Ask Your Mates Open Forum

Expand all | Collapse all

Naturalisation on an Existing Rock Lined Storm-water Channel

  • 1.  Naturalisation on an Existing Rock Lined Storm-water Channel

    Posted 01 December 2019 22:51
    Hi Mates

    I have a question about how to treat the expenditure in relation to removing a rock lined concrete drainage channel through an urban subdivision.

    The project is to go in and remove the rock lined concrete channel and shape the earth to a form a wide flat drainage area with a very slight earthen channel. The trickle flow centre of the channel will be planted with native grass & sedge which will be under cover from dense tree plantings in the adjacent low flow part of the channel. These tress will typically be melaleuca species. On the very low gradient batters in the flood plain area will be larger tree species more openly planted with mowable couch in the understorey.

    So this naturalisation of what was previously a creek bed will cost a not insignificant amount. Other than the obvious footpaths & Picnic Shelters included in the project can anyone share their approach to Capitalisation/Expensing the costs of the concrete removal, shaping earthworks, and purchase & planting of the trees, shrubs and grasses.

    We believe we can allocate a small portion of the earthworks to the existing channel changes but even so that is unusual as with the removal of the concrete lining it could be classed as a down-grade.

    I would really appreciate your thoughts and comments.

    Thanks in Advance.


    Bruce Janke

    Bruce Janke
    Bundaberg Regional Council
    Pro Cert 2

  • 2.  RE: Naturalisation on an Existing Rock Lined Storm-water Channel

    Posted 10 December 2019 17:15
    ​Hi Bruce,
    Assuming the concrete channel is an existing asset, I'd suggest concrete removal is disposal cost assigned to that. For plants and shrubs, etc., we're taking the approach for garden beds of a number of square metre rates categorised by low / medium / high density plantings. We haven't got there just yet, still discussing with our Parks team. Maybe something similar could be done for a "drainage area" as in your case.

    I'd be interested in your outcome.

    Peter Walker
    Senior Advisor Civil Engineering (Assets)
    Gympie Regional Council

    Pro Cert 2

  • 3.  RE: Naturalisation on an Existing Rock Lined Storm-water Channel

    Posted 15 December 2019 18:07
    ​If you are disposing an existing asset (I assume the concrete channel is already recognised in your register), wouldn't you consider associated cost as disposal cost. If you are retiring an asset, how would you treat the cost associated with that?

    Then the creation of 'new asset' or components of that asset (footpath, picnic shelter etc.) - how would your asset recognition policy/guideline treat those?
    Pro Cert 2