Original source · versioned page text
Attachment D - Stormwater and Water Quality report
LOWER MILL SITE
CARPARK EXTENSIONS
STORMWATER TREATMENT AND WATER QUALITY
MANAGEMENT PLAN
FOR
NOOSA COUNCIL
FEBRUARY 2020
Callaghan & Toth
Civil, Environmental &
Hydraulic Engineers
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 (Attachment D - Stormwater and Water Quality report.pdf)
Searchable page text hides email addresses. Original files are unchanged and may show email addresses.
Full text of the other 36 pages
Page 2
Callaghan & Toth
DOCUMENT HISTORY
Document Reference: No: 2001_SWQMP_LowerMillSite.doc
Project Manager: Mitch Turner
Author: Jane Davissen BE (ENV)
Reviewer: Lex Toth NPER3 (ENV) (CIVIL) RPEQ 6069 CPESC
Client: Noosa Council
Contact Person: Mitch Turner
DISTRIBUTION LIST
POSITION ON
NAME ORGANIZATION MANAGEMENT TEAM REVISION REVISION REVISION
0 1 2
Mitch Turner Noosa Council Project Manager 1
Environmental / Civil
Lex Toth Callaghan & Toth 1
Engineers
Mark Lewis Noosa Council Assessment Officer 1
REVISION LIST
REVISION DATE DISTRIBUTED ISSUED BY CHECKED BY
0 6th February 2020 LT JD
The information contained in this report is confidential and proprietary to Callaghan and Toth. 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 Callaghan and Toth.
Callaghan and Toth reserve all legal rights and remedies in relation to infringement of its rights in
respect of its confidential information.
©Callaghan & Toth
2020
2
2001 Lower Mill Carpark Extension SWMP February 2020
Page 3
Callaghan & Toth
CONTENTS
1.0 SUMMARY ......................................................................................................................... 5
2.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 5
3.0 DESCRIPTION.................................................................................................................... 7
3.1 Contaminated Land: ......................................................................................................... 7
3.2 Proposed Works ............................................................................................................... 8
4.0 WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN ................................................................. 10
4.1 Background Lower Mill Site Stormwater Management ................................................ 10
4.2 Proposed On-Site Stormwater Treatment Process ......................................................... 10
4.3 MUSIC Model ................................................................................................................ 11
4.3.1 Source Nodes .......................................................................................................... 11
4.3.2 Treatment Nodes ..................................................................................................... 12
4.3.3 Rainfall Data ........................................................................................................... 13
4.4 MUSIC Modelling Results ............................................................................................. 15
4.4.1 Water Quality Objectives ........................................................................................ 15
4.4.2 Assessment of Results............................................................................................. 16
5.0 FLOODING ASSESSMENT SUMMARY ....................................................................... 17
5.1 Existing Conditions ........................................................................................................ 17
5.2 Proposed Drainage System............................................................................................. 17
6.0 PROPOSED REMEDIATION OF STORMWATER DEVICES ..................................... 18
6.1 Biobasins ........................................................................................................................ 18
7 CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS ..................................................................... 19
APPENDIX A - MUSIC Results ............................................................................................ A
APPENDIX B - Site Management Plan – Contaminated Land .............................................. B
APPENDIX C - IPWEAQ Standard Drawings....................................................................... C
3
2001 Lower Mill Carpark Extension SWMP February 2020
Page 4
Callaghan & Toth
LIST OF REFERENCES
1. EN HEALTH (2004) Guidance on the Use of Rainwater Tanks.
2. Engineers Australia (2006) Australian Runoff Quality. Australian Runoff Quality
Guidelines.
3. Healthy Waterways (2006) Water Sensitive Urban Design Technical Design Guidelines
for South East Queensland
4. Queensland Development Code Part 4.3 (Oct 2008) Alternative Water Sources.
5. Water by Design, MUSIC Modelling Guidelines for South East Queensland – Version 1
(December 2010)
6. Water by Design, Deemed to Comply Solutions – Stormwater Quality Management
(South East Queensland), May 2010
7. Wong, T., Breen, P. & Lloyd, S. (2000) Water Sensitive Road Design – Design Options
for Improving Stormwater Quality of Road Runoff. CRC for Catchment Hydrology
Technical Report No 00/1.
8. Hydrology & Water Management Consulting(Oct 2019), Cooroy Hinterland Park Flood
Assessment (Ref:J00318R1V1)
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1.1 Site Location Plan……………………………………………………… 6
Plan No. 2001-01 Proposed Development Catchment Plan………...............................9
Figure 4.1 MUSIC Model for the Proposed Development……………………… 14
LIST OF TABLES
Table 4.1 MUSIC Catchment Areas……………………………………………….13
Table 4.2 Comparison of Load Reductions……………………………………….17
4
2001 Lower Mill Carpark Extension SWMP February 2020
Page 5
Callaghan & Toth
1.0 SUMMARY
The key points of this investigation are as follows:
1. Runoff from new access roads, car parks and landscaped areas around the existing
Lower Mill site buildings is to be cleaned of nutrients and gross pollutants via the
existing refurbished biobasins and existing and new grass swales. Treated runoff is then
released to existing outlets into the adjacent Cooroy Creek.
2. Pollutant loads from the development are to be attenuated.
3. The flood study detailed that filling for the new carpark areas will not affect flood levels in
the Cooroy Flood Study.
4. The previous MUSIC model for the Lower Mill development, did incorporate a similar
sized carpark on Lot 5, compared to the proposed new carpark on Lot 7.
2.0 INTRODUCTION
This Stormwater Quality Management Plan (SQMP) has been prepared as part of a Material
Change of Use application to Noosa Council. This SQMP is in accordance with:
1. Water Sensitive Design Code in the Noosa Plan, and
2. The latest Water Sensitive Urban Design Technical Design Guidelines for South East
Queensland, published by Health Waterways.
The proposed carparking and new access road works are located on Lot 5 SP213104 and Lot 7
SP173771 and the site is shown in Site Location Plan, Fig 1.1. The site is located at 4-8 Lower
Mill Road, Cooroy and the Cooroy Creek Bushland Reserve (Environmental Reserve 16 Lower
Mill Road, Cooroy).
This SQMP considers the new hardstand areas, including new access road, carparks, and
footpaths, for the existing community uses at the Lower Mill site. The proposed new carparks
will also service the existing Library and the proposed new Hinterland Playground.
There is a total of 52 new carparks proposed in two locations at the Lower Mill site:
22 carparks adjacent the existing buildings on Lot 5 require formalisation with some
extension to existing asphalt or concrete; and
30 new carparks on Lot 7.
In order to receive planning approval from Noosa Council, this site must demonstrate that it
complies with Council’s Water Sensitive Design Code and that the storm water runoff will not
change the surrounding hydrology. There is an existing biobasin located on Lot 7 SP173771
which can accept the flows from the new hardstand areas for treatment. Two existing grass
swales will also treat runoff and two new grass swales will treat and convey flows to the existing
biobasin. These devices will enable the water quality objectives to be achieved.
The Model for Urban Stormwater Improvement Conceptualization (MUSIC) has been used to
assess the suitability of various treatment devices and to model existing and predicted pollution
export loads and concentrations.
5
2001 Lower Mill Carpark Extension SWMP February 2020
Page 6
Callaghan & Toth
Civil, Environmental &
Hydraulic Engineers
[OCR of page images]
©
gua
«
%
3,
% See
2 re Ss Kauri st
© 2
s 8
> = s
a A 3
§ : 3 = a
2 2 -
% -) . ; :
5 & g &
i By
vO
Je
= ie lohnson Ct
ed ~
5 z o
s £ 5
a g
s
2 ~
G
5
a
x >
oe
ow
=> >
x @
RS os®
River S \?
Mary Rd ie
a Ss
~ }
Mary Rix © §
Rd Ma or e 3 o
M) a 2, & 2
f, 'y River R oe RX 2 KS
S$ i x S
a 2 &
zg Pearl St Pearl St_§ Ss
‘5 Q <y
2 ® &S SS
| aoe Rog
Wi
8! © a x \a Pearl La ow”
a é 3 s
So 2 i ~
Village Shopping Centre
erald La {
Coon uJ” { f
Y Wanderer = Diamond St
* m
Vanderer Emerald’ sp Ly 3
a 8
Cooroy W. 2 Diamond La & =
Gam anderer 5 Cc a 5
et St & ooroy £ 5 .
5 Cooroy 5
Samet St = A Opal St Opal St g
400m
Garnet St
i 4563
Map data © OpenStreetMap contributors
SITE LOCATION PLAN
project
Callaghan & Toth | LOWER MILL SITE,
CARPARK EXTENSIONS
Civil, Environmental &
Hydraulic Engineers location
1.16/90 Goodchap St 4—8 AND 16 LOWER
MILL ROAD, COOROY ;
Figure 1.1
P.O. Box 2305
\ NOOSAville 4566
| Ph: 54749081
Scale:NTS
oS]
www.callaghanandtoth.com.au
Source: http://whereis.com.au/
Page 7
Callaghan & Toth
3.0 DESCRIPTION
The site currently consists of two lots, with Lot 5 SP213104 containing the Cooroora
Woodworkers Club building, the Lower Mill site building and the Cooroy Camphor Laurel Club
building. There are hardstand areas associated with these buildings including pathways, formal
and informal carparking areas, access driveways and garden areas.
Lot 7 SP173771 is the Cooroy Creek bushland Reserve and is mostly vegetated with riparian
vegetation along Cooroy Creek. Lot 7 also contains a gravel access driveway and turnaround
area which is an informal carparking area during events. The existing biobasin is located within
Lot 7 and is contained within a drainage easement. This biobasin was constructed when the
Lot Reconfiguration of the Lower Mill site occurred. It is in need of refurbishment as its design
is no longer to current best practice design standards.
The sites are bounded by Cooroy Creek to the south, east and north-east and Lower Mill Road
to the west and Lot 4 SP173771 to the north – an industrial site.
3.1 Contaminated Land:
During previous development of the site, contaminated land issues have been addressed by
Council and managed in accordance with Site Management Plans (SMP).
It is our understanding that the current approved Site Management Plan dated 28 April 2008
(EPA File: 902326) for Lot 5 SP173771, Lot 7 SP173771, Lot 2 RP47020 and Lot 1 RP87371
(See Appendix B) is still current for management of the site.
These lots were part of the Boral Cooroy timber mill which operated from 1959 to 2001.
Previous contaminated land investigation identified a number of areas of contamination which
were treated and/or capped. Residual soil impact in locations F2 and F3 exceeded QLD EPA
EILS for arsenic, copper and chromium (III). Soil remediation works undertaken on Lot 7 in the
year 2000 included capping the area with 500mm clay layer. This clay capping layer had a
confirmed density ratio of 95.5%. This capping layer was covered by 100m of clean soil. One
of the capped areas on Lot 7 is under part of the proposed new carpark.
The SMP states:
The existing capping is to remain in place, undisturbed, other than for the construction of
service trenches. In the event that the existing capping layers are disturbed or removed, a new
capping layer, or equal of better standard and designed to achieve the objectives of this SMP, is
to be installed.
Depending on the detailed design levels of the new carpark there is potential requirements for
excavation works to construct this carpark. The new swales may also require excavation which
needs to be managed in relation to the capped contaminated material areas on Lot 7. As such
the SMP states:
Any soil excavated on the site must be assessed for contaminants of concern to determine if
material is contaminated and to identify appropriate management and disposal/re-use options.
7
2001 Lower Mill Carpark Extension SWMP February 2020
Page 8
Callaghan & Toth
3.2 Proposed Works
The overall proposal is to improve the public carparking on the site and to provide for future
parking for other adjacent community uses to the south of Cooroy Creek i.e. the library and the
proposed new Cooroy Hinterland Playground. The works involve:
Constructing 30 new carparks and access road in an area of informal carparking
(gravel and grassed area) during events in the area (on Lot 7),
Formalising existing sealed/gravelled areas into 22 new carparks (on Lot 5),
Retaining and shaping of existing turfed swale drain (on Lot 5),
Construction of two new grass swales to divert new carpark flows to the existing
biobasin (on Lot 7),
Sealing existing gravel driveway areas to a concrete driveway standard,
New sections of concrete pathway adjacent to the new carparks and connecting to
existing pathways;
Associated landscaping.
As a result of these works, new stormwater drainage and surface drainage treatment devices
are required. These new drainage systems are required to conform to Council’s Water Sensitive
Design Code and meet the Stormwater Management Design Objectives for stormwater quality
of the State Planning Policy. The existing biobasins will be refurbished and two new grass
swales will be constructed.
Refer to Plan 2001-01 which shows the stormwater quality management layout proposed for the
site.
8
2001 Lower Mill Carpark Extension SWMP February 2020
Page 9
Callaghan & Toth
Civil, Environmental &
Hydraulic Engineers
[OCR of page images]
703
Xe
\
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RPII9674
» / f
LEGEND
EDGE OF BITUMEN
—— -—— __ KERB & CHANNEL
——————= PIPE CULVERT
—--2-->— GRASS SWALE WITH SUBSOIL DRAINS
BIORETENTION ZONE
POSSIBLE TANK SITE
ORIGINAL CATCHMENT BOUNDARIES
ALTERED CATCHMENT BOUNDARIES
fu —
f CMT 1C (0.39ha)
he
¥
a
EGEND:
SWALE 4
GRASSED AREA (0.24ha) CMT BDY
SWALE 1
RP47020
REVEGETATED WOODED AREA
ALONG CREEK BANK
REVEGETATED STEEP PARTIALLY CLEARED BANKS
REVEGETATED FLOOD PLAIN
REVEGETATED CLAY CAPPED CONTAMINATED LAND
LISTED ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
REGISTER
CLAY CAPPED CONTAMINATED LAND LISTED ON
4 THE ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT REGISTER
OUTSIDE REVEGATION AREA. SOIL IS NOT TO
BE REMOVED FROM THE DEFINED SITE
WITHOUT APPROVAL
( Callaghan & Toth )
Civil, Environmental &
Hydraulic Engineers
2/11 Sunshine Beach Road
{ NOOSA JUNCTION 4566
Ph: 54749081 Fax: 54749041
=I ‘www.callaghanandtoth.com.au
designed [ADT | datum AHD
drawn BM PSM #
checked | AH Origin (B.M.) RL *
approved
SURVEYED BY
MAX WATTERSON & ASSOCIATES
PHONE 54426121
_——————
project
COOROY LOWER MILL SITE
CARPARKING AND ACCESS
EXTENSION
——$ rd
_——————————————————
Client
NOOSA COUNCIL
|
SS
title
SWQMP CATCHMENT & DRAINAGE}
LAYOUT PLAN
$$$ um
$n
LOT 3 ON RP110206
LOT 1 ON RP88582
LOT 2 ON RP110206 &
LOT 2 ON RP87371
Parish of TEWANTIN
County of MARCH
NOOSA SHIRE COUNCIL
Locality of COOROY
a.
SCALE
0.5 10 15 20 25 Meters 50)
SSS
scale
1:1000(A3) SCALE SHOWN IS ORIGINAL DRAWING SCALE
. DO NOT SCALE FROM THIS DRAWING
USE ONLY DIMENSIONS PROVIDED
REVISIONS
revision details
|
FILES
COMPUTER DIRECTORY
c\JOBS\2001\...
FOR APPROVAL
Sheet * of * sheets
drawing number
2001-01
\ date 06/02/2020 yy
Page 10
Callaghan & Toth
4.0 WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN
4.1 Background Lower Mill Site Stormwater Management
The Lower Mill site was developed by Council in 2005 and resulted in the creation of industrial
lots and community use lots.
The lot reconfiguration involved a stormwater management plan and MUSIC model which
included the new industrial lots i.e. Lots 3, 4 & 6 SP173771, Lot 15 SP301607, new part
industrial/part community use Lot 5 SP213104, community use Lot 7 SP173771 and Lot 2
RP47020.
MUSIC version 2.01 was used to determine suitable treatment nodes for the development and
the model determined the following treatment system:
1. GPTs in each gully pit.
2. Grass Swales will treat stormwater runoff from roads, carparks and footpaths.
3. Bio-Retention Systems – one adjacent the bridge on Mary River Road and one in an
easement in Lot 7.
The Isolated Bio-Retention Basin designed to have an extended detention depth
of 0.4m and consist of a 0.8m deep sandy loam layer underlaid with a 0.2m deep
coarse sand layer.
The Bio-Retention Pods adjacent roads and carparks designed to have a
maximum extended detention depth of 0.3m and consist of a 0.3m deep sandy
loam layer underlaid with a 0.25m deep coarse sand layer.
In addition to this original development, Lot 5 SP213104 was developed in 2006 with the
addition of the Cooroy Camphor Laurel Club shed and associated carparking. A MUSIC model
was prepared for this proposed development and it was determined that the roofwater would be
treated by a rainwater tank which would flow to a bioretention basin (S.A. = 12m2) which would
also treat the carpark areas. It has been noted during site inspections that this rainwater tank
and bioretention basin have not been installed.
4.2 Proposed On-Site Stormwater Treatment Process
The site i.e. Lot 5 and Lot 7 showing the new works was divided into MUSIC model sub-
catchments as shown on Plan No. 2001-01. The previously developed site i.e. the lot
reconfiguration that developed the industrial lots, have also been included in the MUSIC model.
These catchments have been modelled as per the original MUSIC model and the proposed
treatment train for those catchments have not been altered, as it is considered that these works
were completed as per that design and approval conditions.
The new hardstand areas will be mostly diverted to existing treatment systems, particularly the
biobasin (Biobasin 1 – BB1) located on Lot 7 SP173771.
The proposed treatment train for the new hardstand areas for the site is also illustrated on Plan
No. 2001-01 and Fig 4.1 (MUSIC model layout) and listed below:
1. Existing Grass Swales (Swale 1 and 4) – Swale 1 to treat overland flow from the carpark
adjacent the buildings (on Lot 5) prior to flowing into one of the new grass swales which
directs the flow to the biobasin. The existing swales will be reinstated during works and
10
2001 Lower Mill Carpark Extension SWMP February 2020
Page 11
Callaghan & Toth
is 50m long and 4.2m wide, with 1 in 4 batters. Swale 4 to treat flows from the grassed
area in the north of Lot 5
2. New Grass Swales (Swales 2 & 3) – two new grass swales will collect stormwater flows
from the new access road and new carpark area and divert the flows to the existing
biobasin. The new swales are 40m and 45m long and 2.6m wide, with 1 in 3 batters.
3. Existing Biobasin – the existing biobasin in Lot 7 is 12m x 12m giving a total filter area of
144m2. It is proposed to treat the runoff from the new 30 space carpark, the turnaround
and new access road, new pathways and the extra concrete/asphalt required to
formalise the carpark areas adjacent the existing buildings. As this biobasin was
constructed in 2006, it is proposed to refurbish the biobasin by replacing the filter media,
installing an outlet pit and lining the basin. The treated runoff will then be directed to the
existing stormwater outlet which discharges to Cooroy Creek. The bio-retention
component will remove the nutrients and retard flow.
4.3 MUSIC Model
4.3.1 Source Nodes
The existing source nodes within the existing development have been maintained as per the
original MUSIC model as industrial nodes for Lots 6 SP161035, Lot 15 SP301607 and Lot 3 & 4
SP173771 (Lot area = 1.5144 ha) with the road reserve of Lower Mill Road (area = 0.346 ha).
The source nodes have been updated to reflect any changes in the MUSIC modelling guideline.
Whilst the current proposed changes to Lot 5 and Lot 7 are defined using split catchment
technique and source nodes as per the 2010 guidelines.
This approach is considered acceptable as the existing industrial lots have already been
approved with the treatment system in place. The proposed changes to the car parking at the
Lower Mill sites do not change the existing industrial uses adjacent.
MUSIC allows for the characteristics of these source nodes to be amended to ensure that
accurate pollution generation and hydraulic characteristics are used to generate stormwater
runoff within the model. Table 4.1 below details the sub-catchments used in the MUSIC model,
land use, percent imperviousness and area of each sub-catchment. The MUSIC Modelling
Guidelines for South-East Queensland – Version 1 December 2010 have been used to set
levels of imperviousness. The site has been related to a “Industrial” land use and pollutant
export parameters detailed in the Guidelines for this land use have been used for each node.
11
2001 Lower Mill Carpark Extension SWMP February 2020
Page 12
Callaghan & Toth
TABLE 4.1 MUSIC CATCHMENT AREAS (DEVELOPED)
Catchment Land Use Music Area (ha)
Impervious
Adjacent Industrial Catchment – former Lot Reconfiguration Model
Catchment 1a – Lots Future, 1, 2, 3 East & 4 Industrial 65% 0.68
Catchment 1b – Lots Future, 1, 2, 3 East & 4 Roof Roof 100% 0.25
Areas
Catchment 1c – Road Reserve North Commercial 35% 0.28
Catchment 2a – Road Reserve South West Commercial 35% 0.08
Catchment 2b – Road Reserve South East Commercial 35% 0.10
Catchment 5a – Lot 3 West Industrial 65% 0.44
Catchment 5b – Lot 3 West Roof Area Roof 100% 0.05
TOTAL 1.88
EXISTING & PROPOSED AREAS ON LOT 5 AND LOT 7
Catchment 6 – Camphor Shed and carpark Industrial 90% 0.06
Catchment 7 - Existing carpark + driveways – 100% 0.197
Industrial
formalising area
Catchment 8 – new pathway Industrial 90% 0.014
Catchment 9 – new access road 90% 0.06
Catchment 10 – new carpark area 90% 0.12
Existing grassed area used for informal carparking 20% 0.24
TOTAL 0.69ha
4.3.2 Treatment Nodes
The “MUSIC Modelling Guidelines for South East Queensland” Version 1.0 prepared by Water
by Design and dated December 2010 has been used to set the rainfall runoff parameters and
pollutant export parameters for the site.
The land use type used for this model was “Industrial” and the values in the guideline shown in
Table 3.7 and Table 3.8 of the guidelines have been used in this model. Figure 4.1 shows the
MUSIC Model layout for the site. Refer to IPWEAQ standard drawings WSUD 001 & WSUD
003 ( See Appendix C)
Bioretention Basins the existing biobasin in Lot 7 constructed in 2005 will continue to treat flows
from the existing carpark and hardstand areas and from the new proposed carpark, landscaped
areas, and pathways. The existing Biobasin in Lot 7 is 12m x 12m with a total filter area of
144m2. The existing biobasin adjacent Mary River Road is 3m x 8.65m with a total filter area of
26m2. This treatment node has been updated to Version 6.2.1 MUSIC model node and has
been amended to reflect the proposed design changes to the biobasin detailed in Section 6.0.
12
2001 Lower Mill Carpark Extension SWMP February 2020
Page 13
Callaghan & Toth
Biobasin 1 will be:
a. Located in Lot 7 SP173177 in the same footprint of the existing biobasin
adjacent to Cooroy Creek.
b. Designed with a filter area of 144m2.
c. Filter layer depth of 0.5m, transition layer of 0.1m and drainage layer of 0.2m and
an extended detention depth of 0.3m.
d. The size and depth of the systems have been designed in accordance with
Water by Design Guidelines and IPWEAQ standard drawings in Appendix C.
Biobasin 2 will be:
a. Located in Mary River Road road reserve in the same footprint of the existing
biobasin adjacent to Cooroy Creek.
b. Designed with a filter area of 26m2 (3m wide x 8.65m long)
c. Filter layer depth of 0.4m, transition layer of 0.1m and drainage layer of 0.2m and
an extended detention depth of 0.3m.
d. The size and depth of the systems have been designed in accordance with
Water by Design Guidelines and IPWEAQ standard drawings in Appendix C.
Grass Swales will form part of the treatment train, with one existing grass swale accepting flows
form carpark areas adjacent the buildings and the new carpark flowing to two new swales and
flowing to the biobasin BB1.
Swale 1
Existing swale located in Lot 5 formalised,
Length of 50m, top width of 4.2m, base width of 0.2m with 1 in 4 batters,
approximate grade of 1.0%.
The size and depth of the systems have been designed in accordance with Water by
Design Guidelines.
Swales 2 and 3
Located in Lot 7 two new swales adjacent the new carpark,
Length of 40m and 45m respectively, and top width of 2.6m, base width of 0.2m with
1 in 3 batters, approximate grade of 1.0%.
The size and depth of the systems have been designed in accordance with Water by
Design Guidelines.
Swale 4
Existing swale located in drainage easement between Lot 4 and Lot 5.
Length of 40m, top width of 4.2m, base width of 0.2m with 1 in 4 batters,
approximate grade of 1.0%.
The size and depth of the systems have been designed in accordance with Water by
Design Guidelines.
4.3.3 Rainfall Data
The meteorological data used for the MUSIC Model was the data for Cooroy from 01/01/73 –
31/12/83.
The mean Annual Rainfall for Cooroy 1973 – 1983 = 1600mm
The MUSIC Modelling Guidelines for South East Queensland – Version 1 December 2010
details that Cooroy data for 1973 to 1983 should be used.
13
2001 Lower Mill Carpark Extension SWMP February 2020
Page 14
Callaghan & Toth
Civil, Environmental &
Hydraulic Engineers
[OCR of page images]
‘OOROY CREEK
Bio-Retention Swale
G
Rainwater Tan
GB
Rainwater Tank x2
Gross Pollutant Trap
BlOpod CMT6
BIOBASIN 2
rban - Roof CMT 6
[- |: 1.
ment 6 - Carpark for Camphor [!
Catchment 5b - Roof Ar
Catchment 5a - Private Lot 3 West
ross Pollutant T!
(Gross Pollutant Ti
Gross Pollutant Trap
er Tank x 1
Catchment 2b - Road Reserve South East
‘Catchment 2a - Road Reserve South West
Catchment ic - Road Reserve North
ment 1b - Roof Are
Catchment 1a - Private Lots 1, 2,3 East & 4
Buffer - adjacent
SS
ment 8 -new
ment 9 - new access road/pathway [Sealedroad]
Catchment 7 - formalise carpark [Sealedr:
Catchment 10 - new carpark, pathway, s [Sealedr
Grass Area north of carparks [Mixed]
0c 4
eo +
=>
IQ. o
O 3
OW SD
25 ar
one) fy
Na ”
=> v
oO 5
Oo. wn
O
~~
an
Y
Z ne
So =z
LIM OS
HA +10
Ne 1 O
7S << -
= Z
S OQ
=x ZO
“<x ce
Lo a
0 _
gS 2412
e470 B8v2
& a
=n 3
Ss £5 28_§
S Be B8tes
of 2H 8c60.5
ZY Casas
—=—4 Oo 2
Bugs 3
osg 5 z
Oo 4
o US
—
—
oO
UO
Page 15
Callaghan & Toth
4.4 MUSIC Modelling Results
The MUSIC modelling program has been used to investigate the performance of various
treatment options in the treatment train. MUSIC version 6.2.1 is the current version and capable
of incorporating rainwater re-use in the model. These features have been used in making
comparisons between different stormwater management systems for this report.
4.4.1 Water Quality Objectives
This model meets the pollution load reduction target as detailed in the State Planning Policy
2017 (Appendix 2: Table B). The following have been included in Appendix A.
The treatment train effectiveness for the system.
The MUSIC Version 6.2.1 Summary Report.
The information above indicates that the new carpark, carpark roof, footpaths, and associated
landscaping with the proposed stormwater treatment train will achieve reductions in pollutant
loads as detailed in Table 4.2 below.
TABLE 4.2: COMPARISON OF LOAD REDUCTIONS
Parameter MUSIC POLLUTANT LOAD
REDUCTION REDUCTION
RESULT TARGETS
(Source: SPP 2017)
Flow 1.4%
Total Suspended Solids 84% 80%
Total Phosphorous 60% 60%
Total Nitrogen 45% 45%
Gross Pollutants >5mm 99% 90%
15
2001 Lower Mill Carpark Extension SWMP February 2020
Page 16
Callaghan & Toth
4.4.2 Assessment of Results
The developed site has been modelled as a series of Industrial sub-catchments, which
incorporate Water Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD) treatment trains. Plan No 2001-01 shows
the existing treatment systems Biobasin 1 and 2, with the two existing grass swales and two
new swales locations.
This treatment train (once the existing Biobasin systems are refurbished) is able to achieve
reductions as per the pollutant load reduction targets (See Table 4.2) which complies with
Council’s requirements.
16
2001 Lower Mill Carpark Extension SWMP February 2020
Page 17
Callaghan & Toth
5.0 FLOODING ASSESSMENT SUMMARY
The flood study for the site was undertaken by Hydrology & Water Management Consulting.
The results of the flood study and assessment are summarised below.
5.1 Existing Conditions
The site is bounded to the south and east by Cooroy Creek.
The site is subject to ponding of floodwaters from the adjacent watercourses and the Q100 year
ARI flood levels (i.e. 1% AEP event) (see Appendix A in Flood Study). The Lower Mill site is
affected by flood levels across a range of events. The proposed carparks and access roads
and pathways are below the Q100 year inundation line.
The flood assessment from Hydrology and Water (See Appendix 4) reports on the hydrologic
and hydraulic performance of the site including upstream and downstream catchments.
5.2 Proposed Drainage System
The flood study determined that the proposed level changes for the carpark (HWMC used
Council’s design levels) together with the proposed changes to the south of Cooroy Creek for
the new hinterland playground, that the flood depths over the modelled events were comparable
to the existing case; provided structures nominated in the flood study are removed from the
playground design. As stated in the report:
Modelling has demonstrated that care is required to ensure that the design of the park
will not increase flood risk on surrounding properties. Iterative modelling of various
mitigation scenarios has been used to develop several mitigation measures that have
successful reduced offsite flood impacts to an acceptable level.
Following discussions with Council staff, it is understood that mitigation scenarios include
lowering some levels of proposed mounds and to removing proposed viewing platforms into the
creek, to ensure that the flood levels of the proposed case were equivalent to the existing case.
As such the playground design is being amended to ensure that flood levels and velocities are
consistent with the modelling scenarios proposed by HWMC.
It should also be noted that management requirements for the contaminated land area on Lot 7
need to be considered when undertaking detailed design of the carpark levels in association
with flood modelling. Carpark levels may need to be amended i.e. raised to ensure that capping
is not damaged. However, this may affect the flood model, resulting in carpark levels needing
to encroach into the capping of contaminated material. The SMP in Appendix B details the
management requirements of this area.
17
2001 Lower Mill Carpark Extension SWMP February 2020
Page 18
Callaghan & Toth
6.0 PROPOSED REMEDIATION OF STORMWATER DEVICES
6.1 Biobasins
The two existing biobasins will be accepting the existing stormwater flows from the area as well
as the new hardstand areas. These biobasins and are in need of refurbishment, having been in
use for approximately 14 years. It is also noted that design guidelines have changed since
these biobasins were installed, and they are currently not to best practice standards. It is
proposed to undertake the following maintenance:
Biobasin 1 – in Lot 7 (following completion of the new carpark landscaping):
Remove debris and litter
Remove weeds and vegetation around biobasins and on the surface
Fix erosion of the inlet swale to Biobasin
Check the pipe inlet
Check the outlet weir and pipe, fix erosion and clean pipes as required
Remove filter media
Remove underdrainage pipes
Remove drainage layer material
Line Biobasin with welded poly-liner
Install drainage layer with replacement pipes
Install an outlet pit connected to the new underdrainage pipework
Install transition layer
Install filter media to design depth
Landscape planting in filter media
Biobasin 2 – adjacent Mary River Road
Remove debris and litter
Remove weeds and vegetation around biobasins and on the surface
Check the pipe inlet
Check the outlet weir and pipe, fix erosion and clean pipes as required
Remove filter media
Remove underdrainage pipes
Remove drainage layer material
Line biobasin with welded poly-liner
Install drainage layer with replacement pipes
Install an outlet pit connected to the new underdrainage pipework
Install transition layer
Install filter media to design depth
Landscape planting in filter media
18
2001 Lower Mill Carpark Extension SWMP February 2020
Page 19
Callaghan & Toth
7 CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS
The proposed development area i.e. extensions to the carpark areas on site, can be treated by
a treatment train consisting of the refurbished biobasins, grass swales and a grass buffer which
are capable of removing the gross pollutants, sediment, nutrients and heavy metals.
The new car parking on Lot 7 requires assessment in relation to managing the capped
contaminated material on site against the impacts to flood levels from the proposed filling on
site. Generally, the proposed carpark and access road can be designed to ensure the carpark
levels do not impact flood levels in Cooroy in accordance with Council’s requirements.
19
2001 Lower Mill Carpark Extension SWMP February 2020
Page 20
Callaghan & Toth
APPENDIX A - MUSIC Results
A
2001 Lower Mill Carpark Extension SWMP February 2020
Page 21
Source nodes
Catchment 10 -
Catchment 2a - Catchment 1c - Catchment 2b - Catchment 5a - Catchment 7 - Catchment 6 - new carpark_ Catchment 9 - Grass Area
Catchment 1a - Private Road Reserve Road Reserve Road Reserve Private Lot 3 Catchment 1b - Catchment 5b - formalise Carpark for pathway_ new access Catchment 8 - Urban - Roof north of
Location Lots 1_ 2_ 3 East & 4 South West North South East West Roof Areas Roof Areas carpark Camphor grass road/pathway new pathway CMT 6 carparks
ID 2 4 5 7 12 13 14 19 21 23 24 25 28 30
UserDefinedSourceNod UserDefinedSou UserDefinedSou UserDefinedSou UserDefinedSou UserDefinedSou UserDefinedSou UrbanSourceNo UrbanSourceNo UrbanSourceNo UrbanSourceNo UrbanSourceNo UrbanSourceNo UrbanSourceNo
Node Type e rceNode rceNode rceNode rceNode rceNode rceNode de de de de de de de
Zoning Surface Type Sealedroad Sealedroad Sealedroad Sealedroad Sealedroad Roof Mixed
Total Area (ha) 0.68 0.08 0.28 0.1 0.89 0.25 0.05 0.197 0.023 0.12 0.06 0.014 0.038 0.24
Area Impervious (ha) 0.442417544 0.027950877 0.09782807 0.034938596 0.579046491 0.25 0.05 0.197 0.023 0.108241791 0.053894776 0.012575448 0.038 0.047346269
Area Pervious (ha) 0.237582456 0.052049123 0.18217193 0.065061404 0.310953509 0 0 0 0 0.011758209 0.006105224 0.001424552 0 0.192653731
Field Capacity (mm) 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80
Pervious Area Infiltration Capacity coefficient - a 243 243 243 243 243 243 243 243 243 243 243 243 243 243
Pervious Area Infiltration Capacity exponent - b 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6
Impervious Area Rainfall Threshold (mm/day) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Pervious Area Soil Storage Capacity (mm) 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18
Pervious Area Soil Initial Storage (% of Capacity) 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10
Groundwater Initial Depth (mm) 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50
Groundwater Daily Recharge Rate (%) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Groundwater Daily Baseflow Rate (%) 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31
Groundwater Daily Deep Seepage Rate (%) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Stormflow Total Suspended Solids Mean (log mg/L) 1.92 1.92 2.43 1.92 1.92 1.3 1.3 2.43 2.43 2.43 2.43 2.43 1.3 1.92
Stormflow Total Suspended Solids Standard Deviation (log mg/L) 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.44 0.44
Stormflow Total Suspended Solids Estimation Method Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic
Stormflow Total Suspended Solids Serial Correlation 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Stormflow Total Phosphorus Mean (log mg/L) -0.59 -0.59 -0.59 -0.59 -0.59 -0.89 -0.89 -0.3 -0.3 -0.3 -0.3 -0.3 -0.89 -0.59
Stormflow Total Phosphorus Standard Deviation (log mg/L) 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.36
Stormflow Total Phosphorus Estimation Method Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic
Stormflow Total Phosphorus Serial Correlation 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Stormflow Total Nitrogen Mean (log mg/L) 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25
Stormflow Total Nitrogen Standard Deviation (log mg/L) 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32
Stormflow Total Nitrogen Estimation Method Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic
Stormflow Total Nitrogen Serial Correlation 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Baseflow Total Suspended Solids Mean (log mg/L) 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.78 0 0 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.78 0 0.78
Baseflow Total Suspended Solids Standard Deviation (log mg/L) 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0 0 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0 0.45
Baseflow Total Suspended Solids Estimation Method Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic
Baseflow Total Suspended Solids Serial Correlation 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Baseflow Total Phosphorus Mean (log mg/L) -1.11 -0.47 -1.11 -0.47 -1.11 0 0 -1.11 -1.11 -1.11 -1.11 -1.11 0 -1.11
Baseflow Total Phosphorus Standard Deviation (log mg/L) 0.48 0.31 0.48 0.31 0.48 0 0 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.48 0 0.48
Baseflow Total Phosphorus Estimation Method Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic
Baseflow Total Phosphorus Serial Correlation 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Baseflow Total Nitrogen Mean (log mg/L) 0.14 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.14 0 0 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0 0.14
Baseflow Total Nitrogen Standard Deviation (log mg/L) 0.2 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.2 0 0 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0 0.2
Baseflow Total Nitrogen Estimation Method Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic Stochastic
Baseflow Total Nitrogen Serial Correlation 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
OUT - Mean Annual Flow (ML/yr) 8.56 0.866 3.03 1.08 11.2 3.66 0.733 2.89 0.337 1.69 0.844 0.197 0.557 2.38
OUT - TSS Mean Annual Load (kg/yr) 1.19E+03 116 1.37E+03 154 1.57E+03 123 24.2 1.28E+03 152 728 376 86 18.8 332
OUT - TP Mean Annual Load (kg/yr) 3.1 0.316 1.11 0.389 4.05 0.661 0.133 2.06 0.238 1.19 0.595 0.139 0.101 0.86
OUT - TN Mean Annual Load (kg/yr) 20.2 2 7.03 2.48 26.2 8.49 1.72 6.65 0.782 3.97 1.95 0.457 1.29 5.65
OUT - Gross Pollutant Mean Annual Load (kg/yr) 189 15.8 55.4 19.8 248 84.7 16.9 66.8 7.8 38.9 19.4 4.53 12.9 32.3
Rain In (ML/yr) 10.82 1.27295 4.45531 1.59118 14.1615 3.97796 0.79559 3.13463 0.365972 1.90942 0.954708 0.222765 0.60465 3.81883
ET Loss (ML/yr) 2.26819 0.409235 1.43233 0.511546 2.96868 0.31477 0.0629535 0.248039 0.0289587 0.222283 0.111141 0.025933 0.0478445 1.44129
Deep Seepage Loss (ML/yr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Baseflow Out (ML/yr) 0.0108182 0.00236364 0.00827273 0.00295455 0.0141591 0 0 0 0 0.000545455 0.000272727 6.36E-05 0 0.00872727
Imp. Stormflow Out (ML/yr) 6.47653 0.410277 1.43597 0.512847 8.47662 3.66319 0.732638 2.8866 0.337014 1.5825 0.791249 0.184625 0.556805 0.703333
Perv. Stormflow Out (ML/yr) 2.07318 0.452963 1.58537 0.566204 2.71342 0 0 0 0 0.10453 0.0522649 0.0121952 0 1.67248
Total Stormflow Out (ML/yr) 8.5497 0.86324 3.02134 1.07905 11.19 3.66319 0.732638 2.8866 0.337014 1.68703 0.843514 0.19682 0.556805 2.37581
Page 22
Total Outflow (ML/yr) 8.56052 0.865604 3.02961 1.08201 11.2042 3.66319 0.732638 2.8866 0.337014 1.68757 0.843787 0.196884 0.556805 2.38454
Change in Soil Storage (ML/yr) -0.008674 -0.00189518 -0.00663309 -0.00236891 -0.0113527 0 0 0 0 -0.000437364 -0.000218636 -5.10E-05 0 -0.00699755
TSS Baseflow Out (kg/yr) 0.109683 0.0267249 0.0835705 0.0287621 0.152585 0 0 0 0 0.00564527 0.00285345 0.000654273 0 0.0867187
TSS Total Stormflow Out (kg/yr) 1194.1 116.37 1371.67 153.968 1565.14 122.838 24.2083 1276.79 152.496 728.354 375.575 86.0053 18.8185 332.021
TSS Total Outflow (kg/yr) 1194.21 116.397 1371.75 153.997 1565.29 122.838 24.2083 1276.79 152.496 728.359 375.578 86.0059 18.8185 332.108
TP Baseflow Out (kg/yr) 0.00150182 0.00104164 0.00117955 0.00127236 0.00197427 0 0 0 0 7.85E-05 3.99E-05 9.18E-06 0 0.00125173
TP Total Stormflow Out (kg/yr) 3.09826 0.315241 1.1091 0.387741 4.04614 0.661491 0.132837 2.06362 0.237684 1.18537 0.594779 0.139333 0.101321 0.858645
TP Total Outflow (kg/yr) 3.09976 0.316283 1.11028 0.389014 4.04811 0.661491 0.132837 2.06362 0.237684 1.18545 0.594819 0.139342 0.101321 0.859896
TN Baseflow Out (kg/yr) 0.0165275 0.004772 0.0173032 0.00650264 0.0218808 0 0 0 0 0.000858364 0.000418545 9.85E-05 0 0.0131715
TN Total Stormflow Out (kg/yr) 20.1474 1.99888 7.00898 2.47167 26.2076 8.4863 1.72145 6.64522 0.781926 3.96677 1.95217 0.456891 1.29309 5.63634
TN Total Outflow (kg/yr) 20.164 2.00365 7.02628 2.47817 26.2295 8.4863 1.72145 6.64522 0.781926 3.96763 1.95259 0.45699 1.29309 5.64951
GP Total Outflow (kg/yr) 189.143 15.8241 55.3844 19.7801 247.555 84.7437 16.9487 66.778 7.79642 38.8509 19.4254 4.53261 12.881 32.3481
No Imported Data Source nodes
USTM treatment nodes
Rainwater Tank Rainwater Tank Buffer -
Location Bio-Retention Swale Swale 3 BIOBASIN 2 BIOBASIN 1 x 10 x2 Swale 2 Swale 1 adjacent grass BIOpod CMT6 Rainwater Tank Swale 4
ID 9 10 15 16 17 18 20 22 26 27 29 31
BioRetentionNo BioRetentionNo RainWaterTank RainWaterTank BioRetentionNo RainWaterTank
Node Type MediaFiltrationNode SwaleNode deV4 deV4 Node Node SwaleNode SwaleNode BufferNode deV4 Node SwaleNode
Lo-flow bypass rate (cum/sec) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Hi-flow bypass rate (cum/sec) 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
Inlet pond volume 0 0 0
Area (sqm) 48 34 144 22 4.4 62.87723881 12 2.2
Initial Volume (m^3) 44.9 8.98 4.49
Extended detention depth (m) 0.5 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.3
Number of Rainwater tanks 10 2 1
Permanent Pool Volume (cubic metres) 44.9 8.98 4.49
Proportion vegetated 0 0 0
Equivalent Pipe Diameter (mm) 158 71 50
Overflow weir width (m) 2 2 2 10 10 2 10
Notional Detention Time (hrs) 3.32E-02 3.29E-02 3.32E-02
Orifice Discharge Coefficient 0.6 0.6 0.6
Weir Coefficient 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7
Number of CSTR Cells 3 10 3 3 2 2 10 10 3 2 10
Total Suspended Solids - k (m/yr) 15000 15000 8000 8000 400 400 8000 15000 8000 400 15000
Total Suspended Solids - C* (mg/L) 30 30 20 20 12 12 20 30 20 12 30
Total Suspended Solids - C** (mg/L) 13.6 12 12 14 13.6 12 13.6
Total Phosphorus - k (m/yr) 12000 12000 6000 6000 300 300 6000 12000 6000 300 12000
Total Phosphorus - C* (mg/L) 0.18 0.18 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.18 0.13 0.13 0.18
Total Phosphorus - C** (mg/L) 0.143 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.143 0.13 0.143
Total Nitrogen - k (m/yr) 1000 1000 500 500 40 40 500 1000 500 40 1000
Total Nitrogen - C* (mg/L) 1.7 1.7 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.7 1.4 1.4 1.7
Total Nitrogen - C** (mg/L) 1.68 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.68 1.4 1.68
Threshold Hydraulic Loading for C** (m/yr) 3500 3500 3500 3500 3500 3500 3500
Horizontal Flow Coefficient 3 3 3
Reuse Enabled Off Off Off Off Off Off Off Off Off Off Off Off
Max drawdown height (m)
Annual Demand Enabled Off Off Off Off Off Off Off Off Off Off Off Off
Daily Demand Enabled Off Off Off Off Off Off Off Off Off Off Off Off
Daily Demand Value (ML/day)
Custom Demand Enabled Off Off Off Off Off Off Off Off Off Off Off Off
Custom Demand Time Series File
Custom Demand Time Series Units
Filter area (sqm) 25 30 144 12
Filter perimeter (m) 14 14 14
Filter depth (m) 0.5 0.4 0.5 0.4
Page 23
Filter Median Particle Diameter (mm) 0.45
Saturated Hydraulic Conductivity (mm/hr) 316.8 316 222 316
Infiltration Media Porosity 0.3 0.35 0.35 0.35
Length (m) 45 40 50 40
Bed slope 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01
Base Width (m) 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2
Top width (m) 2.6 2.6 4.2 4
Vegetation height (m) 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25
Vegetated with Vegetated with Vegetated with
Effective Effective Effective
Nutrient Nutrient Nutrient
Vegetation Type Removal Plants Removal Plants Removal Plants
Total Nitrogen Content in Filter (mg/kg) 800 800 800
Orthophosphate Content in Filter (mg/kg) 55 55 55
Is Base Lined? No No No
Is Underdrain Present? Yes Yes Yes
Is Submerged Zone Present? No No No
Submerged Zone Depth (m)
B for Media Soil Texture -9999 -9999 13 13 -9999 -9999 -9999 -9999 -9999 13 -9999 -9999
Proportion of upstream impervious area treated 0.5
Exfiltration Rate (mm/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Evaporative Loss as % of PET 100 100 0 0 100 0
Depth in metres below the drain pipe 0
TSS A Coefficient 0.52
TSS B Coefficient -0.39
TP A Coefficient 1.28
TP B Coefficient -0.19
TN A Coefficient 1.67
TN B Coefficient -0.09
Sfc 0.61 0.61 0.61
S* 0.37 0.37 0.37
Sw 0.11 0.11 0.11
Sh 0.05 0.05 0.05
Emax (m/day) 0.008 0.008 0.008
Ew (m/day) 0.001 0.001 0.001
IN - Mean Annual Flow (ML/yr) 11.9 4.07 1.95 23.1 3.66 0.733 3.73 2.89 0.197 0.894 0.557 2.38
IN - TSS Mean Annual Load (kg/yr) 1.58E+03 777 270 2.85E+03 123 24.2 434 1.28E+03 86 167 18.8 332
IN - TP Mean Annual Load (kg/yr) 4.17 1.56 0.705 6.05 0.661 0.133 1.05 2.06 0.139 0.33 0.101 0.86
IN - TN Mean Annual Load (kg/yr) 27.8 8.74 4.48 49.9 8.49 1.72 7.51 6.65 0.457 2.02 1.29 5.65
IN - Gross Pollutant Mean Annual Load (kg/yr) 12.4 38.9 1.78 12.2 84.7 16.9 19.4 66.8 4.53 7.8 12.9 32.3
OUT - Mean Annual Flow (ML/yr) 11.9 4.07 1.87 22.6 3.66 0.733 3.73 2.89 0.197 0.863 0.557 2.38
OUT - TSS Mean Annual Load (kg/yr) 456 110 26.3 637 90.2 17.7 88 58.3 54.7 13.5 14.8 48.3
OUT - TP Mean Annual Load (kg/yr) 1.9 0.687 0.272 3.52 0.59 0.118 0.56 0.458 0.107 0.127 9.26E-02 0.376
OUT - TN Mean Annual Load (kg/yr) 20.9 7.93 1.71 25.1 7.97 1.61 6.82 5.56 0.404 0.783 1.24 4.77
OUT - Gross Pollutant Mean Annual Load (kg/yr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4.53 0 0 0
Flow In (ML/yr) 11.9361 4.07151 1.94784 23.0503 3.66341 0.732482 3.72973 2.88676 0.19688 0.893747 0.556879 2.38499
ET Loss (ML/yr) 0 0 0.0757309 0.406856 0 0 0 0 0 0.0311576 0 0
Infiltration Loss (ML/yr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Low Flow Bypass Out (ML/yr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
High Flow Bypass Out (ML/yr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.09844 0 0 0
Orifice / Filter Out (ML/yr) 6.69345 3.89344 1.60587 16.1424 3.40559 0.679705 3.66446 2.88629 0.09844 0.741726 0.485167 2.35726
Weir Out (ML/yr) 5.2438 0.178564 0.264274 6.4889 0.257604 0.0528521 0.0654196 0 0 0.12019 0.0716623 0.0269575
Transfer Function Out (ML/yr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reuse Supplied (ML/yr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reuse Requested (ML/yr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
% Reuse Demand Met 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
% Load Reduction -0.0097329 -0.0120572 3.9886 1.81782 0.00585644 -0.0102143 -0.00418261 0.0163757 0 3.56158 0.00889699 0.0322738
TSS Flow In (kg/yr) 1583.02 776.695 270.394 2853.5 122.838 24.2084 433.859 1276.78 86.0059 167.3 18.8185 332.107
[OCR of page images]
Filter Median Particle Diameter (mm)
Saturated Hydraulic Conductivity (mm/hr)
Infiltration Media Porosity
Length (m)
Bed slope
Base Width (m)
Top width (m)
Vegetation height (m)
Vegetation Type
Total Nitrogen Content in Filter (mg/kg)
Orthophosphate Content in Filter (mg/kg)
Is Base Lined?
Is Underdrain Present?
Is Submerged Zone Present?
Submerged Zone Depth (m)
B for Media Soil Texture
Proportion of upstream impervious area treated
Exfiltration Rate (mm/hr)
Evaporative Loss as % of PET
Depth in metres below the drain pipe
TSS A Coefficient
TSS B Coefficient
TP A Coefficient
TP B Coefficient
TN A Coefficient
TN B Coefficient
Sfc
st
Sw
Sh
Emax (m/day)
Ew (m/day)
IN - Mean Annual Flow (ML/yr)
IN - TSS Mean Annual Load (kg/yr)
IN - TP Mean Annual Load (kg/yr)
IN - TN Mean Annual Load (kg/yr)
IN - Gross Pollutant Mean Annual Load (kg/yr)
OUT - Mean Annual Flow (ML/yr)
OUT - TSS Mean Annual Load (kg/yr)
OUT - TP Mean Annual Load (kg/yr)
OUT - TN Mean Annual Load (kg/yr)
OUT - Gross Pollutant Mean Annual Load (kg/yr)
Flow In (ML/yr)
ET Loss (ML/yr)
Infiltration Loss (ML/yr)
Low Flow Bypass Out (ML/yr)
High Flow Bypass Out (ML/yr)
Orifice / Filter Out (ML/yr)
Weir Out (ML/yr)
Transfer Function Out (ML/yr)
Reuse Supplied (ML/yr)
Reuse Requested (ML/yr)
% Reuse Demand Met
% Load Reduction
TSS Flow In (kg/yr)
0.45
316.8
0.3
-9999
0.52
-0.39
1.28
-0.19
1.67
-0.09
11.9
1.58E+03
417
278
12.4
11.9
456
1.9
20.9
0
11.9361
0
0
0
0
6.69345
5.2438
0
0
0
0
-0.0097329
1583.02
45
0.01
0.2
26
0.25
-9999
4.07
7717
1.56
8.74
38.9
4.07
110
0.687
7.93
0
4.07151
0
0
0
0
3.89344
0.178564
0
0
0
0
-0.0120572
776.695
316
0.35
Vegetated with Vegetated with
Effective Effective
Nutrient Nutrient
Removal Plants Removal Plants
800 800
55 55
No No
Yes Yes
No No
13 13
0 0
100 100
0.61 0.61
0.37 0.37
0.11 0.11
0.05 0.05
0.008 0.008
0.001 0.001
1.95 23.1
270 2.85E+03
0.705 6.05
448 49.9
1.78 12.2
1.87 22.6
26.3 637
0.272 3.52
1.71 25.1
0 0
1.94784 23.0503
0.0757309 0.406856
0 0
0 0
0 0
1.60587 16.1424
0.264274 6.4889
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
3.9886 1.81782
270.394 2853.5,
222
0.35
-9999
3.66
123
0.661
8.49
84.7
3.66
90.2
0.59
7.97
0
3.66341
0
0
0
0
3.40559
0.257604
0
0
0
0
0.00585644
122.838
-9999
0.733
24.2
0.133
1.72
16.9
0.733
17.7
0.118
1.61
0
0.732482
0
0
0
0
0.679705
0.0528521
0
0
0
0
-0.0102143
24.2084
40
0.01
0.2
26
0.25
-9999
3.73
434
1.05
751
19.4
3.73
88
0.56
6.82
0
3.72973
0
0
0
0
3.66446
0.0654196
0
0
0
0
-0.00418261
433.859
50
0.01
0.2
4.2
0.25
-9999
2.89
1.28E+03
2.06
6.65
66.8
2.89
58.3
0.458
5.56
0
2.88676
0
0
0
0
2.88629
0.0163757
1276.78
-9999
05
0.197
86
0.139
0.457
4.53
0.197
54.7
0.107
0.404
4.53
0.19688
0
0
0
0.09844
0.09844
0
ocoono
0
86.0059
316
0.35
Vegetated with
Effective
Nutrient
Removal Plants
800
55
No
Yes
No
13
100
0.61
0.37
0.11
0.05
0.008
0.001
0.894
167
0.33
2.02
78
0.863
13.5
0.127
0.783
0
0.893747
0.0311576
0
0
0
0.741726
0.12019
0
0
0
0
3.56158
167.3
-9999
0.557
18.8
0.101
1.29
12.9
0.557
14.8
9.26E-02
1.24
0
0.556879
0
0
0
0
0.485167
0.0716623
0
0
0
0
0.00889699
18.8185
40
0.01
0.2
0.25
-9999
2.38
332
0.86
5.65
32.3
2.38
48.3
0.376
477
0
2.38499
0
0
0
0
2.35726
0.0269575
0
0
0
0
0.0322738
332.107
Page 24
TSS ET Loss (kg/yr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
TSS Infiltration Loss (kg/yr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
TSS Low Flow Bypass Out (kg/yr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
TSS High Flow Bypass Out (kg/yr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 43.0029 0 0 0
TSS Orifice / Filter Out (kg/yr) 43.1385 81.3007 4.28689 39.9851 82.8893 16.2788 79.8312 58.2806 11.7417 2.01705 12.6084 44.4313
TSS Weir Out (kg/yr) 412.771 28.7607 21.9999 597.266 7.30014 1.46668 8.20995 0 0 11.4605 2.19548 3.90595
TSS Transfer Function Out (kg/yr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
TSS Reuse Supplied (kg/yr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
TSS Reuse Requested (kg/yr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
TSS % Reuse Demand Met 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
TSS % Load Reduction 71.2 85.8295 90.2784 77.6678 26.5787 26.6968 79.7074 95.4353 36.3478 91.9441 21.3334 85.4453
TP Flow In (kg/yr) 4.16619 1.56127 0.705296 6.0455 0.66149 0.132837 1.05277 2.06362 0.139342 0.330332 0.101321 0.859895
TP ET Loss (kg/yr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
TP Infiltration Loss (kg/yr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
TP Low Flow Bypass Out (kg/yr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
TP High Flow Bypass Out (kg/yr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0696711 0 0 0
TP Orifice / Filter Out (kg/yr) 0.523207 0.620065 0.205148 2.01932 0.545292 0.109495 0.534875 0.457955 0.0371766 0.0952492 0.0802552 0.367072
TP Weir Out (kg/yr) 1.3795 0.0667865 0.0663906 1.50241 0.0446366 0.00861536 0.0255635 0 0 0.03172 0.0123945 0.00874779
TP Transfer Function Out (kg/yr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
TP Reuse Supplied (kg/yr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
TP Reuse Requested (kg/yr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
TP % Reuse Demand Met 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
TP % Load Reduction 54.3299 56.0069 61.5 41.7463 10.8182 11.0868 46.7655 77.8081 23.3197 61.5632 8.55814 56.2947
TN Flow In (kg/yr) 27.8442 8.73885 4.48177 49.904 8.4863 1.72145 7.51249 6.64523 0.456989 2.02072 1.29309 5.6495
TN ET Loss (kg/yr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
TN Infiltration Loss (kg/yr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
TN Low Flow Bypass Out (kg/yr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
TN High Flow Bypass Out (kg/yr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.228495 0 0 0
TN Orifice / Filter Out (kg/yr) 8.84379 7.50365 1.12274 10.7263 7.40628 1.49414 6.67265 5.55991 0.175155 0.516979 1.0773 4.71029
TN Weir Out (kg/yr) 12.0455 0.431178 0.583748 14.3644 0.568045 0.120641 0.146611 0 0 0.26578 0.161499 0.060931
TN Transfer Function Out (kg/yr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
TN Reuse Supplied (kg/yr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
TN Reuse Requested (kg/yr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
TN % Reuse Demand Met 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
TN % Load Reduction 24.9779 9.20045 61.9239 49.7221 6.03293 6.19643 9.22776 16.3323 11.6721 61.2634 4.19861 15.5461
GP Flow In (kg/yr) 12.378 38.8508 1.78007 12.2255 84.7436 16.9487 19.4254 66.778 4.53259 7.79649 12.881 32.3465
GP ET Loss (kg/yr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
GP Infiltration Loss (kg/yr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
GP Low Flow Bypass Out (kg/yr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
GP High Flow Bypass Out (kg/yr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.2663 0 0 0
GP Orifice / Filter Out (kg/yr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
GP Weir Out (kg/yr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
GP Transfer Function Out (kg/yr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
GP Reuse Supplied (kg/yr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
GP Reuse Requested (kg/yr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
GP % Reuse Demand Met 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
GP % Load Reduction 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 49.9999 100 100 100
PET Scaling Factor 2.1 2.1 2.1
Generic treatment nodes
Gross Pollutant Gross Pollutant Gross Pollutant
Location Gross Pollutant Trap Trap Trap Trap
ID 3 6 8 11
Node Type GPTNode GPTNode GPTNode GPTNode
Lo-flow bypass rate (cum/sec) 0 0 0 0
Hi-flow bypass rate (cum/sec) 100 100 100 100
Flow Transfer Function
Input (cum/sec) 0 0 0 0
Output (cum/sec) 0 0 0 0
[OCR of page images]
TSS ET Loss (kg/yr)
TSS Infiltration Loss (kg/yr)
TSS Low Flow Bypass Out (kg/yr)
TSS High Flow Bypass Out (kg/yr)
TSS Orifice / Filter Out (kg/yr)
TSS Weir Out (kg/yr)
TSS Transfer Function Out (kg/yr)
TSS Reuse Supplied (kg/yr)
TSS Reuse Requested (kg/yr)
TSS % Reuse Demand Met
TSS % Load Reduction
TP Flow In (kg/yr)
TP ET Loss (kg/yr)
TP Infiltration Loss (kg/yr)
TP Low Flow Bypass Out (kg/yr)
TP High Flow Bypass Out (kg/yr)
TP Orifice / Filter Out (kg/yr)
TP Weir Out (kg/yr)
TP Transfer Function Out (kg/yr)
TP Reuse Supplied (kg/yr)
TP Reuse Requested (kg/yr)
TP % Reuse Demand Met
TP % Load Reduction
TN Flow In (kg/yr)
TN ET Loss (kg/yr)
TN Infiltration Loss (kg/yr)
TN Low Flow Bypass Out (kg/yr)
TN High Flow Bypass Out (kg/yr)
TN Orifice / Filter Out (kg/yr)
TN Weir Out (kg/yr)
TN Transfer Function Out (kg/yr)
TN Reuse Supplied (kg/yr)
TN Reuse Requested (kg/yr)
TN % Reuse Demand Met
TN % Load Reduction
GP Flow In (kg/yr)
GP ET Loss (kg/yr)
GP Infiltration Loss (kg/yr)
GP Low Flow Bypass Out (kg/yr)
GP High Flow Bypass Out (kg/yr)
GP Orifice / Filter Out (kg/yr)
GP Weir Out (kg/yr)
GP Transfer Function Out (kg/yr)
GP Reuse Supplied (kg/yr)
GP Reuse Requested (kg/yr)
GP % Reuse Demand Met
GP % Load Reduction
PET Scaling Factor
Generic treatment nodes
Location
ID
Node Type
Lo-flow bypass rate (cum/sec)
Hi-flow bypass rate (cum/sec)
Flow Transfer Function
Input (cum/sec)
Output (cum/sec)
0
0
0
0
43.1385
412.771
ooo
0
71.2
4.16619
0
0
0
0
0.523207
1.3795
0
0
0
0
54.3299
27.8442
0
0
0
0
8.84379
12.0455
0
0
0
0
24.9779
12.378
0
cooeooO oO oC Oe
100
Gross Pollutant Trap
3
GPTNode
0
100
0
0
0
0
81.3007
28.7607
0
0
0
0
85.8295
1.56127
0
0
0
0
0.620065
0.0667865
0
0
0
0
56.0069
8.73885
0
0
0
0
7.50365
0.431178
0
0
0
0
9.20045
38.8508
0
ecoooca COC Oe
100
Gross Pollutant
Trap
6
GPTNode
0
100
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
4.28689 39.9851
21.9999 597.266
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
90.2784 77.6678
0.705296 6.0455
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0.205148 2.01932
0.0663906 1.50241
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
61.5 41.7463
4.48177 49.904
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
1.12274 10.7263
0.583748 14.3644
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
61.9239 49.7221
1.78007 12.2255
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
100 100
24 21
Gross Pollutant Gross Pollutant
Trap Trap
8 1
GPTNode GPTNode
0 0
100 100
0
0
0
0
0
0
82.8893
7.30014
0
0
0
0
26.5787
0.66149
0
0
0
0
0.545292
0.0446366
0
0
0
0
10.8182
8.4863
0
0
0
0
7.40628
0.568045
0
0
0
0
6.03293
84.7436
0
ocoooecoo OC os
100
0
0
0
0
16.2788
1.46668
0
0
0
0
26.6968
0.132837
0
0
0
0
0.109495
0.00861536
0
0
0
0
11.0868
1.72145
0
0
0
0
1.49414
0.120641
0
0
0
0
6.19643
16.9487
0
cooeooO oO oC Oe
100
0
0
0
0
79.8312
8.20995
0
0
0
0
79.7074
1.05277
0
0
0
0
0.534875
0.0255635
0
0
0
0
46.7655
7.51249
0
0
0
0
6.67265
0.146611
0
0
0
0
9.22776
19.4254
0
cooa OOO Oe
100
BoD oOo
an
@
ey
Ss
a
ooond
0
95.4353
2.06362
0
0
0
0
0.457955
77.8081
6.64523
0
0
0
0
5.55991
16.3323
66.778
0
ocoooecoo OC os
100
0
0
0
43.0029
11.7417
36.3478
0.139342
0
0
0
0.0696711
0.0371766
23.3197
0.456989
0
0
0
0.228495
0.175155
11.6721
4.53259
0
0
0
2.2663
ocoono
0
49.9999
ooo
0
2.01705
11.4605
0
0
0
0
91.9441
0.330332
0
0
0
0
0.0952492
0.03172
0
0
0
0
61.5632
2.02072
0
0
0
0
0.516979
0.26578
0
0
0
0
61.2634
7.79649
0
ecoooca COC Oe
100
21
0
0
0
0
12.6084
2.19548
0
0
0
0
21.3334
0.101321
0
0
0
0
0.0802552
0.0123945
0
0
0
0
8.55814
1.29309
0
0
0
0
1.0773
0.161499
0
0
0
0
4.19861
12.881
0
ocoooecoo OC os
100
0
0
0
0
44.4313
3.90595
0
0
0
0
85.4453
0.859895
0
0
0
0
0.367072
0.00874779
0
0
0
0
56.2947
5.6495
0
0
0
0
4.71029
0.060931
0
0
0
0
15.5461
32.3465
0
cooeooO oO oC Oe
100
Page 25
Input (cum/sec) 10 10 10 10 Output (cum/sec) 10 10 10 10 Gross Pollutant Transfer Function Enabled TRUE TRUE TRUE TRUE Input (kg/ML) 0 0 0 0 Output (kg/ML) 0 0 0 0 Input (kg/ML) 100 100 100 100 Output (kg/ML) 5 5 5 5 Enabled TRUE TRUE TRUE TRUE Input (mg/L) 0 0 0 0 Output (mg/L) 0 0 0 0 Input (mg/L) 50 50 50 50 Output (mg/L) 50 50 50 50 Total Phosphorus Transfer Function Enabled TRUE TRUE TRUE TRUE Input (mg/L) 0 0 0 0 Output (mg/L) 0 0 0 0 Input (mg/L) 5 5 5 5 Output (mg/L) 5 5 5 5 Total Suspended Solids Transfer Function Enabled TRUE TRUE TRUE TRUE Input (mg/L) 0 0 0 0 Output (mg/L) 0 0 0 0 Input (mg/L) 1000 1000 1000 1000 Output (mg/L) 1000 1000 1000 1000 TSS Flow based Efficiency Enabled Off Off Off Off TSS Flow based Efficiency TP Flow based Efficiency Enabled Off Off Off Off TP Flow based Efficiency TN Flow based Efficiency Enabled Off Off Off Off TN Flow based Efficiency GP Flow based Efficiency Enabled Off Off Off Off GP Flow based Efficiency IN - Mean Annual Flow (ML/yr) 12.2 3.03 11.9 1.95 IN - TSS Mean Annual Load (kg/yr) 1.28E+03 1.37E+03 1.58E+03 270 IN - TP Mean Annual Load (kg/yr) 3.69 1.11 4.17 0.705 IN - TN Mean Annual Load (kg/yr) 28.1 7.03 27.8 4.48 IN - Gross Pollutant Mean Annual Load (kg/yr) 189 55.4 248 35.6 OUT - Mean Annual Flow (ML/yr) 12.2 3.03 11.9 1.95 OUT - TSS Mean Annual Load (kg/yr) 1.28E+03 1.37E+03 1.58E+03 270 OUT - TP Mean Annual Load (kg/yr) 3.69 1.11 4.17 0.705 OUT - TN Mean Annual Load (kg/yr) 28.1 7.03 27.8 4.48 OUT - Gross Pollutant Mean Annual Load (kg/yr) 9.46 2.77 12.4 1.78 Flow In (ML/yr) 12.2242 3.02957 11.9361 1.94784 ET Loss (ML/yr) 0 0 0 0 Infiltration Loss (ML/yr) 0 0 0 0 Low Flow Bypass Out (ML/yr) 0 0 0 0 High Flow Bypass Out (ML/yr) 0 0 0 0 Orifice / Filter Out (ML/yr) 0 0 0 0 Weir Out (ML/yr) 0 0 0 0 Transfer Function Out (ML/yr) 12.2242 3.02957 11.9361 1.94784 Reuse Supplied (ML/yr) 0 0 0 0 Reuse Requested (ML/yr) 0 0 0 0 % Reuse Demand Met 0 0 0 0 % Load Reduction 0 0 0 0 TSS Flow In (kg/yr) 1284.39 1371.74 1583.02 270.394 TSS ET Loss (kg/yr) 0 0 0 0 TSS Infiltration Loss (kg/yr) 0 0 0 0 TSS Low Flow Bypass Out (kg/yr) 0 0 0 0
Page 26
TSS High Flow Bypass Out (kg/yr) 0 0 0 0 TSS Orifice / Filter Out (kg/yr) 0 0 0 0 TSS Weir Out (kg/yr) 0 0 0 0 TSS Transfer Function Out (kg/yr) 1284.39 1371.74 1583.02 270.394 TSS Reuse Supplied (kg/yr) 0 0 0 0 TSS Reuse Requested (kg/yr) 0 0 0 0 TSS % Reuse Demand Met 0 0 0 0 TSS % Load Reduction 0 0 0 0 TP Flow In (kg/yr) 3.68971 1.11027 4.16619 0.705296 TP ET Loss (kg/yr) 0 0 0 0 TP Infiltration Loss (kg/yr) 0 0 0 0 TP Low Flow Bypass Out (kg/yr) 0 0 0 0 TP High Flow Bypass Out (kg/yr) 0 0 0 0 TP Orifice / Filter Out (kg/yr) 0 0 0 0 TP Weir Out (kg/yr) 0 0 0 0 TP Transfer Function Out (kg/yr) 3.68971 1.11027 4.16619 0.705296 TP Reuse Supplied (kg/yr) 0 0 0 0 TP Reuse Requested (kg/yr) 0 0 0 0 TP % Reuse Demand Met 0 0 0 0 TP % Load Reduction 0 0 0 0 TN Flow In (kg/yr) 28.1383 7.02624 27.8442 4.48177 TN ET Loss (kg/yr) 0 0 0 0 TN Infiltration Loss (kg/yr) 0 0 0 0 TN Low Flow Bypass Out (kg/yr) 0 0 0 0 TN High Flow Bypass Out (kg/yr) 0 0 0 0 TN Orifice / Filter Out (kg/yr) 0 0 0 0 TN Weir Out (kg/yr) 0 0 0 0 TN Transfer Function Out (kg/yr) 28.1383 7.02624 27.8442 4.48177 TN Reuse Supplied (kg/yr) 0 0 0 0 TN Reuse Requested (kg/yr) 0 0 0 0 TN % Reuse Demand Met 0 0 0 0 TN % Load Reduction 0 0 0 0 GP Flow In (kg/yr) 189.135 55.3853 247.552 35.6045 GP ET Loss (kg/yr) 0 0 0 0 GP Infiltration Loss (kg/yr) 0 0 0 0 GP Low Flow Bypass Out (kg/yr) 0 0 0 0 GP High Flow Bypass Out (kg/yr) 0 0 0 0 GP Orifice / Filter Out (kg/yr) 0 0 0 0 GP Weir Out (kg/yr) 0 0 0 0 GP Transfer Function Out (kg/yr) 9.45698 2.7691 12.378 1.78007 GP Reuse Supplied (kg/yr) 0 0 0 0 GP Reuse Requested (kg/yr) 0 0 0 0 GP % Reuse Demand Met 0 0 0 0 GP % Load Reduction 100 100 100 100 Other nodes Location COOROY CREEK ID 1 Node Type ReceivingNode IN - Mean Annual Flow (ML/yr) 37.5 IN - TSS Mean Annual Load (kg/yr) 1.19E+03 IN - TP Mean Annual Load (kg/yr) 5.93 IN - TN Mean Annual Load (kg/yr) 48.9 IN - Gross Pollutant Mean Annual Load (kg/yr) 4.53 OUT - Mean Annual Flow (ML/yr) 37.5 OUT - TSS Mean Annual Load (kg/yr) 1.19E+03 OUT - TP Mean Annual Load (kg/yr) 5.93 OUT - TN Mean Annual Load (kg/yr) 48.9 OUT - Gross Pollutant Mean Annual Load (kg/yr) 4.53
Page 27
% Load Reduction 1.35
TSS % Load Reduction 84.2
TN % Load Reduction 45
TP % Load Reduction 60.3
GP % Load Reduction 99.4
Links
Location Drainage Link Drainage Link Drainage Link Drainage Link Drainage Link Drainage Link Drainage Link Drainage Link Drainage Link Drainage Link Drainage Link Drainage Link Drainage Link Drainage Link Drainage Link
Source node ID 2 5 12 9 6 16 10 13 17 14 18 20 19 22 23
Target node ID 3 6 8 1 16 1 16 17 3 18 8 16 22 20 10
Muskingum-Cunge Routing Not Routed Not Routed Not Routed Not Routed Not Routed Not Routed Not Routed Not Routed Not Routed Not Routed Not Routed Not Routed Not Routed Not Routed Not Routed
Muskingum K
Muskingum theta
IN - Mean Annual Flow (ML/yr) 8.56 3.03 11.2 11.9 3.03 22.6 4.07 3.66 3.66 0.733 0.733 3.73 2.89 2.89 1.69
IN - TSS Mean Annual Load (kg/yr) 1.19E+03 1.37E+03 1.57E+03 456 1.37E+03 637 110 123 90.2 24.2 17.7 88 1.28E+03 58.3 728
IN - TP Mean Annual Load (kg/yr) 3.1 1.11 4.05 1.9 1.11 3.52 0.687 0.661 0.59 0.133 0.118 0.56 2.06 0.458 1.19
IN - TN Mean Annual Load (kg/yr) 20.2 7.03 26.2 20.9 7.03 25.1 7.93 8.49 7.97 1.72 1.61 6.82 6.65 5.56 3.97
IN - Gross Pollutant Mean Annual Load (kg/yr) 189 55.4 248 0 2.77 0 0 84.7 0 16.9 0 0 66.8 0 38.9
OUT - Mean Annual Flow (ML/yr) 8.56 3.03 11.2 11.9 3.03 22.6 4.07 3.66 3.66 0.733 0.733 3.73 2.89 2.89 1.69
OUT - TSS Mean Annual Load (kg/yr) 1.19E+03 1.37E+03 1.57E+03 456 1.37E+03 637 110 123 90.2 24.2 17.7 88 1.28E+03 58.3 728
OUT - TP Mean Annual Load (kg/yr) 3.1 1.11 4.05 1.9 1.11 3.52 0.687 0.661 0.59 0.133 0.118 0.56 2.06 0.458 1.19
OUT - TN Mean Annual Load (kg/yr) 20.2 7.03 26.2 20.9 7.03 25.1 7.93 8.49 7.97 1.72 1.61 6.82 6.65 5.56 3.97
OUT - Gross Pollutant Mean Annual Load (kg/yr) 189 55.4 248 0 2.77 0 0 84.7 0 16.9 0 0 66.8 0 38.9
Catchment Details
LowerMillCarpark_7Feb
Catchment Name 2020
Timestep 6 Minutes
Start Date 1/01/1973
End Date 31/12/1983 23:54
Rainfall Station 40059 COOROY
User-defined monthly
ET Station PET
Mean Annual Rainfall (mm) 1595
Mean Annual ET (mm) 1631
Page 28
Drainage Link Drainage Link Drainage Link Drainage Link Drainage Link Drainage Link Drainage Link Drainage Link Drainage Link Drainage Link Drainage Link Drainage Link Drainage Link Drainage Link Drainage Link
24 25 26 28 29 21 27 8 3 30 31 4 7 11 15
20 26 1 29 27 27 1 9 16 31 10 11 11 15 1
Not Routed Not Routed Not Routed Not Routed Not Routed Not Routed Not Routed Not Routed Not Routed Not Routed Not Routed Not Routed Not Routed Not Routed Not Routed
0.844 0.197 0.197 0.557 0.557 0.337 0.863 11.9 12.2 2.38 2.38 0.866 1.08 1.95 1.87
376 86 54.7 18.8 14.8 152 13.5 1.58E+03 1.28E+03 332 48.3 116 154 270 26.3
0.595 0.139 0.107 0.101 9.26E-02 0.238 0.127 4.17 3.69 0.86 0.376 0.316 0.389 0.705 0.272
1.95 0.457 0.404 1.29 1.24 0.782 0.783 27.8 28.1 5.65 4.77 2 2.48 4.48 1.71
19.4 4.53 4.53 12.9 0 7.8 0 12.4 9.46 32.3 0 15.8 19.8 1.78 0
0.844 0.197 0.197 0.557 0.557 0.337 0.863 11.9 12.2 2.38 2.38 0.866 1.08 1.95 1.87
376 86 54.7 18.8 14.8 152 13.5 1.58E+03 1.28E+03 332 48.3 116 154 270 26.3
0.595 0.139 0.107 0.101 9.26E-02 0.238 0.127 4.17 3.69 0.86 0.376 0.316 0.389 0.705 0.272
1.95 0.457 0.404 1.29 1.24 0.782 0.783 27.8 28.1 5.65 4.77 2 2.48 4.48 1.71
19.4 4.53 4.53 12.9 0 7.8 0 12.4 9.46 32.3 0 15.8 19.8 1.78 0
[OCR of page images]
Drainage Link
24
20
Not Routed
0.844
376
0.595
1.95
19.4
0.844
376
0.595
1.95
19.4
Drainage Link
25
26
Not Routed
0.197
86
0.139
0.457
4.53
0.197
86
0.139
0.457
4.53
Drainage Link
26
1
Not Routed
0.197
54.7
0.107
0.404
4.53
0.197
54.7
0.107
0.404
4.53
Drainage Link
28
29
Not Routed
0.557
18.8
0.101
1.29
12.9
0.557
18.8
0.101
1.29
12.9
Drainage Link
29
27
Not Routed
0.557
14.8
9.26E-02
1.24
0.557
14.8
9.26E-02
1.24
Drainage Link
21
27
Not Routed
0.337
152
0.238
0.782
78
0.337
152
0.238
0.782
78
Drainage Link
27
1
Not Routed
0.863
13.5
0.127
0.783
0.863
13.5
0.127
0.783
Drainage Link
8
9
Not Routed
11.9
1.58E+03
417
278
12.4
11.9
1.58E+03
417
278
12.4
Drainage Link
3
16
Not Routed
12.2
1.28E+03
3.69
28.1
9.46
12.2
1.28E+03
3.69
28.1
9.46
Drainage Link
30
31
Not Routed
2.38
332
0.86
5.65
32.3
2.38
332
0.86
5.65
32.3
Drainage Link
31
10
Not Routed
2.38
48.3
0.376
4.77
2.38
48.3
0.376
4.77
Drainage Link
4
1
Not Routed
0.866
116
0.316
15.8
0.866
116
0.316
15.8
Drainage Link
7
1
Not Routed
1.08
154
0.389
2.48
19.8
1.08
154
0.389
2.48
19.8
Drainage Link
11
15
Not Routed
1.95
270
0.705
4.48
1.78
1.95
270
0.705
4.48
1.78
Drainage Link
15
1
Not Routed
1.87
26.3
0.272
1.71
1.87
26.3
0.272
1.71
Page 29
Callaghan & Toth
APPENDIX B - Site Management Plan – Contaminated
Land
B
2001 Lower Mill Carpark Extension SWMP February 2020
Page 30
® Queensland Government Environmental Protection Agency Queensland Parks and Wildlife Service DRAFT SITE MANAGEMENT PLAN (SMP) Environmental Protection Act 1994 (EP Act), Chapter 7 Part 8 Division 5 DATE: 28 April 2008 RPD Lot 5 on Plan SP173770; Lot 7 on Plan SP173770 Lot 2 on Plan RP47020; Lot 1 on Plan RP87371 EPA File: 902326 1.0 SUMMARY OF CONTAMINATION These allotments, Lot 5 on SP173770, (formerly part of Lot 2 on RP87371) Lot 7 on SP173770 (formerly part of Lot 1 on RP 885282), Lot 2 on RP47020 and Lot | on RP87371; were part of the Boral Cooroy timber mill which operated from 1959-2001. Prior to the establishment of the timber mill at the site, the site was used for transient farming and residence. No environmental impacts are known to have occurred at the site prior to its use as a timber mill. The site, known as the Cooroy Lower Mill Domain, is currently occupied by a number of (vacant) buildings associated with the old timber mill activities. It is proposed to use the site to create a cluster of wood working activities for community use through the refurbishment, reuse and preservation of the old mill kiln, hopper and boiler building. Previous environmental investigations at the timber mill site have identified a number of areas as containing levels of soil contamination in excess of the Queensland Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) Environmental Investigation Levels (EILs). Figure 1 shows the location of the former timber mill infrastructure in relation to the current allotment boundaries. Based on the results of the investigations conducted across the allotments, the aforementioned allotments can be used for non-sensitive commercial/industrial landuses which includes premises such as shops and offices as well as factories and industrial sites with minimal opportunities for contact with residual impacted soil, provided the controls outlined herein are implemented and maintained. The proposed activities are consistent with these land uses. Soil impact left in place is discussed below. Lot 2 RP47020: Metal concentrations in excess of Queensland Environmental Protection Agency (Qld EPA) Environmental Investigation Levels (EILs) remain onsite (as shown on Figure 2), with maximum concentrations detected being:111mg/kg of arsenic, which is also above Health-based Investigation Level (HIL) “A” ( standard residential with
Page 31
garden/accessible soil); 109mg/kg of copper; and 1220 mg/kg of zinc. All impacted material occurs at shallow depth (0-200mm) in fill material present across the lot, and attenuates rapidly with depth, with all the (200-500mm) samples collected from natural insitu soils at these locations reporting metal concentrations below the EILs. Lot 1 RP87371: Metal concentrations in excess of Qld EPA EILs remain onsite (as shown on Figure 3), with maximum concentrations being: 112mg/kg of arsenic (also above HIL “A” guidelines); 143mg/kg of copper; 148mg/kg of chromium (III); and 884 mg/kg zinc. Although there is no nominated guideline for boron, two samples collected from this allotment also reported concentrations of boron in excess of the acknowledged background concentrations (maximum concentration detected was 723mg/kg). All impact occurs in samples collected at shallow depth (0-200mm) in fill material present across the lot, however in some locations the impact has not been vertically delineated. Lot 5 SP173771: In the area to the east and south east of the former boiler building (as shown on Figure 4) metal concentrations in excess of Qld EPA commercial/industrial health based investigation levels (HIL “F”) guidelines remain onsite, with maximum concentrations detected being: 8820mg/kg of arsenic; 8930mg/kg of copper; and 30400mg/kg of chromium. This impact occurs at shallow depth (0-200mm) in fill material present in this area of the lot, however in one location it has not been vertically delineated. Although no nominated guideline exists for boron, these samples also reported concentrations of boron in excess of the acknowledged background concentrations (maximum concentration detected was 9410mg/kg). In other areas of Lot 5, metal concentrations in excess of Qld EPA EILs remain onsite, with maximum concentrations detected in other areas of the site being: 60mg/kg for arsenic, and 131mg/kg for chromium(III). All impacted material occurs at shallow depth (0-200mm) in fill material, however in some areas the impact has not been vertically delineated. Lot 7 SP173771 Areas of residual soil impact across this lot are shown in Figure 5. Residual soil impact in locations F2 and F3 exceeds Qld EPA EILs for arsenic, copper and chromium (IIT). As part of soil remediation works undertaken at the site in the year 2000, this area was capped by a 500mm clay layer. This clay capping layer has a confirmed density ratio of 95.5%. This capping layer was covered by 100mm of clean soil. Residual soil impact in the location of the former evaporation pond exceeds Qld EPA HIL”F” levels for arsenic, and the EILs for copper and chromium (III). As part of soil remediation works undertaken at the site in 2000, this area was backfilled with soil excavated during the replacement of the causeway at the site, the soil excavated from behind the boiler as part of other soil remediation works onsite, and imported clay fill. This backfill was then capped by a 500mm clay layer. Sections of this clay capping
Page 32
layer were covered by either 100mm of road base (trafficable areas) or clean soil (non- trafficable areas). Metal concentrations in excess of Qld EPA EILs also exist in the vicinity of the former sawdust shed. This area has maximum concentrations of 101mg/kg for arsenic (also above HIL “A” guidelines), 92mg/kg for copper, and 142mg/kg for chromium (II). All impact was detected in soil samples collected at shallow depth (0-200mm) in fill material present in this area of the lot, however the impact has not been vertically delineated in some locations. 2.0 OBJECTIVES OF THE SMP The purpose of this SMP is to manage contaminated soils and materials on the lots in a manner that protects human health and the environment. This objective will be achieved through the following processes. ° Monitoring and control of all intrusive site works including excavations, trenching, drilling and scraping. ° The placement and maintenance of landscaping and capping layers which will provide barriers to occupiers of the site and the general public from the contamination, as well as restricting erosion and water infiltration and the potential for residual impact to migrate via leaching processes. ° The application of maintenance and monitoring requirements for the capping layers. 3.0 ACHIEVEMENT AND MAINTENANCE OF OBJECTIVES 3.1 Responsibility. The owner of the land (as defined in the Environmental Protection Act 1994) is to ensure that this SMP and any variations approved or required by the administering authority are complied with in order to achieve the objectives. The obligations and conditions set out in this SMP bind the owner of the land. 3.2. Provision of SMP to appropriate persons. The owner must provide all persons involved in building design and planning and all contractors and lessees conducting building and/or excavation works with a copy of the SMP prior to commencement of site works. All persons occupying or working on the site must comply with the requirements of the SMP. 3.3 Site Capping. 3.3.1 Existing Capping. The existing capping is to remain in place, undisturbed, other than for the construction of service trenches. In the event that the existing capping layers are disturbed or removed, a new capping layer, of equal or better standard and designed to achieve the objectives of this SMP, is to be installed. The capping layer must consist of 500mm of compacted clay and/or other equivalent low permeability (less than 1x10” m/s) cover, and is to be installed within areas as outlined in Figures 2 — 5 (attached) to maintain a barrier between the residual contamination and site users. The capping layer is to be maintained in sound condition at all times. If vegetation is to be placed over the capping layer, a minimum thickness of
Page 33
100mm of top soil must be placed on top of the capping layer and only short root zoned plants such as grasses can be used as a vegetative cover. 3.3.2 Boiler Room Area. The identified contamination area (as shown on Figure 4) is to be capped with at least 100mm of structural reinforced concrete or interlocking pavers on a compacted base or equivalent cover. This area is not to be used for any activity which will disturb the capping, or surface soils. 3.3.3 Capping Maintenance. All capping materials are to be maintained in a sound condition at all times. Inspections of the site during construction of any capping materials are to be undertaken with documentation of actual cover, thicknesses and details. 3.4 Soil excavation & Removal. Any soil excavated on the site must be assessed for contaminants of concern to determine if the material is contaminated and to identify appropriate management and disposal/re-use options. Representative sampling and analysis of soil from excavation in contaminated areas must be managed by a person suitably qualified and experienced in accordance with Section 381 of the Environmental Protection Act 1994 (EP Act). Contaminated soil must not be removed off-site without a disposal permit in accordance with Section 424 of the EP Act. 3.5 Unexpected Contamination. If during any site earthworks or excavation, offensive or noxious odours and/or evidence of gross contamination not previously detected is observed, site works are to cease in that area and action taken to immediately abate potential environmental harm. The administering authority is to be notified in writing within two business days of detection and advised of appropriate remedial action. Any remedial action is to be developed by a person suitably qualified and experienced in accordance with Section 381 of the EP Act. 3.6 General Environmental Protection. All earthworks are to be undertaken in accordance with general environmental protection measures to avoid unwanted migration and deposition of soil. These measures include the control of dust, noise, stormwater runoff, sediment, erosion, spillage from haulage trucks and odour releases involving the handling or movement of contaminated material. 3.7. Workplace Health and Safety. A Workplace Health and Safety Plan (WH&S plan), which conforms to the requirements of the Workplace Health and Safety Act 1995 is to be developed for any site excavation works in contaminated areas. The WH&S plan must specifically address contaminants of concern. 4.0 MONITORING AND REPORTING The owner is to undertake annual inspections of the site to determine and record the state of the installed capping in contaminated areas, and to provide the results of these inspections, and any corrective actions implemented to ensure that capping and protective barriers including vegetative covers remain in sound condition, to authorised officers of the EPA on request.
Page 34
Records are to be kept of any inspections, soil excavation in contaminated areas, disposal permits and SMP compliance for review by the administering authority from time to time. This SMP has been developed to manage site contamination risks present at the issue date. Subsequent uses of the site may result in the need to review the plan. This SMP makes reference to two plan attachments that are available from the Administering Authority if required.
Page 35
Callaghan & Toth
APPENDIX C - IPWEAQ Standard Drawings
C
2001 Lower Mill Carpark Extension SWMP February 2020
Page 36
Field inlet Type 1 without
concrete apron as per
(IPWEAQ Std Dwg D—-0050)
Filter cloth, refer note 4 or organic
geotextile matting fixed to perimeter of pit
to avoid runnelling of water between pit
and soil interface. 300 wide, 100 cover
Extended detention depth 100 to
Bioretention basin finished surface level,
refer project drawings and notes 6 and 7
refer project drawings for depth
Transition layer — coarse sand,
Refer note 1
——— Drainage layer — fine aggregate,
Posy 300 (typically 300), refer project
drawings
782 Vegetated surface,
4 ol | Slo refer iy 7
v ” “\/ Bf \/ ——— Mulch layer, 50-75
. v > VY refer note 5
itr , Overflow pit L ~~
y
I >
Ivo vy
Filter cloth to extend |
500 up batter under | > ——— Filter media — loamy sand,
topsoil pinned to batter, vy .
refer note 4 I. , Pipe sealed “90 MIN. cover of drainage layer 500 (typical), 400 MIN
| » into pit (fine aggregate) over subsoil
' ° drainage pipe
Ie ’ =——— constant depth — 100,
{ r yA nom. size 0.5-2.0
\-°
¥ flow Under—drain, refer note 2 constant depth — 200,
yoy ot ee nom. size 2-5
| a Basin base to grade at 0.5% MIN,
* refer note 6
NOTES:
Bioretention media specification shall be in accordance with the Facility for
Filter cloth, refer note 4
BIORETENTION BASIN OVERFLOW PIT DETAIL
Advancing Biofiltration 4. Filter cloth — non-woven geotextile.
Filter cloth not to be placed between any filter layers.
"Guidelines for Soil Filter Media in Bioretention Systems”.
accordance with the Facility for Advancing Biofiltration ’Practice Note 1:
Bioretention hydraulic conductivity shall be in
In Situ Measurement of
Hydraulic Conductivity”. The number of samples to be tested shall be in accordance with the "Water
Sensitive Urban Design Construction and Establishment Guidelines — Swales, Bioretention Systems and
Wetlands (Water by Design).
2. Under—drain: slotted rigid pipe (uPVC or similar to AS 2439.1) or approved equivalent, 0.5% MIN. grade.
Impervious
liner may be required subject to soil testing requirements in accordance with the "Water Sensitive
Urban Design Technical Design Guidelines” (Water by Design).
"Water Sensitive Urban Design Construction and
Refer project drawings for diameter and invert level (Typically 100-150).
Surface to be mulched and planted as per
Establishment Guidelines — Swales, Bioretention Systems and Wetlands” (Water by Design) must be
with a filter sock surrounding pipe. Under—drainage pipes shall be sealed into pits using grout or other
approved watertight seal.
3. Refer to project drawings for vegetated batter slopes (1 in 3 MAX, 1 in 4 typical) and batter topsoil
requirements.
achieved. Construction tolerances must be noted on project plans. Invert levels of pits, pipes and base
Refer landscape drawings for plant specification. Plant specification and density shall be in accordance
with the "Water Sensitive Urban Design Technical Design Guidelines” (Water by Design).
5. Basin finished surface level is top of filter media.
landscape drawings.
6. Construction tolerances as documented in the
Pipe should not be installed
levels must be noted on project drawings.
7.
8. All dimensions are in millimetres unless otherwise noted.
These drawings have been developed in consultation between the participating councils.
BEFORE USE, the user shall confirm that the drawing has been adopted by the appropriate council
13/01/2010
ORIGINAL _ISSUE
2>
DATE.
REVISIONS.
Q
INSTITUTE OF PUBLIC WORKS ENGINEERING AUSTRALIA
QUEENSLAND DIMISION INC.
STANDARD DRAWINGS
BIORETENTION STANDARD PROFILE
OVERFLOW PIT
DRAWING No.
WSUD-001
2-T TTT]
Page 37
NOTES: Bioretention media specification shall be in accordance with the Facility for Advancing Biofiltration "Guidelines for Soil Filter Media in Bioretention Systems”. Bioretention hydraulic conductivity shall be in accordance with the Facility for Advancing Biofiltration "Practice Note 1: In Situ Measurement of Hydraulic Conductivity”. The number of samples to be tested shall be in accordance with the "Water Sensitive Urban Design Construction and Establishment Guidelines — Swales, Bioretention Systems and Wetlands” (Water by Design). 2. Under—drain: slotted rigid pipe (uPVC or similar to AS 2439.1) or approved equivalent, 0.5% MIN. grade. Refer project drawings for diameter and invert level (typically @100-150). Pipe joins should be glued using plumbing cement. Pipe should not be installed with a filter sock surrounding pipe. Under—drainage pipes shall be sealed into pits using grout or other approved watertight seal. 3. Refer to project drawings for vegetated batter slopes (1 in 3 MAX, 1 in 4 typical) and batter topsoil requirements. 4. Filter cloth — non-woven geotextile. Filter cloth not to be placed between any filter layers. Impervious liner may be required subject to soil testing requirements in accordance with the ‘Water Sensitive Urban Design Technical Design Guidelines” (Water by Design). 5. Basin finished surface level is top of filter media. Surface to be mulched and planted as per landscape drawings. 6. Construction tolerances as documented in the "Water Sensitive Urban Design Construction and Establishment Guidelines — Swales, Bioretention Systems and Wetlands” (Water by Design) must be achieved. Construction tolerances must be noted on project plans. Invert levels of pits and pipes and base levels must be shown on project drawings. 7. Refer landscape drawings for plant specification. Plant specification and density shall be in accordance with the "Water Sensitive Urban Design Technical Design Guidelines” (Water by Design). 8. All dimensions are in millimetres unless otherwise C.l. cap. extend cap to approx. 150 above ees basin surface YW V/ Subsoil drain cleanout — pvc pipe (non slotted) and connector cleanouts at head of subsoil drain 4S ‘Y’ branch Refer note 2 Provide locking function or secure cap with screws V/ fer No te 3 \ [p Filter cloth extend 500mm up batter under topsoil pinned to batter, refer note 4. Mulch layer — 50-75, refer note 5 Bioretention basin finished surface level, refer project drawings and notes 5 and 7 |\~——— Filter media — loamy sand, refer project drawings for depth, 500 (typical) 400 MIN Transition layer — coarse sand, constant depth — 100, refer note 1 135° Bend, refer note 2 | nom. size 0.5-2.0 k——— Drainage layer — fine aggregate, constant depth — 200, nom. size 2-5 Provide end cap at head of subsoil drain Filter cloth, refer note 4 | | —DRAI T — | l Provide locking function or C.l. cap. extend cap to \Besin base to grade at 0.5% MIN to overflow pit, refer note 6 50 MIN cover of drainage layer (fine aggregate) over under drainage pipe Mulch layer — 50-75, secure cap with ene approx. 150 above batter surface ee Filter cloth extend 500 l~ up batter under topsoil pinned to batter, refer note 4 VV 135° Bend, Subsoil drain cleanout foe note 2 pvc pipe (non slotted) *Y’ branch, and connector cleanouts at head of subsoil drain refer note 2 —————_ _ _ refer note 5 Pw |I~_—— Filter media — loamy sand, refer project drawings for depth, 500 (typical) 400 MIN Bioretention basin finished surface level, refer project drawings and notes 6 and 7 Transition layer — coarse sand, constant depth — 100, refer note 1 Provide end cap at head l nom. size 0.5-2.0 <= Drainage layer — fine aggregate, of subsoil fone constant depth — 200, nom. size 2-5 Basin base to grade at 0.5% MIN to overflow pit, refer note 6 Filter cloth, refer note 4 a BIORETENTION UNDER—DRAIN CLEANOUT — IN BATTER 150 MIN cover of drainage layer (fine aggregate) over under drainage pipe noted. These drawings have been developed in consultation between the participating councils. BEFORE USE, the user shall confirm that the drawing has been adopted by the appropriate council INSTITUTE OF PUBLIC WORKS ENGINEERING AUSTRALIA BIORETENTION STANDARD PROFILE we Hy QUEENSLAND DIVISION INC. UNDERDRAIN CLEANOUT WSUD—003 = A 13, 1/2010 ORIGINAL ISSUE — STANDARD DRAWINGS La