Naracoorte Lucindale Council Naracoorte Drainage Study

Naracoorte Lucindale Council

Naracoorte Drainage Study

Stage 2

Principal Contacts

Drew Jacobi

December 2005

Ref No 20040622RA1B

id9628234 pdfMachine by Broadgun Software - a great PDF writer! - a great PDF creator! - http://www.pdfmachine.com http://www.broadgun.com

Table of Contents


Naracoorte Drainage Study Stage 2

20040622RA1B.doc Revision: A Date: 22/12/05 Page: i

Table of Contents


Naracoorte Drainage Study

Stage 2

1. Introduction 1

2. Catchment Description 2 2.1 Land Use 2 2.1.1 Existing Stormwater Infrastructure 2

3. Hydrological Modelling 5 3.1 Drain Data 5 3.2 Catchment Data 5 3.3 Rainfall Data 6 3.4 Hydrological Model 6 3.5 Rainfall Loss Model 6 3.6 Model Calibration 7

4. Existing Drainage Assessment 8 4.1 Pipe Capacity 8 4.2 Inlet Capacity 8 4.3 Drainage System Analysis 9 4.3.1 Gare Swamp 9 4.3.2 Town Centre 9 4.3.3 Gum Avenue 12

5. Proposed Drainage Master Strategy 13 5.1 Introduction 13 5.2 Design Standard 13 5.3 Proposed Drainage Upgrade Works 13 5.3.1 Gare Swamp 16 5.3.2 Town Centre 17 5.3.3 Gum Avenue 18

6. Works Priorities and Costing 21 6.1 Priorities 21 6.2 Indicative Cost Estimates 21

7. Summary 22

8. References 23

Tables

Table 4.1 Gum Avenue Catchment Details 12 Table 5.1 Required Stewart Terrace Detention Basin Storages 18 Table 6.1 Costing Summary 21

Table of Contents



20040622RA1B.doc Revision: A Date: 22/12/05 Page: ii

Figures

Figure 2.1 Existing Underground Drainage, Gare Swamp 3 Figure 2.2 Existing Underground Drainage, Town Centre 4 Figure 4.1 Gare Swamp Detention Basin Floodplain 11 Figure 5.1 Proposed Underground Drainage, Gare Swamp 14 Figure 5.2 Proposed Underground Drainage, Town Centre 15 Figure 5.3 Proposed Detention Basin Location, adj Attiwill St 17 Figure 5.4 Proposed detention basin location adjacent Stewart Terrace 19 Figure 5.5 Proposed Drainage, Gum Avenue Catchment 20

Appendices

Appendix A Existing Drainage Hydrology Appendix B Proposed Drainage Hydrology Appendix C Hydraulic Grade Line Calculations Appendix D Cost Estimates

Document History and Status



20040622RA1B.doc Revision: A Date: 22/12/05 Page: iii

Document History and Status

Rev Description Author Rev�d App�d Date

A Draft for comment DAJ DJ DJ 28/06/05

B Final DJ DWS DJ 22/12/05

Introduction



20040622RA1B.doc Revision: A Date: 22/12/05 Page: 1

1. Introduction

The Naracoorte Lucindale Council commissioned a hydrological study to provide a

review of the existing drainage and upgrade options for individual catchments within

the Naracoorte township.

Priorities were assigned to individual catchments within the township to undertake a

detailed design. Three catchments with the highest priority were the Town Centre,

Gare Swamp and Gum Avenue Precincts, which are both addressed in this report.

The key elements of this study include,

Evaluation of the standard of existing underground drainage.

Identification of areas where the existing underground drainage system is

deficient.

Recommendations for upgrading the drainage system to achieve the

required level of protection.

This report documents the findings of the study, including a preliminary costing of the

works recommended to upgrade the Naracoorte Town Centre, Gare Swamp and

Gum Avenue drainage systems.

Catchment Description




2. Catchment Description

The extent of the Gare Swamp and Town Centre catchments are shown in Figure 2.1

and Figure 2.2. The Gare Swamp and Town Centre Precinct have a total catchment

area of 77.5ha and 60.2ha respectively. The underground drainage systems within

these areas were investigated as a part of this study.

Based on 1:2500 Government Standard maps, the catchments were divided into

smaller sub-catchments to an individual entry pit level, as shown in Figure 2.1 and

Figure 2.2.

2.1 Land Use

Existing land use information was derived from site observations and inspection of

the Council development plans.

Land use within the Gare Swamp catchment is predominantly residential with a large

reserve and sanctuary area. A new residential development has been proposed on

the east side of the catchment, along Caves Road.

The Town Centre catchment is predominantly commercial and town centre zoned,

with some residential areas in the south-east section of the catchment.

The Gum Avenue catchment is predominantly residential but does include a portion

of the High School playing fields and Sports Complex.

2.1.1 Existing Stormwater Infrastructure

The urban catchments are served by a number of underground drainage systems.

The drainage systems within the Gare Swamp catchment drain into two connected

stormwater detention basins located in the reserve and sanctuary area, adjacent to

Panorama Crescent. The basins are drained intermittently via a pump and 20mm dia

rising main, discharging into the open channel adjacent to Caves Road.

The Town Centre catchment is served by two main underground drainage systems,

McRae and Hinckley Street systems. Both drainage systems drain into Naracoorte

Creek, adjacent to Riverside Drive.

The stormwater pump stations serving the Gum Avenue catchment have previously

been reported in �Report and Recommendations for Drainage of Low Lying Area at

Gum Avenue, Naracoorte� (BC Tonkin & Associates, 1999).

Hydrological Modelling




3. Hydrological Modelling

Peak flows in the drainage systems were determined through hydrological modelling

for a range of flood events including the 1, 5, 10 and 100 year ARI. Comparison of

calculated peak flows with the known capacity of each drainage system allowed for

identification of system deficiencies and evaluation of the existing standards based

on a fully developed catchment.

3.1 Drain Data

Drain data, including type, size and location were taken from recent work undertaken

that developed a database of existing drainage.

Drain grades were not available from the database, and thus were estimated from

ground survey. The estimated grade was used in the hydrological model to

determine pipe capacity and despite the possible discrepancy between the modelled

and physical pipe grade, the resultant capacity was considered to be valid as the

surface grade closely resembles the maximum available hydraulic gradient. Minor

losses in the pipes due to junction boxes and other structures were accounted for by

reducing the effective hydraulic gradients applied to each pipe segment.

Recognising that some existing Council records are limited, any subsequent detailed

design work may need to be based on field inspection and survey, particularly when

providing connections into existing drains.

3.2 Catchment Data

The catchment was analysed at an individual entry pit level, where sub-catchments

to each side-entry pit were determined from 1:2500 Government Standard maps,

field inspections and ground survey. Field inspections identified sub-catchment

modifications such as spoon drains and verified road and gutter drainage patterns

and the existence, location and specifications of side-entry pits.

Time of concentration for each sub-catchment was calculated based upon the gutter

slope and maximum gutter flow length to the inlet. An additional 5 minutes was

adopted to account for drainage of stormwater from the property roof to the street

water table.





3.3 Rainfall Data

Rainfall data for the hydrological model were derived from Australian Rainfall &

Runoff 0. Rainfall depths and temporal patterns were determined for ARIs between

1 and 100 years and storm durations between 5 minutes to 72 hours.

The parameters obtained to generate the rainfall data were taken at the Naracoorte

Post Office.

3.4 Hydrological Model

The ILSAX model, �Program for Urban Stormwater Drainage Design and Analysis� 0

was used for the Naracoorte (Gare Swamp and Town Centre) hydrological

modelling. ILSAX is a computer based rainfall-runoff routing program, combining

flows through a drainage network and calculating appropriate pipe hydraulic

capacities.

The hydraulic model incorporates equations for flow times and overflows and

determines pipe and culvert capacities. Manning�s Roughness Coefficients of 0.012

and 0.011 were used for culverts and pipes respectively.

ILSAX has been utilised by designers for over a considerable period and has been

accepted as an industry standard tool in analysing urban catchments.

3.5 Rainfall Loss Model

Runoff coefficients for each sub-catchment were estimated through inspection of the

Naracoorte Lucindale Council Development Plans.

Field inspection of downpipe connection in the Gare Swamp catchment indicated that

the majority of allotments were not directly connected to the street network. Several

allotments that are not directly connected to the street tend to drain toward the back

of the property due to surface grade, thus reducing the flow arriving at the street

system.

The majority of the Gare Swamp catchment is relatively old residential development

and it was estimated to have a direct and indirect impervious fraction of 0.2 and 0.1

respectively. For the proposed residential development adjacent to Caves Road, the

direct and indirect impervious fraction allocated was 0.35 and 0.05 respectively.

The Town Centre catchment is largely commercial/town centre zoned, with some

residential areas. The commercial/town centre areas were estimated to have a direct

and indirect impervious connection of 0.7 and 0.1 respectively, while the residential

direct and indirect impervious connection was estimated to be 0.2 and 0.05

respectively.





Throughout the modelling process, an initial loss value of 1mm for the impervious

areas was subtracted from the rainfall hyetograph, with the remaining rainfall

considered to be runoff. An initial loss of 45mm and a continuing loss of 3mm/hr

from the rainfall hyetograph were used to determine runoff from pervious areas of the

catchment.

3.6 Model Calibration

Information on the frequency of known flooding problems within the Gare Swamp

and Town Centre catchments is limited. Flooding problems due to insufficient drain

capacities are likely to be unreported due to sufficient gutter flow capacities to

provide an overflow path for floodwaters.

Despite the lack of comprehensive flooding records, the model is considered to

reasonably reflect the behaviour of the catchment, provide findings on the

performance of the existing system and be a consistent basis on which to provide

recommendations on future upgrading of the drainage network.

Existing Drainage Assessment




4. Existing Drainage Assessment

This section describes the results of the hydrological modelling for the existing

drainage system within the Gare Swamp and Town Centre catchments. The results

have been used to identify the design standard provided by each of the drainage

systems and to assess the locations where the underground drainage system may

be inadequate and require upgrading.

The existing drainage network for the Gare Swamp and Town centre catchments are

shown in Figure 2.1 and Figure 2.2 respectively.

Detailed output including flow information and existing pipe capacities are presented

in Appendix A.

4.1 Pipe Capacity

Design flows for 1, 5, 10 and 100 year ARI flood events were compared to the

existing pipe capacities to determine the current standard of each drain element in

the Gare Swamp and Town Centre catchments. The design flows have been

calculated based on the upstream pipe system being capable of carrying the design

flow, i.e. no flood flows spill out of the catchment. The flow data provided in

Appendix A assumes that flood flows in excess of the pipe capacity will spill out of

the local catchment at points where this physically occurs along the system.

Hydraulic grade line calculations were also carried out for several key systems within

the catchments to provide a closer estimation of the existing standards and proposed

pipe sizes. The systems that were analysed include the main pipeline in the Hinckley

Street system (Town Centre) and the proposed Guernsey Street system (Gare

Swamp). The hydraulic grade line calculations are provided in Appendix C.

4.2 Inlet Capacity

The adequacy of the inlets in the drainage system were assessed by reviewing the

surface flow arriving at the inlets from the sub-catchments. The inlet capacity is

dependant on the size of the side-entry pit and the slope of the approach gutter.

Typically an on-grade, double side-entry pit has a capacity of transferring flows from

gutter into the underground drainage system in the range of 60-80L/s. Gutter flows

in excess of the inlet capacity will bypass an on-grade inlet or pond at a trapped low

point even if the pipe has sufficient capacity.





4.3 Drainage System Analysis

4.3.1 Gare Swamp

The Gare Swamp catchment has six underground drainage systems. The systems

outfall into one of two interconnected detention basins located in the sanctuary area

adjacent to Panorama Crescent.

The majority of the systems have an overall 10 year ARI design standard. The South

system between the existing residential allotments and the proposed residential

development has a less than 1 year ARI standard at the upstream end. This is due

to the flat grade (constructed against the surface grade) and the large sub-catchment

area.

There is also a large sub-catchment in the south that drains towards the Second

Avenue inlets, which produces approximately 250L/s of surface flow along Memorial

Drive for the 10 year ARI flood event.

The First Avenue system along Memorial Drive has insufficient capacity for the 5

year ARI, with approximately 100L/s overflowing from First Avenue to the low point in

Memorial Drive.

Recently approved land divisions at the eastern end of Panorama Crescent and Pine

Crescent have been designed to convey 100 year ARI flows directly to Gare Swamp

via a new drain outfall.

The performance of the detention basin is acceptable with a 100 year ARI flood level

of 59.01mAHD. The 100 year ARI flood event is fully contained within the

reserve/sanctuary area, assuming a 2L/s outlet pumping rate. The 10, 20 and 100

year ARI floodplains are shown in Figure 4.1.

4.3.2 Town Centre

The Town Centre catchment has two main underground drainage systems, the

McRae and Hinckley Street systems. Both systems outfall into Naracoorte Creek,

adjacent to Riverside Drive.

The existing McRae Street system has an overall 10 year ARI design standard.

However, the system along Robertson Street has a less than 5 year ARI capacity

and the system also has an insufficient inlet capacity.

The Hinckley Street system is a large system that follows the valley within the

catchment. This system is undersized, with an overall design standard of less than 1

year ARI. The lower portion of this drain, from Ormerod Street to Naracoorte Creek,

is of particular concern as this reach drains a trapped low point on Ormerod Street.





This location is assumed to be the destination for most overland flood flows within

the catchment during storm events that exceed the capacity of the drain.





4.3.3 Gum Avenue

The assessment of the �Gum Avenue catchment� includes the adjacent low-lying

catchments of McInnes Avenue and Field Avenue. Each of these three locations is

drained to the Naracoorte Creek via small stormwater pump stations.

It has previously been established that the existing pumps are insufficient to cater for

the 1 year ARI event (BC Tonkin & Associates, 1999). Existing catchment, pump

and details are summarised in Table 4.1 below.

Table 4.1 Gum Avenue Catchment Details

Subcatchment Catchment Area (ha) Pump Flow rate (L/s) 1 year ARI Flow (L/s)

Field Avenue 6.8 8 71

Gum Avenue 12.7 12.6 207

McInnes Avenue 1.2 8 22

Flows in excess of the capacity of the pumps accumulate and on pond on the

surface. Flows from McInnes Avenue have been assessed to overflow to Gum

Avenue.

Proposed Drainage Master Strategy




5. Proposed Drainage Master Strategy

5.1 Introduction

This section outlines the preferred works for each system. The standard of each

existing drainage system was reviewed and upgrade options were assessed for the

systems that were found to be inadequate.

5.2 Design Standard

The Naracoorte Lucindale Council generally require a 5 to 10 year ARI design

standard for underground drainage systems.

Based on the above and the results of the hydrological modelling that have

established the current standard provided, the proposed system standards are as

follows:

A roadway capacity to convey the 100 year ARI gap flows.

A 5 to 10 year ARI standard for underground drainage.

A 100 year ARI standard for underground drainage from a trapped low point

in the system.

Less than a 5 to 10 year ARI standard for underground drainage where safe

overflow paths exist and upgrade is not warranted or upgrade costs are

prohibitive.

5.3 Proposed Drainage Upgrade Works

The layout of the proposed drainage network for the Gare Swamp and Town Centre

catchments are shown in Figure 5.1 and Figure 5.2 respectively. The upgraded

drainage systems are considered adequate to provide the desired standard as

discussed in Section 5.2.

The alignment of the proposed drains have been selected using the general criteria

of maximising the use of existing drainage (thus minimising costs), provision of

interception drains to alleviate flows in existing undersized drains, maximising long

lengths of relatively high gutter flows and use of public rather than private land.

Detailed output, including flow information and design pipe sizes for each drain

element, is presented in Appendix B.





5.3.1 Gare Swamp

The proposed drainage upgrade for the Gare Swamp catchment is shown in Figure

5.1.

First Avenue

The pipe along Memorial Drive has a less than 1 year ARI standard. For the 5 year

ARI flood event there is approximately 100L/s overflow along Memorial Drive.

However, overflows will flood to the low point in the road and spill over into the

reserve area and thus does not pose a flooding risk to adjacent properties.

Therefore, the system will not require upgrading.

South System

The South system capacity is very limited with an overall less than a 1 year ARI

standard due to the flat grades and small pipe sizes, especially at the upstream end

of the system where the pipe grades against the surface. However, upgrade of this

system is not preferable as large section of the pipe is located on private property.

Therefore, it is proposed that the majority of flow to the South system will be

intercepted by the proposed Guernsey Street and Third Avenue systems, as

described below.

By intercepting the flow to the South system, the standard is increased from less

than 1 year ARI to 10 year ARI.

Third Avenue

An extension of the Third Avenue system along Memorial Drive, from Third to Sixth

Avenue, and then along Sixth Avenue and Corriedale Street has been proposed.

The proposed upgrade will intercept flows to the limited South system and reduce

gutter flow distances and the volume of surface flow along Memorial Drive. The

system will have a 5 to 10 year ARI design standard.

Guernsey Street

A new system has been proposed along Guernsey Street, connecting into the

existing Corriedale Street system and extending south along Memorial Drive to Pavy

Drive. The system will have a 5 to 10 year ARI standard, and is proposed to

discharge into a detention basin area located in vacant land east of Gurnsey Street.

The detention basin would mitigate flows from the Gurnsey Street system and future

surrounding development, with overflows to be directed north via an open swale

channel to the existing Gare Swamp basins (refer Figure 5.3 below). The area

required for the detention basin and size of the open channel will require detailed

survey of the area and further engineering design. The form of the basin would





obviously also require integration with future surrounding land development, and it is

recommended that this would form a requirement for development of the surrounding

area. Modelling has shown that a 1,500 m3 detention storage at this location could

reduce 100 year ARI peak flows arriving at this location from 1.1 m3/s to 0.2 m3/s.

The alignment of the open channel is proposed to be adjacent to the fenceline that

bisects the vacant parcel of land.

Figure 5.3 Proposed Detention Basin Location, adj Attiwill St

5.3.2 Town Centre

The proposed drainage upgrade for the Town Centre catchment is shown in Figure

5.2.

McRae Street

The existing system along McRae Street has an overall 10 year ARI standard.

However, the system along Robertson Street has a less than 5 year ARI standard

and the inlets have insufficient capacity to capture the approaching 5 and 10 year

ARI flood flows. Therefore, it is proposed that the section be upgraded and

additional inlets be constructed to ensure efficient transfer of the 5 year ARI gutter

flows to the underground system.

Hinckley Street

The main pipeline that follows the catchment valley has a less than 1 year ARI

overall standard and requires a major upgrade. Due to the small existing pipe sizes,

it has been proposed that the main pipeline is replaced rather than constructing

duplicate pipes. The proposed standard to be provided by the new main drain is a

100 year ARI level of protection, due to the number of trapped low points within the

system. A sufficient number of inlets will need be constructed to ensure efficient





transfer of the 100 year ARI gutter flows to the underground system, or where the

roadway capacity is exceeded by the gutter flows. The proposed pipe sizes were

approximated through the hydraulic grade line calculations shown in Appendix C.

The lateral along Smith Street, collecting flows from Sandstone Avenue has a less

than 1 year ARI overall standard. It is proposed that the section along Smith Street

is duplicated to increase the overall standard to a 5 to 10 year ARI.

The lateral that intercepts flows from the low point in Peake Crescent also has a less

than 1 year ARI overall standard. It is proposed that this lateral be duplicated to

achieve a 5 year ARI standard.

Duplicate pipes are also recommended for several other lateral systems that have a

less than 5 year ARI standard. These pipes are shown in Figure 5.2 and the

proposed pipe sizes are given in Appendix B.

5.3.3 Gum Avenue

Previous upgrade proposals within this catchment have been based upon:

Creating a linkage between Gum Avenue and Field Avenue

A new higher capacity pump and rising main

The provision of detention storage in the form of open basins in land

adjacent to the Gum Avenue low point.

100 year ARI design standard

Some vacant land previously nominated for detention storage has since been

developed, and Council staff have indicated that they wish to consider a range of

design standards / lower cost solutions. A revised concept has been prepared taking

this into account. The concept (refer to Figure 5.5) has the following features:

New overflow culverts connected to a detention storage in the grassed road

reserve area opposite Stewart Terrace (shown in Figure 5.4 below)

Retention of all existing pumps stations and rising mains in the medium

term

Long term replacement of the Gum Avenue pump station rising main and

decommissioning of all existing pump stations

Associated drainage to ensure that sufficient flows are collected and

conveyed to the detention storage at a sufficient rate.

The detention storage required in the Stewart Terrace road reserve, for a range of

ARI design standards are shown in Table 5.1 below.

Table 5.1 Required Stewart Terrace Detention Basin Storages

ARI (years) Required Storage (m3)





5 1,230

10 1,450

20 1,790

100 4,000

Figure 5.4 Proposed detention basin location adjacent Stewart Terrace

Clearly the road reserve area should be investigated in further detail to develop a

design that provides as large a storage volume as possible. This design should also

include new underground drainage (designed for the 100 year ARI) capable of

surcharging into the detention basin. This approach should allow for the existing

pump arrangements to remain in the medium term, and provide a substantially

improved level of protection.

A 100 year ARI standard is considered to be the appropriate standard for new works

at this location. However, it is anticipated that only 1,000 - 2,000 m3 of storage can

be created in the Stewart Terrace road reserve and hence a standard of up to a 20

year ARI can be achieved through detention alone. In order to achieve a greater

level of protection in the long term, the Gum Avenue pump station and rising main

would need to be upgraded (and other pumps abandoned), to achieve a discharge

flow capacity of 90 L/s (pump size assumes a 2,000 m3 detention storage).

Works Priorities and Costing




6. Works Priorities and Costing

6.1 Priorities

The priorities for the works identified have been set below, according to the following,

The significance in reduction of flood damages as a result of constructing

the proposed works.

The requirements for a proposed drain to be constructed so that the other

proposed drains feeding into this drain can subsequently be constructed.

Construction costs.

Application of the above criteria produced a preferred priority hierarchy for staging

the construction of these projects as follows:

1. Hinckley Street system, Town Centre

2. Gum Avenue � Stage 1 Detention / Drainage

3. Guernsey Street system, Gare Swamp

4. Memorial Drive system, Gare Swamp

5. McRae Street System (Robertson Street), Town Centre

6. Gum Avenue � Stage 2 Pump

6.2 Indicative Cost Estimates

Cost estimates for each of the proposed drainage systems have been prepared and

are available in Appendix D. The estimated costs for the proposed drains include an

allowance for construction costs, design, alteration of existing services and

contingencies of 20%. The costs do not include GST.

These estimates are prepared for general information only. It is recommended that

an appropriately qualified quantity surveyor be consulted to provide detailed advice

regarding construction costs if a more definitive estimate is required. It is expected

that further development of the design concepts is required to refine the estimates

further.

Table 6.1 Costing Summary

Proposed Upgrade Indicative Cost Estimate

Hinckley Street System, Town Centre $1,510,000

Guernsey Street System, Gare Swamp $310,000

Memorial Drive System, Gare Swamp $240,000

McRae Street System, Town Centre $35,000

Gum Avenue � Stage 1 Detention / Drainage $290,000

Gum Avenue � Stage 2 Pump $230,000

Summary




7. Summary

Hydrological modelling has been undertaken for the drainage systems within the

Gare Swamp and Town Centre catchments in Naracoorte for the Naracoorte

Lucindale Council.

The standard of the existing drainage infrastructure varies greatly, with some

systems having a 10 year ARI standard, while other systems have a less than 1 year

ARI standard.

According to Council requirements, the underground drainage systems were

upgraded to a 5 to 10 year ARI standard and 100 year ARI standard from a low point.

Works are required at the locations listed below with the associated indicative cost

estimates. It is suggested that they be carried out in order according to the relative

priority as specified below. A detailed cost estimate will require further design work

and assessment by an appropriately qualified quantity surveyor.

1. Hinckley Street system $1,510,000

2. Gum Avenue - Stage 1 Detention / Drainage $290,000

3. Guernsey Street system $310,000

4. Memorial Drive system $240,000

5. Additional Inlets on Robertson Street $35,000

6. Gum Avenue - Stage 2 Pump $230,000

References




8. References

BC Tonkin & Associates (1999) �Report and Recommendations for Drainage of Low

Lying Area at Gum Avenue, Naracoorte�, District Council of Naracoorte.

Institute of Engineers Australia (1987) �Australian Rainfall & Runoff�.

O�Loughlin, G. (1993) �The ILSAX Program for Urban Stormwater Drainage Design

and Analysis�, University of Technology, Sydney.

Appendix A



20040622RA1B.doc Revision: A Date: 22/12/05

Appendix A

Existing Drainage Hydrology

Appendix B




Appendix B

Proposed Drainage Hydrology

Appendix B Proposed Drainage Upgrade HydrologyGare Swamp Catchment**Bold print denotes proposed underground drainage

10yr ARI 100yr ARI 10yr ARI 100yr ARIAAA 001 0.09 0.15 - 0.06 375 0.09AAA 002 0.10 0.11 0.01 0.02 375 0.09AAA 003 0.09 0.09 - - 375 0.19AAA 004 0.14 0.17 - - 375 0.19AAA 005 0.18 0.25 - 0.06 375 0.19AAA 006 0.18 0.19 - - 375 0.19AAA 007 0.20 0.27 - 0.03 375 0.24AAB 001 0.02 0.03 - - 375 0.16AAA 008 0.22 0.26 - - 375 0.24AAA 009 0.25 0.31 0.01 0.07 375 0.24AAC 001 0.05 0.08 - - 375 0.16AAA 010 0.28 0.32 - - 450 0.38AAA 011 0.32 0.43 - 0.05 450 0.38AAA 012 0.32 0.38 - - 450 0.38AAD 001 0.03 0.06 - - 300 0.16AAA 013 0.37 0.49 - 0.01 450 0.48AAA 014 0.40 0.52 - - 450 0.95AAE 001 0.01 0.02 - - 375 0.29AAE 002 0.01 0.03 - - 375 0.59AAA 015 0.40 0.54 - - 450 1.07AAA 016 0.40 0.53 - - 533 0.49AAG 001 0.07 0.12 - 0.01 300 0.11AAF 001 0.04 0.06 - 0.01 300 0.05AAF 002 0.05 0.07 - 0.02 300 0.05AAF 003 0.07 0.09 0.02 0.04 300 0.05AAF 004 0.08 0.09 0.03 0.04 300 0.05AAF 005 0.09 0.12 - - 300 0.23AAF 006 0.12 0.17 - - 300 0.23AAF 007 0.17 0.25 - - 375 0.27AAF 008 0.20 0.30 - 0.03 375 0.27AAF 009 0.20 0.27 - - 375 0.27AAF 010 0.25 0.35 - 0.10 225 0.25AAF 011 0.31 0.35 - - 450 0.44AAH 001 0.09 0.17 - - 900 4.33AAH 002 0.24 0.42 - - 975 3.45AAF 012 0.55 0.84 - - 991 2.54AAI 001 0.03 0.09 - - 300 0.20AAI 002 0.05 0.14 - - 300 0.20AAJ 001 0.09 0.16 - - 375 0.37AAI 003 0.20 0.40 - 0.09 375 0.31AAI 004 0.20 0.31 - - 375 0.31AAK 001 0.03 0.05 - - 375 0.31AAI 005 0.26 0.48 - 0.18 375 0.31AAL 001 0.04 0.07 - - 375 0.31AAI 006 0.35 0.60 - - 600 1.08

AAM 001 0.07 0.12 - - 375 0.09AAM 002 0.18 0.31 - - 525 0.22AAI 007 0.64 1.08 - - - 0.73AAI DET 0.64 1.08 - - 1500 m3 0.00AAI 008 0.06 0.20 - - swale 0.20

Grade Capacity [Proposed]

[m3/s]

Pipe Diameter [Proposed]

[mm]

Total Flows to this

Point [m3/s] Overflow [m3/s]

1

Appendix BNaracoorte Drainage Study

Tonkin Consulting


Gare Swamp Catchment**Bold print denotes proposed underground drainage

10yr ARI 100yr ARI 10yr ARI 100yr ARI

Grade Capacity [Proposed]

[m3/s]

Pipe Diameter [Proposed]

[mm]

Total Flows to this

Point [m3/s] Overflow [m3/s]

AAI 009 0.11 0.28 - - swale 0.30AAN 001 0.07 0.11 - 0.03 250 0.09AAO 001 0.03 0.06 - - 300 0.14AAN 002 0.14 0.21 - - 450 0.41AAN 003 0.18 0.27 0.13 0.22 300 0.05AAQ 001 0.01 0.02 - - 300 0.05AAQ 002 0.04 0.07 - 0.02 300 0.05AAQ 003 0.04 0.05 - - 300 0.14AAQ 004 0.04 0.05 - - 300 0.14AAR 001 0.03 0.07 - - 300 0.11AAR 002 0.14 0.25 - 0.06 300 0.19AAR 003 0.18 0.31 - - 375 0.35AAR 004 0.19 0.33 - - 375 0.35AAR 005 0.19 0.33 - - 381 0.20AAP 001 0.03 0.09 - - 300 0.14AAN 004 0.22 0.36 - - 450 0.15AAN 005 0.19 0.20 - - 457 0.32AAN 006 0.19 0.20 - - 457 0.32AAS 001 0.09 0.16 - - 350 0.31AAS 002 0.12 0.19 - - 300 0.20AAS 003 0.11 0.19 - - 300 0.20AAS 004 0.11 0.19 - - 381 0.20AAT 001 - 0.20 - - 300 0.13AAT 002 - 0.20 - - 300 0.13AAA 017 1.50 2.20 - - 991 2.54AAA 018 1.50 2.20 - - 991 2.54AAU 001 0.08 0.13 - - 300 0.23AAU 002 0.10 0.17 - - 300 0.19AAV 001 0.02 0.03 - - 300 0.23AAU 003 0.14 0.24 - 0.01 300 0.23

2

Appendix BNaracoorte Drainage Study

Tonkin Consulting

Appendix C




Appendix C

Hydraulic Grade Line Calculations

Appendix D




Appendix D

Cost Estimates

Civil Works Estimate Sheet

CIVIL WORKS ESTIMATE Job No. 2004.0622Estimator DAJ

Project: Naracoorte Drainage Study Date 22/12/2005Description: Upgrade underground drainage systems

Item No. Description Unit Quantity Rate Amount

GARE SWAMP NARACOORTE

1 Memorial Drive (5year ARI Design)Construct 375 dia RCP m 404 210$ 84,840$ Construct 450 dia RCP m 101 230$ 23,230$ Construct 1800 mm side-entry pit ea 10 2,000$ 20,000$ Construct junction box ea 5 1,800$ 9,000$ Alterations of existing services item 1 10,000$ 10,000$ Preliminaries 14,707$ Design Fees 14,707$ 20% Contingencies 29,414$ SUBTOTAL (incl 1.15 Naracoorte factor) 236,783$

2 Guernsey Street (5/100 year ARI Design)Construct 375 dia RCP m 280 210$ 58,800$ Construct 375 dia RCP m 70 230$ 16,100$ Construct 600 diam RCP m 50 300$ 15,000$ Detention Basin m3 1500 25$ 37,500$ Outfall swale m 400 50$ 20,000$ Construct 1800 mm side-entry pit ea 10 2,000$ 20,000$ Construct junction box ea 6 1,800$ 10,800$ Alterations of existing services item 1 15,000$ 15,000$ Preliminaries 19,320$ Design Fees 19,320$ 20% Contingencies 38,640$ SUBTOTAL (incl 1.15 Naracoorte factor) 311,052$

SUBTOTAL GARE SWAMP DRAINAGE 547,835$

TOWN CENTRE NARACOORTE

3 Hinckley Street (5year ARI Design)Construct 375 dia RCP m 591 210$ 124,110$ Construct 450 dia RCP m 106 230$ 24,380$ Construct 600 diam RCP m 167 300$ 50,100$ Construct 900 diam RCP m 138 500$ 69,000$ Construct 1050 diam RCP m 174 600$ 104,400$ Construct 1200 diam RCP m 253 700$ 177,100$ Construct 1500 diam RCP m 42 900$ 37,800$ Construct 1650 diam RCP m 196 1,000$ 196,000$ Construct 1800 mm side-entry pit ea 38 2,000$ 76,000$ Construct junction box ea 14 1,800$ 25,200$ Alterations of existing services item 1 50,000$ 50,000$ Preliminaries 93,409$ Design Fees 93,409$ 20% Contingencies 186,818$ SUBTOTAL (incl 1.15 Naracoorte factor) 1,503,885$

4 McRae Street (5year ARI Design)Construct 375 dia RCP m 31 210$ 6,510$ Construct 1800 mm side-entry pit ea 4 2,000$ 8,000$ Construct junction box ea 1 1,800$ 1,800$ Alterations of existing services item 1 5,000$ 5,000$ Preliminaries 2,131$ Design Fees 2,131$ 20% Contingencies 4,262$ SUBTOTAL (incl 1.15 Naracoorte factor) 34,309$

SUBTOTAL TOWN CENTRE DRAINAGE 1,538,194$

Tonkin Consulting recommend that a professional Quantity Surveyor be engaged if assurance of cost is required and

project budget estimates allowing for these factors are required.

Tonkin Consulting Page 1 23/04/2007


INDICATIVE CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE

Project: Gum Avenue, Naracoorte - Detention Stage 1Job No: 2004.0622Date: 22-Dec-05 Sheet No 1 of 1

Estimated by: D Jacobi

Item No Description Unit Qty Rate Cost

1 Construction MiscellaneousSetting Out item 1 $2,000 $2,000Establishment item 1 $5,000 $5,000Traffic Control item 1 $500 $500Testing item 1 $2,000 $2,000Cleaning up item 1 $500 $500Dewatering item 1 $0 $0

2 Stormwater Drainage375 dia Class '3' RCP m 100 $210 $21,000450 dia Class '3' RCP m 50 $230 $11,500600 dia Class '2' RCP m 130 $300 $39,000900 sq JB ea 10 $1,800 $18,0001900 x 600 SEP ea 10 $2,000 $20,000

3 Detention BasinCut to spoil off site m3 5000 $10 $50,000Grassing m2 5000 $1 $5,000

4 MiscellaneousEngineering Design and Const Mngmt item 1 $25,000 $25,000Service alterations item 1 $10,000 $10,000

Sub total (incl 1.15 factor) $240,92520% Cont $48,185

Total $289,110

Note: Indicative construction estimates are prepared for general information only, we recommend that an appropriately qualified quantity surveyor be consulted to provide detailed advice regarding construction costs.


INDICATIVE CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE

Project: Gum Avenue, Naracoorte - Pump Upgrade Stage 2Job No: 2004.0622Date: 22-Dec-05 Sheet No 1 of 1

Estimated by: D Jacobi

Item No Description Unit Qty Rate Cost

1 Construction MiscellaneousSetting Out item 1 $2,000 $2,000Establishment item 1 $5,000 $5,000Traffic Control item 1 $500 $500Testing item 1 $2,000 $2,000Cleaning up item 1 $500 $500Dewatering item 1 $0 $0

3 Pumps and Rising MainPump Chamber item 1 $20,000 $20,0002 x 45 L/s Pumps and internal pipework item 2 $10,000 $20,000Controller, electrical cabinet item 1 $20,000 $10,000Provision of ETSA supply point item 1 $15,000 $15,000Bring power from supply point to PS m 80 $75 $6,000Construction of valve chamber item 1 $3,000 $3,000Check valve ea 2 $3,000 $6,000Construction of 200 dia uPVC Class 6 m 275 $160 $44,000Connection of RM to creek ea 1 $3,000 $3,000

4 MiscellaneousEngineering Design and Const Mngmt item 1 $30,000 $30,000Service alterations item 1 $0 $0

Sub total (incl 1.15 factor) $192,05020% Cont $38,410

Total $230,460

Note: Indicative construction estimates are prepared for general information only, we recommend that an appropriately qualified quantity surveyor be consulted to provide detailed advice regarding construction costs.


Documents

Naracoorte Lucindale Council Naracoorte Drainage Study