collated drainage dataset audit

James

Description

Stormwater Data AuditName of Your Organisation SUMMARY Count City of South Perth Town of Mosman Park City of Cockburn Town of Cottesloe CITY OF BAYSWATER City of Rockingham City of Swan Town of Victoria Park Town of Cambridge City of Subiaco City of Armadale Town of Vincent (LGA130) City of Fremantle City of Perth The City of Mandurah City of Gosnells Town of East Fremantle City of Belmont City of Melville SHIRE OF PEPPERMINT Your Name Andrew Crotty Drew France Gunther Schlomer Luke Handcock ROD WOODFORD Rex Ballard Arthur Colyvas Stace Rogers 9311 8144 Jon Bell Cherie Little Ben Symmons Craig Wilson Manuel Tascon Noel Ong Mary Maher Darryl Browning Paul McGinty Jim Polinelli Philip Gale GRAEME SIMPSON Custodian Division/ Business Unit Infrastructure Services Corporate Services GIS Services Department Engineering Services GEOGRAPHIC SERVICES Engineering & Park Services Operations Technical Services Technical Services Infrustructure Services Technical Services Technical Services Technical Services Urban Design Asset Management, Infrastruture Spatial Services Design and Assets Department - Technical Infrastructure Services CHIEF EXECUTIVE The division or business unit which is the custodian of the dataset.Dataset DescriptionDescription Drainage data captured in Drainage point items, Part of Infrastructure Assets Drainage Datasets CITY STORMWATER Drainage Drainage data Stormwater Drainage Network Drainage Pipes and Pits 2D AutoCad drawing based on Drainage in Mapinfo ...

Informations

• Publié par: Thoin
• Nombre de lectures: 44
• Langue: English

Extrait

Stormwater Data Audit

Name of Your Organisation

SUMMARY

Count

City of South Perth

Town of Mosman Park

City of Cockburn

Town of Cotesloe

CITY OF BAYSWATER

City of Rockingham

City of Swan

Town of Victoria Park

Town of Cambridge

City of Subiaco

City of Armadale

Town of Vincent (LGA130)

City of Fremantle

City of Perth

The City of Mandurah

City of Gosnels

Town of East Fremantle

City of Belmont

City of Melvile

SHIRE OF PEPPERMINT

Your Name

Andrew Croty

Drew France

Gunther Schlomer

Luke Handcock

ROD WOODFORD

Rex Balard

Arthur Colyvas

Stace Rogers 931 814

Jon Bel

Cherie Litle

Ben Symmons

Craig Wilson

Manuel Tascon

Noel Ong

Mary Maher

Dar yl Browning

Paul McGinty

Jim Polineli

Philip Gale

GRAEME SIMPSON

Custodian Division/ Busines Unit

Infrastructure Services

Corporate Services

GIS Services Department

Engine ring Services

GEOGRAPHIC SERVICES Engine ring & Park Services

Operations

Technical Services

Technical Services

Infrustructure Services

Technical Services

Technical Services

Technical Services

Urban Design

As et Management, Infrastruture

Spatial Services

Design and As ets Department - Technical Infrastructure Services

CHIEF EXECUTIVE

The division or busines unit which is the custodian of the dataset.

Dataset Description

Description

Drainage data captured in Drainage point items,

Part of Infrastructure As ets

Drainage Datasets

CITY STORMWATER

Drainage

Drainage data

Stormwater Drainage Network Drainage

Pipes and Pits

2D AutoCad drawing based on Drainage

in Mapinfo database

Mapinfo -conjunction Huefner

Council stormwater drains

As constructed

NIL

Brief description of the dataset

Format

MapInfo linked to ac es

ESRI shapefiles

MapInfo, SQL-Server and

GIS - Shapefile

ESRI GEODATABASE

4 x GIS layers

GIS - MapInfo

GIS Layer & Autocad DWG

GIS Layer and Autocad file

Cad converted to GIS layer

*.DWG and *.SHP

AutoCad 20 6 drawing

Cad file with Ac es

GIS

GIS

GIS - MapInfo

Cad

Our drainage data comes in two formats

NIL

GIS layer, CAD file, Other (please state)

Ap roximate number of features

130

1321 points, 530 lines, 17 374km Pipes in Sections,

230

13 FEATURE CLASSESS 30,42

50 0

?

10

6729

?

pipe size, invert, pit locations

9,0 0 pits, 10,0 0 pipes

N/A

0

Ap roximate dataset size (MB)

0.14

0.8

Polygons 239kb, Pipes 5.2Mb, 1

13

24

?

10 MB

759 KB CAD FILE

?

4

5 Mb

10MB

6.5Mbytes

3

0

Geographic extent

Metropolitan Council ,

Town of Mosman Park

10 % of LGA of Cockburn

LGA

LGA (32.7SQKM)

City of Rockingham LGA

LGA

LGA boundary

LGA

LGA

?

Limits of Town

LGA Boundary

LGA

part of Gosnels LGA

LGA

Ful LGA of the City of Belmont 10 %

NIL

State, part of State (specify), LGA, part of LGA (specify %)

Quality

Positional ac uracy (m)

sub-metre +- 5cm

2

Betwe n 0.1m to 0.4m

0.3

2

3m

1

1

1

1m

Upto 3 or 4m ac uracy in

2

meter

<1m

1

1

10 %

+/-10 mm

+/- how many metres?

Positional confidence (%)

84%

95%

10 %

10 %

95%

95%

90%

75%

80%

95%

70%

50%

75%

90%

95%

30%

80%

10 %

90%

How confident are you that the data are positionaly ac urate (to

the positional ac uracy noted in the previous question)?

Atribute ac uracy (%)

68%

95%

95%

10 %

95%

90%

60%

75%

80%

5%

10%

50%

50%

90%

80%

70%

80%

0%

90%

How ac urate are the atributes in the dataset? (as a percentage)

Logical consistency (%)

70%

98%

75%

10 %

9 %

95%

75%

75%

50%

95%

60%

0%

0%

90%

75%

0%

80%

10 %

90%

What is your level of confidence in the structure of the dataset's

geometry? (how wel the features con ect within the dataset and to

other related datasets).

Completenes (%)

75%

20%

95%

98%

80%

95%

90%

80%

80%

95%

90%

30%

85%

90%

85%

30%

30%

90%

95%

0%

0%

How complete are the data (as a representation of relevant

stormwater drainage within the geographic extent of the dataset?)

Cur ency

Update method and frequency

We are in the initial

stages of data colection.

An ualy, by consulting

with engine ring regarding

As Cons, Site Inspection with

Sub-Metre GPS. Constantly

as required we kly

MAINTENANCE FORMS,

MONTHLY CYCLE.

Ir egular, quarterly as required Ongoing

Ad hoc.

Complete review &

survey picup to oc ur in 20 7.

With As Constructed

information only.

The data was last updated

20 1, I am cur ently pro fing

Stil capturing the data

As network extended or

modified.

Once a we k as as-

constructed information is

updated when new data is

provided.

Manualy updated as required.

Data recently colected - no

maintenance regime at

as require

Drainage features are recorded on ascon

surveys in PCG94 and AHD. They are

How are the data maintained, and how often?

Data Structure - Features

Pipe sections

10 %

18 1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

Drainage linework

Pits/ ac es points

89%

16 1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

Pits/ ac es points in the network (eg end wals, end of pipe

Property con ections

3 %

6

1

1

1

1

1

1

Property outlets to the drainage network

Underground conduit pits

3 %

6 1

1

1

1

1

1

Pits/ ac es points in the network

Underground conduits

2 %

4 1

1

1

1

Underground conduit linework

Sump boundaries/ sumps

17%

3

1

1

1

Design boundary extent

1 %

2

1

1

Boundaries for areas of development

Ac es chambers

6%

1

1

Catchments

6%

1

1

Easements

6%

1

1

Gros polutant traps

6%

1

1

Gulies

6%

1

1

Problems with matching to existing data

6%

1

1

An area or notation identifying problems matching the dataset to

th

t di ' d t

t

SEP's

6%

1

1

Soakwels

6%

1

1

sump outlets

6%

1

1

Table drains

6%

1

1

Data Structure - At ributes

For GIS datasets atributes refer to fields in a database (eg a GIS

Pipe Atributes

Diameter

89%

16 1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

Material

89%

16 1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

Length

78%

14 1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

Pipe number or identifier

78%

14 1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

Invert level (upstream and/or downstream)

72%

13 1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

Stre t name

61%

1 1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

Construction date

4 %

8 1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

Catchment number/ id

2 %

4

1

1

1

1

Plan number

2 %

4

1

1

1

1

Condition

17%

3 1

1

1

Subdivision name

17%

3

1

1

1

Ac umulated depreciation

1 %

2

1

1

Item/ design life

1 %

2

1

1

Road number/ road id

1 %

2

1

1

Writen down value

1 %

2

1

1

% of expected life

6%

1

1

Adequacy rating

6%

1

1

Construction company

6%

1

1

Cur ent cost of replacement

6%

1

1

Date Inspected

6%

1

1

Design company

6%

1

1

De-watering factors

6%

1

1

Item type

6%

1

1

Land type

6%

1

1

Linked to as et valuation

6%

1

1

Pipe grade

6%

1

1

Pit Upstream / Downstream & id

6%

1

1

Soil type

6%

1

1

Stage number

6%

1

1

Pit Atributes

Pit number or identifier

78%

14 1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

Lid type

56%

10 1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

Cover level/ finished surface level

50%

9 1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

Stre t name

50%

9 1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

Construction date

4 %

8 1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

Depth

4 %

8 1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

Side length

28%

5

1

1

1

1

1

Side width

28%

5

1

1

1

1

1

Pit type

2 %

4

1

1

1

1

Liter traps

17%

3

1

1

1

Pit condition

17%

3

1

1

1

Plan number

17%

3

1

1

1

Ac umulated depreciation

1 %

2

1

1

Catchment number/ id

1 %

2

1

1

Design life

1 %

2

1

1

Subdivision name

1 %

2

1

1

Writen down value

1 %

2

1

1

% of expected life

6%

1

1

Colected by

6%

1

1

Construction material

6%

1

1

Depth to invert

6%

1

1

Design company

6%

1

1

Land type

6%

1

1

Lid condition

6%

1

1

Lid level

6%

1

1

Reduced level

6%

1

1

Replacement cost

6%

1

1

Road number/ road id

6%

1

1

Soil type

6%

1

1

Special Features and Photo Link

6%

1

1

Property Con ection Atributes

Stre t name

2 %

4

1

1

1

1

Diameter

17%

3

1

1

1

Material

17%

3

1

1

1

Property con ection number or identifier

17%

3

1

1

1

Construction date

1 %

2

1

1

Depth

1 %

2

1

1

Plan number

6%

1

1

Underground Conduit Atributes

Conduit number or identifier

1 %

2

1

1

Diameter

1 %

2

1

1

Length

1 %

2

1

1

Material

1 %

2

1

1

Stre t name

1 %

2

1

1

% of expected life

6%

1

1

Ac umulated depreciation

6%

1

1

Adequacy rating

6%

1

1

Catchment id

6%

1

1

Condition

6%

1

1

Construction date

6%

1

1

Design life

6%

1

1

Land type

6%

1

1

Replacement cost

6%

1

1

Soil type

6%

1

1

Subdivision name

6%

1

1

Type

6%

1

1

Writen down value

6%

1

1

Underground Conduit Pit Atributes

Catchment id

1 %

2

1

1

Conduit pit number or identifier

1 %

2

1

1

Depth

1 %

2

1

1

Material

1 %

2

1

1

Stre t name

1 %

2

1

1

% of expected life

6%

1

1

Ac umulated depreciation

6%

1

1

Adequacy rating

6%

1

1

Construction date

6%

1

1

Depth to invert

6%

1

1

Design life

6%

1

1

Land type

6%

1

1

Pit type

6%

1

1

Reduced level

6%

1

1

Replacement cost

6%

1

1

Soil type

6%

1

1

Subdivision name

6%

1

1

Writen down value

6%

1

1

Note: the data structure and atributes listed in this question aire are based on the Consultant/Developer specifications (D-Spec) published at www.dspec.com.au