the development’s impact upon receiving
waters and the viability of the proposed site development; and
• It is noted that there is a very minor increase in peak flow within the waterway
traversing Pottery Street it is considered that no nuisance flooding would
result from stormwater flows of peak flows in the 1, 2, 5, 10, 20, 50 and 100
year ARI storm event, with site discharge being directed to a lawful point of
discharge.
19
Page 22
7 References
1. Boyd et al (2019), “WBNM User Guide”.
2. Bureau of Meteorology, Online Rainfall IFD Data System
‘http://www.bom.gov.au/water/designRainfalls/revised-ifd/’
3. Department of Infrastructure, Local Government and Planning (2017), “State
Planning Policy”.
4. Department of Energy and Water Supply (2013), “Queensland Urban
Drainage Manual – 3rd Edition”.
5. Institute of Engineers Australia (2001), “Australian Rainfall and Runoff”.
6. Water by Design (2010), “MUSIC Modelling Guidelines Version 1.0”.
7. Institute of Public Works Engineering Australasia, Queensland Division (2017),
“Queensland Urban Drainage Manual – 4th Edition”.
8. Noosa Shire Council (2018a), “Drainage Code”.
9. Noosa Shire Council (2018b), “Flood Hazards Overlay Code”.
20
Page 23
Appendix 1: Site Layout [OCR of page images] x aquaintel Appendix 1: Site Layout Intelligent Water Management Solutions
Page 24
BRIAN NAISMITH
Development Consultant
E-MAIL
[email protected]
MOBILE
0477 925 871
[OCR of page images]
7
495 MCH591 19
RP35066
Conservation 2 1 i
Covenant ~ ~ Ly
: 2 Els Ly RED
RP124556 7675m 8 S Oe | |
So .
_— / S |S | & STREET il
{ \ S) N
8 10348 m? ¢ | <p eee oe
S.___ NEW ROAD ty
~ — 7
/ 6 5 4 5 RP71117
2
1010m? | 1000m*| 1000m o
/ a 2 —] DRAINAGE
EASEMENT EASEMENT. EASEMENT RESERVE
4
RP124556 21 22 1 1
RP148139 RP66341
SP285519
STAGING STAGING
LSTAGE ONE | LOTS 1 to 8 | [STAGE TWO| LOTS 7 to 10 |
cans cre manna or Conservation
Contours and deta shown are based on satellite imagery Covenant
and are provided by Noosa Shire Council 5
Contour interval 1 metre RP124556 675 m? 3
4 9875 m’ 4 ( SS
: oe, _ Sin pe24566 8875 mi’ / \\. NEW ROAD.
Client: ELLEN LEAPE REAR
Proposed Subdivision BRIAN NAISMITH / 10 /
30 Pottery Street, Pomona Development Consultant / 2 J 6 5
Lot 496 on Plan MCH591 / 1673m /
PARISH: ZTUCHEKO/ CouNTY: March [email protected] L 4
MOBILE 04 | 29
Plan No: 3365 Prop A Ver 2d Scale: 1:1000 0477 925 871 Pi | 22
Prepared By: BFN Date. rd June 2020 SP285519 /
Page 25
Appendix 2: Site Rational Method and WBNM Outputs [OCR of page images] x aquaintel Appendix 2: Site Rational Method and WBNM Outputs Intelligent Water Management Solutions
Page 26
RATIONAL METHOD SUMMARY & RAINFALL DATA
Project Pottery Street, Pomona
Project # 2016 IFD Existing
Rainfall IFD Input Data (Australian Rainfall and Runoff)
2 2 2 50 50 50
I1 I12 I72 I1 I12 I72 F2 F50 G
Rainfall Intensity (mm/hr)
DURATION AVERAGE RECURRENCE INTERVAL (years)
(hours) (minutes) 1 yr 2 yr 5 yr 10 yr 20 yr 50 yr 100 yr
0.083 5 109 123 166 194 222 258 285
0.1 6 105 118 159 186 212 246 271
0.167 10 90 102 137 160 181 209 229
0.25 15 77 86 116 135 154 177 194
0.333 20 67 75 101 118 134 155 170
0.417 25 59 67 90 105 119 138 152
0.5 30 53 60 81 95 108 125 138
0.75 45 41.9 47.2 64 75 86 100 110
1 60 34.9 39.3 53 63 72 84 94
1.5 90 26.8 30.3 41.3 48.9 56 66 74
2 120 22.3 25.2 34.5 41.0 47.4 56 63
3 180 17.2 19.5 27.0 32.2 37.5 44.6 50
4.5 270 13.3 15.2 21.3 25.6 29.9 35.8 40.4
6 360 11.2 12.8 18.1 21.9 25.7 30.8 34.9
9 540 8.79 10.2 14.6 17.7 20.8 25.2 28.6
12 720 7.43 8.63 12.5 15.3 18.0 21.9 24.9
18 1080 5.86 6.86 10.1 12.4 14.7 18.0 20.5
Catchment Data
Details: 2016 IFD Exsiting
Variable Value Units 6.00 Standard inlet time
Area: 1.256 ha
C10 0.59 fraction
Rational Method Summary
Adopted Time of Concentration (tc) 6.00 Minutes (or 0.10 hours)
AVERAGE RECURRENCE INTERVAL (years)
Variable 1 yr 2 yr 5 yr 10 yr 20 yr 50 yr 100 yr
Freq Factor 0.80 0.85 0.95 1.00 1.05 1.15 1.20
Intensity (mm/hr) 105.00 118.00 159.00 186.00 212.00 246.00 271.00
3
Discharge (m /s) 0.173 0.207 0.311 0.383 0.459 0.583 0.670
H:\19\19-0155 Aquaintel Project Work\2020023_30PotteryStreetSWMP\Hydrology\Rational_Method_Pottery.xlsm 23/07/2020
[OCR of page images]
RATIONAL METHOD SUMMARY & RAINFALL DATA
Project Pottery Street, Pomona
Project # 2016 IFD Existing
Rainfall IFD Input Data (Australian Rainfall and Runoff)
am "ho "Le 5ey OL Le F2 F590 G
Rainfall Intensity (mm/hr
DURATION AVERAGE RECURRENCE INTERVAL (years)
(hours) | (minutes) 1 yr 2 yr 5 yr 10 yr 20 yr 50 yr 100 yr
0.083 5 109 123 166 194 222 258 285
0.1 6 105 118 159 186 212 246 271
0.167 10 90 102 137 160 181 209 229
0.25 15 77 86 116 135 154 177 194
0.333 20 67 75 101 118 134 155 170
0.417 25 59 67 90 105 119 138 152
0.5 30 53 60 81 95 108 125 138
0.75 45 41.9 47.2 64 75 86 100 110
1 60 34.9 39.3 53 63 72 84 94
1.5 90 26.8 30.3 41.3 48.9 56 66 74
2 120 22.3 25.2 34.5 41.0 47.4 56 63
3 180 17.2 19.5 27.0 32.2 37.5 44.6 50
4.5 270 13.3 15.2 21.3 25.6 29.9 35.8 40.4
6 360 11.2 12.8 18.1 21.9 25.7 30.8 34.9
9 540 8.79 10.2 14.6 17.7 20.8 25.2 28.6
12 720 7.43 8.63 12.5 15.3 18.0 21.9 24.9
18 1080 5.86 6.86 10.1 12.4 14.7 18.0 20.5
Catchment Data
Details: 2016 IFD Exsiting
Variable Value Units 6.00 Standard inlet time
Area: 1.256 ha
Cio 0.59 fraction
Rational Method Summary
Adopted Time of Concentration (tc) 6.00 Minutes (or 0.10 hours)
AVERAGE RECURRENCE INTERVAL (years)
Variable Tyr 2 yr 5 yr 10 yr 20 yr 30 yr T00 yr
Freq Factor 0.80 0.85 0.95 1.00 1.05 1.15 1.20
Intensity (mm/hr) 105.00 118.00 159.00 186.00 212.00 246.00 271.00
Discharge (m*/s) 0.173 0.207 0.311 0.383 0.459 0.583 0.670
H:\19\19-0155 Aquaintel Project Work\2020023_30PotteryStreetSWMP\Hydrology\Rational_Method_Pottery.xlsm
23/07/2020
Page 27
iWBNM Lite
Comment#1 Pottery E01
Comment#2 Existing IMPORT SAVE & RUN
Comment#3 CLEAR_ALL BROWSE WBNM_Run: H:\19\19-0155 Aquaintel Project Work\2020023_30PotteryStreetSWMP\WBNM\wbnm2019_w64.exe
RESULTS_ONLY BROWSE ARR2019 Gauge H:\19\19-0155 Aquaintel Project Work\2020023_30PotteryStreetSWMP\WBNM\PomonaIFD.csv
Note this must be in same location as runfile
GENERAL_PARAMETERS DEFAULTS BROWSE ARR_Catchment: QLD_ARR_Datahub.txt Note this must be in same location as runfile
Lag Parameter (C) 1.6 BROWSE ARR_Patterns: QLD_ECnorth_Increments.csv Note this must be in same location as runfile
Stream Lag Factor 1 LAST_BUILD: H:\19\19-0155 Aquaintel Project Work\2020023_30PotteryStreetSWMP\WBNM\Pottery_E01.wbn
Calculation Timestep 1 mins
Initial Loss 0 mm
Continuing Loss Rate 2.5 mm/hr RAINGAUGE TIPS PomonaIFD
TOPOLOGY STORMS TIPS ARR STRUCTURE
Subarea Name Connects_to Area_ha Imp_% Storm# AEP (ARI) Dura_mins Subarea IWL D-Fact Type %Per to LS %Imp to LS
1 A01 SINK 1.256 5 1 1 10 HS
2 2 1 15 WEIRS Weir#1 Weir#2 PIPES Pipe#1 Pipe#2 Pipe#3 Elevation_m Storage_m3
3 3 1 20 Diverts to Sub Diverts to Sub
4 4 1 25 Crest Elev [m] Invert [m]
5 5 1 30 Length [m] No. Barrels
6 6 1 45 Weir Coeff Ent. Type
7 7 1 60 D_Fact Dia/(Width)[mm]
8 8 1 90 Directed to (Height)[mm]
9 9 1 120 Delay [mins] Disch-Factor
10 10 1 180 Directed to
11 11 1 270 Delay [mins]
12 12 1 360
SINK
RESULTS
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Structure Averages 1 AEP 10 mins 1 AEP 15 mins 1 AEP 20 mins 1 AEP 25 mins 1 AEP 30 mins
1 AEP 45 mins 1 AEP 60 mins 1 AEP 90 mins 1 AEP 120 mins
1 AEP 180 mins 1 AEP 270 mins 1 AEP 360 mins
A01 0.5598 0.569 0.5385 0.5478 0.5413 0.4993 0.4443 0.3999 0.3513 0.3234 0.2875 0.3165
Structure_averages
Inflow Peak [m3/s]
Outflow Peak [m3/s]
Inflow Volume [m3]
Max Vol Stored [m3]
Max Water Elev [m]
ARR2019 Actual above mean
A01 0.561 0.579 0.548 0.575 0.565 0.542 0.462 0.414 0.364 0.332 0.307 0.335
Page 28
iWBNM Lite
Comment#1 Pottery D01
Comment#2 Developed IMPORT SAVE & RUN
Comment#3 CLEAR_ALL BROWSE WBNM_Run: H:\19\19-0155 Aquaintel Project Work\2020023_30PotteryStreetSWMP\WBNM\wbnm2019_w64.exe
RESULTS_ONLY BROWSE ARR2019 Gauge H:\19\19-0155 Aquaintel Project Work\2020023_30PotteryStreetSWMP\WBNM\PomonaIFD.csv
Note this must be in same location as runfile
GENERAL_PARAMETERS DEFAULTS BROWSE ARR_Catchment: QLD_ARR_Datahub.txt Note this must be in same location as runfile
Lag Parameter (C) 1.6 BROWSE ARR_Patterns: QLD_ECnorth_Increments.csv Note this must be in same location as runfile
Stream Lag Factor 1 LAST_BUILD: H:\19\19-0155 Aquaintel Project Work\2020023_30PotteryStreetSWMP\WBNM\Pottery_D01.wbn
Calculation Timestep 1 mins
Initial Loss 0 mm
Continuing Loss Rate 2.5 mm/hr RAINGAUGE TIPS PomonaIFD
TOPOLOGY STORMS TIPS ARR STRUCTURE
Subarea Name Connects_to Area_ha Imp_% Storm# AEP (ARI) Dura_mins Subarea IWL D-Fact Type %Per to LS %Imp to LS
1 A01 SINK 1.256 48 1 1 10 HS
2 2 1 15 WEIRS Weir#1 Weir#2 PIPES Pipe#1 Pipe#2 Pipe#3 Elevation_m Storage_m3
3 3 1 20 Diverts to Sub Diverts to Sub
4 4 1 25 Crest Elev [m] Invert [m]
5 5 1 30 Length [m] No. Barrels
6 6 1 45 Weir Coeff Ent. Type
7 7 1 60 D_Fact Dia/(Width)[mm]
8 8 1 90 Directed to (Height)[mm]
9 9 1 120 Delay [mins] Disch-Factor
10 10 1 180 Directed to
11 11 1 270 Delay [mins]
12 12 1 360
SINK
RESULTS
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Structure Averages 1 AEP 10 mins 1 AEP 15 mins 1 AEP 20 mins 1 AEP 25 mins 1 AEP 30 mins
1 AEP 45 mins 1 AEP 60 mins 1 AEP 90 mins 1 AEP 120 mins
1 AEP 180 mins 1 AEP 270 mins 1 AEP 360 mins
A01 0.693 0.68 0.625 0.6319 0.6175 0.5638 0.5033 0.4465 0.3989 0.3493 0.3112 0.3339
Structure_averages
Inflow Peak [m3/s]
Outflow Peak [m3/s]
Inflow Volume [m3]
Max Vol Stored [m3]
Max Water Elev [m]
ARR2019 Actual above mean
A01 0.7 0.692 0.649 0.633 0.621 0.594 0.548 0.448 0.405 0.359 0.333 0.359
Page 29
Appendix 3: Regional Rational Method and WBNM Outputs [OCR of page images] x aquaintel Appendix 3: Regional Rational Method and WBNM Outputs Intelligent Water Management Solutions
Page 30
RATIONAL METHOD SUMMARY & RAINFALL DATA
Project Pottery Street, Pomona
Project # 2016 IFD Existing REGIONAL
Rainfall IFD Input Data (Australian Rainfall and Runoff)
2 2 2 50 50 50
I1 I12 I72 I1 I12 I72 F2 F50 G
Rainfall Intensity (mm/hr)
DURATION AVERAGE RECURRENCE INTERVAL (years)
(hours) (minutes) 1 yr 2 yr 5 yr 10 yr 20 yr 50 yr 100 yr
0.083 5 109 123 166 194 222 258 285
0.1 6 105 118 159 186 212 246 271
0.167 10 90 102 137 160 181 209 229
0.25 15 77 86 116 135 154 177 194
0.333 20 67 75 101 118 134 155 170
0.417 25 59 67 90 105 119 138 152
0.5 30 53 60 81 95 108 125 138
0.75 45 41.9 47.2 64 75 86 100 110
1 60 34.9 39.3 53 63 72 84 94
1.5 90 26.8 30.3 41.3 48.9 56 66 74
2 120 22.3 25.2 34.5 41.0 47.4 56 63
3 180 17.2 19.5 27.0 32.2 37.5 44.6 50
4.5 270 13.3 15.2 21.3 25.6 29.9 35.8 40.4
6 360 11.2 12.8 18.1 21.9 25.7 30.8 34.9
9 540 8.79 10.2 14.6 17.7 20.8 25.2 28.6
12 720 7.43 8.63 12.5 15.3 18.0 21.9 24.9
18 1080 5.86 6.86 10.1 12.4 14.7 18.0 20.5
Catchment Data
Details: 2016 IFD Exsiting REGIONAL
Variable Value Units 29.0 Bransby Williams
Area: 33.658 ha
C10 0.59 fraction
Rational Method Summary
Adopted Time of Concentration (tc) 29.0 Minutes (or 0.48 hours)
AVERAGE RECURRENCE INTERVAL (years)
Variable 1 yr 2 yr 5 yr 10 yr 20 yr 50 yr 100 yr
Freq Factor 0.80 0.85 0.95 1.00 1.05 1.15 1.20
Intensity (mm/hr) 54.43 61.36 82.65 96.62 109.97 127.32 140.50
3
Discharge (m /s) 2.404 2.879 4.335 5.334 6.374 8.083 9.308
H:\19\19-0155 Aquaintel Project Work\2020023_30PotteryStreetSWMP\Hydrology\Rational_Method_Pottery_REGIONAL.xlsm 28/07/2020
[OCR of page images]
RATIONAL METHOD SUMMARY & RAINFALL DATA
Project Pottery Street, Pomona
Project # 2016 IFD Existing REGIONAL
Rainfall IFD Input Data (Australian Rainfall and Runoff)
am "ho "Le 5ey OL Le F2 F590 G
Rainfall Intensity (mm/hr
DURATION AVERAGE RECURRENCE INTERVAL (years)
(hours) | (minutes) 1 yr 2 yr 5 yr 10 yr 20 yr 50 yr 100 yr
0.083 5 109 123 166 194 222 258 285
0.1 6 105 118 159 186 212 246 271
0.167 10 90 102 137 160 181 209 229
0.25 15 77 86 116 135 154 177 194
0.333 20 67 75 101 118 134 155 170
0.417 25 59 67 90 105 119 138 152
0.5 30 53 60 81 95 108 125 138
0.75 45 41.9 47.2 64 75 86 100 110
1 60 34.9 39.3 53 63 72 84 94
1.5 90 26.8 30.3 41.3 48.9 56 66 74
2 120 22.3 25.2 34.5 41.0 47.4 56 63
3 180 17.2 19.5 27.0 32.2 37.5 44.6 50
4.5 270 13.3 15.2 21.3 25.6 29.9 35.8 40.4
6 360 11.2 12.8 18.1 21.9 25.7 30.8 34.9
9 540 8.79 10.2 14.6 17.7 20.8 25.2 28.6
12 720 7.43 8.63 12.5 15.3 18.0 21.9 24.9
18 1080 5.86 6.86 10.1 12.4 14.7 18.0 20.5
Catchment Data
Details: 2016 IFD Exsiting REGIONAL
Variable Value Units 29.0 Bransby Williams
Area: 33.658 ha
Cio 0.59 fraction
Rational Method Summary
Adopted Time of Concentration (tc) 29.0 _ Minutes (or 0.48 hours)
AVERAGE RECURRENCE INTERVAL (years)
Variable Tyr 2 yr 5 yr 10 yr 20 yr 30 yr T00 yr
Freq Factor 0.80 0.85 0.95 1.00 1.05 1.15 1.20
Intensity (mm/hr) 54.43 61.36 82.65 96.62 109.97 127.32 140.50
Discharge (m*/s) 2.404 2.879 4.335 5.334 6.374 8.083 9.308
H:\19\19-0155 Aquaintel Project Work\2020023_30PotteryStreetSWMP\Hydrology\Rational_Method_Pottery REGIONAL.xism
28/07/2020
Page 31
iWBNM Lite
Comment#1 Pottery E01
Comment#2 Existing REGIONAL IMPORT SAVE & RUN
Comment#3 CLEAR_ALL BROWSE WBNM_Run: H:\19\19-0155 Aquaintel Project Work\2020023_30PotteryStreetSWMP\WBNM\Regional\wbnm2019_w64.exe
RESULTS_ONLY BROWSE ARR2019 Gauge H:\19\19-0155 Aquaintel Project Work\2020023_30PotteryStreetSWMP\WBNM\Regional\PomonaIFD.csv
Note this must be in same location as runfile
GENERAL_PARAMETERS DEFAULTS BROWSE ARR_Catchment: QLD_ARR_Datahub.txt Note this must be in same location as runfile
Lag Parameter (C) 1.6 BROWSE ARR_Patterns: QLD_ECnorth_Increments.csv Note this must be in same location as runfile
Stream Lag Factor 1 LAST_BUILD: H:\19\19-0155 Aquaintel Project Work\2020023_30PotteryStreetSWMP\WBNM\Regional\E01.wbn
Calculation Timestep 1 mins
Initial Loss 0 mm
Continuing Loss Rate 2.5 mm/hr RAINGAUGE TIPS PomonaIFD
TOPOLOGY STORMS TIPS ARR STRUCTURE
Subarea Name Connects_to Area_ha Imp_% Storm# AEP (ARI) Dura_mins Subarea IWL D-Fact Type %Per to LS %Imp to LS
1 A1 A2 4.371 0 1 1 10 HS
2 A2 A3 4.694 5 2 1 15 WEIRS Weir#1 Weir#2 PIPES Pipe#1 Pipe#2 Pipe#3 Elevation_m Storage_m3
3 A3 Node 4.298 5 3 1 20 Diverts to Sub Diverts to Sub
4 B1 B2 3.499 0 4 1 25 Crest Elev [m] Invert [m]
5 B2 Node 4.991 1 5 1 30 Length [m] No. Barrels
6 Node C1 0.001 0 6 1 45 Weir Coeff Ent. Type
7 C1 SINK 11.805 15 7 1 60 D_Fact Dia/(Width)[mm]
8 8 1 90 Directed to (Height)[mm]
9 9 1 120 Delay [mins] Disch-Factor
10 10 1 180 Directed to
11 11 1 270 Delay [mins]
12 12 1 360
SINK
RESULTS
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Structure Averages 1 AEP 10 mins 1 AEP 15 mins 1 AEP 20 mins 1 AEP 25 mins 1 AEP 30 mins
1 AEP 45 mins 1 AEP 60 mins 1 AEP 90 mins 1 AEP 120 mins
1 AEP 180 mins 1 AEP 270 mins 1 AEP 360 mins
A1 1.3726 1.5258 1.5341 1.5662 1.546 1.4387 1.3186 1.211 1.081 1.0108 0.8884 1.0044
A2 1.998 2.4721 2.684 2.8335 2.8165 2.6693 2.49 2.2997 2.0813 1.9246 1.741 1.9436
A3 2.1606 2.8862 3.3698 3.7013 3.7645 3.7147 3.4973 3.1918 2.9198 2.6494 2.4521 2.7377
B1 1.1707 1.2818 1.2779 1.2998 1.2842 1.193 1.0855 0.9946 0.883 0.8256 0.7248 0.8185
B2 1.8987 2.3485 2.5398 2.6761 2.6522 2.513 2.3421 2.1635 1.9553 1.8092 1.6343 1.8263
Node 4.0591 5.2347 5.9098 6.3774 6.4022 6.2119 5.8354 5.3233 4.8699 4.4555 4.083 4.552
C1 4.4137 5.7055 6.7609 7.6003 8.1096 8.4848 8.1144 7.5599 6.8939 6.2183 5.8311 6.5554
Structure_averages
Inflow Peak [m3/s]
Outflow Peak [m3/s]
Inflow Volume [m3]
Max Vol Stored [m3]
Max Water Elev [m]
ARR2019 Actual above mean
A1 1.374 1.556 1.539 1.582 1.584 1.466 1.326 1.221 1.097 1.02 0.92 1.018
A2 1.999 2.497 2.698 2.854 2.88 2.736 2.549 2.331 2.097 2.11 1.742 2.005
A3 2.161 2.89 3.389 3.706 3.766 3.923 3.627 3.502 3.008 2.702 2.608 2.819
B1 1.172 1.309 1.278 1.303 1.303 1.213 1.094 1.029 0.897 0.835 0.757 0.826
B2 1.899 2.371 2.554 2.696 2.717 2.573 2.401 2.192 1.973 1.983 1.636 1.882
Node 4.063 5.242 5.917 6.414 6.413 6.276 5.877 5.824 4.887 4.505 4.083 4.702
C1 4.414 5.732 6.78 7.61 8.13 8.493 8.276 7.855 6.971 6.321 6.067 6.623
[OCR of page images]
‘Comment#i] Pottery E01
Comment#2|Existing REGIONAL IMPORT SAVE & RUN
Comment#i3 CLEAR_ALL BROWSE
RESULTS_ONLY BROWSE
[[eerautts BROWSE
Lag Parameter (C) 16 BROWSE
Stream Lag Factor|
Calculation Timestep 1|mins
Initial Loss O]mm
Continuing Loss Rate| 2.5|mm/hr Hos TIPS PomonalFD
Road
Subarea Name Storm AEP (ARI) Dur: Subarea
TAL 1 1 10
2|Az 2 1 15
3|A3 3 1 20 Diverts to Sub
4{B1 4 1 25 Crest Elev [m]
5|B2 5 1 30 Length {m]
6|Node 6 1 45 Weir Coeff
7/c1 7 1 60 D_Fact
3| 8 1 90 Directed to
9 9 1 120 Delay [mins]
10 10 1 180
uu a 1 270
2 2 1 360
SINK
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Structure Averages AEP 10 mins 1 AEP 15 mins 1AEP 20 mins 1AEP 25 mins 1AEP 30 mi1AEP 45 mins 1AEP60mins 1AEP9Omins 1 AEP 120n1 AEP 180 mins
AL 1.3726 1.5258 1.5341 15662 1.546 1.4387 1.3186 1.211 1.081 1.0108
Az 1.998 2.4721 2.684 2.8335 2.8165 2.6693 2.49 2.2997 2.0813 1.9246
a3 2.1606 2.8862 3.3698 3.7013 3.7645 3.7147 3.4973 3.1918 2.9198 2.6494
B1 1.1707 1.2818 1.2779 1.2998 1.2842 1.193 1.0855 0.9946 0.883 0.8256
82 1.8987 2.3485 2.5398 2.6761 2.6522 2.513 2.3421 2.1635 1.9553 1.8092
Node 4.0591 5.2347 5.9098 6.3774 6.4022 6.2119 5.8354 5.3233 4.8699 4.4555,
a 4.4137 5.7055 6.7609 7.6003 8.1096 8.4848 8.1144 7.5599 6.8939 6.2183
Structure_averages
Inflow Peak [m3/s]
Outflow Peak [m3/s]
Inflow Volume [m3]
Max Vol Stored [m3]
Max Water Elev [m]
‘ARR2019 Actual above mean
AL 1.374 1.556 1.539 1582 1.584 1.466 1.326 1.221 1.097 1.02
Az 1.999 2.497 2.698 2.854 2.88 2.736 2.549 2.331 2.097 241
a3 2.161 2.89 3.389 3.706 3.766 3.923 3.627 3.502 3.008 2.702
B1 1.172 1.309 1.278 1.303 1.303 1.213 1.094 1.029 0.897 0.835
82 1.899 2.371 2.554 2.696 2.717 2.573 2.401 2.192 1.973 1.983
Node 4.063 5.242 5.917 6414 6.413 6.276 5.877 5.824 4.887 4.505
a 4.414 5.732 6.78 7.61 8.13 8.493 8.276 7855 6.971 6.321
WBNM_Run: H:\19\19-0155 Aquaintel Project Work\2020023_30PotteryStreetSWMP\WBNM \Regional\wbnm2019_w64.exe
ARR2019 Gauge H:\19\19-0155 Aquaintel Project Work\2020023_30PotteryStreetS Note this must be in same location as runfile
ARR_Catchment: QLD_ARR_Datahub.txt
ARR_Patterns: QLD_ECnorth_Increments.csv
LAST_BUILD: H:|19\19-0155 Aquaintel Project Work\2020023_30PotteryStreetSWMP\WBNM\Regional\E01.wbn
Note this must be in same location as runfile
Note this must be in same location as runfile
WL
D-Fact %Perto LS %lmp to LS
Weir#t1 Weirlt2
Pipe#1 Pipe#2 Pipe#3_| Elevationm —_Storage_m3
Diverts to Sub
Invert [m]
No. Barrels
Ent. Type
Dia/(Width)[(mm]
(Height)[mm]
Disch-Factor
Directed to
Delay [mins]
1 12
1 AEP 270 mins 1 AEP 360 mins
0.8884 = 1.0044
1.741 1.9436
2.4521 2.7377
0.7248 (0.8185
1.6343 1.8263
4.083 4.552
5.8311 6.5554
0.92 1.018
1.742 2.005
2.608 2.819
0.757 0.826
1.636 1.882
4.083 4.702
6.067 6.623
Page 32
iWBNM Lite
Comment#1 Pottery D01
Comment#2 Developed REGIONAL IMPORT SAVE & RUN
Comment#3 CLEAR_ALL BROWSE WBNM_Run: H:\19\19-0155 Aquaintel Project Work\2020023_30PotteryStreetSWMP\WBNM\Regional\wbnm2019_w64.exe
RESULTS_ONLY BROWSE ARR2019 Gauge H:\19\19-0155 Aquaintel Project Work\2020023_30PotteryStreetSWMP\WBNM\Regional\PomonaIFD.csv
Note this must be in same location as runfile
GENERAL_PARAMETERS DEFAULTS BROWSE ARR_Catchment: QLD_ARR_Datahub.txt Note this must be in same location as runfile
Lag Parameter (C) 1.6 BROWSE ARR_Patterns: QLD_ECnorth_Increments.csv Note this must be in same location as runfile
Stream Lag Factor 1 LAST_BUILD: H:\19\19-0155 Aquaintel Project Work\2020023_30PotteryStreetSWMP\WBNM\Regional\D01.wbn
Calculation Timestep 1 mins
Initial Loss 0 mm
Continuing Loss Rate 2.5 mm/hr RAINGAUGE TIPS PomonaIFD
TOPOLOGY STORMS TIPS ARR STRUCTURE
Subarea Name Connects_to Area_ha Imp_% Storm# AEP (ARI) Dura_mins Subarea IWL D-Fact Type %Per to LS %Imp to LS
1 A1 A2 4.371 0 1 1 10 HS
2 A2 A3 4.694 5 2 1 15 WEIRS Weir#1 Weir#2 PIPES Pipe#1 Pipe#2 Pipe#3 Elevation_m Storage_m3
3 A3 Node 4.298 5 3 1 20 Diverts to Sub Diverts to Sub
4 B1 B2 3.499 0 4 1 25 Crest Elev [m] Invert [m]
5 B2 Node 4.991 5 5 1 30 Length [m] No. Barrels
6 Node C1 0.001 0 6 1 45 Weir Coeff Ent. Type
7 C1 SINK 11.805 15 7 1 60 D_Fact Dia/(Width)[mm]
8 8 1 90 Directed to (Height)[mm]
9 9 1 120 Delay [mins] Disch-Factor
10 10 1 180 Directed to
11 11 1 270 Delay [mins]
12 12 1 360
SINK
RESULTS
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Structure Averages 1 AEP 10 mins 1 AEP 15 mins 1 AEP 20 mins 1 AEP 25 mins 1 AEP 30 mins
1 AEP 45 mins 1 AEP 60 mins 1 AEP 90 mins 1 AEP 120 mins
1 AEP 180 mins 1 AEP 270 mins 1 AEP 360 mins
A1 1.3726 1.5258 1.5341 1.5662 1.546 1.4387 1.3186 1.211 1.081 1.0108 0.8884 1.0044
A2 1.998 2.4721 2.684 2.8335 2.8165 2.6693 2.49 2.2997 2.0813 1.9246 1.741 1.9436
A3 2.1606 2.8862 3.3698 3.7013 3.7645 3.7147 3.4973 3.1918 2.9198 2.6494 2.4521 2.7377
B1 1.1707 1.2818 1.2779 1.2998 1.2842 1.193 1.0855 0.9946 0.883 0.8256 0.7248 0.8185
B2 1.9796 2.4 2.5686 2.6942 2.6809 2.5262 2.3532 2.1767 1.9668 1.824 1.6432 1.8369
Node 4.14 5.2861 5.9385 6.3952 6.4273 6.2188 5.8429 5.3355 4.8794 4.47 4.0909 4.5588
C1 4.4594 5.7589 6.8091 7.6437 8.1421 8.4974 8.1285 7.5706 6.9049 6.2296 5.8394 6.564
Structure_averages
Inflow Peak [m3/s]
Outflow Peak [m3/s]
Inflow Volume [m3]
Max Vol Stored [m3]
Max Water Elev [m]
ARR2019 Actual above mean
A1 1.374 1.556 1.539 1.582 1.584 1.466 1.326 1.221 1.097 1.02 0.92 1.018
A2 1.999 2.497 2.698 2.854 2.88 2.736 2.549 2.331 2.097 2.11 1.742 2.005
A3 2.161 2.89 3.389 3.706 3.766 3.923 3.627 3.502 3.008 2.702 2.608 2.819
B1 1.172 1.309 1.278 1.303 1.303 1.213 1.094 1.029 0.897 0.835 0.757 0.826
B2 1.981 2.43 2.586 2.714 2.753 2.59 2.411 2.222 1.978 1.828 1.645 1.892
Node 4.147 5.32 5.949 6.431 6.436 6.293 5.886 5.837 4.893 4.514 4.092 4.711
C1 4.46 5.786 6.831 7.655 8.161 8.504 8.281 7.867 6.988 6.327 6.072 6.636
[OCR of page images]
‘Comment#i]Pottery DO1
Comment##2|Developed REGIONAL IMPORT SAVE & RUN
Comment#i3 CLEAR_ALL BROWSE
RESULTS_ONLY BROWSE
[[eerautts BROWSE
Lag Parameter (C) 16 BROWSE
Stream Lag Factor|
Calculation Timestep 1|mins
Initial Loss O]mm
Continuing Loss Rate| 2.5|mm/hr Hos TIPS PomonalFD
Road
Subarea Name Storm AEP (ARI) Dur: Subarea
TAL 1 1 10
2|Az 2 1 15
3|A3 3 1 20 Diverts to Sub
4{B1 4 1 25 Crest Elev [m]
5|B2 5 1 30 Length {m]
6|Node 6 1 45 Weir Coeff
7/c1 7 1 60 D_Fact
3| 8 1 90 Directed to
9 9 1 120 Delay [mins]
10 10 1 180
uu a 1 270
2 2 1 360
SINK
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Structure Averages AEP 10 mins 1 AEP 15 mins 1AEP 20 mins 1AEP 25 mins 1AEP 30 mi1AEP 45 mins 1AEP60mins 1AEP9Omins 1 AEP 120n1 AEP 180 mins
AL 1.3726 1.5258 1.5341 15662 1.546 1.4387 1.3186 1.211 1.081 1.0108
Az 1.998 2.4721 2.684 2.8335 2.8165 2.6693 2.49 2.2997 2.0813 1.9246
a3 2.1606 2.8862 3.3698 3.7013 3.7645 3.7147 3.4973 3.1918 2.9198 2.6494
B1 1.1707 1.2818 1.2779 1.2998 1.2842 1.193 1.0855 0.9946 0.883 0.8256
82 1.9796 24 2.5686 2.6942 2.6809 2.5262 2.3532 2.1767 1.9668 1.824
Node 4.14 5.2861 5.9385 6.3952 6.4273 6.2188 5.8429 5.3355 4.8794 4.47
a 4.4594 5.7589 6.8091 7.6437 8.1421 8.4974 8.1285, 7.5706 6.9049 6.2296
Structure_averages
Inflow Peak [m3/s]
Outflow Peak [m3/s]
Inflow Volume [m3]
Max Vol Stored [m3]
Max Water Elev [m]
‘ARR2019 Actual above mean
AL 1.374 1.556 1.539 1582 1.584 1.466 1.326 1.221 1.097 1.02
Az 1.999 2.497 2.698 2.854 2.88 2.736 2.549 2.331 2.097 241
a3 2.161 2.89 3.389 3.706 3.766 3.923 3.627 3.502 3.008 2.702
B1 1.172 1.309 1.278 1.303 1.303 1.213 1.094 1.029 0.897 0.835
82 1.981 2.43 2.586 2714 2.753 2.59 2.411 2.222 1.978 1.828
Node 4.147 5.32 5.949 6.431 6.436 6.293 5.886 5.837 4.893 4514
a 4.46 5.786 6.831 7.655 8.161 8.504 8.281 7.867 6.988 6.327
WBNM_Run: H:\19\19-0155 Aquaintel Project Work\2020023_30PotteryStreetSWMP\WBNM \Regional\wbnm2019_w64.exe
ARR2019 Gauge H:\19\19-0155 Aquaintel Project Work\2020023_30PotteryStreetS Note this must be in same location as runfile
ARR_Catchment: QLD_ARR_Datahub.txt
ARR_Patterns: QLD_ECnorth_Increments.csv
LAST_BUILD: H:|19\19-0155 Aquaintel Project Work\2020023_30PotteryStreetSWMP\WBNM\Regional\D01.wbn
Note this must be in same location as runfile
Note this must be in same location as runfile
WL
D-Fact %Perto LS %lmp to LS
Weir#t1 Weirlt2
Pipe#1 Pipe#2 Pipe#3_| Elevationm —_Storage_m3
Diverts to Sub
Invert [m]
No. Barrels
Ent. Type
Dia/(Width)[(mm]
(Height)[mm]
Disch-Factor
Directed to
Delay [mins]
1 12
1 AEP 270 mins 1 AEP 360 mins
0.8884 = 1.0044
1.741 1.9436
2.4521 2.7377
0.7248 (0.8185
1.6432 1.8369
4.0909 4.5588
5.8394 6.564
0.92 1.018
1.742 2.005
2.608 2.819
0.757 0.826
1.645 1.892
4.092 4.711
6.072 6.636