Feasibility

FeasibilityReport
P y r a m i d E n g i n e e r i n g
S o l u t i o n s

1 0 - 3 - 1 3
PaulKoufalakis
ProjectManager
VickyNguyen
QualityAssuranceManager
Client:TonkinConsulting
FeasibilityReport
2013
1|P a g e
Contents
Contents.................................................................................................................................................0
1.0 Introduction.............................................................................................................................12
2.0 ProposedUseoftheParklands................................................................................................13
2.1 History..................................................................................................................................13
2.2Current.......................................................................................................................................14
2.3FutureIntendedUse..................................................................................................................14
3.0TheDevelopmentPlan...................................................................................................................15
3.1FeasibilityStudiesforStormwaterManagementSysteminSouthParklands...........................15
3.2ProjectProposalsandIllustration..............................................................................................18
3.2.1DetentionBasins.................................................................................................................18
3.2.2Aquifer................................................................................................................................20
3.2.3WetLands...........................................................................................................................21
3.2.4Heritage..............................................................................................................................22
3.3RevegetationScheme................................................................................................................23
3.3.1ProcedurebeforeConstruction..........................................................................................23
3.3.2 Procedureaftertheconstruction................................................................................24
4.0Laws&Acts....................................................................................................................................25
4.1AboriginalHeritageProtectionLegislation...............................................................................28
4.2PublicExpectationsfromtheParklands....................................................................................29
4.3RestrictionofWork....................................................................................................................30
4.4ProtectionofthePublicaroundtheWorkArea........................................................................31
5.Community......................................................................................................................................32
5.1UsersoftheParklands...............................................................................................................32
5.2HowwilltheConstructionPhaseAffecttheUsers?..................................................................35
5.3PublicOpiniononWorks............................................................................................................37
5.4OptionsforMinimisingImpactonCommunity..........................................................................38
5.4.1AppropriateMeasurestoMinimiseEffectsoftheConstructionProcess...........................38
5.4.2RestrictWorkstoAppropriateHours..................................................................................38
5.4.3NightWorks........................................................................................................................38
5.4.5Minimiseintrusionsontosportingfieldsandwalkways....................................................39
5.4.6Minimisethenumberoftreestoberemoved....................................................................39
5.5PublicConsultation....................................................................................................................39
FeasibilityReport
2013
2|P a g e
6.0Heritage.........................................................................................................................................42
6.1AboriginalHeritage....................................................................................................................42
6.1.1Currentknownlocationsandsignificanceofaboriginalheritagesites:.............................43
6.2EuropeanHeritage.....................................................................................................................44
6.2.1CurrentknownlocationsandsignificanceofEuropeanheritagesites...............................44
6.2.1.1GlensideCampus.............................................................................................................45
6.2.1.2VictoriaPark.....................................................................................................................47
7.0 Economy..................................................................................................................................49
8.0ConstructionPhaseIssues.............................................................................................................50
8.1Environmentalissues:................................................................................................................50
8.2FloodinginParkland..................................................................................................................50
8.3NoisePollution...........................................................................................................................51
8.4Airpollution...............................................................................................................................52
8.5Dustmanagement.....................................................................................................................52
8.6UtilityInfrastructure..................................................................................................................52
8.6.1Electricalsupply..................................................................................................................52
8.6.2Watersupply.......................................................................................................................53
9.0Recommendations.........................................................................................................................54
References...........................................................................................................................................55
1. PurposeofEIS................................................................................................................................2
2. LegislationPolicies.........................................................................................................................3
3. OutlineofEISPreparation&Structureofdocument....................................................................4
3.1 ContentsofEnvironmentalImpactAssessment....................................................................5
3.2 EnvironmentalImpactAssessmentFlowchart.......................................................................6
3.3 EnvironmentalImpactAssessmentTool-LeopoldMatrix....................................................6
3.4 EnvironmentalLegislation......................................................................................................7
4. MeteorologicalEnvironmentandClimate.....................................................................................8
5. AirQuality......................................................................................................................................9
6. SoilContamination.......................................................................................................................10
6.1 DetectionandPreventionofSoilContamination................................................................10
7. FloraandFauna...........................................................................................................................11
7.1Flora...........................................................................................................................................11
7.2Fauna.........................................................................................................................................12
FeasibilityReport
2013
3|P a g e
7.3MitigationMeasures..................................................................................................................13
8. Groundwater................................................................................................................................14
8.1 GroundwaterRequirements................................................................................................14
8.2 PotentialGroundwaterContaminants.................................................................................14
8.3 ThreatstoGroundwater......................................................................................................15
8.4 ImpactonGroundwaterUsers.............................................................................................15
9. Construction&WasteManagement...........................................................................................16
9.1 ImpactsofWaste.................................................................................................................16
9.2 ManagementPlan................................................................................................................16
10. CulturalHeritage......................................................................................................................18
10.1 ObjectivesofBaselineStudy................................................................................................18
10.2 Methodology........................................................................................................................18
10.3 IdentificationandmanagementofHeritagesites...............................................................20
11. SocialImpactAssessment........................................................................................................22
11.1 VisualAmenity.....................................................................................................................22
11.2 VisualImpactoftheProject.................................................................................................22
11.3 MitigationMeasures............................................................................................................22
12. RehabilitationandOngoingOperation....................................................................................23
12.1 WetlandManagementPlan.................................................................................................23
12.2 LandRehabilitationPlan......................................................................................................23
12.3 AssessmentofResidualImpacts..........................................................................................24
References...........................................................................................................................................28
AppendixA...........................................................................................................................................29
1.0 Background................................................................................................................................2
1.1ProjectDescription......................................................................................................................3
1.2Scopeofservices..........................................................................................................................3
2.0SiteConditions.................................................................................................................................4
2.1SiteHistory...................................................................................................................................4
3.0InvestigationMethodology..............................................................................................................5
3.1InitialSiteVisit.............................................................................................................................5
3.2GeotechnicalSiteinvestigation....................................................................................................5
3.3LaboratoryTesting.......................................................................................................................5
4.0Geology............................................................................................................................................8
FeasibilityReport
2013
4|P a g e
4.1RegionalGeologicsetting............................................................................................................8
4.2SiteGeologyoverview.................................................................................................................8
4.3Subsurfaceconditions..................................................................................................................9
4.3.1Overviewofcondition...........................................................................................................9
4.3.2VictoriaParksub-surfaceconditions....................................................................................9
.....................................................................................................................................................11
.....................................................................................................................................................13
4.3.3Longsectionlimitationsandconsiderations.......................................................................15
5.0OtherGeologicConsiderations......................................................................................................16
5.1Groundwater..............................................................................................................................16
5.2Permeabilityandinduction........................................................................................................16
5.3ExpandingSoil............................................................................................................................17
5.3.1Somesolutions....................................................................................................................17
5.4Plasticity.....................................................................................................................................18
5.5LiquidLimit.................................................................................................................................18
5.6LateralSpreading.......................................................................................................................18
5.7Subsidence.................................................................................................................................18
6.0GeotechnicalDiscussion................................................................................................................20
6.1Earthworks................................................................................................................................20
6.1.1SitePreparation..................................................................................................................20
6.1.2CutandFill..........................................................................................................................20
6.1.3EarthWorkCostAnalysis....................................................................................................21
7.0Recommendations.........................................................................................................................22
8.0Limitations.....................................................................................................................................23
1.0Background......................................................................................................................................3
2.0 SiteAnalysis...............................................................................................................................4
2.1 PurposeofAnalysis................................................................................................................4
3.0 Sitelocation...............................................................................................................................5
4.0 Scope..........................................................................................................................................7
4.1 Stormwater............................................................................................................................7
4.2 ProblematSouthParklandsandtheGlensideDetentionbasin............................................8
4.3 Rainfall...................................................................................................................................9
4.4 Hydrology.............................................................................................................................12
FeasibilityReport
2013
5|P a g e
4.5 StormwaterManagement...................................................................................................14
4.5.1 UpgradeFullartonRoad/GreenhillRoadCulvert.......................................................15
4.5.2 FeasibilityStudy...........................................................................................................17
4.5.3LocationofnewDetentionbasins......................................................................................20
4.6 Advantageoftheconceptdesignproject............................................................................25
5.0 PreliminaryAnalysis.................................................................................................................26
5.1 Existingconditionofdetentionbasinandlayout................................................................26
5.2 StormwaterQualityManagement.......................................................................................27
5.3 PrimarilyInvestigationWaterSensitiveUrbanDesign(WSUD)........................................28
5.3.1ScopeofWSUD.......................................................................................................................28
5.4 DesignOptionforwaterquality...............................................................................................28
5.4.1GrossPollutionTraps(GPTs)...................................................................................................28
5.5Wetlands....................................................................................................................................31
5.5.1PossibleWaterStorageLocations...........................................................................................31
5.5.2WetlandSystemDesign......................................................................................................33
5.5.3Operations..............................................................................................................................33
5.5.4DesignandSafetyConsiderations...........................................................................................35
5.6AquiferRechargeandRecovery(ASR).......................................................................................36
5.6.1WhyisAquiferStorageRecoverysuitableforthissite?.........................................................37
5.6.2Pre-treatments........................................................................................................................37
5.6.3Advantages.........................................................................................................................38
5.6.4Disadvantages.........................................................................................................................38
5.6.5PossibleLocations...............................................................................................................39
5.6.6Conclusion...............................................................................................................................40
5.7BiodiversityEnhancement.............................................................................................................41
5.8UtilityInfrastructure......................................................................................................................41
5.8.1Watersupply...........................................................................................................................42
5.8.2SewerConnections.............................................................................................................43
5.8.3Electricalsupply..................................................................................................................43
5.8.4Telecommunicationwireandfibreopticalcables..............................................................46
6.0 Costanalysis.............................................................................................................................47
6.1TotalCost...................................................................................................................................52
7.0 References...............................................................................................................................53
FeasibilityReport
2013
6|P a g e
TableofFigures
Figure1:AdelaideParklands................................................................................................................13
Figure2:PreliminaryAnalysisoftheCulvert.......................................................................................15
Figure3:ExistingCreek........................................................................................................................16
Figure4:East-TerraceBasin...............................................................................................................16
Figure5:GlensideBasin.......................................................................................................................17
Figure6:ProposedLocations...............................................................................................................19
Figure7:IllustrationofProposedDetentionBasin..............................................................................20
Figure8:ReservedTreeArea...............................................................................................................22
Figure9:ReservedBushArea..............................................................................................................23
Figure10:CricketGround....................................................................................................................32
Figure11:TennisCourt........................................................................................................................33
Figure12:SoccerGround....................................................................................................................33
Figure13:BikeTracks..........................................................................................................................34
Figure14:MapoftheRunningTrail....................................................................................................34
Figure15:ParklandsArea....................................................................................................................36
Figure16:ExistingRoadneartheOldRaceCourse.............................................................................36
Figure17:RoadNetworkintheParklandsArea..................................................................................37
Figure18:KaurnaTerritory..................................................................................................................42
Figure19:LocationofScarredTree.....................................................................................................43
Figure20:IdentifyingaScarredTree...................................................................................................44
Figure21:LocationofGlensideCampus..............................................................................................45
Figure22:GlensideCampus................................................................................................................46
Figure23:HeritageBuildingatGlensideCampus................................................................................46
Figure24:LocationofVictoriaPark.....................................................................................................47
Figure25:VictoriaPark........................................................................................................................48
Figure26:VictorianGrandstand..........................................................................................................48
Figure27:ExistingCreek......................................................................................................................50
Figure28:ExistingCreek......................................................................................................................51
Figure29:GeneralEIAFlowchart..........................................................................................................6
Figure30:ParklandLocations..............................................................................................................11
Figure31:VariousspeciesofnativeFlora...........................................................................................12
Figure32:TreePlantation...................................................................................................................24
Figure1-LocalityPlan............................................................................................................................2
Figure2-BrownHillKeswickCreekCatchment....................................................................................3
Figure3-AmapofthecurrentGlensideDetentionbasin....................................................................5
Figure4-Detentionbasin......................................................................................................................6
Figure5-Googlesatellitemapofexitingdetentionbasin....................................................................6
Figure6-FloodinginAdelaideRoads....................................................................................................8
Figure7-Annualrainfallprecipitation.................................................................................................10
Figure8-100yearARIbasecasefloodingmappinginSouthParklandsandsurroundingarea.........11
Figure9-TheplotoftherateofinflowinGlensideagainsttimeincrement(min).............................13
FeasibilityReport
2013
7|P a g e
Figure10-CurrentconcretechannelconnectingtheCulverttowardsGlensidedetentionbasinunder
theintersectionofFullartonRoadandGreenhillRoad.......................................................................15
Figure11-Closerlookattheculvertopeninginabovefigure............................................................15
Figure12-Outletfromthedetentionbasintotheculvert.................................................................17
Figure13-AmapofthecurrentGlensideDetentionbasinandtheParknumber.............................18
Figure14-ParklandNumber17intheSouthernParklands................................................................19
Figure15-MapoftheSouthParklands17,18,19and20..................................................................20
Figure16-Satelliteviewofthecurrentdetentionbasin....................................................................21
Figure17-SatelliteviewofbasinatGlensideandproposedbasinatParkland17............................22
Figure18-secondproposeddetentionbasinatParkland20.............................................................22
Figure19-NewExcavationareainwhichthedetentionbasincanincreaseitscapacityofthebasin23
Figure20-centreofdetentionbasinwhereexcavationcanbedonetakinginconsiderationofthe
tree......................................................................................................................................................24
Figure21-Locationofnewdetentionbasins,wetlandsandASRintheSouthParklandsandthe
directionofflow...................................................................................................................................25
Figure22-Sitelocationofexistingbasin............................................................................................26
Figure23-LitteraccumulationinMerriCreek,Melbourne................................................................29
Figure24-Pollutionretainedinafreedrainingstate.Adelaide,SouthAustralia...............................29
Figure25-Alitterscreeninthedirectionoftheflow,thedownwardinclinationencourageslitterto
movealongthescreen,leavingitfreetopassflows.Huntingdale,Victoria.......................................30
Figure26-Floatingtrapscanbesubjectedtohighforcesandvelocitiesduringfloodeventsthatcan
compromisetheirstructuralintegrity.Elwood,Victoria.....................................................................30
Figure27-ChannelnetslocatedacrossawholechannelinWestTorrens,SouthAustralia..............30
Figure28-Wetlands,detentionbasinsandaquiferstoragesystemlocations...................................32
Figure29-AWetlandSystemDesign..................................................................................................33
Figure30-ParafieldandAyfieldStormwaterCatchment...................................................................36
Figure31-PossibleAquiferStoragerecoverylocationsalongthespanoftheParklandCreek.........39
Figure32-ExistingundergroundservicesplanattheGlensideCampus............................................41
Figure33-pipenetworksoverviewmapoftheSouthernParklands..................................................42
Figure34-ETSAPowerLine................................................................................................................43
Figure38-Telecommunicationundergroundwiring..........................................................................46
ListofTables
Table1:Issues/Doubts........................................................................................................................17
Table2:PenaltiesUnderAct1984.......................................................................................................28
Table3:ListofStakeholders................................................................................................................40
Table4:ListofStakeholders(Continued)...........................................................................................41
Table5:RelevantSouthAustralianLegislationrequiredintheEIS.......................................................4
Table6:NativeFlorawithintheregion...............................................................................................29
Table1-Totalprecipitationforeachyear...........................................................................................10
FeasibilityReport
2013
8|P a g e
Table2-Propertiesaffectedbyflooding.............................................................................................11
Table3-Propertiesaffectedbyfloodingaftermitigationworks........................................................12
Table4-CriticalinflowVolumeDatafor7scenarios..........................................................................13
Table5-Criticalinflowdatafor7scenarios........................................................................................14
Table6-Removalofvariouspollutionsbywetlands..........................................................................34
Table7-Soilprofile.............................................................................................................................47
Table8-Existingdetentionbasinincrementcost...............................................................................48
Table9-Park17detentionbasincost.................................................................................................48
Table10-Costofthenewdetentionbasinatpark20........................................................................49
Table11-OverallDetentionBasinCost..............................................................................................49
Table12-WetlandConstructionCost.................................................................................................50
Table13-CostofAquiferStorageRecoveryboredrilling...................................................................51
Table14-TotalcostofAquiferStorageRecovery...............................................................................52
Table15-TotalCostofproposedworks.............................................................................................52
FeasibilityReport
2013
9|P a g e
Introduction
ThefollowingdocumentoutlinesthestrategiesthatPyramidEngineeringSolutionsorganisationhas
implemented in order to find recommendations and solutions for the Stormwater Management in
theSouthParklands.
Thisdocumentprovidesathoroughexplanationindetailoftheproposeddevelopment,coveringall
aspects regarding to; Urban Planning, Environment, Geotechnical and Water and preparation and
planning of the construction of the site. These aspects have been put in their departments
respectively.
The approach used has been well implemented, and by this we aim to provide the best possible
solutionsandrecommendationstotheclient,whilealsoincorporatingcommunityneeds.
To ensure a high standard is maintained throughout the investigation process, each department
contained a specialist in relation to their department. These departments, along with the
Management team have worked collaboratively throughout the feasibility stage, and constant
communicationbetweenalldepartmentsensuredthatallaspectsoftheinvestigationwerecovered.
Documentationincludedforthisfeasibilitystudyincludes:
Feasibilitystudy
QualityAssuranceManual
Byincorporatingalloftheaboveintoeachareaofthefeasibilitystudy,weareabletoshowthebest
optionstotheclientTonkinConsultingEngineers.
FeasibilityReport
S o l u t i o n s

PaulKoufalakis
ProjectManager
VickyNguyen
UrbanPlanning
Department
PranitaPanicker
TeamLeader
UrbanPlanningDepartment
2013
11|P a g e
CompanyDeclaration
CompanyName: PyramidEngineeringSolutions
BusinessAddress: MawsonLakesBlvd
MAWSONLAKES,SA,5095
Contact: Phone:0434372910
Email:koupj002@mymail.unisa.edu.au
CompanyDeclarationStatement:
Thisstatementdeclaresthatthesignatoriesofthisdocumenthavereadtheclientbriefinfulldetail,
understandingallpoliciesandstatementstherein.
This contract acts as assurance that all works conducted by the signatories and their associates
withintheagreedcontractedperiodwillcomplywiththeclientsrequestsandstatutes.
Signatoriesdeclarethattheinformationinthisdocumentatthetimeofsubmissionisaccurateand
istobecompliedwithforthedurationofthecontract.
Name:
Sign:
Date:
Name:
Sign:
Date:
Name:
Sign:
Date:
Name:
Sign:
Date:
Name:
Sign:
Date:
Name:
Sign:
Date:
Name:
Sign:
Date:
2013
12|P a g e
1.0 Introduction
WithinCivilEngineeringtherearenumerousbranchessuchasUrbanPlanningwhichisthedesigning
andestablishingofanurbanlandscape.Thefocusofthisprojectistoproposeaproductiveusagefor
theparklandsanddevelopaplanthatfollowsthelawsandregulationswithoutdisturbingthewell-
being of the community. This project was established upon the cultural heritage of the land and
contemplatingtheeconomicbenefitsoftheurbanlandscape.Constructionalissuessuchaspollution
andutilityinfrastructurewereconsideredthroughoutthisproject.
2013
13|P a g e
2.0 ProposedUseoftheParklands
2.1 History
TheoriginalintendedusefortheAdelaideParklandsproposedbytheCityFounderswasthatitwas
tobeusedasadevelopmentsite.Thatproposalhadbeenvotedagainstbythelocalcommunityand
theAdelaideCityCouncilin1967topreservetheseparklands.
In 1987, due to increasing pressure by potential developers for the development on the Adelaide
Parklands, an association was created by the Adelaide City Council to ensure that no development
onthelandcouldgothroughwithoutthepermissionoftheassociation.Theassociationinquestion
iscalledtheAdelaideParklandsPreservationAssociation(APPA).
The South Australian Jockey Club (SAJC) and the Motor Sport Board of South Australia are
commercial organizations that are based in South Australia. Both of these associations had at the
time been fighting to build a grandstand on land that they did not own, respectively in the South
Parklands.
In 1998, a proposal was created in order to redevelop Victoria Park. The proposal was mainly the
constructionofanewgrandstandtocaterfortheClipsal500andhorseracingevents.Theproposal
was eventually rejected by theAdelaide City Counciland subsequently has still been pursued by
theseassociationstothisday.

Figure1:AdelaideParklands
In2008,theVictoriaParkracecourseandsurroundingParklandsSouth-Eastofthecitycentre,which
hosts the Clipsal 500, gained the interest of potential developers. The developers proposed plans
2013
14|P a g e
that included the construction of a permanent grandstand and other associated structures in the
vicinity.However,thelocalcommunityfoughtagainstthisproposalgoingthrough,andwon.
2.2Current
Recent developments in the Parklands have created the need to ensure that maintenance and
improvement of the Parklands are conducted. This has been implemented through a replacement
plan,wheretreesandvegetationareeitherre-locatedorre-plantedistheSouthParklandsarea.
2.3FutureIntendedUse
AccordingtoIanGilfillan,whoisthecurrentAdelaideParklandsPreservationAssociationpresident,
the Department of Transport and Urban Planning gave a statement that the Parklands in the year
2036,willsetthedirectionforenhancingandconservingtheparklandsandopenspacesthroughout
themetropolitanarea.Thisdirectionwillaimto;provideafamiliarandnaturalreinforcementtothe
metropolitan urban growth containment boundary; increase recreation opportunities of the entire
Parklands system for the people of Adelaide; develop major waterways as linear parks; protect
biodiversityandreintroducingnativeplantsandanimals.
According to Adelaide City Council, they are currently preparing Community Land Management
Plans for the Adelaide Parklands. All the parks together with other areas such as the River Torrens
andtheLight,Hindmarsh,WhitmoreandHurtleSquares,willhaveaplanthatprovidesaframework
for future management. These will provide a direction for features such as planting, landscape,
entertaining/leisureactivities,accessandculturalheritagevalues.Theyarealsoplanningtoinclude
recommendations for closer working relations with Kaurna people and the broader city
communities,whichrecognisingpriorownershipandcontemporarythemesandrisingspacesforthe
enjoymentoftheAdelaidepeople.
How the Adelaide Parklands will be affected by this strategy is presently unclear. Many questions
arise,especiallyregardingtheproposedlegislationformanagingandpreservingtheParklands.
2013
15|P a g e
3.0TheDevelopmentPlan
3.1FeasibilityStudiesforStormwaterManagementSysteminSouth
Parklands.
Pyramid Engineering Solutions has enabled their Environmental Department, Geotechnical
Department and the Water department, to conduct investigations and thorough research into the
proposed design of a series of detention basins; in order to control the flood and to improve the
existingstormwatermanagementsysteminSouthParkLands.
The Urban Planning Department has conducted preliminary analysis in order to find out key issues
and to provide the path way for the best conceptual design. The Urban Planning Department has
alsoresearchedotherdevelopmentprojectssuchasMeadowsWaterTreatmentSolutionbyHEXA
Engineering and documents such as BHK Master Plan, in order to improve the quality of our
developmentplan.
Figure2:PreliminaryAnalysisoftheCulvert
Pyramid Engineering Solutions had approached the planning section of the project once the
thorough investigation of areas such as; Heritage, Topography, Environment and History of the
constructionsite,hadbeencompleted.Theproposeddevelopmentareaishighlyusedbythelocals
andcommunityasawhole.Onceconstructioncommences,itisvitallyimportanttoensurethatthe
following should be kept at a minimum; public prevented from using the parklands, minimum
damagetothefloraandfaunaoftheparklands.There-vegetationschemewasalsoanothermain
objectivethattheUrbanPlanningdepartmenthadcovered.
2013
16|P a g e
Figure3:ExistingCreek
Pyramid Engineering Solutions is planning to propose a new flood mitigation design for the South
Parklands, to manage the stormwater inflow from the Parklands creek (including a 100 year ARI
flood). The existing creek within the Parklands is shown in figure three, which is connected to the
mainbasininGlenside.TheUrbanPlanningDepartmentthroughfurtherinvestigationhasfoundthat
thecreekisalsoconnectedtoanotherbasinlocatedatthefarendofthecreek.Thatbasinislocated
closetoEastTerraceandiscapableofstoringapproximately850,000gallonsofwater.Accordingto
theclientrequirements,weareonlytofocusontheGlensidebasin.
Figure4:East-TerraceBasin
2013
17|P a g e
Figure5:GlensideBasin
Table1belowisshowingasummaryofdoubtsandissuesthattheUrbanPlanningDepartmenthas
been faced with during the preliminary analysis. The second column gives a brief description about
thesolutionandhowtheGeotechnicalDepartmentwillcomeupwithasolution.
Table1:Issues/Doubts
Issues/Doubts
Description
There are two basins which one are we
focusingon?
After the client meeting it was decided that East
Terracebasinisoutinourprojectarea.
Whether the creek is connected to the
Glensidebasin?
The team has found the details of current pipe
networksintheParklandfromtheclientandfoundit
isconnected.
ImpactfortheParklanduses. Discussing amongst other departments and through
research, it was found that there is no considerable
impact.
ImpactfortheEnvironmentandWildlife. Therewillbepossibleimpacts.SotheUrbanPlanning
Departmenthasproposedarecoverymethodcallre-
vegetation scheme which will be discussed further
withinDevelopmentPlansectioninthisreport.
What is the cultural and Heritage value of The Urban Planning Department has conducted an
2013
18|P a g e
thesite? online research in order to find a bit of history,

culturalandheritagevalueofthesite.
How to find the best fit locations for the
proposeddetentionbasins?
This matter was discussed with the Urban Planning
Department, the Water Department and the
Environmental Department. Main parameters of the
discussionthatwasconsiderare;
Minimum impact to the environment and land
users.
Shouldnotbeveryfarfromtheexistingbasin.
Easyaccesstoheavyconstructionmachineries.
Minimize the construction cost and maximize the
efficiencyofconstruction.
How can we guaranty the flood mitigation
designfor100ARIyear?
Not only are we proposing detention basins, other
conceptssuchasWaterAquifersandWetLandshave
also been considered. These concepts can guarantee
that there will not be a lack of capacity for
approximate100years.
3.2ProjectProposalsandIllustration
3.2.1DetentionBasins
Detentions basins are utilised for stormwater control measures that provide retention of
contaminated storm water runoff. Pyramid Engineering Solutions has come up with a proposal of
constructingfournewdetentionbasinsinslots17,18,19and20whicharetheadjacentslotsforthe
existingdetentionbasin.Bythat,itiseasiertointerconnectandtoaccessforconstructionpurposes
asitislocatednexttoGreenHillRoad.Proposedlocationsforthenewdetentionbasinsarespotted
ingreenandtheexistinginredinthemap(Figure6)below.
2013
19|P a g e
Figure6:ProposedLocations
Capacities of all the proposed detention basins are the same and can be altered according to the
requirements of the customer. Parameters such as dimension and capacity have been decided
accordingtothecostandfuturesustainability.
Figurebelowisaclearandsimpleillustrationofthetypeofdetentionbasinsthathasbeenproposed
fortheSouthParklands.Eachoneofthetankshasbeenfittedwithsafetyoverflowingsystemsand
the flood water will be collected and stored in the aquifer and the proposed wet lands so that we
canensurethereisnolackofcapacityandfloodcanbeprevented.
2013
20|P a g e
Figure7:IllustrationofProposedDetentionBasin
3.2.2Aquifer
ThedepartmentofUrbanPlanninghascomeupwithanewideaforstoringthewaterwhichisover
flowing from detention basins. The aquifer is the underground water layer which bearing by a rock
orunconsolidatedmineralssuchasgravel,sandorslit.Extractingandstoringgroundwaterfromthe
aquifer is already implemented in South Australia. Aquifer is always containing purified water and
can be used directly. Over flowed water from the detention tanks could be stored in aquifers and
recoveredtoproducehighqualitywater,withsimpletreatmentsysteminmultiplebarrierapproach.
Thebelowfigureshowsthenormalprocedureforstoringexcesswaterinanaquifer.
2013
21|P a g e
Purposeofeachapproach:
BalancingStorage-Settlementofthegrosspollutionandfines
Wetlands-Filtration,aerobicdegradation,phytoremediation,volatilization
Injectionwell-injectingwatertotheaquifer.
Aquifer-Anaerobicdegradationandpathogenattenuation
3.2.3WetLands
Wet land or wet detention ponds are capable of both retention and treatment of contaminated
storm water. According to the proposal of Urban Planning Department, wet lands are using as a
concept of storm water treatment. Then the aquifer will be used as a natural basin in the second
stageoftheproject.
Twowetlandshavebeenproposedinthefirststageoftheprojectandthiswillbemorebeneficialto
theParklandanditsenvironment.Thisconceptiswillalsogivesomeextrabenefitsasitlistedbelow:
Lowconstructioncost,betterresultsandlowcostmaintenance.
Improvethewetlandwildlifehabits.
Providinghumanrecreationopportunitiessuchasbirdwatching.
Improvethenaturallookwithintheparklands.
Capableofstoringandpurifyingstormwaterbeforesendstotheaquifer.
Improvethevegetation.
Improvethequalityofenvironment.
Capableofprovidingself-mitigationforanyunavoidableimpacttoon-sitenaturalwetlands.
2013
22|P a g e
Accordingtothefeasibilitystudies,thewetlandsareanalternativemethodthatweareprovidingas
wellasarangeofextrabenefitsandalsoplacingthefoundationforensuringfuturesustainabilityof
theproject.
3.2.4Heritage
TheDepartmentofUrbanPlanninghasconductedseveralresearchesandinvestigationsinorderto
find out the heritage and cultural value of the park lands. According to the observations within the
sitearea,theteamhasfoundapproximately500to1000peopleareusingtheparklandinadayand
thisnumberdoublesontheweekendsandpublicholidays.
The South Parklands has a cultural and heritage value. It is viewed by the local community and
persons who use the Parklands in high regard. Also, it is important for the wildlife that lives within
theParklands.Suchas;possums,koalasandbirds.FarmandGumtreesarethemostcommontrees
found in the Parklands. Some are over 100 years old and are reserved by the local government as
valuable natural resources. Figure eight shows the reserved area of the Parklands by the City
Councilandthelocalgovernment.Bushlandswithinthevicinityarealsoreservedbytheauthorized
bodies.Figure2.7isshowsthesignboardcapturedbyoneoftheUrbanPlanningteammember.
Figure8:ReservedTreeArea
2013
23|P a g e
Figure9:ReservedBushArea
3.3RevegetationScheme
Pyramid Engineering Solutions is proposing the re-vegetation scheme in order to minimize the
possible damage to the site environment. Parkland ground is majorly covered by plants and grass.
TheseplantsarewellestablishedtotheparklandsoilandhaveshadebylargeGumandFarmtrees
inthearea.
Within the construction period, there will be large amounts of digging involved. An area with a
diameterof100mapproximatelywillbeduginordertoconstructadetentionbasin.Anewproposal
containingfourdetentionbasinsandaccessofheavymachineriessuchasexcavatorsandtruckswill
possiblyharmthegrassandplantswithintheParkland.AccordingtotheapproximationofPyramid
EngineeringSolutions,1kmby1kmgrassandlandwillbeaffectedbytheconstruction.Revegetation
procedurewillbetherecoverysystemforthedamagedvegetationintheconstructionarea.
3.3.1ProcedurebeforeConstruction
Forthefirststageofthere-vegetationscheme,theEnvironmentalEngineeringDepartment
willneedtoconducttheirresearchtofindwhetherthenativetypesofgrassorplantswillbe
withinthedangerarea.
Ifthenativeplantsorgrassareintheconstructionarea,ourresponsiblegroupswillmakean
arrangement to secure the plants or remove and re-plant them carefully in a secure and
suitableplace.
2013
24|P a g e
Mark and keep the details of the trees, plants and the type of grass that will be damaged
duetotheconstruction.
Conductresearchaboutthenecessaryconditionstore-plantthedamagedplantsinthepark
lands.
Reportingindetailtotheclientaboutthepossiblevegetationdamage.
Being responsible of DO NOT TO TOUCH the reserved old trees within the parklands, such
asGumtrees.Astheyhaveaculturalandheritagevalue.
3.3.2 Procedureaftertheconstruction
Re- arranging the damaged soil with natural fertilizes with the support of Geotechnical
EngineeringDepartment.
Givingthesoiltimetosettledownbeforere-planting.
Re-planting new grass and plants equal to the amount that has been removed during the
constructionperiod.
Introducingmaintenancesystemsinordertoprotecttheplantsuntiltheyarewellestablishedto
theparklandsoil.
MaintenancewillbehandedovertothemaintenancestaffwhoisemployedfortheCityCouncil
Our Environmental tem will be monitoring the progress of vegetation, even after the
construction.
2013
25|P a g e
4.0Laws&Acts
TheparklandsareadefinitivepartofthecityanddatefromColonelLightsoriginalplanin1837.This
showsmorestrictcouncilandmanagementrules.Councilandthestategovernmentmanagevarious
partsoftheparklands;thisparklandistreatedasasingleentity.
AnewActwasintroducedundertheAdelaideParklandsAct2005,activitiescomeunderthisActare:
1. GrowingProsperity
2. Improvingwellbeing
3. Attainingsustainability
4. FosteringcreativityandInnovation
5. BuildingCommunities
6. ExpandingOpportunity
VeryfewActscomesundertheAdelaideParkLandsAct2005,whichhavetobeconsideredpriorto
workorconstructiontakingplace,theyare:
1. City of Adelaide Act 1998:- an act to establish mechanisms to enhance the role of the city of
AdelaideasthecapitalcityofSouthAustralia;tomakespecialprovisioninrelationtothelocal
governanceoftheCityofAdelaide.
2. The Development Act 1993: - This act is also called Amendment of Development Act. There
arefurthersubsectionofthisactwhichareshownasbelow
Amendment of section 4 - section 4 defines the definition of adjacent land insert: Adelaide
ParkLandshavethesamemeaningasintheAdelaideParkLandsAct2005.
Amendment of section 46 Declaration by minister, a declaration needs with respect to
developmentorprojectwithintheAdelaideParkLands.
Amendmentofsection49-Crowndevelopment,section49hasaftersubjection(17)inserts:
(18)Subjecttosubsection(19),thissectiondoesnotapplytoanydevelopmentwithin
the Adelaide Park Lands; also any such development must be assessed under another
DivisionotherthanDivision3A.
(19)Subsection(18)doesnotapply-soastoexcludefromtheoperationofthissection
developmentwithinanypartoftheinstitutionaldistrictoftheCityofAdelaidethathas
beenidentifiedbyregulationsmadeforthepurposeofthisparagraphbythegovernor
ontherecommendationoftheminister.
2013
26|P a g e
(20) minister must take reasonable steps to consult with the Adelaide Park Land
Authority
For the purpose of this section, the institutional district of the city of Adelaide in the
InstitutionalDirectidentifiedanddefinedbytheDevelopmentPlansthatrelatestothe
areaofTheCorporationoftheCityofAdelaide,asinexistenceonthecommencement
ofthissubsection.
Amendmentofsection49(A)-Developmentinvolvingelectricityinfrastructure.
(22)subjecttosubjection(23),thissectiondoesnotapplytoanydevelopmentwithin
theAdelaideParkLands(andanysuchdevelopmentmustbeassessedunderDivision)
(23) Subsection does not apply so as to exclude the governor making a regulation
undersubsection(3)withrespecttominorworkofaprescribedkind.
3. The Local Government Act 1934:- SECT 359 - this act is about the prohibition of traffic or
closure of streets and roads. The council may by resolution, supported by a majority of all
members of the council, vehicles of a particular class from a particular street, road or public
places,
4. The Local Government Act 1999:- amendment of Local Government, described in different
subsections.
9Amendmentofsection4Interpretation
Section4(1),AdelaideCityCouncilmeansTheCorporationoftheCityofAdelaide,
10Amendmentofsection194Revocationofclassificationoflandascommunityland.
Section194(1)(a)unlesstherevocationisbyforceofaprovisionofanotherAct.
11Amendmentofsection196ManagementPlanscomesunderthissection,
Section196(1)(a)
Section 196 the Adelaide City Council must prepare and adopt a management plan
fortheAdelaideParklands.
Section 196(3) provides information of any arrangements or restrictions on public
use of any part of the park lands, or on movement through the park land. Specific
informationmustbeprovidedtothecouncilforthegrantingofleasesorlicensesover
anypartoftheparklands.
Section 196 the Adelaide City Council must have a management plans under this
sectionfortheAdelaideParklandswithin2years.
12Amendmentofsection202Alienationofcommunitylandbyleaseorlicence.
2013
27|P a g e
5. TheRoads(OpeningandClosing)Act1991:-insertionofsection6B
Aroadtowhichthissectionapplesmaybemadewider,narrower,longerorshorterby
theMinister.
Thissectionappliestoaroadwithin,oradjacentto,theAdelaideParkLands.
Theministermusttakeactionunderthissection,evenifanypartoftherelevantland
hasbeendedicatedforthepurposeofparklands.
34GRoadsassociatedwithAdelaideParkLands:
Anapplicationmaybemadetotheministertomakearoadwider,narrower,longeror
shorterpursuanttosection6BBythecommissionerofHighways(includinginacase
involving an area within the City of Adelaide) or by the Adelaide City Council or by a
councilwhoseareaadjoinsthecityofAdelaide.
Theapplicationmustbeaccompaniedbyapreliminaryplanofthelandsubjecttothe
proposedroadprocess,inaformdeterminedorapprovedbytheSurveyor.
A notice must specify that representations on relation to the proposal may be made
withinsuchlongerperiodsastheministermaydirect.
TheapplicationmustforwardtotheSurveyor-generalaftertheexpirationoftheperiod
thatappliesundersubsection.
The Surveyor general must then prepare a report in relation to the matter and
furnishthereporttotheminister.
6. TheWaterworksAct1932:-AmendmentofWaterworks
Amendmentofsection27freesupplyforpublicpurposewithinPortAdelaide
Section 27 delete Corporations of the City of Adelaide and the City of Port
Adelaideandsubstitute
Section 27 delete the City of Adelaide and the township of and substitute the
townshipof
Section 27 delete city and township and occupied and used by either of such
corporationsandsubstitute:townshipandoccupiedandusedbythecouncil
Section27-afteritspresentcontentsasamendedbythissection.
2013
28|P a g e
4.1AboriginalHeritageProtectionLegislation
This part of the report provides an overview of the heritage protection legislation as they are
protected by the commonwealth legislation, namely the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
HeritageProtection:
1. AboriginalHeritageAct1988:
Any Aboriginal site or object, whether it has been previously recorded or is yet to be
discovered,iscoveredundertheblanketprotectionoftheAboriginalHeritageAct1988.Under
section 23 of AHA, it is an offence to damage, disturb or interfere with the aboriginal sites,
objects or remains unless written authorisation from the Minister for Aboriginal affairs and
reconciliation has been obtained. If anything will be done without permission, a legal action
will be taken and penalties for an offence are up to $10,000 or six months imprisonment in
caseofanindividualandupto$50,000inthecaseofacorporatebody.
2. AboriginalandTorresStraitIslanderHeritageProtectionAct1984:-
The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Heritage Protection Act 1984 comes under the
Commonwealth Minister for the Environment, Heritage and the Arts to make declarations
regarding the protection of an Aboriginal objects, sites or remains. All Aboriginal Heritage is
protectedunderthisAct.
Section22ofthisactprescribesactionscontradictingadeclarationmadeundertheActresults
inPenaltiesof:
Table2:PenaltiesUnderAct1984
ForAreas ForObjects
$50,000forabodycorporate $25,000forabodycorporate
$10,000 and 5 years imprisonment in other
cases
$5,000 and 2 years imprisonment in other
cases
3. EnvironmentProtectionandBiodiversityConservation(EPBC)Act1999:-
This act is relevant to Aboriginal and historic/colonial cultural heritage, when the heritage
values of a place meet the criteria for historic or other categories. Historic places have been
recognizedonnationalheritagevaluesandarelistedontheNationalHeritagelist.
2013
29|P a g e
Section 324 of the EPBC protects the national heritage values of National Heritage Places.
National heritage places are administered through the National Heritage List and the
CommonwealthHeritageList.UnderthisActanyactionthathasasignificantimpactonplaces
ofnationalculturalmustbereferredtotheMinisterfortheEnvironmentforapproval.
4. NativeTitleAct1993:-
Native title Act 1993 is part of the Commonwealths response to the High Courts decision in
Mabo V Queensland (no. 2) and adopts the common law definition of native title defined as
the rights and interests that are possessed under the traditional laws and customs of the
Aboriginalpeopleinlandandwatersthatarerecognizedbycommonlaw.
5. HeritagePlacesAct1993:-
The Heritage Places Act 1993 is the paramount European heritage protection legislation in
SouthAustralia.Section16ofthisActestablishesasetofcriteriatobeusedtoassesswhether
aplacequalitiesfoelistingontheSAheritageregister.Buriedculturalmaterialhasrelevance
underthisAct.Section36makesitanoffencetodamageaheritageplaceenteredontotheSA
heritageRegistered.
6. DevelopmentAct1993:-
ACT1993providesimplementationofaDevelopmentPlantoregulatedevelopmentwithinthe
State.Developmentplansmayincludeplacesoflocalheritagesignificance.
7. EnvironmentProtectionandBiodiversityConservation(EPBC)act1999:-
The commonwealth EPBC Act 1999 protects places of national cultural and environment
significancefromdamageandinterferencebyestablishingaNationalHeritage.EPBCsetsouta
procedure for obtaining approvals, which may include the need to prepare an environmental
impactstatementfortheproposedaction.
4.2PublicExpectationsfromtheParklands
Openspace-Thepublicareentitledtoanopenspaceareaforleisureactivities
Opportunitiesforsportsandrecreation-Sportsandphysicalactivitiesareusuallyconducted
outdoors. So facilities have been built to ensure team sports in the parklands continue.
Recreationalactivitieshavealsobeenconsidered.
Attractiveandsustainablelandscape
2013
30|P a g e
Versatileeventvenues
Interpretationofournaturalandculturalheritage
4.3RestrictionofWork
Noiserules:
The level of sound pressure is measured in decibels (dB (A)), where dB (A) is the variation
measurement used to analyze noise and prescribed levels for noise from commercial sites
andsitework.Thefollowingchartshowsthenoiselevelsandtheredescriptions:
EPA
(EnvironmentProtectionAuthority)hasrecommendedworkinghoursforanyconstruction
work.
1. Must not occur on a Sunday or other Public Holidays (however, if work is on large
scaleitmayoccuronaSundayorPublicHolidaybetween9amto7pm).
2. Mustnotoccuronanyotherdayexceptbetween7amto7pm.
3. The Environment protection Act 1993 is about the reasonable measures that must
betakenbythebuildingcompaniesandcontractorstominimisenoise.
DustControl:
Figure: typical noise sources and their respective noise levels
2013
31|P a g e
Company or contractor must take appropriate steps to prevent dust nuisance, at any time
during the course, the city Precinct Officer may specify times to restrict dust-creating work
where,intheopinionofthatofficer,apublicnuisancewouldotherwiseoccur.
BreachingoflawsandActscancauseapenaltyof$5000.
4.4ProtectionofthePublicaroundtheWorkArea
GeneralConsiderations
1. Publicsafety
2. Localenvironment
3. Hazardousmaterials
4. Wastemanagement
Permitsarerequiredforeveryactivity
A company should hold permits on site all times that will take place in public space.
Including;cranework,concretepumps,installationsofvehicles,stormwatercrossingplaces,
servicepits.
AccessaroundtheSite
Whenworkistocontinueonsite,thepublicshouldhaveeasyaccessaroundthesite,which
wouldbesafeandconvenient.
Trafficcontrol
If the proposed activity will impact on normal traffic conditions, the appropriate Traffic
Management Plan needs to be produced for agreement by council, more information in
AustralianStandard1742.3-ManualifUniformTrafficControlDevices.
2013
32|P a g e
5.Community
TheAdelaideParklandshaveaniconicreputationwithinthelocalcommunitiesthatsurroundthem,
the wider Adelaide community and are recognisable to Adelaide across the country. With this in
mindthereisobviouslyalargevestedinterestfromavastarrayofstakeholdersintoanyworkthat
would affect the area. In general, work and developments to the parklands receive a very cautious
response from these stakeholders; hence it will be very important to not only develop a plan that
minimisesitsadverseeffectonparkusers,buttoalsoincludeparklandsgroupsthatmaybeaffected
bytheworksinanyrelevantdiscussions.Thiswillhelpgaugepublicopinionsontheworksandwill
alsoopenupopportunitiesforanypotentialcompromisesthatmaybebeneficialtotheproject.
5.1UsersoftheParklands
Therearemanydifferentgroupsthatmakedailyuseoftheparklands,suchas;
Figure10:CricketGround
2013
33|P a g e
Figure11:TennisCourt
Figure12:SoccerGround
2013
34|P a g e
Figure13:BikeTracks
Figure14:MapoftheRunningTrail
2013
35|P a g e
Therearealsoalargenumberofparklandsusersthatutilisetheareaonadailybasisbutnotundera
formalororganisedarrangement.
Runners/Joggers
Cyclists
Modelairplanegroups
Exercisegroups
Walkers
Groups that may not directly use the parklands but still hold an interest in any changes that are
proposed
Localresidents
Localbusinesses
Communitygroups
Adetailedlistofstakeholdershasbeenprovidedbytheclient
5.2HowwilltheConstructionPhaseAffecttheUsers?
Theconstructionphasewillpotentiallyhavethegreatestimpactontheusersoftheparklands.The
impact that this phase will have on the parklands users will heavily depend on the solution that is
chosen to increase the drainage capacity. The final detailed design will give a definitive scope of
whattheactualconstructionphasewillentailandtheestimatedlengthofcompletion.
It is likely however that the construction of any detention basin and any other relevant works will
have a large impact on the immediate effected area. Depending on where this area is located it
couldpotentiallyhaveanegativeimpactonavastarrayofparklandsusers.
Theconstructionphasewillmostlikelyinvolve;
The utilization of paths and roadways already within the parklands and the potential
construction of new temporary roadways. These paths will be needed for transportation of
equipment to and from the construction site and allow plant to travel to and from site.
These paths will ideally be able to be positioned in a way so they do not unnecessarily
inconvenienceparklandusers,suchasbeingplacedthroughsportingfields.
2013
36|P a g e
Figure15:ParklandsArea
Figure16:ExistingRoadneartheOldRaceCourse
Theestablishmentofthesite,thiswillalsodependonthefinaldesignastowheresiteswillneedto
be established. If widening the culvert is decided as a means of increasing the drainage for the
2013
37|P a g e
parklandsthenasitearoundtheFullartonandGreenhillroadsintersectionwillneedtobemapped
out.
Oncethisprocessisstarted,usersofthisintersectionwillstarttobeeffected.Itwillbeimportantto
implementstrategiestohelpreducetheimpactthatisfeltbyroadusers.Thiscouldbeachievedby
performing works in off peak times such as night works. Developing a comprehensive traffic
managementplanforwhenconstructionisinprogress.
Figure17:RoadNetworkintheParklandsArea
5.3PublicOpiniononWorks
The publics opinion on the proposed works will obviously be very diverse. There will always be
people and groups on both sides of the agenda. What is important is to involve these groups and
find out what they are concerned about and what they are pleased with. Everyone will not be able
to be pleased, but if people and groups have the option of being involved in the process they can
feelliketheyarehavinganinputintotheproject.Thisconsultationprocesscouldalsobringtolight
somescenariosandproblemsthathadnotbeenpreviouslythoughtof.
2013
38|P a g e
5.4OptionsforMinimisingImpactonCommunity
5.4.1AppropriateMeasurestoMinimiseEffectsoftheConstructionProcess
It is very unlikely that there will be absolutely no disruption to the users of the parklands and
potentially motorists, particularly ones that use Greenhill and Fullarton roads, during the
constructionprocess.Therearewayshoweverthattheseimpactscanbereduced.
Reducinganyinconveniencethatcouldpotentiallydisruptthedailyroutinesofpotentiallythousands
of people a day (large proportion motorists) will be extremely beneficial to the project and will
ultimatelyincreasethefeasibilityoftheentireplannedaction.
5.4.2RestrictWorkstoAppropriateHours
Thisisoneveryeffectivewaytodecreasetheinconveniencelevelsthatthepublicaresubjectedto.
Byrestrictingtheworktoappropriatetimesoftheday,thenumberofpeopleaffectedbytheworks
canbegreatlyreduced.Thiscanbeachievedbyperforming;
5.4.3NightWorks
Night works are a very effective way to reducing impact on the community due to a construction
process. This is achieved by performing works when the large majority of people are at home and
notcommutingtoandfromwork.Thenumberorroadusershavedrasticallyreducedwhich,inthe
case of the widening of the culvert under the Fullarton and Greenhill roads intersection, would be
verybeneficialtotheproject.
In the case of works actually within the Parklands, night works may be less necessary or even
inappropriate. The number of people that will be disrupted from their daily activities within the
Parklands,especiallyifworksaretoonlybeundertakenonweekdays,willbesignificantlylessthan
the proposed road works. This could be justification for works to be undertaken during traditional
workinghours.
NightworkswithintheParklandscouldalsobelookeduponasanunviableoptionforotherreasons.
The area could be considered a semi residential area. Although there is a large proportion of
surrounding businesses, there is also a intermingling of residential properties and apartment
complexes. Given the proximity of these properties to the proposed works, night works may be
consideredinappropriateduetothenoisethatwouldbeemitted.
A night works agenda may also be considered inappropriate due to possible disruptions to the
sleepingpatternsofthewildlifethatlivewithintheparklands.Numerousspeciesofbirdsandother
nativeanimalsresidewithintheparklandsanditmaynotbeconsideredenvironmentallyresponsible
toknowinglyunstablethisarrangementforaprolongedperiodoftime.
2013
39|P a g e
5.4.5Minimiseintrusionsontosportingfieldsandwalkways
A large proportion of the parklands in question have been developed as sporting fields, covering a
wide variety of sports as mentioned previously. These sporting fields would be used for both
organised competition, trainings and also by recreational users on a wide variety of times and days
throughouttheweek.Withthisinminditwouldbebeneficialtotheviabilityoftheprojectifasfew
ofthesevenuescouldbeencroacheduponaspossibleduringtheconstructionphaseoftheproject.
Thiswouldalsoinvolvedirectingtransportaroundthesefieldsoneither,temporarilydesignedpaths
androadwaysorbyutilisingtheroadnetworkalreadyinplacewithintheparklands.
5.4.6Minimisethenumberoftreestoberemoved
Onemajorfactorthatcoulddramaticallyaffectthepublicopinionoftheprojectwillbetheamount
of vegetation that is destroyed in the process and particularly the amount of significant trees that
areremoved.Thepublicisverysensitivetotheremovalofsignificanttrees,especiallynativespecies
and a proposed design that included large numbers of tree removal could spark a public backlash.
Hence,therecommendationistokeeptheremovalofsignificanttreestoanabsoluteminimum.This
willalsosavetheaddedcostofcouncilfeesandoffsetsthatwillberequiredforremovals.
5.5PublicConsultation
An extensive public consultation process will need to be undertaken to help gauge public concerns
abouttheimpendingproject.Thefeedbackformprovidedtotheclientsspecified,oncereturnedwill
giveavaluableinsightintoageneralpublicopinionoftheworksandwillmoreimportantlyhopefully
helptooutlineinmoredetailhowpeoplewithindifferentgroupsusetheparklandsonadailybasis.
The issues that will hopefully be highlighted by this public survey can be taken into account during
the detailed design phase of the project. This will prove to be a very in touch method of
investigating the areas of the parklands that are important to the parklands users, investigating
usagepatternsoftheparklandsbyusersandhopefullygivethepublicabetterimpressionofwhole
project.Belowisalistofthestakeholdersthatthesurveywillbemailedoutto.
2013
40|P a g e
Table3:ListofStakeholders
Organisation
Adelaide&MountLoftyRangesNRM
Board
Glenelg to Adelaide Park Lands
RecycledWaterProject
CityofBurnside SAHealthMajorProjectOffice
CityofAdelaide SECRA
CityofUnley Residents of Effective Stormwater
SolutionsInc.
AdelaideParkLandsAuthority Adelaide Park Lands Preservation
Association
2013
41|P a g e
Table4:ListofStakeholders(Continued)
Organisation
RegularEventHolders
AdelaideInternationalPedalPrixInc. ClassicAdelaide
SAPSASA ArcherySA
SACatholicPrimarySchoolCrossCountry Clipsal
SportingLicenceHolders
PrinceAlfredCollege AdelaideHockeySeniors
ChristianBrothersCollege TennisSeniorsSA
St.AloysiusCollege SouthParkHockey&TennisCentre
PembrokeSchool SACroquetAssociation
PultneyGrammarSchool SouthTerraceCroquetClub
SouthernSoaringLeague ClubdePetanquedAdelaide
SADogObedienceClub AdelaideCometsSoccerClub
KenilworthCricketClub AdelaideHarriersAmateurAthleticClub
AdelaideCityJuniorSoccerClub
InterestGroupsintheParkLands
HorseSA NatureConservationSocietyofSA
WestAdelaideSoccerClub DTPI-OfficeforCyclingandWalking
AdelaideUnitedFootballClub SAVeteranCyclingAssociation
AdelaideWomensSoccerClub BicycleInstituteofSA
MercedesCollege SARugbyUnionLtd
Equestrian Federation of Australia Inc (SA
Branch)
ConservationCouncilofSA
AdelaideUniversityHockeyClub
2013
42|P a g e
6.0Heritage
6.1AboriginalHeritage
The project area is located within the claimed traditional lands of the Kaurna people. The Kaurna
territory extends from Cape Jervis to Port Wakefield along Eastern shore of Gulf St. Vincent; inland
tonearCrystalBrook,Snowtown,Blyth,Hoyleton,HamleyBridge,Clarendon,Gawler,andMyponga;
from the East side of the Hummock Range to Red Hill. The stringy bark forests of the Mount Lofty
Rangesaremarkedastheboundaryoftheirterritory.
Figure18:KaurnaTerritory
SincetheprojectareaislocatedintheAdelaideparklandsitfallsintheMt.Loftyblock.
2013
43|P a g e
6.1.1Currentknownlocationsandsignificanceofaboriginalheritagesites:
Only one Aboriginal site is recorded with heritage significance in the project area. It is a Scarred
treewhichislocatednearsouthterraceinpark18(WiteWirra).
Figure19:LocationofScarredTree
Aboriginal people caused scars on trees by removing the bark for various purposes. Aboriginal
people removed bark from trees to make canoes, containers and shields and to build temporary
shelters. They also cut toe holds in trees to make them easier to climb. This allowed them to use
trees as lookouts and helped them in hunting as well. Screed trees are important because they
providevaluablecluesabouttheuseofperishablematerialsbyAboriginalpeople.Scarredtreesare
easiertofindthanmanyotherarchaeologicalsites.TheytelluswhereAboriginalpeopleusedtolive,
andhelpusfindothertypesofarchaeologicalsites,suchasscattersofstonetools.Scarredtreesalso
provide Aboriginal people today with an important link to their culture and their past. The scarred
treeatthesiteisaredgumtree.Ascaredtreeisidentifiedbycheckingifthesapwoodisexposed.
Theidentificationofascarredtreeisdetailedinthepicturebelow.
2013
44|P a g e
Figure20:IdentifyingaScarredTree
Wetlandshavebeenplannedtobecreatedinonpart18.Butthewetlandwouldbecreatedinsuch
awaythatitwouldnotharmthescreedtreeinanyway.
Since the area has an aboriginal history there is a potential of unrecorded archaeological sites or
deposits to exist in the project area which might disrupt the project. If any such issue occurs after
thecommencementoftheprojecttheworkersatthesiteshouldfirstreportittothecompanyand
thenthecompanyshouldreferittothecouncil,anarchaeologistandtheaboriginalgroup.
6.2EuropeanHeritage
176 years ago Colonel Light designed a blueprint for Adelaide which consisted of the Torrens River
separatingintotwo.AfterEuropeansettlementin1788,ColonelLightsinnovativestructurewasthe
first extensively sustainable project with six productive town squares. In total he designed and
constructedover931hectaresofland.
6.2.1CurrentknownlocationsandsignificanceofEuropeanheritagesites
There are two important European Heritage sites in the project area. One is the Glenside Campus
andtheotheroneistheVictoriaPark.
2013
45|P a g e
6.2.1.1GlensideCampus
The Glenside Campus first opened in 1870 as Adelaides primary psychiatric hospital. The original
hospital campus was much larger than the current site. However, numerous historic buildings
remainontheGlensideCampus.
TheheritagezoneattheGlensideCampusconsistsofthefollowingstructures
HistoricHospitalBuildings
StateHeritagelistedstonewall.
TheHeritageZoneiscomprisedofaclusterofearly,StateHeritagelistedhospitalbuildingstowards
the centre of the site. These landmark buildings and associated the wall are situated within its
distinctivesettingofmatureeucalypts,figsanddeciduoustrees.TheHeritageZoneextendsfromthe
historiccoreandfunnelstowardthemainentrancetothesiteoffFullartonRoad.Thesymmetryof
thebuildingsalongthismainentranceaxiscreatesthemostimportantlandscapesettingforthesite,
whichwillbestrengthenedandenhancedthroughcarefullandscapedesign.
Figure21:LocationofGlensideCampus
2013
46|P a g e
Figure22:GlensideCampus
Figure23:HeritageBuildingatGlensideCampus
2013
47|P a g e
6.2.1.2VictoriaPark
In the Victorian heritage the Grandstand situated in Victoria Park was constructed in the 19
th
CenturybywhitesettlersaspartoftheAdelaideParkLands.ThepurposeoftheGrandstandwasto
entertain the citizens with horse races. The design was aesthetically pleasing and durable. The
Grandstandconsistsofaticketcounter,gardenarea,snackbarandabeerstand.
Figure24:LocationofVictoriaPark
2013
48|P a g e
Figure25:VictoriaPark
Figure26:VictorianGrandstand
But the heritage structures in both the sites will not be affected since no project activities will take
placeintheparticularareaswheretheheritagestructuresarelocated.
Themethodologyofidentificationandmanagementoftheculturalheritageisdiscussedindetailby
theEnvironmentalDepartment.
2013
49|P a g e
7.0 Economy
Adelaide Parklands have a lot of economic benefits. The main benefit would have to do with its
Heritage Heritage is considered to be a major tourism attraction, and can contribute to greater
economic value to the community. A structure like the Grandstand at the parklands is a tourist
attraction.
These heritage listed structures are a major incentive to visit Adelaide and its surrounding areas
boosting the economy and employment. The horse races, Clipsal, etc. that are hosted at the
parklandsaddtoeconomyofthearea.
Creation of wetlands during the project will not only benefit the biodiversity but also tourists and
residents.Thecreationofwetlandswillalsoincreaseemploymentasitwouldneedtobeconstantly
maintained. Even promoting camps, BBQ, etc. at the parklands without affecting the environment
willbenefittheeconomyofthearea.
2013
50|P a g e
8.0ConstructionPhaseIssues
8.1Environmentalissues:
Naturalenvironmentrequirementsarebeingsupportedandappreciatedsuchas:
ReinforcethenaturalcharacteroftheParkthroughtheplantingoflocalnativespecies.
PossibleprotectionandenhancementremnantplantswithintheParkarea.
Supply additional plantings of South Australian Blue Gums around the boundaries of the soccer
pitchesandenclosethespace.
Reinforce plantings such as Glen Osmond road and Unley Road with additional South Australian
BlueGums.
8.2FloodinginParkland
2013
51|P a g e
TheParkLandsCreekshouldberestoredthroughtheimplementationoffloodmitigationmeasures
along the length of the creek to contain potential flooding within the boundaries of the Park Lands
area. According to the Adelaide city council the Creek has a nearly direct lane through the South
Park Lands with very little meandering. Existing flood storage within the South Park Lands is
relativelylimitedwithfloodwaterschannelleddirectlytotheoutlet.
8.3NoisePollution
Roadway through the parklands have already alienated over 100 acres of our precious real estate
and continue to grow for accommodating even for more vehicle for traffic, council parking and city
workers.UpgradingtheBritanniaintersectionneartotheparklandisthelatestviolation.
Traffic noise is an even greater reason to destroy the South Parkland amenity than the road way
through them. This noise pollution are mostly generated from the motors and tire abrasion,
parameters in to the parklands to verify depths, weather conditions, the types of material used in
buildingtheroadsurface.
Noiselevelsshouldbekepttoaminimumtoavoiddisturbingtheoccupiersofadjoiningproperties
andthegeneralpublicaccordingtoIanGilfillan.
2013
52|P a g e
8.4Airpollution
Thepresenceofpollutionsintotheatmosphereresultsdirectlyintotheairqualitydegradation.Air
pollution is also critical factor affecting the quality of the other environmental resources as well as
humanmadestructuresandthefacilitiesinthearea.
Theprocedureoftheconstructiondisturbsthesoilaroundtheparklandthatallowsthewindtopick
up particles and carry them over the large distance. Smoke from wood fired heaters and behind
motorvehicleemissionsisamajorcauseofairpollutionneartotheAdelaideparklands.
All those airborne pollutants have potential inference for human body and can have terrible effect
onthesurroundinghabitats
8.5Dustmanagement
To control the level of dust pollution should apply water or a binding agent to those areas or
activitiesthatarelikelytoproducedust,Stabilizestockpilesandfinishedground,erectatemporary
screen minimum two meters in height with a porosity of around 50 per cent in the direction of
prevailingwindsensurethetrucksleavingtheareashouldbecoveredandthatanyspillageontothe
groundsurfaceandroadsispromptlycleanedup.
8.6UtilityInfrastructure
8.6.1Electricalsupply
ElectricitysupplytotheAdelaideParklandthroughtheCityareawasbeingproposedbyElectraNet
andETSA.ThatprojectwasinvolvingtoinstallcablesthroughtheParkLandsatthenorthernendof
parkland that includes construction of the bridge across the Torrens River and through the south-
western Park Lands (According to Adelaide Parkland Authority). That time numbers of options for
routes and the crossing of the river were being discussed too. In addition only streets were not
considered feasible by Electra Net and ETSA representatives because of the distraction of the
vehicles and access to properties and current underground services. The work required wide, deep
trenchingwithsomeholesleftopenforalongtime.Also,thelocationofthecablinghadtobeaway
fromexistinggasandsewermains.ThatshowsthattheAdelaideParkLandsalwaysseemtobethe
easieroption.
2013
53|P a g e
8.6.2Watersupply
In 2002, a shortage of water in to the Murray Darling basin and local catchments led to water
conservationtargetsbeingsetacrosstheAdelaideParkLands.Thesemeasuresincludedtargetsfor
water reduction in certain areas flooded from the River Torrens were higher in 2003 to require
sporting licence holders were using River Torrens water to abide by the same water maintenance
measuresimplementedbySAWaterformainswater.
2013
54|P a g e
9.0Recommendations
This section identifies the approach that should be taken for this project in order to ensure its
success.TheUrbanPlanningteamwouldrecommendsthefollowingpoints
Withacomprehensiveplaninplacetoinformthecommunityoftheproposedworksthereis
noreasonthattheprojectshouldnotbeabletoproceedasintended.Anyproblemsthatthe
community might have about the project will be highlighted during this process and once
highlightedcanbedealtwithaccordingly.
The design of the project is such that known heritage places are avoided. But if any
unrecorded archaeological sites are found then appropriate measures like informing the
authoritiesneedtobedone.
TheAdelaidesouthParklandsshouldhavesomethingforallpeoplesuchasawiderangeof
walking trails, as well as picnic areas and play grounds to enjoy with family and friends, a
widerangeofsportingfacilities,andexcitingevents.
Bestfitlocationsfortheproposeddetentionbasinsshouldbebasedon-
a) Minimumimpacttotheenvironmentandlandusers.
b) Shouldnotbeveryfarfromtheexistingbasin.
c) Easyaccesstoheavyconstructionmachineries.
d) Minimizetheconstructioncostandmaximizetheefficiencyofconstructionworks.
2013
55|P a g e
References
AdelaideCityCouncil.(2013).Noise.Available:
http://www.adelaidecitycouncil.com/environment/noise/
AdelaideCityCouncil.2013.AdelaideCityCouncil.[ONLINE]Availableat
http://www.adelaidecitycouncil.com/assets/acc/Council/docs/city_works_guidelines_bookl
et.pdf.[Accessed03April2013]
Gilfilan.I,17
th
November2004,AdelaideParklandNews,2004,
<http://www.adelaide-parklands.org/pdfs/newsletters/News13_Dec03.pdf>
Gilfilan.I,13
th
November2004,AdelaideParklandNews,2003
<http://www.adelaide-parklands.org/pdfs/newsletters/news17_Dec04.pdf>
Harbison,M.,2005,Stateoftheenvironmentalreport,AdelaidecityCouncil
<http://www.adelaidecitycouncil.com/assets/acc/Environment/plans-
policies/docs/state_of_the_environment_report.pdf>

1 0 - 4 - 1 3
PaulKoufalakis
ProjectManager
VickyNguyen
FeasibilityReport
Environmental
Department
HarshpreetGhataura
TeamLeader
EnvironmentalDepartment
2013
1|P a g e
CompanyDeclaration
MAWSONLAKES,SA,5095
Name:
Sign:
Date:
Name:
Sign:
Date:
Name:
Sign:
Date:
Name:
Sign:
Date:
Name:
Sign:
Date:
Name:
Sign:
Date:
Name:
Sign:
Date:
2013
2|P a g e
1. PurposeofEIS
The purpose of preparing an Environmental Impact Statement [EIS] is to provide a detailed report
describingthepotentialeffectswhichcanoccurthroughtheproposedactivitiesontheenvironment.
In this scenario, Environment is ultimately defined as the physical and natural states and the
relationship of people within that environment. The term environment in an EIS report refers to
theaspectsof;water,land,structures,air,livingorganisms,environmentalvaluesofthesiteandthe
social,economical,culturalandsustainableaspects.
Thetermimpactaddressesthechangethatoccursduetoaproposedactivity.Theseimpactscanbe
positive or negative or both. An EIS provides a description of the impacts, as well as appropriate
mitigation schemes designed to avoid, reduce or compensate for any significant adverse effects
identified.
Thus,anEnvironmentalImpactStatementisadocumentthatillustratesthepotentialimpactsonthe
environment as a result of proposed actions; as well as providing impacts of alternative situations
andtheappropriatemitigationscheme.
2013
3|P a g e
2. LegislationPolicies
TabulatedbelowisthelistofStateandCommonwealthlegislationsapplicabletotheStage3ofthe
project.Referencetospecificlegislationswillbemadeinlatersections.
EnvironmentalAspect Legislation Relevancetotheproject
AirQuality EnvironmentalProtection(Air
Quality)Policy1994
Fromfuelburningequipments
andmachines,theproposed
projectwillresultinair
emissions.
MeteorologicalEnvironment&
Climate
NationalGreenhouseand
EnergyReportingAct2007
ClimateChangeGreenhouse
EmissionsReductionAct2007
Thesewillhelpinaddressing
issuesrelevanttoclimate
changeinordertoachieve
ecologicallysustainable
development.
Flora&Fauna NativeVegetationAct1991
NativeVegetationRegulations
2003
NaturalResources
ManagementAct2004
NaturalResources
ManagementPlan2006
EnvironmentalProtectionAct
1993
EnvironmentalProtectionand
BiodiversityConservationAct
1999
Theprojectwouldinvolve
multipleactivitiesof
environmentalsignificanceand
theseprovideguidelines
relevanttofloraandfauna.
SoilManagement SoilconservationandLand
UtilizationAct
Duringthesitepreparationfor
construction,soildisturbance
willoccur.
Planning,Constructionand
Development
DevelopmentAct1993
PlanningAct
LocalGovernmentAct1999
OccupationalHealth,Safety
andWelfareAct1995
WorkplaceHealthandSafety
2007
WorkplaceHealthandSafety
Regulations
Thesewillassistinpromoting
healthandsafetyaspectsofthe
projectandoffsiteduringthe
constructionphase.
NoiseandVibration EnvironmentalProtection Thequalityoftheproject,as
2013
4|P a g e
(MachineNoise)Policy1994
EnvironmentalProtection
(Noise)Policy2007
wellasthesocialandeconomic
developmentwillbeaffected
bythevariousaspectsofthe
project.
WaterQuality EnvironmentalProtection
(WaterQuality)Policy2003
Sustainablemanagementof
watersisrelevanttothe
variousaspectsoftheproject.
AboriginalCulturalHeritage AboriginalHeritageAct1988
HeritageProtectionAct1984
Thesewillassistinpreserving
theareasandobjectsof
specificsignificanceto
Aboriginaltradition.
Non-AboriginalCultural
Heritage
HeritagePlacesAct1961
HeritageConservationAct
Theseprovideprotectionfor
archaeologicalsitesofvalue
andtheprojectincludesitems
ofnon-Aboriginalsignificance.
WasteManagement PublicandEnvironmental
HealthAct1987
DangerousSubstancesAct1979
DangerousSubstances
Regulations2002
WasteManagementand
PollutionControlAct
PublicandEnvironmental
Health(WasteControl)
Regulations1995
Theseaimatprotecting,
improvingandpromoting
publicandenvironmental
healthandreducingwaste.
Rehabiilitation WeedsManagementAct2001 Constructionactivitieshavethe
potentialtointroduceweed
species.
Table5:RelevantSouthAustralianLegislationrequiredintheEIS
3. OutlineofEISPreparation&Structureofdocument
TheEnvironmentalImpactAssessment(EIA)processensuresallenvironmentalissuesinrelationto
allaspectsoftheSouthParklandsProjectarebroughtupduringStage1andthatallapprehensions
are addressed as the project gains momentum towards implementation. For the benefit of the
community and the council, it is essential to carry out environmental impact assessments to
determine the significant environmental impacts in the initial stage of the project so that
recommendations can be made into the design and cost analysis could be performed without
causing major delays. The level of pollution and any environmental recovery process within the
area has to be monitored adequately once implementation stage has commenced to ensure the
effectivenessoftheEIAapproach.
2013
5|P a g e
3.1 ContentsofEnvironmentalImpactAssessment
TheprocedureusedinwhichEIAiscarriedoutinthisprojectconsistsofaseriesofsteps.Themain
stepsintheEIAprocessusedforthisprojectare:
ProjectDescriptionandLegalAdministrativeFramework
ScreeningandScoping
Descriptionoftheexistingenvironment
Analysisofalternativesandbasisfortheselectionofthealternativepurpose
EnvironmentalIssuesoftheproject
PredictionandMitigationMeasures
EnvironmentalManagementandTraining,andMonitoringPlan
EIAFlowchart
EIAToolLeopoldMatrix
Recommendations made by the EIA may require the team to redesign some of the project works,
which will require further studies, evaluation and modification to the current design. This is not
preferable, as it will modify the economic feasibility of the project and will cause time delay in
projectcompletion.
2013
6|P a g e
Proposal
Identification
Screening
EIA Requiered No EIA
Initial
environmental
examination
Scoping *Public involvement
*Public involvement
Impact analysis
Mitigation
and impact
managment
EIA Report
Review
Decision-making
Not approved Approved
Implementation
and follow up
Resubmit
Redesign
*Public involvement typically
occurs at these point. It may
also occur at any other stage
of the EIA Process
Information from this process
contributes to effective future EIA
Ehvrohmehta lmpact Assessmeht
1 Geherased ElA process fowchart
3.2 EnvironmentalImpactAssessmentFlowchart
Figure 1 below shows a general flow chart of the EIA process and how it collaborates with the
publicinvolvement,thecouncil,andtheeconomy.
3.3 EnvironmentalImpactAssessmentTool-LeopoldMatrix
There are several types of matrices used in impact identification of EIA. In this document, a
qualitative EIA method called Leopold Matrix is implemented. The Leopold Matrix consists of a
numberofactionslistedonthex-axisandanumberoffactorslistedonthey-axis.Ifagivenaction
ispredictedtocauseachangeintheenvironmentalfactor,thisisnotedattheintersectionpointin
Figure29:GeneralEIAFlowchart
2013
7|P a g e
the matrix and can be further described in terms of magnitude (upper diagonal section) and
importance (lower diagonal section) of each of the intersection box. The magnitude of action and
the importance of an environmental factor are represented by numerical scale. It is described by
thenumericalvaluefrom1to3. Thevalue3representsthelargestmagnitudeandthevalue
1 represents the lowest magnitude, whereas value 2 represents impacts of moderate magnitude
towards an environmental factor. The scale of importance also ranges from 1 to 3. The higher the
value, the higher the importance; the lower the value, the lower the importance. Hence, the
intersectionsarefilledintoindicatethemagnitude(from-3to+3)andtheimportance(from1to3)
oftheimpacteachactivityoneachindividualfactor.Plus(+)andminussign(-)areusedtoindicate
thelevelofimpactiseitherbeneficialoradverse.
AdetailedEnvironmentalImpactAssessment(EIA)canbefoundattheendofthisreport,assessing
the potential environmental impacts and their possible consequences. The assessment has been
prepared giving consideration to all stakeholders and will bring their attention to any
environmentalissueswhichmayariseasaresultofthedevelopment.
3.4 EnvironmentalLegislation
ThefollowinglegislationshavebeenconsideredthroughouttheEnvironmentImpactAssessment,to
ensurenobreachtoanyenvironmentallawsandpolicieshavebeenmade.
EnvironmentProtectionandBiodiversityConservationAct1999,Commonwealth
NativeVegetationAct1991,SouthAustralia
NationalResourcesManagementAct2004,SouthAustralia
DevelopmentAct1993,SouthAustralia.
2013
8|P a g e
4. MeteorologicalEnvironmentandClimate
Climate change in IPCC usage refers to a change in the state of the climate that can be identified
(e.g. using statistical tests) by changes in the mean and/or the variability of its properties and that
persists for an extended period, typically decades or longer. It refers to any change in climate over
time,whetherduetonaturalvariabilityorasaresultofhumanactivity.Thisusagediffersfromthat
in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).Here, climate change
referstoachangeofclimatethatisattributeddirectlyorindirectlybyhumanactivity.Humanactivity
altersthecompositionoftheglobalatmosphereandthatisinadditiontonaturalclimatevariability
observedovercomparabletimeperiods.
Changes to the climate have the potential to create major impacts on human and natural systems.
Furtherchangestotheclimatearelikelyifemissionsofgreenhousegasescontinuetoincrease.The
impacts of climate change vary between regions and require tailored responses relevant to local
characteristics. Lower average annual rainfall directly affects the performance of the MAR
development and its annual yield. The likelihood of lower annual rainfall should be taken into
considerationduringthedetaileddesignstage.
There is evidence that an increase in extreme weather events may occur, such as frequent heat
waves, more severe storms and rainfall events leading to increasing flood risk. Heat waves are a
concernasthesewillincreasethechanceoffireriskinvegetatedareas.
2013
9|P a g e
5. AirQuality
Air pollution can take many forms and can be produced from a range of sources.According to the
EPA one of the major sources of air pollution in Adelaide is motor vehicles and industries which
contributemostoftheoxidesofnitrogen,carbonmonoxide,andbenzeneintheatmosphere.Major
industries in particular can have a significant effect on local air pollution, including odorous, visual
andhealth-relatedpollution.
Naturaleventslikebushfiresarealsocontributorstoatmosphericpollution.Fineparticlesandother
harmful chemicals are contained in smoke from bushfires and can be transported over South
AustraliafromareasasfarasVictoriaandNewSouthWales.AsSouthAustraliaisknowntobeadry
state,duringthewinterperiodcertainweatherconditionscancarrysurfacedustfromtheNorthern
partsofthestateovertheSouthernparts.Thisdustformsahazeovertheaffectedareas.
Duringearthworkforconstruction,dieselfuelledplantequipmentwillbethegreatestemitterofair
pollution.TheNationalEnvironmentalProtectionMeasure(DieselVehicleEmissions)aimstoreduce
exhaustemissionsfromdieselvehiclesbyfacilitationcompliancewithin-serviceemissionsstandards
for diesel vehicles. Thus during site inductions, contractor service log books should be checked.
Maintainingandimprovingthequalityofairisimportant,althoughtheairqualityinSouthAustralia
isgenerallygood,evencurrentlevelsofairpollutioncanhavesignificanthealthimpactsandcosts.
2013
10|P a g e
6. SoilContamination
Soilcontaminationisalargeconcernwhenconsideringthesafetyrisksinvolvedwithaprojectthat
requiresanyexcavatingorintrusionintothegroundofanysort.Soilcontaminationisthepresence
of xenophobic chemicals that could have been caused by a range of actions, including industrial
activity and the incorrect disposal of waste. Before the construction phase of the project can
commence, rigorous testing of the soil must be done to ensure it does not contain any harmful
substances. Common soil contaminants include; pesticides, inorganic chemicals, solvents,
petroleumhydrocarbons,polynucleararomatichydrocarbons,leadandotherheavymetals.
6.1 DetectionandPreventionofSoilContamination
Testingofsoilcontaminantswillbeachievedthroughageo-environmentalassessmentcarriedout
by Coffey Geotechnics who have already produced a geotechnical report for the site in question.
Althoughthesitehasnothadanymajorconstructiontakenplaceonitbefore,andthepresenceof
soilcontaminantsisunlikely,allmeasuresmustbetakentobecertainthatcontaminationhasnot
taken place. If wetlands and an aquifer are constructed on this area as part of the stormwater
managementplan,thenthequalityofthewaterisessentialinachievingpositivewaterstorageand
recovery. Therefore, any pre-existing contamination must be rectified and any future
contamination risk during and after construction must be controlled. After the production of the
wetlands,theywillthenactasanaturalfiltertoreducethecontaminationinboththesurrounding
soil and the water flowing through it to provide cleaner living. Water recovered from this storm
waterplanwillbeusedtosupplymuchmoreoftheparklandsthanbeforemakingthequalityofthe
watercrucial.
It is possible that soil contamination can occur throughout the duration of the project due to the
machinery involved in the construction phase. Problems such as oil, fuel and chemical spills can
lead to contaminants leeching into the soil. As this is a slow process, it can be avoided easily if
awareness is high and all safety standards are followed. If a hazardous material spill was to take
place,allworkersmustbevigilantinremovingallcontaminatedsoilfromsite.
Pyramid Engineering Solutions will adopt all appropriate occupational health and safety policies to
ensureallsafetyhazardsduetosoilcontaminationareminimizedduringconstruction.Thisincludes
thehealthandsafetyofhumansaswellasthatofthelocalfloraandfauna.Policiesmustalsobeput
into place to make certain that all chemicals are handled appropriately and the ongoing
maintenance of equipment is kept up in order to minimize the chances of a hazardous chemical
spills.
2013
11|P a g e
7. FloraandFauna
7.1Flora
Development on the land is likely to cause some environmental issues at the site, with both flora
and fauna possibly being affected the most. Therefore, thorough investigation and research must
beconductedpriorfurtherplanningorconstructiononthedevelopment.
FivedifferentparkzoneshavebeenseparatedontheSouthParkLand.Theseare:Kurrangga-(Park
20), Pityarrilla-(Park 19), Wita Wirra-(Park 18), Tuttanga-(Park 17) and Bakkabakkandi-(Park 16)
(EBS,2009).
Although flora is present on site, they are not present in all zones, therefore it is extremely
important to ensure that details of all the flora species and their environments are known and
considered.Figure2showsallfiveParklandslocations.
Figure30:ParklandLocations
WithreferencetothetablesinAppendixA,theyoutlinethevariousspeciesofpresentnaturalflora
speciesthatwillbeaffected.Figure3showsthevariousspeciesofnativeflorapresentintheproject
area.
Park20
Park16
Park17
Park18
Park19
2013
12|P a g e
7.2Fauna
A review of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 online Protected
Matters database for the project did not recognize any fauna species likely to occur within the
project area. However, research from the EBS states that currently there are approximately 49
different species of fauna. These include; two species of Possums, 10 species of Micro-bats, three
species of reptiles, two species of amphibians and 32 species of birds living in the parklands
Figure31:VariousspeciesofnativeFlora
2013
13|P a g e
currently.MostfaunaspeciesareconsideredcommonfortheAdelaideregion,althoughoneofthe
PossumspeciesisconsideredtoberarewithinSouthAustralia.
OtherthantherarePossumspecies,itisconsideredunlikelythatanyfaunaspeciesofconservation
significancewouldbeutilisingthehabitatwithintheprojectarea.
7.3MitigationMeasures
Tominimizethedamagetothefloraandfaunaonsite,removalofanyfloraisnotsuggestedasitcan
directly affect the fauna living there. Trees and vegetation must be replaced or replanted, if
removed,toalocationwithintheParkLandsarea.
Sinceitisconsideredunlikelythatanyfaunaspeciesofconservationimportancewouldbeusingthe
habitatwithintheprojectarea,nomajorimpactonfaunalifeorhabitatwilloccur.However,fauna
nearbytheareamaybedisturbedduringtheconstructionperiodduetoincreasednoise.
During each of the proposed construction phases, the working corridors that are to be utilized
shouldbekeptasminimalinsizesotoavoidpossiblefurtherdisruptiontothesite.
2013
14|P a g e
8. Groundwater
Groundwateriswaterderivedfromrainwhichpercolateddownthroughtheearthssurfacesinsoil
pore spaces or in the facture of a rock formation called aquifers. Groundwater is an important
source of water in South Australia as it provides approximately 65% of all irrigation water for
viticulture, agriculture and horticulture. In addition, groundwater is fundamental to maintaining
flowinmanyoftheriversandcreeksofSouthAustralia.
8.1 GroundwaterRequirements
ThequalityofwaterinjectedorextractedfromacquirersissetbytheEPAstandards.TheEPAscode
ofPracticeforAquiferStorageandRecoverycontaintherelevantrequirementsformanagedaquifer
rechargeschemes,withtheaimto:
Preventproblemssuchascloggingandexcessiverecoveryofaquifermaterial
Whereaquiferstorageandrechargeispracticed,thegroundwaterqualitymustbeimproved
orprotected
Ensurethatthequalityofrecoveredwaterisfitforitsintendeduse
Theseaimsareachievedbythedevelopmentofamultiplebarriersystem.Monitoringandreporting
is needed to be carried out to assess water quality parameters at both ends of the process before
injectionandextractionofgroundwateroccurs.
8.2 PotentialGroundwaterContaminants
Contamination of groundwater occurs due to the inappropriate disposal of waste, spillage of
dangerous materials or inappropriate land use. Many of these practices are now prohibited;
however the pollution can remain in the contaminated groundwater for many years. Potential
sources of groundwater contamination are septic tanks, storage tanks and chemicals used for
agriculturalpurposeswhichcanleakorbemismanaged.Thiscausesadverseimpactsasthepolluted
groundwater can discharge into waterways and wetlands and harmfully impact on groundwater-
dependent ecosystems. Thus it is essential to monitor pollution due to its long term environmental
andhealthimpacts.
2013
15|P a g e
8.3 ThreatstoGroundwater
Processes and activities that threaten groundwater include; water resource development,
agricultural land use, acid sulphate soils, urban and commercial development, mining, and
plantation forestry. The overuse of groundwater lowers the water table, resulting in many
surrounding plants and ecosystems of the area becoming dehydrated. Additionally, the overuse
reducesthequalityofwaterthatseepsintoriversanddestroyshabitatsincavesandaquifers.
Plantation forestry reduces the rate of runoff, stream-flow and groundwater recharge, and the
pressure of underground water. All of these may affect groundwater dependent ecosystems.
However, the lowering of groundwater levels may be beneficial to ecosystems where the water
tablehasbeenunnaturallyelevatedbyirrigation.
8.4 ImpactonGroundwaterUsers
From a health perspective, users of groundwater are at risk if groundwater is contaminated or
mismanaged,andinadditionthismaycauseproblemswiththeagriculture.Healthissuesthatmay
arise from the contamination of groundwater include; vomiting, headaches, nausea, skin problems,
diarrhoea and other chronic side effects. The natural groundwater could prove to be harmful and
thatdependsprimarilyonthesalinityofthegroundwater.Therearetwowaysinwhichthesalinity
of the soil affects vegetation according to the Department of Primary Industrials and Resources of
SouthAustralia-thesearetoxicityandtheosmoticeffect.
2013
16|P a g e
9. Construction&WasteManagement
Thisprojectwillincludewasteofbothorganicandinorganicnaturethatwillhavetobemanagedin
theappropriatemanner.Thiswastemayconsistof:
- During construction a considerable amount of soil (and stones) will have to be dug up in
ordertoconstructthewetlandsaswellastheaquiferanddetentionbasin
- Bitumen,tarandotherroadmaterialifitisdeemednecessarytodigupanypartoftheroad
inordertoaccesspipes,drainsorculvertsaswellasotherutilities.
- Contaminatedsoil
- Generalgreenwastefromremovedvegetation
- Generalwaste,suchasmaterialwaste
- Chemicalwaste
9.1 ImpactsofWaste
Waste,ifnottreatedproperly,canhaveanadverseeffectonthesurroundingenvironmentandcan
be detrimental to the life of native flora and fauna. For this reason careful actions must be taken
while dealing with harmful waste. Contaminated soil as well as chemical spills can seep into the
groundwater and affect the wildlife around it. Both flora and fauna can become infected and as a
result die, as well as it posing a risk to human health. Not only can it be harmful to the local
environment,butalsoifthecontaminantentersamajorwaterway,throughacreekordrain,itcan
quickly spread and impact on a much larger scale. If sections of the road have to be dug up
(depending on the scale) they may be able to be put into rubbish skips or taken away by truck to
theappropriatefacility.
9.2 ManagementPlan
To minimize the many risks that arise by waste during construction, one must take careful
consideration when dealing with it. Waste such as soil and rock that has been excavated during
construction can then be reused in the formation of the detention basins, which require a
significant amount of earth to be place around it to avoid flooding. This is an effective way of
minimizingwasteaswellasoptimizingmaterialsusedforthejob.
Any material that is deemed hazardous must be handled and disposed of according to the The
HazardousWasteRegulationsAct;bywheretheEnvironmentalProtectionAgencywillmonitorthe
wastefromthesitetothesuitablefacilityandseethatitishandledinthecorrectfashion.
2013
17|P a g e
General waste that is generated throughout the duration of the project from workers or the
materials used will be placed into a series of rubbish skips located on site and strict guidelines of
allowablematerialswillbegivenduringinduction.Separateskipsforrecyclablematerialandwaste
willbeavailabletooptimizetheamountofreusablecontent.
Green waste, where possible will be reused in the construction of the wetlands, otherwise will be
transportedoffsiteandbrokendowntobereused.
2013
18|P a g e
10. CulturalHeritage
In this section the Aboriginal and European cultural heritage aspects of the project area are
summarizedanddiscussed.Theanalyticalprocedureofidentification,managementandprotection
of archaeological sites and areas of cultural significance to the local communities has also been
included in the discussion. This information utilized in this section is derived from previous past
operationssuchastheGlensideCampusRedevelopmentMasterPlan.
10.1 ObjectivesofBaselineStudy
The baseline study undertaken in this section is essentially focused on the existing historic and
culturalresourcesoftheSouthParklandsprojectsite.
Afore commencing the study, the parameters of the project site have to be defined. As such, this
willincludetheproposedthreatenedareaswhichwillbeaffectedbyanyofthedevelopmentofthe
project.
The principle behind undertaking the study is to effectively identify any potential culturally
significant areas. The study also is intended to generate a description of any historical and
prehistoric events which may have occurred, and pre-existing land use trends and patterns which
mayormaynotbeaffectedbytheprojectdevelopment.Thestudyalsoincorporatesthefactorsof
industry, commerce and growth and the relationship of the region to the environment and its
inhabitants.
10.2 Methodology
Defining the current baseline parameters is obtained and reliant on existing resources which are
readily available from the state and local governing bodies, such as; the Reconciliation Division of
South Australia (AARD), Aboriginal Affairs and the City of Burnside. The environmental impact
statement must be given attention in regards to the presence of cultural and historic sites in the
vicinityoftheprojectsite.
The information obtained for the purpose of the literature search is effectively cross referenced
withthedescriptionoftheproject.Thisallowsforthedeterminationofthetypeofinformationthat
willberequiredforevaluationpurposes.Anoptionalfieldinvestigationmaybeundertakenifthis
processexposesgapsintheexistingavailableinformation.
The method outlined which has been demonstrated to be an effective technique in the cultural
heritageanalysiswillbeutilizedfortheprojectarea.However,themethodispreparedinsegments
withrelationtothenumberofdifferentstagesthatareentailedtothisspecificsiteandsituation.
2013
19|P a g e
The characteristics of a cultural resources investigation may include some of or all the following
methods:
Stage1:LiteratureStudy
The literature study will be undertaken through the examination of pre-existing available
documents to determine the adequacy of collected information on known cultural resources and
potential impacts. The study focus should be on Heritage Places, Geological Heritage and
Aboriginal/EuropeanHeritage.
Consultation with relevant government departments i.e. Aboriginal Affairs and Reconciliation
Division (AARD), Department for Environment and Heritage and the Environmental Protection
Authority (EPA)should be undertaken in order to determine the adequacy of existing cultural
information and the possible needs to undertake additional field investigations, such as surveys if
necessary.
Conducting literature searches of local and state government sites that contain relevant
informationinregardstoallknownheritagelistedsiteswithinSouthAustralia.
Stage2:FieldSurveys
The field surveys will be undertaken through contacting historical societies, local communities,
indigenous elders, universities and planning officials to determine potentially significant sites of
interest. The region of Adelaide prior to European settlement belonged to various Aboriginal
communities. In relation to this specific project, the area was occupied by the Kaurna community
forwhomthelandmayholdspecialculturalandhistoricalsignificance.
During the Field Survey, visitation of the site will be undertaken which in turn will enable the
processofmappinganddocumentknownculturalresourcesitesontopographicbasemaps.
Stage3:SiteSurveyandDataLogging
Thesitesurveyanddataloggingwillbeundertakenthroughthephysicalprocessofconductingan
effective on foot surveys, to locate potentially undocumented cultural resource sites and areas of
highinterest.Theverificationofpreviouslydocumentedsitesinregardstoaccuracyisundertaken.
As well as undertaking the shovel test technique on grounds where there is a potential interest
which coincides with cultural resources. The complication of any located site and its setting is
achieved through a photographic log. The preparation of mapping any newly located sites on the
topographicbasemapandrequiredsitespecificmapswillalsobeundertaken.
Stage4:InterpretationofNewData
The interpretation of new data will be undertaken through the determination and identification of
significant cultural resources which will be evaluated through the process of examining
2013
20|P a g e
archaeological sites, consulting the appropriate governing bodies, local and knowledgeable
individualssuchasanAboriginalElder.
All the tasks undertaken and carried out must be in accordance with the terms specified in the
appropriate legislations, such as; the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1988, Development Act 1993 and the
Heritage Places Act 1993. Due to the assortment of South Australian State Heritage Areas, other
types of legislation may be applicable and also have an influence on the project. These include the
Pastoral Land Management and Conservation Act 1989, National Parks and Wildlife act as well as
otherlegislationssuchastheNativeVegetationAct1991.
Stage5:FinalReportPreparation
The preparation of the final report will be accomplished through the successful completion of the
previousstagesinaccordancewiththeprofessionalguidelinessetforallaspectsofthestudy.These
aspectsincludethemanagement,culturalresourcesandtheappropriatedata.
This process may be viewed as overly intensive for the undertaking of the study. An alternative
proposed procedure which will utilize the additional supervised site visit and analysis of already
documentedliterature,communityandgoverningbodiesconsultationmayenabletheprocesstobe
shortened if all the appropriate information is validated and determined to be accurate. The
environmental team will work with Aboriginal elders and historical experts when conducting the
studytoensurethattheimpactsduetothedevelopmentarekeptasminimalaspossible.
10.3 IdentificationandmanagementofHeritagesites
Theprocessforidentificationandmanagementofheritagesitesincludethefollowing:
Essentiallyearlyidentificationofsitesthatholdheritagesignificancewillbeidentifiedtoensure
that they are kept in mind through the conceptual design process for the final stage 3
developments and hence effectively managed through the phases of construction and
operation.
Site specific management plans catered to the project development will effectively ensure the
protectionofheritageplaceswheredirectimpactswillbeanticipated.Thesemanagementplans
will effectively illustrate and advise how the potential impacts of the development can
essentiallybeminimizedorreducedandhavelessereffectonheritagesites.
At this stage, the proposed project is not expected to significantly impact heritage places. Through
effective management it is expected that these effects can be controlled and reduced. The cultural
heritagemanagementplanswillbepreparedpriortotheconstructionphaseforplacesdetermined
to be affected. The management plans will include: identification of protection measures,
2013
21|P a g e
remediation techniques of heritage places where damage may occur and applicable as well the
preparationofabuildingconditionassessment.
2013
22|P a g e
11. SocialImpactAssessment
11.1 VisualAmenity
Developments on an area usually impact the environment in different ways. For example, visual
impact is an impact that might occur on site due to incomplete planning and organization. Visual
impactsarethepotentialconsequencesthatdifferentprojectactivitiesvisuallyhaveontheproject
area. This is by affecting its natural and built environment to the surrounding road users and
residents.
Anassessmentneedstoconsiderthelevelofvisualimpactcausedbytheconstruction,andhowto
avoidorminimisethevisualimpactasmuchaspossible.
11.2 VisualImpactoftheProject
The South Parklands is separated into five different zones, which are all surrounded by residential
communities.Therefore,anysensitivevisualchangewilleasilyaffectthesocialcommunitiesaround
theparks.Visualimpactcanoccurby:
Largeconstructionvehiclesandmachinesparkedaroundthesurroundingthesites
Vegetationdeathcausedbyconstruction
Removaloftreesduetoconstruction
Uncleanedconstructionwaste(soil,deadvegetation,etc)
11.3 MitigationMeasures
Protecting the environment and catering to the social communities needs are considered to be the
main priorities. To achieve this, visual impact must be kept as minimum as possible. To reduce the
visualeffects,mitigationmeasuresneedtobeadheredtothatincludes:
Retainingexistingtreeswherepossibletoassistwithscreeningdevelopmentsites.
Ongoingmaintenanceofthelandscapeplantingswithinparks,reservesandwetlandstoensure
healthyplantgrowth.
Evacuateallconstructingvehiclesandmachinesontimestominimizeadverseeffects.
Plantingopenareaswithnativespecies.
2013
23|P a g e
12. RehabilitationandOngoingOperation
Environmental recovery and rehabilitation process of the site will be performed right after the
construction stage is completed. The environmental impact assessment will be conducted first to
assess the environmental damage done to the land and only then environmental recovery and
rehabilitationprocesscouldbeconducted.Themainideaofenvironmentalrecoveryincludes:
Toprotectandconservethenaturalecologicalsystemsandnativefloraandfauna
Tominimizefutureenvironmentaldamageonhistoricalstructures
Toimprovetheairqualityaroundtheparkanddetentionbasinarea
Toimprovethewaterqualityfromstormwaterrunoff
12.1 WetlandManagementPlan
Terrestrial planting of appropriate indigenous tree, shrub and groundcover species will be
introduced to the wetlands to provide additional shading and habitat requirements necessary for
wetlandanimals.Selectiveplantspeciesfromsubmerged,emergentandfloatingwaterplantsgroup
willbeplantedatthewetlandsarea.Grosspollutantandsedimenttrapswillbeinstalledtoreduce
quantitiesoflitter,debrisandcoarsesedimentsfromdischargingtothewetlands.
12.2 LandRehabilitationPlan
Land rehabilitation involves replacement of top soil and the specific plant species (River Red Gum
andOlives)willbeplantedwithinthedetentionbasinareaandparkarea.Byusingtheinformation
growth of native plants, tree growth will be monitored and Quantified Tree Risk Assessment will
be performed once in 3-6 months to ensure trees are healthy and to restore the lost ecological
systemwithinthearea.Groundcoversuchasgrassandshrubswillbeplantedtoreducesoilerosion
andairpollutionfrommovingsoilparticulates.Uniformvegetationwillbeplantedthroughoutfrom
theculverttothewetlandsastopromotegoodflowspreadandtoreducesoilerosion.
Figure4depictsthetreeplantationsonsite.
2013
24|P a g e
12.3 AssessmentofResidualImpacts
A systematic approach in evaluating the significance of predicted environmental impact should be
adhered to define the requirements for mitigation and other remedial actions. It is strongly
suggested that Residual Impact Assessment is implemented to measure whether or not a
construction would cause a significant impact considering the triple bottom line: environment,
economic and social aspects. This will lead to more effective operation and maintenance of the
developmentsthroughagreaterunderstandingofthenaturalinfrastructure.
Figure32:TreePlantation
2013
25|P a g e
WitaWirra(PARK18)
Name Location
GlenOsmondRoadSugarGum(Eucalyptus
cladocalyx)Avenue
Onthenortheasternandsouth-westernflanksof
GlenOsmondRoad
GoldenPrivet(Ligustrumovalifolium
Aureum)
North-southanddissectingOsmondGardenfromthe
mainpartofPark18
DatePalm(Phoenixdactylifera) LocatedinthewesterncornerofOsmondGarden
Kurrajong(Brachychitonpopulneus) InthewesterncornerofOsmondGarden
UnidentifiedPalmssp InthewesternmiddleofOsmondGarden
FanPalms(Licualaramsayi) InthewesternmiddleofOsmondGarden
RiverRedGum(Eucalyptuscamaldulensis) InthewesternmiddleflankofOsmondGarden
RiverRedGum(Eucalyptuscamaldulensis) ImmediatenorthofHimejiGardeninOsmond
Garden
Evergreen/HollyOak(Quercusilex) InthecentreofOsmondGarden
CanaryIslandPalm(Phoenixcanariensis) Externaltothesouth-eastcornerofHimejiGardenin
OsmondGarden
ChileanWinePalm(Jubeachilensis) ThesouthofHimejiGardeninOsmondGarden
FanPalm(Licualaramsayi) ThesouthofHimejiGardeninOsmondGarden
WindmillPalm(Trachycarpusfortunei) ThesouthofHimejiGardeninOsmondGarden
NorfolkIslandHibiscus(Lagunariapatersonii) ThesouthofHimejiGardeninOsmondGarden
WindmillPalm(Trachycarpusfortunei) thesouth-westofHimejiGardeninOsmondGarden
IrishStrawberry(Arbutusunedo) ThesouthofHimejiGardeninOsmondGarden
GlossyPrivet(Ligustrumlucidium) ThesouthofHimejiGardeninOsmondGarden
RiverRedGum(Eucalyptuscamaldulensis) ThesouthofHimejiGardeninOsmondGarden
AleppoPine(Pinushalepensis) OnthecentralHuttStreetfrontage
SugarGum(Eucalyptuscladocalyx) OnthenorthernHuttStreetfrontage
RiverRedGum(Eucalyptuscamaldulensis)
grove
OnthecornerofSouthTerraceandHuttStreet
stretchingwestwards
Carob(Ceratoniasiliqua)tree InthesoutherncornerofPark18
2013
26|P a g e
Pityarrilla(PARK19)
Name Location
GlenOsmondRoadSugarGum(Eucalyptus
cladocalyx)Avenue
Onthenortheasternandsouth-westernflanksof
GlenOsmondRoad
EnglishElm(Ulmusprocera)pedestrian
Avenue
FromGreenhillRoadtothecornerofUnleyRoadand
SouthTerrace
DesertAsh(Fraxinusangustifoliavaroxycarpa FromGreenhillRoadtothecornerofUnleyRoadand
SouthTerrace
SugarGum(Eucalyptuscladocalyx) OnthecornerofGreenhillandUnleyRoads
RiverRedGum(Eucalyptuscamaldulensis) AlongthenorthernportionofUnleyRoad
PepperTree(Schinusaeriavarmolle) Inthenorth-westerncorneradjacenttofourCarob
(Ceratoniasiliqua)trees
AleppoPine(Pinushalepensis) AlongGlenOsmondRoadadjacenttoMarshmallow
Playground
MoretonBayFig(Ficusmacrophylla) WithintheMarshmallowPlayground
Kurrangga(PARK20)
Name Location
SellarAvenueWhiteCedar
(Meliaazedarachvaraustralasica)
pedestrianAvenue
FromthecornerofUnleyandGreenhillRoadsnorth-
westtothecornerofSouthTerraceandPeacockRoad
LombardyPoplar(Populusnigra
Italica)pedestrianAvenue
North-westdrainagelineinthesouth-easterncornerof
Park20
WhitePoplar(Populusalba)
pedestrianAvenue
North-northeastdrainagelineinthesouth-eastern
cornerofPark20
Kurrajong
(Brachychitonpopulneus)
pedestrianavenue
North-southaxisline,onthesouthernareaoftheblock
MoretonBayFig
(Ficusmacrophylla)
OntheedgeofGreenhillRoadadjacenttotheLombardy
Poplar(PopulusnigraItalica)pedestrianavenue
2013
27|P a g e
MoretonBayFigs
(Ficusmacrophylla)
Inthesouth-westerncornerofPark20between
PeacockRoadandtheKurrajong
(Brachychitonpopulneus)pedestrianAvenue
RiverRedGum(Eucalyptus
camaldulensis)
OnthecornerofSouthTerraceandUnleyRoad
Olive(Oleaeuropea) AlongthemiddleflankoftheUnleyRoadsideofPark20
CanaryIslandPines
(Pinuscanariensis)
Adjacenttothewatercourseinthesouth-easterncorner
oftheblock
MoretonBayFig
(Ficusmacrophylla)
Adjacenttothewatercourseinthesouth-easterncorner
oftheblock
CapeChestnut
(Calodendrumcapense)
OnthesouthernflankofUnleyRoad
StonePine(Pinuspicea) Adjacenttothesouth-westerncornerofGlover
Playground
EnglishElm(Ulmusprocera) PairwithintheGloverPlayground
GoldenAsh
(Fraxinusangustifolia)
IntheGloverPlayground
SugarGum(Eucalyptus
cladocalyx)
OnthePeacockRoadflankofPark20
2013
28|P a g e
References
EnvironmentProtectionAuthority,dateviewed4
th
April2013,
http://www.epa.sa.gov.au/advanced_search.php?k=groundwater&x=0&y=0
IntergovernmentalPlaneonClimateChange,dateviewed2
nd
April,
<http://www.ipcc.ch/>.
Kumar,A2008,ATextbookofEnvironmentalScience,1
st
edition,APHPublishing,NewDelhi
Miller,GT&Spoolman,S2008,EnvironmentalScience:Principles,Connectionsand
Solutions,12
th
edn,Brook/ColeCengageLearning,Canada.
NEPMforAmbientAirQuality,dateviewed2
nd
April2013,
<http://www.environment.gov.au/atmosphere/airquality/publications/cmp.html>.
UnitedNationsFramworkConventiononClimateChanage,dateviewed3
rd
April2012,
<http://unfccc.int/2860.php>
2013
29|P a g e
AppendixA
Table6:NativeFlorawithintheregion
Bakkabakkandi(PARK16)
Name Location
DragonsBloodTree
(Dracenadraco)
WithintheVictoriaParkRacecourseGardens
NorfolkIslandPine(Araucaria
heterophylla)
heterophylla)
FullartonRoadOlive
(Oleaeuropaea)
AlongtheflankofFullartonRoadoppositethesuburbof
Dulwich
Rose(Rosassp)hedge WithintheVictoriaParkRacecourseGardens
GoldenPrivet
(LigustrumovalifoliumAuream)
hedge
BunyaBunyaPine(Araucaria
bidwillii)
CanaryIslandPalm(Phoenix
canariensis)
CanaryIslandPalm(Phoenix
canariensis)
heterophylla)
ImmediatelyadjacenttotheBrittanniaHotelroundabout
BunyaBunyaPine(Araucaria
bidwillii)
heterophylla)
OrientalPlanes Withinthehorsestallsyards
2013
30|P a g e
(Platanusorientalis)
heterophylla)
Withinthehorsestallsyards
DesertAsh
(Fraxinusangustifoliavaroxycarp
a)
Alongtherearofthehorsestallsyards
North-WesternOlive
(Oleaeuropaea)Grove
OnthecornerofWakefieldRoad,EastTerraceand
boundedbyanavenueofRiverRedGums(Eucalyptus
camaldulensis)onitseasternflank
Grove
Thesouthern-mostpointoftheracecoursecircuitand
nestledadjacenttothecreekandracecourseroutes
RiverRedGums(Eucalyptus
camaldulensis)
Withintheracecoursecircuit
WakefieldRoadRiverRedGum
(Eucalyptuscamaldulensis)
AdjacenttotheroadreserveinBakkabakkandi/Park16
EastTerraceRiverRedGum
North-southadjacenttotheOlive(Oleaeuropaea)grove
inthenorth-westerncornerofBakkabakkandi/Park16
FullartonRoadRiverRedGum
Fromthesouthernextentoftheracecoursebuildingsand
standstotheedgeofthecreek
AngasStreetLondonPlane
(Platanusxacerifolius)
Anincompleteplantationthatrunsfromtheconstructed
flanksofAngasStreetintoBakkabakkandi/Park16
camaldulensis)
AtthesouthernendofEastTerrace
camaldulensissppcamaldulensis)
AtthesouthernendofEastTerrace
WesternAustralianRed
FloweringGum(Corymbiafi
cifolia)
IntheEastTerracecarriagedriveattheintersectionof
EastandSouthTerraces
Tuttagga(PARK17)
Name Location
2013
31|P a g e
EnglishElm(Ulmusprocera) ArcsthroughtheParkfromHuttStreettoBeaumontRoad
DesertAsh
(Fraxinusaugustifoliasspoxyca
pa)
TheintersectionofSouthTerraceandHuttStreetwiththe
intersectionofGlenOsmondandGreenhillRoads.
Ironbark(Eucalyptus
sideroxylon)Grove
Inthenorth-westernflankoftheParkbetweentheEnglish
Elm(Ulmusprocera)carriage-driveAvenueandtheDesert
Ash(Fraxinusoxycapa)pedestrianAvenue
AleppoPine
(Pinushalepensis)Grove
TheeasternsideoftheHuttStreetsportingpavilion
HuttStreetEnglishElm
(Ulmusprocera)
South-easternedgeoftheHuttStreet-scape
EnglishOak(Quercusrobur) LocatedinthecentreofthePark.
Grove
InthecentreoftheParkadjacenttotheEnglishElm
(Ulmusprocera)avenue
MoretonBayFig
(Ficusmacrophylla)
InthecentreofthePark
camaldulensis)
OnthecornerofSouthTerraceandHuttStreet
SweetPittosporum
(Pittosporumundulatum)
InthenortherncorneroftheSouthTerraceCroquetClub
Grounds.
LondonPlane(Platanusx
acerifolia)ring
Inaringsurroundingthereservoir
camaldulensis)
AlongSouthTerracenearStAndrewsHospital.
SugarGum
(Eucalptuscladocalyx)Grove
ThesouthofthereservoirandnexttotheSouthTerrace
CroquetClubgrounds.
CarobTree(Ceratoniasiliqua) Theimmediateeastofthereservoir
ThreeCanaryIslandPines
(Pinuscanariensis)
AdjacenttoSouthTerraceoppositeStAndrewsHospital
WhiteCedar
(Meliaazedarachvaraustralasi
South-easternflankofthereservoir
2013
32|P a g e
ca)Grove
GreenhillRoadStonePine
(Pinuspicea)
OntheflankofGreenhillRoad
GreenhillRoadEnglishElm
(Ulmusprocera)
ImmediateeastoftheGlenOsmondRoadintersection
GlenOsmondRoadSugar
Gum(Eucalyptuscladocalyx)
Onthenortheasternandsouth-westernflanksofGlen
OsmondRoad
GeotechnicalDepartment 2013
0|P a g e
Feasibility
Report
S o l u t i o n s

PaulKoufalakis
ProjectManager
Geotechnical
Department
SamGow
TeamLeader
1|P a g e
CompanyDeclaration
MAWSONLAKES,SA,5095
Name:
Sign:
Date:
Name:
Sign:
Date:
Name:
Sign:
Date:
Name:
Sign:
Date:
Name:
Sign:
Date:
Name:
Sign:
Date:
Name:
Sign:
Date:
2|P a g e
1.0 Background
ThegeotechnicalteamofPyramidEngineeringSolutionshaveundertakenafeasibilitystudyforthe
proposedfloodmitigationbasinsinthesouthParklands.Theaimofthisgeotechnicalstudywasnot
to review all the geotechnical information provided e.g. reports, topographys but to represent the
findings,recommendationsobtainfromthereportssuppliedbyCoffeygeotechnicalPtyLtd.
The studies that have been undertaken to help determine the subgrade surface conditions at the
selected locations throughout the parklands, to find suitable locations for detention basins.
Furthermore, it is necessary to find out a suitable volume for the culvert, which will allow for
increaseflowcapacityandsustainablestoragethroughtheparkland.
Figure1:BrownHillKeswickCreekCatchment
3|P a g e
1.1ProjectDescription
The proposed project is to design a series of flood mitigation basins in the south Parklands to
manage the stormwater inflow from the Parklands creek. Pyramid engineering Solutions
Geotechnical solutions is also required to design and construct a new culvert under the Fullarton
road Greenhill road intersection that will allow for more flow through the Parklands creek to
minimizefloodingacrossthecurrentbasinandovertheintersection.
Figure2:Existinglandusezonesandpolicyareas.
1.2Scopeofservices
The purpose of undertaking a geotechnical assessment is to evaluate the existing condition of the
proposed site in order to identify the geotechnical risks and constraints that could impact not only
the design but also on construction of the proposed detention basins/culvert. Pyramid Engineering
Solutions Geotechnical department have been investigating the reports given, to determine where
the basins are most efficient and the number of basins that would be sufficient to obtain the
capacityof115ML.Thescopeofworkincludesvisitstothesitetoobservethetopographiccondition
ofthesite,toreviewthepreviousgeotechnicalreportsandthepreparationofthefeasibilityreport.
4|P a g e
2.0SiteConditions
TheproposedsiteislocatedtothesouthoftheexistingVictoriaParkracecourse,nearthecornerof
FullartonRoadandGreenhillRoad.Thesiteiscoveredwithgrass,scatteredwithtreesandisgently
slopingwest.ThereisanunlinedopendrainthatrunseastwestindirectionattheSouthernendof
theproposeddetentionbasin.Thetestingofsoilsampleobtainedfromboreholedrillingcarriedout
by the Coffey Geotechnical Engineers indicated that the subsurface materials consists of Silty sand
topsoiloverlayingmediumplasticitysandyclaywithsomefinetocoursegravel.
Figure3:ConditionofsiteatGlensideHospital
2.1SiteHistory
The proposed development site is a development that catches stormwater, discharging into
underground pipelines which further lead into the detention basins. This land has been used as a
racecourse/sports field, for several years before the proposal of being turned into numerous
detention basins to improve flooding in the area. The site is to be underlain with predominantly
medium to high plasticity sands and silty clays and no bedrock was encountered over the depth
range.
5|P a g e
3.0InvestigationMethodology
3.1InitialSiteVisit
ThesitevisitwasperformedbythemanagementteamofPyramidEngineeringSolutionsatthesouth
parklands. The main purpose was to stride over and perceive the general conditions and
surroundingenvironmentofthesite.
3.2GeotechnicalSiteinvestigation
Field investigation was performed by Coffey Geotechnics Pty Ltd on the 28
th
May 2010 (borehole
Drilling)andtestpitexcavationon1
st
July2010.Thefieldworkincluded:
Drilling9boreholestothedepthrangingfrom4.2mto6m
Excavating7pitstodepthsrangingfromabout1.1mto1.6m
Obtainingbulksoilsamplesfromselectedtestpitsforlaboratorytesting
The test pits were excavated with Kubota U17 (1.7t) tracked excavator. It should be noted that the
depthofthetestpitswaslimitedtoadepthofabout1.6mduetothesizeoftheexcavatorusedand
thedifficultexcavationconditionsencountered.
Theboreholesandtestpitswerelocatedtoprovideabroadbasinsubjecttoconstraintsimposedby
coverage of the proposed detention basin existing surface features and known underground
services.Thelocationsoftheboreholesandtestpitsareshownapproximatelyonfigure1.
The field investigation was conducted under the direction of a geotechnical engineer from Coffey
who was responsible for logging the soil profile encountered in the boreholes and test pits and
collectingsamplesforsubsequentlaboratorytestings.
The soil profile encountered in the boreholes and tests pits described on the engineering logs
containedinappendixA,areprecededbyanexplanationsheetthatoutlinesthetermsandsymbols
usedintheirpreparation.
3.3LaboratoryTesting
The geotechnical laboratory testing was performed by Coffey Geotechnics Pty Ltd. Atterberg limits,
moisture contents and sieve tests were performed for BH11, BH25, and BH28 to establish the key
properties and confirm the field classification of the sub surface soils. Furthermore, Emerson
dispersion test were performed for three samples (BH11, BH25 & BH28), the samples were
remouldedatoptimummoisturecontenttoadrydensityof95%.
6|P a g e
Figure4:particlesizedistribution&Atterberglimits
7|P a g e

Figure5:DeterminationofEmersonClassnumber
8|P a g e
4.0Geology
There has been no direct testing at the Glenside Campus vicinity nor at the park numbers
17, 18, 19 and 20 of South Parklands, but a confident assumption is made that the soil
profilewillbesimilartotheVictoriaParksitebasedontheradiusdistancethatisonlyless
than1.5kilometresapart.
The Geotechnical investigation (including the sub-surface conditions of Victoria Park site)
hasbeencompletedbytheCoffeyGeotechnicalteam.Theanalysishasbeenconductedby
drilling 9 boreholes at the particular site to depths fluctuating from 4.2 m to 6m and also
excavating7pitstodepthsfluctuatingfrom1.1mto1.6m.
4.1RegionalGeologicsetting
ThesitesarelocatedintheregionwhichispartoftheAdelaideRiftComplex(alsoknownas
Adelaide Geosyncline) that is stretched from Flinders Range, narrowing at the Fleurieu
PeninsulaandextendingintoKangarooIsland,asshowninfigure
below:
The Glenside detention basin (A) and park number 17, 18, 19
and 20 (B) are located in Adelaide region closely south of the
existingVictoriaparkracecourse(C),nearthecornerofFullarton
RoadandGreenhillRoad,showninthefigurebelow:
4.2SiteGeologyoverview
The soil Association Map of Adelaide Region indicates that the
site is likely to be underlain by red brown clay soil types that
have granular structure as well as some calcareous elements.
Theredbrownearthhasthecharacterthatishighlyreactiveand
with the possibility of undergoing great volume alterations in
thecontentofthesoilmoisture.
Figue6
9|P a g e
4.3Subsurfaceconditions
4.3.1Overviewofcondition
The sub-surface conditions of particular sites are broadly consistent with regional geology
settingsdescribedearlier,whichiscompriseofsiltysandtopsoiloverlyingmediumplasticity
sandy clay with some fine to coarse grained gravel, with no deep fill (depth more than 3
meters).
Therewasfillingnoticedintheboreholesaswellastestingpilestoadeepnessvaryingfrom
about0.2mto0.65.Thedetailsoftheidentifiedfillintheboreholesaswellasthetestpiles
canbefoundintable1Coffeyhandout.
4.3.2VictoriaParksub-surfaceconditions
Long sections below show an almost accurate estimation of ground materials found from the
boreholesandtestpitsrunningsouthtonorth.
Thesoilprofileinthelongsectionsbelowissimplifiedwiththese
categories:
Thedepth(inmetre)ofthebeginningofeachsoilprofileineachboreholesandpitsshownintable
below:
SOILCATEGORIES BH6 BH18 BH25 BH27 BH28 BH30 BH41 BH47
FILL - - - 0 - - - 0
SAND 0 0 0 0.2 0 - 0 0.3
CLAY 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.6 0.3 0 0.4 1.4
TANSITIONAL
MATERIAL
- 4 5.2 1.6 5 - - 2.8
FILL
SAND
CLAY
TANSACTIONAL
MATERIAL
GRAVEL
10|P a g e
GRAVEL - - - - - 4.3 - 3.8
SOILCATEGORIES TP2 TP38 TP42 TP48 TP49

FILL 0 - - 0 0
SAND 0.2 - 0 0.5 0.15
CLAY 0.4 0 0.3 0.8 -
TANSITIONAL
MATERIAL
- - - - -
GRAVEL - - 1.2 - 0.4
Figure7Tableofboreholes
11|P a g e
12|P a g e
13|P a g e
14|P a g e
15|P a g e
4.3.3Longsectionlimitationsandconsiderations
The long sections created above by using an approximation data, include the simplified ground
materials, depth and chainages from specific boreholes and test pits. In addition to this, the
transitionalmaterialshowninfigure7ismostlyclayeysand,sandyclayandgravellysandyclay.
16|P a g e
5.0OtherGeologicConsiderations
5.1Groundwater
ItisimportanttocontroltheamountofGroundwaterasitaffectsthestabilityofthestructureabove
by reducing or increasing the effective stress. Depending on the amount of groundwater present,
also variation in groundwater can cause settlement which can also destabilise the structure above.
There was no Groundwater encountered by Coffey geotechnics at the time of Geotechnical
investigationfordepthsuntil6m,howeverseasonalvariationcancauseanincreaseingroundwater
duetothepresenceofpermeablesandylayer.Moreover,itshouldbenotedthattheGeotechnical
investigation was carried out in July 2010 which was a relatively dry period and after that in
December 2010 to 2012 La Nina cyclone events occurred which might have caused an increase in
groundwater.
Thereisalsopossibilitythatseepagecouldoccurduringexcavationneartheexistingdrainwithinthe
coarse grained alluvium. This could be to avoided through dewatering, by pumping water from
perimetertrenchesandsumpslocatedwithinexcavation.
5.2Permeabilityandinduction
Soil permeability is the property of soil to transmit water, it is important to consider permeability
because more permeable soil would cause more loss in water through soil. The Permeability of
mediumandhighplasticityisrelativelylowwhenreworkedandcompactedtodrydensityratioofat
least 95% based on standard compaction; it is estimated to be in order of . This medium and
highplasticitysoilshouldbepiledwhenexcavatinginordertoreuseasclay-liner.Thepermeability
of low to medium plasticity silty/sandy clay is slightly more than medium and high plasticity clays.
Therefore, it is not very useful to re-use for clay liner. The coarser grained alluvium is more
permeableandveryhighseepageandisnotsuitableasclayliner.Thecoarsergrainedalluviumand
low plasticity clay can be stockpiled to be used in landscaping work. Due to soil structure effects
such as fissure and root holes, the soil permeability affect could be higher for medium and high
plasticity clay than the remoulded soil permeability. In order to reduce seepage loss, the exposed
clay will need to be reworked to break the soil structure. A professional field engineer needs to be
present at site to provide suitable material for clay liner. The amount of thickness for clay liner
woulddependontherequiredseepageandshouldbemorethanthestandardminimumof300mm.
Themorepermeableareasneedstobeexcavatedtoadepthofatleast400mmandthenfilledback
withtwo200mmcompactedandmoistureconditionedthicklayersofclayliner.
17|P a g e
5.3ExpandingSoil
Expansive soil is found mostly in arid or semi-arid regions such as South Australia. The wetting and
dryingofsoilcausesvolumetricchangewhichleadstogroundheaveandothersettlementproblems.
Thisaffectstheconstructionofstructurethatwillbebuiltonthesoil.
Most movement in expansive soil takes place top 1-3 m. One solution to decrease the change in
volumeistoapplySwellingPressure;thispressureisthemaximumforceperunitareathatneedsto
be applied over a swelling soil to avoid volume increase. This pressure is mostly applied by
structures such as pavements, canals, pipelines, retaining walls, house footings and light industrial
building.
Itisverydifficulttodryexpansivesoilwhenitrainsanditbecomesextremelyslipperywhenwetas
thedensityofsoilvariesalongthedepth.Thesurfacedensityismorethanthesoilindepth.When
soil is dry the shear strength is very high on surface and reduces constantly along depth; whereas
whenitisrainingshearstrengthincreasesonsurfacebutitisverylownearsurface.
Another consequence of expansive soils is added horizontal pressure applied to foundation walls
found in basements. Increased moisture in the soils adjacent to the foundation wall will cause the
soils to expand and increase the lateral pressure applied to the foundation wall. If the foundation
wall does not have adequate strength, minor cracking, bowing or movement of the wall might
happen.Severestructuraldamagetothewallmayalsooccur.
5.3.1Somesolutions
Beforeconstructionasoiltestshouldbetakentoensurethesoilwillbestableandtodeterminethe
possibleeffectsoilduetothestructure.
Forstructuresalreadybuilt,thereareseveralwaystostoptheeffectofexpansivesoils.Onesolution
istomaintainauniformandconstantmoisturelevelinthesoil.
This means that moisture need to be introduced in the soil continually and uniformly, to prevent
shrinkage and prevent excessive saturation of soil through proper drainage and grading techniques
which will prevent swelling. Further, movement of soil can be prevented by providing additional
strength to foundation. This can be done by various methods such as underpinning which will
preventverticalmovementandreinforcingthefoundationwalltowithstandlateralpressure.
18|P a g e
5.4Plasticity
Plasticityistheabilityofsoiltostayinitsdeformedshapeafterithasbeenmoulded.Averyplastic
soil when moulded to a wire cannot be easily broken whereas a low plastic soil will return to its
former state when moulded. It is important to consider plasticity as it gives a measure of soil
expansion. A low plasticity soil will not expand much whereas a high plasticity will be more
expansive.
5.5LiquidLimit
LiquidLimitinsoilisthemoisturecontentthatchangessoilfromplastictoliquidbehaviour.Whena
soilbecomesviscousfluid,thesoilstartstoflowunderitsownweight(lateralspreading).Belowisa
tablewithLiquidLimit.
5.6LateralSpreading
TheliquidlimitatBH28containsthelargestvalue,therefore,thereislesschanceoflateralspreading
compared to other locations, therefore there is less chance of lateral spreading compared to
locationBH25andBH11.Lateralspreadingisalsopossibleasaresultofearthquakeandcanbevery
harmfultoenvironmentaround.
5.7Subsidence
Subsidence is the downward motion of surface relative to a datum due to removal of groundwater
or consolidation of soil. This will depend on the Plasticity index. Location BH28 has high Plasticity
indexwhichmeansitismoreexpansive,thereforethereislesslikelihoodofconsolidation.However,
19|P a g e
at BH11 it was determined that there is low Plasticity index which might mean it is comparatively
morelikelytoundergosubsidencecomparedtoBH28.
Subsidenceduetogroundwateralsodoesnotseemtobeamajorriskastherewasnogroundwater
discovered from the investigation however, it is recommended to check groundwater level over a
numberofyearsinordertoachievemaximumconfidencethatthisproblemdoesntoccur.
20|P a g e
6.0GeotechnicalDiscussion
6.1Earthworks
The proposed development includes numerous works, including; detention basins, clay lined
wetlands south of Victoria racecourse. Therefore, there are numerous key issues that must be
considered when undertaking earth works on the site. The key geotechnical issues regarding earth
worksthatmustbeconsideredinthedesignphaseare:
Theexcavatabilityofsubsurfacematerials.
The appropriate cut to fill volumes in preparation for the construction of detention basins,
aquiferandwetlands(filtrationsystem).
Thesustainabilityofexistingclaysforconstruction.
Appropriateexcavationdepthsinordertogetthesitepreparedforconstruction.
6.1.1SitePreparation
OrganictopsoilwasfoundinparticularpartsofthesitemainlylocatedatBH27andBH47,shownin
table4.3.2.Thedepthsoftopsoilrangedfrom0.2mto0.3m.Therefore,atypicaldepthof0.3mwill
be adopted, increasing the area of residual soils to 1.6 for BH27 and 2.8 for BH47. Initially, earth
workswillonlyoccurwheretheproposeddetentionbasinandaquifers.Forfeasibilitypurposes,the
locationplanprovidedbyCoffeyGeotechnicsPtyLtdwillbeused.
6.1.2CutandFill
Cut and fill analysis will be required in order to continue the construction of detention basin at the
proposedsite.Thevolumeofthisanalysiswillbegeneratedfromthesubgradelevelthatisdesigned
the design stage; hence an appropriate analysis will not be finalised and likewise the accurate
volume of cut and fill will not be generated in this feasibility stage. In order to remove excess cost,
thegeotechnicaldesigningteamwillbeencouragedtomaintainthebalanceofvolumes,bothfrom
cutandfillprocess.Hence,anyexcessfillfromthecutprocesswillbeusedforlandscapingpurposes
intheparklandsarea.
21|P a g e
6.1.3EarthWorkCostAnalysis
Anappropriatecostcannotbeassignedatthispointaswedonthaveanaccuratecuttofillvalue,as
these are dependent on the design levels. The following is a summary of the appropriate costs
associatedwiththeremovalofexcessmaterialandotherassociatedcosts.
Drillingthroughrockis$150/m
Drillingthroughsandandclay$220/m
Cuttofill$16.6forevery500m
Disposalofexcessmaterial-$3.00/m
Importationofexcessmaterialpricessubjecttochange.
22|P a g e
7.0Recommendations
Our recommendation constructing area for the proposed detention basin is the area around BH 28
for various reasons. First of all, the liquid limit at BH 28 is the most appropriate from all the
boreholes taken into the investigations, therefore the chance of lateral spreading to occur is
minimum compared to other recommended locations such as BH25 and BH11. Another reason to
consider is the subsidence which is the downward motion of surface relative to a datum due to
removal of groundwater or consolidation of soil which will surely depend on the Plasticity index.
BasedonthegeotechnicalinvestigationreportfromCoffeyGeotechnics,thelocationaroundBH28
has a high Plasticity index which means it is more expansive type of soil therefore there is less
likelihood of consolidation, however at BH 11 it was determined that there is low Plasticity index
whichmeansitiscomparativelymorelikelytoundergosubsidencecomparedtoBH28.
Another reason for considering BH28 is that according to Coffey Geotechnical report not the ASR
report, there is no or little presence of coarser grained alluvium which is not suitable for clay liner
and should be avoided or used for landscape work due to its high permeability that will likely to
cause very high seepage. A professional field engineer will need to be present at site to provide
suitable material for clay liner. The amount of thickness for clay liner would depend on the
acceptable seepage losses from the proposed basin and should be more than the recommended
thicknessof300m.
Lastly, based on the Australian Groundwater Technologies South Parklands ASR Potential, the
recommendation area for establishing ASR scheme in the South Parklands site is the Area
immediately south of Victoria Park racecourse. By utilizing the existing well number 22151 that is
able to store up to 100 ML water per year will surely fulfil the demand of 30-50 ML storage from
Water Engineers. However as an fractured bedrock aquifer, there are risks that is brought by this
existingwell:
1. PotentiallowrecoveryASR,duetobrackishambientandgreaterflowgroundwater.
2. Limiteddischargeboundary,whichlaterwilllimitthestoragecapacityoftheaquiferand
createthenecessitytobuildadditionalwell.
3. Thereisnoguaranteethatadequatewellyieldswillbeobtainedforanyadditionalwell,
giventheheterogeneousnatureoffracturedrockaquifers.
23|P a g e
8.0Limitations
Thisreporthasbeenexclusivelyperformedbypyramidengineeringsolutionsunderthesupervision
ofseniorstaffandpartners.Thisreporthasbeenpreparedentirelyfortheprojectlocationdescribed
in this report and is proposed to be used. If relevant project details change or otherwise fluctuate
from those designated herein, Pyramid Engineering Solutions should be notified immediately and
retained to appraise the effect of the changes on the recommendations presented in this report.
Revising the recommendations if essential, the recommendations presented in this report should
not be used for other structures located at this site or similar structures at other sites, without
additionalevaluationand/orinvestigation.
WaterDepartment 2013
0|P a g e
FeasibilityReport
S o l u t i o n s

PaulKoufalakis
ProjectManager
VickyNguyen
WaterDepartment
KesabDahal
VasiliGiannopoulos
TeamLeaders
1|P a g e
CompanyDeclaration
MAWSONLAKES,SA,5095
Name:
Sign:
Date:
Name:
Sign:
Date:
Name:
Sign:
Date:
Name:
Sign:
Date:
Name:
Sign:
Date:
Name:
Sign:
Date:
Name:
Sign:
Date:
2|P a g e
StormwaterManagementintheSouthParklands
Pyramid Engineering Solutions has undertaken a comprehensive feasibility study on the potential
design of series of flood mitigation basins in the South Parklands to manage the stormwater inflow
formtheParklandscreek.
Pyramid Engineering Solutions was engaged to undertake the feasibility study to develop a
conceptual design for the project and have worked with a number of consultants and referred the
documents by The Torrens Catchment, BHK Master Plan, AGT South Parklands ASR potential,
BrownHillandKeswickCreekstormwaterprojectdocumentstodeveloptheproposal.
Thefeasibilitystudyisaimedtomanagefloodriskbybuildingnewinfrastructure,andupgradingthe
existinginfrastructureinordertoreducetheimpactofflooding.
Figure33-LocalityPlan
3|P a g e
1.0Background
Parklands Creek originates in the City of Burnside, collecting stormwater from Beaumont, Glen
Osmond, Hazelwood Park, Linden Park, St Georges, Glenunga, Frewville and Glenside. Stormwater
from this suburb is collected and flows through various underground ground drains until it reaches
the Glenside hospital site where is it discharged into the Glenside stormwater detention basin. The
dischargefromthebasinflowsviaaculvertundergroundthroughtheintersectionofGreenhillRoad
/Fullarton Road into the South Parkland. This plan is intended to assist in the management of
stormwaterviaimplementationofinnovativewatermanagementpolicies,strategiesandprojects.
The proposal of this project is to design flood mitigation options in the South Parklands to manage
the stormwater inflow from the parklands creek (including a 100 year ARI flood). Furthermore, to
investigate the further use of parts of the detention basin system for longer term storage of water
for other purposes including; Aquifer Storage and Recovery (ASR), biodiversity enhancement
opportunities,wetlandsandrelatedtechnology.
Figure34-BrownHillKeswickCreekCatchment
4|P a g e
2.0 SiteAnalysis
2.1 PurposeofAnalysis
The site visit and analysis of the surrounding area is an important step in planning the
redevelopment of the current Glenside Campus and the South Parklands. The detailed
understanding of the land use, the conservation of fauna and flora with the cultural importance of
thesitehaveattachedmanyvariousconstraints,whichhavebeenthoroughlydetailedintheUrban
and Environmental Section of the report The intention of the analysis is to minimise the negative
environmentalimpactsduetofurtherdevelopmentintheSouthParklands.
5|P a g e
3.0 Sitelocation
Figure35-AmapofthecurrentGlensideDetentionbasin
TheGlensidestormwaterdetentionbasin(Showninfigure3)islocatedinsidetheGlensidehospital
area,approximatelythreekilometresSouth-EastoftheAdelaidecity.Itisnexttotheintersectionof
GreenhillRoadandFullartonRoad.Thereisalargeconcretechannelandaculvert.Theculvertfrom
where the discharge of the detention basin flows is located as previously mentioned underground
through the intersection of Greenhill Road / Fullarton Road. The site of the detention basin has
surrounding roadways and car parking along with some leisure areas. Greenhill Road and Fullarton
Road are the two boundaries in the North and West side of the detention basin. There are some
offices and small buildings located on the Northern side of the Glenside hospital. The surrounding
boundary of the basin consists of a brick wall along the Eastern side of the basin (Greenhill Road)
and the Southern side of the basin (Fullarton Road), as well as dense screen planting located
amongstthefencedarea.
N
6|P a g e
Figure36-Detentionbasin
ThehospitalaswellasotherbuildingslocatedinsidethevicinityisconsideredtobeHeritagelisted.
Furthermore, outside the Glenside Detention basin there are trees, plants, and residential blocks
alongwithashoppingcentrearealsocategorisedasHeritagelisted.
Figure37-Googlesatellitemapofexitingdetentionbasin
ExistingGlenside
detentionbasin
7|P a g e
4.0 Scope
4.1 Stormwater
Urbanstormwaterisdefinedasarunofffromurbanareas,includingthemajorflowsduringthewet
season. The growth of urbanisation is considered to be one of the major problems for the
management of stormwater, since it increases the frequency and intensity of runoff and flooding
events. An appropriately designed stormwater system will be required to capture all stormwater
generated from the Parklands Creek (which originates in the City of Burnside that collects water
From Beaumont, Glen Osmond, Hazelwood Park, Linden Park, St Georges, Glenunga, Frewville and
Glenside). Water from surrounding suburbs is collected and flows through various underground
drains until it reaches the Glenside Hospital site where it discharges into the Glenside stormwater
detention basin. Discharge from the basin flows through the culvert under the Greenhill Road /
Fullarton Road intersection and into the South Parklands. The Parklands Creek catchment is
predominantly urbanised and hence the area is susceptible to flooding in short durations of storm
overthecatchment,floodingthroughroadwaysandopenspace.
Pyramid Engineering Solutions aims to develop a water management system in line with Water
Quality Management Strategy (NWQMS) and Australian Guideline for Urban Stormwater
Management. This will ensure that the newly designed stormwater system will protect the current
areaunderflooding,thecreeksystemaswellastheundergroundwatersystemintheintheSouth
Parklands.
8|P a g e
4.2 ProblematSouthParklandsandtheGlensideDetentionbasin
Duringthewetseasonwhentherearemajorstorms,floodingoccursintheSouthParklandsareaand
theotherresidentialareaslocatedintheUnleyCouncilregion.Thefloodmitigationparametersfor
theparklandscreekaresummarisedbelow:
Existing1%AnnualExceedenceProbability(AEP)flowforParklandsoutflowisapproximately
23.4m
3
/swhichhasfloodedtheParklandsCreek
Thedesired1%AEPflowformtheParklandsCreekoutflowtobelessthan8.0m3/s
Designing of additional 115 ML of detention storage along the Parklands to minimise the
flow
Figure38-FloodinginAdelaideRoads
9|P a g e
During the major flooding events, flood damage in the Glenside detention basin site and Parklands
sitecanbelistedasbelow:
DuringmajorstormeventstheoverflowfromConyghamStreethascreatedfloodingthrough
theGlensideHospital,localresidentialareasandminorfloodingintheresidentialproperties
in-betweenFullartonRoadandGlenOsmondRoad.
Flooding through the South Parklands is mainly in the recreational area but there is still
somedamagealongthepropertiesonSouthTerracewhichareinundated.Thistotaldamage
valueis$1.8MillionaspertheBHKFinalMasterPlanReport.
FloodingintheGreenhillareaisveryabigissueasthefloodwatercanreachheightsofupto
2.5m.
The insufficient capacity of the Fullarton Road Culvert near the Greenhill road culvert in
Wayville has resulted in the total pre-mitigation flood damage for Parklands Creek in the
orderof$15.3MillionaspertheBHKMasterPlanFinalReport.
4.3 Rainfall
The annual rainfall data provided by the client can be used to determine the additional water
coming from rainfall and ending up in the South Parklands. This amount of additional from rainfall
plustheoriginalwatercomingfromtheParklandscreek,havetobeconsideredinthedesignofthe
detentionbasinsasitwillassistindeterminingtheirfinalcapacity.
The provided annual rainfall data was measured in a station located at the suburb of Kent town,
wherearaingaugeissetup.AsthereisnorainstationscurrentlysetupinthevicinityoftheSouth
Parklands,theraingaugeinKentTownisusedasitsrainfalldataistheconsideredtobetheclosest
to South Parklands. The rainfall data covers the year 2002 up to 2008 (rainfall data for the years
2001and2009areincomplete,andthereforeexcludedfromtheanalysis).
ThedatawasanalysedusingMicrosoftExcel2010inordertofindoutthetotalrainfallprecipitation
on the South Parklands for each of the years from 2001 up to 2009. The following table and graph
summarisethefindings.
10|P a g e
Table7-Totalprecipitationforeachyear
Year 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
TotalPrecipitation(mm) 433 1522.6 566.4 613.2 271.8 450.4 380
Figure39-Annualrainfallprecipitation
From the above table and graph, it can be seen that the maximum and critical annual rainfall
precipitationisabout1553mmwhichtookplacein2003.Intermsofaverages,theaverageannual
rainfallprecipitationisabout605mm.
Moreover, in terms of daily rainfall, it was found that the maximum total precipitation 937.4 mm
which took place on the 14
th
of October 2003 at 1pm. However, it will be ignored as the letter F is
corresponding to this data which means no quality control performed. The second maximum total
precipitation is 21.4 mm which took place on the 14
th
of January 2002 at 1pm and the letter Y is
correspondingtothisdatawhichmeansitisqualitycontrolledandacceptable.Therefore,21.4mm
willbeusedasthemaximumandcriticaldailytotalprecipitation.
Inthedesignstageoftheproject,therainfalldataresultswillbeusedalongwithotherhydrological
results(suchastheinflowhydrographsresults)tocalculatenecessaryhydrologicalparameters.This
will help to determine the final required capacity of the basins which will decrease the flow for
ParklandsCreekoutflowfrom23.4m
3
/sto7.5m
3
/s.
11|P a g e
Figure8below,showsthe1:100ARIyearbasecasefloodingmappingintheSouthernParklandsand
thesurroundssuburbs.
Figure40-100yearARIbasecasefloodingmappinginSouthParklandsandsurroundingarea
Table8-Propertiesaffectedbyflooding
Table 2, shows the properties affected by flooding for existing conditions. It is evident that the
current detention basin at Brown Hill Keswick Creek will affect more than a thousand properties in
10 years. However, in conjunction with flood mitigation works and biodiversity enhancement the
overallnumberofaffectedpropertieswillbereducedconsiderably.
DesignFloodEvent NumberofFloodAffectedProperties
Over-FloorFlooding Under-FloorFlooding Total
10YearARI 151 1,001 1,152
20YearARI 805 3,059 3,864
50YearARI 1,513 4,199 5,712
100YearARI 1,712 5,209 6,921
500YearARI 2,440 7,806 10,246
12|P a g e
Table9-Propertiesaffectedbyfloodingaftermitigationworks
DesignFloodEvent NumberofFloodAffectedProperties
Over-FloorFlooding Under-FloorFlooding Total
10YearARI 61 401 462
20YearARI 222 755 977
50YearARI 405 1,095 1,500
100YearARI 685 1,385 2,070
500YearARI 976 2,122 3,098
Table3,indicatesthatthenumberofpropertiesaffectedbyfloodingwouldbedecreaseifmitigation
worksareundertakenimmediately.The1:10ARIwoulddecreasefrom1,152to462properties,1:20
ARIwoulddecreasefrom3,864to977properties,1:50ARIwoulddecreasefrom5,712to1,500,and
the1:100ARIwoulddecreasefrom6,921to2,070.
4.4 Hydrology
Runoff is when there is rainfall beyond the ground to absorb and is expressed as an instantaneous
rateofflowinlitres/secorm
3
/s.Runofffromurbanareaisreferredtoasstormwaterandcanoccur
duetoanycombinationofrainfallintensity,stormdurationandcatchmentlossesprevailingattime
ofthestorm.(BHKCStormwaterManagementplan2012)
Inflowdataanalysis
TheclienthasprovideddocumentationsregardingthewaterinflowdataatGlenside,atsixdifferent
testingfrequenciesina100yeartimeframe;respectivelyinvariousstormwaterdurations(hours)of
1.5, 4.5, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24. The time increments of the inflow data testing will be taken in 5 minutes
incrementsexceptforthe1.5hourduration,wherethetimewillbetakenevery2minutes.Thedata
isinincrementsof5minutes,thusmakingatotalof60increments.
The data was simulated in Excel to present the distribution of inflow in the detention basing
entranceinGlenside,refertoFigure9below.
13|P a g e
Figure41-TheplotoftherateofinflowinGlensideagainsttimeincrement(min)
Asshowninfigure9,therearesevendifferentscenariosoftestingstormwaterdurationin100year
floodtimespan.Themainpointtoconsiderofthisscenarioisthatthepeakinflowoccurswhenthe
accumulationofwaterreachestoacertainextentthendecreasesgradually.
Thedataof4.5hours/100yearsinflowwastakentobe23.33m
3
/satitspeak,andthehighestpeak
scenarioofthe6hour/100yearswas20.76m
3
/s.The9hour/100yearsdatashows21.17m
3
/sisthe
greatest inflow, while the maximum inflow data for 12 hour/100years is 21.13 m
3
/s. When it came
to the critical data in 18 hour and 24 hour in 100 years, the highest data recorded was 14.01 m
3
/s
and13.88m
3
/srespectively.Thetable4showsthevariationofthecriticalinflowvolumeperhourin
different 7 scenarios. It can be inferred that the maximum volume of each case occurs generally
aroundthehourwhichhasthepeakvolumeoftheinflow.
Table10-CriticalinflowVolumeDatafor7scenarios

unit:m^3
4.5 6 9 12 18 24 1.5
hour
1 149.8309 40.63233 113.6338 123.6387 31.24976 6.00E+01 69.82661
2 179.39 192.997 134.102 125.811 145.907 150.966 296.88
3 140.489 183.51 189.58 183 109.047 113.67 284.56
4 86.735 126.398 115.388 116.93 180.5 180.45 151.91
5 86.592 109.791 43.223
14|P a g e
Table11-Criticalinflowdatafor7scenarios
4.5 hour 6 hour 9 hour 12 hour 18 hour 24 hour 1.5 hour
runoff type inflow 23.3 20.76 21.17 21.13 14.01 13.88 28.51
outflow 0.0009681 0.0009244 0.000994 0.000905 0.000919 0.000907 0.000948
stormwater duration(m^3/s)
Table5showsthecriticalinflowrateoftheexitingdetentionbasininGlensidewillbefiguredoutby
usingthecriticalvolumedataindifferentcases.Itisdependentthatrealsituationgovernstheflood
data.
ThepreliminarycriticalinflowdatawillbedesignedasthefundamentalwaterinputattheGlenside.
However,themostcriticalcaseswillbethepeakdataof1.5hourstormwaterdurationin100year
whichis4.742m
3
/s
4.5 StormwaterManagement
A Stormwater management plan is a major tool to determine the planning and investigation
strategies for the urban stormwater action, and will be measured across the South Parklands. The
draft for the stormwater management covers the catchments of Brown Hill and Keswick Creeks,
including Glen Osmond and Parklands Creeks, which are important drainage watercourses to the
Glenside detention basin. The management requires a careful analysis of the rainfall duration,
intensity and the duration in the area which involves the application of hydrological science to
calculate and predict storm runoff. This hydrological study will enable the Water Department to
understandtheoutflowformtheGlensidedetentionbasinintotheculvertundertheintersectionof
Greenhill Road and Fullarton Road. The feasibility study will only deal with the peak flow from the
detentionbasinwhichshallnotexceedthe100yearAverageRecurrenceInterval(ARI)events.
A 100 ARI flood is a flood that will occur on average once every 100 years, and has a 1% chance of
occurring in a given year. Currently, a 100 year ARI storm in the Brownhills and Keswick Creek
catchmentwouldaffectmanypropertiesandcancausemillionsofdollarsofpotentialdamage.
The management includes proposals to upgrade the existing detention basins current capacity of
17ML to approximately 30ML; and build series of new detention basins with some wetlands along
the parklands in order to reduce the impact of flooding and to increase the quality of water. The
total volume of the additional detention basins (including wetlands) can take more than 115ML of
stormwater from the Parklands Creek. The current detention basin is almost 1.5 meter deep and
thatcanbeincreasedto2.5metertakingintoconsiderationalltheinvestigationofallunderground
infrastructureswhichcanincreasethecapacityofthedetentionbasin.
15|P a g e
Thewell-designedandintegratedstormwatermanagementsystemcanprovidecommunitybenefits
including;
MinimisingfloodingoftheSouthParklandsandtheproperty
Protectingdownstreamwaterbodiesfromthecontaminationintherunoff
Providingrecreationalfacilitiesonwater
Providingnaturalhabitatintheareaforbirdsandotherspecies
Providingwaterforreuse
4.5.1 UpgradeFullartonRoad/GreenhillRoadCulvert
Figure42-CurrentconcretechannelconnectingtheCulverttowardsGlensidedetentionbasinunder
theintersectionofFullartonRoadandGreenhillRoad
Figure43-Closerlookattheculvertopeninginabovefigure
16|P a g e
This flows in the Parklands Creek from Burnside which enters the Glenside Hospital grounds and
thenisattenuatedbytheexistingGlensideDetentionbasinbeforeflowingthroughtheculverttothe
parklands.AspertheBHKMasterplan,theareaissubjectedtofloodingwhenthefloodingexceeds
1:10 AEP event. In order to protect the area for 1:100 AEP events the culvert capacity has to be
increased. For the flood mitigation option at the detention basin area, the following information
shouldbeadoptedinaccordancetothecurrentculvertsizeandcapacity:
The existing culvert dimension is a 3.05m x 1.37m RCBC and it is 115 m long. The current
capacityisapproximately17.4m
3
/s.
1:100 AEP (90min) hydrological modelling assumes a peak flow of 23.6 m
3
/s is required to
passthroughtheculvert.
Additional3.6mx1.2mRCBCisrequiredtotaketheadditionalflow.
Services should be unaffected while increasing the capacity of the culvert (water supply,
sewer,telecommunication,electricity).
Requiresextensivetrafficcontrolasitisamajorintersection.
Capitalcostestimateas$2.7millionincludedintheBHKMasterplan
Atthecurrentsituationduetoheavytraffic(daily),highcosts,extensivetrafficmanagementandthe
sufficientspaceavailableforanyfurtherdevelopmentintheSouthParklands,upgradingtheculvert
doesnt seem to be feasible. Hence, the following option is considered for the feasibility study
option.
17|P a g e
Figure44-Outletfromthedetentionbasintotheculvert
4.5.2 FeasibilityStudy
For the Stormwater Management in the South Parklands, Pyramid Engineering Solutions has
consulted with the main stakeholders, GHD and Tonkin Consulting to develop the following
conceptualplanforfeasibilitystudy:
IncreasingthecapacityoftheexistingbasininGlensideCampus,fromastoragecapacityof
18 ML to approximately 30 ML, and to limit the flow into the South Parklands for the 100
year ARI storm to within the capacity of the existing culvert under the Fullarton and
Greenhillroadintersection.
Addition of new storage up to 115 ML incorporating the proposed wetlands that are to be
theconstructedaspartoftheVictoriaParkManagementPlan.
Construction of embankment to create storage up to 40 ML in the Southern and Western
partofpark20,whichislocatedbetweenPeacockandUnleyRoad,refertofigure13below.
18|P a g e
Figure45-AmapofthecurrentGlensideDetentionbasinandtheParknumber
Abypasshastobeinstalledatthewetlandstodirectthemajorstormwatertotheotherdetention
basins in order to maintain the ecology of the wetland. The size and the type of bypass will be
determinedbyusingaHEC-RAShydraulicmodelwithmaximumsizeofbypassflowbeinglimitedby
thedownstreamcapacityconstraintofeitherthechannelorstructures(TokinConsulting,2009).
TheproposedfeasibilitystudyplanwillmanagefloodingintheSouthParklandsincludinga100year
ARIflood.Thefeasibilitystudytargetstoreducethecurrent1%AnnualExceedenceProbability(AEP)
flow for the Parklands Creek outflow from 23.4 m
3
/s to 8.0 m
3
/s. As the flood fills each of the
individual basins, the peak flow through Parklands is reduced. The flow of water in series of the
detentionbasinwilldecreasethehydrographofthebasin.Wetlandswillplayotherimportantroles
in decreasing the velocity of water and will act as basins. By the time the flood reaches the most
downstreambasininparklandNo.20,thepeakflowwouldbesignificantlylessthanwhentheflow
enterstheParklands.Furthermore,theconstructionofembankmentintheparknumber20willhelp
to achieve the target outflow from the culvert under the Greenhill road, approximately 200 meters
EastofKingWilliamRoad/PeacockRoadintersection,intoUnleyCouncil.
ParklandCreek
No.17
18
19
20
N
19|P a g e
Figure46-ParklandNumber17intheSouthernParklands
Potentiallocationsofdetentionbasinsandtheircapacitydependupontheexistingopenspace.The
greateramountofopenspacethatisavailablethelargerthedetentionbasinswillbeconstructed.
ThecurrentcapacityoftheculvertunderGreenhillroadapproximately200meastoftheintersection
of King William Road and Peacock Road, is 8.0 m
3
/s. The targeted outflow from the Parkland
detention basin is 7.6 m
3
/s (almost equal to the capacity of the Greenhill culvert). Minor flooding
along Greenhill Road may therefore still occur. However, this damage can be avoided during the
detaileddesignphase.
Evenwiththenewdesign,floodingisstillexpectedtooccurinsomelimitedareasforsomeflooding
events. Implementing further investigations by the engineers would be possible to provide higher
levels of flood protection, however, the social impacts and capital cost would far overshadow the
benefit.
ThedetentionbasinsintheSouthParklandswillcontrolthespeedofthestormwaterandasaresult,
no property damage will occur in and around the surrounding areas along with the downstream
area. However, the detention basins will cause inundation in several playing fields which require
significant clean-up efforts once the flood is downgraded. The area will be fully protected against
100yearARIflood(TokinConsulting,2009).
20|P a g e
SeriesofdetentionbasinsintheSouthParklandswouldcreateopportunitiestore-createthenatural
ephemeral creek through the South Parklands system and replenish soil moisture stores for
terrestrial plants over a large area in the South Parklands. This could improve the water quality to
reuse through Aquifer Storage Recharge (ASR) option for irrigation in the South Parklands area by
implementingengineeringknowledgeandimprovingthebiodiversityinthearea.Thishastheadded
benefit of not affecting any existing properties due to open areas in the Parklands. The estimated
costinthefinalReportofBHKMasterplanis$10Million.
Figure47-MapoftheSouthParklands17,18,19and20

4.5.3LocationofnewDetentionbasins
Detentionbasinsaredesignedtotemporarilystorestormwaterrunoff,thusreducingthepeakrate
ofrunofftodifferentmeans,suchasculvertsandstormwatersewers.Bydesigningsuchbasins,the
likelihood of floods will be reduced significantly depending on the properties of the designed
detentionbasins.
AtthecurrentdetentionbasininGlenside,theculvertislikelytobefloodedduringintenserunoffs.
Hence,thecurrentdesignedcapacityisnotsufficienttodeliveramaximumdischargeof17.4m3per
secondtoallowasmoothrunoffundertheculvert.Asproposedearlier,duetohightrafficvolumes
17
18
19
20
21|P a g e
and cost related issues, it is not feasible to contribute any alterations to the current culvert to
increase its capacity; thereby increasing the current detention basin capacity seems to be the only
sufficientoptiontoreducethepeakoutflowtoculvert.
Figure48-Satelliteviewofthecurrentdetentionbasin
Theareaofthecurrentdetentionbasinhighlightedinredaboveis15600m
2
accordingtoSAHealth
andWorleyParsons.Thisareacanholdupto18MLofwaterrunoff,refertoFigure17.Inorderto
increasethecapacity,theyellowhighlightedareacanbeaddedtothecurrentbasintogiveupto30
ML basin capacity. Besides that, some excavation work to the current basin at higher surfaces to
make sloppy surface towards the stormwater sewer will be required, refer to figure 16. This
extension will significantly drop the overall discharge per second; therefore the culvert will not
experienceanyfloodsasitcanrunupto17.4m
3
smoothly.
22|P a g e
Figure49-SatelliteviewofbasinatGlensideandproposedbasinatParkland17
Figure17showstheproposeddetentionbasinatparkland17inred.Judgingbytheareasabove,the
proposedbasinatparkland17canholdupapproximately40MLofrunoff.
Figure50-secondproposeddetentionbasinatParkland20
23|P a g e
Figure18,showsthelocationofthesecondplanneddetentionbasin.Theassumeddesignwillholda
maximum runoff capacity of 40 ML. The series of basins and wetlands along Glenside campus and
parklandscreekwilldecreasetherunoffdischargeattheoutlet.
Figure51-NewExcavationareainwhichthedetentionbasincanincreaseitscapacityofthebasin
As labelled in figure 19, the higher surfaces can be excavated to allow more stormwater to store
duringmajorfloodingevent.
Thecentreofthedetentionbasinwillhaveahighersurfacewhichallowswatertoleaktowardsthe
North. If excavated, more water storage capacity will be increased. Increasing the depth can also
increasethecapacityofthebasinbutlocationofsewerpipeshastobeinvestigated.
24|P a g e
Figure 52 - centre of detention basin where excavation can be done taking in consideration of the
tree
Figure 20, shows the current detention basin where excavation can be undertaken to increase the
volume.
We have proposed a series of detention basins, Aquifier Storage Recovery and wetlands in the
SouthernParklandsarea.Theseproposeddetentionbasinsandwetlandscanbeseenbelow,Figuere
21.Thebluecircleindicatesdetentionbasin,greencircleindicateswetlandandtheyellowindicates
thebestlocationforASR.ThecapacityofGlensideisincreasestoapproximately30ML.Thedetention
basin in park no. 17 and 20 can hold approximately 30 ML and 40 ML respectively. The wetland in
parkno.17canholdapproximately35MLandtheotherwetlandsinparklandno.19and20areas
wellfeasibletogetthebetterqualityofstormwater.
Thewetlandsatparklandno.19andno20arelocatedatthosepointsastheyarethemostsuitable
area. The best location for the ASR is denoted by yellow circle and has capacity of 100
ML/annum.Theblacklineindicatesthedirectionofflow,Hencethetotalcapacityofthedetention
basinwiththewetlandisapproximately117MLisshownbelow:
AdditionalnewdetentionbasininGlenside12MLapproximately
ParklandNo.1730MLapproximately
WetlandinparklandNo.1735MLapproximately
Detentionbasininparklandno.2040ML
25|P a g e
Figure 53 - Location of new detention basins, wetlands and ASR in the South Parklands and the
directionofflow
4.6 Advantageoftheconceptdesignproject
Thefeasibilitystudyforthestormwatermanagementaimsfor:
ManagementoffloodingintheSouthParklandsanddownstreamatGreenhillroad
Publichealthandsafety
Utilising the existing gross pollutant trap at the Glenside campus and construction of an
enlargedsedimentationbasintoimprovethewaterquality.
Ecologicallysustainabledevelopmentthroughseriesofpassingwetlands
The wetlands will slow down water flow and provide further treatment prior to returning
waterbackintoParklandsCreekandharvestingofstormwater
Rechargingtheaquiferifsuitable
EnhancedamenityandrecreationalopportunitiesfortheSouthernpartofVictoriaPark.
Integratedwatercyclemanagement
26|P a g e
5.0 PreliminaryAnalysis
5.1 Existingconditionofdetentionbasinandlayout
PyramidEngineeringSolutionsrealisesthatdetailedandthoroughanalysisoftheexistingdetention
basins is fundamental to stormwater management in the South Parklands. The existing basin in
Glenside campus is identified in Figure 22 and located South-East of the Victoria Park Racecourse
site.TheSouthParklandsareacontainsthefollowingparkswhichhavebeenzonedbyAdelaideCity
Council:Tuttangga,Witawirra,Pityarrilla,Kurrangga.
Figure54-Sitelocationofexistingbasin
Currently, the Glenside Campus detention basin plays essential roles to influence the storm water
system in the South Parklands. The existing detention basin is located in the North-West corner of
theGlensideCampusinordertocaterfora100yearARIfloodeventshownonfigure.Thefollowing
informationhasbeenprovidedbySAHealthandWorleyParsons:
Thestoragecapacityofexistingdetentionbasinis18ML.
Theareaofdetentionbasinisaround15600m
2
.
One large open concrete drain and two smaller permanent ponds build along the Northern
edgeofthezone.
Eucalyptustreeshavebeenplantedthroughoutthiszone.
Adepressionofsometwometershasbeendevelopedforretentionofstormwaterinshort
27|P a g e
durationstorms.
Atthedownstreamendoftheculvert,thecreekflowsintotheGlensideStormwaterBasin.Thereis
a major drain running through the Glenside Campus and under the Fullarton Road/Greenhill Road
intersection, where it connects with Parklands Creek in the South Parklands. The drain forms an
integralpartofthecatchmentsforBrownhillandKeswickCreeks.Thiscatchmentprovidesdrainage
capacityforaconsiderableportionofSouth-EasternandSouth-WesternAdelaide.
5.2 StormwaterQualityManagement
The discharge of pollution in urban area mainly occurs during the more frequent storm events.
Reducingtherunoffofthestormeventwillassistinreducingthepollutants.Thestormwaterquality
controlsystemshouldbeimplementedduringboththeconstructionandpost-constructionphaseof
the urban development at both source and the end of pipe of channel. To maintain high potable
water standard appropriate monitoring and maintenance must be adhered to by contractors,
consultantsandcouncilofficers.Sourcecontrolofstormwaterpollutiontominimisetheamountof
pollutionenteringinthesystemasaresultthestormwatertreatmentmeasures,maynotbeableto
reducepollutionloadstodesirelevelsinlongrun.
Themajortypesofpollutantscanbeclassifiedinthreecategories:
Naturalorganicmaterialssuchasleaves,grassclippingsandsediments
Chemicaldetergents,coolant,oil,grease,fertiliserandpaint
Litterplasticbags,cigarettebuttsetc.
Litter baskets, litter pit, litter racks, sediment trap, gross pollutant trap and litter boom can be
primarily installed to remove the litters and other gross pollutants, and course sediments form the
stormwaterinthechannelofstormwateroutletpoints.
Apond/wetlandcanremovenutrients,bacteria,finesedimentsandheavymetalsfromstormwater.
They also help to decrease the velocity of flow, as well as increasing the quality of water in
downstream.
28|P a g e
5.3 PrimarilyInvestigationWaterSensitiveUrbanDesign(WSUD)
5.3.1ScopeofWSUD
Water Sensitive Urban Design is the integration tool for development along with the management,
protectionandconservationofwatercycleinasustainableway.ThegovernmentofSouthAustralia
stronglysupportsandisactivelyengagedintheintegratedmanagementofourmostpreciouswater
resources.TransitioningSouthAustraliaandAdelaidetoawatersensitivestateandcityrespectively,
is a key objective of the Government and is articulated in the states security plan, Water for good
(Department of Water, 2012). The techniques for water sensitive urban design includes; grassed
swales, filtration trenches, bio-retention system, wetlands, rainwater tanks and the combination of
these and other techniques for the best possible result which is sustainable and feasible for
everyone. The principles of WSUD are based on minimising the impacts of development and
maximisingthebenefitsofastormwatersystem.
TheoverallgoalsofWSUDforthisprojectare:
Managementofstormwater
Protectionofexistinglanduse,surfaceandundergroundwaterresources
Protecting the surrounding natural features and protecting the existing water courses
allowingthemtofunctionmoreeffectively
Encouragingstormwaterreusebyincreasingthequalityofwater
Reducingthestormwaterrunoffandavoidingpeakflow
5.4 DesignOptionforwaterquality
5.4.1GrossPollutionTraps(GPTs)
Primary treatment of stormwater is a part of the total water management strategy. The primary
purpose of GPTs is to remove gross pollutants (litter and debris greater than 5 mm) and coarse
sediments(particlessizelargerthan0.125mm)fromdischargingtoreceivingwatertodownstream
treatmentmeasures.WSUDapproachtostormwatermanagementreducesthelargercontaminants
forthefurthertreatmentofstormwaterbywetland.
ThelocationofGrossPollutantTrapsisdeterminedbythelocationofothertreatmentmeasuresand
be consistent with the strategic catchment treatment objectives. Topography, ground water,
available space and excess for monitoring and maintenance determine the best location of a Gross
PollutantTraps.Somesocialconstraintsincludeissueofhealthandsafety,aestheticandimpactson
recreationfacilitiesandmanysocialissuescanbeaddressedsimplyduringthedesignstage.
29|P a g e
There is a wide choice of GPTs available with in Australia. They vary in size, cost and trapping
performancebyorderofmagnitude.GPTsvaryintype,suchas:
Directscreeningdevices:littercollectionbaskets,releasenets,trashracks,returnflowlitter
basketsandchannelnets
Non-cloggingscreens:circularanddownwardlyinclinedscreens
Floatingtraps:flexiblefloatingbooms,floatingdebristrap
Sediment traps: sediment settling basins and ponds, circular settling tanks, hydrodynamic
separators.
Thenon-cloggingscreens,floatingtrapsandsedimenttrapsrespectivelycanbeinstalledaseachhas
anadvantageanddisadvantageinthemajorstormwaterseasons,thesecanbeseeninFigure23,24,
25,26and27.
Figure55-LitteraccumulationinMerriCreek,Melbourne
Figure56-Pollutionretainedinafreedrainingstate.Adelaide,SouthAustralia
30|P a g e
Figure57-Alitterscreeninthedirectionoftheflow,thedownwardinclinationencourageslitterto
movealongthescreen,leavingitfreetopassflows.Huntingdale,Victoria
Figure58-Floatingtrapscanbesubjectedtohighforcesandvelocitiesduringfloodeventsthatcan
compromisetheirstructuralintegrity.Elwood,Victoria
Figure59-ChannelnetslocatedacrossawholechannelinWestTorrens,SouthAustralia
31|P a g e
5.5Wetlands
Wetlands are a series of multiple ponds, which provide water storage and natural purification
withouttheneedforchemicalsormachinery.Thespacerequiredforawetlandisgenerallygreater
than that of a conventional detention basin, due to the multiple ponds; however they provide a
numberofbenefitsincluding:
Purifyingstormwatertoanacceptablelevelforirrigationoraquiferstoragerecovery(ASR)
Aestheticallypleasingandencouragingrecreationinthepark
Enhancingbiodiversityintheparkbyprovidinghabitatsfornativefloraandfauna.
Stormwaterfloodmitigationbycontrollingflowqualityandquantity.
Stormwaterrunoffcarriesamultitudeofpollutantsincludingdetergents,fertilisers,litter,sewerage,
oil and petrol. This pollution has the potential to flow into creeks and rivers, before being dumped
into the ocean which can be detrimental to native flora and fauna. Wetlands along water
catchments act as natural water treatment areas, filtering pollutants and helping to improve water
quality. Wetlands have detention basins or ponds that slow the water flow so that a number of
naturalprocessescanoccur,includingtrappinggrosspollutants,nutrientuptake,sedimentationand
bacteriaremoval.
5.5.1PossibleWaterStorageLocations
Onelargewetlandistobeutilisedinconjunctionwithdetentionbasinsintheparklands,duetothe
variousadvantagesofthetwosystemspreviouslyoutlined.Therearemultiplelocationsavailablefor
the wetland along the catchment; however many of the ideal locations have issues that would
impede construction, such as the privately owned Victoria Park Racecourse. The two most optimal
locationsforaquiferstoragerecovery(ASR)areinpark17,southoftheVictoriaParkRacecourseand
park 20 (Figure 28), which are in the vicinity of the Peacock Road and Greenhill Road intersection.
Therefore these areas would be optimal for the placement of wetland systems, as the stormwater
mustbetreatedbeforeitcanbepumpedintotheaquifer,whichthewetlandwilldo.Totalrequired
storageexpansionis115ML,withapproximately12MLbeingaccountedforbyupgradingthecurrent
detentionbasinatGlenside,40MLfromtheproposeddetentionbasininpark20and30MLfromthe
proposeddetentionbasininpark17.
32|P a g e
Therefore,alargewetlandsystemwithastoragecapacityof35MListobebuiltinpark17alongthe
riverjustaftertheproposeddetentionbasin,extendingtotheASRsothatthepurifiedwatercanbe
pumped into the aquifer to further increase storage capacity. The proposed locations of
aforementioned water storage systems are outlined below, the blue rings representing detention
basins,thegreenringsrepresentingwetlandsandthemaroonringsrepresentingASRlocations.The
locationsindicatedinparks19and20areonlypossibilitiesincasetheclientisnotsatisfiedwiththe
proposalorinthecaseofissuesimpedingdevelopmentoftheproposedsingularwetlandandASRin
park17,refertoFigure28.
Figure60-Wetlands,detentionbasinsandaquiferstoragesystemlocations
33|P a g e
5.5.2WetlandSystemDesign
The proposed wetland system will be of basic design, similar to the design diagram below (Figure
29).Theinletpondwillslowtheflowofthewater,allowingsedimentationtooccur.Thewaterwill
then pass through a series of smaller vegetated ponds which will allow for nutrient uptake and the
removalofbacteria.Themajorityofthepurifiedwaterwillrejointheby-passflowoftheriver,with
some being pumped into the aquifer via ASR. The required quantity of increased water storage is
35ML,whichtranslatestoavolumerequirementof35,000m
3
Figure61-AWetlandSystemDesign
5.5.3Operations
PreTreatment
Beforethewaterreachesthewetland,itmustpassthroughthepretreatmentofaGrossPollutant
Trap(GPT),specifically,atrashrackwhichwillreduce95%oflitter.
Physical
Sedimentation:Theinitialinletpondwillslowtheflowofwater,allowingthesuspendedsolidsto
settle,trappingthemduetotheextradepthofthepond.Thesettlingofthesolidsallowthe
pollutantstobeabsorbedinconjunctionwiththevegetationaroundthepond.
Filtration:Thevarioustypesofvegetationprovidedifferentmethodsoffiltration.Macrophytes,such
asnativesedgesandrushesfiltercolloidalsubstanceswhichadheretopopulatedmacrophytezones.
Organicbiomasssuchasalgaegrowsonsubmergingplantspeciessuchasnativeriverweedand
providesexcellentfiltering.
34|P a g e
BiologicalandChemical
Entrapmentandabsorption:Thewetlandvegetationprovidessurfacesforepiphyticbiofilmswhich
takeupandtrapdissolvedpollutants.Thechemicalabsorptionofpollutantscoupledwithfine
suspendedparticlesoccursbythesedimentationandsurfacefiltrationfromthemacrophytesand
biofilms,providingrapidbiodegradationoforganicmaterial.
PollutantTransformation
Regularwettinganddryingcycles:Thesereducethepotentialfornutrientreleaseinthesediment
substratum.Thisoccurs,reducingtheanoxicconditionsofthewaterandremobilizationofnutrients.
Table12-Removalofvariouspollutionsbywetlands
Pollutant ExpectedRemoval Comments

Litter >95% Subjecttoappropriate
hydrologiccontrol
TotalSuspendedSolids 65-95% Dependsonparticlesize
distribution
TotalNitrogen 40-80% Dependsonspeciationand
detentiontime
TotalPhosphorus 60-85% Dependsonspeciationand
particlesizedistribution
CoarseSediment >95% Subjecttoappropriate
hydrologiccontrol
HeavyMetals 55-95% Quitevariable,dependenton
particlesizedistribution,
detentiontime,etc
Table6above,indicatestheexpectedremovalofvariouspollutantsbythewetlands.
35|P a g e
5.5.4DesignandSafetyConsiderations
KeyDesignRequirements
Lengthtowidthratiobetween5:1and10:1
Flowvelocitylessthan1m/s
Maxdepth1.5to2m
Inletstoorificessubmergedtominimisecloggingwithdebris
Pondssurfaceslinedwithclaytoensurestorageofwater
Vegetationandweedmaintenanceprogram
Mimicphysicalcharacteristicsofnaturalwetlandssuchasshape,depth,edgegradientsand
wetting/dryingcycles
Useofnativespeciesinwetlandvegetationplantings
Creationoffaunarefugeareas,intheformofislandswithseveralraisedmounds(heightsno
greaterthan10mm)
150mmTopsoil
Linedorunlined(Clay)
SafetyConsiderations
Minimumoffsetof15m,fromtheedgeofpondstoanyallotmentboundaries
Edgesofanydeepopenwaterwillnotbehiddenorobscured
Approachbatterslopeswillbenosteeperthanaratioof1:5VerticaltoHorizontal
Waterbodiesgreaterthan0.9mdeeprequireasecondarysafetybenchat0.9m
Fencingwillbeplacedtoensuresafetyofpatronsfromfallingintotheponds,toallow
domesticanimalaccesswhilstpreventingpotentialattacksonthenativefloraandfauna
AppropriatesignageistobeputinplaceaccordingtoAustralianstandardstoensuresafety
forpatronsaroundthewetland,aswellastoinformthemofthepurposeofthewetlandand
interestingfactsabouthowthesystemworksanditsbenefits
36|P a g e
5.6AquiferRechargeandRecovery(ASR)

AquiferStorageRecovery(ASR)isthereinjectionofwaterbackintoanaquiferforlateruse.ASRhas
been done for municipal, industry and agriculture use (Adam 2012, p. 4). The proposed aquifer
storage recovery in the South Park Lands will be constructed for municipal purposes. Figure 30
below, shows an aquifer storage recovery system for the Parafield and Ayfield stormwater
catchments.ThisprocesswillbesimilartotheoneusedfortheSouthParkLands.Stormwaterwillbe
harvested from the suburbs of Beaumont, Glen Osmond, Hazelwood Park, Linden Park, St Georges,
Glenunga, Frewville and Glenside. This water will travel through the Glenside detention basin and
into the South Park Lands via the Park Lands Creek. It is proposed that numerous wetlands be
constructedintheSouthParkLands.Thesewetlandswillbeutilisedasafiltrationsystemtoremove
leaf litter, gross pollutants and aquatic life before it enters the injection well. A disinfection system
will also be required to reduce pathogenic bacteria and the growth of bacteria slimes within the
injectionwell.Oncethewaterispumpedintotheaquiferitcanbestoreduntilitisneededagainto
increasethesurfacewaterlevelsinthesurfacewetlandsorforirrigationpurposes.
Figure62-ParafieldandAyfieldStormwaterCatchment
37|P a g e
5.6.1WhyisAquiferStorageRecoverysuitableforthissite?
Water from Glenside Campus currently travels through the South Park Lands via the Park Lands
Creek. With the introduction of additional detention basins along the span of the Creek will ensure
flood waters migrate safely without harming nearby suburbs. The introduction of additional
detentionbasinswithintheSouthParkLandsallowsanopportunitytosimultaneouslyinstallaquifer
storage recovery. The Park Land Creek collects water from Beaumont, Glen Osmond, Hazelwood
Park, Linden Park, St George, Glenunga, Frewville and Glenside. This water can be collected in a
seriesofwetlandslocatedintheSouthParkLands.Fromthewetlandstheycanbepumpeddowna
wellintoaquiferstorage.Inthefuture,ifthewaterisneededitcanbepumpedbackupthroughthe
samewell.
5.6.2Pre-treatments
Beforethestormwatercanentertheaquiferitmustbetreatedtoensurecontaminationofexisting
ground water is prevented. The water quality policy in South Australia requires the following
treatmentofwaterbeforeitenterstheaquifer:
Stormwaterbeingpumpedintotheaquifershouldbeatthesamestandardasexistingwater
inthataquiferorbetterwherepossible.
Leaf litter, gross pollutants and aquatic life should be screened to prevent them from
enteringthetreatmentsystemorinjectionwell.
Filtrationsystemtoreducetheamountofsuspendedsedimentsininjectedwater.
Adisinfectionsystemtoreducepathogenicbacteriaandthegrowthofbacteriaslimeswithin
theinjectionwell.
Noproductscontainingchlorinearetobeintroducedtotheaquiferwatersupply.
(EnvironmentProtectionAuthority2004)
38|P a g e
5.6.3Advantages
There are many advantages of aquifer storage recovery. Aquifer storage recovery is a proven
technology that has been implemented in numerous countries, including Australia and South
Australia. Aquifer storage recovery is currently established in the Mount Gambier and Angas-
Bremer regions. There are also aquifer storage recovery sites within the metropolitan area. These
metropolitansitesare,ScotchCollege,RegentGardens,AndrewsFarm,ThePaddocks, Greenfields,
Kurna Park and Northgate (Water for Good). The knowledge gained by past projects in South
Australia regarding the construction of aquifer storage recovery, provide the South Park Lands
proposal with the information necessary to succeed. In addition, aquifer storage recovery is cost
efficientandbeneficialtotheexistingenvironment.Aquiferscanstoresubstantialamountsofwater
eliminating the need for large and expensive above ground detention basins (Department of
Ecology).
5.6.4Disadvantages
There are many advantages of aquifer storage recovery. Aquifer storage recovery is a proven
technology that has been implemented in numerous countries, including Australia and South
Australia. Aquifer storage recovery is currently established in the Mount Gambier and Angas-
Bremer regions. There are also aquifer storage recovery sites within the metropolitan area. These
metropolitansitesare,ScotchCollege,RegentGardens,AndrewsFarm,ThePaddocks,Greenfields,
Kurna Park and Northgate (Water for Good). The knowledge gained by past projects in South
Australia regarding the construction of aquifer storage recovery, provide the South Park Lands
proposal with the information necessary to succeed. In addition, aquifer storage recovery is cost
efficientandbeneficialtotheexistingenvironment.Aquiferscanstoresubstantialamountsofwater
eliminating the need for large and expensive above ground detention basins (Department of
Ecology).
39|P a g e
5.6.5PossibleLocations
Therearethreepossibleoptions(Figure31)withregardtothelocationofaquiferstoragerecovery.
Thesesitesare:
1. SouthParkLandsSouthofVictoriaPark
2. SouthParkLandsBoundedbyPeacockRoadandGreenhillRoad
3. Glenside
Consultation with geotechnical engineers and environmental engineers will ensure a suitable
locationforaquiferstoragerecoveryisdetermined.
Figure63-PossibleAquiferStoragerecoverylocationsalongthespanoftheParklandCreek
VictoriaPark
The area south of Victoria Park was determined to be suitable for aquifer storage by the
GeotechnicalDepartment.Theaquiferislocated174mbelowgroundlevelandiscapableofstoring
50-100ML/year.
PeacockRoad
The area bounded by Peacock and Greenhill Road was also determined to be suitable for aquifer
storage recovery. The aquifer is located 54m below ground level and is capable of storing
100ML/year. However, to achieve 100ML/year four injection wells will need to be installed at 100-
150mspacings.
Glenside
40|P a g e
ItwasdeterminedthattheGlensideareawouldnotbesuitableforaquiferstoragerecoverybythe
GeotechnicalDepartment.Thereisminimalspaceforconstructionintheareaandthecarbonaceous
natureoftheaquiferisproblematicforstormwaterinjection.
BestOption
The area bounded by Peacock and Greenhill road showed promising aquifer storage abilities,
however four or more wells would need to be constructed in that location to handle the required
capacity. Therefore, after consultation with the Geotechnical Department, it was determined that
themostappropriatelocationforaquiferstoragerecoverywillbeSouthofVictoriaParkatwellpoint
22151.TheareasouthofVictoriaParkwillonlyrequireonewellinjectionandhasthelargestwater
storagecapabilities.Drillingonlyonewellreducesthecostandthereforemakestheaquiferstorage
recoveryconstructionsouthofVictoriaParkfeasible.
5.6.6Conclusion
The aim of this study was to determine whether it is feasible to construct aquifer storage recovery
simultaneously with wetlands in the South Park Lands. Aquifer storage recovery is a proven
technology which has already been utilised in South Australia. In addition, it is cost efficient and
beneficial to the existing environment. The Geotechnical Department have determined that the
most suitable location for aquifer storage recovery is South of Victoria Park. This location will be
utilised as it is the most suitable, in terms of construction accessibility and required capacity. The
area bounded by Peacock and Greenhill road also showed promising aquifer storage abilities,
however multiple wells would need to be constructed in that location to handle the required
capacity. The area south of Victoria Park will only require one well injection to handle the same
capacity. Drilling only one well significantly reduces the cost making the aquifer storage recovery
construction feasible. Due to its low construction cost and ability to eliminate the need for large
surfacedetentionbasins,aquiferstoragerecoverywillbeutilisedintheSouthParkLands.Anaquifer
storage recovery will be located south of Victoria Park and be used to store flood waters when
required.
41|P a g e
5.7BiodiversityEnhancement
The proposed design of a combination of detention basins and wetlands will help the influence of
biodiversityenhancement.Thisisduetoitbeingabletodiffusepollutionwhichwouldminimisethe
damagetothefloraandfaunathatiscurrentlyintheSouthParklands.Duetotheminimalfauna
5.8UtilityInfrastructure
Currently,thereisasignificantnetworkofexistingutilityinfrastructureundertheGlensideCampus
Area.Figure32below,showsadetailedmapofwhereeachundergroundsupplyis:electrical,gas,
sewerage,stormwater,telecomandwatersupply.Toinvestigatethemanagementofstormwaterin
theSouthParklandsandtodesigntherequireddetentionalongwiththeimprovingthequalityof
waterweneedtoconsiderthefollowing:WaterSupply,ElectricalSupply,SewerConnectionand
Telecommunicationsupply.
Figure64-ExistingundergroundservicesplanattheGlensideCampus
42|P a g e
5.8.1Watersupply
There is a main water supply at the Fullarton Road entrance. Three other connections exist on the
South and Northern boundaries and a small connection in the South-Western corner of the site.
Water Supply utilities in the permitting areas around the Southern Parklands would sustain limited
damage during a flood event. Water storage facilities would not be affected, distribution pipes are
allunderpressure.Damagetothepipeswouldbethroughcrackingofthepipenetworkduetothe
destructionofsupportingstructures(i.e.bridgesandlargeculverts).
Afirehydranthastwoincoming150mmconnections,whicharelocatedattheSouthernboundaryto
aboosterfacilityandtheWesternboundarytoaboosternearthemainentrance.
Pipeconnection
TheSouthernParklandspipenetworkscanbeseenbelow,Figure33.
Figure65-pipenetworksoverviewmapoftheSouthernParklands
43|P a g e
5.8.2SewerConnections
Multiplesewerconnectionsareconnectedtovariousbuildingsonthecampus.Thediameterofthe
main sewer connections is larger than 225mm. The sewer enters the Glenside Campus at the East
andexitsintheNorth-Westerncornerofthesite
5.8.3Electricalsupply
Theexistingelectricalinfrastructureincludesasingleincomingfeed,whichoriginatesfroman11KV
feed that runs along Fullarton Road. It is also feeding five on-site related transformers located on
FullartonRoad.ThesetransformersprovideelectricitytotheWesternsideofFullartonRoadaswell
as street lighting. The electrical supply around the Brown Hill Keswick Creek can be seen below,
Figure (34, 35, 36 and 37). In a severe case of flooding the electricity transmission lines would be
affected, resulting in loss of power in the affected suburbs. It is estimated that it could take 1-2
weeks to complete these works if all components were available. However, during these works we
believe that there would be enough poles in the surrounding suburbs to transmit power to these
homesinsuchanevent.
Figure66-ETSAPowerLine
44|P a g e
45|P a g e
46|P a g e
5.8.4Telecommunicationwireandfibreopticalcables
Therearetwo100diameterTelstrapipesconstructedintothemainentranceoftheFullartonRoad.
Figure38below,showstheundergroundtelecommunicationwireslocatedthroughouttheSouthern
parklandscatchmentarea.Ifthecatchmentareawasinundated,landlinetelecommunicationswould
be affected; especially business phones, facsimiles and internet operations. Due to the area of
telecommunicationwiringintheSouthernparklands,thecosttoreplacedamaged/destroyedcables
wouldbesubstantialandcouldtakemonthstogetlandlinecommunicationsoperating.
Figure70-Telecommunicationundergroundwiring
47|P a g e
6.0 Costanalysis
DetentionBasinCosting
Inthefeasibilitystage,Stormwatercanbemanagedbyincreasingtheexistingdetentionbasin.The
current capacity of Glenside detention basin is 18ML, which can be increased to approximately
40ML, while also creating new detention basin at the southern parklands with an approximation of
capacity30ML.Toincreasethecapacityof22MLthereisaneedofdiggingthegourd.Forcostingthe
Rawlinsons Australian Construction guide was used. Since different prices are used for varying
typesofsoilstheGeotechnicalDepartmentneededtofoundoutwhatthesoilprofileoftheGlenside
Campus.
Table 7 shows the soil profiles at the Glenside Campus and the types of soils at certain depths. By
usingthisinformationcostingisabletobecalculated.

Table13-Soilprofile
Depth(m) soiltype(material)
1 siltyclay(highplasticity,redbrown)
2 siltyclay(mediumtohighplasticity,brown,withpaleorange
browncalcareouspockets)
3 siltyclay(highplasticity,brown;withcalcareouspockets)
4 siltysandclay(highplasticity,brown,orangebrown;withoccasionalgrey
mottlingwithgreyspecks)
Table7abovedescribesthesoilprofiletypes,whichinturnhelpswithcosting.
48|P a g e
Table14-Existingdetentionbasinincrementcost
Description Unit Adelaide$ ML cum Cost($)
Sand cum 4.30 0.2 200 860
LightSoil cum 5.25 1.8 1800 9,450
Clay cum 5.00 11 11000 55,000
Total 65,310
Table 8, shows the cost of the soil to be excavated and the volume of the specific soil types that
need to be excavated. The total cost for the extension of current Glenside detention basin is AU$
65,310/-
The Second detention basin is purposed to be created in the parklands to further reduce the peak
flowofthestormwater.Thesoilprofileofthesecondproposeddetentionbasinisverysimilartothe
Glenside Campus detention basin. Therefore, the same procedure used above was also undertaken
toestimatethecostofthenewdetentionbasinatpark17whichhasacapacityofapproximately30
ML.Table9belowindicatesthecostofthedetentionbasinatpark17.
Table15-Park17detentionbasincost

Sand cum 4.30 0.1 100 430
LightSoil cum 5.25 5.9 5900 30,975
Clay cum 5.00 24 24000 120,000
Total $167,215
Table9showsthecostofthesoiltobeexcavatedandthevolumeofthespecificsoiltypeneedsto
beexcavated.ThetotalcostfortheenhancementofGlensidedetentionbasinisAU$167,215/-
49|P a g e
Thesecondnewdetentionbasinatparknumber20hasaproposedcapacityofapproximately40
ML.Thereasonwhythisdetentionhasthehighestcapacityoutofbothnewdetentionbasinisto
ensurethattherewillnotbeanyoverflowfromthestormwater.Thesoilprofileissameonthe
parklandhencecalculationissameasforthepark17detention.AccordingtothesoilprofileinTable
7,thecostistabulatedbelow(Table10).
Table16-Costofthenewdetentionbasinatpark20
Excavation
Sand cum 4.30 1 1000 4,300
LightSoil cum 5.25 12 12000 63,000
Clay cum 5.00 27 27000 135,000
Total 202,300
Table 10, shows the cost of the soil to be excavated and the volume of the specific soil types that
need to be excavated. The total cost for the enhancement of Glenside detention basin is AU$
202,300.
Table17-OverallDetentionBasinCost
DetentionBasin OverallCost($)
Extensionofcurrentdetentionbasin 65,310
ParklandareaNumber17 167,215
Parklandareanumber20 202,300
TotalCost 434,825
Table11indicatestheoverallcostofimplementingthedetentionbasinsinourproposeddesign.The
totalcostis$AU434,825.
50|P a g e
Wetlands
Wetlandstructureshavedifferentphasestopreparethem.Forplantation,thereisarequirementfor
thesoiltobepreparedsothattheplantscangrow.Thefirstprocessistopreparethesoilinaway,
makingitfertile.Secondly,theplantsarethenplantedinthepreparedsoil.Theyaredifferenttypes
ofplantsthatcanbeplantedinthewetlandsthatareabletofilterthewater.Thesespeciesofplants
have different costs. The soil is proposed to be prepared for an area of 500 m
2
to enhance the
wellbeing of the plants. Shrubs also need to be located in wetlands, thus we have estimated that
therewillbe5scatteredinthearea.Table12below,showsthecost.
Table18-WetlandConstructionCost
Wetland
PrepareSoil
Description Unit Adelaide$ M
2
M
2
Cost($)
Soilspreadinlayerandraked150mm sqm 8.25 500 1 4,125

Planting
Description Unit Adelaide$ M
2
M
2
Cost($)
Groundcoverincludingplanting sqm 7.5 500 1 3,750
Shrubs No. 32 500 1 16,000
OverallCost
Planting 4,125
SoilPreparation 19,750
TotalCost 23,875

Table 12 shows that the total cost of wetland construction which includes the soil preparation and
plantationisAU$23,875.
51|P a g e
Filters
Thereisarequirementofthegrossfiltertopreventtheculvertfromheavyandlargedebris.There
aredifferenttypesoffilterbutthemostcommonisanetfilterastheykeepthegrossmaterialand
then can be removed. The cost for net filter is AU$120 per m
2
. The estimated cost of the filters is
AU$785.
AquiferStorageRecovery
Thecosttodrilla150mmboreintorockandclay/sandis$150and$220respectively(MajorDrilling
2013). Clay and sand require casing, therefore it is more expensive to construct wells in those
materials. The casing process involves laying class 12 PVC pipe which cost $52.00 per length of the
pipe. These pipes the bore and filling it with concrete. Once this is achieved, water is pumped into
thepipeandtheconcreteismouldedbetweenthepipeandtheground.Thepurposeofcasingthe
wellistoensurenocave-insoccurandthewellremainscontinuouslyclearofobstructions.Table13
below,showstheestimatedcostofaquiferstoragerecoveryboredrilling.

Table19-CostofAquiferStorageRecoveryboredrilling
Depth(m) Profile Costpermetre($) Cost($)

70 SandandClay 220 15400
104 Rock 110 11440
Total $24,840
ThetotalcostfortheaquiferboredrillingisAU$24840/-.
52|P a g e
Table20-TotalcostofAquiferStorageRecovery
Description Cost($)
Drill 24840
Pipe 884
Concretefill 794
Pump 80,000
TotalCost 106,518
Table14indicatesthetotalconstructioncostfortheAquiferStorageRecoveryisAU$106,158.
6.1TotalCost
Table21-TotalCostofproposedworks
Description Cost($)
DetentionBasins 434,825
Wetlands 23,875
AquiferStorageRecovery 106,158
TotalCost 564,858
Table15showsthetotalcostoftheproposedworks:existingdetentionbasin,newdetentionbasin
at park 17 in the parklands, construction of wetlands and aquifer Storage Recovery. The total cost
fortheproposeddesignmentionedinthefeasibilitystudyisAU$564,858.
53|P a g e
7.0 References
1. Adam,E2012,WaterinMineralProcessing,SME,Englewood,Colorado,USA
2. AustralianGroundWaterTechnologiesPtyLtd2009,SouthParklandsASRPotential,AUS
3. AustralianGuidelinesforUrbanStormwaterManagement2000,viewedon29/03/2013,
<http://www.environment.gov.au/water/publications/quality/pubs/urban-stormwater-
management-paper10.pdf>
4. CityofSalisbury2013,AquiferStorageRecovery,Adelaide,AUS,viewed3/4/2013
<http://www.salisbury.sa.gov.au/Our_City/Environment/Water/Water_Recycling/Aquifer_S
torage_Recovery>
5. ConnecticutStormwaterQualityManual,2004,viewedon29/03/2013,
<http://www.ct.gov/deep/cwp/view.asp?a=2721&q=325704>
6. ConstructedWetlandsFactsheet,viewed29/03/2013,
<https://engineering.purdue.edu/~frankenb/NU-prowd/cwetfact.htm>
7. DepartmentofEcology,AquiferStorageandRecovery,viewed7/4/2013,
<http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/wr/asr/asr-home.html>
8. EnvironmentProtectionAuthority2004,CodeofPracticeforAquiferStorageRecovery,
Adelaide,AUS,viewed3/4/2013,
<http://www.epa.sa.gov.au/xstd_files/Water/Code%20of%20practice/cop_aquifer.pdf>
9. GlensideCampusRedevelopmentMasterPlan,viewedon22/03/2013,
<http://sahealth.sa.gov.au/wps/wcm/connect/0d710e80428ab4b19aedbae7eece1070/Glen
side-MP-Part2-sss-sahealth-
12.pdf?MOD=AJPERES&CACHEID=0d710e80428ab4b19aedbae7eece1070
10. Howdowetlandsimprovewaterquality?,viewedon28/03/2013,
<http://waterwatchadelaide.net.au/index.php?page=how-does-a-wetland-work>
11. IntroductiontourbanstormwatermanagementinAustralia,viewedon28/03/2013,
<http://www.environment.gov.au/coasts/publications/stormwater/pubs/stormwater.pdf>
12. MelbourneWater(2005).ConstructedWetlandSystemsDesignGuidelinesforDevelopers
13. 2012, Rawlinsons Australian Construction handbook vol. 30 , Rawlinsons Publishing. Perth,
WesternAustralia.
14. StormwaterPollution,viewedon30/03/2013,
<http://www.epa.sa.gov.au/xstd_files/Water/Information%20sheet/water_general.pdf>
15. TheEdwardsAquiferWebsite,AquiferStorageRecovery,viewed3/4/2013,
<http://www.edwardsaquifer.net/asr.html>
54|P a g e
16. WaterforGood,AquiferStorageRecoveryinSA,Adelaide,AUS,viewed3/4/2013,
<http://www.waterforgood.sa.gov.au/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/fs0005_asr_in_sa.pdf>
17. WaterSensitiveurbandesign,viewedon31/03/2013,
<http://www.sa.gov.au/subject/Housing,+property+and+land/Building+and+development/S
outh+Australia's+land+supply+and+planning+system/Water-sensitive+urban+design>
18. Watersensitiveurbandesign,viewedon30/03/2013,
<http://www.lga.sa.gov.au/webdata/resources/files/WSUD_Consultation_Statement.pdf>
19. What,whyandhowwetlandswork,viewedon29/03/2013,
<http://www.wetlandcare.com.au/Content/articlefiles/403-
wetlands%20general%20A4.pdf>
20. UrbanStormwaterInitiative,2006.GuidelineFrameworkforUniformCatchmentBased
StormwaterManagementPlanningbyLocalGovernmentCouncils.NaturalResource
ManagementCouncil.
21. UrbanStormwaterInitiative,2005.UrbanStormwaterManagementPolicyforSouth
Australia.LocalgovernmentAssociationandStategovernmentinSouthAustralia

Feasibility

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Feasibility

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

FeasibilityReport

thesite? online research in order to find a bit of history,

GRAVEL - - - - - 4.3 - 3.8

SOILCATEGORIES TP2 TP38 TP42 TP48 TP49

Pollutant ExpectedRemoval Comments

Description Unit Adelaide$ ML cum Cost($)

Depth(m) Profile Costpermetre($) Cost($)

You might also like