Original source · versioned page text
Attachment E - Cardno Statement - flood
Attached to the e-mail MCU18/0009 - Representations to conditions of approval.
Original PDF page 11, section 1. The text section number identifies this passage in the reader.
Response Additional hydrologic and hydraulic modelling has been undertaken in the technical memo to provide a solution to this issue. All design events up to the defined flood event (39% to 1% AEP) have been modelled to meet requirement O22 of the Natural Hazards Overlay Code. Section 5 provides a summary of the hydraulic results from the modelling. The results indicated that the proposed development does not cause any negative impacts both internal and external to the site. Maximum flood depths, water surface elevations, velocities, affluxes and hazards have been provide in the figures attached (Attachment B). The modelling determined that for all design events, no negative impacts were caused by the proposed development either on or offsite. Access to the proposed buildings as per the drawings shown in Attachment A remains flood free with no impacts on human safety identified. 2 Site Description A site description can be found in the original flood study, (Flood Study Noosa Care – Carramar WE17064 24 July 2017). 3 Hydrology Model The original flood study (Flood Study Noosa Care – Carramar WE17064 24 July 2017) setup a hydrology model with a full range of rainfall event durations for the 10% and 1% AEP events. The same hydrology model and methodology were adopted to capture the peak events for the new 39%, 10%, 5% and 2% AEP events. 3.1 RORB Parameters An initial and continuing loss approach was adopted to represent the expected losses from the design storm events. An initial loss of 15.0 mm and a continuing loss of 2.5 mm/hr were adopted. The parameters adopted for this study are provided in Table 3-1, which has been validated using the Rational Method. The AR&R 2016 Intensity Frequency Duration (IFD) data was used to define the rainfall intensities for use in the hydrology model. To account for the impact of climate change the rainfall intensities were increased by 20 percent. 3.2 RORB Validation As there was no stream flow gauge within the catchment, there was no opportunity to calibrate the rainfall and runoff model (RORB) using known flow hydrographs and rainfall. Validation of the RORB model was undertaken using the Rational Method at the outlet point of the catchment. The Bransby-Williams method was used to calculate the time of concentration. Table 3-1 below shows the Rational Method parameters adopted, with validation results presented in Table 3-2. The C10 values adopted are in line with the parameters previous flood study. Table 3-1 Rational Method Parameters Ration Method Parameters Total Catchment Catchment Area (ha) 503 Fraction Impervious 0.24 Runoff Coefficient (C10) 0.76 Time of Concentration (min) 77.5
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 up to a minute.