Original source · versioned page text
Landslide Hazard Report_compressed
Specialists in transport geotechnics
Project Title 416 – 411 Black Pinch Road - Slope Stability Assessment
Project Number CGC.SR.2022.011
Report Number CGC.SR.2022.011.Rev01
Client Matt Bradley Designs
Review Record
Revision Date Prepared Reviewed by Approved
Number by by
01 10/05/2022 RP ICT ICT
Issue Record
Distribution to Date Number of
Copies
CGC – Project File 10/05/2022 1
Matt Bradley 10/05/2022 1
Details - Civil Geotechnical Consultants
Civil Geotechnical Consultants Pty Ltd
PO Box 689, Moffat Beach, QLD, 4551
Email:
www.cgc.net.au
The information contained in this report is and shall remain the property of Civil Geotechnical
Consultants Pty Ltd.
See the original
The page text is free to read. Viewing or downloading an original file needs an account.
Log in to see the originalLog in to download the original file
Large file: the download may take up to a minute.
Searchable page text hides email addresses. Original files are unchanged and may show email addresses.
Full text of the other 47 pages
Page 2
Specialists in transport geotechnics
416-411 Black Pinch Road,
Cootharaba
Slope Stability Assessment
For: Matt Bradley Designs
May, 2022
Page 3
Specialists in transport geotechnics
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Details of Development .................................................................................................. 1
1.2 Site Location and Description ......................................................................................... 1
1.3 Qualifications of company and competent person(s) to prepare report. .......................... 2
2 METHODOLOGY .................................................................................................................. 3
2.1 General .......................................................................................................................... 3
2.2 Landslide Risk Assessment ............................................................................................ 3
2.2.1 Implications of Risk Assessment ............................................................................. 4
2.2.2 Surface Characteristics of Landslides and Hazard Identification.............................. 6
3 EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS ............................................................................................. 7
3.1 Desktop Study ................................................................................................................ 7
3.1.1 Detailed Surface Geology........................................................................................ 7
3.1.2 Noosa Shire Council Landslide Hazard Overlay Map .............................................. 8
3.1.3 Aerial Imagery ......................................................................................................... 9
3.1.4 Site History .............................................................................................................. 9
3.2 Site Inspection/Investigation ........................................................................................... 9
3.2.1 Groundwater ......................................................................................................... 11
3.2.2 Surface Drainage .................................................................................................. 11
3.2.3 Vegetation ............................................................................................................. 11
3.2.4 Buildings, other structures ..................................................................................... 11
3.2.5 Site Classification .................................................................................................. 11
4 SLOPE RISK ASSESSMENT .............................................................................................. 11
4.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 11
4.2 Effects of Development on Land Stability ..................................................................... 12
4.2.1 Existing Conditions ................................................................................................ 12
4.2.2 Effects ................................................................................................................... 12
5 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IMPACT ASSESSMENT ..................................................... 13
5.1 Site layout .................................................................................................................... 13
5.2 Proposed development components ............................................................................ 13
10 May 2022 CGC-SR-2022-011-R01-Rev01 Page i
Page 4
Specialists in transport geotechnics
5.3 Roadworks, Driveways and other Pavements .............................................................. 13
5.4 Earthworks ................................................................................................................... 13
5.5 Foundations ................................................................................................................. 13
5.6 Surface drainage .......................................................................................................... 13
5.7 Wastewater treatment and disposal.............................................................................. 13
5.8 Overall effect of development on stability ..................................................................... 13
6 CONSTRAINTS/ PRECAUTIONS/ RECOMMENDATIONS................................................. 14
6.1 General ........................................................................................................................ 14
6.2 Foundations ................................................................................................................. 14
6.3 Drainage ...................................................................................................................... 14
6.4 Earthworks ................................................................................................................... 14
6.5 Inspection, Monitoring and Maintenance ...................................................................... 15
6.6 Engineering Design and Practice ................................................................................. 16
7 Summary and Conclusions .................................................................................................. 16
8 References ........................................................................................................................... III
Attachment 1: Site Plan ............................................................................................................... IV
Attachment 2: Aerial Imagery ....................................................................................................... V
Attachment 3: AGS guidelines for Hillside Construction ............................................................... VI
10 May 2022 CGC-SR-2022-011-R01-Rev01 Page ii
Page 5
Specialists in transport geotechnics
1 INTRODUCTION
Civil Geotechnical Consultants was engaged by Matt Bradley Designs to undertake a slope
assessment of the proposed development at 416-411 Black Pinch Road, Cootharaba. The site is
located within the Noosa Shire Council area hazard overlay map, which requires geotechnical
assessment and reporting to occur. An initial site visit and slope assessment report has been
conducted to inform the potential works (if any) associated with proposed residential
development.
1.1 Details of Development
The proposed development at 416-411 Black Pinch Road, Cootharaba involves the construction
of a raised, piered dwelling on a natural sloping block. Provided designs/layout suggest the
house footprint on the site will be approximately 260m2. Refer to Figure 1 below and Appendix 1
for plan details.
Figure 1: Proposed development 416-411 Black Pinch Road (Approximate Building Location in Yellow)
1.2 Site Location and Description
The site is located on western side of Black Pinch Road approximately 13km south west of
Boreen Point. The proposed dwelling is accessed via a steep farm track that runs off Black Pinch
Road with the proposed dwelling to be constructed in the south western corner of the property.
Provided plans indicate that little to no earthworks are intended for the site and the house is to be
piered to sit above the natural sloping terrain.
10 May 2022 CGC-SR-2022-011-R01-Rev01 Page 1
Page 6
Specialists in transport geotechnics
Figure 2: Contour Map of property at 416-411 Cootharaba Road (Approximate Building Location in Yellow)
Inspection of the site and aerial images show some clearing at the development location from the
existing access track to the north. North of the cleared area the slope steepens to approximately
30 degrees and the vegetation becomes dense with mixed large trees and undergrowth though
grass was sparse down the slope leaving largely exposed soil. The slope terminates in a small
creek that feeds a billabong on the western boundary of the property.
1.3 Qualifications of company and competent person(s) to
prepare report.
Civil Geotechnical Consultants (CGC) is a Queensland based Geotechnical consultant providing
services to the public and private sectors in South East Queensland. CGC maintains an
accredited quality system, has the highest level of organisational pre-qualifications from DTMR
projects and its Principals are all recognised on DTMR’s individual expert panel of advisors in
Geotechnical Engineering and/or Engineering Geology.
Ian Thompson (RPEQ 9092), the reviewer of this report, has more than 18 years of experience in
the field of civil and Geotechnical Engineering, with extensive experience working in
geotechnically challenging infrastructure projects here in Australia.
Civil Geotechnical Consultants (CGC) were requested to undertake a site visit and initial slope
stability assessment (if possible) to provide initial view on potential for landslide instability, using
industry standard assessment methods.
The results of the site visit and assessment are contained herein.
10 May 2022 CGC-SR-2022-011-R01-Rev01 Page 2
Page 7
Specialists in transport geotechnics
2 METHODOLOGY
2.1 General
This report presents a portion of the above requirements. The methodology adopted in the initial
stage 1 slope assessment is noted below:
1. Desktop study
a) Review of available relevant planning documentation including layout, topographic
plans and flood data.
b) A review of existing Hazard mapping (where available), aerial photographs and
various published information to assist in identifying past activity.
c) Collation of regional soil and geological data.
2. Site investigation (non-intrusive)
3. Landslide Risk Assessment (qualitative risk to property)
The methodology for conducting the Landslide Risk assessment is in general compliance with
Australian Geomechanics Society (AGS), Volume 42, No.1 March 2007. Key details are
discussed below. The AGS framework for Landslide Risk management is presented in Figure 3.0
below.
2.2 Landslide Risk Assessment
This qualitative risk assessment has been carried out to assess the geological hazards on the
site and attempt to define the likelihood of that hazard becoming an event, and as a consequence
the resultant risk to property. A qualitative assessment ranks risk on a scale as opposed to a
quantitative risk assessment that defines the risk as a numerical probability.
A risk is made up of the product of the likelihood of an event, and the consequences of that event
occurring. We have used a methodology guided by the paper ‘A National Landslide Risk
Management Framework for Australia’; Volume 42 March 2007 published by the Australian
Geomechanics Society in 2007 (AGS 2007). The risk matrix from AGS 2007 is attached in
Appendix B.
This document was created in an attempt to standardise the terms and methodologies used for
risk assessment for landslide events in Australia, and also to formalise the procedures in
conducting risk assessments. The guidelines use common terms and methods of assessment,
combined with a risk matrix to define risk. The terms used in this document that reference
definitions in AGS 2007 are written in bold.
For example, the likelihood of a small rock falling may be assessed as ‘likely’ (e.g., the
assessment that a rock will likely fall in the next significant rain event) whilst the consequences of
that particular rock impacting a building may be ‘insignificant’ (e.g. the rock is so small that the
building damage might be insignificant). The resultant risk relating to that particular hazard could
then be assessed using the AGS 2007 risk matrix from Appendix B to be ‘low’.
The risk assessments are based on CGC’s assumptions and judgements. The risks assessed
using these methods are generally ranges, and in some cases span two or more categories of
risk. The range of values indicates the uncertainty in the data used to estimate the likelihood and
consequences of events. Further investigation work may be required to reduce this uncertainty.
10 May 2022 CGC-SR-2022-011-R01-Rev01 Page 3
Page 8
Specialists in transport geotechnics Figure 3.0 - Framework for Landslide Risk Management 2.2.1 Implications of Risk Assessment The implications of the risk levels are discussed in AGS 2007 and a table from that document describing commonly accepted levels of risk is included in Appendix B. Generally, where risk is assessed as greater than Low risk, some form of detailed investigation and treatment options are implemented. Where risk is Low or Very Low the risk is often accepted. Moderate risk commonly requires investigation and treatment to reduce the risk to Low or less. 10 May 2022 CGC-SR-2022-011-R01-Rev01 Page 4
Page 9
Specialists in transport geotechnics
Examples of Qualitative measures and risk from AGS 2007 used to inform the decision process
are presented below are presented below in table 1 and 2. A risk matrix used to inform
“Qualitative Risk” it presented in Table 3. Risk Level implications outlined in Table 4.
Table 1: Qualitative Measures of Likelihood
Approximate
Level Descriptor Description Annual
Probability
A ALMOST CERTAIN The event is expected to occur over the design life
10-1
The event will probably occur under adverse
B LIKELY 10-2
conditions over the design life
The event could occur under adverse conditions over
C POSSIBLE 10-3
the design life
The event might occur under very adverse
D UNLIKELY 10-4
circumstances over the design life
The event is conceivable but only under exceptional
E RARE 10-5
circumstances over the design life
The event is inconceivable or fanciful over the design
F BARELY CREDIBLE 10-6
life
Table 2: Qualitative Measures of Consequences To Property
Level Descriptor Description
Structure(s) completely destroyed and/or large-scale damage
1 CATASTROPHIC requiring major engineering works for stabilisation. Could cause at
least one adjacent property major consequence damage.
Extensive damage to most of structure, and/or extending beyond site
2 MAJOR boundaries requiring significant stabilisation works. Could cause at
least one adjacent property medium consequence damage.
Moderate damage to some of structure, and/or significant part of site
3 MEDIUM requiring large stabilisation works. Could cause at least one property
minor consequence damage.
Limited damage to part of structure, and/or part of site requiring
4 MINOR
reinstatement stabilisation works.
5 INSIGNIFICANT Little damage.
Table 3: Qualitative Risk Analysis Matrix
Likelihood Consequence to
Property
Approx. 1: 2: 3: 4: 5:
Annual
Probability Catastrophic Major Medium Minor Insignificant
A – Almost
10-1 VH VH VH H M/L
Certain
B - Likely 10-2 VH VH H M L
C - Possible 10-3 VH H M M L
D - Unlikely 10-4 H M L L VL
E - Rare 10-5 M L L VL VL
F - Barely
10-6 L VL VL VL VL
Credible
10 May 2022 CGC-SR-2022-011-R01-Rev01 Page 5
Page 10
Specialists in transport geotechnics
Table 4: Risk Level Implications
Risk Level Example
Implications
Unacceptable without treatment. Extensive detailed investigation and research, planning and
implementation of treatment options essential to reduce risk to Low; may be too expensive and not
VH Very High practical. Work will likely cost more than the value of the property
H High Unacceptable without treatment. Detailed investigation, planning and implementation of treatment options
required to reduce risk to Low. Work would cost a substantial sum in relation to the value of the property.
M Moderate May be tolerated in certain circumstances (subject to regulator’s approval) but requires investigation,
planning and implementation of treatment options to reduce risk to Low.
L Low Usually acceptable to regulators. Where treatment has been required to reduce the risk to this level,
ongoing maintenance is required.
VL Very Low Acceptable. Manage by normal slope maintenance procedures.
Notes:
1. “Existing Slopes” in this context are slopes that are not part of a recognizable landslide and have demonstrated non-failure
performance over at least several seasons or events of extended adverse weather, usually being a period of at least 10 to 20 years.
2. “Existing Development” includes existing structures, and slopes that have been modified by cut and fill, that are not located on or
part of a recognizable landslide and have demonstrated non-failure performance over at least several seasons or events of extended
adverse weather, usually being a period of at least 10 to 20 years.
3. “New Constructed Slope” includes any change to existing slopes by cut or fill or changes to existing slopes by new stabilisation
works (including replacement of existing retaining walls or replacement of existing stabilisation measures, such as rock bolts or catch
fences).
4. “New Development” includes any new structure or change to an existing slope or structure. Where changes to an existing structure
or slope result in any cut or fill of less than 1.0m vertical height from the toe to the crest and this change does not increase the risk,
then the Existing Slope / Existing Structure criterion may be adopted. Where changes to an existing structure do not increase the
building footprint or do not result in an overall change in footing loads, then the Existing Development criterion may be adopted.
5. “Existing Landslides” have been considered likely to require remedial works and hence would become a New Constructed Slope
and require the lower risk. Even where remedial works are not required per se, it would be reasonable expectation of the public for a
known landslide to be assessed to the lower risk category as a matter of “public safety”.
2.2.2 Surface Characteristics of Landslides and Hazard Identification
The ability to recognise the presence of a landslide is dependent on a number of factors: fresh
landslides are generally easily recognisable providing they have distinct scarps and runouts, but
some landslides are more subtle in morphology – such as creep and lateral spread. Recognition
of these may be dependent on the experience of the geotechnical professional and the ability to
recognise the morphological context.
In general terms, weathering processes will tend to form fairly uniform hill slopes; the presence of
landslides will disrupt this uniformity and form (mainly) concave features, which may have
hummocky ground or talus slopes at the foot of the hill where the failed material has
accumulated.
The slope may also show benches, scars or scarps where the ground has been displaced,
changes in vegetation may be present in historical landslide areas, and this may take the form of
smaller trees in the form of regrowth, or a patch of different species through change in
subsurface conditions and opportunistic recolonization.
10 May 2022 CGC-SR-2022-011-R01-Rev01 Page 6
Page 11
Specialists in transport geotechnics Slow, creeping landslides and historic events may be recognisable by consistently bent trees; as the ground moves and tilts the trees will continue to grow near vertically, which can lead to a kink in the trunks – this will be exhibited by a number of trees and single specimens are not likely representative of slope movements. Creep and lateral spread in low-angle slopes may be seen by linear irregularities in the slope. Historic landslides may also be picked up in high-resolution topographic maps: downslope lobes and hummocks can often be seen, and when combined with irregularities in the slope and gullies, can identify areas which warrant further investigation. Anthropogenic features may also be disturbed by landslides; powerlines may be tilted, retaining walls can bulge, roads and railway lines may show cracking and offset. Sometimes, areas which are in danger of developing landslides can be picked up by the formation of tension cracks and the presence of springs and altered drainage, however, for the most part these areas need to be assessed by considering a combination of slope angles, material types and assessing the risk from historical records and context. 3 EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS Information on existing site conditions during this initial assessment have been gathered from the following information sources: • Desktop study • Non-intrusive site investigation comprising of a site walkover and assessment. Refer below for summary details. 3.1 Desktop Study A desktop study has been conducted to examine and report available geotechnical information associated with the proposed development and surrounds. Refer below for details. 3.1.1 Detailed Surface Geology With reference to Queensland Governments “GeoResGlobe” 1:100,000 scaled detailed surface geological mapping, Figure 4 below identifies the surrounding geology of the proposed site (416- 411 Black Pinch Road). The overlay indicates the property is overlain by the Kin Kin Beds (Rk). 10 May 2022 CGC-SR-2022-011-R01-Rev01 Page 7
Page 12
Specialists in transport geotechnics
Rk
Qa
Proposed
Development
Figure 4: 1:100,000 Site Geology taken from GeoResGlobe
3.1.2 Noosa Shire Council Landslide Hazard Overlay Map
Noosa Shire Council (NSC) Landslide hazard risk overlay has been referred to for this
assessment. This overlay is generally referred to during new developments, where land is
located on the NSC overlays it is a requirement that a geotechnical assessment be undertaken to
demonstrate that the landslide risk is low to very low prior to development. The NSC Landslide
hazard risk overlay (see figure 5) identifies the majority of the property as being a moderate or
high risk of landslide hazard area. High Risk areas are nominated to occur on the south facing
slope to the north of the development site. In the localised area of the site where the
development is proposed the Hazard Overlay nominates Low to Moderate risk.
10 May 2022 CGC-SR-2022-011-R01-Rev01 Page 8
Page 13
Specialists in transport geotechnics
Proposed
Development
Figure 5: NSC Landslide Hazard Areas Overlay
3.1.3 Aerial Imagery
Historical aerial imageries were accessed through Nearmap and GeoResGlobe to identify the
changes that the proposed development site has undergone through the period. No visible
significant instabilities around/within the proposed site were identified in the aerial images review.
Refer to Appendix 2 for the reviewed aerial images.
3.1.4 Site History
No documentation has been located or made available for review in relation to the site history of
landslides.
3.2 Site Inspection/Investigation
A site walkover was conducted by a CGC geotechnical engineer on the 6th May 2022 to
understand the condition of the proposed development site. No intrusive geotechnical field
investigation or testing was undertaken during the site visit.
10 May 2022 CGC-SR-2022-011-R01-Rev01 Page 9
Page 14
Specialists in transport geotechnics From its highest point on the southern boundary the site slopes south to north where it reaches its lowest point in a small creek before sloping upwards in a northerly direction. Where the access track is located on the southern boundary the site is near level from which point the slope angle increases from approximately 10 degrees in the dwelling location to approximately 30 degrees at base of the slope by the creek. Material identified at the ground surface of the cleared grassed area was generally residual red/brown clay. Down the slope the vegetation becomes denser and there was little ground cover leaving the red brown clay exposed at the surface between trees and shrubs. The current site conditions are reflected in following series of site photos below in figure 6. Figure 6: Site Photos -06/05/2022 Photo 1: Proposed dwelling location looking west Photo 2: Proposed dwelling location looking east Photo 3: Small billabong on the western boundary of the Photo 4: Small creek at the base of the slope with exposed property downslope from the proposed development clay slope in the background 10 May 2022 CGC-SR-2022-011-R01-Rev01 Page 10
Page 15
Specialists in transport geotechnics Photo 5: Proposed development location looking east along the Photo 6: Exposed residual clay downslope from the tree line adjacent to the access track. development location 3.2.1 Groundwater It is unclear whether any groundwater seepage was present on site at the time of the inspection. 3.2.2 Surface Drainage Little to no surface drainage was identified on the site. Natural overland flow is the only mechanism currently directing water down slope into the creek at the base of the steep bushland to the north of the property. 3.2.3 Vegetation The south-western corner of the property is largely cleared with some established trees spread around the proposed development area. To the south of the cleared area the slope becomes steeper and the vegetation becomes denser with large trees and shrubs. Where the property had been cleared, well established grass covered the area though down slope where the vegetation becomes more dense there is very little ground cover and the soil is largely exposed. 3.2.4 Buildings, other structures The property is currently vacant and does not have any structures on it besides rural fencing. 3.2.5 Site Classification A site classification report has been previously completed by others and is outside the scope of this report. 4 SLOPE RISK ASSESSMENT 4.1 Introduction Utilising the Australian Geomechanics Society Guidelines for Landslide Risk Management (2007) risk assessment methodology, and provided that the development construction and post construction maintenance of the site is undertaken in accordance with the restrictions and precautions outlined in Section 5, the site assessed risk level is considered to be Low. 10 May 2022 CGC-SR-2022-011-R01-Rev01 Page 11
Page 16
Specialists in transport geotechnics
Table 5 summarises qualitative assessment of slope instability risk prior to any remedial works or
engineering controls. Table 6 shows the assessed qualitative risk following appropriate
engineering controls and practices in design and construction, risk management, including
earthworks in accordance with the guidelines in this report.
Table 5: Results of Qualitative Assessment of Risk to Property - Without Engineering Controls
Without Engineering Controls
Potential Hazard Likelihood of
Elements at Risk Qualitative Risk
Consequence Occurrence
- Shallow failure Elements in proposed Medium Unlikely Low
building envelope
- Deep seated failure
within the residual soil Elements in proposed Low
profile Major Rare
building envelope
Table 6: Results of Qualitative Assessment of Risk to Property - With Engineering Controls
With Engineering Controls
Engineering Controls to Reduce Risk Likelihood of
Consequence Qualitative Risk
Occurrence
- Provision for good drainage and erosion
control measures i.e. surface water interceptor
drains and flow spreaders. Minor Rare
- Plant ground cover over natural slopes to
Very Low
reduce erosion over time.
- Structure piers to be founded in hard residual
soils
- Keep additional structures away from the crest
of steep bushland land to the North Rare Low
Medium
- Manage drainage
- Limit land clearing
4.2 Effects of Development on Land Stability
4.2.1 Existing Conditions
Existing conditions are discussed in section 3 above.
4.2.2 Effects
Based on observations made in the field, the effect on land stability due to the proposed
development is considered to be low should good construction practice be followed during
construction.
Site drainage around the development in the form of swale drains to minimise effects of erosion
should be included.
10 May 2022 CGC-SR-2022-011-R01-Rev01 Page 12
Page 17
Specialists in transport geotechnics 5 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IMPACT ASSESSMENT 5.1 Site layout Please refer to Appendix 1 for the layout and contour plans. 5.2 Proposed development components The proposed development at 416-411 Black Pinch Road Cootharaba involves the construction of a dwelling on an undeveloped property. 5.3 Roadworks, Driveways and other Pavements No detailed plans have been provided at this stage of assessment. It is recommended that pavements should be tied neatly into adjacent ground and minimise any potential for concentrated flow paths to be generated onto adjacent land surfaces through the use of swale drains. 5.4 Earthworks Based on the development plans provided it there is minimal earthworks required for the construction of the dwelling which is to be founded above ground on piers. Should earthworks be required it is recommended that the fill operations be undertaken with the appropriate engineering supervision to ensure compaction is achieved. Any fill batter on the down slope side of the house will require appropriate batter angles/retention systems to ensure the stability of the fill platform and house foundations. 5.5 Foundations No structural details have been provided at this stage of assessment besides to architectural plans. It is assumed the foundations would comprise piered stumps to support the house. It is recommend that piers found at depth in the underlying hard residual soils. As a minimum, good hillside design practices as defined in AGS (Refer to Appendix 3) are recommended for this site. 5.6 Surface drainage Surface details for the proposed development, levels are currently only available on approximate architectural drawings. It is recommended that swale drains be constructed to direct flow around the house and to slow and dissipate flow down the slope to ensure flow is kept away from the house. 5.7 Wastewater treatment and disposal Details of the wastewater treatment facility are beyond the scope of this report. 5.8 Overall effect of development on stability It is considered that the proposed development has the potential to have a Low impact on the site given its current condition. Implementation of engineering controls outlined in Section 6 should be incorporated to reduce the long term and short-term risk. Inspection, monitoring and maintenance should be undertaken at a minimum to ensure the site stability into the future. 10 May 2022 CGC-SR-2022-011-R01-Rev01 Page 13
Page 18
Specialists in transport geotechnics
6 CONSTRAINTS/ PRECAUTIONS/ RECOMMENDATIONS
6.1 General
Good hillside engineering construction practice is considered mandatory during development of
the site. The notes and illustrations attached in Appendix 3 of this report outline some typical
hillside construction guidelines including, earthworks, erosion control and drainage practices for
hillside areas, which should be applied to this site.
6.2 Foundations
It is recommended that the foundations for the shed be designed and constructed in accordance
with AS2870 Residential Slabs and Footings. As a minimum, piers should extend to found at
depth in the underlying hard residual soil strata (1.5m into clays, or 0.5m into weathered rock if
encountered).
6.3 Drainage
The control of drainage is important to the stability of the proposed development. The following
recommendations are made with respect to drainage for the site:
• Well designed and engineered surface water controls should be used to reduce the
infiltration potential of the site during and following rainfall. Surface water from the site and
from areas upslope of the site must be diverted away from footing systems, cut and fill
batters and retaining walls. The use of appropriate self-flushing spoon drains is
recommended.
• Subsurface drainage must be installed behind retaining walls in order to prevent the
development of hydrostatic pressure. This normally comprises slotted ‘aggi’ pipe wrapped
in filter ‘sock’ and placed in gravel backfill.
• Discharge from rainwater tanks, roof water and runoff collection systems must be
controlled and discharged as diffuse flow at least 10 metres down slope of any footing,
batter or retaining structure.
• Any water disposal must be controlled and discharged as diffuse flow at least 10 metres
down slope of any footing, batter or retaining wall.
• All excess stormwater collected from proposed pavements (driveways/road) and around
the proposed shed (including overflow from rainwater tanks) must be directed by pipes or
lined channels to the legal point of downstream discharge.
6.4 Earthworks
The following recommendations are made for earthworks on the site:
• Vegetation acts to reinforce and protect the soil profile on a sloping site. Therefore,
vegetation clearance should be kept to the minimum necessary to undertake the works
and should be limited to the immediate vicinity of the building envelope and works area.
• Earthworks on the site should be minimised as far as possible.
• Any fill should be placed under a Level 1 Inspection and Testing regime in accordance
with the requirements of AS3798-2007 “Guidelines on Earthworks for Commercial and
10 May 2022 CGC-SR-2022-011-R01-Rev01 Page 14
Page 19
Specialists in transport geotechnics
Residential Developments” and certified by a geotechnical inspection and testing
authority.
• Where fill is placed over side slopes, the subgrade slopes should be cut to form a series
of horizontal terraces to ensure that the fill is bonded to the subgrade.
• Cut and fill batters must not exceed a slope of 2H:1V.
• All cut and fill earthworks of greater than 1.0 m height or depth must be designed by a
professional engineer and checked for stability.
• All retaining structures greater than 1.0 m high must be designed by a professional
engineer in accordance with AS4678-2002 “Earth Retaining Structures”. The design
should be adequately designed for earth pressures, surcharges and elevated ground
water conditions and fully account for sloped backfill and retained ground. The adopted
design should also include conservatively sized drainage and regularly scheduled
maintenance measures. Retaining walls should be founded into hard residual soils or
weathered rock. The actual required depth of founding will need to be designed to
provide an adequate factor of safety against global instability for the height of retained
material.
• Earthworks should only be undertaken during periods when ground conditions are
relatively dry and there is no threat of prolonged rainfall. A risk assessment should be
undertaken prior to undertaking any earthworks operations on the site.
6.5 Inspection, Monitoring and Maintenance
Inspection, monitoring and maintenance is a key activity required for maintaining expected short-
and long-term performance of any existing structure and proposed works element. Generic
mitigations are noted below.
The owner of the property should be responsible for:
• Maintaining adequate surface drainage path in and out of the property and piping the
drainage outlet away from the immediate slope to avoid potential scouring on the slope
surface.
• Fixing/repairing the leaking or broken underground drainage/sewer pipes as soon as the
fault has been identified.
• Undertaking periodic visual inspection of the property and surrounds for any cracking,
ground movement etc (say every 6 months too annually or after large storm periods).
• Where the risk levels are determined to be higher then an inspection by qualified and
suitably experienced personnel is required.
• Maintaining vegetation cover or other means of surface protection (as applicable) inside
the property boundary to minimise surface infiltration into underlying foundation materials.
• Where practical, encouraging/facilitating vegetation growth on the crest and slope below
the house.
• Seeking appropriate geotechnical and design advice if any construction activities
including renovation/addition or replacement are planned within the extent of the property.
• Following Council’s relevant regulatory requirements for new construction inside the
property.
10 May 2022 CGC-SR-2022-011-R01-Rev01 Page 15
Page 20
Specialists in transport geotechnics 6.6 Engineering Design and Practice Good engineering design of foundations and earthworks not only reduces maintenance costs of the structure throughout its design life, it also minimises uncertainties associated with foundation- structure interaction and hence the risks. Some notes on good and poor engineering practice for hillside construction are presented in Appendix 3 (reproduced from AGS 2007c, Appendix 3). It is recommended that the guidelines on good engineering practice provided in Appendix 3 be used for this site. 7 Summary and Conclusions Civil Geotechnical Consultants has undertaken a slope risk assessment at 416-411 Black Pinch Road, Cootharaba and it is considered that based on the site walkover and with reference to the recommendations contained within this report the development will have a low risk of instability due to landslip actions. It has been found that the development would, subject to the recommendations herein being followed, satisfy the Performance Outcome PO1 as defined in the Noosa Plan 2020, Table 8.2.8.3 of the Noosa Shire Council Planning Scheme. A site-specific geotechnical assessment has been completed for the site and has demonstrated that the landslide hazard risk is considered to be Low. The development is not situated in an area of high risk of land instability and the proposed development should not adversely impact on this risk if the recommendations made herein are adhered to. It is advisable that a final inspection and evaluation of the site works be undertaken by a competent RPEQ following completion of the development. This is to ensure general compliance to the above recommendations and sound building practices on steep and sloping sites. 10 May 2022 CGC-SR-2022-011-R01-Rev01 Page 16
Page 21
Specialists in transport geotechnics
Limitations to this advice
Foundation and geotechnical engineering problems are a principal cause of construction delays, cost overruns,
claims and disputes. The following information is provided to help you to understand this report and its
limitations and manage your risks.
Scope and Applicability of this Report
This report has been prepared for a specific purpose and scope and its applicability is limited. CGC cannot
accept any responsibility for the use of this report outside of the stated scope and purpose. If a service has not
been explicitly included in the scope, it must be assumed that it has not been provided. Assessment of soil or
groundwater contamination does not form part of this geotechnical report and any reference to any potential
site contamination is for information only. If you are uncertain about the applicability of the results for any
particular purpose, you should consult CGC to avoid any misunderstanding or miss-application.
This report has been prepared for the nominated Client and project only and should not be relied upon by
other parties, or for other purposes, without consulting CGC. Any party relying on this report beyond its
specific purpose and scope does so entirely at their own risk and responsibility. CGC does not take
responsibility for the use of this document by any other person or party than the Client.
Project Details and Information Provided
This report has been based on project details as provided to us at the time of the commission. We have
assumed that the information supplied to CGC by the client or other external sources on behalf of the client, is
correct unless explicitly stated so. CGC does not accept any responsibility for incomplete or inaccurate data
provided by others.
If any project details change during the course of the project or observed conditions are considered to differ
from those expected or assumed, CGC should be notified in order to investigate if and how changes in project
details affect the conclusions and recommendations in our report. If CGC is not consulted when changes are
made to the initial project details, we cannot accept any responsibility for problems arising from these
changes.
Geotechnical Information and Interpretation
Site investigations only sample discrete parts of the ground, and that extrapolation and interpolation of
collected information can be used with varying degrees of risk and uncertainty depending on the extent and
quality of the site investigation, the variability of the subsurface conditions and the consequences to the
proposed works.
The analyses and recommendations in this report rely on the results of site investigation information, and
other reported geotechnical information that is relevant to the works. This may include the results of pile load
testing, other geotechnical testing, and inspections and observations from studies that have been performed
as part of the works or in the vicinity of the works previously.
We have endeavoured to incorporate the available information into an appropriate geotechnical model based
on our interpretation of the likely subsurface conditions. This process, and the geotechnical analysis and
interpretation based on that model, is an inexact science, as a model is but a simplification of reality to derive
a geotechnical solution. While we endeavour to incorporate realistic model parameters, our models,
interpretations and the outcomes or our work generally may differ from reality for a range of reasons
including:
• Spatial Variability: Geotechnical and geological variability across the site which may not have been
captured in the site investigation works that have been used in our works. Geotechnical site
investigations are very limited in the extent of physical investigation compared to the size of the
entire site. No site investigation, no matter how comprehensive, can reveal all subsurface details and
anomalies and conditions that differ from those observed in the site investigation will occur;
• Temporal Variability: Subsurface conditions can change with time due to man-made events such as
cutting or filling or any construction works on or adjacent to the site which can also affect the site
drainage and hence underlying properties; or by natural events such as floods or groundwater
fluctuations.
10 May 2022 CGC-SR-2022-011-R01-Rev01 Page I
Page 22
Specialists in transport geotechnics
• Variability in Mechanical Properties: Normal geotechnical variability in the inferred properties of
materials represented in the boreholes, the performance of foundations or other elements that are
tested or observed, and the performance of structures that are in contact with the ground in general.
The data collected is only directly relevant to the exact location where the investigation was
undertaken. The subsurface conditions between test locations have been inferred based on
judgement and experience with the facts available at that time and related to the relative position of
the proposed works;
• Testing Limitations: Uncertainty associated with geotechnical testing, design correlations associated
with those tests or material descriptions, and case histories from which geotechnical parameters may
have been inferred or in design and/or analysis methods that have been adopted;
• Construction Effects: Variability in the performance of construction equipment, such as hammers,
cushions, guides and associated equipment for piling, construction effects that may influence the way
structures interact with the ground, as well as inaccuracies in data measurement and testing methods
that may have been used to record construction processes.
• The results provided should be considered as indicative of the best estimate of likely outcomes (or
range thereof), and should not be considered to be definitive or absolute, or represent the full range
of possible outcomes at this site. Caution and prudence should be exercised when making decisions
with significant implications for your project. The limitations of this report as outlined herein should
be incorporated in decision making, and appropriate contingencies should be put in place to
accommodate unexpected variability in relation to the works.
Geotechnical Modelling
Model parameters that are used may vary in nature depending on the purpose of the analysis. Where it is
necessary to make a realistic evaluation of the soil model, we would normally describe this as a best estimate.
Depending on the particular application, it may be important to understand the sensitivity of the solution to
soil model changes. We may then also define an upper bound soil model and a lower bound soil model, being
estimates of the likely strongest and weakest soil conditions which are anticipated based on the available
geotechnical information and inferred geotechnical parameters. In certain circumstances, such as cases where
the ground conditions appear to be extremely uncertain or variable, we may also define extreme upper bound
and extreme lower bound parameters which are intended to represent the likely extremes of the site
conditions. In all cased, these models are inferred using engineering judgement from the available information
and actual conditions and associated outcomes may differ from those assumed or given in our report, due to
the inherent unpredictability of the ground, as outlined in the preceding section.
It should be noted that depending on the particular application either upper bound or lower bound analyses
could be deemed conservative.
Disclaimer
The results, opinions, conclusions and any recommendations in this report are based on assumptions made by
CGC in order to carry out the work. CGC specifically disclaims responsibility: arising from, or in connection
with, any change to the site conditions or the nature of the proposed works including change in position of the
structure or proposed works relative to the available data; to update this report if the site conditions or project
details change or if the report is used after a protracted delay; and for liability arising from any of the
assumptions that have been made or information provided being incorrect, incomplete or inaccurate.
Subject to the terms of an Agreement for Professional Services between CGC and the client, and to the
maximum extent permitted by law, all implied warranties and conditions in relation to the services provided by
CGC and this report are excluded.
Closure
Unless otherwise documented by way of a signed agreement for the services provided, all services in preparing
this report have been provided under CGC’s standard terms and conditions which are referenced in our fee
proposal. The report is specific to the brief provided with its associated time and cost constraints.
Should you require any further information or clarification in relation to this report, please contact Civil
Geotechnical Consultants.
10 May 2022 CGC-SR-2022-011-R01-Rev01 Page II
Page 23
Specialists in transport geotechnics
8 References
1. AGS (2007a). “Guideline for landslide susceptibility, hazard and risk zoning for land
use planning”, Australian Geomechanics, Vol 42, No. 1, March 2007.
2. AGS (2007b). “Commentary on guideline for landslide susceptibility, hazard and risk
zoning for land use planning”, Australian Geomechanics, Vol 42, No. 1, March 2007.
3. AGS (2007c). “Practice note guidelines for landslide risk management”, Australian
Geomechanics, Vol 42, No. 1, March 2007.
4. AGS (2007d). “Commentary on practice note guidelines for landslide risk
management”, Australian Geomechanics, Vol 42, No. 1, March 2007.
5. AGS (2007e). “Australian GeoGuides for slope management and maintenance”,
Australian Geomechanics, Vol 42, No. 1, March 2007.
10 May 2022 CGC-SR-2022-011-R01-Rev01 Page III
Page 24
Specialists in transport geotechnics
Attachment 1: Site Plan
10 May 2022 CGC-SR-2022-011-R01-Rev01 Page IV
Page 25
REVISION
No. DATE DESCRIPTION ISS. BY
D. A .
O R
FRONT PERSPECTIVE
U E F T I ON
I S S T F O R CO
NO
N S TRUC
matt bradley designs
PARADISE - HOUSE RELOCATION DRAWING REGISTER ©MATT BRADLEY DESIGNS - ACN: 637 963 396 - ABN: 53 637 963 396
www.mattbradleydesigns.com.au - [email protected] - 0488 554 020
ALL DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION METHODS & MATERIALS TO BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH:
CLASS 1A PRIMARY DWELLING NO. DRAWING NAME ISSUE LATEST REVISION DESCRIPTION DATE ISSUED
- THE BUILDING CODE OF AUSTRALIA (BCA);
- THE QUEENSLAND DEVELOPER CODE (QDC);
- BUILDING REGULATIONS;
- CURRENT ISSUES OF AUSTRALIAN STANDARDS & MANUFACTURER'S
SPECIFICATIONS & INSTALLATION DETAILS FOR MATERIALS USED.
DIMENSIONS ARE SUBJECT TO SITE MEASUREMENT & VERIFICATION.
DO NOT SCALE OFF THIS DRAWING. PLANS COPYRIGHT MATT BRADLEY DESIGNS PTY LTD
REAL PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: WD-01 COVER PAGE PROJECT ADDRESS
- PROPERTY ADDRESS: 411 BLACK PINCH ROAD,COOTHARABA QLD 4565 WD-02 CONSTRUCTION LEGEND 411 BLACK PINCH ROAD,COOTHARABA
- LOT PLAN: 1SP297286
- SITE AREA: 111066.68 sq.m.
WD-03 LOCALITY PLAN QLD 4565
WD-04 SITE PLAN DRAW ING TITLE
WD-05 EXISTING / DEMO POST SETOUT COVER PAGE
WD-06 EXISTING / DEMO FIRST FLOOR
WD-07 EXISTING / DEMO ROOF PLAN
EXISTING HOME AREAS NEW HOME AREAS WD-08 NEW POST / SLAB SETOUT PLAN CLIENT
MATT PAVELICH AND JUSTINE OXLEY
FRONT DECK: 84.2m² FRONT DECK: 84.2m² WD-09 NEW FIRST FLOOR DRAW N
FIRST LEVEL: 170.0m² FIRST LEVEL: 170.0m² WD-10 NEW ROOF PLAN KD/EB
REAR DECK: 7.3m² REAR DECK: 9.1m² WD-11 ELEVATIONS
SCALE
As indicated @ A3
WD-12 ELEVATIONS DATE
2022-04-19
TOTAL: 261.5m² TOTAL: 263.3m² WD-13 ELECTRICAL PLAN
MEASURED TO OUTSIDE FACE OF WALL MEASURED TO OUTSIDE FACE OF WALL
PROJECT NO.
2022032
WD-01
DRAW ING NO.
REFER TO CONSTRUCTION LEGEND SHEET FOR BUSHFIRE NOTES rev:
QBCC LICENCE: 15025395
Page 26
STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS SHEET
BE ADVISED : SOME CLAUSES IN THIS SPECIFICATION MAY NOT BE RELEVANT TO THIS PROJECT. CHECK AGAINST BUILDER SPECIFICATIONS AND ENGINEERING DRAWINGS & SPECIFICATIONS.
REVISION
- WHERE NECESSARY REINFORCE BELOW AND OVER OPENINGS WITH GALVANISED WOVEN WIRE - PROVIDE 100mm COMPACTED LIMESTONE BASE TO DRIVEWAY TOPPED WITH 50mm CLEAN SAND
GENERAL SYMBOLS LEGEND
No. DATE DESCRIPTION ISS. BY
FABRIC 75mm WIDE IN CENTRE OF EACH LEAF OPENING EXTENDING ALUMINIUM OF 600mm BEYOND AND GRADE TO FALLS.
THE OPENING. - UNLESS NOTED PAVING PATTERN IS TO CLIENTS DETAIL.
- UNLESS OTHERWISE SHOWN ON DRAWINGS EXTERNAL FACE WORK: 230x110x76mm WINDOW SILLS: - BRICK PAVERS SHALL BE:
SYMBOL DESCRIPTION SYMBOL DESCRIPTION 2c FACE BRICK SPLAYED SILLS. TRAFFICABLE AREAS: MIN. 65mm SOLID CLAY OR CONCRETE
PEDESTRIAN AREAS: MIN. 43mm SOLID CLAY OR CONCRETE
HC EXTERNAL HOSECOCK FW FLOOR WASTE 6.0 LINTELS
GAS GAS CONNECTION SK KITCHEN SINK MAX SPAN LINTELS SIZE BEARING EACH END
16.0 ENERGY EFFICIENCY
- INSULATION MUST FORM A CONTINUOUS BARRIER WITH CEILINGS, WALLS AND FLOORS BY
HW HOT WATER CONNECTION VB VANITY BASIN (mm) (VERT x HORIZ x THICK) (mm) ABUTTING OR OVERLAPPING ADJOINING INSULATION.
- INSULATION MUST NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT DOMESTIC SERVICES OR FITTINGS.
CW COLD WATER CONNECTION WC WC WASTE 900 75x10 150 - REFLECTIVE INSULATION IS TO BE PROVIDED WITH A MINIMUM 25mm AIRSPACE AND IS FITTED
1200 75x75x8 150
HC HOUSE CONNECTION LT LAUNDRY TUB 1500 90x90x8 150
CLOSE TO OPENINGS SUCH AS WINDOWS/DOORS ETC. AND IS PROVIDED WITH ADEQUATE SUPPORT.
- BULK INSULATION MUST MAINTAIN ITS POSITION, THICKNESS. ENSURE THAT CEILING INSULATION
IO INSPECTION OPENING STK PLUMBING STACK TO 1800 100x75x8 230 OVERLAPS UN-INSULATED WALLS.
2100 125x75x8 230
ORG OVERFLOW RELIEF GULLY FLOOR ABOVE / BELOW 2400 125x75x10 230
- CONSTRUCTION JOINTS, SUCH AS BETWEEN WALL AND FLOOR, ARE TO BE TIGHT FITTING OR
SEALED USING CAULKING OR JOINERY ITEMS SUCH AS SKIRTING OR CORNICES.
2500 100x100x8 230
YG YARD GULLY SH SHOWER 3000 150x90x10 230
- EXHAUST FANS ARE TO BE FITTED WITH A SELF CLOSING DAMPER.
- ROOF LIGHTS MUST BE SEALED WITH WEATHERPROOF SEALS.
DP DOWNPIPE LOCATION BA BATH - HEATED WATER PIPING MUST BE THERMALLY INSULATED AND PROTECTED AGAINST THE WEATHER
AND SUN.
7.0 CARPENTRY WORK - INTERNAL HEATED WATER PIPING TO HAVE AN R VALUE OF 0.2
- ENCLOSED ROOF SPACE TO HAVE AN R VALUE OF R3.5
1.0 GENERAL - ROOF AND CEILING FRAMING SHOULD COMPLY WITH AS 1684 LIGHT TIMBER FRAMING CODE. DRAW
- ALL DIMENSIONS SHALL BE CHECKED ON SITE PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF ANY WORK STRAP FIRMLY OVER WALL PLATES AND SECURELY FIX TO TOP OF PLATE BY 2x30mm GALV.
- ALL MATERIALS SHALL COMPLY WITH RELEVANT CURRENT AUSTRALIAN STANDARDS AND CLOUTS/STRAP.
UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED ON THE PLANS SHALL BE NEW AND THE BEST OF THE THEIR
RESPECTIVE KIND AND SUITABLE FOR THEIR INTENDED PURPOSES. - REFER TO AS 1684 FOR ROOF FRAMING SIZES UNLESS SPECIFIED ON DRAWINGS. SUBTERRANEAN TERMITES:
- ALL WORKMANSHIP SHALL COMPLY WITH RELEVANT CURRENT AUSTRALIAN STANDARDS AND TO
GOOD TRADE PRACTICES - SUPPLY AND FIX ALL BULKHEADS & FALSE CEILINGS AS SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS. SUBTERRANEAN TERMITE PROTECTION TO BE IN
- ALL WORK SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH REQUIREMENTS OF THE RESPECTIVE AUTHORITY
HAVING JURISDICTION OVER THE WORKS. 8.0 ROOFING ACCORDANCE WITH AS 3660. KORDON PHYSICAL
- THE ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS SHOULD BE READ IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE SPECIFICATION, - SELECTED ROOFING MATERIAL SHALL BE INSTALLED AND FIXED IN ACCORDANCE WITH TERMITE BARRIER TO PERIMETER AND ALL SLAB
MANUFACTURERS SPECIFICATION AND RELEVANT BUILDING CODES.
SCHEDULES AND CONSULTANTS DRAWINGS THAT FORM PART OF THE CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS
- GUTTER, FASCIA, DOWNPIPES, FLASHING SHALL BE IN LONGEST POSSIBLE LENGTHS.
PROTRUSIONS / PENETRATIONS. 80MM MIN
REFERRED TO IN THE "BUILDING CONTRACT".
- DO NOT SCALE FROM DRAWINGS. NOTIFY OF ANY ERRORS OR OMISSIONS BEFORE PROCEEDING - ALLOW FOR ALL JOINTS AND JOINING MATERIALS, COLLARS, STRAPS & FASTENINGS NECESSARY TO EXPOSED SLAB FACE TO PERIMETER TO ACT AS
WITH ANY WORKS COMPLETE WORK. VISUAL DETECTION SYSTEM AGAINST TERMITE
- ENSURE THAT SUBSTRATES ARE SUITABLE FOR THE INTENDED SUBSEQUENT FINISHES. - ALLOW FOR ALL ROOF PENETRATIONS, ROOF COWLS, FLASHING, FLUMES THROUGH ROOF.
- FIX GUTTERS & FLASHING TO PERMIT THERMAL MOVEMENT IN THEIR FULL LENGTH.
INFESTATION AS PER AS3660 AND ALL RELATED
COMMENCEMENT OF WORK ON THE SUBSTRATES IMPLIES ACCEPTANCE BY THE SUBCONTRACTOR OF
THE SUBSTRATES ON WHICH FINISHES ARE APPLIED. - SEAL BETWEEN OVERLAPPING FLASHING; FLASHING TURNED DOWN OVER BASE OR APRON CODES. ANY OTHER SYSTEM USED MUST BE A
- CONTRACTOR IS TO SUPPLY ALL EQUIPMENT NECESSARY FOR THE COMPLETION OF THE RESPECTIVE FLASHING; FLASHING OVER METAL ROOF; FLASHING OVER SECRET GUTTERS; AROUND ROOF CERTIFIED SYSTEM TO BCA REQUIREMENTS.
WORKS. PENETRATIONS ETC.
- CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE PROGRESSIVE CLEAN UP DURING AND AFTER THE
COMPLETION OF RESPECTIVE WORKS. 9.0 WINDOWS/GLAZING
- UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED ON THE DRAWINGS WINDOW FRAMES SHALL BE ALUMINIUM
2.0 EARTHWORKS RESIDENTIAL OR COMMERCIAL IN SECTION WITH POWDERCOAT FINISH AS SELECTED BY OWNER. NEW CONSTRUCTION
- UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED, REMOVE TOPSOIL TO A MINIMUM DEPTH OF 200mm INCLUDING ALL - ALLOW FOR FLYSCREENS TO BE FITTED TO ALL WINDOWS.
ROOTS, AND OTHER MATTER, AND REQUIRED BY THE SOIL CONDITION AND/OR BUILDER. PROVIDE - ANGLED WINDOW UNITS SHALL BE FACTORY MADE AND FIXED AND DELIVERED ON SITE AS A
SUITABLE CLEAN FILL AND COMPACT IN LAYERS NOT GREATER THAN 300mm TO REDUCE LEVELS AS COMPLETE UNIT. - FOR HABITABLE ROOMS:
SHOWN. - WHERE RELEVANT WINDOWS ARE TO COMPLY WITH THE SPECIFICATIONS PROVIDED BY THE - TOTAL R VALUE MUST BE 2.8
- DO NOT EXCAVATE SERVICES TRENCHES WITHIN AN ANGLE OF 45 DEGREES DOWN FROM THE THERMAL PERFORMANCE ASSESSOR.
BOTTOM EDGE OF THE FOOTING. - CLEAR GLASS GENERALLY: OBSCURE GLASS TO BATHROOMS, REFER TO DRAWINGS.
- ALL RETAINING WALLS TO BE TREATED WITH "BITKOTE" WATERPROOFING AGENT. - WHERE GLASS BLOCKS HAVE BEEN NOMINATED, THEY SHALL BE IN FRAMES AND INSTALLED TO
MANUFACTURERS SPECIFICATIONS
3.0 CONCRETE
- ALL CONCRETE REINFORCEMENT AND FORMWORK SHALL BE TO STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS DETAILS, 10.0 JOINERY
RELEVANT BUILDING CODES AND STANDARDS. - ALL JOINERY SHALL BE OF HIGHEST QUALITY MATERIALS TO BEST TRADE PRACTICES AND HIGH
- THE FOOTING AND SLAB CONSTRUCTION IS TO COMPLY WITH AS 2870. QUALITY FINISH.
- PROVIDE A PROPRIETARY VAPOUR BARRIER WHICH CONSISTS OF HIGH IMPACT RESISTANT - EXTERNAL DOOR FRAMES SHALL BE: 110x40 DOUBLE REBATED FRAME WITH 130x40 WEATHERED
THRESHOLD U.N.O.
.
POLYTHENE FILM MIN 0.2mm THICK WHICH HAS BEEN PIGMENTED AND BRANDED BY THE
- SUPPLY AND BUILD IN TIMBER DOOR FRAMES TO EXTERNAL LOCATIONS AS SHOWN ON
A
MANUFACTURER.
.
ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS.
D
4.0 TERMITE PROTECTION
R
- PROVIDE ANTI-TERMITE TREATMENT UNDER THE BUILDING AREAS IN ACCORDANCE WITH AS 2057, AS 11.0 CEILINGS
O
- CEILINGS SHALL BE RECESSED EDGE, MINIMUM 8.0mm PLASTERGLASS OR GYPROCK.
F T I ON
3660.1 AND APPENDIX D, FOR RETICULATED SYSTEMS.
- BUILDER SHALL PROVIDE "BIFLEX" OR SIMILAR APPROVED ANTI-TERMITE TREATMENT IN ACCORDANCE - FLUSH JOINTS, SCREW HEADS, AND OTHER BLEMISHES IN THE SHEETS USING APPROVED SYSTEMS
E
TO PROVIDE FLUSH SMOOTH CONTINUOUS SURFACE.
U
WITH RELEVANT AUSTRALIAN STANDARD CODES.
I S S T F O R CO
- PROVIDE AND FIX ALL FLUSH STOP BEADS & CASING BEADS TO ALL CORNERS & EDGES.
- PROVIDE ALL SELECTED MOLDINGS AND CORNICES TO ALL CEILINGS AS SHOWN ON THE
TRUC
5.0 BRICKWORK
- BRICK WORK SHALL COMPLY WITH : AS A123 MASONRY CODE & AS 3700 MASONRY CODE. DRAWINGS.
- BRICK GAUGE 7 STANDARD COURSES = 600 m m . MORTAR FOR MASONRY CONSTRUCTION
- TIES SHALL BE 3.5mm DIAMETER GALVANIZED WIRE KINKED FOR AND BUILT IN EVERY 5TH COURSE AT
APPROXIMATELY 900mm CENTRES, WITH ADDITIONAL TIES AT THE RATE OF 1 TIE/300mm HEIGHT OF
12.0 PLASTERING
- INTERNAL WALL FINISHES INCLUDING CUPBOARD, BIN & FRIDGE RECESSES ETC SHALL BE (OTHER
N S
THAN FACE FINISHES OR WHERE COVERED BY FEATURE MATERIALS) FLOAT AND SET IN HARDWALL
NO
OPENINGS AND VERTICAL CONTROL JOINTS AND WITHIN 150mm OF OPENINGS. BUILD TIES INTO EACH
LEAF AT LEAST 50mm. PLASTER U.N.O.
- PLASTERED WALLS SHALL BE NOMINAL 12mm THICK CONSISTING OF 1:1:9, CEMENT:LIME:SAND
matt bradley designs
- VERTICAL CONTROL JOINTS SHALL BE 12mm WIDE FILLED AT COMPLETION WITH A CONTINUOUS
FILLER STRIP.
- CAVITIES TO BE KEPT CLEAR OF MORTAR. PROVIDE CAVITY BOARDS. TEMPORARILY OMIT BRICKS TO
RENDER, AND FINISHED WITH NOMINALLY 3mm HARDWALL PLASTER.
- SUPPLY AND FIX EXTERNAL CORNER BEADS TO ALL EXTERNAL CORNERS. BAL 12.5 BUSHFIRE
PERMIT RAKING OUT OF CAVITY BOTTOMS. - PROVIDE STOP BEADS WHERE PLASTER WORK ABUTS TIMBER FRAMES, OR FACEWORK. ©MATT BRADLEY DESIGNS - ACN: 637 963 396 - ABN: 53 637 963 396
www.mattbradleydesigns.com.au - [email protected] - 0488 554 020
- EXTERNAL RENDER WHEN APPLICABLE SHALL BE 2 COAT SAND FINISH. (FOR PAINTING). SUBFLOOR ENCLOSURE BY EXTERNAL WALL OR BY STEEL, BRONZE OR ALUMINUM MESH. NON-
- FORM WEEP HOLES EVERY FOURTH PERPEND ABOVE FLASHING AND CAVITY FILL KEEP CLEAR OF ALL DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION METHODS & MATERIALS TO BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH:
- NIBS IN INTERNAL CORNERS ADJACENT TO DOOR FRAMES GREATER THAN 40mm SHALL NOT BE SUPPORTS COMBUSTIBLE OR NATURALLY FIRE RESISTANT TIMBER SUPPORTS WHERE THE - THE BUILDING CODE OF AUSTRALIA (BCA);
MORTAR. DO NOT LOCATE WEEPHOLES CLOSER THAN 500mm TO JOINTS IN DAMP PROOF COURSES - THE QUEENSLAND DEVELOPER CODE (QDC);
FLUSHED UP WITH FRAMES. SUBFLOOR IS UNENCLOSED - BUILDING REGULATIONS;
OR FLASHING. - CURRENT ISSUES OF AUSTRALIAN STANDARDS & MANUFACTURER'S
- PROVIDE V-JOINTS IN RENDER & FINISHING PLASTER WHERE BRICK WORK ABUTS OR JOINS ONTO
SPECIFICATIONS & INSTALLATION DETAILS FOR MATERIALS USED.
- PROVIDE DAMP PROOF COURSES (DPC) IN THE BOTTOM 3 COURSES OF BRICK WORK AND SLAB FLOORS CONCRETE SLAB ONGROUND OR ENCLOSURE BY EXTERNAL WALL, METAL MESH AS DIMENSIONS ARE SUBJECT TO SITE MEASUREMENT & VERIFICATION.
AND/OR FOOTINGS. DPC ADDITIVE SHALL BE CLEAR IN ALL FACEWORK. CONCRETE WORK. ABOVE OR FLOORING LESS THAN 400MM ABOVE GROUND LEVEL TO BE NON- DO NOT SCALE OFF THIS DRAWING. PLANS COPYRIGHT MATT BRADLEY DESIGNS PTY LTD
- SETOUT BRICKWORK ACCURATELY, PLUMP, LEVEL AND PROPERLY BONDED. RISING WORK TO BE COMBUSTIBLE, NATURALLY FIRE RESISTANT TIMBER OR PROTECTED ON THE PROJECT ADDRESS
RAKED BACK, JAMBS, REVEALS, CORNERS, PERPENDS, ETC TO BE TRUE, PLUMB AND IN LINE WITH
PERPENDS TRUE LINE. SETOUT DOOR FRAMES NEAR PERPENDICULAR WALL WITH A MERGIN OF 12mm
13.0 FLOORING FINISHES
- CARPET FLOOR COVERINGS TO NOMINATED AREAS COMPLETE WITH SELECTED UNDERLAY
UNDERSIDE WITH SARKING OR MINERAL WOOL INSULATION 411 BLACK PINCH ROAD,COOTHARABA
EXTERNAL PARTS LESS THAN 400MM ABOVE GROUND OR DECKS ETC TO BE OF NON-
OR GREATER THAN 50mm SMOOTH EDGE, DIMINISHING STRIPS ETC, TO COMPLETE THE WORKS: REFER TO DRAWINGS AND WALLS COMBUSTIBLE MATERIAL, 6MM FIBRE CEMENT. CLAD OR BUSHFIRE QLD 4565
- PROVIDE 12mm PLASTERING MARGIN BETWEEN WINDOW FRAME AND INTERNAL BRICKWORK TO BE FINISHES SCHEDULE. RESISTANT/NATURALLY FIRE RESISTANT TIMBER DRAW ING TITLE
PLASTERED. - PROVIDE TILED FLOOR FINISHES TO NOMINATED AREAS COMPLETE WITH ALL MATERIALS, ANGLE
- WHERE NECESSARY REINFORCE BELOW AND OVER OPENINGS WITH GALVANISED WOVEN WIRE
FABRIC 75mm WIDE IN CENTRE OF EACH LEAF OPENING EXTENDING ALUMINIUM OF 600mm BEYOND
TRIMS ETC. TO COMPLETE THE WORKS: REFER TO DRAWINGS AND FINISHES SCHEDULE.
- PROVIDE TIMBER FLOOR FINISHES TO NOMINATED AREAS COMPLETE WITH ALL MATERIALS,
EXTERNAL
WINDOWS
4MM GRADE 'A' SAFETY GLASS OR GLASS BLOCKS WITHIN 400MM OF GROUND, DECK
ETC WITH OPENABLE PORTION METAL SCREENED WITH FRAME OF METAL OR METAL CONSTRUCTION LEGEND
THE OPENING. DIMINISHING BOARDS ETC TO COMPLETE THE WORKS: FLOOR BOARDS TO BE SANDED AND REINFORCED PVC-U OR BUSHFIRE RESISTING TIMBER
POLISHED TO HIGH STANDARD WITH PREMIUM QUALITY SEALER (2 COATS). REFER TO DRAWINGS EXTERNAL SCREENED WITH STEEL, BRONZE OR ALUMINUM MESH OR
BUILD IN ALCOR/PGI FLASHINGS AS FOLLOWS: AND FINISHES SCHEDULE. DOORS GLAZED WITH 5MM TOUGHENED GLASS, NONCOMBUSTIBLE OR 35MM SOLID TIMBER
- WHEREVER SHOWN ON DRAWINGS. FOR 400MM ABOVE THRESHOLD, METAL OR NATURALLY FIRE RESISTANT (HIGH CLIENT
MATT PAVELICH AND JUSTINE OXLEY
- CAVITY WALLS BUILT OF SLAB ON GROUND (WHERE NOT PARGED). 14.0 SIGNAGE DENSITY) TIMBER FRAMED FOR 400MM ABOVE GROUND, DECKING, ETC, TIGHT-FITTING
- WHERE NECESSARY SUPPLY & FIX SELECTED UNIT AND HOUSE NUMBERS TO EACH UNIT AND TO WITH WEATHER STRIPS AT BASE DRAW N
- OVER LINTELS TO EXPOSED OPENINGS - EXTEND THE FULL WIDTH OF OUTER LEAF CONTINUOUS
ACROSS CAVITY 50mm INTO INNER LEAF 2c ABOVE. LETTERBOXES AS SCHEDULED. KD/EB
ROOFS NON-COMBUSTIBLE COVERING. ROOF/WALL JUNCTION SEALED. OPENINGS FITTED
- OVER ROOF - EXTEND THE FULL WIDTH OF EXTERNAL LEAF, STEPPED TO ROOF SLOPE TURNED
DOWN MIN. 50mm OVER BASE FLASHING. TURN UP IN CAVITY SLOPING INWARDS AND BUILT INTO 15.0 PAVING WITH NON-COMBUSTIBLE EMBER GUARDS.
SCALE
1 : 100 @ A3
- GENERALLY: WHEN PAVING IS INCLUDED IN THE BUILDING CONTRACT THE FOLLOWING SHALL VERANDAHS, ENCLOSED SUB-FLOOR SPACE – NO SPECIAL REQUIREMENT FOR MATERIALS EXCEPT
INNER LEAF 1c ABOVE.
- DOOR/WINDOW STILES - EXTEND THE FULL HEIGHT 150mm WIDE FIXED TO FRAMES INTERLEAVED APPLY AS A MINIMUM STANDARD. DECKS ETC. WITHIN 400MM OF GROUND. NO SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS FOR SUPPORTS
DATE
2022-04-19
WITH SILL AND HEAD FLASHING AT EACH END. ꞏ SUPPLY AND LAY ALL PAVING TO EXTERNAL AREAS AS SHOWN ON WORKING DRAWINGS. OR FRAMING. DECKING TO BE NON-COMBUSTIBLE OR BUSHFIRE RESISTANT WITHIN
- STRUCTURE OR SERVICES WITHIN 30mm OF OUTER BRICK LEAF IN CAVITY: VERTICAL FLASHING ꞏ CUT, FILL & COMPACT SAND TO REQUIRED LEVELS. SCREED TO UNIFORM THINNESS AND LEVELS 300MM HORIZONTALLY AND 400MM VERTICALLY FROM A GLAZED ELEMENT
PROJECT NO.
2022032
CONTINUOUS 1c BELOW FL TO ABOVE STRUCTURE OR FRAME. NOMINAL 300m WIDE. ꞏ PROVIDE BRICK EDGE RETAINING FOOTING EMBEDDED IN MORTAR BENEATH THE PAVING BRICK
WD-02
DRAW ING NO.
- FOR HORIZONTAL STRUCTURES/SERVICES: CONTINUOUS FLASHING BUILT IN AS FOR OVER LINTELS. ꞏ TO DRIVEWAY AREAS, PROVIDE NOMINAL 300x150mm CONCRETE FOOTING ALONG PERIMETER OF rev:
- AT CAVITY WALLS WITH GLASS BLOCK 300mm WIDE FIXED TO GLASS BLOCK FRAME AND TURNED DRIVEWAY AND BED EDGE BRICK IN MORTAR.
AWAY IN CAVITY FROM INNER LEAF. QBCC LICENCE: 15025395
Page 27
PR
OP
E RT
Y
NORTH
SITE NOTES: REVISION
No. DATE DESCRIPTION ISS. BY
ꞏ UNLESS A SURVEY PLAN WAS
PROVIDED ASSUME COUNCIL MAPPING
WAS USED. DISCLAIMER: COUNCIL
PR
MAPPING MAY BE OFF AND WE WON'T
OP
TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR INCORRECT
RTE
MAPPING. CLIENT TO PROVIDE SURVEY
Y
PLAN FOR BUILDER TO CHECK.
ꞏ CONFIRM ALL DIMENSIONS ON SITE TO
EXISTING RESIDENCE PRIOR TO
COMMENCEMENT OF ANY WORK.
ꞏ ALL BUILDING WORK TO BE CARRIED
OUT IN ACCORDANCE WITH A.S.1684 AND
THE B.C.A. AND ALL OTHER RELEVANT
CODES AND STANDARDS.
ꞏ EXISTING PLUMBING AND ELECTRICAL
WORKS TO BE REMOVED AND MADE
GOOD AS NECESSARY.
ꞏ THIS PLAN IS TO BE READ IN
CONJUNCTION WITH LANDSCAPING
PR
DETAIL PLANS FOR SPECIFIC PLANTING
LOCATIONS.
OP
ꞏ THE EXACT LOCATION OF
E
RT
UNDERGROUND AND ABOVEGROUND
Y
SERVICES SHALL BE PROVEN ON SITE.
NO GUARANTEE IS GIVEN THAT ALL
EXISTING SERVICES ARE SHOWN.
ꞏ THIS DRAWING SET TO BE READ IN
CONJUNCTION WITH THE SPECIFICATION
PROVIDED.
ꞏ BEWARE OF EXISTING SERVICES.
PROPERTY
CONFIRM LOCATIONS PRIOR TO
EXCAVATION. TAKE EXTREME CARE.
ꞏ REFER ALL MAJOR WORKS TO RAMPS,
WALKWAYS, DRIVEWAYS ETC
BLACK PIN
(INCLUDING CARPARK WORKS, LEVELS &
DATUMS) REFER TO CIVIL ENGINEERS
DOCUMENTATION.
ꞏ ALL EFFLUENT & WASTE WATER TO BE
CONNECTED TO COUNCIL SEWERAGE
LINE AS PER COUNCIL & ESTATE
REQUIREMENTS U.N.O.
ꞏ ALL ROOF RAINWATER TO BE DIRECTED
TO PROPERTY BOUNDARY FOR
A .
DISTRIBUTION TO THE ROOF WATER
D.
HARVESTING SCHEME AS PER
R
REQUIREMENTS.
O
F T I ON
ꞏ CONTRACT DOCUMENTS AND
CH ROAD
E
ENGINEERS DRAWINGS AND
PROPER
U
SPECIFICATIONS ARE TO TAKE
I S S T F O R CO TRUC
PRECEDENCE OVER THESE PLANS.
DEMOLITION NOTES:
N S
TY
PROPOSED CARPORT
ꞏ CAP OFF EXISTING PLUMBING AND
(BY
ELECTRICAL WORKS AS NECESSARY BY
CERTIFIED TRADESPERSON. NO
matt bradley designs
PROPOSED PRIMARY
ꞏ MODIFIED BRICKWORK TO BE DWELLING
TOOTHED INTO EXISTING WHERE (HOUSE
©MATT BRADLEY DESIGNS - ACN: 637 963 396 - ABN: 53 637 963 396
APPLICABLE AND CAVITY TO REMAIN www.mattbradleydesigns.com.au - [email protected] - 0488 554 020
ALL DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION METHODS & MATERIALS TO BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH:
CONTINUOUS AT ALL TIMES. - THE BUILDING CODE OF AUSTRALIA (BCA);
- THE QUEENSLAND DEVELOPER CODE (QDC);
- BUILDING REGULATIONS;
ꞏ EXISTING MATERIALS TO BE REUSED APPROX. WASTEWATER
- CURRENT ISSUES OF AUSTRALIAN STANDARDS & MANUFACTURER'S
SPECIFICATIONS & INSTALLATION DETAILS FOR MATERIALS USED.
TO OWNERS DETAIL. LOCATION
DIMENSIONS ARE SUBJECT TO SITE MEASUREMENT & VERIFICATION.
FASCIA
DO NOT SCALE OFF THIS DRAWING. PLANS COPYRIGHT MATT BRADLEY DESIGNS PTY LTD
23930
ꞏ MATERIALS REMOVED FROM SITE
18224
PROJECT ADDRESS
MUST BE DISPOSED OF AS PER 411 BLACK PINCH ROAD,COOTHARABA
COUNCIL REGULATIONS. QLD 4565
ꞏ INVESTIGATON SHOULD BE PROPERTY
DRAW ING TITLE
UNDERTAKEN BEFORE ALL WORKS BOUNDARY
THAT REQUIRES EXCAVATION 39060
PROPERT
Y LOCALITY PLAN
PR
FASCIA OP
STAGING NOTES: E RT
Y CLIENT
MATT PAVELICH AND JUSTINE OXLEY
ꞏ STAGE 1 - HOUSE RELOCATION AND CARPORT
DRAW N
ꞏ STAGE 2 - BATHROOM RENOVATION KD/EB
TY
PE R 1 : 2000 @ A3
PROPOSED DRIVEWAY TO COMPLY WITH AO8 & AO9 of the SCALE
Low Density Housing Code
PRO DATE
2022-04-19
PROPOSED CROSSOVER PROJECT NO.
2022032
1 LOCALITY PLAN
0 1 2 4 6 8 10 20m
WD-03
DRAW ING NO.
rev:
1 : 2000 QBCC LICENCE: 15025395
SCALE = 1:200
Page 28
WD-12
2 NORTH
REVISION
No. DATE DESCRIPTION ISS. BY
1 WD-12
PROPOSED
WD-11 2 PRIMARY
DWELLING
(HOUSE RELOCATION)
PROPOSED
CARPORT
(BY OTHERS)
PROPOSE
D PATH
PROPOSED
DRIVEWAY
D. A .
R
CARPORT FASCIA
E O
F T I ON
FASCIA
23345
U
FASCIA
23570
23930
I S S T F O R CO TRUC
1
N S
WD-11
NO
matt bradley designs
©MATT BRADLEY DESIGNS - ACN: 637 963 396 - ABN: 53 637 963 396
www.mattbradleydesigns.com.au - [email protected] - 0488 554 020
ALL DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION METHODS & MATERIALS TO BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH:
- THE BUILDING CODE OF AUSTRALIA (BCA);
- THE QUEENSLAND DEVELOPER CODE (QDC);
- BUILDING REGULATIONS;
- CURRENT ISSUES OF AUSTRALIAN STANDARDS & MANUFACTURER'S
SPECIFICATIONS & INSTALLATION DETAILS FOR MATERIALS USED.
DIMENSIONS ARE SUBJECT TO SITE MEASUREMENT & VERIFICATION.
DO NOT SCALE OFF THIS DRAWING. PLANS COPYRIGHT MATT BRADLEY DESIGNS PTY LTD
PROJECT ADDRESS
411 BLACK PINCH ROAD,COOTHARABA
QLD 4565
DRAW ING TITLE
SITE PLAN
PROPERTY
CLIENT
MATT PAVELICH AND JUSTINE OXLEY
DRAW N
KD/EB
SCALE
1 : 200 @ A3
DATE
2022-04-19
PROJECT NO.
2022032
1 SITE PLAN
0 1 2 4 6 8 10 20m
WD-04
DRAW ING NO.
rev:
1 : 200 QBCC LICENCE: 15025395
SCALE = 1:200
Page 29
REVISION
NOTES: No. DATE DESCRIPTION ISS. BY
BUILDER TO VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS
PRIOR TO ORDERING ANY MATERIALS
DEMOLITION LEGEND
SYMBOL DESCRIPTION
DEMOLISHED WALL
DEMOLISHED TIMBER FLOOR/SUBFLOOR
DEMOLISHED 300 X 300 TILE
DEMOLISHED 600 X 600 TILE 70 1430 70 2950 70 2350 70 2400 70 2360 70 1760 140 1770 70 900 70 1945 70
DEMOLISHED TILE ROOF
DEMOLISHED SHEET METAL ROOF 70 1570 140 1440 70
200 - 240 DIA. POSTS
70
2930
DECK
BLOCK WALL BLOCK PIER
70
100 x 70 H/W BEARER
(TYPICAL HOUSE)
2810
HOUSE
BLOCK WALL
75
90 x 90
SHS POST
LANDING DECK
.
2195
A
ABOVE
HOUSE
.
ABOVE
O R D
F T I ON
75
STUD WALL
HOUSE
U E
I S S T F O R CO S TRUC
2745
150 x 75 H/W
BEARERS N
140 x 45 H/W JOISTS @
NO
450 CENTERS
matt bradley designs
240 x 70 H/W BEARER DECK ©MATT BRADLEY DESIGNS - ACN: 637 963 396 - ABN: 53 637 963 396
140 x 45 H/W www.mattbradleydesigns.com.au - [email protected] - 0488 554 020
JOISTS @ 450
ABOVE ALL DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION METHODS & MATERIALS TO BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH:
- THE BUILDING CODE OF AUSTRALIA (BCA);
CENTRES DEMO 145 x 70 H/W BEARER (DECK
- THE QUEENSLAND DEVELOPER CODE (QDC);
- BUILDING REGULATIONS;
- CURRENT ISSUES OF AUSTRALIAN STANDARDS & MANUFACTURER'S
2930
TYPICAL) SPECIFICATIONS & INSTALLATION DETAILS FOR MATERIALS USED.
DIMENSIONS ARE SUBJECT TO SITE MEASUREMENT & VERIFICATION.
DECK DO NOT SCALE OFF THIS DRAWING. PLANS COPYRIGHT MATT BRADLEY DESIGNS PTY LTD
PROJECT ADDRESS
411 BLACK PINCH ROAD,COOTHARABA
QLD 4565
DRAW ING TITLE
70
EXISTING / DEMO POST
SETOUT
CLIENT
MATT PAVELICH AND JUSTINE OXLEY
DRAW N
KD/EB
SCALE
1 : 100 @ A3
DATE
2022-04-19
PROJECT NO.
2022032
1 EXISTING / DEMO POST SETOUT
0 0.5 1 2 3 4 5 10m
WD-05
DRAW ING NO.
rev:
1 : 100 QBCC LICENCE: 15025395
SCALE = 1:100
Page 30
REVISION
NOTES: No. DATE DESCRIPTION ISS. BY
BUILDER TO VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS
PRIOR TO ORDERING ANY MATERIALS
DEMOLITION LEGEND
SYMBOL DESCRIPTION
DEMOLISHED WALL
DEMOLISHED TIMBER FLOOR/SUBFLOOR
DEMOLISHED 300 X 300 TILE
DEMOLISHED 600 X 600 TILE
DEC
DEMOLISHED TILE ROOF K
DEMOLISHED SHEET METAL ROOF
AIR
BED
03 W/
BED
DININ 04 BATHROOM
G KIT.
REF
LANDING TO BE LANDING
RETAINED AND LINEN
WC
RECONFIGURED ON
SITE
2ND LIVING
SITTING LIVIN
G
AIR
DEC
.
K
A
BED BED
D.
02 01
DEC
E O R
F T I ON
U
K
I S S T F O R CO
NO
N S TRUC
matt bradley designs
©MATT BRADLEY DESIGNS - ACN: 637 963 396 - ABN: 53 637 963 396
www.mattbradleydesigns.com.au - [email protected] - 0488 554 020
ALL DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION METHODS & MATERIALS TO BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH:
- THE BUILDING CODE OF AUSTRALIA (BCA);
- THE QUEENSLAND DEVELOPER CODE (QDC);
- BUILDING REGULATIONS;
- CURRENT ISSUES OF AUSTRALIAN STANDARDS & MANUFACTURER'S
SPECIFICATIONS & INSTALLATION DETAILS FOR MATERIALS USED.
DIMENSIONS ARE SUBJECT TO SITE MEASUREMENT & VERIFICATION.
DO NOT SCALE OFF THIS DRAWING. PLANS COPYRIGHT MATT BRADLEY DESIGNS PTY LTD
PROJECT ADDRESS
411 BLACK PINCH ROAD,COOTHARABA
QLD 4565
DRAW ING TITLE
EXISTING / DEMO FIRST
FLOOR
CLIENT
MATT PAVELICH AND JUSTINE OXLEY
DRAW N
KD/EB
SCALE
1 : 100 @ A3
DATE
2022-04-19
PROJECT NO.
2022032
1 EXISTING / DEMO FIRST FLOOR
0 0.5 1 2 3 4 5 10m
WD-06
DRAW ING NO.
rev:
1 : 100 QBCC LICENCE: 15025395
SCALE = 1:100
Page 31
REVISION
NOTES: No. DATE DESCRIPTION ISS. BY
BUILDER TO VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS
PRIOR TO ORDERING ANY MATERIALS
DEMOLITION LEGEND
SYMBOL DESCRIPTION
1835 3010 11700 2770
DEMOLISHED WALL
DEMOLISHED TIMBER FLOOR/SUBFLOOR
DEMOLISHED 300 X 300 TILE 320 15685 320
O/H O/H
DEMOLISHED 600 X 600 TILE
DEMOLISHED TILE ROOF
DEMOLISHED SHEET METAL ROOF
O/H
320
3345
8°
EXISTING SHEET
METAL ROOF
22.5 °
3640
4235
8°
EXISTING SHEET
METAL ROOF EXISTING SHEET
METAL ROOF
9° 9° 22.5 ° 22.5 °
14740
14100
610
D. A .
O R
9°
F T I ON
22.5 °
U E
I S S T F O R CON S TRUC
7145
7145
NO
matt bradley designs
8°
©MATT BRADLEY DESIGNS - ACN: 637 963 396 - ABN: 53 637 963 396
www.mattbradleydesigns.com.au - [email protected] - 0488 554 020
ALL DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION METHODS & MATERIALS TO BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH:
- THE BUILDING CODE OF AUSTRALIA (BCA);
- THE QUEENSLAND DEVELOPER CODE (QDC);
- BUILDING REGULATIONS;
- CURRENT ISSUES OF AUSTRALIAN STANDARDS & MANUFACTURER'S
SPECIFICATIONS & INSTALLATION DETAILS FOR MATERIALS USED.
DIMENSIONS ARE SUBJECT TO SITE MEASUREMENT & VERIFICATION.
DO NOT SCALE OFF THIS DRAWING. PLANS COPYRIGHT MATT BRADLEY DESIGNS PTY LTD
PROJECT ADDRESS
411 BLACK PINCH ROAD,COOTHARABA
O/H
320
QLD 4565
DRAW ING TITLE
EXISTING / DEMO ROOF PLAN
320 18675 320
O/H O/H CLIENT
MATT PAVELICH AND JUSTINE OXLEY
1835 3010 7420 7050 DRAW N
KD/EB
SCALE
1 : 100 @ A3
DATE
2022-04-19
PROJECT NO.
2022032
1 EXISTING / DEMO ROOF PLAN
0 0.5 1 2 3 4 5 10m
WD-07
DRAW ING NO.
rev:
1 : 100 QBCC LICENCE: 15025395
SCALE = 1:100
Page 32
NORTH
NOTES: REVISION
LICENSED PLUMBER TO VERIFY DOWNPIPE No. DATE DESCRIPTION ISS. BY
DECK
NUMBERS AND POSITIONS PRIOR TO
CONSTRUCTION OR ORDERING
PLATFORM IMMEDIATELY SURROUNDING
DWELLING TO FALL AWAY AT A SLOPE OF 1 IN 20.
SURFACE DRAINAGE TO DISCHARGE EVENLY
WITHOUT NUISANCE TO ADJOINING PROPERTIES
SITE TO BE SCRAPED CLEAN OF VEGETATION TO
BUILDING AREA
ALL LEVELS SHOWN ARE INDICATIVE ONLY AND
ARE TO BE CONFIRMED ON SITE. NO
RESPONSIBILITY TAKEN FOR ANY LEVELS SHOWN.
SURVEYORS PLANS TO TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER ENGINEERS TO SPECIFY
ANY LEVELS SHOWN ON THESE DOCUMENTS HOUSE POSTS FOR DOUBLE
LANDING BEARERS
ABOVE DECK ABOVE
PLUMBER TO DESIGN GROUNDWATER DRAINAGE ABOVE HOUSE
SYSTEM. ONE (1) YARD GULLY STANDARD ABOVE
NOTE: ENGINEERS DETAILS, DRAWINGS &
SPECIFICATIONS TO TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER
THESE DRAWINGS
HOUSE
BUILDER TO VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO
ORDERING ANY MATERIALS
SEAL ALL WET AREAS IN ACCORDANCE WITH AS
3740 & BCA REQUIREMENTS GRAVAL PAD ON GROUND
REFER TO ENGINEER'S
PLUMBER RESPONSIBLE TO LOCATE AND CONFIRM NEW DRAWINGS AND
SEWER HOUSE CONNECTION LOCATION DECK SPECIFICATIONS
ACCURATELY PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT. ABOVE
PLUMBER IS TO VERIFY WITH SITE SUPERVISOR HOUSE ABOVE SSL 140200
PRIOR TO SETTING OUT FIXTURE DRAINAGE DECK
POINTS. NO AMENDMENTS OR SPECIAL FIXTURES
HAVE BEEN NOMINATED
REFER TO SPECIFICATION FOR ALL CONCRETE
SLAB FINISHES
WHERE SERVICES / PIPEWORK ARE LOCATED
.
UNDER DRIVEWAYS AND SLABS CONTRACTORS
D. A
ARE TO ENSURE ADEQUATE COMPACTION TO
R
TRENCH BACKFILL ACHIEVED TO SUPPORT
O
CONCRETE
F T I ON
PROPOSED
U E
REBATE GARAGE DOORS & SLIDING GLASS DOORS
I S S T F O R CO TRUC
20mm, AND SHOWER RECESSES 40mm IN
LOCATIONS SHOWN ACCORDING TO MANUF' SPEC.
OR BUILDERS DIRECTIONS N S
DEVELOPMENT SEWER CONNECTION DETAILS NO
AND INFORMATION WAS UNAVAILABLE AT THE
TIME OF WORKING DRAWINGS PREPARATION.
matt bradley designs
©MATT BRADLEY DESIGNS - ACN: 637 963 396 - ABN: 53 637 963 396
PLUMBER IS RESPONSIBLE TO DETERMINE
www.mattbradleydesigns.com.au - [email protected] - 0488 554 020
ALL DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION METHODS & MATERIALS TO BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH:
CONNECTION INFORMATION FROM - THE BUILDING CODE OF AUSTRALIA (BCA);
- THE QUEENSLAND DEVELOPER CODE (QDC);
- BUILDING REGULATIONS;
DEVELOPER AND TO COMPLY WITH ALL - CURRENT ISSUES OF AUSTRALIAN STANDARDS & MANUFACTURER'S
SPECIFICATIONS & INSTALLATION DETAILS FOR MATERIALS USED.
RELEVANT DETAILS AND REQUIREMENTS DIMENSIONS ARE SUBJECT TO SITE MEASUREMENT & VERIFICATION.
DO NOT SCALE OFF THIS DRAWING. PLANS COPYRIGHT MATT BRADLEY DESIGNS PTY LTD
PROJECT ADDRESS
411 BLACK PINCH ROAD,COOTHARABA
QLD 4565
SUBTERRANEAN TERMITES: DRAW ING TITLE
SUBTERRANEAN TERMITE PROTECTION TO BE IN NEW POST / SLAB SETOUT
ACCORDANCE WITH AS 3660. KORDON PHYSICAL
TERMITE BARRIER TO PERIMETER AND ALL SLAB
PLAN
PROTRUSIONS / PENETRATIONS. 80MM MIN CLIENT
MATT PAVELICH AND JUSTINE OXLEY
EXPOSED SLAB FACE TO PERIMETER TO ACT AS DRAW N
VISUAL DETECTION SYSTEM AGAINST TERMITE KD/EB
INFESTATION AS PER AS3660 AND ALL RELATED SCALE
1 : 100 @ A3
CODES. ANY OTHER SYSTEM USED MUST BE A
CERTIFIED SYSTEM TO BCA REQUIREMENTS.
DATE
2022-04-19
PROJECT NO.
2022032
0 0.5 1 2 3 4 5 10m
WD-08
DRAW ING NO.
rev:
QBCC LICENCE: 15025395
SCALE = 1:100
Page 33
NORTH
NOTES: NEW BATHROOM AND
REVISION
No. DATE DESCRIPTION ISS. BY
REFER ENGINEERS DRAWINGS LAUNDRY CUP'D
& SPECIFICATIONS FOR ALL DEC 71070 STAGE 2
STRUCTURAL DETAILS, K
FRAMING, BRACING, TIE DOWN NEW STAIRS
AND SLAB/FOOTING DETAILS
NEW
RAILING BED
BUILDER TO VERIFY ALL AIR
03 DR
DIMENSIONS ON SITE PRIOR TO
1810
ORDERING MATERIALS W/
SEAL WET AREAS IN 4800 6000
EXISTING DININ STUDY
ACCORDANCE WITH AS3740 & LANDING IN KIT.
70
G
BCA REQUIREMENTS NEW POSITION BATHROOM
STAGE 2
PROVIDE FLOOR WASTE TO ALL
REF
WET AREAS
SMOKE ALARMS TO BE FITTED LINEN NEW STAIRS
IN ACCORDANCE WITH BCA WC
STAIRS, HANDRAILS AND
BALUSTRADING TO BE
1200
CONSTRUCTED IN 2ND LIVING
ACCORDANCE WITH BCA P3.9.2
AND ALL RELEVANT CODES AND SITTING LIVIN
EQUIREMENTS G
LIFT OFF HINGES TO BE FITTED
TO WC DOORS AND ENCLOSED
SPACES WHERE REQUIRED IN AIR
ACCORDANCE BCA P3.8.3.3 PROPOSED
NEW PROPOSED
6000
PATH
5120
BED BED DECK CARPORT
ANY NEW WINDOWS TO WET 02 01
AREAS MAY BE REQUIRED TO
BE TOUGHENED SAFETY GLASS
DEC
PROVIDE MECHANICAL K
VENTILATION AND DIRECTLY
VENT TO THE OUTSIDE OF THE
BUILDING (E.G. USING DUCTING
TO A SOFFIT VENT)
UPPER FLOOR: HARDIES
A .
'SECURA' FLOORING TO TILED
D.
AREAS 1500
PROPOSED DRIVEWAY
E O R
F T I ON
U
I S S T F O R CON S TRUC
NO
matt bradley designs
©MATT BRADLEY DESIGNS - ACN: 637 963 396 - ABN: 53 637 963 396
www.mattbradleydesigns.com.au - [email protected] - 0488 554 020
ALL DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION METHODS & MATERIALS TO BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH:
- THE BUILDING CODE OF AUSTRALIA (BCA);
- THE QUEENSLAND DEVELOPER CODE (QDC);
- BUILDING REGULATIONS;
- CURRENT ISSUES OF AUSTRALIAN STANDARDS & MANUFACTURER'S
SPECIFICATIONS & INSTALLATION DETAILS FOR MATERIALS USED.
DIMENSIONS ARE SUBJECT TO SITE MEASUREMENT & VERIFICATION.
DO NOT SCALE OFF THIS DRAWING. PLANS COPYRIGHT MATT BRADLEY DESIGNS PTY LTD
PROJECT ADDRESS
411 BLACK PINCH ROAD,COOTHARABA
QLD 4565
DRAW ING TITLE
EXISTING HOME AREAS NEW HOME AREAS NEW FIRST FLOOR
FRONT DECK: 84.2m² FRONT DECK: 84.2m²
FIRST LEVEL: 170.0m² FIRST LEVEL: 170.0m²
REAR DECK: 7.3m² REAR DECK: 9.1m² CLIENT
MATT PAVELICH AND JUSTINE OXLEY
DRAW N
TOTAL: 261.5m² TOTAL: 263.3m² KD/EB
MEASURED TO OUTSIDE FACE OF WALL MEASURED TO OUTSIDE FACE OF WALL SCALE
1 : 100 @ A3
DATE
2022-04-19
PROJECT NO.
2022032
1 NEW FIRST FLOOR
0 0.5 1 2 3 4 5 10m
WD-09
DRAW ING NO.
rev:
1 : 100 QBCC LICENCE: 15025395
SCALE = 1:100
Page 34
NOTES: NORTH
REVISION
PLUMBER TO VERIFY ALL DETAILS No. DATE DESCRIPTION ISS. BY
PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF
WORK /ORDERING
8°
PLUMBER RESPONSIBLE TO
CONFIRM ROOFWATER
DISCHARGE SYSTEM WITH ESTATE
AS CONS AND TO ENSURE
CORRECT CONNECTION IS
ACCESSED AND SYSTEM USED
GUTTERS AND DOWNPIPES: SHEET
ENSURE THAT ALL GUTTERS, BOX METAL ROOF
22.5 °
GUTTERS AND DOWNPIPES ARE
DESIGNED AND INSTALLED IN
ACCORDANCE WITH THE NCC VOL
8°
TWO PART 3.5.3. WITH A MAXMIUM SHEET METAL
DISTANCE BETWEEN DOWNPIPES ROOF SHEET METAL
OF 12M. ROOF
9° 9° ROOF AND CEILING
ALL SERVICES TO BE HIDDEN INSULATION TO
FORM VIEW AT STREET LEVEL TOTAL R3.5 6000 6000
22.5 ° MINIMUM 22.5 ° FASCIA
9°
22.5 °
10 °
PROPOSED CARPORT ROOF
6000
(BY MANUFACTURER)
8°
10 °
D. A .
E O R
F T I ON
U
I S S T F O R CON S TRUC
NO
matt bradley designs
©MATT BRADLEY DESIGNS - ACN: 637 963 396 - ABN: 53 637 963 396
www.mattbradleydesigns.com.au - [email protected] - 0488 554 020
ALL DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION METHODS & MATERIALS TO BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH:
- THE BUILDING CODE OF AUSTRALIA (BCA);
- THE QUEENSLAND DEVELOPER CODE (QDC);
- BUILDING REGULATIONS;
- CURRENT ISSUES OF AUSTRALIAN STANDARDS & MANUFACTURER'S
SPECIFICATIONS & INSTALLATION DETAILS FOR MATERIALS USED.
DIMENSIONS ARE SUBJECT TO SITE MEASUREMENT & VERIFICATION.
DO NOT SCALE OFF THIS DRAWING. PLANS COPYRIGHT MATT BRADLEY DESIGNS PTY LTD
PROJECT ADDRESS
411 BLACK PINCH ROAD,COOTHARABA
QLD 4565
DRAW ING TITLE
NEW ROOF PLAN
CLIENT
MATT PAVELICH AND JUSTINE OXLEY
DRAW N
KD/EB
SCALE
1 : 100 @ A3
DATE
2022-04-19
PROJECT NO.
2022032
1 NEW ROOF PLAN
0 0.5 1 2 3 4 5 10m
WD-10
DRAW ING NO.
rev:
1 : 100 QBCC LICENCE: 15025395
SCALE = 1:100
Page 35
REVISION
EXTERIOR MATERIAL & FINISHES No. DATE DESCRIPTION ISS. BY
SYMBOL DESCRIPTION FINISH COMMENTS
WB01 EXISTING PAINTED WEATHERBOARD CLADDING PT01 ROLL FINISH
FC01 EASYLAP FIBRE CEMENT SHEET PT02 ROLL FINISH
PT01 PAINT TBC PATCH & PAINT WHERE REQUIRED
PT02 PAINT TBC PATCH & PAINT WHERE REQUIRED
NOTE: ALL CLADDING AND FIRE RATED WALL SYSTEMS MUST BE INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH
MANUF' SPEC. POSITION CLADDING SHEETS AS SHOWN IN ELEVATIONS AS ACCURATELY AS POSSIBLE
1645
ROOF
LEVEL RL 144350
5845
3000
FRONT WB01 WB01 WB01 NEW REAR
DECK DECK
FIRST
PROPOSED CARPORT LEVEL RL 141350
1200
GROUND
LEVEL RL 140150
1 SOUTH
1 : 100
ELEVATION
D. A .
1645
E O R
F T I ON
U
I S S T F O R CO
ROOF
LEVEL RL 144350
N S TRUC
NO
5845
matt bradley designs
3000
WB01 WB01
©MATT BRADLEY DESIGNS - ACN: 637 963 396 - ABN: 53 637 963 396
www.mattbradleydesigns.com.au - [email protected] - 0488 554 020
ALL DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION METHODS & MATERIALS TO BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH:
- THE BUILDING CODE OF AUSTRALIA (BCA);
- THE QUEENSLAND DEVELOPER CODE (QDC);
FIRST - BUILDING REGULATIONS;
- CURRENT ISSUES OF AUSTRALIAN STANDARDS & MANUFACTURER'S
LEVEL RL 141350
SPECIFICATIONS & INSTALLATION DETAILS FOR MATERIALS USED.
DIMENSIONS ARE SUBJECT TO SITE MEASUREMENT & VERIFICATION.
DO NOT SCALE OFF THIS DRAWING. PLANS COPYRIGHT MATT BRADLEY DESIGNS PTY LTD
PROJECT ADDRESS
1200
GROUND 411 BLACK PINCH ROAD,COOTHARABA
LEVEL RL 140150 QLD 4565
DRAW ING TITLE
ELEVATIONS
CLIENT
MATT PAVELICH AND JUSTINE OXLEY
DRAW N
KD/EB
2 WEST ELEVATION SCALE
1 : 100 @ A3
1 : 100
DATE
2022-04-19
PROJECT NO.
2022032
0 0.5 1 2 3 4 5 10m
WD-11
DRAW ING NO.
rev:
QBCC LICENCE: 15025395
SCALE = 1:100
Page 36
NORTH
REVISION
EXTERIOR MATERIAL & FINISHES No. DATE DESCRIPTION ISS. BY
SYMBOL DESCRIPTION FINISH COMMENTS
WB01 EXISTING PAINTED WEATHERBOARD CLADDING PT01 ROLL FINISH
FC01 EASYLAP FIBRE CEMENT SHEET PT02 ROLL FINISH
PT01 PAINT TBC PATCH & PAINT WHERE REQUIRED
PT02 PAINT TBC PATCH & PAINT WHERE REQUIRED
NOTE: ALL CLADDING AND FIRE RATED WALL SYSTEMS MUST BE INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH
MANUF' SPEC. POSITION CLADDING SHEETS AS SHOWN IN ELEVATIONS AS ACCURATELY AS POSSIBLE
1645
ROOF
LEVEL RL 144350
5845
NEW FRONT
3000
REAR DECK
DECK WB01 WB01
WB01
FIRST
PROPOSED CARPORT LEVEL RL 141350
1200
GROUND
LEVEL RL 140150
2 NORTH
1 : 100
ELEVATION
D. A .
E O R
F T I ON
U
I S S T F O R CO TRUC
1645
ROOF N S
LEVEL RL 144350
NO
matt bradley designs
5845
©MATT BRADLEY DESIGNS - ACN: 637 963 396 - ABN: 53 637 963 396
www.mattbradleydesigns.com.au - [email protected] - 0488 554 020
3000
ALL DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION METHODS & MATERIALS TO BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH:
- THE BUILDING CODE OF AUSTRALIA (BCA);
WB01 - THE QUEENSLAND DEVELOPER CODE (QDC);
WB01
- BUILDING REGULATIONS;
- CURRENT ISSUES OF AUSTRALIAN STANDARDS & MANUFACTURER'S
SPECIFICATIONS & INSTALLATION DETAILS FOR MATERIALS USED.
DIMENSIONS ARE SUBJECT TO SITE MEASUREMENT & VERIFICATION.
DO NOT SCALE OFF THIS DRAWING. PLANS COPYRIGHT MATT BRADLEY DESIGNS PTY LTD
WB01 FIRST PROJECT ADDRESS
LEVEL RL 141350 411 BLACK PINCH ROAD,COOTHARABA
QLD 4565
BEARER
1200
1050
PROPOSED CARPORT GROUND DRAW ING TITLE
LEVEL RL 140150 ELEVATIONS
CLIENT
MATT PAVELICH AND JUSTINE OXLEY
DRAW N
KD/EB
1 EAST ELEVATION
SCALE
1 : 100 @ A3
1 : 100
DATE
2022-04-19
PROJECT NO.
2022032
0 0.5 1 2 3 4 5 10m
WD-12
DRAW ING NO.
rev:
QBCC LICENCE: 15025395
SCALE = 1:100
Page 37
NORTH
REVISION
ELECTRICAL LEGEND No. DATE DESCRIPTION ISS. BY
SYMBOL DESCRIPTION SYMBOL DESCRIPTION
LED BATTEN GPO SINGLE
RECESSED DOWNLIGHT GPO DOUBLE
PENDANT LIGHT (PL01) GPO DOUBLE WATERPROOF
PENDANT LIGHT (PL02) PH PHONE CONNECTION
VANITY LIGHT TV TELEVISION CONNECTION
LED STRIP LIGHT SWITCH POINT
SMOKE DETECTOR DIMMER SWITCH POINT
S.D
MOTION SENSOR MAIN SWITCH BOARD
CEILING FAN HWU HOT WATER UNIT
MV MECHANICAL VENTILATION
NOTE:
- ELECTRICIAN TO PROVIDE ELECTRICAL PLAN
- PROVIDE HARD-WIRED, INTERCONNECTED, PHOTOELECTRIC SMOKE
ALARMS WITH BATTERY BACK-UP, COMPLYING WITH AS3786
DEC
K
BED
03
STUD
DININ Y BATHROOM
G KIT.
S. S.
S.
LINEN
WC
D. A .
O R
S.
F T I ON
2ND LIVING
U E
S.
I S S T F O R CO
SITTING LIVIN
TRUC
G
S. S.
N S
NEW NO
BED BED DECK matt bradley designs
©MATT BRADLEY DESIGNS - ACN: 637 963 396 - ABN: 53 637 963 396
02 01 www.mattbradleydesigns.com.au - [email protected] - 0488 554 020
ALL DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION METHODS & MATERIALS TO BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH:
- THE BUILDING CODE OF AUSTRALIA (BCA);
- THE QUEENSLAND DEVELOPER CODE (QDC);
- BUILDING REGULATIONS;
- CURRENT ISSUES OF AUSTRALIAN STANDARDS & MANUFACTURER'S
DEC SPECIFICATIONS & INSTALLATION DETAILS FOR MATERIALS USED.
DIMENSIONS ARE SUBJECT TO SITE MEASUREMENT & VERIFICATION.
K
DO NOT SCALE OFF THIS DRAWING. PLANS COPYRIGHT MATT BRADLEY DESIGNS PTY LTD
PROJECT ADDRESS
411 BLACK PINCH ROAD,COOTHARABA
QLD 4565
DRAWING TITLE
ELECTRICAL PLAN
CLIENT
MATT PAVELICH AND JUSTINE OXLEY
DRAWN
KD/EB
SCALE
1 : 100 @ A3
DATE
2022-04-19
PROJECT NO.
2022032
1 FIRST LEVEL RCP
0 0.5 1 2 3 4 5 10m
WD-13
DRAWING NO.
rev:
1 : 100 QBCC LICENCE: 15025395
SCALE = 1:100
Page 38
Specialists in transport geotechnics
Attachment 2: Aerial
Imagery
10 May 2022 CGC-SR-2022-011-R01-Rev01 Page V
Page 39
2010
Aerial Image of 416-411, Black Pinch Road, Cootharaba – 2012 Aerial Image of 416-411, Black Pinch Road, Cootharaba – 2015
2018
Aerial Image of 416-411, Black Pinch Road, Cootharaba – 2017 Aerial Image of 416-411, Black Pinch Road, Cootharaba – 2019
REV DATE AMENDMENT / REVISION DESCRIPTION TITLE NAME DESIGNER CLIENT PROJECT TITLE
1 10/5/2022 FINAL
DESIGNER RP SLOPE RISK ASSESSMENT
416-411 BLACK PINCH ROAD
DESIGN CHECK
ICT COOTHARABA
TITLE
PROJECT MANAGER
RP HISTORICAL IMAGERY
PROJECT NO.
PROJECT DIRECTOR
ICT CGC-SR-2022-011
DESIGN LOT DRAWING NO. REVISION
CIVIL GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS FIGURE 2 01
Page 40
2010
Drone Image of 416-411, Black Pinch Road, Cootharaba – 06-05-2022 Drone Image of 416-411, Black Pinch Road, Cootharaba – 06-05-2022
2018
Drone Image of 416-411, Black Pinch Road, Cootharaba – 06-05-2022 Drone Image of 416-411, Black Pinch Road, Cootharaba – 06-05-2022
REV DATE AMENDMENT / REVISION DESCRIPTION TITLE NAME DESIGNER CLIENT PROJECT TITLE
1 10/5/2022 FINAL
DESIGNER RP SLOPE RISK ASSESSMENT
416-411 BLACK PINCH ROAD
DESIGN CHECK
ICT COOTHARABA
TITLE
PROJECT MANAGER
RP DRONE IMAGERY
PROJECT NO.
PROJECT DIRECTOR
ICT CGC-SR-2022-011
DESIGN LOT DRAWING NO. REVISION
CIVIL GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS FIGURE 2 01
Page 41
Specialists in transport geotechnics
Attachment 3: AGS
guidelines for Hillside
Construction
10 May 2022 CGC-SR-2022-011-R01-Rev01 Page VI
Page 42
PRACTICE NOTE GUIDELINES FOR LANDSLIDE RISK MANAGEMENT 2007
APPENDIX G - SOME GUIDELINES FOR HILLSIDE CONSTRUCTION
GOOD ENGINEERING PRACTICE POOR ENGINEERING PRACTICE
ADVICE
GEOTECHNICAL Obtain advice from a qualified, experienced geotechnical practitioner at early Prepare detailed plan and start site works before
ASSESSMENT stage of planning and before site works. geotechnical advice.
PLANNING
SITE PLANNING Having obtained geotechnical advice, plan the development with the risk Plan development without regard for the Risk.
arising from the identified hazards and consequences in mind.
DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION
Use flexible structures which incorporate properly designed brickwork, timber Floor plans which require extensive cutting and
or steel frames, timber or panel cladding. filling.
HOUSE DESIGN
Consider use of split levels. Movement intolerant structures.
Use decks for recreational areas where appropriate.
SITE CLEARING Retain natural vegetation wherever practicable. Indiscriminately clear the site.
ACCESS & Satisfy requirements below for cuts, fills, retaining walls and drainage. Excavate and fill for site access before
DRIVEWAYS Council specifications for grades may need to be modified. geotechnical advice.
Driveways and parking areas may need to be fully supported on piers.
EARTHWORKS Retain natural contours wherever possible. Indiscriminatory bulk earthworks.
Minimise depth. Large scale cuts and benching.
CUTS Support with engineered retaining walls or batter to appropriate slope. Unsupported cuts.
Provide drainage measures and erosion control. Ignore drainage requirements
Minimise height. Loose or poorly compacted fill, which if it fails,
Strip vegetation and topsoil and key into natural slopes prior to filling. may flow a considerable distance including
Use clean fill materials and compact to engineering standards. onto property below.
FILLS Batter to appropriate slope or support with engineered retaining wall. Block natural drainage lines.
Provide surface drainage and appropriate subsurface drainage. Fill over existing vegetation and topsoil.
Include stumps, trees, vegetation, topsoil,
boulders, building rubble etc in fill.
ROCK OUTCROPS Remove or stabilise boulders which may have unacceptable risk. Disturb or undercut detached blocks or
& BOULDERS Support rock faces where necessary. boulders.
Engineer design to resist applied soil and water forces. Construct a structurally inadequate wall such as
Found on rock where practicable. sandstone flagging, brick or unreinforced
RETAINING
Provide subsurface drainage within wall backfill and surface drainage on slope blockwork.
WALLS
above. Lack of subsurface drains and weepholes.
Construct wall as soon as possible after cut/fill operation.
Found within rock where practicable. Found on topsoil, loose fill, detached boulders
Use rows of piers or strip footings oriented up and down slope. or undercut cliffs.
FOOTINGS
Design for lateral creep pressures if necessary.
Backfill footing excavations to exclude ingress of surface water.
Engineer designed.
Support on piers to rock where practicable.
SWIMMING POOLS Provide with under-drainage and gravity drain outlet where practicable.
Design for high soil pressures which may develop on uphill side whilst there
may be little or no lateral support on downhill side.
DRAINAGE
Provide at tops of cut and fill slopes. Discharge at top of fills and cuts.
Discharge to street drainage or natural water courses. Allow water to pond on bench areas.
SURFACE Provide general falls to prevent blockage by siltation and incorporate silt traps.
Line to minimise infiltration and make flexible where possible.
Special structures to dissipate energy at changes of slope and/or direction.
Provide filter around subsurface drain. Discharge roof runoff into absorption trenches.
Provide drain behind retaining walls.
SUBSURFACE
Use flexible pipelines with access for maintenance.
Prevent inflow of surface water.
Usually requires pump-out or mains sewer systems; absorption trenches may Discharge sullage directly onto and into slopes.
SEPTIC &
be possible in some areas if risk is acceptable. Use absorption trenches without consideration
SULLAGE
Storage tanks should be water-tight and adequately founded. of landslide risk.
EROSION Control erosion as this may lead to instability. Failure to observe earthworks and drainage
CONTROL & Revegetate cleared area. recommendations when landscaping.
LANDSCAPING
DRAWINGS AND SITE VISITS DURING CONSTRUCTION
DRAWINGS Building Application drawings should be viewed by geotechnical consultant
SITE VISITS Site Visits by consultant may be appropriate during construction/
INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE BY OWNER
OWNER’S Clean drainage systems; repair broken joints in drains and leaks in supply
RESPONSIBILITY pipes.
Where structural distress is evident see advice.
If seepage observed, determine causes or seek advice on consequences.
Australian Geomechanics Vol 42 No 1 March 2007 113
Page 43
AUSTRALIAN GEOGUIDE LR6 (RETAINING WALLS)
RETAINING WALLS
Retaining walls are used to support cuts and fills. Some are built in the open and backfill is placed behind them (gravity
walls). Others are inserted into the ground (cast in situ or driven piles) and the ground is subsequently excavated on one
side. Retaining walls, like all man-made structures, have a finite life. Properly engineered walls should last 50 years, or
more, without needing significant repairs. However, not all walls fit this category. Some, particularly those built by
inexperienced tradesmen without engineering input, can deflect and even fail because they are unable to withstand the
pressures that develop in the ground around them or because the materials from which they are built deteriorate with
time. Design of retaining walls more than 900mm high should be undertaken by a geotechnical practitioner or
structural engineer and normally require local council approval.
Retaining walls have to withstand the weight of the ground on the high side, any water pressure forces that develop, any
additional load (surcharge) on the ground surface and sometimes swelling pressures from expansive clays. These
forces are resisted by the wall itself and the ground on the low side. Engineers calculate the forces that the retained
ground, the water, and the surcharge impose on a wall (the disturbing force) as well as the maximum force that the wall
and ground on the low side can provide to resist them (the restoring force). The ratio of the restoring force to the
disturbing force is called the "factor of safety" (GeoGuide LR1). Permanent retaining walls designed in accordance with
accepted engineering standards will normally have a factor of safety in the range 1.5 to 2.
Never add surcharge to the high side of a wall (e.g. place fill, erect a structure, stockpile bulk materials, or park vehicles)
unless you know the wall has been designed with that purpose in mind.
Never more than lightly water plants on the high side of a retaining wall.
Never excavate at the toe of a retaining wall.
Any of these actions will reduce the factor of safety of the wall and could
lead to failure. If in doubt about any aspect of an existing retaining wall, or
changes you would like to make near one, seek advice from a
geotechnical practitioner, or a structural engineer. This GeoGuide sets out
basic inspection requirements for retaining walls and identifies some
common signs that might indicate all is not well. GeoGuide LR11
provides information about records that should be kept.
GRAVITY WALLS
Gravity walls are so called because they rely on their own weight (the
force of gravity) to hold the ground behind in place.
Formed concrete and reinforced blockwork walls (Figure 1) - should Figure 1- Typical formed concrete wall
be built so the backfill can drain. They should be inspected at least once
a year. Look for signs of tilting, bulging, cracking, or a drop in ground
level on the high side, as any of these may indicate that the wall has
started to fail. Look for rust staining, which may indicate that the steel
reinforcement is deteriorating and the wall is losing structural strength
("concrete cancer"). Ensure that weep holes are clear and that water is
able to drain at all times, as high water pressures behind the wall can lead
to sudden and catastrophic failure.
Concrete “crib” walls (Figure 2) - should be filled with clean gravel, or
"blue metal" with a nominated grading. Sometimes soil is used to reduce
cost, but this is undesirable, from an engineering perspective, unless
internal drainage is incorporated in the wall's construction. Without
backfill drainage, a soil filled crib wall is likely to have a lower factor of
safety than is required. Crib walls should be inspected as for formed Figure 2 -Typical crib
concrete walls. In addition, you should check that material is not being lost
through the structure of the wall, which has large gaps through it.
Timber “crib” walls - should be checked as for concrete crib walls. In
addition, check the condition of the timber. Once individual elements
show signs of rotting, it is necessary to have the wall replaced. If you are
uncertain seek advice from a geotechnical practitioner, or a structural
engineer.
Masonry walls: natural stone, brick, or interlocking blocks (Figure 3) -
more than about 1m high, should be wider at the bottom than at the top
and include specific measures to permit drainage of the backfill. They
should be checked as for formed concrete walls. Natural stone walls
should be inspected for signs of deterioration of the individual blocks:
strength loss, corners becoming rounded, cracks appearing, or debris Figure 3 -Typical masonry wall
from the blocks collecting at the foot of the wall.
170 Australian Geomechanics Vol 42 No 1 March 2007
Page 44
AUSTRALIAN GEOGUIDE LR6 (RETAINING WALLS)
Old Masonry walls (Figure 4) - Many old masonry retaining walls have
not been built in accordance with modern design standards and often
have a low "factor of safety" (GeoGuide LR1). They may therefore be
close to failure and a minor change in their condition, or loading, could
initiate collapse. You need to take particular care with such structures
and seek professional advice sooner rather than later. Although masonry
walls sometimes deflect significantly over long periods of time collapse,
when it occurs, is usually sudden and can be catastrophic. Familiarity
with a particular situation can instil a false sense of confidence.
Reinforced soil walls (Figure 5) - are made of compacted select fill in
which layers of reinforcement are buried to form a "reinforced soil zone".
The reinforcement is all important, because it holds the soil "wall"
together. Reinforcement may be steel strip, or mesh, or a variety of
geosynthetic ("plastic") products. The facing panels are there to protect
Figure 4 - Poorly built masonry wall
the soil "wall" from erosion and give it a finished appearance.
Most reinforced soil walls are proprietary products. Construction should
be carried out strictly in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions.
Inspection and maintenance should be the same as for formed concrete
and concrete block walls. If unusual materials such as timber, or used
tyres, are used as a facing it should be checked to see that it is not rotting,
or perishing.
OTHER WALLS
Cantilevered and anchored walls (Figure 6) - rely on earth pressure on
the low side, rather than self-weight, to provided the restoring force and
an adequate factor of safety. These walls may comprise:
• a line of touching bored piers (contiguous bored pile wall) or
• sprayed concrete panels between bored piers (shotcrete wall) or
• horizontal timber or concrete planks spanning between upright timber Figure 5 - Typical reinforced soil wall
or steel soldier piles or
• steel sheet piles.
Depending on the form of construction and ground conditions, walls in
excess of 3 m height normally require at least one row of permanent
ground anchors.
INSPECTION
All walls should be inspected at least once a year, looking for tilting and
other signs of deterioration. Concrete walls should be inspected for
cracking and rust stains as for formed concrete gravity walls. Contiguous
bored pile walls can have gaps between the piles - look for loss of soil
from behind which can become a major difficulty if it is not corrected.
Timber walls should be inspected for rot, as for timber crib walls. Steel
sheet piles should be inspected for signs of rusting. In addition, you
should make sure that ground anchors are maintained as described in
Figure 6 - Typical cantilevered or
GeoGuide LR4 under the heading "Rock bolts and rock anchors".
anchored wall
One of the most important issues for walls is that their internal drainage systems are operational. Frequently verify that
internal drainage pipes and surface interception drains around the wall are not blocked nor have become inoperative.
More information relevant to your particular situation may be found in other Australian GeoGuides:
• GeoGuide LR1 - Introduction • GeoGuide LR7 - Landslide Risk
• GeoGuide LR2 - Landslides • GeoGuide LR8 - Hillside Construction
• GeoGuide LR3 - Landslides in Soil • GeoGuide LR9 - Effluent & Surface Water Disposal
• GeoGuide LR4 - Landslides in Rock • GeoGuide LR10 - Coastal Landslides
• GeoGuide LR5 - Water & Drainage • GeoGuide LR11 - Record Keeping
The Australian GeoGuides (LR series) are a set of publications intended for property owners; local councils; planning authorities;
developers; insurers; lawyers and, in fact, anyone who lives with, or has an interest in, a natural or engineered slope, a cutting, or an
excavation. They are intended to help you understand why slopes and retaining structures can be a hazard and what can be done with
appropriate professional advice and local council approval (if required) to remove, reduce, or minimise the risk they represent. The
GeoGuides have been prepared by the Australian Geomechanics Society, a specialist technical society within Engineers Australia, the
national peak body for all engineering disciplines in Australia, whose members are professional geotechnical engineers and engineering
geologists with a particular interest in ground engineering. The GeoGuides have been funded under the Australian governments’ National
Disaster Mitigation Program.
Australian Geomechanics Vol 42 No 1 March 2007 171
Page 45
AUSTRALIAN GEOGUIDE LR7 (LANDSLIDE RISK)
LANDSLIDE RISK landslide risk assessment for a particular site you
should expect to receive a report prepared in
Concept of Risk accordance with current professional guidelines and in
a form that is acceptable to your local council, or
Risk is a familiar term, but what does it really mean? It planning authority.
can be defined as "a measure of the probability and
severity of an adverse effect to health, property, or the Risk to Property
environment." This definition may seem a bit Table 1 indicates the terms used to describe risk to
complicated. In relation to landslides, geotechnical property. Each risk level depends on an assessment of
practitioners (GeoGuide LR1) are required to assess how likely a landslide is to occur and its consequences
risk in terms of the likelihood that a particular landslide in dollar terms. "Likelihood" is the chance of it
will occur and the possible consequences. This is called happening in any one year, as indicated in Table 2.
landslide risk assessment. The consequences of a "Consequences" are related to the cost of repairs and
landslide are many and varied, but our concerns temporary loss of use if a landslide occurs. These two
normally focus on loss of, or damage to, property and factors are combined by the geotechnical practitioner to
loss of life. determine the Qualitative Risk.
Landslide Risk Assessment TABLE 2: LIKELIHOOD
Some local councils in Australia are aware of the Likelihood Annual Probability
potential for landslides within their jurisdiction and have
Almost Certain 1:10
responded by designating specific “landslide hazard
Likely 1:100
zones". Development in these areas is often covered
by special regulations. If you are contemplating Possible 1:1,000
building, or buying an existing house, particularly in a Unlikely 1:10,000
hilly area, or near cliffs, go first for information to your Rare 1:100,000
local council. Barely credible 1:1,000,000
The terms "unacceptable", "may be tolerated", etc. in
Landslide risk assessment must be undertaken by
Table 1 indicate how most people react to an assessed
a geotechnical practitioner. It may involve visual
risk level. However, some people will always be more
inspection, geological mapping, geotechnical
prepared, or better able, to tolerate a higher risk level
investigation and monitoring to identify:
than others.
• potential landslides (there may be more than
Some local councils and planning authorities stipulate a
one that could impact on your site) maximum tolerable level of risk to property for
• the likelihood that they will occur developments within their jurisdictions. In these
• the damage that could result situations the risk must be assessed by a geotechnical
• the cost of disruption and repairs and practitioner. If stabilisation works are needed to meet
• the extent to which lives could be lost. the stipulated requirements these will normally have to
Risk assessment is a predictive exercise, but since the be carried out as part of the development, or consent
ground and the processes involved are complex, will be withheld.
prediction tends to lack precision. If you commission a
TABLE 1: RISK TO PROPERTY
Qualitative Risk Significance - Geotechnical engineering requirements
Very high VH Unacceptable without treatment. Extensive detailed investigation and research, planning and
implementation of treatment options essential to reduce risk to Low. May be too expensive and not
practical. Work likely to cost more than the value of the property.
High H Unacceptable without treatment. Detailed investigation, planning and implementation of treatment
options required to reduce risk to acceptable level. Work would cost a substantial sum in relation to
the value of the property.
Moderate M May be tolerated in certain circumstances (subject to regulator's approval) but requires
investigation, planning and implementation of treatment options to reduce the risk to Low.
Treatment options to reduce to Low risk should be implemented as soon as possible.
Low L Usually acceptable to regulators. Where treatment has been needed to reduce the risk to this
level, ongoing maintenance is required.
Very Low VL Acceptable. Manage by normal slope maintenance procedures.
172 Australian Geomechanics Vol 42 No 1 March 2007
Page 46
AUSTRALIAN GEOGUIDE LR7 (LANDSLIDE RISK)
Risk to Life
developed areas, where works can be carried out as
Most of us have some difficulty grappling with the part of the development to limit risk. The tolerable level
concept of risk and deciding whether, or not, we are
is raised to 1:10,000 in established areas, where
prepared to accept it. However, without doing any sort specific landslide hazards may have existed for many
of analysis, or commissioning a report from an "expert", years. The distinction is deliberate and intended to
we all take risks every day. One of them is the risk of prevent the concept of landslide risk management, for
being killed in an accident. This is worth thinking about, its own sake, becoming an unreasonable financial
because it tells us a lot about ourselves and can help to burden on existing communities. Acceptable risk is
put an assessed risk into a meaningful context. By usually taken to be one tenth of the tolerable risk
identifying activities that we either are, or are not, (1:1,000,000 for new developments and 1:100,000 for
prepared to engage in we can get some indication of established areas) and efforts should be made to attain
the maximum level of risk that we are prepared to take. these where it is practicable and financially realistic to
This knowledge can help us to decide whether we really do so.
are able to accept a particular risk, or to tolerate a
particular likelihood of loss, or damage, to our property TABLE 3: RISK TO LIFE
(Table 2).
Risk (deaths per Activity/Event Leading to
In Table 3, data from NSW for the years 1998 to 2002, participant per Death
and other sources, is presented. A risk of 1 in 100,000 year) (NSW data unless noted)
means that, in any one year, 1 person is killed for every
100,000 people undertaking that particular activity. The
NSW data assumes that the whole population 1:1,000 Deep sea fishing (UK)
undertakes the activity. That is, we are all at risk of
being killed in a fire, or of choking on our food, but it is 1:1,000 to
Motor cycling, horse riding ,
reasonable to assume that only people who go deep 1:10,000
ultra-light flying (Canada)
sea fishing run a risk of being killed while doing it.
Motor vehicle use
It can be seen that the risks of dying as a result of 1:23,000
falling, using a motor vehicle, or engaging in water-
related activities (including bathing) are all greater than 1:30,000 Fall
1:100,000 and yet few people actively avoid situations
where these risks are present. Some people are averse 1:70,000 Drowning
to flying and yet it represents a lower risk than choking
to death on food. Importantly, the data also indicate 1:180,000 Fire/burn
that, even when the risk of dying as a consequence of a
particular event is very small, it could still happen to any 1:660,000 Choking on food
one of us any day. If this were not so, no one would
ever be struck by lightning.
1:1,000,000 Scheduled airlines (Canada)
Most local councils and planning authorities that
stipulate a tolerable risk to property also stipulate a 1:2,300,000 Train travel
tolerable risk to life. The AGS Practice Note Guideline
recommends that 1:100,000 is tolerable in newly 1:32,000,000 Lightning strike
More information relevant to your particular situation may be found in other AUSTRALIAN GEOGUIDES:
• GeoGuide LR6 - Retaining Walls
• GeoGuide LR1 - Introduction
• GeoGuide LR8 - Hillside Construction
• GeoGuide LR2 - Landslides
• GeoGuide LR9 - Effluent & Surface Water Disposal
• GeoGuide LR3 - Landslides in Soil
GeoGuide LR10 - Coastal Landslides
• GeoGuide LR4 - Landslides in Rock
• GeoGuide LR11 - Record Keeping
• GeoGuide LR5 - Water & Drainage
The Australian GeoGuides (LR series) are a set of publications intended for property owners; local councils; planning authorities;
developers; insurers; lawyers and, in fact, anyone who lives with, or has an interest in, a natural or engineered slope, a cutting, or an
excavation. They are intended to help you understand why slopes and retaining structures can be a hazard and what can be done with
appropriate professional advice and local council approval (if required) to remove, reduce, or minimise the risk they represent. The
GeoGuides have been prepared by the Australian Geomechanics Society, a specialist technical society within Engineers Australia, the
national peak body for all engineering disciplines in Australia, whose members are professional geotechnical engineers and engineering
geologists with a particular interest in ground engineering. The GeoGuides have been funded under the Australian governments’
National Disaster Mitigation Program.
Australian Geomechanics Vol 42 No 1 March 2007 173
Page 47
AUSTRALIAN GEOGUIDE LR8 (CONSTRUCTION PRACTICE)
HILLSIDE CONSTRUCTION PRACTICE
Sensible development practices are required when building on hillsides, particularly if the hillside has more than a low
risk of instability (GeoGuide LR7). Only building techniques intended to maintain, or reduce, the overall level of landslide
risk should be considered. Examples of good hillside construction practice are illustrated below.
WHY ARE THESE PRACTICES GOOD?
Roadways and parking areas - are paved and incorporate kerbs which prevent water discharging straight into the
hillside (GeoGuide LR5).
Cuttings - are supported by retaining walls (GeoGuide LR6).
Retaining walls - are engineer designed to withstand the lateral earth pressures and surcharges expected, and include
drains to prevent water pressures developing in the backfill. Where the ground slopes steeply down towards the high
side of a retaining wall, the disturbing force (see GeoGuide LR6) can be two or more times that in level ground.
Retaining walls must be designed taking these forces into account.
Sewage - whether treated or not is either taken away in pipes or contained in properly founded tanks so it cannot soak
into the ground.
Surface water - from roofs and other hard surfaces is piped away to a suitable discharge point rather than being allowed
to infiltrate into the ground. Preferably, the discharge point will be in a natural creek where ground water exits, rather
than enters, the ground. Shallow, lined, drains on the surface can fulfil the same purpose (GeoGuide LR5).
Surface loads - are minimised. No fill embankments have been built. The house is a lightweight structure. Foundation
loads have been taken down below the level at which a landslide is likely to occur and, preferably, to rock. This sort of
construction is probably not applicable to soil slopes (GeoGuide LR3). If you are uncertain whether your site has rock
near the surface, or is essentially a soil slope, you should engage a geotechnical practitioner to find out.
Flexible structures - have been used because they can tolerate a certain amount of movement with minimal signs of
distress and maintain their functionality.
Vegetation clearance - on soil slopes has been kept to a reasonable minimum. Trees, and to a lesser extent smaller
vegetation, take large quantities of water out of the ground every day. This lowers the ground water table, which in turn
helps to maintain the stability of the slope. Large scale clearing can result in a rise in water table with a consequent
increase in the likelihood of a landslide (GeoGuide LR5). An exception may have to be made to this rule on steep rock
slopes where trees have little effect on the water table, but their roots pose a landslide hazard by dislodging boulders.
Possible effects of ignoring good construction practices are illustrated on page 2. Unfortunately, these poor construction
practices are not as unusual as you might think and are often chosen because, on the face of it, they will save the
developer, or owner, money. You should not lose sight of the fact that the cost and anguish associated with any one of
the disasters illustrated, is likely to more than wipe out any apparent savings at the outset.
ADOPT GOOD PRACTICE ON HILLSIDE SITES
174 Australian Geomechanics Vol 42 No 1 March 2007
Page 48
AUSTRALIAN GEOGUIDE LR8 (CONSTRUCTION PRACTICE)
WHY ARE THESE PRACTICES POOR?
Roadways and parking areas - are unsurfaced and lack proper table drains (gutters) causing surface water to pond and
soak into the ground.
Cut and fill - has been used to balance earthworks quantities and level the site leaving unstable cut faces and added
large surface loads to the ground. Failure to compact the fill properly has led to settlement, which will probably continue
for several years after completion. The house and pool have been built on the fill and have settled with it and cracked.
Leakage from the cracked pool and the applied surface loads from the fill have combined to cause landslides.
Retaining walls - have been avoided, to minimise cost, and hand placed rock walls used instead. Without applying
engineering design principles, the walls have failed to provide the required support to the ground and have failed,
creating a very dangerous situation.
A heavy, rigid, house - has been built on shallow, conventional, footings. Not only has the brickwork cracked because
of the resulting ground movements, but it has also become involved in a man-made landslide.
Soak-away drainage - has been used for sewage and surface water run-off from roofs and pavements. This water
soaks into the ground and raises the water table (GeoGuide LR5). Subsoil drains that run along the contours should be
avoided for the same reason. If felt necessary, subsoil drains should run steeply downhill in a chevron, or herring bone,
pattern. This may conflict with the requirements for effluent and surface water disposal (GeoGuide LR9) and if so, you
will need to seek professional advice.
Rock debris - from landslides higher up on the slope seems likely to pass through the site. Such locations are often
referred to by geotechnical practitioners as "debris flow paths". Rock is normally even denser than ordinary fill, so even
quite modest boulders are likely to weigh many tonnes and do a lot of damage once they start to roll. Boulders have
been known to travel hundreds of metres downhill leaving behind a trail of destruction.
Vegetation - has been completely cleared, leading to a possible rise in the water table and increased landslide risk
(GeoGuide LR5).
DON'T CUT CORNERS ON HILLSIDE SITES - OBTAIN ADVICE FROM A GEOTECHNICAL PRACTITIONER
More information relevant to your particular situation may be found in other Australian GeoGuides:
• GeoGuide LR1 - Introduction • GeoGuide LR6 - Retaining Walls
• GeoGuide LR2 - Landslides • GeoGuide LR7 - Landslide Risk
• GeoGuide LR3 - Landslides in Soil • GeoGuide LR9 - Effluent & Surface Water Disposal
• GeoGuide LR4 - Landslides in Rock GeoGuide LR10 - Coastal Landslides
• GeoGuide LR5 - Water & Drainage • GeoGuide LR11 - Record Keeping
The Australian GeoGuides (LR series) are a set of publications intended for property owners; local councils; planning authorities;
developers; insurers; lawyers and, in fact, anyone who lives with, or has an interest in, a natural or engineered slope, a cutting, or an
excavation. They are intended to help you understand why slopes and retaining structures can be a hazard and what can be done with
appropriate professional advice and local council approval (if required) to remove, reduce, or minimise the risk they represent. The
GeoGuides have been prepared by the Australian Geomechanics Society, a specialist technical society within Engineers Australia, the
national peak body for all engineering disciplines in Australia, whose members are professional geotechnical engineers and engineering
geologists with a particular interest in ground engineering. The GeoGuides have been funded under the Australian governments’
National Disaster Mitigation Program.
Australian Geomechanics Vol 42 No 1 March 2007 175