Original source · versioned page text
REPS - Updated SWMP
Very large file (15.5 MB): the original may take a few minutes to open or download. The page text below is quick to read.
Original PDF page 1, section 1. The text section number identifies this passage in the reader.
DEVTEX NOMINEES
73 Eumundi - Noosa Road, Noosaville
Stormwater Management Plan
BBNE00529_0002_0001-REP-001-2
1 MAY 2025
73 EUMUNDI - NOOSA ROAD, NOOSAVILLE I BBNE00529_0002_0001-REP-001-2
See the original
The page text is free to read. Viewing or downloading an original file needs an account.
Log in to see the originalLog in to download the original file
The download may take a few minutes. On mobile data, it is best to wait for Wi-Fi.
Full text of sections 2 to 31 (of 57)
Section 2
DISCLAIMER This Report has been prepared on behalf of and for the exclusive use of DEVTEX NOMINEES and is subject to and issued in accordance with DEVTEX NOMINEES instruction to Engeny Australia Pty Ltd (Engeny). The content of this Report was based on previous information and studies supplied by DEVTEX NOMINEES. Engeny accepts no liability or responsibility whatsoever for it in respect of any use of or reliance upon this Report by any third party. Copying this Report without the permission of DEVTEX NOMINEES or Engeny is not permitted. Rev Date Description Author Reviewer Project Mgr. Approver 0 25/09/2024 Client Issue Adeeba Ayaz Brendon Bolt Brendon Bolt Kelsey Mundt 1 23/01/2025 Client Issue Brendon Bolt Kelsey Mundt Brendon Bolt Kelsey Mundt 2 1/05/2025 Client Issue Brendon Bolt Kelsey Mundt Brendon Bolt Kelsey Mundt Signatures: 73 EUMUNDI - NOOSA ROAD, NOOSAVILLE I BBNE00529_0002_0001-REP-001-2 ii
Section 3
CONTENTS
1. Introduction 1
1.1 Project Purpose and Scope 1
1.2 Site Characteristics 1
1.3 Project Data and Guidelines 3
1.4 Performance Criteria 3
1.5 Previous Approval 3
2. Information Request 4
3. Stormwater Quality Management 6
3.1 Overview 6
3.2 Operational Phase 6
3.3 Model Development 6
3.3.1 Catchments 6
3.3.2 Climate Data 7
3.3.3 Modelling Parameters 7
3.4 Treatment System 9
3.4.1 Treatment Train Sizing 9
3.5 Water Quality Model Results 10
3.6 Treatment Train Operation and Maintenance 11
3.6.1 Construction & Establishment 11
4. Stormwater Quantity Management 12
4.1 Existing Detention Basin 12
4.1.1 Existing Scenario 12
4.1.2 Developed Scenario (unmitigated) 13
4.1.3 Mitigation Scenario 15
4.1.4 Existing Detention Basin – Climate Change 16
4.2 Townhouse Site 16
4.2.1 Catchment 16
4.2.1 Results 17
4.3 Flows South to Starboard Avenue 18
5. Conclusion 19
6. QUALIFICATIONS 20
Appendix A: Proposed Site Layout Plan 21
Appendix B: Preliminary Engineering Design Plans 22
Appendix C: WBNM Results Summary 23
73 EUMUNDI - NOOSA ROAD, NOOSAVILLE I BBNE00529_0002_0001-REP-001-2 iii
Section 4
Tables Table 2.1: MUSIC Model Results .......................................................................................................................................................................... 5 Table 3.1: Water Quality Objectives .................................................................................................................................................................... 6 Table 3.2: Treated Catchment Properties ............................................................................................................................................................ 6 Table 3.3: Rainfall-Runoff Parameters ................................................................................................................................................................. 7 Table 3.4: Pollutant Export Parameters ............................................................................................................................................................... 8 Table 3.5: Bioretention Parameters..................................................................................................................................................................... 9 Table 3.6: MUSIC Model Results ........................................................................................................................................................................ 10 Table 4.1:WBNM Sub-Catchment Fraction Impervious Values – Existing Scenario ........................................................................................... 13 Table 4.2: Existing Scenario Peak Flows ............................................................................................................................................................. 13 Table 4.3: WBNM Sub-Catchment Fraction Impervious Values – Developed Scenario ..................................................................................... 13 Table 4.4: Peak Discharge Comparison – Existing Vs Developed Sceanrio ........................................................................................................ 14 Table 4.5: Elevation-Storage Data for Approved / Constructed Detention Basin .............................................................................................. 15 Table 4.6: Peak Discharge Comparison – Existing vs Mitigated Scenarios ......................................................................................................... 15 Table 4.7: Peak Discharge Comparison – Existing vs Mitigated Scenarios ......................................................................................................... 16 Table 4.8: WBNM Sub-Catchment Fraction Impervious Values – Developed Scenario ..................................................................................... 17 Table 4.9: 10% AEP flows – Existing vs Mitigated Scenarios .............................................................................................................................. 18 Figures Figure 1.1: Locality Plan ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 1 Figure 1.2: New Townhouse Locality ................................................................................................................................................................... 2 Figure 2.1: Stormwater Quality Catchment Plan ................................................................................................................................................. 7 Figure 2.2: Typical Conventional Bioretention Filter Section (Water by Design, 2014) ....................................................................................... 9 Figure 2.3: Music Model Arrangement for Developed Case .............................................................................................................................. 10 Figure 2.1: Existing Scenario Catchment Plan .................................................................................................................................................... 12 Figure 2.2: Developed Scenario Catchment Plan ............................................................................................................................................... 14 Figure 2.3: Excerpt of the Catchment Plan from Design Drawing (catchment 1/3) ........................................................................................... 17 Figure 2.4: Catchment of Gap Flow Reporting South down Starboard Avenue ................................................................................................. 18 73 EUMUNDI - NOOSA ROAD, NOOSAVILLE I BBNE00529_0002_0001-REP-001-2 iv
Section 5
1. INTRODUCTION
Engeny Australia Pty Ltd (Engeny) have been engaged by Devtex Nominees Pty Ltd to prepare an update to an approved Stormwater
Management Plan (SMP) to incorporate a townhouse development within a portion of the approved site (located on approved lots 1, 2, 3,
48, 49 and 50) at 73 Eumundi-Noosa Road, Noosaville (the Site). The original Reconfiguration of Lot (ROL) application (23686 DA) was
approved following an appeal in the Planning and Environment Court (Appeal No: 118 of 2006). From which an Operational Works application
was approved (Ref: OPW15/0133 dated 6 March 2017). As part of the OPW, a SMP was prepared by AquaIntel (02/09/2016 – revision B).
1.1 Project Purpose and Scope
The purpose of this SMP is to identify if the approved / constructed stormwater treatment measures can manage the new townhouse
configuration located within the approved development to achieve the requirements of the Noosa Shire Council (NSC) Planning Scheme
"Water Quality and Drainage Code”. The scope of the project has included the following:
• Assessment of the Site’s stormwater quantity and stormwater quality management based on the approved and constructed bioretention
and detention basins.
• Confirmation that the existing detention basin can manage stormwater quantity runoff from the Site based on the updated layout.
• Confirmation that the existing bioretention basin can still achieve the required Water Quality Objectives (WQO’s) for the Site based on
the updated layout.
• Collation of findings in a consolidated Stormwater Management Plan (SMP).
1.2 Site Characteristics
The Site has an area of 4.65 ha, with 0.5 ha being utilised for the proposed townhouse development. The pre-development site was largely
cleared with sporadic trees at rear. The Site grades from the west to east and connects into a culvert under Sands Avenue. Site elevations
range from 2.0 to 12.0 m AHD. There is a minor external catchment which extends to the west of the site up to Eumundi-Noosa Road. The
proposed townhouse layout and associated engineering drawings are provided in Appendix A and Appendix B, respectively. The location of
the Site is shown in below Figure 1.1, with the post-development layout shown in Figure 1.2.
SITE
Figure 1.1: Locality Plan
73 EUMUNDI - NOOSA ROAD, NOOSAVILLE I BBNE00529_0002_0001-REP-001-2 1
Section 6
Figure 1.2: New Townhouse Locality 73 EUMUNDI - NOOSA ROAD, NOOSAVILLE I BBNE00529_0002_0001-REP-001-2 2
Section 7
1.3 Project Data and Guidelines
The following data has been utilised for this assessment:
• Site plans prepared by Blackwood Architects (dated 13/09/2024).
• Design inputs for hydrologic and hydraulic modelling from the Australian Rainfall and Runoff Data Hub.
• Rainfall and Meteorological Data by Australian Bureau of Meteorology (BoM).
• Aerial LiDAR data of the ANZLIC Committee on Surveys and Mapping (ELVIS, https://elevation.fsdf.org.au/).
The guidelines, standards, and codes considered during the assessment were as follows:
• Noosa Council Planning Scheme 2020.
• Planning act 2016 and the associated State Planning Policy (DILGP, 2017).
• MUSIC Modelling Guidelines (Water by Design, 2018).
• Queensland Urban Drainage Manual 2017 (QUDM).
• Australian Rainfall and Runoff 2019 (ARR) 2019 (Ball, et al, 2019).
Reference documents relevant to the assessment are:
• NSC OPW Approval (ref: OPW15/0133 dated 6 March 2017).
1.4 Performance Criteria
Several objectives have been adopted for the development with respect to the management of stormwater quality and quantity:
• Stormwater Quality:
– 80% reduction in total suspended solids.
– 60% reduction in total phosphorous.
– 45% reduction in total nitrogen.
– 90% reduction in gross pollutants.
• Stormwater Quantity:
– No actionable nuisance caused by changes in stormwater quantity.
1.5 Previous Approval
As mentioned earlier, the original reconfiguration application (23686 DA) was approved following an appeal in the Planning and Environment
Court (Appeal No: 118 of 2006). Following this, an Operational Works (OW) application was approved (Ref: OPW15/0133 dated 6 March
2017). As part of the OW application a SMP (prepared by AquaIntel dated 2 September 2016 – Revision B) was approved in support of the
OW approval. As of the approved SMP, the following was design and constructed.
• Bioretention Basin – 400m2 filter area with 0.3 m extended detention depth.
• Detention Basin – Storage Volume of 1,018 m3.
This updated assessment for the townhouse (located on approved lots 1, 2, 3, 48, 49 and 50) will aim to utilise the existing stormwater
bioretention and detention basin in the assessment to confirm the objectives are still maintained.
73 EUMUNDI - NOOSA ROAD, NOOSAVILLE I BBNE00529_0002_0001-REP-001-2 3
Section 8
2. INFORMATION REQUEST
An Information Request was received from NSC for development application MCU24/0125, OPW24/0158, and RAL24/0021 on 28 October
2024. Item 4 of the Information Request relates to Stormwater Management and is outlined below:
External Drainage Impacts and Non-Worsening
Issue
The hydraulics of this area are complicated because the pipe flows in Starboard Ave (which this site connects to) run against the road grade
immediately downstream of the site. This means that any surface flows beyond the pipe system capacity will not flow to the detention basin
but towards the sag in Starboard Ave. Unless the pipe system was designed to convey the 1%AEP, the simplistic catchment assumptions
adopted in the SWMP will be incorrect for larger events. WBNM is too simplistic for this assessment and a model which can account for the
complicated hydraulics needs to be adopted.
The assessment needs to consider the impacts from the development on all parts of the drainage network external to the site – not just the
point of discharge from the detention basin. The impact to the drainage network between the site and the detention basin needs to be
considered, as well as the other discharge direction from the site in larger events (the sag in Starboard Ave) Climate change considerations
have not been addressed in the design and are required as per PO2 of the Water Quality and Drainage Code.
Information Required
Item 9 - Provide an updated SWMP which demonstrates either non-worsening or that the QUDM performance criteria for the street network
are achieved, and which:
a. Accurately considers the direction of flows from the site in events of different magnitudes and considers the impacts at all sensitive
receptors downstream from the site (not just at the discharge point from the existing detention basin);
b. This should include HGL long-sections and overland flow mapping for the street network downstream of the site (both directions) –
showing that either QUDM criteria are achieved or that non-worsening (pre-subdivision) is met.
c. Correctly incorporates the changes in site imperviousness as a result of the development (imperviousness values adopted in the
current SWMP could not be replicated);
d. Demonstrates that the existing and proposed pits along the Starboard Ave access strip, Starboard Ave and Ely Street do not surcharge
during the 0.5EY, 10%AEP and 1%AEP events; and
e. Incorporates climate change through increased rainfall intensity as per current ARR advice. It is considered that SSP2-4.5 would be
an appropriate scenario. BoM 2016 rainfall intensity should be increased for the current climate assessments as per ARR and a time
horizon of 2100 adopted for future climate scenarios.
Response:
a. All flows up to the 10% AEP from the townhouse site will be captured and piped to the existing detention, which is in line with the
current modelling in this SMP. It is acknowledged that in events greater than the 10% AEP the gap flow will not report to the
existing detention basin and report south down Starboard Avenue. This gap flow is less than the flows from the pre-development
catchment which reports south down Starboard Avenue and hence non-worsening is achieved (refer Section 4.3). Further to this,
a 50m3 detention tank is proposed within the townhouse site to ensure pipe flows in the 10% AEP event are less than design flows
determined as part of the original operational works design of the stormwater system. This will ensure that HGL levels in the
network do not increase and as such compliance with QUDM drainage criteria.
b. Flows that go north down Starboard Avenue and Ely Street have reduced, with the inclusion of a 50m3 detention tank, and pipe /
surface flows align with the original design calculations (refer Section 4.2). Flows that report south down Starboard Street have
reduced, with no flows reporting there in events less than the 10% AEP and flow reducing significantly in the 1% AEP event (refer
Section 4.3). It is considered that flows going north achieve the QUDM design criteria (in line with original design) and flows going
south achieve non-worsening. No further assessment is required.
c. Imperviousness of each catchment area considered to be correct, with 50% impervious applied to the approved subdivision and
90% imperviousness applied to the townhouse site. The increase in imperviousness from the townhouse site, is mostly offset by
the 0.35 ha park within the development (this area was counted as 50% impervious in the original SMP).
73 EUMUNDI - NOOSA ROAD, NOOSAVILLE I BBNE00529_0002_0001-REP-001-2 4
Section 9
d. A 50m3 detention tank is proposed within the townhouse site to ensure pipe flows in the 10% AEP event are less than design flows
determined as part of the original operational works design of the stormwater system. This will ensure that HGL levels in the
network do not increase and as such compliance with QUDM drainage criteria.
e. The design of the townhouse site will be completed in line with recent ARR updates and SSP2-4.5 for climate change. Given the
existing development (which is constructed) was designed in 2016 and the townhouse site will connect into existing stormwater
infrastructure, it is not considered appropriate to assess the existing infrastructure using higher rainfall intensities. Further
assessment of the existing basin and gap flow down Starboard Street is discussed in Sections 4.1.4 and 4.3.
Internal Drainage Design
Issue
Stormwater drainage design details for the internal site have not been provided to a standard suitable for OPW approval.
Information Required
10. Provide stormwater drainage calculations and stormwater long-sections for the 0.5EY, 10%AEP and 1%AEP (including HGL long-sections)
for the internal site drainage.
11. Provide details for the major event (1%AEP 2100) showing where overland flow paths will be located, that adequate freeboard is achieved
for the subject dwellings and that no overland flow path from the development will enter
Response: Engineering Plans have been updated to reflect the updated sizing’s required (refer Appendix B) and response has been provided
by TOD Consulting.
Stormwater Quality
Information Required
12. Provide an updated SWMP and MUSIC model which includes the hydrologic and pollutant loading from the external catchments which
drain to the existing bioretention basin. The total load removed by the system should then be compared to the load reduction required to
be removed from the development and subdivision alone.
Response: The additional assessment requested above results in a more conservative outcome then if the development is assessed in
isolation. However, to respond to this item, the external catchment (1.41ha) was added a lumped residential node with 50% impervious.
Table 2.1 below, compares the loads removed with the external catchment and when assessing the development in isolation. These results
highlight that when including the external catchment there are more pollutant loads removed then when comparing the development in
isolation. It is considered these results highlight compliance with this request.
TABLE 2.1: MUSIC MODEL RESULTS
Parameter Load Reduction with Load Reduction Required Difference Compliance
External Catchment for Development Alone to (kg/yr) Achieved
Included (kg/yr) Achieve WQO (kg/yr)
Total Suspended Solids (TSS) 8,550 6,450 2,100 ✓
Total Phosphorus (TP) 14.65 10.87 3.78 ✓
Total Nitrogen (TN) 62.2 51.4 10.8 ✓
Gross Pollutants (GP) 1,261 916 345 ✓
73 EUMUNDI - NOOSA ROAD, NOOSAVILLE I BBNE00529_0002_0001-REP-001-2 5
Section 10
3. STORMWATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT 3.1 Overview This proposed development was originally approved for 50 low density residential lots and associated new road. Since the initial development, a portion of the Site – 6 lots (refer Figure 1.2), is proposed to be converted to a townhouse site consisting of 11 dwellings. This stormwater quality assessment proposes to confirm the existing bioretention constructed as part of the original development (OPW15/0133) still achieves load-based Water Quality Objectives (WQO’s) for the Site with the inclusion of the new townhouse area. 3.2 Operational Phase The WQO’s stipulated in the State Planning Policy – July 2017 for the South-East Queensland region will be adopted for the Site. The NSC Planning Scheme provides stormwater management design objectives for the operational phase of developments. The applicable Water Quality Objectives (WQO’s) for the Site are shown in Table 3.1. TABLE 3.1: WATER QUALITY OBJECTIVES Pollutant Minimum Load Reduction Target (%) Total Suspended Solids (TSS) 80 Total Phosphorus (TP) 60 Total Nitrogen (TN) 45 Gross Pollutants (GP) 90 3.3 Model Development 3.3.1 Catchments The representation of the post-development catchments (approved development and new townhouse) has been split into three catchment source nodes, being road, roof, and ground. The development site area then reports to a bioretention basin. Catchment properties have been summarized in Table 3.2 and a catchment plan shown in Figure 2.1. TABLE 3.2: TREATED CATCHMENT PROPERTIES Land Use Approved Development (ha) Bypass (ha) New Townhouse (ha) Total Impervious (%) Roof 0.766 0.060 0.239 100 Road / Hardstand 0.920 - 0.080 100 Ground 1.905 0.147 0.187 20 Park 0.348 - - 0 Total 3.936 0.207 0.506 - 73 EUMUNDI - NOOSA ROAD, NOOSAVILLE I BBNE00529_0002_0001-REP-001-2 6
Section 11
Figure 2.1: Stormwater Quality Catchment Plan 3.3.2 Climate Data Climate data for the catchment was sourced from the Bureau of Meteorology (BoM). Rainfall pluviograph data was obtained from the Corooy gauge for the ten (10) years between 1/1/1973 and 31/12/1983 at six-minute intervals. 3.3.3 Modelling Parameters The MUSIC water quality model (2018 – Version 3) has been used to represent the proposed development. Table 3.3 and Table 3.4 highlight the source node parameters from “MUSIC Modelling Guidelines” (Water by Design, 2010) that were applied in the MUSIC model. TABLE 3.3: RAINFALL-RUNOFF PARAMETERS Parameter Source Node Source Node Land Use Residential Rural Residential (Park) Rainfall Threshold (mm) 1 1 Soil Storage Capacity (mm) 500 98 73 EUMUNDI - NOOSA ROAD, NOOSAVILLE I BBNE00529_0002_0001-REP-001-2 7
Section 12
Parameter Source Node Source Node
Initial Storage (% capacity) 10 10
Field Capacity (mm) 200 80
Infiltration Capacity Coefficient A 211 84
Infiltration Capacity Exponent B 5 3.3
Initial Depth (mm) 50 50
Daily Recharge Rate (%) 28 100
Daily Baseflow Rate (%) 27 22
Daily Deep Seepage Rate (%) 0 0
TABLE 3.4: POLLUTANT EXPORT PARAMETERS
Land Use Flow Type TSS Log Values TP Log Values TN Log Values
MEAN ST. DEV. MEAN ST. DEV. MEAN ST. DEV.
Baseflow - - - - - -
Roof
Stormflow 1.30 0.39 -0.89 0.31 0.26 0.23
Baseflow 1.00 0.34 -0.97 0.31 0.20 0.20
Road
Stormflow 2.43 0.39 -0.30 0.31 0.26 0.23
Baseflow 1.00 0.34 -0.97 0.31 0.20 0.20
Ground
Stormflow 2.18 0.39 -0.47 0.31 0.26 0.23
Baseflow 0.53 0.24 -1.54 0.38 -0.52 0.39
Rural Res
Stormflow 2.26 0.51 -0.56 0.28 0.32 0.30
73 EUMUNDI - NOOSA ROAD, NOOSAVILLE I BBNE00529_0002_0001-REP-001-2 8
Section 13
3.4 Treatment System The approved / constructed bioretention basin is proposed to treat the stormwater runoff from the Site, which includes the proposed townhouse site. The location of the bioretention system is co-located with the detention basin and will be located in the north-east corner of the site, just upstream of Sands Avenue (site outlet). An indicative footprint area has been set aside to the north of the proposed car parking area. A standard bioretention filter media configuration is proposed, with a typical section detail shown in Figure 2.2. Figure 2.2: Typical Conventional Bioretention Filter Section (Water by Design, 2014) 3.4.1 Treatment Train Sizing The bioretention basin has been modelled in MUSIC in accordance with the Water by Design MUSIC Modelling Guidelines. The modelled bioretention system properties are summarized in Table 3.5. The MUSIC model layout can be seen in Figure 2.3. TABLE 3.5: BIORETENTION PARAMETERS Parameter Value Extended Detention Depth (m) 0.3 Storage Surface Area (m2) 575 Filter Media Area (m2) 403 Unlined Filter Media Perimeter (m) 0 Saturated Hydraulic Conductivity (mm/hr) 200 Filter Depth (m) 0.5 TN Content of Filter Media (mg/kg) 400 Orthophosphate Content of Filter Media (mg/kg) 30 Exfiltration Rate (mm/hr) 0 73 EUMUNDI - NOOSA ROAD, NOOSAVILLE I BBNE00529_0002_0001-REP-001-2 9
Section 14
Figure 2.3: Music Model Arrangement for Developed Case
3.5 Water Quality Model Results
The results of the MUSIC model have been summarised in Table 3.6. The results of the MUSIC modelling indicate that the load-based
reduction targets have been achieved with the proposed treatment train. As such, the proposed treatment train will be adopted for the Site.
TABLE 3.6: MUSIC MODEL RESULTS
Parameter Unmitigated Mitigated Reduction Target Compliance
(kg/yr) (kg/yr) Achieved (%) Reduction (%) Achieved
Total Suspended Solids (TSS) 7,760 1,310 83.1 80 ✓
Total Phosphorus (TP) 14.4 3.53 75.5 60 ✓
Total Nitrogen (TN) 94.9 43.5 54.2 45 ✓
Gross Pollutants (GP) 7760 1,310 83.1 90 ✓
73 EUMUNDI - NOOSA ROAD, NOOSAVILLE I BBNE00529_0002_0001-REP-001-2 10
Section 15
3.6 Treatment Train Operation and Maintenance
In the context of development Sites and associated construction and building works, delivering bioretention basins and establishing
vegetation can be challenging. Therefore, bioretention basins require a careful construction and establishment approach to ensure the basins
are formed in accordance with the design intent. The following sections outline a recommended staged construction and establishment
methodology for bioretention basins as outlined within Healthy Waterways Technical Design Guidelines.
3.6.1 Construction & Establishment
The following is a proposed staged construction and establishment method:
3.6.1.1 Functional Installation
Construction of the functional elements of the bioretention basin will occur at the end of civil works construction along with the installation
of temporary protective measures. During the building phase, the protection will consist of a suitable geofabric covered with shallow topsoil
(e.g. 25 mm) and sacrificial turf layer until 80-90% of the building in the catchment is complete.
This is in alignment with Option 1 of the Construction and Establishment Guidelines (Water by Design, 2010). This guideline should be referred
to for the step-by-step sequence and sign-off forms.
3.6.1.2 Erosion and Sediment Control
An Erosion and Sediment Control program and plan will be prepared for the construction phase of the development. This will be completed
for the Site in the detailed design phase and is to be kept on Site and implemented for the duration of the construction phase.
3.6.1.3 Operational Establishment
At completion of the building phase, removal of any temporary protective measures along with accumulated sediment and the system
planted in accordance with the design planting schedule.
Vegetation establishment will be aided based on the following controls:
• Weed control:
Adopting high planting densities and if necessary, applying a suitable biodegradable erosion control matting to the batters will help to
combat weed invasion and reduce labour intensive maintenance requirements. A heavy application of seedless hydro-mulch can also
provide short term erosion and weed control. No matting or hydro-mulch is to be applied to the surface of the bioretention basin
following the construction phase, as this will hinder filtration of stormwater through the filter media.
• Watering:
Regular watering of bioretention basin vegetation is essential for successful establishment and healthy growth. The frequency of watering
to achieve the successful plant establishment is dependent upon rainfall, maturity of planting stock and the water holding capacity of
the soil. The following watering program is generally adequate but should be adjusted to suit the Site conditions:
Week 1-2 3 visits/week.
Week 3-6 2 visits/week.
Week 7-12 1 visit/week.
After this initial 3-month period, watering may still be required, particularly during the first winter. Watering requirements to sustain healthy
vegetation should be determined during ongoing maintenance Site visits.
3.6.1.4 Maintenance
The bioretention system will be maintained by the Council owner, who as the asset custodian, will be responsible for the on-going
maintenance of the water quality device. Operations and maintenance should be conducted in accordance with the Maintaining Vegetated
Stormwater Assets (Feb 2012) guideline.
73 EUMUNDI - NOOSA ROAD, NOOSAVILLE I BBNE00529_0002_0001-REP-001-2 11
Section 16
4. STORMWATER QUANTITY
MANAGEMENT
This section assesses the potential impact that the proposed new townhouse development will have on peak flows discharging to the existing
detention basin approved and constructed as part of the original approval (OPW15/0133).
Hydrologic modelling of the catchment has been carried out using WBNM software developed jointly by the University of Wollongong, Rienco
Consulting and Balance R&D. The 2019 version has been used for this investigation, with ARR2019 hydrology.
Modelling has been carried out for the 63%, 50%, 20%, 10%, 5%, 2% and 1% AEP storm events. The following scenarios have been
investigated:
• Existing Scenario.
• Developed Scenario.
• Mitigated Scenario.
4.1 Existing Detention Basin
4.1.1 Existing Scenario
The Existing Scenario catchment boundaries and parameters are consistent with the approved report (AquaIntel, 2016). The only changes
made to this scenario was to update the hydrology model to utilise the ARR2019 methodology and update the losses to align with the Noosa
River Flood Study (2017). The existing catchment plan is shown in Figure 2.1, with the proposed townhouse development located in SUBB.
The existing scenario sub-catchment areas and fraction impervious values for each sub-catchment are tabulated below in Table 4.1.
Figure 2.1: Existing Scenario Catchment Plan
73 EUMUNDI - NOOSA ROAD, NOOSAVILLE I BBNE00529_0002_0001-REP-001-2 12
Section 17
TABLE 4.1:WBNM SUB-CATCHMENT FRACTION IMPERVIOUS VALUES – EXISTING SCENARIO
WBNM Sub-Catchment Area (ha) Impervious (%)
SUBA 1.43 50
SUBB 4.29 10
Total 5.71
The catchment lag parameter adopted was 1.6, which is within the accepted range of values provided in the WBNM technical reference
manual. Rainfall loss rates adopted are consistent with those from the Noosa River Flood Study (2017) and are an initial and continuing loss
of 15 mm and 2.5 mm/h for pervious surfaces respectively, and 0 mm and 0 mm for impervious surfaces. Modelling has been completed for
a range of standard design storm events ranging from the 63.2% AEP to the 1% AEP event, with durations ranging from 10 minutes to 3
hours. Peak flows tabulated in this report represent the peak values extracted from this range of storm events.
TABLE 4.2: EXISTING SCENARIO PEAK FLOWS
63% AEP 50% AEP 20% AEP 10% AEP 5% AEP 2% AEP 1% AEP
WBNM (m3/s) 0.60 0.72 1.11 1.41 1.68 1.99 2.23
4.1.2 Developed Scenario (unmitigated)
For the Developed Scenario (unmitigated) the approved development was represented along with the new townhouse area proposed in the
south-west corner of the development. The development was represented within the WBNM model by adjusting the site sub-catchments
and the fractions impervious values. The catchment parameters applied in the Developed Scenario are provided in Table 4.4, with the
approved development represented as low density residential (50% imp), townhouse site (90% imp) and park area (0% imp).
The Developed Scenario catchment plan is shown in Figure 2.2
TABLE 4.3: WBNM SUB-CATCHMENT FRACTION IMPERVIOUS VALUES – DEVELOPED SCENARIO
WBNM Sub-Catchment Area (ha) Impervious (%)
SUBA 1.430 50
SUBB 4.408 50.7
SUBC 0.140 50
Total 5.978 -
73 EUMUNDI - NOOSA ROAD, NOOSAVILLE I BBNE00529_0002_0001-REP-001-2 13
Section 18
Figure 2.2: Developed Scenario Catchment Plan
A comparison of the Existing and Developed scenario peak flow shows the Site would result in an increase in peak flows if the detention basin
was not constructed, which is in line with outcomes of the approved SMP (AquaIntel, 2016).
TABLE 4.4: PEAK DISCHARGE COMPARISON – EXISTING VS DEVELOPED SCEANRIO
63% AEP 50% AEP 20% AEP 10% AEP 5% AEP 2% AEP 1% AEP
Existing (m3/s) 0.60 0.72 1.11 1.41 1.68 1.99 2.23
Developed (m3/s) 0.83 0.98 1.47 1.79 2.10 2.45 2.74
Difference (m3/s) 0.22 0.26 0.36 0.38 0.42 0.46 0.51
73 EUMUNDI - NOOSA ROAD, NOOSAVILLE I BBNE00529_0002_0001-REP-001-2 14
Section 19
4.1.3 Mitigation Scenario
For the Mitigation Scenario, the only update made to the Developed Scenario model was to represent the approved / constructed detention
basin. It is noted that the small detention basin within the townhouse site has not been represented within this assessment, which is
considered a more conservative approach (and is consistent with the original assessment. A summary of the elevation-storage data for the
detention basin is provided in Table 4.5 with a summary of the outlet configuration and key details provided below:
• Outlet Summary:
– Pipe 1 = 1 x 225mm at RL1.56m.
– Pipe 2 = 900 x 900mm culvert at RL1.56m.
– Weir = 5m at RL2.72m.
TABLE 4.5: ELEVATION-STORAGE DATA FOR APPROVED / CONSTRUCTED DETENTION BASIN
Elevation (m RL) Volume (m3)
1.56 0
1.7 81
1.9 206
2.1 344
2.3 494
2.5 659
2.7 841
2.8 1019
A comparison of the existing and mitigated peak flows at the Site outlet is presented in Table 4.6. The results show that a minor increase in
peak flows is expected in the smaller events (<10% AEP) and the 1% AEP, with reductions in the 5% and 2% AEP events. As the catchment
details have not changed significantly between the approved SMP and this update, it is considered the minor increases are a result of the
change in the hydrologic method from ARR1987 to ARR2019 and the change to the losses. As such, it is considered that these minor increases
would not result in actionable nuisance, and the outcome remains consistent with the approved SMP. Further to this, the Site’s bioretention
system will provide some additional detention in the smaller flood events to help in managing this further. Further to this, the gap flow from
the townhouse site (refer 4.3) is approx. 0.11m3/s in the 1% AEP, which would report south downs Starboard Street (away from basin) and
improve results further in the 1% AEP events.
TABLE 4.6: PEAK DISCHARGE COMPARISON – EXISTING VS MITIGATED SCENARIOS
Scenario 63.2% AEP 50% AEP 20% AEP 10% AEP 5% AEP 2% AEP 1% AEP
Existing (m3/s) 0.61 0.72 1.11 1.41 1.68 1.99 2.23
Mitigated (m3/s) 0.65 0.77 1.16 1.42 1.64 1.92 2.27
Difference (m3/s) 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.01 -0.04 -0.07 0.03
A full summary of peak flow results is presented in Appendix C.
73 EUMUNDI - NOOSA ROAD, NOOSAVILLE I BBNE00529_0002_0001-REP-001-2 15
Section 20
4.1.4 Existing Detention Basin – Climate Change An additional assessment was completed of the above assessment of the existing detention basin using the updated IFD values to account for climate change. From this the IFD values increased by 20%. A comparison of the existing and mitigated peak flows at the Site outlet is presented in Table 4.7. The results show that a minor increase in peak flows is expected in 63%, 50%, 20%, 2% and 1% AEP, with reductions in the 10% and 5% AEP events. These results are consistent with those presented in Table 4.6, with the update to IFD effectively increases the magnitude of e ach event compared to the previous assessment. As such, it is considered that these minor increases would not result in actionable nuisance, and the outcome remains consistent with the approved SMP. Further to this, the gap flow from the townhouse site (refer 4.3) is approx. 0.13 m3/s in the 1% AEP, which would report south downs Starboard Street (away from basin) and improve results further in the 2% and 1% AEP events. TABLE 4.7: PEAK DISCHARGE COMPARISON – CLIMATE CHANGE EXISTING VS MITIGATED SCENARIOS Scenario 63.2% AEP 50% AEP 20% AEP 10% AEP 5% AEP 2% AEP 1% AEP Existing (m3/s) 0.78 0.93 1.43 1.79 2.12 2.48 2.78 Mitigated (m3/s) 0.83 0.99 1.45 1.72 2.10 2.59 2.94 Difference (m3/s) 0.05 0.06 0.01 -0.07 -0.02 0.11 0.15 4.2 Townhouse Site An assessment completed of the existing stormwater drainage network to determine if it can convey the additional flow from the Townhouse site and achieve compliance with the QUDM drainage criteria. It was found that with the increase in flows that some of the minor storm (10% AEP) drainage criteria became exceeded. The original drainage design completed by TOD Consulting identified that the capacity of the stormwater network from Catchment 1/3 (refer Figure 2.3) is 0.24m3/s in the 10% AEP, from which any additional flow generated in the 10% AEP would result in in non-compliance with the minor drainage design criteria. As such, a detention tank is proposed to be installed within the townhouse site to ensure the 10% AEP peak flows are detained back to the development intensity that the drainage system was designed upon. The existing drainage network assumed the contributing catchment of the original development had an imperviousness of 50%. With the Townhouse site increasing the imperviousness of this catchment to 90%, the detention tank has therefore been sized to mitigate flows back to the original design intent. 4.2.1 Catchment The catchment reporting into the existing drainage network is catchment 1/3, which is 0.687 ha, of which 0.506 ha is the townhouse site. An excerpt of the catchment plan from the original design drawing is detailed in Figure 2.3. 73 EUMUNDI - NOOSA ROAD, NOOSAVILLE I BBNE00529_0002_0001-REP-001-2 16
Section 21
Figure 2.3: Excerpt of the Catchment Plan from Design Drawing (catchment 1/3)
TABLE 4.8: WBNM SUB-CATCHMENT FRACTION IMPERVIOUS VALUES – DEVELOPED SCENARIO
WBNM Sub-Catchment Area (ha) Design Impervious (%) Proposed Impervious (%)
Townhouse 0.506 50 90
Balance 0.181 50 50
Total 0.687 - -
4.2.1 Results
The aim of this assessment is to size a detention tank within the townhouse site to ensure peak flows in the 10% AEP are reduced to be below
the TOD 10% AEP pipe capacity, from which the drainage network was designed (that is going from 50% to 90% impervious). The drainage
design flows reporting from Catchment 1/3 are 0.24m3/s in the 10% AEP, which align with estimates from the WBNM model (0.26m3/s).
A summary of the storage size and outlet configuration and key details provided below:
• Detention Tank Summary:
– Size = 50m3
– Outlet 1 = 2 x 225mm at RL0.0m.
– Outlet 2 = 3m weir at RL1.30 (this allows for surcharge of the tank back to the driveway in events larger than the 1% AEP).
– Flow Depth in 10% AEP = RL1.0m
73 EUMUNDI - NOOSA ROAD, NOOSAVILLE I BBNE00529_0002_0001-REP-001-2 17
Section 22
TABLE 4.9: 10% AEP FLOWS – EXISTING VS MITIGATED SCENARIOS
Scenario 10% AEP
Existing – Pipe Capacity (m3/s) 0.261
Developed (m3/s) 0.314
Mitigated (m3/s) 0.258
Difference (m3/s) -0.003
4.3 Flows South to Starboard Avenue
From the development site there is approximately 0.8 ha of catchment (refer Figure 2.4) that would report south down Starboard Avenue in
events where the design capacity of the drainage network has been exceeded (i.e. minor design storm of 10% AEP). As mentioned earlier,
the original drainage design completed by TOD Consulting identified that capacity of the piped network reporting north from Catchment 1/3
(refer Figure 2.3) is 0.24m3/s in the 10% AEP. Flows in excess of this are considered to surcharge and report south to Starboard Avenue.
From this it is considered that the gap flow, being the difference between minor (10% AEP) and major storm (1% AEP), would report, as
overland flow, south down Starboard Avenue. Assessment of the pre-development flow reporting from this catchment, south, down
Starboard Avenue in the 1% AEP is approximately 0.37m3/s. The gap flow in the post-development scenario is 0.13m3/s (0.37 – 0.24m3/s),
which is less than the pre-development scenario. In the 10% AEP, the flow reporting south would be 0m3/s, hence, non-worsening is
achieved.
Pipe Flow North
(0.24m3/s)
0.8ha
Gap Flow
Report South
Figure 2.4: Catchment of Gap Flow Reporting South down Starboard Avenue
73 EUMUNDI - NOOSA ROAD, NOOSAVILLE I BBNE00529_0002_0001-REP-001-2 18
Section 23
5. CONCLUSION Engeny have completed this SMP for Devtex Nominees Pty Ltd to represent the proposed townhouse development to be incorporated into a portion (located on approved lots 1, 2, 3, 48, 49 and 50) of a previously approved reconfiguration of Lot (Planning and Environment Court (Appeal No: 118 of 2006) and Operational Works application (Ref: OPW15/0133 dated 6 March 2017)). The approved roads, lots and detention / bioretention basins have been constructed as part of the Operational Works approval. This assessment has been completed to determine if the approved / constructed detention and bioretention basin can manage the new townhouse site within the approved developed. The following summarises the findings from the Stormwater Management Plan for the proposed development at 73 Eumundi Noosa Road, Noosaville. Stormwater Quality The existing bioretention basin (403m2 filter surface) is suitable to achieve the Water Quality Objectives outlined in the NSC Planning Scheme. Details of the water quality modelling and sizing of the treatment train are summarised in Section 3. Stormwater Quantity The existing detention basin (1,019 m3 storage volume) is suitable to provide mitigation for the stormwater quantity flows, with only minor increases noted in peak flows in the smaller events (<10% AEP) and the 1% AEP, with reductions in the 5% and 2% AEP events. As the catchment details have not significantly changed between the approved SMP and this assessment, it is considered the minor increases are a result of the change in the hydrologic method from ARR1987 to ARR2019 and the updated catchment losses. As such it is considered that these minor increases would not result in actionable nuisance, and the outcome remains consistent with the approved SMP. In addition, a new 50m3 detention tank is proposed within the townhouse site to manage flows to ensure design outcomes within the existing downstream stormwater is maintained, with flows in the 10% AEP mitigated back to align with the original design (refer Section 4.2) Details of the water quantity modelling is summarised in Section 4. Preliminary Engineering Plans Preliminary engineering plans detailing the stormwater management arrangement is provided in Appendix B. 73 EUMUNDI - NOOSA ROAD, NOOSAVILLE I BBNE00529_0002_0001-REP-001-2 19
Section 24
6. QUALIFICATIONS
(a) In preparing this document, including all relevant calculation, and modelling, Engeny Australia Pty Ltd (Engeny) has exercised the degree
of skill, care and diligence normally exercised by members of the engineering profession and has acted in accordance with accepted
practices of engineering principles.
(b) Engeny has used reasonable endeavours to inform itself of the parameters and requirements of the project and has taken reasonable
steps to ensure that the works and document is as accurate and comprehensive as possible given the information upon which it has
been based including information that may have been provided or obtained by any third party or external sources which has not been
independently verified.
(c) Engeny reserves the right to review and amend any aspect of the works performed including any opinions and recommendations from
the works included or referred to in the works if:
(i) Additional sources of information not presently available (for whatever reason) are provided or become known to Engeny; or
(ii) Engeny considers it prudent to revise any aspect of the works in light of any information which becomes known to it after the
date of submission.
(d) Engeny does not give any warranty nor accept any liability in relation to the completeness or accuracy of the works, which may be
inherently reliant upon the completeness and accuracy of the input data and the agreed scope of works. All limitations of liability shall
apply for the benefit of the employees, agents, and representatives of Engeny to the same extent that they apply for the benefit of
Engeny.
(e) This document is for the use of the party to whom it is addressed and for no other persons. No responsibility is accepted to any third
party for the whole or part of the contents of this Report.
(f) If any claim or demand is made by any person against Engeny on the basis of detriment sustained or alleged to have been sustained as
a result of reliance upon the Report or information therein, Engeny will rely upon this provision as a defence to any such claim or
demand.
(g) This Report does not provide legal advice.
73 EUMUNDI - NOOSA ROAD, NOOSAVILLE I BBNE00529_0002_0001-REP-001-2 20
Section 25
APPENDIX A: PROPOSED SITE
LAYOUT PLAN
73 EUMUNDI - NOOSA ROAD, NOOSAVILLE I BBNE00529_0002_0001-REP-001-2 21
Section 26
Sewer MH:*Plotted from records*
IL: 10.20 (from records) Sewer MH:*Plotted from records*
Type: 150 PVC IL: 5.34 (from records)
Type: 150 PVC
MH MH
EMT ASP305303 EMT DSP305303 EMT ESP305303
Sewer MH:*Plotted from records*
IL: 5.22 (from records)
Type: 150 PVC
EMT YSP2
98783
Sewer MH:*Plotted from records*
IL: 5.22 (from records)
Resident Type: 150 PVC
A: 13.50 m2
11
Resident 10
12
A: 13.50 m2
Resident 7
A: 13.50 m2
9
Resident
A: 13.50 m2 SW Field Inlet:IL: 3.564Type: 150 PVC
13 8
14
Visitor
A: 13.50 m2
SW Field Inlet:IL: 2.296Type: 150 PVC
Resident
Sewer MH:
A: 13.50 m2
IL: 4.955
Type: 150 PVC 4
SW Field Inlet:IL: 2.274Type: 150 PVC
Sewer MH:IL: 4.936Type: 225 PVC
SW Field Inlet:IL: 3.470Type: 150 PVC
MH MH
Resident Sewer MH:IL: 4.972Type: 150 PVC
Resident A: 13.50 m2
A: 13.50 m2
5
EMT Z - SP298783
Resident
A: 13.50 m2
SW Field Inlet:IL: 3.365Type: 150 PVC
7 Sewer MH:IL: 2.382Type: 225 PVC
13 SW Field Inlet:IL: 3.355Type: 150 PVC
Resident
Sewer MH:IL: 1.946Type: 225 PVC
A: 13.50 m2
3
12 Visitor
A: 13.50 m2
11 10
Resident
A: 13.50 m2
14 9
8
Resident
15
A: 13.50 m2
Resident
A: 13.50 m2
SW Field Inlet:IL: 6.668Type: 150 PVC
15
Resident
EMT XSP106085
A: 13.50 m2
EMT WSP106085
Resident
Resident
14 13 A: 13.50 m2
A: 13.50 m2
MH
Resident
A: 13.50 m2
Visitor Sewer MH:(Unable to open)
A: 13.50 m2
Resident
A: 13.50 m2 Resident
A: 13.50 m2
10
14 12 11
Resident 9
A: 13.50 m2 Resident
A: 13.50 m2 8
15
Sewer Line: US IL: 10.863Type: 150
RCP
#DrgID #DrgID
#LayID #LayID
B L A C K
SITE PLAN THE AVALON
W O O D
DA1.06
Scale Project No. Date Revision
13/09/2024 A For Devtex Nominees Pty Ltd
1:500, 1:2.61 @ A3 202507
a r c h i t e c t u r e & d e s i g n 73-77 Eumundi Noosa Rd + 2C/2D/2E Starboard Ave, Noosaville QLD 4566
Section 27
APPENDIX B: PRELIMINARY
ENGINEERING DESIGN PLANS
73 EUMUNDI - NOOSA ROAD, NOOSAVILLE I BBNE00529_0002_0001-REP-001-2 22
Section 28
73-77 EUMUNDI-NOOSA ROAD
NOOSAVILLE, QLD 4566
CIVIL ENGINEERING DRAWINGS
for DEVTEX NOMINEES PTY LTD
DRAWING SCHEDULE
DRAWING NO. REVISION DESCRIPTION
24572 - C010 A COVER SHEET, LOCALITY PLAN AND DRAWING SCHEDULE
24572 - C011 A GENERAL NOTES
24572 - C012 A ROAD ALIGNMENT SETOUT PLAN AND TABLES
24572 - C020 A EARTHWORKS LAYOUT PLAN
24572 - C021 A EARTHWORKS SECTIONS
24572 - C022 A RETAINING WALL LAYOUT PLAN
24572 - C023 A RETAINING WALL DETAILS - SHEET 1
LOCATION OF 24572 - C024 A RETAINING WALL DETAILS - SHEET 2
WORKS 24572 - C030 A ROADWORKS AND STORMWATER LAYOUT PLAN
24572 - C031 A PAVEMENT JOINTING LAYOUT PLAN
24572 - C032 A PAVEMENT TYPICAL DETAILS
24572 - C033 A STORMWATER DRAINAGE LONGITUDINAL SECTIONS (10% AEP)
24572 - C034 A STORMWATER DRAINAGE LONGITUDINAL SECTIONS (1% AEP)
24572 - C035 A STORMWATER DRAINAGE CATCHMENT PLAN
24572 - C036 A STORMWATER DRAINAGE CALCULATIONS (10% AEP AND 1% AEP)
24572 - C040 A ROAD LONGITUDINAL SECTIONS AND TYPICAL SECTIONS
24572 - C041 A ROAD CROSS SECTIONS - EUMUNDI-NOOSA ROAD
24572 - C050 A SEWERAGE RETICULATION LAYOUT PLAN
24572 - C051 A SEWERAGE LONGITUDINAL SECTIONS
24572 - C060 A WATER RETICULATON LAYOUT PLAN
24572 - C070 A REFUSE VEHICLE SWEPT PATH LAYOUT PLAN
24572 - C080 A B99 CAR VEHICLE SWEPT PATH LAYOUT PLAN
24572 - C090 A SIGHT DISTANCE LAYOUT PLAN AND SECTIONS
LOCALITY PLAN 24572 - S001 A STORMWATER DETENTION TANK STRUCTURAL DETAILS
NOT TO SCALE
COPYRIGHT © Associated Consultants Client Drawn Verified Project Drawing Title Scale Sheet Size
M.K.P. D.R.
This drawing is subject to
copyright in accordance with DEVTEX NOMINEES 73-77 EUMUNDI-NOOSA ROAD COVER SHEET, LOCALITY PLAN AS SHOWN A1
the agreement between TOD Designed Verified
Consulting Pty Ltd (tc) and tc's PTY LTD M.K.P. D.R. NOOSAVILLE, QLD 4566 AND DRAWING SCHEDULE Drawing Number
client. This drawing shall only
be used for this specific project. Approved RPEQ No RP DESCRIPTION LOTS 1, 2 3, 48, 49 AND 50 ON SP298783 24572-C010
This drawing shall not be used Noosa: 07 5449 9600 Sunshine Coast: 07 5329 3190 D. REYNOLDS 9072 LOCAL AUTHORITY NOOSA SHIRE COUNCIL
MCU APPROVAL HORIZ DATUM MGA DERIVED 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Sheet Revision
for construction until marked as PO Box 61, Noosaville, QLD 4566 Signed
A 23.01.25 ISSUED FOR APPROVAL MKP ROL APPROVAL VERT DATUM RL.13.595 AHD
'Issued For Construction' in the
revision description. Rev Date Revision Description Drawn
[email protected] www.todconsulting.com
ABN 39 128 805 336 23.01.25 OPW APPROVAL RL DATUM PSM 53205 MEASUREMENT BAR - INCREMENTS IN mm 1 OF 23 A
Section 29
GENERAL NOTES TOPSOIL:
1. DO NOT SCALE DRAWINGS. 8. PRIOR TO ANY EARTHWORKS ACTIVITIES, TREE STUMPS, BUILDING DEBRIS, ORGANIC RICH TOPSOIL AND SEVERELY 11. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN A WRITTEN RECORD OF DATES OF ALL INSPECTIONS INCLUDING ANY CORRECTIVE
2. ALL DISCREPANCIES SHALL BE REFERRED TO THE SUPERINTENDENT FOR CLARIFICATION BEFORE PROCEEDING. ROOT AFFECTED AREAS MUST BE REMOVED. ACTIONS TAKEN.
3. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY THE SUPERINTENDENT IN WRITING OF ALL VARIATIONS ARISING FROM THE 9. ORGANIC RICH TOPSOIL MUST NOT BE USED IN FILL. IT SHALL BE STOCKPILED FOR RE-USE IN LANDSCAPING OR
CLARIFICATION OF THE DISCREPANCY. DISPOSED OF TOPSOIL STOCKPILES SHALL NOT EXCEED 2m IN HEIGHT. EXISTING PAVEMENT:
4. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT DETAILS OF ANY ADDITIONAL COST ARISING FROM A VARIATION TO THE 1. WHERE PAVEMENT WIDENING IS PROPOSED, THE EXISTING PAVEMENT IS TO BE SAW CUT TO FORM THE JOINT, AS PER
SUPERINTENDENT FOR APPROVAL, BEFORE PROCEEDING WITH THE WORKS. SUBSOILS: STANDARD DRAWING IPWEAQ RS-170. THE DEPTH OF THE EXISTING PAVEMENT IS TO BE CONFIRMED AS PART OF THIS
5. ALL WORK AND MATERIALS SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE DRAWINGS, SPECIFICATIONS, CURRENT RELEVANT 10. ENSURE SUITABLE GROUND COVER IS PROVIDED TO ALL EXPOSED SUBSOILS AS SOON AS PRACTICAL, TO MINIMISE PROCEDURE.
AUSTRALIAN STANDARDS, OTHER STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS AND TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE LOCAL AUTHORITY THE RISK OF SOIL EROSION, ESPECIALLY IF THE SOILS ARE DISPERSIVE. 2. ALL EXISTING PAVEMENT SURFACES ARE TO BE SWEPT CLEAN OF ALL LOOSE DEBRIS/FOREIGN MATTER PRIOR TO
AND THE SUPERINTENDENT. APPLICATION OF SEAL.
6. NO WORK IS TO COMMENCE ON SITE UNTIL THE APPROVAL OF THE COUNCIL HAS BEEN RECEIVED IN WRITING AND AN SUBGRADES: 3. AREAS OF EXISTING PAVEMENT CONTAINING POTHOLES, TO BE SAW CUT AND REPLACED WITH DEEP LIFT ASPHALT
OFFICIAL PRE-START MEETING WITH A REPRESENTATIVE OF COUNCIL AND THE ENGINEER HAVE BEEN HELD. THE WITH A MINIMUM THICKNESS OF 100mm.
CONTRACTOR IS TO OBTAIN A COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE PRE-START MEETING AND SHALL COMPLY WITH THE 11. SUBGRADES IN PAVEMENT AREAS SHALL BE PROOF ROLLED USING A MINIMUM FULLY LADEN WATER TRUCK (MIN. 20
TONNE) AND ANY SOFT SPOTS OR UNSUITABLE MATERIALS SHALL BE EXCAVATED AND REPLACED WITH SELECT FILL. 4. IF UNDERLYING GRAVEL IS EXPOSED DURING MILLING OPERATIONS A PRIMER SEAL SHALL BE PLACED OVER THE
REQUIREMENTS THEREOF. AFFECTED AREA.
THE SUBGRADE IS TO BE INSPECTED BY THE SUPERINTENDENT BY MEANS OF A PROOF ROLL, BY A MINIMUM FULLY
7. ALL CONSTRUCTION SHALL COMPLY WITH THE RELEVANT WORK PLACE HEALTH AND SAFETY LEGISLATION. LADEN WATER TRUCK (MIN. 20 TONNE), PRIOR TO PLACEMENT OF ANY PAVEMENT LAYERS. THE SUBGRADE SHALL
8. A MINIMUM OF 23 HOURS NOTICE IS REQUIRED FOR ALL ENGINEERING INSPECTIONS, WHERE POSSIBLE. EXHIBIT NO VISIBLE SIGNS OF DEFORMATION UNDER PROOF ROLLING. SIGNS AND LINEMARKING
9. THE WORK AREA WILL BE MINIMISED TO FACILITATE CONSTRUCTION WHILST ENABLING CONTINUAL OPERATIONS OF 12. SUBGRADE TESTS SHALL BE UNDERTAKEN AND RESULTS SUPPLIED TO THE ENGINEER, TO DETERMINE THE 1. ALL ROAD SIGNS AND LINEMARKING SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MANUAL OF UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL
THE NEIGHBOURING AREA, TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE PRINCIPAL AND SUPERINTENDENT. ADEQUACY OF THE PAVEMENT DEPTH DETAILED ON THE DRAWINGS. DEVICES (MUTCD), PUBLISHED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF MAIN ROADS.
10. WORKING HOURS, COMMUNICATIONS PROTOCOLS, SITE ACCESS, AREA FOR CONTRACTORS FACILITIES/STORAGE AND 13. THE SUPERINTENDENT MAY REQUEST ADDITIONAL SUBGRADE TESTING OR SUBGRADE REPLACEMENT FOLLOWING 2. ALL SIGNS SHALL BE SIZE 'A' UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE.
SITE SECURITY TO BE AGREED WITH THE PRINCIPAL AND SUPERINTENDENT. THIS INSPECTION.
3. SIGNS LOCATED WITHIN MEDIANS OR TRAFFIC ISLANDS TO BE INSTALLED USING LOC SOCKET.
11. THE FOLLOWING HOLD POINT INSPECTIONS WILL BE REQUIRED;
● CONSTRUCTION PRE-START MEETING 4. ALL SIGN FOOTINGS TO BE CONCRETE IN ACCORDANCE WITH STANDARD DRAWING IPWEAQ RS-130.
STOCKPILE MANAGEMENT:
● SET OUT 5. ALL ROAD SIGNS TO BE OFFSET A MINIMUM OF 600mm FROM FACE OF KERB.
● DEMOLITION 14. CONTRACTOR TO ENSURE STOCKPILES ARE NOT LOCATED IN A POSITION WHERE THEY COULD BE WASHED INTO A
GUTTER, DRAIN OR WATER BODY, SUCH AS: 6. THE FINAL SIGN LOCATION IS TO BE AGREED ON SITE, TO ENSURE IT IS VISIBLE AND NOT OBSTRUCTED BY EXISTING
● SUBGRADE PROOF-ROLLS INFRASTRUCTURE OR VEGETATION ETC.
● PRE-SEAL PROOF-ROLLS ● ON A ROAD PAVEMENT;
● CONCRETE PRE-POURS ● WITHIN AN OVERLAND FLOW PATH; 7. ALL SIGNS SHALL BE MANUFACTURED, AND INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH MRTS14.
● FINAL INSPECTION ● ADJACENT TO STREAM BANKS. 8. STREET NAME SIGNS TO BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH IPWEAQ RS-130 AND RS-131.
● ADDITIONAL HOLD POINT INSPECTIONS MAY BE REQUIRED (TO BE DETERMINED) 15. CONTRACTOR TO ENSURE STOCKPILES ARE ADEQUATELY STABILISED. LONG TERM STOCKPILES CAN BE COVERED
WITH MULCH OR TEMPORARY VEGETATION (GRASS).
12. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE ALL MANAGEMENT PLANS, INCLUDING TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN, STORMWATER DRAINAGE
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN AND WORK PLACE HEALTH AND SAFETY PLAN FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF 16. ENSURE APPROPRIATE DUST CONTROL MEASURES EXIST FOR ALL STOCKPILES. ENSURE AN APPROPRIATE SEDIMENT GENERAL
PRINCIPAL AND SUPERINTENDENT, PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. CONTROL SYSTEM IS LOCATED DOWN-SLOPE OF ALL STOCKPILES.
1. EXCAVATION, BEDDING AND BACKFILLING OF STORMWATER DRAINAGE PIPES TO BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH STANDARD
13. FOLLOWING COMPLETION OF THE WORKS THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CLEAN UP THE SITE AND DEMOBILISE TO THE DRAWING IPWEAQ DS-0030 (TYPE 2).
SATISFACTION OF THE PRINCIPAL AND SUPERINTENDENT. SITE REHABILITATION: 2. ALL MANHOLES TO BE 1050mm DIAMETER IN ACCORDANCE WITH STANDARD DRAWING IPWEAQ DS-010.
17. ENSURE THE SOIL SURFACE IS SCARIFIED PRIOR TO THE PLACEMENT OF TOPSOIL TO BREAK UP ANY EXCESSIVE 3. ALL MANHOLE COVERS LOCATED WITHIN ROADWAY TO BE SOLID DUCTILE CAST IRON CLASS D IN ACCORDANCE WITH
SURVEY COMPACTION, AND ENABLE THE APPROPRIATE KEYING OF THE SOIL LAYERS. STANDARD DRAWING IPWEAQ DS-019.
1. THIS DESIGN IS BASED ON SURVEY PROVIDED BY BENNETT+BENNETT SURVEYORS. 18. SCARIFY LIGHTLY COMPACTED SOILS TO A MINIMUM DEPTH OF 100mm AND HEAVILY COMPACTED SUBSOILS TO A 4. ALL MANHOLE COVERS LOCATED NOT WITHIN ROADWAY TO BE SOLID DUCTILE CAST IRON CLASS B IN ACCORDANCE
MINIMUM DEPTH OF 300mm. WITH STANDARD DRAWING IPWEAQ DS-020.
2. ALL LEVELS ARE TO AUSTRALIAN HEIGHT DATUM (AHD).
19. TURF MUST NOT BE PLACED ON EXCESSIVELY COMPACTED SOILS. 5. THE CONTRACTOR IS TO CONSIDER CONSTRUCTION LOADING ON EXISTING AND NEW STORMWATER PIPES AND
3. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONFIRM EXISTING LEVELS, FEATURES AND UTILITIES PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.
20. ALL SITE REHABILITATION MEASURES SHOULD BE MONITORED, PARTICULARLY AFTER RAINFALL. STRUCTURES.
4. ALL ELEMENTS OF PROPOSED WORK TO BE SETOUT AND CHECKED BY THE CONTRACTOR'S LICENSED SURVEYOR AND
6. ALL PIPE PENETRATIONS WILL BE FLUSH AND NEATLY MORTARED ON THE INSIDE FACE OF MANHOLES AND / OR PITS.
ANY DISCREPANCIES ARE TO BE REPORTED TO THE SUPERINTENDENT.
EROSION & SEDIMENT CONTROL 7. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ENSURING THAT ALL TRENCH EXCAVATION AND CONSTRUCTION IS IN
ACCORDANCE WITH CURRENT CONSTRUCTION SAFETY ACT AND WORKPLACE HEALTH AND SAFETY LEGISLATION.
EXISTING SERVICES OBJECTIVES:
8. THE CONTRACTOR IS TO TAKE ALL POSSIBLE MEASURES TO ENSURE PROPER COMPACTION TO BACKFILLING OF
1. THE LOCATION OF ALL IN-GROUND AND OVERHEAD SERVICES HAS BEEN DETERMINED FROM FIELD SURVEY, BEFORE 1. THESE DRAWINGS ARE PROVIDED FOR GUIDANCE ONLY. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ASSESS WHAT MEASURES ARE
TRENCHES AND STRUCTURES.
YOU DIG AUSTRALIA ENQUIRIES AND INFORMATION PROVIDED BY THE SERVICE PROVIDERS / AUTHORITIES. REQUIRED TO SUIT THE PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION METHODOLOGY AND STAGING. SITE SPECIFIC CONSTRUCTION ESC
DRAWINGS TO BE UNDERTAKEN BY CPESC IN ACCORDANCE WITH ICEA REQUIREMENTS. 9. THE CONTRACTOR IS TO PROVIDE A CCTV SURVEY OF ALL NEWLY CONSTRUCTED STORMWATER DRAINAGE ASSETS
2. THE SERVICES ARE SHOWN ON THESE DRAWINGS FOR INFORMATION ONLY AND NO RESPONSIBILITY IS TAKEN FOR FOR APPROVAL BY THE ENGINEER AND / OR LOCAL AUTHORITY.
THE ACCURACY OR COMPLETENESS OF THE INFORMATION SUPPLIED. 2. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL COMPLY WITH ALL STATUTORY REGULATIONS DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PHASE AND
MAINTENANCE PERIOD. 10. IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR TO DEMONSTRATE HE HAS CAUSED NO DAMAGE TO EXISTING
3. NOT ALL EXISTING SERVICES HAVE NECESSARILY BEEN IDENTIFIED AND SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS. STORMWATER INFRASTRUCTURE DURING THE CONSTRUCTION OF THESE WORKS.
3. EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL MAY BE AIDED BY MINIMISING THE AREA OF DISTURBANCE.
4. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY THE LOCATION OF ALL EXISTING SERVICES ON THE SITE PRIOR TO COMMENCING 11. ALL DEFECTS IDENTIFIED BY THE CCTV SURVEY WILL BE REPAIRED TO A SATISFACTORY STANDARD BY THE
WORKS. 4. PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF ANY WORKS ONSITE, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PREPARE SITE SPECIFIC CPESC
CONTRACTOR. PAYMENT FOR THESE REPAIRS WILL BE THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR, UNLESS IT
CERTIFIED ESC PLANS AND SUBMIT TO THE SUPERINTENDENT FOR APPROVAL.
5. NO WORK IS TO BE UNDERTAKEN OVER OR WITHIN 3m OF EXISTING SERVICES PRIOR TO NOTIFICATION TO THE CAN BE DEMONSTRATED THAT THE IDENTIFIED DAMAGE WAS PRE-EXISTING AND THE RESPONSIBILITY OF OTHER
APPROPRIATE AUTHORITIES. PARTIES.
6. EXISTING VALVES, HYDRANTS, PITS, ACCESS CHAMBERS AND OTHER UTILITIES SHALL BE MODIFIED WHERE MANAGEMENT PRINCIPLES: 12. UPON COMPLETION ALL STORMWATER DRAINAGE INFRASTRUCTURE WILL BE CLEAR OF DEBRIS AND OTHER
NECESSARY TO SUIT FINAL FINISHED SURFACE LEVELS. 4. THE MANAGEMENT PRINCIPLES EMPLOYED IN THESE DRAWINGS ARE GENERALLY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE 'BEST BLOCKAGES.
PRACTICE EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL' MANUAL, PUBLISHED BY THE INTERNATIONAL EROSION CONTROL
ASSOCIATION (IECA). THE BASIC PRINCIPLES ARE TO:
CLEARING, GRUBBING AND DISPOSAL SUBSOIL DRAINAGE
● MINIMISE THE AREA OF DISTURBANCE;
1. CLEARING SHALL NOT OCCUR UNLESS PRECEDED BY THE INSTALLATION OF ALL NECESSARY EROSION AND SEDIMENT ● CONTROL DRAINAGE PATHS UPSTREAM OF SITE AND AT OUTLETS FROM SITE; 13. SUBSOIL DRAINS SHALL BE SUPPLIED AND CONSTRUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH MRTS03.
CONTROL MEASURES. THE EXCEPTION WOULD BE ANY CLEARING NECESSARY TO ALLOW INSTALLATION OF THESE ● MINIMISE EROSION; 14. SUBSOIL DRAINS ARE TO BE GRADED AT 1% MINIMUM (DESIRABLE) AND 0.5% (MINIMUM).
CONTROL MEASURES. ● MINIMISE SEDIMENTATION;
15. SUBSOIL FLUSHING POINTS ARE TO BE PLACED AT A MAXIMUM DISTANCE OF 50m.
2. CLEARING SHALL BE STAGED TO MINIMISE THE EXTENT AND DURATION OF SOIL EXPOSURE. ● PROGRESSIVELY REVEGETATE AND REHABILITATE THE SITE.
· RELEVANT DECISION NOTICE CONDITIONS. 16. THE MAXIMUM LENGTH OF ANY SUBSOIL DRAINAGE LINE SHALL BE 100m.
3. ESTABLISH ANY NON-DISTURBANCE OR EXCLUSION AREAS IDENTIFIED.
17. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ENSURE THAT ANY EXISTING SUBSOIL DRAINS HAVE AN APPROPRIATE OUTLET.
4. WHERE APPROPRIATE, IDENTIFY, ISOLATE AND/OR PROTECT RETAINED VEGETATION.
CONSTRUCTION PRE-START MEETING:
5. CLEARING SHALL BE MINIMISED TO ONLY THE TREES AND VEGETATION NECESSARY TO UNDERTAKE THESE WORKS.
5. THE CONSTRUCTION PRE-START MEETING IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR ALL PARTIES TO DISCUSS CRITICAL ISSUES, SUCH
6. A SPOTTER-CATCHER SHALL BE PRESENT DURING ALL CLEARING OPERATIONS.
AS:
7. CLEARING AND GRUBBING INCLUDES REMOVAL OF THE MAIN TREE ROOTS TO A MINIMUM DEPTH OF 1.0m AND THE ● KEY OBJECTIVES OF THE EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PLAN;
REMOVAL OF SURFACE ROOTS AND VEGETABLE MATTER FROM THE TOP 0.3m BELOW THE NATURAL SURFACE LEVEL. ● REQUIRED WATER QUALITY OBJECTIVES;
8. DISPOSAL OF ALL CLEARED VEGETATION AND RUBBISH SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE ● PERFORMANCE MONITORING AND INSPECTION PROCEDURES;
LOCAL AUTHORITY. ● IDENTIFICATION OF THE RESPONSIBLE SITE OFFICERS;
● IDENTIFICATION OF CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS;
9. CLEARED VEGETATION CAN BE PROCESSED THROUGH WOOD CHIPPING AND THE MULCH PRODUCED PLACED IN
● REPORTING PROCEDURES FOR NON-COMPLIANCE ACTIVITIES AND EVENTS.
INTERIM STOCKPILES FOR LATER USE IN EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL OR LANDSCAPING PURPOSES.
● RELEVANT DECISION NOTICE CONDITIONS.
EARTHWORKS / EXCAVATION
SITE INSPECTION AND MONITORING:
GENERAL:
6. CONTRACTOR SHALL NOMINATE A PERSON RESPONSIBLE FOR INSTALLATION, MONITORING AND MAINTENANCE OF
1. ALL EXISTING UNDERGROUND SERVICES TO BE LOCATED AND MARKED PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF EXCAVATION.
CONTROL MEASURES (E.G. SITE FOREMAN).
2. ALL EARTHWORKS ACTIVITIES INCLUDING STRIPPING, EXCAVATION, FILLING, COMPACTION AND TESTING, IS TO BE
7. ALL EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURES SHOULD BE INSPECTED:
UNDERTAKEN IN ACCORDANCE WITH MRTS04, THE DRAWINGS, SPECIFICATIONS, CURRENT RELEVANT AUSTRALIAN
● AT LEAST DAILY WHEN RAIN IS OCCURRING;
STANDARDS, OTHER STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS AND TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE LOCAL AUTHORITY AND THE
● AT LEAST WEEKLY (EVEN IF WORK IS NOT OCCURRING ON-SITE);
ENGINEER.
● WITHIN 24 HOURS PRIOR TO EXPECTED RAINFALL;
3. STOCKPILES SHALL BE PROPERLY STABILISED. ● WITHIN 18 HOURS OF A RAINFALL EVENT.
4. EARTHWORKS SHALL AVOID THE EROSION OR SILTATION OF ADJOINING LANDS, STREAMS OR WATERCOURSES. 8. CONTRACTOR TO CHECK AFTER RAINFALL FOR PERFORMANCE INDICATORS SUCH AS EVIDENCE OF EXCESSIVE FLOW
5. ALL EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROLS TO BE INSTALLED AND FULLY OPERATIONAL PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF CONCENTRATIONS, EROSION PATHS DEVELOPING, SILT AND SEDIMENT ACCUMULATION.
EARTHWORKS. 9. CONTRACTOR TO CHECK DURING RAIN THAT FLOWS ARE NOT BYPASSING CONTROL MEASURES.
6. EARTHWORKS SHALL BE STAGED TO MINIMISE THE EXTENT AND DURATION OF SOIL EXPOSURE. 10. WHEN A SITE INSPECTION DETECTS A NOTABLE FAILURE IN THE ADOPTED MEASURES, THE SOURCE OF THIS FAILURE
7. ALL FILLING TO BE UNDERTAKEN UNDER LEVEL 1 SUPERVISION. MUST BE INVESTIGATED AND THE APPROPRIATE AMENDMENTS MADE TO THE SITE CONTROLS.
COPYRIGHT © Associated Consultants Client Drawn Verified Project Drawing Title Scale Sheet Size
M.K.P. D.R.
This drawing is subject to
copyright in accordance with DEVTEX NOMINEES 73-77 EUMUNDI-NOOSA ROAD GENERAL NOTES AS SHOWN A1
the agreement between TOD Designed Verified
Consulting Pty Ltd (tc) and tc's PTY LTD M.K.P. D.R. NOOSAVILLE, QLD 4566 Drawing Number
client. This drawing shall only
be used for this specific project. Approved RPEQ No RP DESCRIPTION LOTS 1, 2 3, 48, 49 AND 50 ON SP298783 24572-C011
This drawing shall not be used Noosa: 07 5449 9600 Sunshine Coast: 07 5329 3190 D. REYNOLDS 9072 LOCAL AUTHORITY NOOSA SHIRE COUNCIL
MCU APPROVAL HORIZ DATUM MGA DERIVED 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Sheet Revision
for construction until marked as PO Box 61, Noosaville, QLD 4566 Signed
A 23.01.25 ISSUED FOR APPROVAL MKP ROL APPROVAL VERT DATUM RL.13.595 AHD
'Issued For Construction' in the
revision description. Rev Date Revision Description Drawn
[email protected] www.todconsulting.com
ABN 39 128 805 336 23.01.25 OPW APPROVAL RL DATUM PSM 53205 MEASUREMENT BAR - INCREMENTS IN mm 2 OF 23 A
Section 30
LEGEND 5
EUMUN
SP305303
PROPERTY BOUNDARY
CONTROL LINE 3
SP305303
DI-NOO
60 58.228 4
SP298783
52.647
SA RO
AD
3.0m WIDE SEWER
EASEMENT
DRIVEWAY 3
40
00
40 40
20
DRIVEW
DRIVEW
DRIVEWAY 1
41.565
20
00
108
AY 2
AY 4
SP106085
20
20 20
3.0m WIDE SEWER
EASEMENT
109
SP106085
00
00 00
75
3.0m WIDE SEWER
RP71151 EASEMENT
107
SP106085
CONTROL LINE SETOUT - EUMUNDI NOOSA ROAD
PT CHAINAGE EASTING NORTHING BEARING RAD/SPIRAL A.LENGTH DEFL.ANGLE
IP 1 0.000 505038.610 7079532.565 19°05'27.38" CONTROL LINE SETOUT - DRIVEWAY 2
IP 2 21.159 505045.705 7079553.065 R = -78.000 42.318 31°05'05.78" PT CHAINAGE EASTING NORTHING BEARING RAD/SPIRAL A.LENGTH DEFL.ANGLE
CT 42.318 505041.197 7079574.285 348°00'21.60" IP 1 0.000 505087.365 7079531.962 358°09'05.57"
IP 3 49.887 505039.624 7079581.689 IP 2 20.051 505086.718 7079552.002
IP 4 60.000 505037.505 7079591.578 347°54'07.12" IP 3 58.228 505079.656 7079589.521 349°20'23.49"
CONTROL LINE SETOUT - DRIVEWAY 1 CONTROL LINE SETOUT - DRIVEWAY 3 CONTROL LINE SETOUT - DRIVEWAY 4
PT CHAINAGE EASTING NORTHING BEARING RAD/SPIRAL A.LENGTH DEFL.ANGLE PT CHAINAGE EASTING NORTHING BEARING RAD/SPIRAL A.LENGTH DEFL.ANGLE PT CHAINAGE EASTING NORTHING BEARING RAD/SPIRAL A.LENGTH DEFL.ANGLE
IP 1 0.000 505042.682 7079563.907 88°09'05.57" IP 1 0.000 505131.427 7079575.270 87°37'56.89" IP 1 0.000 505138.733 7079536.335 349°22'20.43" 0 4 8 12m
IP 2 41.565 505084.225 7079565.248 88°09'05.57" IP 2 20.000 505151.410 7079576.096 87°37'56.89" IP 2 52.647 505129.024 7079588.079 349°22'20.43"
Scale 1:200 @A1
Scale 1:400 @A3
COPYRIGHT © Associated Consultants Client Drawn Verified Project Drawing Title Scale Sheet Size
M.K.P. D.R.
This drawing is subject to
copyright in accordance with DEVTEX NOMINEES 73-77 EUMUNDI-NOOSA ROAD ROAD ALIGNMENT SETOUT AS SHOWN A1
the agreement between TOD Designed Verified
Consulting Pty Ltd (tc) and tc's PTY LTD M.K.P. D.R. NOOSAVILLE, QLD 4566 PLAN AND TABLES Drawing Number
client. This drawing shall only
be used for this specific project. Approved RPEQ No RP DESCRIPTION LOTS 1, 2 3, 48, 49 AND 50 ON SP298783 24572-C012
This drawing shall not be used Noosa: 07 5449 9600 Sunshine Coast: 07 5329 3190 D. REYNOLDS 9072 LOCAL AUTHORITY NOOSA SHIRE COUNCIL
MCU APPROVAL HORIZ DATUM MGA DERIVED 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Sheet Revision
for construction until marked as PO Box 61, Noosaville, QLD 4566 Signed
A 23.01.25 ISSUED FOR APPROVAL MKP ROL APPROVAL VERT DATUM RL.13.595 AHD
'Issued For Construction' in the
revision description. Rev Date Revision Description Drawn
[email protected] www.todconsulting.com
ABN 39 128 805 336 23.01.25 OPW APPROVAL RL DATUM PSM 53205 MEASUREMENT BAR - INCREMENTS IN mm 3 OF 23 A
Section 31
N
LEGEND N
N
N
76.0 NATURAL CONTOUR
N
W
T
W
5 E
EUMUN
D
N
76.0 DESIGN CONTOUR SP305303 C021
N C C021
N
PROPERTY BOUNDARY N
C021
EXISTING BITUMEN EDGE 3
W
T
W
N
SP305303 S S S
S
DI-NOO
S
N
S S S
EXISTING KERB N T S S II II II
EXISTING STORMWATER LINES
60 N
58.228 II II II II II II II II
4
II II II SP298783
II II II
II
NW
N
II II
II
EXISTING OVERHEAD POWER LINES/POLE
52.647
W
11.0
11.0
11.2
9.0
10.0
SA RO
T
11.0
8.0
12.0
EXISTING TELSTRA
E
S
13.0
S
E
E E EXISTING ELECTRICITY
II
N
EXISTING WATER MAIN E
AD
N
W
T
W
N
7 .0
EXISTING SEWER MAIN 14.0
T
S
KERB AND CHANNEL N T
E
II
E
N
S
CONTROL LINE N
REMOVE REDUNDANT
W
W
14.2
EXISTING DRIVEWAY E E
14.0
CONCRETE BLOCK RETAINING WALL N E E
S
6.2
CONCRETE SLEEPER RETAINING WALL
E
N
N
S
MINOR RETAINING WALLS CONSTRUCTED
6.0
40
W
5.8
S
W
S
11.2
II
B S
11.2
AS PART OF FUTURE BUILDING WORKS S
W
N
6.0
00
S
REFER ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS C021 N
SW
E
S
SW SW
EARTHWORKS DEPTHS (0.5m INCREMENTS) SW SW
SW
6.2
40 40 SW SW II II II II
II
W
CUT FILL N
W
20
S
W
EXISTING TREES TO BE II
S
II II II
II
II
II II
13.0
E
REMOVED TO IMPROVE
SIGHT LINES N
SW
SW
II
11.2
11.2
11.4
W
11.6
11.8
12.0
12.2
12.4
W
12.6
12.8
13.0
13.2
13.4
13.6
13.8
14.0
14.2
14.4
S
14.6
7.0
14.8
T
II
S
II
W
E
N
SW
SW
REMOVE REDUNDANT
41.565
II
20
EXISTING PATHWAY
W
W
00
108
S
T
SP106085
II
S
N
SW
SWW
E
II
9.0
II
12.0
10.0
8.0
W
11.0
14.
REMOVE REDUNDANT
S
0
II
T
SW
N
SW
EXISTING DRIVEWAY
W
20
E
II
W
S
15.0
11.2
The text continues on section 32.