Original source · versioned page text
Attachment 7A - Responses to NC Info Request by ADG
Noosa Council
PO Box 141
TEWANTIN QLD 4565
Attention: Patrick Murphy – Coordinator Planning
Your Ref: MCU22/0118
Our Ref: 22366 C L002
14th December 2022
MVI / am
Sunshine Coast Office
RE: 94 AND 142 NOOSA DRIVE, NOOSA HEADS QLD 4567, LOT 3 ON SP126203, LOT 0 ON
SP203417 & LOT 203 ON SP267424
APPLICATION REF: MCU22/0118
RESPONSE TO INFORMATION REQUEST
On behalf of RACV Ltd, ADG Engineers provides the following civil engineering responses to the information
request issued by Noosa Council on the 29th of August 2022 and 2nd of September 2022, associated with 94
and 142 Noosa Dr, Noosa Heads (Lot 3 on SP126203, Lot 0 on SP203417 & Lot 203 on SP267424).
INFORMATION REQUEST ITEM ADG RESPONSE
GENERAL ENGINEERING
1. The submitted planning refers to We understand Attachment 8 – Site Based Stormwater
“Attachment 8 – Site Based Management Plan had been submitted and responded to with
Stormwater Management Plan by NC 2nd Information Request by Noosa Council.
ADG” but the SWMP was not
attached.
FLOOD IMMUNITY REQUIREMENTS
2. Obtain a flood search certificate It is noted that the flood hazard overlay for 142 Noosa Drive,
for the site and demonstrate that Noosa Heads shows an overlay in the north-western corner of
the minimum surface and floor the lot at approx. RL2.4m AHD. Given the car park, walkways
levels required by Table 8.2.6.4 and building for the proposed site are to be suspended and
of the Flood Hazard Overlay located at a minimum RL of 3.4m, there is a minimum of 1.0m
Code are achieved for the car between the assumed defined flood event and finished floor
park, walkways and buildings level of the suspended Cabins. Refer to architectural plans
proposed for the site. included in Appendix B of the SBSMP.
STORMWATER QUALITY TARGETS
3. Provide an updated SWMP and Updated SBSMP and MUSIC modelling provided to illustrate the
updated MUSIC modelling which HEV status of the receiving waters and demonstrating that the
recognises the HEV status of the development causes negligible or nil increase in gross
receiving waters and pollutants, total suspended solids, total phosphorous and total
demonstrates that PO6 and nitrogen compared to the pre-development scenario.
AO6.1 of the Water Quality and
Drainage Code has been
achieved.
BRISBANE / SYDNEY / MELBOURNE / GOLD COAST / SUNSHINE COAST / DARWIN / PERTH ABN 63 131 876 143
See the original
The page text is free to read. Viewing or downloading an original file needs an account.
Log in to see the originalFull text of the other 1 page
Page 2
STORMWATER TREATMENT DEVICE DETAILS
4. Clarify the filter media area Refer updated SBSMP (ADG Ref: 22366 C R10 Rev04) that
proposed for the bioretention provides a preliminary section showing integration with car
device and provide a preliminary parking and surrounding.
section showing how it integrates
with the proposed car parking
and surrounding levels
5. Provide geotechnical borehole Refer geotechnical borehole and test results for neighbouring
and test results demonstrating development “Noosa Sanctuary” (Report No.
that the proposed ‘pipeless’ GEOTKPAR1178AA/A) that is included as an appendice in
bioretention will function at the ADG’s SBSMP. The bio-retention basin is likely to sit
proposed location by providing approximately 0.7m – 1.0m beneath existing surface level.
the following for the bioretention Geotech borehole logs identify a medium dense silty sand
location: (alluvial) at approximately 1.0m depth beneath existing ground
level (varies).
5.1. In-situ Soil classification
5.2. Groundwater level (BGL and The groundwater was noted at depths of 1.3m below ground
mAHD) surface level and as the subsurface profile is predominately
sands, the water table is likely to fluctuate with tides, flood and
rainfall events.
5.3. In-situ saturated hydraulic It is recommended that in-situ saturated hydraulic conductivity
conductivity test results at testing is performed during detailed design to confirm the
proposed level of bioretention modelling assumptions. Assumptions included in the SBSMP
base are that a silty sand will have a minimum hydraulic
conductivity, k, of 1.0 * 10^-8 m/s and a maximum hydraulic
conductivity of 5.0 * 10^-6. An appropriate hydraulic
conductivity has been assumed between these ranges and it is
recommended that a hydraulic conductivity and permeability
test be conducted by an experienced Geotechnical Engineer at
detailed design stages.
ADG have assumed saturated hydraulic conductivity of 4 × 10−6
m/s which gives a yearly capacity of 3,784 𝑚3 /yr for a 30 m2
bioretention infiltration area.
Please see attached MUSIC modelling which shows the yearly
amount of water required to be infiltrated is 2,900 𝑚3 /yr.
5.4. Details of proposed planting Details of proposed planting to be provided by landscape
within he bioretention device architect.
We believe the above responses along with the supporting information adequately addresses the items
raised in Council’s recent correspondence. Should you wish to discuss further, please feel free to contact
me on the above details.
Yours sincerely,
ADG ENGINEERS (AUST) PTY LTD
MICHAEL VAN ITALLIE
Associate Director - Civil
Page 2 of 2