Original source · versioned page text
C1. Engineering Response Memo
Attached to the e-mail Response to Information Request - MCU17/0572 & OPW17/0611.
8.0 Provide additional comment on and a
preliminary design of the stormwater system
required on the site. The comment and plan
must include but not be limited to:
c) Existing stormwater connections and Refer to the amended preliminary engineering
drainage paths layout plan (20769_DA03) prepared by this office
for the existing and proposed stormwater
d) Proposed stormwater connections and connection points, surveyed levels and drainage
drainage paths including finished levels paths.
e) Comment from a suitably qualified person I, Michael Van Itallie (CPEng, RPEQ 13469)
that demonstrates that the subject site has confirm that the subject site has the legal right to
the legal rights to discharge into the discharge into the neighbouring drainage system in
drainage system in the adjoining property accordance with the easement deed (attached).
f) A design in accordance with QUDM 2017 Finalised stormwater arrangements, including
and Council’s Planning Scheme Policy 5 construction of the subject site stormwater outlet is
to be confirmed during detailed design and
g) Sufficient detail to demonstrate that the constructed in accordance with Councils Planning
downstream drainage system has the Scheme Policy 5 and QUDM standards.
capacity to cater for the proposed runoff
from the site. ADG reviewed the capacity of the constructed
infrastructure and confirms there is capacity for the
increase of flow from the subject site development.
The existing 900mm stormwater main located
within EMT B on RP154227; using a Manning’s ‘n’
of 0.013, has a capacity of approximately 5000 L/s
(size and grade of pipe based on survey & Council
records). The existing upstream catchment has an
area of approximately 0.2ha (based on Council
records). Using BOM rainfall data charts assuming
a fraction imperviousness of 0.68 yields a
catchment flow rate of 178 L/s. The proposed
catchment as previously computed resulted in an
additional 176L/s. Thus, the flow is still within the
design capacity of the existing infrastructure for
capacity requirements. It can be assumed that the
constructed stormwater infrastructure has been
designed to cater for upstream developments with
much higher imperviousness.
20769 C L002 09.02.2018 Council RFI Response Page 2 of 3
See the original
The page text is free to read. Viewing or downloading an original file needs an account.
Log in to see the originalSearchable page text hides email addresses. Original files are unchanged and may show email addresses.