Annex A

Residential morcellement at
Gros Billot New Grove
District of Grand-Port
Rose Belle Sugar Estate Board
Morcellement Layout

APRIL 2014

Annex B

Residential morcellement at
Gros Billot New Grove
District of Grand-Port
Rose Belle Sugar Estate Board
Title Deed

APRIL 2014

Annex C

Residential morcellement at
Gros Billot New Grove
District of Grand-Port
Rose Belle Sugar Estate Board
Land Conversion Permit

APRIL 2014

Annex D

Residential morcellement at
Gros Billot New Grove
District of Grand-Port
Rose Belle Sugar Estate Board

Engineering Report

APRIL 2014

EIA Engineering Report

CONTENTS
PART A: GEOTECHNICAL SURVEY

Page

A1

SUMMARY

A2

SITE GEOLOGY

A3

SITE LOCATION

A4

TRIAL PIT CHARACTERISTICS

A5

SOIL STRATIGRAPHY

A6

CONCLUSION

PART B: PERCOLATION TESTS

B1

INTRODUCTION

B2

METHODOLOGY OF PERCOLATION TESTS

B3

RESULTS

B4

CONCLUSION

PART C: ON SITE WASTE WATER DISPOSAL

C1

INTRODUCTION

11

C2

SEWAGE TREATMENT OPTIONS

11

C3

SIZING OF SEPTIC TANK AND LEACHING FIELD

11

PART D: WATER SUPPLY

D1

WATER DEMAND

12

D2

RETICULATION

12

PART E: SURFACE RUN OFF AND DRAINAGE CONSIDERATIONS

E1

INTRODUCTION

13

E2

RETURN PERIODS

13

E3

HYDROLOGICAL ANALYSIS

14

E4

PARAMETER (ARF)

18

E5

PERMISSIBLE VELOCITY

18

E6

SIZING OF DRAIN

18

E7

COMPUTATIONS

19

EIA Engineering Report

ANNEXURES
ANNEXURE 1: SEPTIC TANK DETAILS

ANNEXURE 2: ABSORPTION PIT

II

ANNEXURE 3: LEACHING FIELD

III

ANNEXURE 4: PROPOSED STORM WATER DRAINAGE

IV

ANNEXURE 5: ROADSIDE DRAIN SECTION

ANNEXURE 6: SOAKAWAY ABSORPTION PIT

IV

PART A - GEOTECHNICAL SURVEY

A1.

SUMMARY
A geotechnical survey was undertaken on the site earmarked for development with a
view to:
(a) identify the geological characteristics of the site
(b) assess the soil geomorphology
(c) identify any geological failures or issues including high water table
(d) identify solutions, if any, in case of problems
The tests and terminologies used as part of this report are in accordance with BS 1377:
1990 and BS 5930: 1999.

A2.

SITE GEOLOGY
Except for some consolidated coral and shell debris in isolated remnant raised beaches,
and the coral reefs and beach and sand dunes around most of the coast, Mauritius is
entirely volcanic. Simpson recognised an Older volcanic series and a younger volcanic
series between which there was a long period of erosion. The younger volcanic series
was subdivided into the Early and Late Lavas.
The project site located in the region of New Grove originates from the intermediate
lavas of the Younger Volcanic Series. These rocks deposited from lava flows and are
generally vesicular olivine fine-grained basalt and are usually grey to dark in colour. The
site geology is indicated by FAO/MSIRI map as indicated below:

A3.

SITE LOCATION
The proposed site for development is found at Gros Billot, New Grove. The site is
predominantly covered by sugarcane cultivation and partly covered by bushes. Site
visits have revealed that the site does not accommodate any endangered flora and is not
classified as an ESA (Environmentally Sensitive Area). No watercourses as classified
under the Rivers and Canals Act. The site topography is relatively flat with plot slopes
varying between 2% and 6%.

A4.

TRIAL PIT CHARACTERISTICS

A hydraulic excavator was used to dig two trial pits to depth varying between 2.50m
and 2.90m. The trial pits were used to investigate the soil strata on the project site.

A5.

SOIL STRATIGRAPHY
The stratigraphy is characterised by the topsoil being reddish brown in colour with a
high organic content and numerous roots to a depth of approximately 150mm. Below
150mm, the soil stratigraphy shows firm mottled reddish yellowish brown slightly
sandy silt. Moderately weathered rocks are also witnessed within the different trial pits.
No trace of the water table have been identified and there were no presence of caves.
In light of the soil properties and characteristics, it can be safely assumed that the
allowable bearing capacity would be in the region of 200 kN/m2; a value for than
adequate for construction of residential/low rise commercial buildings.
The was no sign of any caves within the project vicinity and no sign of water was
observed in the trail pits.
A typical soil profile is indicated in the sketch below:
A dark brown in the top-most 300 mm, with a higher organic material content.
A reddish brown silty clayey material layer with a lower organic content which merges
and going down to the bottom of the trail pits.
A parent material beyond the depth of 2.50 m.

A6.

CONCLUSION
Detailed design will involve undertaking laboratory tests in order to assess and
confirm the preliminary geotechnical survey undertaken by digging trial pits. The
laboratory tests undertaken will include:
a. Determination of moisture content
b. Proctor test
c. CBR test
d. Atterberg limit
e. Sieve analysis
The above will enable accurate determination of the soil characteristics during the
pavement structure design. No particular foundation problem are foreseen during
the construction of residential buildings although further investigation will be
necessary and undertaken during the implementation of the morcellement project.

PART B PERCOLATION TESTS

B1.

INTRODUCTION
In line with the requirements of the "EIA Guideline for proposed residential morcellement"
published by the Ministry of Environment and Sustainable development, the client,
Rose Belle Sugar Estate Board has commissioned a percolation tests. The
percolation tests were undertaken by SEKA Ltd and received approval from the
Waste Water Management Authority (WMA) in a correspondence dated 09
September 2003 and bearing reference WMA/238/8.

B2.

METHODOLOGY OF PERCOLATION TEST

Using a hydraulic excavator, two trial pits have been dug and percolation tests
undertaken. The percolation test is undertaken in order to assess the absorption
capacity of the soil in saturated conditions. The results of the percolation tests are
used to design on-site waste water disposal system and also soakaway pits which
can be used as evacuation point as part of the storm water drainage network. The
characteristics of the trial pits dug are shown below:
TP 1
Length = 1.50 m
Width = 1.80 m
Depth = 2.50 m
TP 2
Length = 1.80 m
Breadth = 2.60 m
Depth = 2.90 m

B3. RESULTS
The results of the percolation tests undertaken together with approval from the
Waste Water Management Authority (WWMA) are shown below.
B4. CONCLUSION
The percolation rate as observed from SEKA report below was found to be above
200 mm/hour. Under the Government Notice published (2nd Schedule) as
indicated below, the soil is highly permeable and an infiltration rate of 50l/m2/d
should be used for dimensioning the absorption pit or leaching field.

10

PART C - ON SITE WASTE WATER DISPOSAL

C1

INTRODUCTION
The proposed site for development is not connected to an existing sewer network.
Waste water emanating from bathrooms, toilets and kitchen waste should therefore
be directed into an on-site waste water disposal system. The above system would be
applicable for all the residential plots.

C2

SEWAGE TREATMENT OPTIONS

In order to cater for waste water disposal for the proposed undertaking, on site
disposal techniques of the following types are recommended.

Septic tank-absorption pit arrangement

Septic tank-leaching field arrangement

Typical details of the septic tank are shown at Annexure 1. The septic tank will
consist of three compartment tanks with a design retention period of 2 days to
allow for sedimentation and sludge digestion.
In fact in a correspondence dated 03 September 2003, the Waste Water
Management Authority (WWMA) has approved the septic tank - leaching field
arrangement in light of percolation rates obtained. Typical details of the absorption
pit are found at Annexure 2 and typical details of the leaching field are also shown
at Annexure 3.
C3.

SIZING OF SEPTIC TANK AND LEACHING FIELDS

Assuming water requirements per plot to be 1.0m3/day, it can be safely assumed
that the daily volume of waste water would be 0.9m3. In order to cater for the 2
days retention time, a septic tank of size 3m3 is recommended. Desludging of the
septic tank every 3 - 5 years depending on frequency of use if also recommended.
Based on the percolation tests carried out and the highly permeable nature of the
soil, an infiltration rate of 50l/m2/d should be used. Therefore:
Total daily wastewater generated per household
Infiltration rate

= 0.9m3 = 900L
= 50l/m2/d

Surface area required

= 18m2

The above value in fact corresponds to the 20m2 area recommended by the Waste
Water Management Authority (WWMA) in its letter dated 03 September 2003.

11

PART D - WATER SUPPLY

D1.

WATER DEMAND
The water demand for the project site will be as follows:
No of residential plots
Water consumption per capita
Assuming 5 persons per dwelling,
Water consumption for residential plots per day

= 155
= 200L/capita/day
= 155 x 5 x 200
= 155,000L
= 155 m 3

D2.

Water consumption for commercial plot

= 10m 3

Total water consumption

= 165 m 3

RETICULATION
Liaison and meetings will be required with the Central Water Authority (CWA) in
order to assess the connection point for the proposed morcellement. The design of
the internal water reticulation network will be finalised with the CWA upon issue of
the Letter of Intent (LOI) from the Morcellement Board. The following will be
taken into consideration during the design of the potable water reticulation
network:
a. Pipes will be routes within the road reserves
b. All pipes will be HDPE type
c. House connections will be 20mm pipes
d. Maximum velocity in pipes will be limited to 1.5m/s
e. Minimum pressure at household will be 1 bar
f. Pipes will be connected using electrofusion process as indicated below:

12

PART E - SURFACE RUNOFF & DRAINAGE

CONSIDERATIONS
E1.

INTRODUCTION
An adequate storm water drainage network is required in order to channel surface
run off so as to minimise or eliminate damages which may be caused by such
surface run off. In the above scenario, the change of land use from a site previously
under shrubs and bushes to a residential area is likely to increase the surface run
off.

E2.

RETURN PERIODS
As a normal practice, the areas for major catchments have been determined using
the survey sheets of scale 1:25000 with 10m contour lines. However, since the
catchment areas attributed to the sites under study are relatively small and
localised, survey sheets of scale 1:2500 have been used to delimitate the
different
catchment
areas supplemented by necessary field surveys. The
direction of the surface runoff has been determined by the visual inspection of the
topography for the different sites.

Intensity (mm/min)

As per the information obtained from the Mauritius Meteorological Services

(MMS), these Intensity Duration (ID) curves should be used for run-off
calculations for bridges, culverts and cross drainage (CD) structures. The chart
showing the ID curves for return period T2, T5, T10, T25, T50, T100 and the
table showing rainfall intensities in mm/min for the corresponding return period
as obtained from MMS, are shown in the Table and Figure below. These have been
used for working out the runoff from the adjacent catchment areas. In general
there is practically no difference in the heaviest rainfall intensities over short
periods in different localities in Mauritius

R a in f a ll I n t e n s it y ( m m / m in ) - R e t u r n P e r io d

13

Duration (minutes)
Return
Period
(Years)

10

15

30

60

120

T2

2.0868

1.7155

1.4153

1.1550

0.9354 0.6354

0.3699

T5

2.9185

2.2616

1.8416

1.4519

1.2297 0.9388

0.6126

T10

3.4693

2.6232

2.1239

1.6483

1.4246 1.1236

0.7733

T25

4.1650

3.0800

2.4805

1.8967

1.6709 1.3577

0.9763

T50

4.6812

3.4190

2.7450

2.0809

1.8536 1.5305

1.1269

T100
5.1936 3.7554 3.0076
(Source: Mauritius Meteorological Service)

2.2637

2.0349 1.7025

1.2764

The design of a hydraulic structure requires an investigation to determine the

runoff from the drainage area contributing to the water flow. The amount of
runoff from a drainage area will vary depending on the storm frequency being
adopted. The less frequent storm is, the greater the associated precipitation will be
and thus the greater the runoff will be.
Ideally, every hydraulic structure would be designed for the largest possible
amount of flow that could ever occur. Unfortunately, this would require
unusually large structures and would add an unjustifiable amount of cost to the
projects; therefore hydraulic structures are analysed for a specific storm frequency.
When selecting a storm frequency for design purposes, consideration is given to
the potential degree of damage to the roadway and adjacent property, potential
hazard and inconvenience to public and the initial construction cost of the
hydraulic structure. Based on the above, the following return periods are
recommended and used.
Types of structure
Gutters, ditches, absorption drains and storm drain laterals
Storm drain inlets on longitudinal slope
Standard culverts
Bridges-design for river flow passage
E3.

(years)
10
10
25
50

HYDROLOGICAL ANALYSIS
As in Mauritius, most of the catchments under consideration are small and not
gauged, standard procedures for use on ungauged catchments have been used for
hydrological analysis.

14

A number of methods exist to estimate design flood discharge, the most popular
ones being the Rational Method, Generalised Tropical Flood Method and SCS-UH
Hydrograph Method.
However, since only relatively small catchment areas are being considered, the
Rational Method was found to be the most appropriate one and has been adopted
for the study.
The modified rational formula is:
where:
: Discharge (m3/s) for return period of T years
: Runoff coefficient for return period of T years
: Intensity (mm/hr) for return period of T years
ARF

: Area Reduction Factor

:Catchment Area in km2

Parameter
, the run-off coefficient relates to three parameters namely slope, soil
permeability and land use contained in the equation below:

where

relates to the return period under consideration. Values of

are listed

in Table D1:
Return period / years

value

0.50

0.55

10

0.60

25

0.70

50

0.83

100

1.00
Table D1:

values

It is observed from the above that the relationship between

values and the

selected return period is not a linear one.

is the percentage of the catchment area considered as rural whilst

is the

percentage of the catchment area considered as residential.

15

The above coefficients would normally apply for relatively large catchment areas
incorporating both built up and undeveloped portions. The value of
incorporates three elements relating to topography (
vegetation

in turn

, permeability

and

which are correlated by the following equation:

Mean
catchment
slope

values for different mean

annual precipitation (mm)

Classification
< 600

600 - 900

> 900

Less than 3%

Marsh/wetland

0.01

0.03

0.05

3% to 10%

Flat

0.06

0.08

0.11

10% to 30%

Hilly

0.12

0.16

0.20

Greater than 30%

Steep

0.22

0.26

0.30

Table D2:

Classification
< 600
0.03
0.06
0.12
0.21

Very permeable
Permeable
Semi permeable
Impermeable

Table D3:

values
values for different mean
annual precipitation (mm)
600 - 900
0.04
0.08
0.16
0.26

> 900
0.05
0.10
0.20
0.30

values

values for different mean annual precipitation

(mm)

Classification

< 600

600-900

> 900

Thick bush and Plantation

0.03

0.04

0.05

Light bush and farmland

0.07

0.1

0.15

Sugarcane

0.17

0.2

0.25

No vegetation

0.26

0.28

0.30

Table D4:

The values of
the value of

and

values

are obtained from Tables 4.5.7.2 to 4.5.7.4. Finally

is derived using the following equation:

residential x

where

= 0.5
16

Intensity duration frequency (IDF) curves have been developed by the

meteorological station of Mauritius which are deemed to be applicable to the
whole island. From the IDF curves, the rainfall intensity in mm/hour can be
determined using the following equation:

For a duration

t < 1hr

I R t 0.29

t > 1hr

I R t 0.49

The value of R depends on the selected return period as shown in Table D5:
Return period / years

value

33

53

10

66

25

90

50

111

100

140
Table D5: R value

In the Rational Method, the storm rainfall is assumed to have a duration equal to
the catchment time of concentration,

The time of concentration,

is

substituted for t in the above equations for rainfall intensity. Different formulae
are available for calculating the time of concentration. A common formula is the
Bransby-Williams formula:

where

is time of concentration (hours)

L is longest flow path (km)
S is slope of L (m/m)

The above formula may give relatively small time of concentration, thus resulting
in very large rainfall intensity which may adversely affect the drain sizing. Hence
the rainfall intensity may be modified based on local experience or by altering the
formula used for calculating the rainfall intensity.

17

E4.

PARAMETER ARF
The area reducing factor (ARF) is introduced when large areas are considered.
This particular factor is introduced to take into account the fact that rainfall
intensity may not be same over vast extents. In the scenario considered, the area
can be assumed to be small and no ARF was considered.

E5.

PERMISSIBLE VELOCITY
The storm water flowing within the roadside drain should have a minimum slope,
normally 0.5% to ensure a self cleansing velocity of 0.75m/s. The threshold self
cleansing velocity depends on the type of material used for the size of drain.
Typical permissible velocities and manning's coefficients (roughness) are listed in
Table D6:
Material

Manning's

Permissible velocity (m/s)

coefficient
Concrete

0.015

4.0 - 6.0

Stone pitched drain

0.025

2.0 - 3.0

Gabions

0.030

2.0 - 3.0

Earth drain

0.035

1.8 - 2.0

Natural stream

0.050

1.8 - 2.0

Table D6: Manning's coefficient and permissible velocities

The permissible velocity can be derived using the Manning's formula:
=
where V is the permissible velocity
R is the hydraulic radius
S is the slope
n is the manning's coefficient
E6.

SIZING OF DRAIN
In order to determine the size of drain, the carrying capacity of the drain should be
calculated assuming a drain size i.e 500mm
project.

500mm for the above mentioned

18

If the carrying capacity of the drain

exceeds the peak discharge flow

for

the area under consideration, the drain size can be assumed to be adequate.
E7.

COMPUTATIONS
Based on the above information, the following were calculated:

= 0.082 m3/s
For the proposed 500mm by 500mm drain within the proposed morcellement, the
carrying capacity is calculated as follows:

= 0.357 m3/s
Given the carrying capacity of the drain exceeds the peak discharge, the drain size can be
considered as acceptable. The following annexures provide more information on the storm
water drainage network proposed:
Annexure 4 - Preliminary storm water drainage network
Annexure 5 - Typical roadside drain section
Annexure 6 - Typical soakaway pit details

19

ANNEXURE 1
SEPTIC TANK DETAILS

20

ANNEXURE 2
ABSORPTION PIT

21

ANNEXURE 3
LEACHING FIELD

22

ANNEXURE 4
PROPOSED STORM WATER DRAINAGE

23

ANNEXURE 5
ROADSIDE DRAIN SECTION

24

ANNEXURE 6
SOAKAWAY ABSORPTION PIT

25

Annex E

Residential morcellement at
Gros Billot New Grove
District of Grand-Port
Rose Belle Sugar Estate Board

Site Zoning

APRIL 2014