Perron Developments Pty Ltd
Key Close, Baldivis
Local Water Management Strategy
Lot 535, 559 and 579 Baldivis Rd Baldivis
January 2015
Suite 1/27 York St, Subiaco WA 6008 l PO Box 117, Subiaco WA 6904 T +61 (08) 9388 2436 F +61 (08) 9381 9279 W jdahydro.com.au
JDA Key Close, Lot 535, 539 and 579 Baldivis Rd Baldivis: LWMS
CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 BACKGROUND 1 1.2 STATUTORY FRAMEWORK 1 1.2.1 Regional Planning 1 1.2.2 District Planning 1 1.2.3 Local Structure Plan 1 1.3 KEY DESIGN PRINCIPLES AND OBJECTIVES 1 1.3.1 Stormwater Management Manual for Western Australia (DoW, 2007) 2 1.3.2 Better Urban Water Management (WAPC, 2008) 2 1.3.3 East Baldivis District Water Management Strategy (PB, 2007) 2 1.3.4 North-East Baldivis Flood Modelling and Drainage Studies (DoW, 2014) 3
2. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT 5
3. PREDEVELOPMENT ENVIRONMENT 6 3.1 EXISTING LAND USE 6 3.2 TOPOGRAPHY 6 3.3 CLIMATE 6 3.4 REMNANT VEGETATION 6 3.5 WETLANDS 6 3.6 ABORIGINAL HERITAGE 6 3.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS 7 3.8 ACID SULPHATE SOILS 7 3.9 SITE CONTAMINATION 7 3.10 SURFACE WATER HYDROLOGY 7 3.10.1 Existing Surface Drainage 7 3.10.2 Floodplain Management 7 3.10.3 Survey Details 8 3.11 GROUNDWATER HYDROLOGY 8 3.11.1 Superficial Aquifer 8 3.11.2 Leederville Aquifer 9 3.11.3 Yarragadee Aquifer 10 3.11.4 Groundwater Resources for Irrigation 10
4. LOCAL WATER MANAGEMENT STRATEGY 11 4.1 WATER BALANCE 11 4.2 WATER SUSTAINABILITY INITIATIVES 12 4.2.1 Water Supply 12 4.2.2 Water Efficiency Measures 12 4.3 WETLAND MANAGEMENT 12 4.4 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT 13
J5157y 19 January, 2015 ii JDA Key Close, Lot 535, 539 and 579 Baldivis Rd Baldivis: LWMS
4.4.1 Variation from the DWMS 13 4.4.2 Design Criteria 13 4.4.3 Local Stormwater Management 13 4.5 STUDY AREA SURFACE WATER MODELLING 14 4.5.1 Perron Land 14 4.5.2 Adjacent Land 16 4.6 GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT 16 4.7 WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT 17 4.7.1 Nutrient Source Controls 17 4.7.2 Land Use Change Nutrient Impacts 18 4.7.3 Irrigation Water 18
5. IMPLEMENTATION 19 5.1 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN (SUBDIVISION) 19 5.2 MOSQUITO MANAGEMENT 19 5.3 CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT 19 5.3.1 Dewatering 19 5.3.2 Acid Sulphate Soils 19 5.4 STORMWATER SYSTEM OPERATION AND MANAGEMENT 19 5.5 MONITORING PROGRAMME AND CONTINGENCY PLANNING 20
6. REFERENCES 22
LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Summary of Design Principles and Objectives Table 2: Details of Groundwater Monitoring Bores Table 3: Details of DoW Monitoring Bores Table 4: Study Area Water Balance Table 5: DWMS Catchments and Allowable Discharge Rates Table 6: Land Use Runoff Parameters for XP-Storm Model Table 7: Post-Development LWMS Catchment Land Use Breakdown Table 8: XP-STORM Model Results for Detention Storage Table 9: XP-STORM Model Results for Detention Storage with Freeway Culvert Blocked TABLE 10: Minimum Specifications for Bio-Retention Systems TABLE 11: Trigger Values for Post-Development Monitoring TABLE 12: Monitoring Schedule and Reporting TABLE 13: Contingency Planning
J5157y 19 January, 2015 iii JDA Key Close, Lot 535, 539 and 579 Baldivis Rd Baldivis: LWMS
LIST OF FIGURES 1. Location Plan
2. Existing Land Use and Topography
3. Wetland Mapping
4. Surface Geology and ASS
5. Existing Drainage and 100yr ARI Flood Level
6. Groundwater Levels
7. Proposed Structure Plan
8. Catchment and Stormwater Management Plan
9. Bio-Retention Concept North-East POS
APPENDICES A. Drainage Infrastructure Survey (MAPS, 2013) B. JDA Monitoring Bore Logs C. Water Level Monitoring Results (JDA, 2013) D. JDA Bore Water Quality Monitoring Results E. DoW Groundwater Licence (GWL176048) and Bore Construction Licence (CAW176047) F. NiDSS Modelling Results G. Landscaping Concepts (Emerge, 2014) H. Preliminary Bulk Earthwork Levels (Wood & Grieve Engineers, 2014)
J5157y 19 January, 2015 iv JDA Key Close, Lot 535, 539 and 579 Baldivis Rd Baldivis: LWMS
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background This Local Water Management Strategy (LWMS) has been prepared by JDA Consultant Hydrologists on behalf of Perron Developments Pty Ltd in support of the Local Structure Plan addressing the landholding of Lots 535, 559 and 579 Baldivis Rd Baldivis City of Rockingham (herein referred to as the Study Area, Figure 1).
The LWMS provides the framework for the application of total water cycle management to the proposed urban structure, consistent with the Department of Water (DoW) principles of Water Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD) described in the Stormwater Management Manual (DoW, 2007).
1.2 Statutory Framework
1.2.1 Regional Planning Lots 535, 559 and 579 Baldivis Rd Baldivis are currently zoned ‘urban deferred’ under the Metropolitan Regional Scheme (WAPC, 2013).
1.2.2 District Planning The Study Area lies within the East Baldivis District Structure Plan area. The District Structure Plan has been adopted by the City and is currently with the WAPC for approval.
A District Water Management Strategy (DWMS) was prepared by Parsons Brinckerhoff (2007) and accepted by Council and provides guidance on water reuse options, sizing stormwater treatment measures, water-quality related monitoring and vegetation treatments for stormwater structures.
1.2.3 Local Structure Plan This LWMS is presented in support of the Local Structure Plan (LSP) pepared by CLE (2013), as part of the Better Urban Water Management Framework.
The LWMS addresses the LSP area and provides a refinement of the flood modelling, surface water management strategy and groundwater management strategy to a local scale. This LWMS is consistent with water sensitive urban design practices as described in the Stormwater Management Manual of WA (DoW, 2007).
1.3 Key Design Principles and Objectives The LWMS employs the following key documents to define its content, key principles and objectives:
Stormwater Management Manual for Western Australia (DoW, 2007)
Better Urban Water Management (WAPC, 2008)
North-East Baldivis Flood Study (DoW, 2014)
Serpentine River Floodplain Management Strategy (SKM, 2010)
East Baldivis District Water Management Strategy (DWMS) (PB, 2007)
A summary of the key design principles and objectives from these documents is provided in Table 1 and summarised below.
J5157y 19 January, 2015 1 JDA Key Close, Lot 535, 539 and 579 Baldivis Rd Baldivis: LWMS
1.3.1 Stormwater Management Manual for Western Australia (DoW, 2007) The Water and Rivers Commission (now Department of Water, DoW) released A Manual for Managing Urban Stormwater Quality in Western Australia in 1998 to define and practically describe Best Management Practices (BMP’s) to reduce pollutant and nutrient inputs to stormwater drainage systems. The Manual also aims to provide guidelines for the incorporation of water sensitive design principles into urban planning and design, which would enable the achievement of improved water quality from urban development.
The document was released to provide a guideline for best planning and management practices and was intended for use by Water and Rivers Commission, but also by other State and Local Government Authorities and sectors of the urban development industry.
DoW completed a major review of the Manual in consultation with a working team comprising industry and government representatives. The revised manual was officially launched in August 2007 (DoW, 2007).
Principle objectives for managing urban water in WA are stated as:
Water Quality: To maintain or improve the surface and groundwater quality within development areas relative to pre-development conditions
Water Quantity: To maintain the total water cycle balance within development areas relative to the pre- development conditions
Water Conservation: To maximise the reuse of stormwater
Ecosystem Health: To retain natural drainage systems and protect ecosystem health
Economic Viability: To implement stormwater systems that are economically viable in the long term
Public Health: To minimise the public risk, including risk of injury or loss of life to the community
Protection of Property: To protect the built environment from flooding and waterlogging
Social Values: To ensure that social aesthetic and cultural values are recognised and maintained when managing stormwater
Development: To ensure the delivery of best practice stormwater management through planning and development of high quality developed areas in accordance with sustainability and precautionary principles
1.3.2 Better Urban Water Management (WAPC, 2008) The guideline document Better Urban Water Management (WAPC, 2008), focuses on the process of integration between land use and water planning and specifying the level of investigations and documentations required at various decision points in the planning process, rather than the provision of any specific design objectives and criteria for urban water management.
This LWMS complies with the BUWM process.
1.3.3 East Baldivis District Water Management Strategy (PB, 2007)
The East Baldivis DWMS was prepared in support of the East Baldivis District Structure Plan.
The aims of the DWMS as summarised in the strategy are: 1. Define land area requirements for conveyance of flood flows and protection of future urban development from peak flood events; 2. Propose a drainage design strategy appropriate for local conditions in the strategy area that incorporates best practice water sensitive urban design measures. This strategy should identify
J5157y 19 January, 2015 2 JDA Key Close, Lot 535, 539 and 579 Baldivis Rd Baldivis: LWMS
Water Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD) practices to be implemented within both private allotments and the public domain, and the legal mechanisms by which all identified practices will be implemented; 3. Prescribe the design criteria for water quantity and water quality for each sub-catchment; 4. Outline the hydrologic and hydraulic framework parameters and subsequently develop the overall drainage network concept; 5. Define an implementation plan for the drainage design strategy, that will outline timing, cost estimates, mechanisms and responsibilities; and 6. Recommend monitoring programs for water quantity and water quality pre, during and post development as well as for ensuring hydraulic performance over the lifetime of the drainage structures.
1.3.4 North-East Baldivis Flood Modelling and Drainage Studies (DoW, 2014) At the request of the Department of Planning (DoP), Department of Water completed the North-East Baldivis Flood Modelling and Drainage Studies. The Study includes a hydraulic flood model using MIKE FLOOD covering an area of 78 km2 surrounding the land identified by DoP. The Study includes sections of the Peel, Serpentine and Birriga Main Drains, and a section of the Serpentine River.
The flood study sets out four items for future consideration:
1. The potential for levee overtopping or failure on the Birriga and Serpentine Main Drains;
2. The availability of free-draining outlets where winter groundwater levels are high and back-water effects are present;
3. The low hydraulic grade and capacity of existing drains within the Study Area; and
4. Where there are breaks in the levee, the capacity of the Peel Main Drain to convey flows without affecting downstream landholders.
TABLE 1: SUMMARY OF DESIGN PRINCIPLES AND OBJECTIVES
J5157y 19 January, 2015 3 JDA Key Close, Lot 535, 539 and 579 Baldivis Rd Baldivis: LWMS
Key Guiding Principles Facilitate implementation of sustainable best practice in urban water management Provide integration with planning processes and clarity for agencies involved with implementation To minimise public risk, including risk of injury or loss of life. Protection of infrastructure and assets from flooding and inundation Encourage environmentally responsible development. Facilitate adaptive management responses to the monitored outcomes of development Category DWMS Objectives LWMS Criteria Surface Water Minimise changes in hydrology to Post-development critical 100 yr ARI peak flow shall Management prevent impacts on receiving be consistent with pre-development peak flow at the environments. discharge point of each sub-catchment and discharge Manage water flows from major events points of all subdivisions into waterways to protect infrastructure and assets. All 1 yr 1 hr ARI event runoff will be treated at source Apply the Principles of WSUD. where possible. Adopt nutrient load reduction design Storage areas to have a minimum separation of 0.3 m objectives for stormwater runoff. between maximum or controlled groundwater levels. Floodplain management and urban Drain re-alignment or profile modification may be drainage. carried out if the pre-development hydraulic capacity has been maintained. Manage surface water flows from major events to protect infrastructure and assets from flooding and inundation. Groundwater Manage groundwater levels to protect Managing and minimising changes in groundwater Management infrastructure and assets levels and groundwater quality following development. Maintain groundwater regimes for the Subsurface drainage (sub-soils) and drainage protection of groundwater-dependent infrastructure set at or above the groundwater design ecosystems level, although existing inverts below this level may Protect the value of groundwater remain. resources. Subsoil drainage outlets to be free draining. Adopt nutrient load reduction design objectives for discharges to groundwater. Monitoring and Adopt an adaptive management Design based on methodology in Stormwater Implementation approach. Management Manual of adopting a treatment train Maintain drainage and treatment including: structures. • structural treatment measures (infiltration storages, plus bio-retention/ treatment structures sized to min 2% of connected impervious area) • non-structural measures to reduce applied nutrient loads. Maintain groundwater quality at pre-development levels. Water quality not to exceed trigger values for more than two consecutive years. Trigger values determined as physical and chemical parameter median values lower than the 80th percentile of concentration levels and higher than the 20th percentile for pH (ANZECC, 2000). Water Adopt drinking water consumption Aim to achieve the State Water Plan target for water Conservation target. use of 100 kL/person/yr. Ensure that non-potable water supply Consider alternative fit for purpose water sources systems deliver a net benefit to the where appropriate and cost-effective. community. Ensure that non-potable water supply systems are designed as part of an integrated water supply
J5157y 19 January, 2015 4 JDA Key Close, Lot 535, 539 and 579 Baldivis Rd Baldivis: LWMS
2. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
The Study Area is 28ha and situated within the southern corridor of the Perth Metropolitan Region, approximately 38km south of the Perth CBD.
The Study Area is bounded by Safety Bay Rd to the south, Kwinana Fwy to the east and Baldivis Rd to the west (Figure 1). Key Close road reserve runs east west across the Study Area.
The proposed land use is for residential development consistent with regional planning. The structure plan for the Study Area is shown on Figure 7.
Key elements of the Structure Plan related to urban water management include:
Retaining the existing Water Corporation Sub Drain F (see Figure 5). As part of the development the Drain will be realigned and redesigned to include a pipe drain.
Use of bio-retention treatment systems for detention and treatment of stormwater.
Local native plants make up a minimum 50% of the planted areas and streetscape treatments. Any non-local species will be selected for drought tolerance and low fertiliser requirements.
J5157y 19 January, 2015 5 JDA Key Close, Lot 535, 539 and 579 Baldivis Rd Baldivis: LWMS
3. PREDEVELOPMENT ENVIRONMENT
3.1 Existing Land Use The Study Area is extensively cleared of native vegetation. The land was previously used for agricultural purposes and grazing, and now primarily consists of degraded bushland and pasture (Figure 2).
3.2 Topography The existing topography of the Study Area is shown on Figure 2. The Study Area generally slopes from west to east, with a high of 10mAHD at the western edge of the Study Area and a low point of 3mAHD at the eastern edge.
3.3 Climate The Baldivis area is characterised by a Mediterranean climate with warm dry summers and cool wet winters.
Rainfall data from the nearby Bureau of Meteorology Medina Research Station (Site No. 9194) is applicable to the Study Area.
The long term average annual rainfall is 760mm (1986-2012). This average has decreased between 2000 to present, to an average annual rainfall of 690mm, reflecting a 9% reduction compared to the long term average.
The seasonal rainfall distribution has also altered since 2000, with a reduction of average monthly totals in the winter months, but no reduction in in summer months.
The average annual pan evaporation is approximately 1900mm (Luke et al, 1988).
3.4 Remnant Vegetation Investigations carried out by 360 Environmental indicate the Study Area is situated in the South West Botanical Province and the Darling Botanical District. The region typically consists of forest country with related woodlands. The Study Area consists mainly of Banksia Low Woodland in leached sands, Melaleuca Swamps in poorly drained areas and Woodland of Tuart, Jarrah and Marri on the less leached soils (360 Environmental, 2014).
3.5 Wetlands The Department of Environment and Conservation (DEC, 2012) Geomorphic Wetlands of the Swan Coastal Plain mapping shows the boundaries and locations of wetlands in the Study Area (Figure 3). The Study Area is partially located, in the north east corner, on wetland classified as Multiple Use Dampland, with the balance of the Study Area not mapped as wetland. The multiple use classification indicates the land can be developed for urban use.
The closest Resource Enhancement Wetland (REW) to the Study Area is Folly Pool (see Figure 3), which is connected to the Peel Main drain system and which will not be impacted by the Key Close development.
3.6 Aboriginal Heritage A search of the Department of Indigenous Affair’s Aboriginal Heritage Inquiry System (http://www.dia.wa.gov.au/AHIS/default.aspx) indicates that there are no Aboriginal Heritage sites located on the Study Area. The closest Site is located at Folly Pool on the eastern side of the Kwinana Fwy (DIA, 2013).
J5157y 19 January, 2015 6 JDA Key Close, Lot 535, 539 and 579 Baldivis Rd Baldivis: LWMS
3.7 Geology and Soils Surface geology mapping by Gozzard (1983) is shown on Figure 4.
The Study Area is situated near the interface of the Bassendean Dune system and the Spearwood Sands formation but is located wholly within the Bassendean System. The thickness of the Bassendean Sands varies and overlies clays of the Guildford Formation. The Bassendean Sands are characterised as “very light at surface, yellow at depth, fine to medium grained, sub-rounded quartz moderately well sorted of Aeolian origin” (Gozzard, 1983).
3.8 Acid Sulphate Soils According to mapping published by the Department of Water, the Study Area is classified as moderate to low risk of Acid Sulphate Soils (ASS) occurring less than 3m from surface (DoW, 2010), see Figure 4.
Detailed ASS investigations will be undertaken at the time of subdivision, as it is recognised there may be potential for acid sulphate soils, particularly near the eastern boundary. In the event that any ASS is encountered an Acid Sulphate Soil Management Plan will be prepared and implemented as part of the subdivision process in accordance with WAPC Bulletin No. 64 (WAPC, 2003).
3.9 Site Contamination 360 Environmental carried out a Preliminary Site Investigation (PSI) in 2014 assessing the likelihood of potential contamination across the Study Area. The PSI concluded previous land use was not considered to be contaminating and the Study Area is suitable for urban development. The results of the PSI confirmed no contaminants exist on site and subsequently no further management of contaminants is required (360 Environmental, 2014).
3.10 Surface Water Hydrology
3.10.1 Existing Surface Drainage The existing local drainage network in relation to the Study Area is shown on Figure 5.
The Water Corporation sub drain F is a branch drain which connects to the Peel Main Drain (PMD) via a 450mm diameter culvert under the Kwinana Fwy. The PMD runs south alongside the Freeway before discharging to the Serpentine River which in turn discharges to the Peel Harvey Estuary (Figure 5).
Based on topography and Water Corporation sub-drain inverts, 60ha of land has the potential to utilise this culvert as a drainage outlet. The allowable outflow that has been adopted for the LWMS is 4.5 L/s/ha for the 100yr ARI, consistent with the Water Corporation’s Mundijong Drainage District drainage criteria (Water Corporation, 2000).
3.10.2 Floodplain Management The Peel Main Drain has been modelled by DoW in the recently released North-East Baldivis Flood Modelling and Drainage Studies (DoW, 2014) as described in Section 1.3.4. A flood level for the 100yr ARI was established at 4.37 mAHD upstream of the Folly Road crossing which causes inundation in the Study Area (Figure 5).
This report has been prepared based on the information presented in the DoW North-East Baldivis Flood Modelling and Drainage Studies (2014).
J5157y 19 January, 2015 7 JDA Key Close, Lot 535, 539 and 579 Baldivis Rd Baldivis: LWMS
3.10.3 Survey Details A detailed feature survey including drainage was carried out by McMullen Nolan Surveyors in April 2013 in order to determine existing drainage infrastructure and invert levels to be used for future drainage work design. Survey results are included in Appendix A.
3.11 Groundwater Hydrology There are three aquifers of significance underlying the Study Area; each assigned the name of the major geological unit in which the aquifer occurs. In descending order of depth from natural surface they are:
Superficial Aquifer (unconfined, +5 to -25mAHD)
Leederville Aquifer (confined, -25 to –250mAHD)
Yarragadee Aquifer (confined, >-310mAHD)
3.11.1 Superficial Aquifer The Superficial Formation is of quaternary age and consists of a thin veneer of sand (Bassendean Sand) overlying sandy clay and clay (Guildford Formation). The Superficial Formation forms an unconfined aquifer containing generally fresh to slightly brackish groundwater (500 – 1500mg/L Total Dissolved Solids), with slightly acid to neutral pH (Davidson, 1995). The water table is shallow, rising to within 0.5m or at the surface during winter, depending on surface elevation.
Davidson and Yu (2006) estimate the average recharge in this area to be approximately 8% of rainfall or equivalent to 84mm per year. Depending on the specific yield of the local soils, fluctuations in the regional water table may vary between 1.0 and 1.5m seasonally.
Six groundwater monitoring bores (WMW1 to 6) were installed across the Study Area by JDA (Figure 6), with water levels first measured in all bores in May 2012, then monthly for 12 months. The highest level in all bores was recorded on 25 September 2012.
Details of the bores are provided in Table 2. A time series plot of water levels recorded in the bores is included as Appendix C along with the lithological log for each bore provided in Appendix B.
TABLE 2: DETAILS OF GROUNDWATER MONITORING BORES
GDA Coordinates Water Depth Bore ID Natural Total Top of Screened Level Estimated to Surface Depth Casing Interval 25 Sept AAMGL AAMGL Easting Northing (mAHD) (mBns) (mAHD) (mBNS) 2012 (mAHD) (mBNS) (mAHD)
WMW1 389460 6423087 4.62 5.0 5.22 2.0 – 5.0 3.95 3.95* 0.13
WMW2 388928 6423072 8.37 6.5 8.97 3.5 – 6.5 4.41 4.95 3.42
WMW3 389036 6422860 8.11 6.5 8.70 3.5 – 6.5 4.41 4.94 3.17
WMW4 389332 6422840 5.01 5.0 5.61 2.5 – 5.0 4.31 4.85 0.16
WMW5 389353 6422542 5.81 5.0 6.40 2.5 – 5.0 4.38 4.91 0.90
WMW6 389086 6422545 7.09 6.0 7.69 3.5 – 6.0 4.35 4.89 2.20
Notes: * No correction applied due to Sub Drain F influence m BNS = metres below natural surface m AHD = metres Australian Height Datum
To correlate the water levels recorded in WMW bores on 25 September 2012 to long-term groundwater levels, measurements were also recorded in Department of Water (DoW) monitoring bores T290(o),
J5157y 19 January, 2015 8 JDA Key Close, Lot 535, 539 and 579 Baldivis Rd Baldivis: LWMS
T300, T350 and T340(o). These bores are located between 1.5km and 4km from the Study Area, see Figure 6. The bores have long-term records spanning from 1975 to present.
TABLE 3: DETAILS OF DOW MONITORING BORES Water Level Record Top of Casing AAMGL Difference Bore ID 25/09/2012 Period (mAHD) (mAHD) (m) (mAHD) T290(o) 1975- 2012 20.06 1.45 2.05 0.60 T300 1975- 2012 5.93 5.12 5.22 0.11 T350 1975 - 2012 7.88 5.03 5.74 0.71 T340(o) 1975 - 2012 5.15 1.40 2.13 0.73 Average 0.54
For each of the DoW monitoring bores an Average Annual Maximum Groundwater Level (AAMGL) was calculated, which is an average of the winter peak levels over the period of record. Based on the water levels recorded in the DoW bores on 25 September 2012 (Table 3) a correction of 0.54m was applied to the water levels measured in the JDA bores on the same date to estimate the AAMGL. AAMGL contours and depth to groundwater from the existing natural surface are shown in Figure 6. Depth to AAMGL below natural surface varies between 0.13m (WMW1) and 3.42m (WMW2).
Groundwater quality monitoring of bores WMW1 to WMW6 was completed quarterly for one year by JDA from May 2012 to April 2013. Monitoring commenced in May 2012 finishing in April 2013. Samples were analysed for physical parameters, nutrients, heavy metals and major ions. Groundwater quality results are attached as Appendix D. Samples were filtered in the field prior to laboratory analysis.
The ANZECC 2000 95% guideline values for lowland river systems of south west Australia have been used for water quality parameter comparison. The Peel Harvey WQIP (EPA, 2008) total phosphorus targets for the rivers and estuary of the Peel-Harvey System have been used in preference to ANZECC 2000 guideline values.
A summary of the monitoring results are as follows:
Average TN concentrations for all bores were above the ANZECC 2000 TN guideline of 1.2mg/L.
Average TP concentrations for all bores, except WMW4, were below the Peel-Harvey WQIP TP target value of 0.1mg/L.
Detectable limits used for all heavy metal parameters were above the ANZECC 2000 95% guideline values. Measurements for copper and zinc in bores WMW4 and WMW5 respectively were measured above the detectable limit and thus also above the ANZECC 2000 95% guideline values.
Average EC levels were generally between ANZECC guideline values with the exception of WMW1 and WMW2. WMW1 EC readings varied between 0.2 and 6.6 ms/cm throughout the monitoring period. This can be attributed to the groundwater level being close to the surface at this location, with evaporation concentrating salts over a long period of time.
The pH generally is slightly acid (4.8 to 6.1) and below ANZECC guideline values.
3.11.2 Leederville Aquifer The Leederville Aquifer is of Cretaceous age and consists of interbedded sandstone, siltstone and shales made up by the Mariginiup, Wanneroo and Pinjar members and the Henley Sandstone Formation. The Leederville Aquifer is a major regional aquifer, from which large yields of fresh groundwater can be obtained. The groundwater in the Leederville Formation is confined with the potentiometric surface in this area at approximately ground level (Davidson, 1995).
J5157y 19 January, 2015 9 JDA Key Close, Lot 535, 539 and 579 Baldivis Rd Baldivis: LWMS
The South Perth Shale is present from -260 to -310m AHD and forms the confining layer between the Leederville Aquifer and Yarragadee Aquifer.
3.11.3 Yarragadee Aquifer The Yarragadee Aquifer is a multilayer aquifer more than 2000m thick consisting of interbedded sandstones, siltsones and shales made up of the Gage Formation and Yarragadee Formation in the Baldivis area. Similar to the Leederville Aquifer, the groundwater in the Yarragadee Aquifer is confined with the potentiometric surface in this area at approximately ground level (Davidson, 1995).
3.11.4 Groundwater Resources for Irrigation The Superficial Aquifer is the most cost effective groundwater source for irrigation of POS following development of the Study Area.
The Study Area is located within the Stakehill Groundwater Area and the Tamworth Swamp Groundwater Sub-area. As of the 18 May 2012 DoW reported 103,813 kL available for allocation.
A Department of Water Application Form 3G for a 5C Licence to Take Water was submitted by JDA on the 27 July 2012 for 36,000 kL/yr for construction and POS irrigation.
GWL176048 with an allocation of 22,000 kL/yr was issued on 7 May 2013 for Stage 1 works and irrigation (Appendix E). A further allocation of 14,000 kL/yr will be issued as the development progresses in accordance with the development timetable provided to DoW. A further 15,750 kL/yr has also been set aside by DoW for future use by the Primary School.
J5157y 19 January, 2015 10 JDA Key Close, Lot 535, 539 and 579 Baldivis Rd Baldivis: LWMS
4. LOCAL WATER MANAGEMENT STRATEGY
4.1 Water Balance The water balance of the site will be influenced by the frequency and intensity of rainfall and evapotranspiration. As the most reliable estimates of rainfall, evaporation, transpiration and recharge are at regional scales, for the purposes of this water balance assessment annual average values have been assumed and the Study Area has been considered as a whole, without further detailed assessment of the various land uses.
Pre-development Water Balance
The pre-development water balance assumptions are as follows;
Rainfall based on the long term annual average for Medina Research Station of 760mm/yr.
Recharge is 8% of rainfall as estimated in Davidson and Yu (2006).
The balance of inputs is discharged as surface runoff.
Post-development Water Balance
Assumptions for the post-development water balance are as follows;
Water supply for all POS irrigation will be met by local groundwater supplies. Irrigation rate of 7500 kL/ha/yr is assumed consistent with DoW allocation.
10% of landowners assumed to have a private bore for irrigation supply.
Surface runoff matches pre-development flows.
The balance of inputs will be discharged via subsoils.
Results of the water balance are presented in Table 4. TABLE 4: STUDY AREA WATER BALANCE Pre Area
Development Use (ha) Total kL/yr % Inputs Rainfall 30 760 222,800 100 Input total 222,800 100 Outputs Evapotranspiration Native Bush 5.3 800 42,400 21 Rural (Cleared) 24.7 400 98,800 42 Surface Runoff 64,576 29 Superficial aquifer recharge 60.8 17,024 8 Output total 222,800 100 Balance 0 Post Area
Development Use (ha) Total kL/yr % Inputs Rainfall 30 760 222,800 90 Groundwater Abstraction Parks 3.3 24,750 9 Private gardens 0.2 1100 1 Input total 248,650 100 Outputs Evapotranspiration Residential 17.7 350 61,195 25 Parks 3.3 1200 39,600 14 Surface Runoff 64,576 26 Superficial Infiltration Aquifer Recharge 228 38,210 15 Subsoil Discharge 45,069 18 Output total 248,650 100 Balance 0
J5157y 19 January, 2015 11 JDA Key Close, Lot 535, 539 and 579 Baldivis Rd Baldivis: LWMS
4.2 Water Sustainability Initiatives
4.2.1 Water Supply Public Open Spaces
Considering the fit for purpose strategy, the water supply for the public open spaces is proposed to be from local groundwater resources. As discussed in Section 3.9.4 the groundwater licence has been secured for the Study Area.
Residential Lots
Water supply to households is to be via extension of the scheme water system. The project civil engineer will negotiate the extension of the system with Water Corporation.
4.2.2 Water Efficiency Measures Public Open Spaces
The estimated irrigated POS area for the development is 3.3ha (Perron Land) which will require approximately 24,750 kL/yr (DoWs recommendation for 7,500 kL/ha/yr). This will be sourced from the unconfined groundwater reserves consistent with a fit for purpose strategy.
Landscaped Public Open Space areas are to be at least 50% native plants, with water wise irrigation system design.
Development Area
Development of the Study Area will lead to an increased demand for water for new residents as well as irrigation of public open spaces.
Water conservation measures encouraged to be implemented to reduce scheme water consumption within the development will be consistent with Water Corporation’s “Waterwise” land development criteria include:
Promotion of use of waterwise practices including water efficient fixtures and fitting (taps, showerheads, toilets and appliances, rainwater tanks, waterwise landscaping)
All houses to be built consistent with current Building Commission Australia water efficiency standards.
Use of native plants in POS/Neighbourhood Park /street verges.
Use of groundwater bores for irrigation of POS and vegetated areas.
Maximising on site retention of stormwater.
4.3 Wetland Management The following key measures will be implemented to ensure the wetlands and watercourses to the east of the site, including Folly Pool, will not be negatively impacted from urban runoff by increased nutrient loads;
All stormwater and groundwater discharge from the estate will be treated prior to discharging to the Peel Main Drain (Refer Section 4.6).
Peak outflows will be consistent with pre-development flow rates
J5157y 19 January, 2015 12 JDA Key Close, Lot 535, 539 and 579 Baldivis Rd Baldivis: LWMS
4.4 Stormwater Management
4.4.1 Variation from the DWMS To control back flow from the Peel Main Drain the drainage strategy in the DWMS (PB, 2007) identifies that the number of drainage outlets to the Peel Main Drain should be reduced from the two existing outlets (Sub H and Sub F) to one outlet (Sub H) (Figure 5). This currently has not been implemented.
Due to the fragmented ownership of the land and the impact of having to redirect drainage approximately 550m further north from Sub F to Sub H, this LWMS utilises the existing southern culvert as a discharge outlet.
Land to the north of the Study Area (Figure 2) has been accounted for as part of this drainage strategy to ensure other land owners will not be negatively impacted by this variation from the DWMS. Section 4.4.2 shows allowable outflows based on a pro-rata basis.
4.4.2 Design Criteria Post-development critical 100 yr ARI peak flow will be consistent with pre-development peak flow at the discharge point of each sub-catchment and discharge points of all subdivisions into waterways. 1 yr 1 hr ARI event runoff will be treated at source where possible. Drain re-alignment, or removal, may be carried out if the pre-development hydraulic capacity has been maintained in the POS design. Manage surface water flows from major events to protect infrastructure and assets from flooding and inundation. Existing inverts for drains will be maintained to ensure the same water regime post-development. Key Close system designed to accept drainage from Lot 10 and Mirvac development.
Flow rates presented in Table 5 below are based on 4.5L/s/ha as described in Section 3.10.1.
TABLE 5: DWMS CATCHMENTS AND ALLOWABLE DISCHARGE RATES DWMS Catchments Area (ha) Allowable 100yr ARI flow (L/s)
Mirvac development 6.1 27.5 Lot 535, 559, 579 (Perron) 25.7 115.7 School site1 4.2 18.9 Lot 10 2.2 9.9 Total 38.2 172.0 Note: 4.5 L/s/ha allowable flow 1- School site split between Perron and Mirvac Developments
4.4.3 Local Stormwater Management The stormwater drainage system will be designed using a major/minor approach. The major drainage system is defined as the arrangement of roads, drainage reserves, detention basins and open space planned to provide safe passage of stormwater runoff from major events which exceed the capacity of the minor system, typically greater than 5yr ARI. The major drainage system is described below with the key elements of the drainage system shown in Figure 8.
The minor drainage system is defined as the series of pipes, kerbs and gutters etc designed to carry runoff generated by low frequency ARI storms, typically less than 5yr ARI. The minor drainage incorporates a treatment train of best management practice (BMP) water quality structural controls such as vegetated swale and storage systems that provide water quality treatment from the proposed development.
J5157y 19 January, 2015 13 JDA Key Close, Lot 535, 539 and 579 Baldivis Rd Baldivis: LWMS
Major Drainage System The major drainage system is designed to manage rainfall events greater than the 5yr ARI, up to the 100yr ARI.
Key points of the major drainage system strategy are as follows:
Sub-drain F filled and connection provided to neighbouring land to the north to allow flow into POS design.
Discharge rates from the detention basin will be controlled to pre-development flow rate. An overland flow path will be provided to the existing freeway culvert in case the control pipe becomes blocked.
Roads will be graded to direct flow to the lowest point in the catchment. The pipe system will bubble up into the North-East POS and be detained to pre-development flows through a controlled outlet pipe (Figure 9).
All lot finished levels will have a minimum 0.5m clearance above the estimated 100yr ARI flood level of the detention storages.
Storage areas to have a minimum separation of 0.5 m between maximum or controlled groundwater levels.
The design strategy is consistent with the objectives provided in the district DWMS (PB, 2007). Results for the major drainage system are presented in Table 8 and shown in Figures 8 and 9.
Minor Drainage System The minor drainage system is designed to manage rainfall events up to the 5yr ARI and the following strategies are proposed;
Where depth to AAMGL is >1.5 m soakwells will be provided to infiltrate the 1yr1hr ARI rainfall event.
Lots with insufficient depth to AAMGL (<1.5m) or 9 m or less lot frontage will be provided with a lot connection.
The roadside pipe network will be sized to convey the 5yr ARI flow.
Flush kerbing to be utilised around POS areas subject to detailed engineering design.
Drainage treatment train systems will have the minimum capacity to treat the 3 month ARI event.
Frequent rainfall events up to the 1yr 1hr event will pass through amended soil media and exit the Study Area via subsoil drains.
4.5 Study Area Surface Water Modelling
4.5.1 Perron Land The detention storage has been modelled using XP-STORM. The detention storage is located in the North-East POS based on existing topographic contours, survey levels, depth to groundwater mapping and local structure plan constraints (Figure 7). Detention storage elevation has been assumed to be 0.5m above the controlled groundwater levels for modelling purposes. Existing drain inverts will be maintained.
The design storms modelled in XP-STORM were calculated according to the methodology in Australian Rainfall & Runoff (AR&R) (Engineers Australia, 2001). The rainfall temporal pattern was assumed to be spatially uniform across the catchment. Storm durations modelled ranged from 10 minutes to 72 hours.
J5157y 19 January, 2015 14 JDA Key Close, Lot 535, 539 and 579 Baldivis Rd Baldivis: LWMS
Runoff coefficients applied to various land uses in the Study Area are presented in Table 6, with the land use breakdown presented in Table 7 and shown on Figure 9.
TABLE 6: LAND USE RUNOFF PARAMETERS FOR XP-STORM MODEL Initial Loss Continuing Loss Runoff Coefficient Drainage Area (mm) (mm/hr) (%) Lots (>9 m lot frontage) 15.7 - 30 Lots (<9 m lot frontage) 15.7 1.0 - Road - - 80 Tram Reserve 10 POS - - 10
TABLE 7: POST-DEVELOPMENT LWMS CATCHMENT LAND USE BREAKDOWN Land Use (ha) Perron Land
Road & Rd Reserve 7.2 School 2.1 Lots (>9 m lot frontage) 13.0 Lots (<9 m lot frontage) 2.2 POS Area 3.3 Catchment Area (ha) 27.8
XP-STORM modelling results are presented in Table 8 and shown in Figure 8 for the 1yr1hr and critical 5yr ARI and 100yr ARI for Perron Land.
The Peel MD flood levels as reported in DoW (2014), were applied to the model as a tailwater condition as presented in Table 8.
TABLE 8: XP-STORM MODEL RESULTS FOR DETENTION STORAGE
Post-Development Storage 1yr 1hr 5yr ARI 10yr ARI 100yr ARI
Storage Data Impervious Catchment Area (ha) 9.09 12.06 12.06 12.06 Storage Invert (mAHD) 4.50 4.50 4.50 4.50 Outlet Invert (mAHD) 4.00 (subsoil) 4.80 4.80 4.80 Tailwater (mAHD) - 3.46 3.53 4.37 Critical Storm Duration (hrs) 1 48 24 24 Storm Rainfall (mm) 15.7 103.2 89.5 136.3 Runoff Volume (m3) 1430 12450 10790 16440 Water level rise (m) 0.30 0.725 0.80 0.90 Top Water Level (mAHD) 4.80 5.225 5.30 5.40 Storage Area (m2) 5185 6990 7225 20740 Stored Volume(m3) 900 3580 4110 6175 Peak Outflow (m3/s) - 0.1071 0.1171 0.1451 Stored Volume/ Runoff Volume (%) 63 29 38 38 1- Combined outflow including external catchment Lot 10 and school site
Note that the detention storage shown in Figures 8 and 9 is indicative only and provided for comparison to the POS areas allocated on the Structure Plan. The final configuration (side slopes etc) and exact location of the storage areas will be dependent on final earthworks, drainage and road design levels for the
J5157y 19 January, 2015 15 JDA Key Close, Lot 535, 539 and 579 Baldivis Rd Baldivis: LWMS development. The details will be refined at the sub-division stage and reported in the relevant Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP). Landscaping concepts are provided in Appendix G and preliminary bulk earthwork levels provided in Appendix H.
No overland flow path exists to the Peel Main Drain from the Study Area due to the higher elevation of the Kwinana Fwy to the east. In light of this, an analysis of potential blockage of the outlet pipe under the Kwinana Fwy during 100yr ARI rainfall events was completed. The available storage at the low point is sufficient for the 100yr 12hr ARI storm provided the blocked pipe is cleared immediately following the storm and prior to any further rainfall (Table 9).
TABLE 9: XP-STORM MODEL RESULTS FOR DETENTION STORAGE WITH FREEWAY CULVERT BLOCKED Post-Development Storage : 100yr 12hr Storage Data Storage Invert (mAHD) 4.50 Road Level (mAHD) 5.70 Tailwater (mAHD) - Critical Storm Duration (hrs) 12 Storm Rainfall (mm) 104.8 Runoff Volume (m3) 15470 Water level rise (m) 1.2 Top Water Level (mAHD) 5.7 Storage Area (m2) 20740 Stored Volume(m3) 13105 Peak Outflow (m3/s) - Stored Volume/ Runoff Volume (%) 851 1- Remaining 15% stored in soakwells and throughout the pipe drainage system
4.5.2 Adjacent Land Due to neighbouring land having varying development timeframes, if required, drainage connections will be provided so as to not impact on neighbouring land.
A cut off drain will be provided along the southern and northern boundaries of the subdivision abutting Lot 10 and the Mirvac development (Lot 750) with an outlet pipe sized to allow 9.9 L/s and 27.5 L/s respectively (based on allowable outflow of 4.5 L/s/ha) connected to the Key Close drainage system (Figure 8).
Lot 10 currently drains towards Sub drain F via an existing drain along the western side of the dual use path. The drain is situated outside the Study Area and will need to remain unobstructed so flows (if any) from Lot 10 can still reach Sub drain F.
4.6 Groundwater Management Groundwater Management for the Study Area has been prepared in line with design criteria presented in the East Baldivis DWMS (PB, 2007) and the Stormwater Management Manual for Western Australia (DoW, 2007):
Manage groundwater levels to protect infrastructure and assets.
Maintain groundwater regimes for the protection of groundwater-dependent ecosystems
Protect the value of groundwater resources.
Adopt nutrient load reduction design objectives for discharges to groundwater.
J5157y 19 January, 2015 16 JDA Key Close, Lot 535, 539 and 579 Baldivis Rd Baldivis: LWMS
To protect infrastructure from high seasonal groundwater levels, the groundwater design level has been set at AAMGL, calculated by measurement of the water table as described in Section 3.9.1 (Figure 6). With reference to these contours, subsoil drainage will be required as part of the development.
Subsoils will be provided where the development finished level is less than 2.0m above the groundwater design level or where the surface is underlain by clay as shown on Figure 8.
Water table mounding will occur between subsoil drain inverts, and will be allowed for in detailed design. Groundwater mounding should be calculated from the nearest subsoil invert level.
4.7 Water Quality Management
4.7.1 Nutrient Source Controls The effective implementation of the structural and non-structural controls as part of the urban development will enhance water quality from the Study Area as a result of the land use change.
Non-structural source controls to reduce nutrient export from the site need to focus on reducing the need for nutrient inputs into the landscape. The following strategies are proposed;
Local native plants make up a minimum 50% of the planted areas and streetscape treatments. Any non-local species will be selected for drought tolerance and low fertiliser requirements.
Street sweeping. The UWMP will outline the schedule and cleaning requirements for street sweeping which will be co-ordinated with the City of Rockingham.
Structural source controls are proposed to compliment the non-structural source controls and provide a complete treatment train for stormwater movement through the development. The following structural controls are considered appropriate for the development area;
The use of bio-retention systems to treat road runoff. A minimum treatment capacity of approximately 2% of the connected impervious area should be provided.
The minimum specifications for all bio-retention systems (swales and storages) are presented in Table 10.
TABLE 10: MINIMUM SPECIFICATIONS FOR BIO-RETENTION SYSTEMS Item Specification Amended soil media Minimum 500 mm thick. Hydraulic Conductivity (sat) 3 m/day. PRI 10 Light compaction only. Infiltration testing of material prior to installation and again once construction is complete. On-going testing as per the monitoring program. Plant selection Tolerant of periodic inundation and extended dry periods. Spreading root system. Preferential selection of endemic and local native species. Planting to provide 70-80% coverage at plant maturity. Planting density and distribution Planting density appropriate for species selection. Even spatial distribution of plant species. The bio-retention systems should be sized to function correctly with a K (saturated) of 3 m/day. Recent research conducted by the Facility for Advancing Water Biofiltration (FAWB, 2008) indicates that the desired
Ksat is in the range of 2.5 to 7 m/day, to fulfil the drainage requirements as well as retain sufficient moisture to support the vegetation. The FAWB (2008) research also specifies that for vegetated systems some clogging will occur in the first few years until the vegetation is established. Once the plants are established, the roots and associated biological activity maintain the conductivity of the soil media over time.
It should be recognised that data currently guiding the design of bio-retention systems is only recent and largely based on laboratory testing. Details of plant selection, maintenance and likely nutrient uptake in the
J5157y 19 January, 2015 17 JDA Key Close, Lot 535, 539 and 579 Baldivis Rd Baldivis: LWMS
Baldivis environment are not well known at this stage. The specifications provided in this document should be considered as the best available information at the time. Some flexibility in the specifications will be required as the knowledge base increases.
4.7.2 Land Use Change Nutrient Impacts JDA NiDSS model (Nutrient Input Decision Support System) has been used to help quantify the nutrient inputs for the pre-development and post-development scenarios. The NiDSS model analyses inputs for Total Phosphorus and Total Nitrogen only.
The NiDSS analysis shows that the changes in land use from rural (pasture) to a built urban environment, without WSUD measures, will result in an increase in the nutrient load on the catchment. This increase needs to be reduced using WSUD principles. With the implementation of the proposed structural and non- structural controls, a reduction of 51% for Phosphorus and 35.3% for Nitrogen is achieved compared to urban development without WSUD. The modelled post-development input rates of 14.8 kg/ha/yr for Phosphorus and 144 kg/ha/yr for Nitrogen are within the targets of the Peel Harvey WSUD Planning Policy which specifies input rates of 15 kg/ha/yr for Phosphorus and 150 kg/ha/yr for Nitrogen (EPA, 2006).
NiDSS model output is presented in Appendix F.
4.7.3 Irrigation Water Analysis of the water quality provided in Section 3.11.1 is not appropriate to determine suitability of groundwater for irrigation purposes. The current production bore on site will provide a more realistic analysis for irrigation water due to being screened at the bottom of the Superficial Aquifer. Water quality analysis will be carried out and data provided at detailed design stage including information on an appropriate treatment system if required to ensure groundwater is suitable for irrigation purposes.
J5157y 19 January, 2015 18 JDA Key Close, Lot 535, 539 and 579 Baldivis Rd Baldivis: LWMS
5. IMPLEMENTATION
5.1 Urban Water Management Plan (Subdivision) Processes defined in Better Urban Water Management (WAPC, 2008) require an Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) at subdivision stage. With an approved LWMS, a UWMP is required as a condition of subdivision and prior to any subdivision activities.
Further work that is identified for inclusion in the UWMP:
Refinement of stormwater modelling and associated drainage requirements, subsoil drainage and trigger values.
Design of treatment structures, vegetated swales and dry/ephemeral storages as outlined in the Stormwater Management Manual (DoW, 2007)
Refine the final configuration (side slopes etc) and exact location of the flood detention storage areas dependent on final earthworks, drainage and road design levels for the development.
Investigate the possibility of utilising road side rain gardens to allow groundwater recharge higher in the catchment.
5.2 Mosquito Management It is anticipated that as a condition of subdivision, a Mosquito Management Plan will need to be prepared and implemented at subdivision stage.
5.3 Construction Management
5.3.1 Dewatering Dewatering will be required for some elements of subdivision construction. Given the depth of construction, dewatering will only be in the Superficial Aquifer.
Prior to the commencement of any dewatering, the construction contractor will apply for and obtain from DoW a “Licence to Take Water”. All dewatering will be carried out in accordance with the conditions of this licence. Where possible, construction will be timed to minimise impacts on groundwater and any dewatering requirement.
5.3.2 Acid Sulphate Soils Management of Acid Sulphate Soils (ASS) will be addressed as a separate process to the urban water management document approvals process (LWMS/UWMP).
ASS will be investigated and managed in accordance with the applicable DEC Acid Sulphate Soil Guideline Series and requirements of dewatering licences as they arise.
5.4 Stormwater System Operation and Management The operation and maintenance of the drainage system will initially be the responsibility of the developer, ultimately reverting to the local authority, City of Rockingham.
The surface and subsoil drainage system will require regular maintenance to ensure its efficient operation. It is considered the following operating and maintenance practices will be required periodically:
Removal of debris to prevent blockages
J5157y 19 January, 2015 19 JDA Key Close, Lot 535, 539 and 579 Baldivis Rd Baldivis: LWMS
Street sweeping to reduce particulate build up on road surfaces and gutters
Maintenance of vegetation in bio-retention systems/ storages as outlined in the UWMP
Cleaning of sediment build up and litter layer on the bottom of storages as specified in the UWMP
Undertake education campaigns regarding source control practices to minimise pollution runoff into stormwater drainage system
Checks on subsoil drainage function
5.5 Monitoring Programme and Contingency Planning The monitoring program has been designed to allow a quantitative assessment of hydrological impacts of the proposed development.
The post-development monitoring program is designed to operate over a 3 year period. The program will be periodically reviewed to ensure suitability and practicality. The program may need to be modified as data is collected to increase or decrease the monitoring effort in a particular area or alter the scope of the programme itself.
The proposed post-development monitoring sites should be located to:
Monitor groundwater levels and quality at 3 (WMW1, WMW3 and WMW6) pre-development groundwater sites for comparison to pre-development data (Figure 6). Trigger values are provided in Table 11
Measure peak outflows and water quality at the main surface water discharge point (Figure 8).
A summary of the proposed monitoring program and reporting schedule is shown in Table 12, with the frequency of water quality target review and the contingency action plan detailed in Table 13.
All sampling is to be conducted according to Australian Standards and all water quality sample testing will be conducted by a NATA approved laboratory.
The preparation of annual monitoring reports is to be co-ordinated by the developer and submitted to the Department of Water/City of Rockingham for review.
TABLE 11: TRIGGER VALUES FOR POST-DEVELOPMENT MONITORING
Bore Parameter WMW1 WMW3 WMW6
Water Level (mAHD) 3.95 4.94 4.89
pH1 4.68 - 7.55 4.10 - 6.89 4.05 - 6.98
EC (ms/cm) 7.81 0.36 0.38
TN (mg/L) 3.72 8.28 9.60
TP (mg/L) 0.14 0.05 0.08
1- pH values to be between range provided
J5157y 19 January, 2015 20 JDA Key Close, Lot 535, 539 and 579 Baldivis Rd Baldivis: LWMS
TABLE 12: MONITORING SCHEDULE AND REPORTING
Monitoring Type Location Method Frequency, Timing & Responsibility Parameter Reporting
3 monitoring sites Electrical depth probe or Quarterly for 3 years by Developer Water Level Groundwater Level (WMW1, WMW3 and similar (m AHD) WMW6) (Jan, April, July, Sept)
Surface Water Outlet to Peel Main Annual reports to be provided by the continuous logger Downloaded 3 times per year Stage (Flow inferred) Quantity Drain developer for a period of 3 years. Reports will be submitted to Quarterly for 3 years by Developer 3 monitoring sites In-situ: pH, EC, temp DoW/CoR within 3 months of Groundwater Quality (WMW1, WMW3 and Pumped bore samples (typically Jan, April, July, Sept) Lab: TN, TKN, NOX, Ammonia, completion of the reporting period. WMW6) TP, FRP, selected metals Inlet to drainage basin In-situ: pH, EC, temp Collect grab samples or Surface Water Quality and Outlet to Peel Main 3 times per year while flowing Lab: TN, TKN, NO , Ammonia, rising stage sampler X Drain TP, FRP, selected metals, TSS
TABLE 13: CONTINGENCY PLANNING
Monitoring Criteria Assessment Criteria for Assessment Contingency Action Type Frequency
Groundwater levels do not exceed the groundwater Groundwater After monitoring 1. Review design and operation of subsoil and stormwater drainage system. design level by more than 300mm for a period of Level occasion 2. Perform maintenance as required. more than 3 months
Surface Water Peak flows discharging from Study Area to be Annual review of water 1. Review design and operation of detention storage areas Quantity similar to pre-development flow rates quantity targets 2. Perform maintenance as required
Groundwater Nutrient concentrations in shallow bores should not exceed 120% of the maximum recorded pre- Quality development level 1. Identify and remove any point sources. Annual review of water 2. Review operational and maintenance (e.g. fertilising, cleaning) practices. Assess performance of vegetated detention quality targets 3. Consider alterations to POS areas including landscape regimes and soil amendment. Surface Water storages in nutrient reduction. (Water quality 4. Consider modifications to the stormwater system. discharging from the Study Area should not exceed Quality 20% of the maximum recorded pre-development level.).
J5157y 19 January 2015 21 JDA Key Close, Lot 535, 539 and 579 Baldivis Rd Baldivis: LWMS
6. REFERENCES
360 Environmental. (2014), Watson Land Parcel, East Baldivis Environmental Assessment Report. Prepared for Perron Developments Pty Ltd. ANZECC – Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council and Agricultural and Resource Management council of Australia and New Zealand. (2000a), Australian and New Zealand Guidelines for Fresh and Marine Water Quality, National Water Quality Management Strategy, October 2000. Bureau of Meteorology. (2013), Climate Data Online. http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/data/ CLE. (2013), Local Structure Plan Package. Davidson. (1995), Hydrology and Groundwater Resources of the Perth Region Western Australia Davidson, W.A. and Yu, X. (2006), Perth Regional Aquifer Modelling System (PRAMS) Model Development: Hydrogeology and Groundwater Modelling. DoW Hydrogeological Record Series HG 20. Department of Water. (2007), Stormwater Management Manual for Western Australia, August 2007.
Department of Water. (2010), Acid Sulphate Soil Hazard Mapping.
Department of Water, (2014), North-East Baldivis Flood Modelling and Drainage Studies, April 2014.
Department of Environment and Conservation. (2012) Wetland Dataset.
Department of Indigenous Affairs (2013). Aboriginal Heritage Inquiry System. Accessed 5th March 2013. http://www.dia.wa.gov.au/AHIS/default.aspx . Environmental Protection Authority. (2008), Water Quality Improvement Plan for the Rivers and Estuary of the Peel-Harvey System – Phosphorus Management, Environmental Protection Authority, Perth, Western Australia. Environmental Protection Authority. (2006), Peel Harvey WSUD Planning Policy.
Facility for Advancing Water Bio-filtration. (2008), Guidelines for Soil Filter Media in Bioretention Systems. Gozzard. (1983), Rockingham Surface Geology. Environmental Geology Series. Geological Survey of Western Australia. Landgate. (2012), StreetMap. Luke, G.L, Burke, K.L. & O’Brien, T.M. (1988) Evaporation data for Western Australia – technical report 65. Perth: W.A. Department of Agriculture, division of resource management. McMullen Nolan, (2013), Lots 921 & 922 Baldivis Rd and Lot 3 Key Close Baldivis: Detailed Survey. DRG No. 97199-DE-002-A. 22/4/2013 Parsons Brinckerhoff. (2007), East Baldivis District Water Management Strategy. October 2007. Produced for Australand Holdings limited, Watson Property Group and Peet Limited. Perth Main Roads. (2010) Western Australia Main Roads Dataset. Water Authority of Western Australia. (1993). Serpentine Flood Study – Peel Inlet to Southern Highway. Water Corporation. (2000). Mundijong Drainage District Rural Drainage Criteria. Western Australian Planning Commission. (2013), Metropolitan Regional Scheme.
Western Australian Planning Commission. (2008), Better Urban Water Management, October 2008.
J5157y 19 January, 2015 22
FIGURES
387300 388200 389100 390000 390900 Study Area ±
Armadale 6424000
6423200 Rockingham
Study Area 1:500,000 6422400
Lot 579 6421600 Lot 559
Lot 535
Kwinana Fwy 6420800
1:15,000
Data Source: Perth Main Roads (2010), Landgate (2012) J5157 Perron Developments 1:30,000 Scale: Key Close LWMS 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 Metres Figure 1: Location Plan © COPYRIGHT JIM DAVIES & ASSOCIATES PTY. LTD. 2014 ±
Scale: 0 J5157 No. Job
© COPYRIGHT JIM DAVIES & ASSOCIATESPTY. LTD. 2014 9
9
8.5
10
1:6,000 9
9 8
100
8
10 8.5 7
10 8 10.5
9 9.5 8
10 6
6.5
7
7.5 8
8 200
6
8 6
5.5 4
300 4 6 6 4
6 6
6 6
3.5 6 6
6 4
400 6
3.5
Metres 6 6 6
6
4
6 6 4 6 4
4 3.5 4 4
4 4 Exisitng Landuse Exisitng 6
4 6 6
6
4 5 6
5.5 5
6 5
Veterinary Clinc Veterinary Development Urban Reserve Road Bush Degraded Pasture Cleared Topographic (0.5m) contours Study Area 8 6.5 6 5.5 8.5
7 5 5 4.5
5 5 5.5 6 Topography Figure 2: Existing Landuse and Topography and Landuse 2: Existing Figure Perron Developments Perron Existing Land Use Land Existing Key Close LWMS KeyClose 1:8,000 Study Area FIFTY RD Conservation Category Wetland (CCW) Resource Enhancement Wetland (REW) EIGHTY RD ± Multiple Use Dampland Bush Forever Sites
BALDIVIS RD WETLAND DEFINITIONS:
Conservation Wetland: Wetlands that support a high level of ecological attributes and functions.
Resource Enhancement Wetland: Wetlands which may have been partially modified but still support substantial STALBANS RD ecological attributes and functions.
Multiple Use Dampland: Wetlands with few ecological attributes and functions remaining.
FOLLY RD
YOUNG RD Peel Main Drain
EIGHTY RD BALDIVIS RD BRIDGEMAN WY
HUXTABLE TCE
TRUSTY PWY
FOLLY RD
SAFETY BAY RD
YOUNG RD
SAFETY BAY RD
HUXTABLE TCE Peel Main Drain
CLYDE AV DOGHILL RD DOG HILL RD
CLYDE AV DOGHILL RD
Geomorphic Wetlands Bush Forever Sites Scale 1:50,000 Data Source: DEC (2012) Job No. J5157 Perron Developments Scale:1:25,000 Key Close LWMS 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 Metres Figure 3: Wetland Mapping © COPYRIGHT JIM DAVIES & ASSOCIATES PTY. LTD. 2014 Surface Geology Study Area C2: CLAY - strong brown and dark grey clay, plastic in places, soft when wet, variable silt content in Surface Geology matrix, of alluvial origin. C2 Mc2: CLAYEY SILT - dark greyish brown, mottled in part, soft when wet, plastic in part, blocky, variable Mc2 ± clay content, of alluvial origin. S8 S8: SAND - very light grey at surface, yellow at depth, fine to medium grained, sub-rounded quartz, Water moderately well sorted, of eolian origin as relatively thin veneer over C2, M4 and Mc2. Acid Sulphate Soils High to Moderate Risk ACID SULPAHTE SOILS - RISK DEFINITIONS:
Moderate to Low Risk High to moderate risk of ASS occurring within 3m of natural soil surface: No Known Risk ASS in these environments can be widespread or sporadic. They may be very close to the surface or C2 buried by many metres of alluvium or windblown sand. Base sediments of estuaries, rivers, creeks and A@ JDA Monitoring Bores lakes are also considered areas of high risk of ASS occurrence. Moderate to low risk of ASS occurring within 3m of natural soil surface: Where environments have not generally been suitable for ASS formation or ASS are highly localised or WMW2 WMW1 sporadic, they have been classed as having a moderate to low risk of occurrence. Where ASS is A@ A@ present, it may be close to the surface or buried by many metres of alluvium or windblown sand. Most of these landforms are not expected to contain ASS.
No known risk of ASS occurring within 3m of natural soil surface (or deeper): ASS are not known or expected to occur in these environments
WMW3 WMW4 A@ A@
S8 A@ A@
A@ A@ Baldivis Rd Folly Rd Mc2 WMW5 WMW6 A@ A@ A@ A@
Surface Geology Acid Sulphate Soils 1:25,000 Data Source: Gozzard (1983), DoW (2010) Job No. J5157 Perron Developments Scale:1:8,000 Key Close LWMS 0 100 200 300 400 Metres Figure 4: Surface Geology and ASS © COPYRIGHT JIM DAVIES & ASSOCIATES PTY. LTD. 2014 1050mm culvert ± Sub H Branch Drain beneath fwy
Study Area
Folly Pool Sub F Branch Drain
450mm culvert beneath fwy
Serpentine River
FOLLY RD
4.37 mAHD flood level BALDIVIS RD Kwinanaat Folly Fwy Road
Peel Inlet
Peel Main Drain
1:400,000
Study Area Water Corporation Sub Drains Peel Main Drain Peel MD 100yr ARI Floodplain (DoW, 2014) Flow Direction
Job No. J5157 Perron Developments Scale:1:10,000 Key Close LWMS 0 100 200 300 400 Metres Figure 5: Existing Water Corporation Drainage and100yr ARI Flood Level © COPYRIGHT JIM DAVIES & ASSOCIATES PTY. LTD. 2014 Depth to Groundwater
BALDIVIS RD ± A@ A@ WMW2 WMW1 3.6 A@ 4.95 A@ 3.95 3.6 4
3.8
3.8 A@ A@ 4 4 4.2 3.8 3.6 BALDIVIS RD
4.4 4.6 A@ A@ WMW3 A@ 4.94 WMW4 A@ 4.85
1:10,000 4.8 DoW Bore Location T300 <& T290 (O) <&
BALDIVIS RD
AAMGL (mAHD) Study Area A@ MonitoringBores
WMW5 Depth to AAMGL WMW6 Ponding at Surface A@ 4.91 A@ 4.89 0m to 1m 1m to 2m 2m to 3m T350 Greater than 3m <& &< DoW Bores T340 (O) <& 4.95 AAMGL (mAHD) Scale 1:50,000
Job No. J5157 Perron Developments Scale:1:5,000 Key Close LWMS 0 100 200 300 400 Metres © COPYRIGHT JIM DAVIES & ASSOCIATES PTY. LTD. 2014 Figure 6: Groundwater Levels ±
Kwinana Fwy
Baldivis Rd
Folly Rd
Study Area Key Subdivision Information: LandUse Total Study Area: 27.8ha POS Lot Area: 15.2ha Road Saftey Bay Rd POS Area: 3.3ha Lots Road Area: 7.2ha School School Area: 2.1ha
Data Source: CLE (2013) Job No. J5157 Perron Developments Scale:1:6,000 Key Close LWMS 0 100 200 300 400 Metres Figure 7: Proposed Structure Plan © COPYRIGHT JIM DAVIES & ASSOCIATES PTY. LTD. 2014 Study Area Total inflow 27.5 L/s External Catchments from Mirvac land
6.1 ha
Total outflow 162.5 L/s
2.2ha
Study Area Stormwater Detention Storage External Catchments 1:9,000 100yr 10yr Total inflow 9.9 L/s 1yr Catchment Information: from Lot 10 Minimum Area for Subsoils Drainage Direction External catchments conveyed through the Study Area Exisiting 450mm Culvert as per Section 4.4.2
Drainage cross section provided in Figure 9. Job No. J5157 Perron Developments Scale:1:5,000 Key Close LWMS 0 100 200 300 400 Metres Figure 8: Catchment and Stormwater Management Plan © COPYRIGHT JIM DAVIES & ASSOCIATES PTY. LTD. 2014 Post-Development Storage 1yr 1hr 5yr ARI 10yr ARI 100yr ARI Study Area Stormwater Detention Storage Storage Data 100yr Impervious Catchment Area (ha) 9.09 12.06 12.06 12.06 10yr Storage Invert (mAHD) 4.50 4.50 4.50 4.50 1yr Outlet Invert (m AHD) 4.00 (s ubsoil) 4.80 4.80 4.80 Drainage Direction Tailwater (m AHD) - 3.46 3.53 4.37 Indicative Flush Kerbing Critical Storm Duration (hrs) 1 48 24 24 Storm Rainfall (m m) 15.7 103.2 89.5 136.3 3) 1430 12450 10790 16440 Runoff Volum e (m Water level rise (m) 0.30 0.725 0.80 0.90 Top Water Level (mAHD) 4.80 5.225 5.30 5.40 2 Storage Area (m ) 5185 6990 7225 20740 Stored Volume(m 3) 900 3580 4110 6175 Peak Outflow (m 3/s ) - 0.107 0.117 0.148 Stored Volume/ Runoff Volume (%) 63 29 38 38
Overland Flow from Study Area
100yr ARI TWL: 5.40 mAHD 10yr ARI TWL: 5.30 mAHD 5yr ARI TWL: 5.225 mAHD
1 Overflow to Peel Main Drain 8 1yr 1hr TWL: 4.80 mAHD
Basin invert: 4.50 mAHD
Amended Soil Profile: 0.5m deep AAMGL 4.00 mAHD
Subsoil invert: 4.0 mAHD
Job No. J5157 Perron Developments Key Close LWMS Figure 9: POS concept, North-east POS
© COPYRIGHT JIM DAVIES & ASSOCIATES PTY. LTD. 2014
APPENDIX A
Drainage Infrastructure Survey (MAPS, 2013) 221700 221850 222000 222150 222300 Rev. A In i tial Issue tial Description
5025050250 5025050250
B
A
L
D
I
V
I 8
S 8 .6 8
9 . 5 8 .9 8
8 7 . 9
. 9 .1 8 8 2 .9
8 .4 5 1 3 .0
8 7
8 9
. 8 8
0 .9 .
9 0 6
. 3 9
5
3
9
8
.9 9 . .3
2 1 BORE
1
BORE 9
8 1 8
. 0 . 1
5 . 9 8 6 8 8 8
6 0 0 .0 . 9 . .7 8 .
8 2 9 7 6 8 . 6
WA 9
. . 0 3 5 1 . 6 3
8 4 1 4 .0 7 8
. 2 0 9 9
4 . 9 1
0 1 .
1 1
9 6
.
8 8 3
8 .7 . 7 8
. 5 8 . 8
7 7 5 9 8 8 2 . 1
9 . 9 8 . .3 6 1
.
338 8 . 8 . 5 3 3
8 4 8 1
9 0 9 3 . 8 4 8
. 0 .7 6 . 5 .4
9 6 8 2 4
. 6 .9 7 8 3
8 8 8
9 . 8 6 1 .5
9 .
.1 3 8 5 8
1 .
9 3 9 9 0
. . . 5 8 R 6 8 3 0 4 8
8 6 .2 .1 O 9 9 . . 8 8 8 8
1 9 5 9 .4 8 8 . 7 A 2 3 9 . 9 4 . 5 .2 .3 4 .9 . 5 . 9 0 8 4 6 2 D 5 8 1 8 1 .2 8 . 9 3 2 .8 8 4 .3 9 2 . 6 8 rw aeChecked Date Drawn . 5 3 5 9 1 .0 9 45 3 .6 6 7 .2 0 .9
D 22/04/2013 ADG 8 7 8 . 2 6 1 .8 8 8 8 9 1 . 8 . . 9 8 7 . 0 5 .5 9 . 3 2 7 6 6 .1 7 8 2 7 9 9 7 7 8 .2 . . .2 8 . 6 4 6 9 0 .8 3 6 . 6 ) Demolished Be ( To House Old 7 9 3 6 7 . 9 4 8 .9 9 9 6 . . 7 . . 4 4 4 7 . 457 8 8 4 8 4 0 0 8 7 2
9 . 7 7 .
0 . .6 5 .8 8 8 5 7 2 3 . 5 8 8 4 8 8 . 1 . .1 8 6 3 8 1 .1 7 8 5 3 .2 . 10 . 7 1 0 7 8 7 5 T 8 . 7 7 T 9 BORE 3 . . 1 1 .0 7 7 4 .1 1 0 1 0 1 1 9 9 1 8 .3 2 9 1 . 0 . 0 0 9 .5 . . 6 1 2 .3 1 0 . .8 1 1 0 4 T . 3 T 0 6 1 1 5 9 7 7 0 . 2 1 4 .8 7 . .3 2 7 .7 4 5 4 8 1 1 T .3 7 7 7 6 5040050400 1 . . 6 6 . 5040050400 0 0 8 8 2 1 .1 .9 .8 6 .2 1 . .0 5 5 0 4 2 9 3 0 8 0 2 . .2 8 9 2 8 1 . 8 1 1 9 .4 0 .0 7 0 0 1 8 3 7 .4 6 .0 .3 489 1 0 9 9 8 9 7 . 1 6 0 .1 .7 .3 .9 8 .1 6 .2 5 2 1 2 7 5 6 8 CAY . 6 1 487 . 7 7 0 1 9 7 8 . 1 .5 9 0 . 5 2 6 7 . . 7 8 7 2 . 6 6 4 1 . 5 . 8 . 6
0 4 0 8 4 8 7 6 . . 1 7 7 6 0
9 3 .4 9
. 1 1 7 1 0 7 1 7 6 1 0 0 0 . 7 . 3 . . . 8 6 . 5 1 2 3 .0 7 3 7 6 6 6 8 3 3 6 9 9 2 . 6 7 .4 .1 . . 9 . 6 . 2
486 9 0 7 2 4 9 .5 8 3 7 6 . 9 4 4 .3 5 .0 5 . 3 8 0 6 7 4 1 9 7 . 6 .9 9 0 4 . 5 .4 6 4 . . 4 7 7 6 6 .0 8 9 7 1 8 .6 . 3 .0 3 2 3 1 5 5 3 6 .5 7 9 .6 6 8 485
pppe . p 4 .
sssa 9
bbby 7
s 8
b . aaan a 3 7 7 0
eeer . 7 . aaat 7 . . 0 ttth y yyy
t 1 nnnd 6 8 9 5 4 2 5 TTT
T .
rrrs 7 ttti hhhe . 8 . 6 5 7
c 5 3 . d ddd . 3 9 8 6 6 6 ssso h he
iiis 2 h h . ccco
ee e 1 4 0 4 . sssf 2 . 8 c 9 . ooon 6 4 7 7
ooon 9 0 e eee
r 3 ccco 8 fffy . 82 . For a true to scale reproduction of this plan, plot it to A1 with the Paging Scaling set to None. to set Scaling Paging the with A1 to it plot plan, this of reproduction scale to true a For . 6 4 1 T nnns 8 2 9 rrre
nnnt 8 . c ooor y yyy 3 . 9 1 9 6 ccco eeev ss s 4 ttta
rrrr 0 5
t . 7 6 ooon w 7 9 6 vvvi aaac
ttth . rrre . . 5 wwwi . 9 1 7 2 6 0 nnnt 6 hhhe
iiis 6 eeec ccct 481 7 3 8
sssi 1 .0 . .8 . iiis ttte 3 ttti
eeem 0 ccct 9
sssh iiio 3 2 1 5 ooon
eeen 1 iiin 8
t ttt .
mmms 8 . hhhi nnng 7 2 6 5 2 479 nnnt nn n a 7 . 9 0 .
iiin 5 5 gg g
ssse 3 .
aaas .
nnng . . 5 p ttts 1 7 1 0 5 eeel t 5 pppa s sss 6 6 0 5 s sss g ggg 2 9 ttth
478 7
lllv . . . o
o 5 aaan 7 3
t 5 8
vvve . hhhe
ooof 6 1 ooof . . ttto 1 7 8 0 nnne 8 1 6 6 5 eees ee e . 8 7 6
f fff . 06 010150 120 90 60 30 0 477 f fff oo o 8 7 9 . 6 7 . . 8 eeel 7 . . 4 0 ss s
M 7 t BORE 7 2 8 5 t . 7 7 . u 9 4 0 2 3
MMMc 1 lll. ttth . o 6 ttth 7 7 2 .
uuut 4 . .
. ... 3 6 476 0 0 7 ooof . hhhe . hhhi
1 7 5 7 BORE
cccM 6 ttti 8 4 A
Water Trough Water
ff f .
ee e 7 iiis 7 7
MMMu 7 AAAl
iiil 5 s sss 6 t llli . 8 . d 0
475 8 iiis 2 1 p ttth . uuul llll ssse ddda 1 . 4 6 6 6 5 5
l lll 6 3 pppl hhhi 7 4 .
ee e . . llll c 3 . . 4 aaat . 8 474 3 8 4 3 0 llle llla 7 . 1 iiis ccco .
t 7
eeen 3 aaan . 6 3
s sss 4 8 ttte 0 3 2 ooon ttth 6 5 p nn n n nnn ee e 6 2 6
hhhi 7 nnns 7 pppl . 5 N s a .4 6 . . 9 . 5 iiis sssu 473 4 6 llla
NNNo 2 ssst aaar 7 4 s sss 4 .
aaan 7 . 5 . uuul 0 . 9 3 5 ttta 4 1 472 d rrre 7 oool 1 3 . nnns 1 6
lllt 4 aaat ddda 7 . 6 0 ee e 6 1 6 5 llla ttta . 7
ss s . . 7 aaan
ttte 6 . aaat . 6 . c 8 3 8 aaan 5 9 6 6 4 c 4
eeed . 8 6 cccu 3 5
nn n 8 ttta 4 7 6 . 2 . cccu nnnt K . 470 6 8 . 6 uuur 5 d ddd aa a 5 6
G 4 uuur ttts . 0 5 . 0
GGGr 8 rrrr 7 8 3 0 s w 6 . rrrr ss s 8 5 6
rrre . sssh wwwi 7 . 5 rrro 4 a rrre . 1 6
eeen .
hhho 7
7 0 E ooou aaan 7 8 8 eeen iiit . .
ttth 0 4 nnnt ooou 0 6 7 7 nnnd uuup
nnnc 6 469 7 . hhhi 8 0 . ttt uuul . 7 2 ppp. ddd . 6 5 cccy 6 7 7 iiin 5 1
llld 6 . 5 . 4 nnn ... yyy . 3 Y 2 7 6 5 1 ddd 3 0 .3 6 3 . . 5 .2 3 .6 2 .3 6 6 6 3 7 .3 4 1 7 . 7 . . 3 5 8 3 . 7 8 8 6 4 9 6 7 . 5 4 6 .2 .4 5 7 1 . .4 5 7 6 7 . 4 6 5 5 . 5 4 8 . .2 3 . 9 8 5 . .6 9 C 1 7 0 6 7 9 0 0 .4 3 8
Precal/Cad:- Date:- Survey Surveyor:- 7 .2 6 . 7 7 3 4 ALL DISTANCESALL INARE METRES 2 . 0 .4 . . 6 6 6 3 6 7 2 6 6 2 4 . 8 L . 9 .8 8 . 1 .5 466 2 7 6 .1 5 4 0
5 6 538 0 5 . . 3
. 6 2 6 .6 9 5 . 1 6 4 4 4 2 .2 O . 7 .9 4 9 . SCALE @ A1 @ SCALE 6 6 3 1 9 6 4 6 7 5 7 6 . . . . 6 8 1 4 5 4 6 3 6 . 6 2 6 7 0 . 4 .2 . S 6 . . 6 1 7 .6 8 .9 . 3 2 6 3 .1 3 6 4 2 5 5 3 7 9 7 . 2 4 4 3
5 6 6 6 6 .7 . . 6 E . . 1 9
6 .6 9 9 . BORE 5 1 4 . 5 8 7 6 5 5 . . 1 0 6 3 1 6 6 . .1 1 2 . 8 .9 6 5 4 1 4 2 *** BE DEMOLISHED TO BUILDINGS ALL *** 0 7 4 1 6 5 .5 6 .7 .0 1:1500 6 . 6 . .2 5 4 4 4 3 . 1 539 7 5 5 4 DP202758 1 W 0 8 0 6 6 6 . . .0 5 . .6 . 8 5 0 5 .7 1 9/04/2013 6 6 1 6 . 4
. 9 6 0 .6 6 1 5 4 . B 5055050550 2 6 6 4 6 . 1 4 5055050550
7 . . . 6 7 2 7 . 5 8 7 . 5 4 540 6 3 1 6 7 1 6 2 . 3 542 4 . 6 6 . 6 8 1 . 9 3 . . 6 6 4 . 6 1 7 4 0 . 8 0 . .2 4 4 . 8 .3 4 9 0 3 0 2 6 8 6 3 . 1 8 6 6 7 . 0 543 . .8 4 5 5 3 6 6 6 6 . . .8 6 8 5 . 4 2 4 3 5 . 3 5 5 3 7 .3 . 0 6 4 . . 9 750 6 550 6 6 3 3 6 . .5 4 2 . . 2 6 6 2 8 5 9 6 3 0 544 1 3 . 921 House . 5 . 6 6 6 6 6 . 2 9 10 6 6 6 . 9 8 5 7 5 4 . . . . 4 .1 7 . . . 3 1 2 2 2 1 6 6 5 0 6 . 3 3 0 2 3 8 6 . 1 5 7 2 8 .7 .6
548 6 . 5 . . 5 6 1 Shed 4 0 7 4 6 551 6 8 5 6 3 .6 .3 5 4 .9 3 3 97199B - 97199de-002a - 97199B File - Drawing File - FILES
T . . 6 6 4 6 4 3 4 . 6 7 .4 . 547 . . 8 0 549 4 8 3 4 5 Tank Water . 2 0 7 545 9 5 5 6 6 5 . 3 .0 6 T 6 . 4 4 3 . 5 .3 .5 6 6 7 2 .2 3 .3 3 6 6 6 6 546 9 .4 .0 9 1 .6 8 .5 3 5 .1 .2 6 8 922 9 7 0 9 .4 6 6 3 .9 3 5 .6 3 . 9 9 .4 .3 5 6 6 0 6 4 9 . .0 . 5 1 Shed 0 6 2 5 .3 3 9 6 6 . 6 9 .3 7 .8 6 . . 6 . 6 4 9 3 3 3 5 .1 2 3 4 6 4 .8 .3 . . . 7 5 4 . 2 5 6 3 6 4 4 3 8 552 5 . 3 5 1 4 2 6 .7 4 9 . .3 Sheds Shed . 9 .8 8 3 4 8 0 2 .3 3 6 6 4 8 .4 6 .3 9 3 6 .3 6 4 .6 .3 9 5 . 3 5 9 6 .3 3 3 .4 3 6 .2 6 1 . 8 3 3 . 6 . BORE 6 4
6 . 1 6 6 6 6 6 0 .4 .3 6 5 . 0 3 . . . . 4 4 3 . 0 3 2 2 3 3 . 4 3 1 4 . 9 2 5 6 0 6 3 5 7 . 3 .4 4 6 5 .3 . 8 1 3 . 6 3 8 . 6 6 7 1 . 4 .4 2 6 6 .1 4 5 4 0 0 . . 7 0 3 2 3 4 3 3 0 6 3 .2 . .
T 3 . 1 3 3 6 3 . .3 6 3 0
6 6 1 5 4 9 3 . 3
. . 6 .3 6 .4 5 . 1 0 5 6 . 3 8 5 0 8 .9 6 6 2 5 3 . 0 4 8 .0 5 6 6 .2 7 5 4 .3 3 0 . . 6 .1 7 6 .7 4 . 3 6 5 3
9 0 . 6 8 . 7 .9 5 . .5 3 8 5 0 0 6 2 5 .
. 583 6 3 0 6 5 2 5 3 5 0 9 . .3 6 2 4 4 3 9 3 3 3.34m IL . 6 .4 . .5 3 . .5 3 1 9 1 8 .5 4 8 . 9 5 6 1 3 5 6 3 9 .3 .5 6 6 . 3 3 . 6 6 0 3 1 . . 2 6 .1 .2 1 4 3 4 5 3 3 5 6 . 9 1 5 . .5 3 9 3 7 . .9 .0 6 1 .7 2 8 .6 .6 6 9 1 . 2 1 7 3 3 3 1 0 6 5 6 4 .4 2 . . 1
9 .0 . 5 5 .2 .9 8 5 5 9 6 8 . .9 2 5 3 8 5 3 6 8 2 6 6 . 3 .6 8 .0 . 9 . 3 3 0 2 1 6 5 4 5 . . 1 . 0 6 6 BORE 0 .3 4 2 2 3 5 2 . 3 . 1 .7 6 6 6 6 4 9 3 5 . . . 5 . 3 3 0 5 5 0 1 . 5 3 3 . 3 5 . . 5 6 7 7 4 .6 3 . 3 . 6 . 9 9 .8 5 5 6 7 0 . 6 .6 6 0 9 4 7 . 5 7 2 3.44m IL 1 8 8 .9 . . 2 8 4 3 6 5 9 0 3 . 5 5 5 5 4 3 .6 3 7 .9 .9 6 .0 4 3 .6 1 .6 2 6 3 4 6 . 7 .0 .6 2 3 2 .0 1 9 3 8 3 3 . 3 6 0 5 5 .7 . .5 3 3 . .4 .0 3 3 6 6 . 6 0 5 2 4 3 . 6 6 1 .9 . 6 3 7 8 3 3 .
581 0 5 6 6 0 3 .6 7 .9 5 . .5 4 1 3 0 5 .9 0 3 2 .6 .9 6 6 9 4 .7 3 9 4 5 .0 5 .4 6 . 3 . 6 6 1 . 9 3 6 .6 9 5 . .0 4 4 .5 3 5 3 .9 0 5 580 6 3 5
. 6 7 0 5 . 5 . .1 3 8
5 9 .0 9 .9 0 8 . 3 6 50700 5070050700 .8 1 0 8 7 6 0 3 6 . 3 3 50700 6 3 2 . 3.51m IL 7 .0 . . . 5 .6 6 3 2 0 7 6 9 3 3 6 . 4 1 3 9 .6 7 .6 3 5 8
579 5 5 . 9 .6 3 3 .8 8 6 3 . .4 5 0 3 . 7 4 3 1 .9 5 .8 6 4 .8 5 7 .3 5 5 3 6 1
. 3.39m IL 5 .9 6 5 5 3 .0 4 5 3 3.42m IL .9 7 6 . 6 6 .8 6 4 9 3 .7 5 2 6 6 0 . . .9 .7 .2 .7 3 3 . .0 .0 .0 8 0 0 8 0 5 5 0 . 7 0 0 3 1 7 6 3 6 3 3 .0 4 .6 9 . 5 9 BORE 6 5 4 . 3 4 .7 9 . 3 3 2 3 3 7 .7 .7 135 5 .9 7 3 0 5 . 5 8 3 .
578 8 . 6 5 2 . 7 5 3 3 .7 6 3 3 . . 9 5 3.35m IL 6 7 3 5 . 3 .7 7 5 5 .7 2 .9 3 1 3 6 . 5 9 4 7 . 3 .7 5 5 . 6 5 8 . 3 7 .6 3 5 .7 .8 5 5 0 .0 .8 3 4 0 . 8 . 4 . . 0 6 6 .4 8 7 7 3 3 4 0 9 9 5 8 9 .7 . 9 2 5 . 3 0 3 8 8 5 5 .7 .8 0 9 .7 . 9 3 7 0 3.37m IL 3 BORE 6 5 . 3 3 . 5 2 7 . . .8 5 577 7 . 0 8 7 .6 6 7 5 4 3 7 3 1 9 6 7 . . 3 . 576 7 0 6 3 4
6 5 6 .7 9 . .
5 . 6 8 1 . 5 5 5 3 1 4 7 5 7 . 5 .9 5 5 . 0 3 3 3 . 8 7 . 2 .9 . 7 . .8 .8 6 7 8 1 7 2 8 1 4 1 2 8 4 2 3
5 3.40m IL . 4 .3 4 3 3 .8 8 5 5 . 3 .2 .9 . 3 1 575 6 8 4 .8 .7 5 4 1 0 4 3 .8 0 7 .7 .7 3 4 3 4 4 3 9 .7 .2 5 5 .2 .8 7 5 3.78m IL 5 5 . .7 6 7 . . 8 3.49m IL 7 8 7 5 3 3 3 3 0 5 5 .8 .8 3 5 5 .7 5 3 3 .8 6 3 . . .7 6 5 .5 .4 4 . 3 2 . 9 8 .8 9 4 . 8 . 7 4 1 8 7 2 4 .5 0 3 3 7 3 6 5 . 2 7 3 . 9 . 5 . 5 8 . 3 8 3 8 574 8 . 0 8 1 3 5 .7 0 5 0 5 .8 .9 3
. 6 3.75m IL 7 6 .7 5 6 3 .8 obtain this information. Re-establishment of the cadastral boundaries is recommended recommended is boundaries cadastral the of Re-establishment information. this obtain 5 . 5 4.03m IL 0 7 . 8 4 1 7 3 2 5 . The boundaries shown on this plan were not re-established as part of this survey, this of part as re-established not were plan this on shown boundaries The
encumbrances or interests are not depicted and a title search is recommended to to recommended is search title a and depicted not are interests or encumbrances 4 8 .7 4 4 5 . .0 0 4 4 . 4 4.19m IL 0 4 5 5 5 5 5 5 . 3 3 .0 . .7 .8 . 4 2 4 .9 1 th 6 6 . 4 2 . 9 0 2 7 7 4 . 1 3 4 0 5.59m IL .8 4 1 .9 5 5 2 6 6 4 e .6 5 .7 . 7 . 3 5 2 refore this plan does not guarantee their accuracy. Existing easements, easements, Existing accuracy. their guarantee not does plan this refore 7 8 0 5 5 .2 5 .7 . 6 .7 6 3 5 6 3 2 5 .0 .7 5 . 4 4 9 4.05m IL .7 5 0 . . 6 5 5 4 1 4 5 5 0 . 2 5 4 . 5 3 3.54m IL .9 .1 .8 7 5 .7 5 9 5 0 2 6 5 . 3 . 5 5
IL 4.84m IL . for any proposed works on or near existing boundaries. existing near or on works proposed any for 7 6 7 4 9 .7 3 . 5 . 4 5 .9 5 9 1 5 8 . 6 .9 6 0 5 . 8 3 7 . 6 .7 7 9 0 . 7 7 5 4 0 6 4 5 5 .3 5 1 . . 5 9 5.88m IL . 5 0 8 .7 . .7 9 . 4 4 6 3 7 3 5 6 9 5 .2 9 . 4 4 6 .9 5 8 . 4 6 6 5 1 9 . . . 5.67m IL . IL 5.39m IL 4 2 5 9 5 5 3 6 7 6 . 5 134 .7 5 3 8 . 8 5 5 .8 . 4 4 2 .9 5 4 5 5 7 5 . 5 4 . . 5 5 .6 4 3 .9 9 8 .6 . 7 5 5.24m IL 7 0 6 7 WP 6 5 4 7 131 . . 3 8 9 5 .9 5 T 8 5 0 . 5 . 5 .7 3.60m IL 4 0 5 . 8 5.01m IL 8 BORE . 6 6 . 3 5 5 9 5 0 5 7 4 5 8 . 9 . 5 4.46m IL . 6 .8 . .9 5 5.12m IL 6 1 . 5 7 9 0 . 7 8 2 1 0 9 5 5 9 5 5085050850 5 5 7 . 5 IL3.28m PIPE Ø450 .2 5085050850 6 6 . . 8 . 5 .1 0 5 5 IL3.78m PIPE Ø450 .6 8 9 9 8 . 6 IL3.69m PIPE Ø450 .1 .4 MB 3 5 6 6 8 5 .1
IL 4.49m IL 6
E 0 E 4 I.L. .6 2 .7 5 6 T 1 T 6 3 . 6 5 4.34m IL .0 . 5 8
5 0 0 . 4 4 4.37m IL
. 2 7 5 4 . 8 5 0 . 2 .3 4 4 3 4 6 2 .3 4 . 7 BORE 3 5 . 6 .3 4 4 5 1 6 6 9 .3 .4 4 1 .0 9 3 .5 7 8 5 4 .2 . 8 5 I.L. 1 9 .8 5 IL4.99m PIPE Ø450 6 5 4 I.L. . 6 .4 5 5 5 9 .4 0 . 6 .2 0 .9 . 5 . 1 2 9 5 7 4 7 .5 7 5 4 7 . 6 7 . 0 I.L. 9 I.L. . Pipe Length 51.7m Length Pipe 6 4 8 4 2 5
1 I.L. 5 . .9 .8 4 3.78 E 0 Bitume 3 3 3 4 I.L. 5 n I.L. Cy . E cle Path 8 .6 . 3 4 3 3
8 I.L.
4 3 I.L. 9 6 .6 . 3 .5 I.L. 6 . 4 3 3
7 4 4 I.L. 1 1 .5 4 . 3 .6 3 3 3 8 5 .5 1 . .7 . 3
I.L. 7 5 7 2 8 .7
8 8 3 1 8 . . 8 6
5 1 I.L. 5 1 7 . 6 2 6 0 .
IL 4.76 IL 8
6 5.76 IL 10 6 6 6 6 6 1 8 7 7 . .8 .9 .9 .7 1 1 9 . .4 . 9 6 2 2 4 1 0 .0 1 8 1 1 1 2 1 . . 10 0 3 2 8 ILU/S 3.25 PIPE Ø450 2 4 13.5m Length Pipe IL 3.71 PIPEFREEWAY TO Ø450 1 12 . 12 3 7 PITCHING STONE
2 3 IL3.39m PIPE Ø300 IL3.71m PIPE INGULLY Ø300 IL4.95m PIPEFREEWAY TO Ø450 .8 4 IL3.61m PIPE Ø375
4 IL4.00m PIPE Ø450 IL 3.46 PIPE Ø300 IL 3.81 PIPE INGULLY Ø300 (Rock Pitched) (Rock IL3.26m PIPE Ø450 Pipe Length 7.8m Length Pipe Lev Headoffice: W.A. 6964,Australia Success 3526, POBox W.A. Jandakot, 6164 Offices Hedland,Port in: MargaretRiver, Kununurra Broome, 165 el 1, 2 Sabre Crescent 1,elSabre 2 6 STONE PITCHING STONE Pipe Length 97.0m Length Pipe IL3.20m PIPE Ø300 2x
4 4 3 .9 (FROM FREEWAY) (FROM IL4.73m PIPE Ø150PVC 9 4 4 . .1 3
ABN 90 009 363 311 363 009 90 ABN www.mcmullennolan.com.au [email protected] 1500 6436 (08) Fax: 1599 6436 (08) Tel: 3 3 . 2 3 . 4 I.L. 5 7 9 3 4 .4 . 4 4 .2 2 2 1 3 4 3 3 .4 3 .8 3 . .4 3 .4 7 4 .7 5 2 5 5100051000 .6 6 3 5100051000
2 3
IL4.84m POLYPIPE Ø150 . I.L. I.L. 4 9 3 3 2 .1 3 .3 5 0 3 .2 8 . 4 .2 6 0 . 3 0 5 I.L. I.L. 1 3 .0 5 9 . 4 1 .2 3 3 3 2 4 .5 . .3 1 6.3m Length Pipe 3 3 4 8 3 3 2 .0 .1 .1 .0 2 8 2 6 0 .9 IL 3.00 PIPE CONCRETE Ø450 I.L. 7
5 4 IL3.14m PIPE Ø300 2x 5 . . . 1 4 3 3 1 2 8 .4 .1 4 1 9 I.L. I.L.
4
. 4 1 4 5
.8
9 6 1517 Pipe Length 8.1m Length Pipe LOTS 921 AND 922 BALDIVIS ROAD AND LOT3 KEY CLOSE CLIENT:
751 IL4.55m PIPEPOLY Ø150 4 4
.9
8 6 5 .6 6 1 .0
5 I.L. 1 4 5 . . 1.78 9 6 9 0 Perron Group Pty Group Ltd Perron I.L. 1. 7 7
6 .0 4 L BORE WP MB 5115051150 WA 5115051150 E E T T STEEL WIRE ANCHOR WIRE STEEL POWER DOME POWER BORE LEVEL SURFACE NATURAL POWER POLE POWER TELSTRA MARKER TELSTRA PIT TELSTRA SINGLE POLE SIGN POLE SINGLE VALVE RETICULATION PIT ELECTRICAL SURVEY PEG SURVEY POLE LIGHT METER BOX BANK BANK RETAINING WALL RETAINING FENCE BANK BOTTOM BANK TREE 0.3-1.0m DIA 0.3-1.0m TREE TREE 0-0.3m DIA 0-0.3m TREE G TREE 1.0-1.5m DIA 1.0-1.5m TREE E TOP DETAIL SURVEY N D BA L DIVIS Project Mngr. CHARLES YOUNGE CHARLES Mngr. Project 923 97199 E Nu Job m ber 53 - 934 55 D Type au PCG94 / AHD Datum 5130051300 5130051300 33 - 002 Number Plan Revision A- 221700 221850 222000 222150 222300
APPENDIX B
JDA Monitoring Bore Logs
JDA Consultant Hydrologists Suite 1, 27 York Street Subiaco WA 6008 Tel: 9388 2436 LITHOLOGICAL LOG Fax: 9381 9279
Client: Perron Development Job No: J5157 Project: : Baldivis LWMS Hole commenced: 18/04/2012 Bore location: 389460E 6423087N Hole completed: 18/04/2012 Datum: GDA (1994) Zone 50 Logged by: RD Bore Name: WMW1 Total Depth: 5.0m Drill type: Hollow Auger Mechanical R.L. TOC: 5.22mAHD Hole diameter: 100mm Natural Surface: 4.62mAHD LITHOLOGICAL LOG Depth BORE GRAPHICAL (m) CONSTRUCTION LOG LITHOLOGY COLOUR GRAIN SIZE SORTING GRAIN SHAPE OTHER
sandy loam black/ fine to medium brown poor sub-rounded 0.5m
loam
1.0m
sandy clay loam brown moderately sub-rounded to some brown clay rounded veins, placticity, moist 1.5m
sandy clay rounded green clay veins, moist
2.0m fine
clay grey/ brown 2.5m moist well
3.0m
grey
3.5m sandy clay rounded
4.0m
4.5m
5.0m EOH
5.5m
6.0m
Sand Grain Size Sorting Grain f - fine p - poorly a - angular Loamy sand m - medium m - moderately suba - subangular c course w - well subr - subrounded Sandy Loam v.c - very course r - rounded g - gravel wr - well rounded Loam Remarks: Sandy Clay Loam Water level measured 25/09/2012 Clay Loam
Sandy Clay
Clay
JDA Consultant Hydrologists Suite 1, 27 York Street Subiaco WA 6008 Tel: 9388 2436 LITHOLOGICAL LOG Fax: 9381 9279
Client: Perron Development Job No: J5157 Project: : Baldivis LWMS Hole commenced: 18/04/2012 Bore location: 388928E 6423072N Hole completed: 18/04/2012 Datum: GDA (1994) Zone 50 Logged by: RD Bore Name: WMW2 Total Depth: 6.5m Drill type: Hollow Auger Mechanical R.L. TOC: 8.97mAHD Hole diameter: 100mm Natural Surface: 8.37mAHD LITHOLOGICAL LOG BORE GRAPHICAL Depth (m) CONSTRUCTION LOG LITHOLOGY COLOUR GRAIN SIZE SORTING GRAIN SHAPE OTHER
black very coarse poor rounded organic matter
0.5m
grey coarse sub-rounded moderately
1.0m
light grey sub-rounded to rounded moist
1.5m
white moderately- sub-rounded well 2.0m
grey medium to organic matter coarse 2.5m moist light brown sand
3.0m
light yellow/ brown poor- sub-rounded to moderately rounded moist 3.5m
yellow
4.0m
4.5m
5.0m
5.5m
6.0m light yellow brown
6.5m EOH
Sand Grain Size Sorting Grain f - fine p - poorly a - angular Loamy sand m - medium m - moderately suba - subangular c course w - well subr - subrounded Sandy Loam v.c - very course r - rounded g - gravel wr - well rounded Loam Remarks: Sandy Clay Loam Water level measured 25/09/2012 Clay Loam
Sandy Clay
Clay
JDA Consultant Hydrologists Suite 1, 27 York Street Subiaco WA 6008 Tel: 9388 2436 LITHOLOGICAL LOG Fax: 9381 9279
Client: Perron Development Job No: J5157 Project: : Baldivis LWMS Hole commenced: 18/04/2012 Bore location: 389036E 6422860N Hole completed: 18/04/2012 Datum: GDA (1994) Zone 50 Logged by: RD Bore Name: WMW3 Total Depth: 6.5m Drill type: Hollow Auger Mechanical R.L. TOC: 8.70mAHD Hole diameter: 100mm Natural Surface: 8.11mAHD LITHOLOGICAL LOG Depth BORE GRAPHICAL (m) CONSTRUCTION LOG LITHOLOGY COLOUR GRAIN SIZE SORTING GRAIN SHAPE OTHER
brown moderately
0.5m rounded organic matter
light brown poorly
1.0m medium light brown/ poorly to yellow moderately
1.5m
yellow
2.0m
brown/ sub-rounded yellow organic matter
2.5m
sand
3.0m moderately yellow
3.5m
fine to medium
4.0m moist
4.5m
pale yellow
5.0m
light brown
5.5m
6.0m brown
6.5m EOH
Grain Sand Grain Size Sorting Shape f - fine p - poorly a - angular Loamy sand m - medium m - moderately suba - subangular c course w - well subr - subrounded Sandy Loam v.c - very course r - rounded g - gravel wr - well rounded Loam Remarks: Sandy Clay Loam Water level measured 25/09/2012 Clay Loam
Sandy Clay
Clay
JDA Consultant Hydrologists Suite 1, 27 York Street Subiaco WA 6008 Tel: 9388 2436 LITHOLOGICAL LOG Fax: 9381 9279
Client: Perron Development Job No: J5157 Project: : Baldivis LWMS Hole commenced: 18/04/2012 Bore location: 389332E 6422840N Hole completed: 18/04/2012 Datum: GDA (1994) Zone 50 Logged by: RD Bore Name: WMW4 Total Depth: 5.0m Drill type: Hollow Auger Mechanical R.L. TOC: 5.61mAHD Hole diameter: 100mm Natural Surface: 5.01mAHD LITHOLOGICAL LOG Depth BORE GRAPHICAL (m) CONSTRUCTION LOG LITHOLOGY COLOUR GRAIN SIZE SORTING GRAIN SHAPE OTHER
grey coarse organic matter 0.5m moderately
light brown medium
1.0m
grey
moist 1.5m
sand dark grey 2.0m
sub-rounded
2.5m
moderately to well 3.0m
3.5m
moist 4.0m black fine to medium sample blemished with white sand
4.5m
5.0m EOH
5.5m
6.0m
Sand Grain Size Sorting Grain f - fine p - poorly a - angular Loamy sand m - medium m - moderately suba - subangular c course w - well subr - subrounded Sandy Loam v.c - very course r - rounded g - gravel wr - well rounded Loam Remarks: Sandy Clay Loam Water level measured 25/09/2012 Clay Loam
Sandy Clay
Clay
JDA Consultant Hydrologists Suite 1, 27 York Street Subiaco WA 6008 Tel: 9388 2436 LITHOLOGICAL LOG Fax: 9381 9279
Client: Perron Development Job No: J5157 Project: : Baldivis LWMS Hole commenced: 18/04/2012 Bore location: 389353E 6422542N Hole completed: 18/04/2012 Datum: GDA (1994) Zone 50 Logged by: RD Bore Name: WMW5 Total Depth: 5.0m Drill type: Hollow Auger Mechanical R.L. TOC: 6.41mAHD Hole diameter: 100mm Natural Surface: 5.81mAHD LITHOLOGICAL LOG Depth BORE GRAPHICAL (m) CONSTRUCTION LOG LITHOLOGY COLOUR GRAIN SIZE SORTING GRAIN SHAPE OTHER
black coarse
well rounded organic matter 0.5m
grey
1.0m medium
light grey moderately
1.5m
white sub-rounded sand
2.0m
light brown
2.5m
brown poorly to moderately
3.0m
light grey thin, cemented coffee rock layer at 3.8m 3.5m
gold brown moderately
4.0m
4.5m
5.0m EOH
5.5m
6.0m
Sand Grain Size Sorting Grain f - fine p - poorly a - angular Loamy sand m - medium m - moderately suba - subangular c course w - well subr - subrounded Sandy Loam v.c - very course r - rounded g - gravel wr - well rounded Loam Remarks: Sandy Clay Loam Water level measured 25/09/2012 Clay Loam
Sandy Clay
Clay
JDA Consultant Hydrologists Suite 1, 27 York Street Subiaco WA 6008 Tel: 9388 2436 LITHOLOGICAL LOG Fax: 9381 9279
Client: Perron Development Job No: J5157 Project: : Baldivis LWMS Hole commenced: 18/04/2012 Bore location: 389086E 6422545N Hole completed: 18/04/2012 Datum: GDA (1994) Zone 50 Logged by: RD Bore Name: WMW6 Total Depth: 6.0m Drill type: Hollow Auger Mechanical R.L. TOC: 7.69mAHD Hole diameter: 100m Natural Surface: 7.09mAHD LITHOLOGICAL LOG Depth BORE GRAPHICAL (m) CONSTRUCTION LOG LITHOLOGY COLOUR GRAIN SIZE SORTING GRAIN SHAPE OTHER
black organic matter poor 0.5m medium sub-rounded light grey
1.0m
light brown/ yellow
1.5m moderately yellow sub-rounded to rounded
2.0m
light brown/ sub-rounded organic matter yellow fine to 2.5m medium
sand yellow sub-rounded to 3.0m rounded
3.5m moist
4.0m
4.5m
white/ moderately to yellow tinge well 5.0m
5.5m
6.0m EOH
Sand Grain Size Sorting Grain f - fine p - poorly a - angular Loamy sand m - medium m - moderately suba - subangular c course w - well subr - subrounded Sandy Loam v.c - very course r - rounded g - gravel wr - well rounded Loam Remarks: Sandy Clay Loam Water level measured 25/09/2012 Clay Loam
Sandy Clay
Clay
APPENDIX C
Water Level Monitoring Results (JDA, 2013) 5
4.5
WMW1 (mAHD) 4 WMW2 Level WMW3 WMW4 Water WMW5 WMW6 3.5
3 12 12 13 13 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 13 13 13 12 12 12 12 12 12 13 13 13 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ Jul Jul Jul Jan Jan Jun Jun Oct Oct Apr Apr Sep Sep Feb Feb Dec Dec Dec Aug Aug Nov Nov Mar Mar May Date
Job No. J5157 Perron Developments Key Close LWMS Figure 9: Water Levels
© COPYRIGHT JIM DAVIES & ASSOCIATES PTY. LTD. 2013
APPENDIX D
JDA Bore Water Quality Monitoring Results 9 ANZECC (2000) Trigger Value 1.2mg/L 8 Mean Values Max 7 Q3 (upper quartile, 0.75) 6 Median Q1 (lower quartile, 0.25) 5 Min mg/L 4 TN 3 2 1 0 WMW1 WMW2 WMW3 WMW4 WMW5 WMW6
9 8 7 6 5 mg/L
4
TN 3 2 1 0 May‐12 Jul‐12 Aug‐12 Oct‐12 Dec‐12 Jan‐13 Mar‐13
WMW1 WMW2 WMW3 WMW4 WMW5 WMW6
Job No. J5157 Perron Developments Key Close LWMS Figure D1: Water Quality - Total Nitrogen
© COPYRIGHT JIM DAVIES & ASSOCIATES PTY. LTD. 2013 0.6 Peel Harvey TP Target 0.1mg/L ANZECC (2000) Trigger Value 0.065mg/L 0.5 Mean Values Max Q3 (upper quartile, 0.75) 0.4 Median Q1 (lower quartile, 0.25)
mg/L 0.3 Min
TP 0.2
0.1
0 WMW1 WMW2 WMW3 WMW4 WMW5 WMW6
0.6
0.5
0.4
mg/L 0.3
TP 0.2
0.1
0 May‐12 Jul‐12 Aug‐12 Oct‐12 Dec‐12 Jan‐13 Mar‐13
WMW1 WMW2 WMW3 WMW4 WMW5 WMW6
Job No. J5157 Perron Developments Key Close LWMS Figure D2: Water Quality - Total Phosphorus
© COPYRIGHT JIM DAVIES & ASSOCIATES PTY. LTD. 2013 7 ANZECC (2000) Trigger Value 0.12 ‐ 0.3 ms/cm Mean Values 6 Max Q3 (upper quartile, 0.75) 5 Median Q1 (lower quartile, 0.25) 4 Min ms/cm 3 EC
2
1
0 WMW1 WMW2 WMW3 WMW4 WMW5 WMW6
7
6
5
4 (ms/cm) 3 EC 2
1
0 May‐12 Jul‐12 Aug‐12 Oct‐12 Dec‐12 Jan‐13 Mar‐13
WMW1 WMW2 WMW3 WMW4 WMW5 WMW6
Job No. J5157 Perron Developments Key Close LWMS Figure D3: Water Quality - Electrical Conductivity
© COPYRIGHT JIM DAVIES & ASSOCIATES PTY. LTD. 2013 8
7
6
5
4 pH ANZECC (2000) Trigger Value 6.5 to 8.0 3 Mean Values Max 2 Q3 (upper quartile, 0.75) Median 1 Q1 (lower quartile, 0.25) Min 0 WMW1 WMW2 WMW3 WMW4 WMW5 WMW6
6.5
6
5.5
5 pH
4.5
4
3.5 May‐12 Jul‐12 Aug‐12 Oct‐12 Dec‐12 Jan‐13 Mar‐13
WMW1 WMW2 WMW3 WMW4 WMW5 WMW6
Job No. J5157 Perron Developments Key Close LWMS Figure D4: Water Quality - pH
© COPYRIGHT JIM DAVIES & ASSOCIATES PTY. LTD. 2013 21st May 2012 16th August 2012 21st May 2012 16th August 2012
WMW1 WMW1 WMW2 WMW2
Mg (meq) Mg (meq) Mg (meq) Mg (meq) 4 4 25 50 CI(meq) Ca (meq) CI(meq) 2 Ca (meq) CI(meq) 2 Ca (meq) CI(meq) 12.5 Ca (meq) 25
0 0 0 0
HCO3 (meq) Na(meq) HCO3 (meq) Na(meq) HCO3 (meq) Na(meq) HCO3 (meq) Na(meq)
SO4(meq) SO4(meq) SO4(meq) SO4(meq)
25 September 2012 26 April 2013 25 September 2012 26 April 2013
WMW1 WMW1 WMW2 WMW2
Mg (meq) Mg (meq) Mg (meq) Mg (meq) 50 25 4 4
CI(meq) 25 Ca (meq) CI(meq) 12.5 Ca (meq) CI(meq) 2 Ca (meq) CI(meq) 2 Ca (meq)
0 0 0 0
HCO3 (meq) Na(meq) HCO3 (meq) Na(meq) HCO3 (meq) Na(meq) HCO3 (meq) Na(meq)
SO4(meq) SO4(meq) SO4(meq) SO4(meq)
Job No. J5157 Perron Developments Key Close LWMS Figure D5: Major Ions: Bores WMW1 and WMW2
© COPYRIGHT JIM DAVIES & ASSOCIATES PTY. LTD. 2013 21st May 2012 16th August 2012 21st May 2012 16th August 2012
WMW3 WMW3 WMW4 WMW4
Mg (meq) Mg (meq) Mg (meq) Mg (meq) 1.2 1.6 1.6 1
CI(meq) 0.6 Ca (meq) CI(meq) Ca (meq) CI(meq) 0.8 Ca (meq) CI(meq) 0.8 Ca (meq) 0.5
0 0 0 0
HCO3 (meq) Na(meq) HCO3 (meq) Na(meq) HCO3 (meq) Na(meq) HCO3 (meq) Na(meq)
SO4(meq) SO4(meq) SO4(meq) SO4(meq)
25 September 2012 26 April 2013 25 September 2012 26 April 2013
WMW3 WMW3 WMW4 WMW4
Mg (meq) Mg (meq) Mg (meq) 1.6 Mg (meq) 1.2 1 1.2
CI(meq) Ca (meq) CI(meq) 0.6 Ca (meq) CI(meq) 0.8 Ca (meq) 0.5 CI(meq) 0.6 Ca (meq)
0 0 0 0
HCO3 (meq) Na(meq) HCO3 HCO3 (meq) Na(meq) Na(meq) HCO3 (meq) Na(meq) (meq)
SO4(meq) SO4(meq) SO4(meq) SO4(meq)
Job No. J5157 Perron Developments Key Close LWMS Figure D6: Major Ions: Bores WMW3 and WMW4
© COPYRIGHT JIM DAVIES & ASSOCIATES PTY. LTD. 2013 21st May 2012 16th August 2012 21st May 2012 16th August 2012 WMW5 WMW5 WMW6 WMW6
Mg (meq) Mg (meq) Mg (meq) Mg (meq) 2 2 1.2 1.2
CI(meq) 1 Ca (meq) CI(meq) 1 Ca (meq) CI(meq) 0.6 Ca (meq) CI(meq) 0.6 Ca (meq)
0 0 0 0
HCO3 HCO3 Na(meq) Na(meq)HCO3 (meq) Na(meq) HCO3 (meq) Na(meq) (meq) (meq)
SO4(meq) SO4(meq) SO4(meq) SO4(meq)
25 September 2012 26 April 2013 25 September 2012 26 April 2013
WMW5 WMW5 WMW6 WMW6
Mg (meq) Mg (meq) Mg (meq) Mg (meq) 1 1.4 1.2 0.8
CI(meq) 0.5 Ca (meq) CI(meq) 0.7 Ca (meq) CI(meq) 0.6 Ca (meq) CI(meq) 0.4 Ca (meq)
0 0 0 0
HCO3 HCO3 HCO3 (meq) Na(meq) HCO3 Na(meq) Na(meq) Na(meq) (meq) (meq) (meq)
SO4(meq) SO4(meq) SO4(meq) SO4(meq)
Job No. J5157 Perron Developments Key Close LWMS Figure D7: Major Ions: Bores WMW5 and WMW6
© COPYRIGHT JIM DAVIES & ASSOCIATES PTY. LTD. 2013
APPENDIX E
DoW Groundwater Licence (GWL176048 and Bore Construction Licence (CAW176047)
APPENDIX F
NiDSS Modelling Results Perron Land Baldivis Total Phosphorus Total Nutrient Input - No WSUD (kg/yr) 1,666 NutrientNiDSS Input Decision Support System Reduction due to WSUD (kg/yr) 0 Total Nitrogen Version 2.0 March 2005 Percentage Overall Reduction 0.0% JDA Consultant Hydrologists Pecentage Development Reduction 0.0% Report Date : 13-May-14 Cost of Selected Program ($/kg/yr) $0
Catchment Name Perron Land Baldivis Option Description Pre-Development Scenario Catchment Area 30 ha
Land Use Breakdown Residential : ~R15 0.0% lower density residential areas (excludes road reserve area) Residential : ~R35 0.0% higher density residential areas (excludes road reserve area) Road Reserves : Minor 0.0% maintainance of verge by landowners Road Reserves : Major 0.0% maintainance of verge by local authority POS : Active 0.0% grassed areas POS : Passive / Basins 0.0% native vegetation Rural : Pasture 90.0% general pasture Rural : Residential ~R2.5/R5 10.0% low density Total Residential 0.0% Rural : Poultry 0.0% specific high nutient input land use Total Area 100.0% Commercial/Industrial 0.0% town centre etc
Nutrient Input Without WSUD
Residential Garden 64.90 kg/net ha/yr 0.00 kg/gross ha/yr 0 kg/yr 0.0% Lawn 92.40 0.00 0 0.0% Pet Waste 15.72 0.00 0 0.0% Car Wash 0.04 0.00 0 0.0% Sub Total 0.00 0 0.0%
POS Garden/Lawn 73.40 kg/ha POS/yr 0.00 kg/gross ha/yr 0 kg/yr 0.0% Pet Waste 0.00 0.00 0 0.0% Sub Total 0.00 0 0.0%
Road Major Roads 29.36 kg/ha RR/yr 0.00 kg/gross ha/yr 0 kg/yr 0.0% Reserve Minor Roads 132.00 0.00 0 0.0% Sub Total 0.00 0 0.0%
Rural Pasture 60.00 kg/ha Rural/yr 54.00 kg/gross ha/yr 1,620 kg/yr 97.3% Poultry Farms 175.00 0.00 0 0.0% Residential (R2.5/R5) 15.20 1.52 46 2.7% Sub Total 55.52 1,666 100.0%
Total 55.52 kg/gross ha/yr 1,666 kg/yr 100.0%
Residential Areas (R15-R35) : Nutrient Removal via Source Control
Native Gardens (Lots - Garden) Native Gardens (Lots - Lawn) Native Gardens (POS) Street Sweeping
Community Education : Fertiliser Community Education : Pet Waste Community Education : Car Wash
Education Effectiveness 0%
% Area of Removal Removal Removal Capital Operating Cost Influence kg/gross ha/yr kg/yr % Cost $ Cost $/yr $/kg/yr Native Gardens (Lots - Garden) 0% 0.00 0 0.0% $0 $0 $0.0 Native Gardens (Lots - Lawn) 0% 0.00 0 0.0% $0 $0 $0.0 Native Gardens (POS) 0% 0.00 0 0.0% $0 $0 $0.0 Community Education : Fertiliser 0% 0.00 0 0.0% $0 $0 $0.0 Community Education : Pet Waste 0% 0.00 0 0.0% $0 $0 $0.0 Community Education : Car Wash 0% 0.00 0 0.0% $0 $0 $0.0 Street Sweeping 0% 0.00 0 0.0% $0 $0 $0.0 Totals 0.00 0 0.0% $0 $0 $0.0
Residential Areas (R15-R35) : Nutrient Removal via In-Transit Control
Gross Pollutant Trap Water Pollution Control Pond
% Area of Removal Removal Removal Capital Operating Cost Influence kg/gross ha/yr kg/yr % Cost $ Cost $/yr $/kg/yr Gross Pollutant Traps 0% 0.00 0 0.0% $0 $0 $0.0 Water Pollution Control Ponds 0% 0.00 0 0.0% $0 $0 $0.0 Total 0.00 0 0.0% $0 $0 $0.0
Net Nutrient Input
kg/gross ha/yr kg/yr % Nutrient Input : Residential Area without WSUD 0.00 0 0.0% Nutrient Input : Rural Area 55.52 1,666 100.0% Capital Operating Cost Cost $ Cost $/yr $/kg/yr Removal via Source Control 0.00 0 0.0% $0 $0 $0.0 Removal via In-Transit Control 0.00 0 0.0% $0 $0 $0.0 Total Removal 0.00 0 0.0% $0 $0 $0.0
Net Nutrient Input 55.52 1,666 100.0% Perron Land Baldivis Total Phosphorus Total Nutrient Input - No WSUD (kg/yr) 6,792 NutrientNiDSS Input Decision Support System Reduction due to WSUD (kg/yr) 2,470 Total Nitrogen Version 2.0 March 2005 Percentage Overall Reduction 36.4% JDA Consultant Hydrologists Pecentage Development Reduction 36.4% Report Date : 13-May-14 Cost of Selected Program ($/kg/yr) $4
Catchment Name Perron Land Baldivis Option Description Post-Development Scenario Catchment Area 30 ha
Land Use Breakdown Residential : School 7.0% lower density residential areas (excludes road reserve area) Residential : ~R35 58.0% higher density residential areas (excludes road reserve area) Road Reserves : Minor 24.0% maintainance of verge by landowners Road Reserves : Major 0.0% maintainance of verge by local authority POS : Active 11.0% grassed areas POS : Passive / Basins 0.0% native vegetation Rural : Pasture 0.0% general pasture Rural : Residential ~R2.5/R5 0.0% low density Total Residential 65.0% Rural : Poultry 0.0% specific high nutient input land use Total Area 100.0% Commercial/Industrial 0.0% town centre etc
Nutrient Input Without WSUD
Residential Garden 80.69 kg/net ha/yr 52.45 kg/gross ha/yr 1,574 kg/yr 23.2% Lawn 113.01 73.46 2,204 32.4% Pet Waste 63.22 41.09 1,233 18.2% Car Wash 0.04 0.02 1 0.0% Sub Total 167.03 5,011 73.8%
POS Garden/Lawn 73.40 kg/ha POS/yr 8.07 kg/gross ha/yr 242 kg/yr 3.6% Pet Waste 178.33 19.62 589 8.7% Sub Total 27.69 831 12.2%
Road Major Roads 29.36 kg/ha RR/yr 0.00 kg/gross ha/yr 0 kg/yr 0.0% Reserve Minor Roads 132.00 31.68 950 14.0% Sub Total 31.68 950 14.0%
Rural Pasture 60.00 kg/ha Rural/yr 0.00 kg/gross ha/yr 0 kg/yr 0.0% Poultry Farms 175.00 0.00 0 0.0% Residential (R2.5/R5) 15.20 0.00 0 0.0% Sub Total 0.00 0 0.0%
Total 226.40 kg/gross ha/yr 6,792 kg/yr 100.0%
Residential Areas (R15-R35) : Nutrient Removal via Source Control
Native Gardens (Lots - Garden) Native Gardens (Lots - Lawn) Native Gardens (POS) Street Sweeping
Community Education : Fertiliser Community Education : Pet Waste Community Education : Car Wash
Education Effectiveness 20%
% Area of Removal Removal Removal Capital Operating Cost Influence kg/gross ha/yr kg/yr % Cost $ Cost $/yr $/kg/yr Native Gardens (Lots - Garden) 50% 26.23 787 11.6% $0 $0 $0.0 Native Gardens (Lots - Lawn) 50% 36.73 1,102 16.2% $0 $0 $0.0 Native Gardens (POS) 50% 4.04 121 1.8% $0 $0 $0.0 Community Education : Fertiliser 100% 14.31 429 6.3% $0 $451 $1.1 Community Education : Pet Waste 0% 0.00 0 0.0% $0 $0 $0.0 Community Education : Car Wash 0% 0.00 0 0.0% $0 $0 $0.0 Street Sweeping 100% 0.48 14 0.2% $0 $2,970 $206.0 Totals 81.78 2,453 36.1% $0 $3,421 $1.4
Residential Areas (R15-R35) : Nutrient Removal via In-Transit Control
Gross Pollutant Trap Water Pollution Control Pond
% Area of Removal Removal Removal Capital Operating Cost Influence kg/gross ha/yr kg/yr % Cost $ Cost $/yr $/kg/yr Gross Pollutant Traps 100% 0.57 17 0.2% $56,400 $2,160 $326.7 Water Pollution Control Ponds 0% 0.00 0 0.0% $0 $0 $0.0 Total 0.57 17 0.2% $56,400 $2,160 $326.7
Net Nutrient Input
kg/gross ha/yr kg/yr % Nutrient Input : Residential Area without WSUD 226.40 6,792 100.0% Nutrient Input : Rural Area 0.00 0 0.0% Capital Operating Cost Cost $ Cost $/yr $/kg/yr Removal via Source Control 81.78 2,453 36.1% $0 $3,421 $1.4 Removal via In-Transit Control 0.57 17 0.2% $56,400 $2,160 $326.7 Total Removal 82.34 2,470 36.4% $56,400 $5,581 $3.6
Net Nutrient Input 144.05 4,322 63.6% Perron Land Baldivis Total Phosphorus Total Nutrient Input - No WSUD (kg/yr) 552 NutrientNiDSS Input Decision Support System Reduction due to WSUD (kg/yr) 0 Total Nitrogen Version 2.0 March 2005 Percentage Overall Reduction 0.0% JDA Consultant Hydrologists Pecentage Development Reduction 0.0% Report Date : 13-May-14 Cost of Selected Program ($/kg/yr) $0
Catchment Name Perron Land Baldivis Option Description Pre-Development Scenario Catchment Area 30 ha
Land Use Breakdown Residential : ~R15 0.0% lower density residential areas (excludes road reserve area) Residential : ~R35 0.0% higher density residential areas (excludes road reserve area) Road Reserves : Minor 0.0% maintainance of verge by landowners Road Reserves : Major 0.0% maintainance of verge by local authority POS : Active 0.0% grassed areas POS : Passive / Basins 0.0% native vegetation Rural : Pasture 90.0% general pasture Rural : Residential ~R2.5/R5 10.0% low density Total Residential 0.0% Rural : Poultry 0.0% specific high nutient input land use Total Area 100.0% Commercial/Industrial 0.0% town centre etc
Nutrient Input Without WSUD
Residential Garden 21.65 kg/net ha/yr 0.00 kg/gross ha/yr 0 kg/yr 0.0% Lawn 10.09 0.00 0 0.0% Pet Waste 2.81 0.00 0 0.0% Car Wash 0.13 0.00 0 0.0% Sub Total 0.00 0 0.0%
POS Garden/Lawn 2.60 kg/ha POS/yr 0.00 kg/gross ha/yr 0 kg/yr 0.0% Pet Waste 4.47 0.00 0 0.0% Sub Total 0.00 0 0.0%
Road Major Roads 1.04 kg/ha RR/yr 0.00 kg/gross ha/yr 0 kg/yr 0.0% Reserve Minor Roads 20.00 0.00 0 0.0% Sub Total 0.00 0 0.0%
Rural Pasture 20.00 kg/ha Rural/yr 18.00 kg/gross ha/yr 540 kg/yr 97.8% Poultry Farms 75.00 0.00 0 0.0% Residential (R2.5/R5) 4.00 0.40 12 2.2% Sub Total 18.40 552 100.0%
Total 18.40 kg/gross ha/yr 552 kg/yr 100.0%
Residential Areas (R15-R35) : Nutrient Removal via Source Control
Native Gardens (Lots - Garden) Native Gardens (Lots - Lawn) Native Gardens (POS) Street Sweeping
Community Education : Fertiliser Community Education : Pet Waste Community Education : Car Wash
Education Effectiveness 0%
% Area of Removal Removal Removal Capital Operating Cost Influence kg/gross ha/yr kg/yr % Cost $ Cost $/yr $/kg/yr Native Gardens (Lots - Garden) 0% 0.00 0 0.0% $0 $0 $0.0 Native Gardens (Lots - Lawn) 0% 0.00 0 0.0% $0 $0 $0.0 Native Gardens (POS) 0% 0.00 0 0.0% $0 $0 $0.0 Community Education : Fertiliser 0% 0.00 0 0.0% $0 $0 $0.0 Community Education : Pet Waste 0% 0.00 0 0.0% $0 $0 $0.0 Community Education : Car Wash 0% 0.00 0 0.0% $0 $0 $0.0 Street Sweeping 0% 0.00 0 0.0% $0 $0 $0.0 Totals 0.00 0 0.0% $0 $0 $0.0
Residential Areas (R15-R35) : Nutrient Removal via In-Transit Control
Gross Pollutant Trap Water Pollution Control Pond
% Area of Removal Removal Removal Capital Operating Cost Influence kg/gross ha/yr kg/yr % Cost $ Cost $/yr $/kg/yr Gross Pollutant Traps 0% 0.00 0 0.0% $0 $0 $0.0 Water Pollution Control Ponds 0% 0.00 0 0.0% $0 $0 $0.0 Total 0.00 0 0.0% $0 $0 $0.0
Net Nutrient Input
kg/gross ha/yr kg/yr % Nutrient Input : Residential Area without WSUD 0.00 0 0.0% Nutrient Input : Rural Area 18.40 552 100.0% Capital Operating Cost Cost $ Cost $/yr $/kg/yr Removal via Source Control 0.00 0 0.0% $0 $0 $0.0 Removal via In-Transit Control 0.00 0 0.0% $0 $0 $0.0 Total Removal 0.00 0 0.0% $0 $0 $0.0
Net Nutrient Input 18.40 552 100.0% Perron Land Baldivis Total Phosphorus Total Nutrient Input - No WSUD (kg/yr) 844 NutrientNiDSS Input Decision Support System Reduction due to WSUD (kg/yr) 399 Total Nitrogen Version 2.0 March 2005 Percentage Overall Reduction 47.3% JDA Consultant Hydrologists Pecentage Development Reduction 47.3% Report Date : 13-May-14 Cost of Selected Program ($/kg/yr) $22
Catchment Name Perron Land Baldivis Option Description Post-Development Scenario Catchment Area 30 ha
Land Use Breakdown Residential : School 7.0% lower density residential areas (excludes road reserve area) Residential : ~R35 58.0% higher density residential areas (excludes road reserve area) Road Reserves : Minor 24.0% maintainance of verge by landowners Road Reserves : Major 0.0% maintainance of verge by local authority POS : Active 11.0% grassed areas POS : Passive / Basins 0.0% native vegetation Rural : Pasture 0.0% general pasture Rural : Residential ~R2.5/R5 0.0% low density Total Residential 65.0% Rural : Poultry 0.0% specific high nutient input land use Total Area 100.0% Commercial/Industrial 0.0% town centre etc
Nutrient Input Without WSUD
Residential Garden 21.65 kg/net ha/yr 14.07 kg/gross ha/yr 422 kg/yr 50.0% Lawn 10.09 6.56 197 23.3% Pet Waste 2.81 1.83 55 6.5% Car Wash 0.13 0.09 3 0.3% Sub Total 22.54 676 80.2%
POS Garden/Lawn 2.60 kg/ha POS/yr 0.29 kg/gross ha/yr 9 kg/yr 1.0% Pet Waste 4.47 0.49 15 1.7% Sub Total 0.78 23 2.8%
Road Major Roads 1.04 kg/ha RR/yr 0.00 kg/gross ha/yr 0 kg/yr 0.0% Reserve Minor Roads 20.00 4.80 144 17.1% Sub Total 4.80 144 17.1%
Rural Pasture 20.00 kg/ha Rural/yr 0.00 kg/gross ha/yr 0 kg/yr 0.0% Poultry Farms 75.00 0.00 0 0.0% Residential (R2.5/R5) 4.00 0.00 0 0.0% Sub Total 0.00 0 0.0%
Total 28.12 kg/gross ha/yr 844 kg/yr 100.0%
Residential Areas (R15-R35) : Nutrient Removal via Source Control
Native Gardens (Lots - Garden) Native Gardens (Lots - Lawn) Native Gardens (POS) Street Sweeping
Community Education : Fertiliser Community Education : Pet Waste Community Education : Car Wash
Education Effectiveness 20%
% Area of Removal Removal Removal Capital Operating Cost Influence kg/gross ha/yr kg/yr % Cost $ Cost $/yr $/kg/yr Native Gardens (Lots - Garden) 50% 7.04 211 25.0% $0 $0 $0.0 Native Gardens (Lots - Lawn) 50% 3.28 98 11.7% $0 $0 $0.0 Native Gardens (POS) 50% 0.14 4 0.5% $0 $0 $0.0 Community Education : Fertiliser 100% 2.54 76 9.0% $0 $451 $5.9 Community Education : Pet Waste 0% 0.00 0 0.0% $0 $0 $0.0 Community Education : Car Wash 0% 0.00 0 0.0% $0 $0 $0.0 Street Sweeping 100% 0.19 6 0.7% $0 $2,970 $526.1 Totals 13.19 396 46.9% $0 $3,421 $8.6
Residential Areas (R15-R35) : Nutrient Removal via In-Transit Control
Gross Pollutant Trap Water Pollution Control Pond
% Area of Removal Removal Removal Capital Operating Cost Influence kg/gross ha/yr kg/yr % Cost $ Cost $/yr $/kg/yr Gross Pollutant Traps 100% 0.11 3 0.4% $56,400 $2,160 $1,740.3 Water Pollution Control Ponds 0% 0.00 0 0.0% $0 $0 $0.0 Total 0.11 3 0.4% $56,400 $2,160 $1,740.3
Net Nutrient Input
kg/gross ha/yr kg/yr % Nutrient Input : Residential Area without WSUD 28.12 844 100.0% Nutrient Input : Rural Area 0.00 0 0.0% Capital Operating Cost Cost $ Cost $/yr $/kg/yr Removal via Source Control 13.19 396 46.9% $0 $3,421 $8.6 Removal via In-Transit Control 0.11 3 0.4% $56,400 $2,160 $1,740.3 Total Removal 13.30 399 47.3% $56,400 $5,581 $22.5
Net Nutrient Input 14.82 445 52.7%
APPENDIX G
Landscape Concepts (Emerge, 2014) POS A LANDSCAPE CONCEPT
• Acoustic wall to rear of residential lots and side of end lot
• Existing principle shared path within the Freeway road reserve
PROPERTY BOUNDARY
1:1 rain storage event 1:5 rain storage event 1:10 rain storage event 1:100 rain storage event
• Clumps of clear trunked native trees
• Native planted edge screens Freeway
• Open grass kickabout space acts as a fi re barrier to adjacent lots
• Footpath acts as maintenance edge between swale planting and adjacent turf area
• Possible street parking bays, numbers to be determined
• Feature playground
• Existing Freeway vegetation to be retained
• Planted basin with 1:8 side slopes. • Refer to hydrology report for fi nal volumes
• Picnic shelters and bbq fronting open kickabout space
• Shade tree avenue defi nes space. Species to be determined
• Indicative street paving, fi nal extent and design to be fi nalised
• Acoustic wall to rear of residential lots and side of end lot
dwg • POS A_Concept date • NOV 2014 lot number 3, 10, 921, 922 Baldivis Road and Key Close rev • A scale • 1:1000 @ A3 © THIS DRAWING CAN NOT BE PUBLISHED OR DISPLAYED WITHOUT THE WRITTEN PERMISSION OF THE CLIENT & AUTHOR, AND IS ISSUED FOR local structure plan - landscape INFORMATION PURPOSES ONLY AND MAY ALTER WITHOUT NOTIFICATION.
APPENDIX H
Preliminary Bulk Earthwork Levels (Wood & Grieve Engineers, 2014)
4 .5
8 . 2 4 .6 NOTES 4.3 4 . WMW2 7 ------4.4 8 WMW1
. 3 1. GENERAL
7 4 4.5 . 1.1. LEVELS ARE REDUCED FROM A.H.D. . 9 5 1.2. THIS DRAWING SHALL BE READ IN CONJUNCTION WITH 4.6 DRAWINGS AND THE SPECIFICATION.
8
. 4 1.3. DESIGN LEVELS SHOWN SHALL BE ON THE FINISHED SURFACE 4.7 7 INCLUDING TOPSOIL. 7 . 4 7 7 7 6 6 6 6 . .3 .2 7.1 .0 .9 .8 .7 .6 6 4.8 1.4. EXISTING LEVELS & CONTOURS INDICATED ARE REFLECTIVE
4 OF THE BULK EARTHWORKS DESIGN. 4 8 4.9 1.5. TREES SHOWN AS BEING RETAINED ARE TO BE PROTECTED. . 6 5 THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY THE SUPERINTENDENT IF 4 6 5.0 .5 . THIS IS UNABLE TO BE ACHIEVED. 7 1.6. NO WORKS OR ACCESS IS PERMITTED TO THE TRAMWAY 8 . 8 8 . 8 RESERVE. 7 . 8 6 8 4 . 4 8 . 2 8 1.7. NO EARTHWORKS ARE TO BE UNDERTAKEN IN 'AREA 2'. .1 8 6 7 . 7 . 0 .9 5
8
. 2. EARTHWORKS 2 7 . 6 ARE 8 A 2 .1 2.1. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL LIMIT THE MOVEMENT OF 8.0
6 . EQUIPMENT AND MANPOWER TO THE MINIMUM AREA 7 .9 6
3 NECESSARY AND PROTECT ALL VEGETATION ON SITE.
.
8 (EXCLUD ED FROM APPLICATION) 2.2. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CUT AND FILL THE SITE AS 7 8.0 .9 SPECIFIED.
4 2.3. WHERE THE PROPOSED LOTS FACE THE ROAD, CONTRACTOR
.
8 7 .8 TO GRADE TO A MAXIMUM OF 1 IN 6 FROM THE VERGE TO
6 DESIGN PAD LEVEL OF THE LOT. . 7 7 7 1 7 . 7 7 . . . 7 7 . 5 . 5 7 . 5 8 7 6 6 4 7 7 7 7 6 8 . 7 . . . . . 9 7 7.7 .6 7. 7. 3 2 .1 0 9 8 7. .8 4 9 4.6 3. DUST CONTROL
4 3.1. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ALLOW FOR DUST CONTROL 6
5 . . 0 7 7 8 6 MEASURES AS SPECIFIED.
. . . 7 9 4
8
8
. 8 1
.
2 8 4. STABILISATION 8 .3 . 6 7 8 8 4.1. THE COMPLETED SURFACE SHALL BE STABILISED BY . 8 . 4 9 8
. 8 . 3 .5 2 HYDROMULCH WITH SEED & GREEN DYE. 8.5 6 4 4 8 .8
. 8.4 0 8 5. TOPSOIL . 8 7
. 8 5.1. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CLEAR ALL VEGETATION FROM 8 8.4 8.4 8.3 8.2 8.1 8.2 8.1 8.0 . 8 4 .3 8.2 ENTIRE WORKS AREA TO A STOCKPILE AFTER MULCHING.
8 5.2. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE TOPSOIL FROM WORKS . 9 .1 8 AREA TO BE DISTURBED AND STOCKPILE FOR A LATER DATE.
6
7 5.3. FOLLOWING THE COMPLETION OF EARTHWORKS, TOPSOIL 8 .
. 7 5 8 9 FROM AREA 1 SHALL BE RESPREAD OVER THE WORKS AREA . . 4 0 4 AS SPECIFIED. 4 5.4. EXCESS TOPSOIL SHALL BE REMOVED FROM SITE.
8
. 6.8 6 9 2 8 6.9 6 .7 . 6.9 7.0 .8 1 . 7 6 .4 7. 3 7.2 7.1 7.0 6. NATIVE GRASS TREES 8 6.9 . 5 6.1. ANY GRASS TREE ON THE SITE MUST NOT BE DAMAGED OR 9 .2 DESTROYED. 6.9 6.2. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY THE SUPERINTENDENT 8 8 4 9 . 6 . 7 . 3 3 . SHOULD A GRASSTREE BE IDENTIFIED, WITH THE INTENT FOR 8 8 IT TO BE REMOVED IN TACT AND TRANSPLANTED AT A NEARBY . 6 6
9 LOCATION OFFSITE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ALLOW A .4 8 PROVISIONAL SUM FOR REMOVAL AND TRANSPLANTATION OF 8 7.0
. 8 6 8 . GRASSTREES. .
7 4 9 8 .7
. 9 8 4 . 5 . 7 7. DILAPIDATION SURVEYS WMW3 7.1. DILAPIDATION SURVEY OF BALDIVIS ROAD ADJACENT TO THE 8 A 7.1 9 . 7 9 A SITE, OF ALL ENTRY AND EXIT POINTS TO THE SITE AND OF .6 . 0 10 BE 7 2 . LOT 10 BALDIVIS ROAD MUST BE COMPLETED AND 8 8 7 BE2 . . 8 5 FORWARDED TO THE SUPERINTENDENT PRIOR TO WORKS 9 .7 COMMENCING. WMW4
0 . 1 . 9 9 8. TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT
2 0 . 6 9 .9 . 8 6 .1
7 7 . 9 7 2 7 8 3 . 7. 9 6 7. 8.1. THE CONTRACTOR MUST PREPARE A TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT . . 0 8 .
6 7 5 9 9 . 7 7 7 7 6. 7.1 4 . 4 . .2 . . . 6 3 1 0 7.1 7.0 9 PLAN PRIOR TO WORKS COMMENCING AND IMPLEMENT IT FOR .5 9 10 6 THE DURATION OF THE WORKS, TO THE SATISFACTION OF 9 . 7 9 .9 . T 9 THE LOCAL AUTHORITY. R 9 . 0
A 1 7 0 8 . 7 LEGEND . . M 0 7 ------W 7.1 8 A 1 6 EARTHWORK BOUNDARY 0 9 4 7 .9 . . . 1 1 Y 8
R 8 7 7.0 . DESIGN CONTOURS (0.1m INTERVAL) 8 B . E 0 7.1 A S
9 L 9 . 4 E . 7 .8 2 4.6 D AAMGL CONTOURS (0.1m INTERVAL) R I V V 7 7.2 . I E 1 4 S 8 EXISTING CONTOURS (0.5m INTERVAL) .9
A 6 REA 1 R 9 O 9. 9.6 9.5 9.4 9.3 9.2 9.2 .1 WMW4 7 9 7 2 .2 . BORES TO BE RETAINED AND PROTECTED .8 .0 9 .9 7 8 0 7 6 . 6 7 .1 A . 7 8 . . 7 7.0 9.8 . 7 7 7 D 9 7 7 .3 7 7 7 6.9 7.0 .1 .5 .4 .2 .1 .0 7 8 .8 TREE TO BE RETAINED AND PROTECTED 8 B . 7 8 . 7 6 B 8 . E2 1 B . 10 5 8 8 5 . 0 . . 4 7 0 10 .2 8 BE . 6 2 3 7 8 . . 2 2
.1 8 1 IN 6 BATTER DOWN TO 0 10 . 8 9 . 7 EXISTING AT BOUNDARY .1 7 . 3
0
.
7
7
. 4
7
. 7.2 1
7
. 5
WWW.1100.COM.AU 10
7 6
. 6 2 8 . 7 6 8.0 8 .6 7 .4 7 1 .6 .5 4 3 . 7 7 7.6 .5 . 0 9 8 7 5 .3 .1 .0 .9 .8 .7 8 8 8. . .2 .1 0 7 7. 7.7 0. . . . . 9 9 9 8 8 8 8 8 8 8. 7.9 10 1 9 9 9 9 6
10 9 .4 7 . 7
9 .2 .5 8 7 6 A 8 ORIGINAL ISSUE SEA 7 8
. 9 . 9 1 .6 7 REV. DESCRIPTION DRAWN VER APPROVED 8. . E 0 8 S 7.3 LO 9 C .7 EY 6 Wood & Grieve Engineers Ltd PERTH K 1 7. MELBOURNE 9 8.0 8. 8.0 9 A.C.N. 137 999 609 . 8 8 .1 Ground Floor SYDNEY 8 . 7 0 . BRISBANE 100 2 8. 226 Adelaide Tce, Perth 9 1 C . 7 GOLD COAST 9 6 .2 Western Australia 6000 1 B . E Phone: +61 8 6222 7000 ALBANY 8 2 10 6 Fax: +61 8 6222 7100 BUSSELTON 90
. 0 4 Email [email protected] SHENZHEN .0 . 8 9 7 . WOOD & GRIEVE ENGINEERS Web www.wge.com.au DARWIN 8 1 8 .2 . 3 80
0 . CLIENT: 8
10 .0 C 5 5 . 8 PERRON DEVELOPMENTS PTY LTD 70 9 8 . 2 B .3 E 8 2 3 . PROJECT: T . 4 9 1 .
R 60 9 1 . 7 . 7 LOTS 920, 921 & 3 BALDIVIS ROAD, BALDIVIS A 9 7 .2 8. 6 M 4 8 9 TITLE: . . 3 8 W 50 8
7 . . 8 5 .5 BULK EARTHWORKS PLAN A 8 .2 7 8 7 Y 5 . .3
. 40 7 8 R 3 . 3 E 8 4 . 2 6 7.5 7. 7 PRELIMINARY 8. .3 .4 .5 8. 8.7 8 8 8 2 .6 S 8 8 8 .6 .5 .4 . 6 .7 7 30 1 8 7 . E 8 7 SECTION: CIVIL SERVICES VERIFIED : SCALE :A1@ 1:1000 .0 6 .4 R 9 8 . 7 APPROVED V 8 6 20 7. DESIGNED :SEA FOR TENDER: DATUM : A.H.D. E 7 . .6 7 7 8 APPROVED FOR .4 DRAWN : SEA CONSTRUCTION : WAPC : -
5 7 10 . 1 IN 6 BATTER DOWN TO 7 2 7. WMW5 EXISTING AT BOUNDARY PROJECT No. DRAWING No. REVISION 3 .0 . 7 7 6 .8 0 WMW6 6 6 6. 1000 2000
23990-PER-C BE1 A : : 1 1
6 @ @
L:\TECH\23900\90\Preliminary\c plan bulk earthworks rough.dgn 1 3 A A
Suite 1, 27 York St, Subiaco WA 6008 PO Box 117, Subiaco WA 6904 Ph: +61 8 9388 2436 Fx: +61 8 9381 9279
www.jdahydro.com.au