Kingfisher Parade Seawall 29 8 2013 Safety Share 1. Evacuation - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Kingfisher Parade Seawall

29 8 2013

Safety Share

• 1. Evacuation plan

Safety Share

• 1. Evacuation plan

Program

• 1. Design standard
• 2. Development approvals
• 3. Cost estimates
• 4. Design – Quarry, testing and structural form
• 5. Program

Risk analysis & Design standard

• Draw a line in the sand
• Halt on-going erosion
• Less than 5% damage during a 50 year storm event
• A design life of 50 years

… What it is not:

• A structure designed for flood protection
• A structure that can survive without maintenance

Functional requirements

Design Criteria

Australian Standard – 4997 – Maritime Structure Guildelines Small craft harbour – principal residence Main harbour - high value properties Recommended design wave event

Development Approvals

Legislative approvals

Permit/Approval Legislation Administering authority Trigger Statutory timeframes Comment Federal Referral of proposed action Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 SEWPaC Impacts to federally listed species or habitat. 20 business days. Not likely to apply. Self assessment can be undertaken if necessary. State Operational Works that are Prescribed Tidal Works Coastal Protection and Management Act 1995 FCRC/DEHP Undertaking tidal works IDAS timeframes apply.

• Required. FCRC will act as the Assessment Manager,

DEHP as concurrence agency. Development application to provide assessment against the PTW Code (Coastal Act), Coastal SPRP, and the SDAP provisions. Marine Park Permit Marine Parks Act 2004 DNPRSaR Undertaking works within the boundaries

• f the Great Sandy

Strait Marine Park No statutory timeframes applicable. Applications typically take up to three months, which includes a 35 business day period for Native Title Notification. Boundary of marine park in this instance is the ‘esplanade’ boundary. Works are located within a ‘Habitat Protection Zone’. Permit will be required for Option B where works are located outside of the ‘esplanade’. Also required where construction activities are required

• utside of the esplanade (eg. machinery/access).

An EMP will be required to outline measures for protection of marine environment during construction. Protected Plants Clearing Permit Nature Conservation Act 1992 DNPRSaR Destruction or damage to native flora/fauna. 40 business days (with an additional 20 business day information request period). Required for the removal of native vegetation. Operational Works within a Declared Fish Habitat Area (FHA) Fisheries Act 1994 DAFF Undertaking assessable works completely or partly within the boundaries

• f the Beelbi Fish

Habitat Area IDAS timeframes apply. Required for Option B where works are located outside

• f the ‘esplanade’.

Operational Works for the removal, destruction or damage to Marine Plants Fisheries Act 1994 DAFF Clearing of marine plant species IDAS timeframes apply. Required where the removal of marine plants (eg. Salt couch) is required. An Offset Strategy will be needed for Public works where area of fish habitat impact ≥ 25m2 (0.0025 ha). Can be direct or indirect offset. Operational Works for vegetation clearing Vegetation Management Act 1999 DNRM Clearing of remnant vegetation on unallocated state land. IDAS timeframes apply. Required for the clearing of least concern RE’s on State land. Exemptions may apply for works within the road reserve A re-vegetation strategy will be required to demonstrate measures to rehabilitate the environment.

Legislative approvals

Permit/Approval Status Next step Early indication Actual timeframes Comment Federal Referral of proposed action Not applicable N/A Ecological Survey did not find federally listed species State Operational Works that are Prescribed Tidal Works Pre-lodged with agency FCRC to lodge formally Favourable SARA timeframes apply. “matter of days”

• Required. FCRC will act as the Assessment Manager,

DEHP as concurrence agency. Development application to provide assessment against the PTW Code (Coastal Act), Coastal SPRP, and the SDAP provisions. Marine Park Permit 2006 survey line (in fact 2004) Detailed discussion Pre-lodged mid August Marine Park conditions pending DNPRSaR FCRC Favourable, with conditions in EMP No statutory timeframes applicable. Applications typically take up to three months, which includes a 35 business day period for Native Title Notification. Native title notification - sent Cultural heritage notification – sent Protected Plants Clearing Permit Pre-lodged DNPRSaR FCRC Favourable 40 business days (with an additional 20 business day information request period). Minor destruction Operational Works within a Declared Fish Habitat Area (FHA) 1981 survey-line DAFF Favourable SARA timeframes apply. Works are likely to be outside Zone A Operational Works for the removal, destruction or damage to Marine Plants N/A follow FHA DAFF Favourable Clearing of marine plant species SARA timeframes apply. No impact in this zone Operational Works for vegetation clearing N/A DNRM Favourable SARA timeframes apply. A re-vegetation strategy will be required to demonstrate measures to rehabilitate the environment.

Cost estimates

Cost estimates

Basis “Minimum damage” following a 50 year ARI storm tide event Dundorwan Quarry would provide armouring Calculated Risk 2 % risk each year of “minimum damage” to be exceeded 33% risk over 20 year of “minimum damages” to be exceeded Key design parameters Storm Tide Level 2.85m AHD Significant wave height 2.5m*

Cost estimates

Total estimates

Quarry

Quarry Material

Testing

• Lithology - classification
• Density
• Water absorption
• Porosity
• Unconfined Compressive Strength
• Point load test
• Sonic velocity
• Schmidt impact index
• Los Angeles Abrasion
• Sulphate Soundness Test
• Micro Deval Abrasion
• Wet-dry loss
• Secondary mineral content

Aurecon Rock Quality scale Not assessed “Excellent” “Good” “Moderate” “Low” “Unsuited”

Procurement & reliability

Stone weathering - OK Change in seawall shape – N/A Quarry capacity - OK Quarry yield / grading - OK Installed grading – Quality Control Stone stockpiling – To Be Confirmed

Rock Degradation

Erosion Fracture Plane

Rock Quality is:

“Excellent” “Good”

“Moderate”

“Low” “Unsuited”

Physical testing

Test schedule

8-9 August 2013 3 cross section tested:

Armour Stability

“Pattern” placement

Overtopping - Normal conditions

10 m Mean High Water Spring

King Tide

10 m “king tide”

King Tide + waves

10 m Some overtopping

“50 year” storm event

Rainfall/run-off Wave run-up and high overtopping

“50 year” storm event

Rainfall/run-off Wave run-up and high overtopping Possible partial collapse at the back of the crest Scour Scour Collapsible toe to mitigate Risk of seawall undermining

Drawings

Alignment

Cross section

Cross Section (detail)

Staircase

Program

Detailed design End August 2013 All Development Application submitted Early September 2013 Tendering period September 2013 Start of work (stockpiling, clearing) Early October 2013 Completion January 2013 Mobilised Personnel and key plant (incl. quarry and construction site) A dozen “full time” workers + (Clearing//Survey/engineer/project management, etc…) 2 - 4 haul trucks 3 x large excavators, bobcat, 4WDs, etc… Site office, change room, toilets Safety (Traffic control?, etc…)

THANK YOU