Council archive · source document
Slope Stability Report (4) · EXE22/0020
Very large file (24.3 MB): the whole original can take several minutes to open, especially on a phone. Text is quick to read.
Specialists in transport geotechnics
24 Lyrebird Ct Peregian Beach
Slope Stability Assessment
For: Matt Bradley Designs
August, 2022
See the original
The page text is free to read. Viewing or downloading an original file needs an account.
Log in to see the originalFull text of the other 43 pages
Page 2
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 ............................................................................................. 8
3.1 Desktop Study ................................................................................................................ 8
3.1.1 Detailed Surface Geology........................................................................................ 8
3.1.2 Noosa Shire Council Landslide Hazard Overlay Map .............................................. 9
3.1.3 Aerial Imagery ......................................................................................................... 9
3.1.4 Site History .............................................................................................................. 9
3.2 Site Inspection/Investigation ......................................................................................... 10
3.2.1 Groundwater ......................................................................................................... 11
3.2.2 Surface Drainage .................................................................................................. 11
3.2.3 Vegetation ............................................................................................................. 11
3.2.4 Buildings, other structures ..................................................................................... 12
3.2.5 Site Classification .................................................................................................. 12
4 SLOPE RISK ASSESSMENT .............................................................................................. 12
4.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 12
4.2 Effects of Development on Land Stability ..................................................................... 13
4.2.1 Existing Conditions ................................................................................................ 13
4.2.2 Effects ................................................................................................................... 13
5 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IMPACT ASSESSMENT ..................................................... 13
5.1 Site layout .................................................................................................................... 13
5.2 Proposed development components ............................................................................ 13
9 August 2022 CGC-SR-2022-012-R01-Rev01 Page i
Page 3
Specialists in transport geotechnics
5.3 Earthworks ................................................................................................................... 13
5.4 Foundations ................................................................................................................. 14
5.5 Surface drainage .......................................................................................................... 14
5.6 Overall effect of development on stability ..................................................................... 14
6 CONSTRAINTS/ PRECAUTIONS/ RECOMMENDATIONS................................................. 14
6.1 General ........................................................................................................................ 14
6.2 Foundations ................................................................................................................. 14
6.3 Drainage ...................................................................................................................... 14
6.4 Earthworks ................................................................................................................... 15
6.5 Inspection, Monitoring and Maintenance ...................................................................... 16
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
9 August 2022 CGC-SR-2022-012-R01-Rev01 Page ii
Page 4
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 24 Lyrebird Court, Peregian Beach. 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 the proposed additions to the
existing dwelling.
1.1 Details of Development
The proposed development at 24 Lyrebird Court, Peregian Beach involves the addition of a new
deck and spa extended off an existing dwelling and pool. Provided designs/layout suggest the
deck and spa will add an additional 10.5m2 to the building footprint. Refer to Figure 1 below and
Appendix 1 for plan details.
Figure 1: Proposed development location at 24 Lyrebird Ct, Peregian Springs
1.2 Site Location and Description
The site is located on cul-de-sac of Lyrebird Court approximately 1.5km from Peregian Beach
township. Provided plans indicate that minimal earthworks will be required to provide a
foundation for the spa and the deck is to be supported on poles. Foundation designs have not
been provided at the time of writing this report.
9 August 2022 CGC-SR-2022-012-R01-Rev01 Page 1
Page 5
Specialists in transport geotechnics
Figure 2: Contour Map of property at 24 Lyrebird Court
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.
9 August 2022 CGC-SR-2022-012-R01-Rev01 Page 2
Page 6
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.
9 August 2022 CGC-SR-2022-012-R01-Rev01 Page 3
Page 7
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. 9 August 2022 CGC-SR-2022-012-R01-Rev01 Page 4
Page 8
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
9 August 2022 CGC-SR-2022-012-R01-Rev01 Page 5
Page 9
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.
9 August 2022 CGC-SR-2022-012-R01-Rev01 Page 6
Page 10
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. 9 August 2022 CGC-SR-2022-012-R01-Rev01 Page 7
Page 11
Specialists in transport geotechnics
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 (24
Lyrebird Court). The overlay indicates the property is overlain by Holocene period blowout dunes
and quartz sand (Qhd/2).
Proposed Qcw
Development
Qhd/2
Qpt
Figure 4: 1:100,000 Site Geology taken from GeoResGlobe
9 August 2022 CGC-SR-2022-012-R01-Rev01 Page 8
Page 12
Specialists in transport geotechnics
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 a moderate risk of
landslide hazard area with the exclusion of the house footprint.
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.
9 August 2022 CGC-SR-2022-012-R01-Rev01 Page 9
Page 13
Specialists in transport geotechnics 3.2 Site Inspection/Investigation A site walkover was conducted by a CGC geotechnical engineer on the 27th July 2022 to understand the condition of the proposed development site. No intrusive geotechnical field investigation or testing was undertaken during the site visit. The site slopes from South to North with the house located on the elevated southern section of the property directly off Lyrebird Court. From the house platform the site is terraced with a number of retaining walls, with rendered block walls around the house area and timber sleeper walls down the slope. The terraces are generally near level and well grassed with some shrubs and larger trees located throughout. The lowest terrace had minimal ground cover and was generally shaded by the larger trees surrounding it. This area was covered with palm fronds and branches on the sand and the fencing on the northern boundary was leaning showing signs of surficial movement in the area. The current site conditions are reflected in following series of site photos below in figure 6. Figure 6: Site Photos -27/07/2022 Photo 1: Deck extension and spa location adjacent to existing Photo 2: Deck extension and spa location adjacent to existing pool pool 9 August 2022 CGC-SR-2022-012-R01-Rev01 Page 10
Page 14
Specialists in transport geotechnics
Photo 3: Terraced yard looking upslope to pool in top right Photo 4: Southern boundary fence
Photo 5: Terraced yard with southern boundary to the left Photo 6: Terraced yard retaining walls with pool and house
above
3.2.1 Groundwater
No groundwater seepage was observed on site at the time of the inspection.
3.2.2 Surface Drainage
Little to no surface drainage was identified on the site. There are multiple timber retaining walls
down the slope of which behind wall drainage was not observed. Natural overland flow appears
the be the only mechanism currently directing water down slope to the lower property boundary.
3.2.3 Vegetation
The property has been terraced with a number of retaining walls progressing level grassed areas
down to the property boundary. There are some trees and shrubs placed throughout the property
with the majority of the larger trees located along the property boundaries. The southern portion
of the property is covered with the dwelling footprint, pool and additional paving.
9 August 2022 CGC-SR-2022-012-R01-Rev01 Page 11
Page 15
Specialists in transport geotechnics
3.2.4 Buildings, other structures
The property has been development and landscaped with a double story dwelling with an
attached pool and deck. The southern portion of the property is linked with paving around all
sides of the house which leads to the terraced northern portion of the property. North of the
house there are a number of retaining walls varying in height that have resulted in multiple flat
grassed areas. These retaining walls are generally constructed from rendered block work where
linked to the house and timber sleeper walls at the lower terraces.
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.
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 Elements in proposed Low
Major Rare
building envelope
9 August 2022 CGC-SR-2022-012-R01-Rev01 Page 12
Page 16
Specialists in transport geotechnics
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
- Monitor retaining walls and related drainage.
- Structure piers to be founded in dense Very Low
underlying soils
- Monitor pool for potential leaks into underlying
soils
- Monitor existing structures for movement and
Medium Rare Low
ensure excess runoff and current drainage
remains operational
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.
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 24 Lyrebird Court, Peregian Beach involves the addition of a spa
and deck to an existing dwelling and pool area.
5.3 Earthworks
Based on the development plans provided it there is minimal earthworks required for the
construction of the spa and deck extension 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 foundations.
9 August 2022 CGC-SR-2022-012-R01-Rev01 Page 13
Page 17
Specialists in transport geotechnics
5.4 Foundations
No structural details have been provided at this stage of assessment besides to architectural
plans. It is noted that surface loose sands have been identified as having poor bearing capacity
and as such it is assumed the foundations would extend to the underlying medium dense (or
denser) sand. Excess and/or differential settlement may result if foundations are constructed on
very loose/loose sands. As a minimum, good hillside design practices as defined in AGS (Refer
to Appendix 3) are recommended for this site.
5.5 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 foundation area to slow and dissipate flow down the slope keeping concentrated flow away
from the house and associate structures.
5.6 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.
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 and spa be designed and constructed in
accordance with AS2870 Residential Slabs and Footings. As a minimum, foundations should
extend to found at depth in the underlying medium dense sands to meet bearing capacity
requirements.
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.
9 August 2022 CGC-SR-2022-012-R01-Rev01 Page 14
Page 18
Specialists in transport geotechnics
• 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
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.
9 August 2022 CGC-SR-2022-012-R01-Rev01 Page 15
Page 19
Specialists in transport geotechnics
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.
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 24 Lyrebird Court,
Peregian Beach 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
9 August 2022 CGC-SR-2022-012-R01-Rev01 Page 16
Page 20
Specialists in transport geotechnics 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. 9 August 2022 CGC-SR-2022-012-R01-Rev01 Page 17
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.
9 August 2022 CGC-SR-2022-012-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.
9 August 2022 CGC-SR-2022-012-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.
9 August 2022 CGC-SR-2022-012-R01-Rev01 Page III
Page 24
Specialists in transport geotechnics
Attachment 1: Site Plan
9 August 2022 CGC-SR-2022-012-R01-Rev01 Page IV
Page 25
REVISION
No. DATE DESCRIPTION ISS. BY
A R Y
R E L IMIN UCTION
STREET PERSPECTIVE
P OT F OR
N
C O NSTR
WELCH HOME EXTENSION/RENOVATION DRAWING REGISTER 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);
CLASS 1A DWELLING - RENOVATION + EXTENSION NO. DRAWING NAME ISSUE LATEST REVISION DESCRIPTION DATE ISSUED - 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: 24 LYREBIRD COURT, PEREGIAN BEACH, QLD 4573 WD-02 CONSTRUCTION LEGEND 24 LYREBIRD CT, PEREGIAN BEACH, QLD
- LOT PLAN: 164P93135
- SITE AREA: 1,438.57 sq.m.
WD-03 SITE PLAN 4573
WD-04 EXISTING / DEMO DECK DRAWING TITLE
WD-05 EXISTING / DEMO LAUNDRY COVER PAGE
WD-06 EXISTING / DEMO ROOF PLAN
NEW HOME AREAS WD-07 NEW DECK
LAUNDRY: 6.8m² WD-08 NEW LAUNDRY CLIENT
JAMES WELCH
NEW DECK: 6.5m² WD-09 NEW ROOF PLAN DRAWN
SPA: 4.0m2 WD-10 ELEVATIONS JC/KD
SCALE
As indicated@ A3
TOTAL: 23.8m² DATE
MEASURED TO OUTSIDE FACE OF WALL 2022-07-06
PROJECT NO.
2022058
DRAW ING NO.
WD-01 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
No. DATE DESCRIPTION ISS. BY
FABRIC 75mm WIDE IN CENTRE OF EACH LEAF OPENING EXTENDING ALUMINIUM OF 600mm BEYOND AND GRADE TO FALLS.
GENERAL SYMBOLS LEGEND 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 16.0 ENERGY EFFICIENCY
MAX SPAN LINTELS SIZE BEARING EACH END - 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 CLOSE TO OPENINGS SUCH AS WINDOWS/DOORS ETC. AND IS PROVIDED WITH ADEQUATE SUPPORT.
HC HOUSE CONNECTION LT LAUNDRY TUB 1500 90x90x8 150
- 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 - CONSTRUCTION JOINTS, SUCH AS BETWEEN WALL AND FLOOR, ARE TO BE TIGHT FITTING OR
ORG OVERFLOW RELIEF GULLY FLOOR ABOVE / BELOW 2400 125x75x10 230 SEALED USING CAULKING OR JOINERY ITEMS SUCH AS SKIRTING OR CORNICES.
2500 100x100x8 230 - EXHAUST FANS ARE TO BE FITTED WITH A SELF CLOSING DAMPER.
YG YARD GULLY SH SHOWER 3000 150x90x10 230 - 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
- SUPPLY AND FIX ALL BULKHEADS & FALSE CEILINGS AS SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS.
GOOD TRADE PRACTICES 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
SCHEDULES AND CONSULTANTS DRAWINGS THAT FORM PART OF THE CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS MANUFACTURERS SPECIFICATION AND RELEVANT BUILDING CODES.
- 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
POLYTHENE FILM MIN 0.2mm THICK WHICH HAS BEEN PIGMENTED AND BRANDED BY THE THRESHOLD U.N.O.
MANUFACTURER. - SUPPLY AND BUILD IN TIMBER DOOR FRAMES TO EXTERNAL LOCATIONS AS SHOWN ON
ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS.
4.0 TERMITE PROTECTION
- PROVIDE ANTI-TERMITE TREATMENT UNDER THE BUILDING AREAS IN ACCORDANCE WITH AS 2057, AS 11.0 CEILINGS
3660.1 AND APPENDIX D, FOR RETICULATED SYSTEMS. - CEILINGS SHALL BE RECESSED EDGE, MINIMUM 8.0mm PLASTERGLASS OR GYPROCK.
- 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
WITH RELEVANT AUSTRALIAN STANDARD CODES. TO PROVIDE FLUSH SMOOTH CONTINUOUS SURFACE.
- PROVIDE AND FIX ALL FLUSH STOP BEADS & CASING BEADS TO ALL CORNERS & EDGES.
5.0 BRICKWORK - PROVIDE ALL SELECTED MOLDINGS AND CORNICES TO ALL CEILINGS AS SHOWN ON THE
- 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 12.0 PLASTERING
APPROXIMATELY 900mm CENTRES, WITH ADDITIONAL TIES AT THE RATE OF 1 TIE/300mm HEIGHT OF - INTERNAL WALL FINISHES INCLUDING CUPBOARD, BIN & FRIDGE RECESSES ETC SHALL BE (OTHER
OPENINGS AND VERTICAL CONTROL JOINTS AND WITHIN 150mm OF OPENINGS. BUILD TIES INTO EACH THAN FACE FINISHES OR WHERE COVERED BY FEATURE MATERIALS) FLOAT AND SET IN HARDWALL
LEAF AT LEAST 50mm. PLASTER U.N.O.
- VERTICAL CONTROL JOINTS SHALL BE 12mm WIDE FILLED AT COMPLETION WITH A CONTINUOUS - PLASTERED WALLS SHALL BE NOMINAL 12mm THICK CONSISTING OF 1:1:9, CEMENT:LIME:SAND
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. matt bradley designs
©MATT BRADLEY DESIGNS - ACN: 637 963 396 - ABN: 53 637 963 396
PERMIT RAKING OUT OF CAVITY BOTTOMS. - PROVIDE STOP BEADS WHERE PLASTER WORK ABUTS TIMBER FRAMES, OR FACEWORK. www.mattbradleydesigns.com.au - [email protected] - 0488 554 020
- FORM WEEP HOLES EVERY FOURTH PERPEND ABOVE FLASHING AND CAVITY FILL KEEP CLEAR OF - EXTERNAL RENDER WHEN APPLICABLE SHALL BE 2 COAT SAND FINISH. (FOR PAINTING). ALL DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION METHODS & MATERIALS TO BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH:
- THE BUILDING CODE OF AUSTRALIA (BCA);
MORTAR. DO NOT LOCATE WEEPHOLES CLOSER THAN 500mm TO JOINTS IN DAMP PROOF COURSES - NIBS IN INTERNAL CORNERS ADJACENT TO DOOR FRAMES GREATER THAN 40mm SHALL NOT BE - THE QUEENSLAND DEVELOPER CODE (QDC);
- BUILDING REGULATIONS;
OR FLASHING. FLUSHED UP WITH FRAMES. - CURRENT ISSUES OF AUSTRALIAN STANDARDS & MANUFACTURER'S
SPECIFICATIONS & INSTALLATION DETAILS FOR MATERIALS USED.
- PROVIDE DAMP PROOF COURSES (DPC) IN THE BOTTOM 3 COURSES OF BRICK WORK AND SLAB - PROVIDE V-JOINTS IN RENDER & FINISHING PLASTER WHERE BRICK WORK ABUTS OR JOINS ONTO DIMENSIONS ARE SUBJECT TO SITE MEASUREMENT & VERIFICATION.
AND/OR FOOTINGS. DPC ADDITIVE SHALL BE CLEAR IN ALL FACEWORK. CONCRETE WORK. 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 PROJECT ADDRESS
13.0 FLOORING FINISHES
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 - CARPET FLOOR COVERINGS TO NOMINATED AREAS COMPLETE WITH SELECTED UNDERLAY
24 LYREBIRD CT, PEREGIAN BEACH, QLD
OR GREATER THAN 50mm SMOOTH EDGE, DIMINISHING STRIPS ETC, TO COMPLETE THE WORKS: REFER TO DRAWINGS AND 4573
- PROVIDE 12mm PLASTERING MARGIN BETWEEN WINDOW FRAME AND INTERNAL BRICKWORK TO BE FINISHES SCHEDULE. 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,
CONSTRUCTION LEGEND
THE OPENING. DIMINISHING BOARDS ETC TO COMPLETE THE WORKS: FLOOR BOARDS TO BE SANDED AND
POLISHED TO HIGH STANDARD WITH PREMIUM QUALITY SEALER (2 COATS). REFER TO DRAWINGS
BUILD IN ALCOR/PGI FLASHINGS AS FOLLOWS: AND FINISHES SCHEDULE.
CLIENT
- WHEREVER SHOWN ON DRAWINGS.
14.0 SIGNAGE
JAMES WELCH
- CAVITY WALLS BUILT OF SLAB ON GROUND (WHERE NOT PARGED).
- OVER LINTELS TO EXPOSED OPENINGS - EXTEND THE FULL WIDTH OF OUTER LEAF CONTINUOUS - WHERE NECESSARY SUPPLY & FIX SELECTED UNIT AND HOUSE NUMBERS TO EACH UNIT AND TO DRAWN
ACROSS CAVITY 50mm INTO INNER LEAF 2c ABOVE. LETTERBOXES AS SCHEDULED. JC/KD
SCALE
- 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
1 : 100 @ A3
INNER LEAF 1c ABOVE. - GENERALLY: WHEN PAVING IS INCLUDED IN THE BUILDING CONTRACT THE FOLLOWING SHALL DATE
- DOOR/WINDOW STILES - EXTEND THE FULL HEIGHT 150mm WIDE FIXED TO FRAMES INTERLEAVED APPLY AS A MINIMUM STANDARD. 2022-07-06
WITH SILL AND HEAD FLASHING AT EACH END. · SUPPLY AND LAY ALL PAVING TO EXTERNAL AREAS AS SHOWN ON WORKING DRAWINGS. PROJECT NO.
- STRUCTURE OR SERVICES WITHIN 30mm OF OUTER BRICK LEAF IN CAVITY: VERTICAL FLASHING · CUT, FILL & COMPACT SAND TO REQUIRED LEVELS. SCREED TO UNIFORM THINNESS AND LEVELS 2022058
CONTINUOUS 1c BELOW FL TO ABOVE STRUCTURE OR FRAME. NOMINAL 300m WIDE. · PROVIDE BRICK EDGE RETAINING FOOTING EMBEDDED IN MORTAR BENEATH THE PAVING BRICK DRAW ING NO.
- FOR HORIZONTAL STRUCTURES/SERVICES: CONTINUOUS FLASHING BUILT IN AS FOR OVER LINTELS.
- AT CAVITY WALLS WITH GLASS BLOCK 300mm WIDE FIXED TO GLASS BLOCK FRAME AND TURNED
· TO DRIVEWAY AREAS, PROVIDE NOMINAL 300x150mm CONCRETE FOOTING ALONG PERIMETER OF
DRIVEWAY AND BED EDGE BRICK IN MORTAR.
WD-02 rev:
AWAY IN CAVITY FROM INNER LEAF. QBCC LICENCE: 15025395
Page 27
NOTES:
- SETBACK RELAXATION LIKELY
REQUIRED FOR DECK
R Y NORTH
SITE NOTES: DA PROPOSED REVISION
OUN
B RENO / EXTENSION No. DATE DESCRIPTION ISS. BY
· UNLESS A SURVEY PLAN WAS R TY
PROVIDED ASSUME COUNCIL MAPPING PE
P RO
WAS USED. DISCLAIMER: COUNCIL
MAPPING MAY BE OFF AND WE WON'T
TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR INCORRECT
MAPPING. CLIENT TO PROVIDE SURVEY PR
PLAN FOR BUILDER TO CHECK. OP
· CONFIRM ALL DIMENSIONS ON SITE TO ER
TY
PR
EXISTING RESIDENCE PRIOR TO BO
OP
COMMENCEMENT OF ANY WORK. OX. EXISTING UN
APPR D
POOL AR
ER
· ALL BUILDING WORK TO BE CARRIED Y
TY
OUT IN ACCORDANCE WITH A.S.1684 AND WD-10
THE B.C.A. AND ALL OTHER RELEVANT
BO
CODES AND STANDARDS.
UN
EXISTING PRIMARY
· EXISTING PLUMBING AND ELECTRICAL 4
DA
DWELLING
WORKS TO BE REMOVED AND MADE
CT
RY
(NOT A PART OF THIS APPROVAL)
GOOD AS NECESSARY.
· THIS PLAN IS TO BE READ IN
D
PROPOSED
LYREBIR
CONJUNCTION WITH LANDSCAPING DECK EXTENSION + SPA
DETAIL PLANS FOR SPECIFIC PLANTING
LOCATIONS. PROPERTY BOUNDARY
· THE EXACT LOCATION OF
UNDERGROUND AND ABOVEGROUND PROPOSED
SERVICES SHALL BE PROVEN ON SITE.
2 LOCALITY PLAN RENO / EXTENSION
NO GUARANTEE IS GIVEN THAT ALL
EXISTING SERVICES ARE SHOWN. 1 : 500
· THIS DRAWING SET TO BE READ IN EXISTING SHEET APPROX. EXISTING
CONJUNCTION WITH THE SPECIFICATION APPROX. LOCATION METAL ROOF CROSSOVER
PROVIDED. OF EXISTING SHED
· BEWARE OF EXISTING SERVICES. WD-10
CONFIRM LOCATIONS PRIOR TO APPROX. EXISTING 3
00
APPROX. EXISTING
RETAINING WALL
CK
15
EXCAVATION. TAKE EXTREME CARE. DRIVEWAY
DE
· REFER ALL MAJOR WORKS TO RAMPS,
K
EC
WALKWAYS, DRIVEWAYS ETC
0
.D
50
(INCLUDING CARPARK WORKS, LEVELS & APPROX. EXISTING
OX
PR
DATUMS) REFER TO CIVIL ENGINEERS POOL PUMP
AP
DOCUMENTATION.
PR
· ALL EFFLUENT & WASTE WATER TO BE
EXISTING OP
CONNECTED TO COUNCIL SEWERAGE APPROX. L ER
TY
LINE AS PER COUNCIL & ESTATE POO BO
REQUIREMENTS U.N.O. UN
D AR
· ALL ROOF RAINWATER TO BE DIRECTED
Y
TO PROPERTY BOUNDARY FOR
DISTRIBUTION TO THE ROOF WATER
Y
HARVESTING SCHEME AS PER
REQUIREMENTS.
A R
IMIN UCTION
· CONTRACT DOCUMENTS AND
ENGINEERS DRAWINGS AND EXISTING
SPECIFICATIONS ARE TO TAKE
PRECEDENCE OVER THESE PLANS.
DEMOLITION NOTES:
PRIMARY
DWELLING
(NOT A PART OF THIS APPROVAL) R E L
P OT F OR C O NSTR
N
D CT
DARY
· CAP OFF EXISTING PLUMBING AND
ELECTRICAL WORKS AS NECESSARY BY
CERTIFIED TRADESPERSON.
matt bradley designs
TY BOUN
©MATT BRADLEY DESIGNS - ACN: 637 963 396 - ABN: 53 637 963 396
· MODIFIED BRICKWORK TO BE www.mattbradleydesigns.com.au - [email protected] - 0488 554 020
ALL DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION METHODS & MATERIALS TO BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH:
TOOTHED INTO EXISTING WHERE - THE BUILDING CODE OF AUSTRALIA (BCA);
- THE QUEENSLAND DEVELOPER CODE (QDC);
- BUILDING REGULATIONS;
APPLICABLE AND CAVITY TO REMAIN - CURRENT ISSUES OF AUSTRALIAN STANDARDS & MANUFACTURER'S
SPECIFICATIONS & INSTALLATION DETAILS FOR MATERIALS USED.
LYREBIR
CONTINUOUS AT ALL TIMES.
PROPER
DIMENSIONS ARE SUBJECT TO SITE MEASUREMENT & VERIFICATION.
DO NOT SCALE OFF THIS DRAWING. PLANS COPYRIGHT MATT BRADLEY DESIGNS PTY LTD
APPROX. FASCIA
· EXISTING MATERIALS TO BE REUSED WD-10 1 PROJECT ADDRESS
TO OWNERS DETAIL. 24 LYREBIRD CT, PEREGIAN BEACH, QLD
1000
· MATERIALS REMOVED FROM SITE 4573
MUST BE DISPOSED OF AS PER DRAW ING TITLE
COUNCIL REGULATIONS.
· INVESTIGATON SHOULD BE
PROPERTY BOUNDARY SITE PLAN
UNDERTAKEN BEFORE ALL WORKS
THAT REQUIRES EXCAVATION.
PROPOSED CLIENT
2 GARAGE EXTENSION APPROX. EXISTING JAMES WELCH
DRIVEWAY DRAWN
JC/KD
SCALE
WD-10 As indicated@ A3
APPROX. EXISTING DATE
2022-07-06
CROSSOVER
PROJECT NO.
2022058
0 1 2 4 6 8 10 20m
1 SITE
1 : 200
PLAN DRAW ING NO.
WD-03 rev:
QBCC LICENCE: 15025395
SCALE = 1:200
Page 28
APPROX. LOCATION OF
EXISTING SHED
APPROX LOCATION
OF EXISTING
SKIMMER BOX
NORTH
DEMOLITION LEGEND APPROX. EXISTING TREES
REVISION
No. DATE DESCRIPTION ISS. BY
SYMBOL DESCRIPTION
DEMOLISHED WALL
APPROX. EXISTING POOL SHED
DEMOLISHED TIMBER FLOOR/SUBFLOOR
DEMOLISHED 300 X 300 TILE
DEMOLISHED 600 X 600 TILE
DEMOLISHED TILE ROOF
DEMOLISHED SHEET METAL ROOF
660
PR
OP
APPROX. EXISTING POOL PUMP
ER
TY
DE 0
CK
50
BO
UN
D
660
AR
Y
RL 33680
APPROX. EXISTING RETAINING
APPROX. EXISTING
WALL
POOL
EXISTING
PRIMARY
DWELLING
(NOT A PART OF THIS APPROVAL)
A R Y
R E L IMIN UCTION
P OT F OR
N
C O NSTR
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
24 LYREBIRD CT, PEREGIAN BEACH, QLD
4573
DRAW ING TITLE
EXISTING / DEMO DECK
CLIENT
JAMES WELCH
DRAWN
PROPERTY BOUNDARY JC/KD
SCALE
1 : 100 @ A3
DATE
2022-07-06
PROJECT NO.
2022058
0 0.5 1 2 3 4 5 10m
1 EXISTING
1 : 100
/ DEMO DECK DRAW ING NO.
WD-04 rev:
QBCC LICENCE: 15025395
SCALE = 1:100
Page 29
NORTH
REVISION
NOTES: No. DATE DESCRIPTION ISS. BY
BUILDER TO VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS
PRIOR TO ORDERING ANY MATERIALS
DEMOLITION LEGEND
SYMBOL DESCRIPTION
DEMOLISHED WALL PR
DEMOLISHED TIMBER FLOOR/SUBFLOOR
OP
ER
DEMOLISHED 300 X 300 TILE T YB
OU
DEMOLISHED 600 X 600 TILE ND
DEMOLISHED TILE ROOF
AR
Y
DEMOLISHED SHEET METAL ROOF
EXISTING
PRIMARY
DWELLING
(NOT A PART OF THIS APPROVAL)
100
REF.
GARAGE
A R Y
IMIN UCTION
DRYER ABOVE
BENCH
LAUNDRY
R E L
P OT F OR NSTR
APPROX. WALL
C O
APPROX. WALL
W/M
3730
N
2916
matt bradley designs
APPROX. WALL
©MATT BRADLEY DESIGNS - ACN: 637 963 396 - ABN: 53 637 963 396
www.mattbradleydesigns.com.au - [email protected] - 0488 554 020
1000
190
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
PROPERTY BOUNDARY PROJECT ADDRESS
EXISTING EXISTING BEAMS 24 LYREBIRD CT, PEREGIAN BEACH, QLD
DOWNPIPES ABOVE 4573
DRAW ING TITLE
1600 260 7210 EXISTING / DEMO LAUNDRY
END OF SLAB
CLIENT
JAMES WELCH
DRAWN
JC/KD
SCALE
1 : 100 @ A3
DATE
2022-07-06
PROJECT NO.
2022058
0 0.5 1 2 3 4 5 10m
1 EXISTING
1 : 100
/ DEMO LAUNDRY DRAW ING NO.
WD-05 rev:
QBCC LICENCE: 15025395
SCALE = 1:100
Page 30
NORTH
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
DEMOLISHED TILE ROOF
DEMOLISHED SHEET METAL ROOF
EXISTING PRIMARY
DWELLING
(NOT A PART OF THIS APPROVAL)
DARY
Y BOUN
T
PROPER
APPROX. WALL
SHEET METAL
APPROX. WALL
EXISTING
5082
APPROX. WALL
ROOF
1946
APPROX. WALL
2.5 °
3730
2916
APPROX. FASCIA
981
PROPERTY BOUNDARY
A R Y
IMIN UCTION
260 7210 260
PARAPET PARAPET
R E L
P OT F OR C O NSTR
N
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
24 LYREBIRD CT, PEREGIAN BEACH, QLD
4573
DRAW ING TITLE
EXISTING / DEMO ROOF PLAN
CLIENT
JAMES WELCH
DRAWN
JC/KD
SCALE
1 : 100 @ A3
DATE
2022-07-06
PROJECT NO.
2022058
0 0.5 1 2 3 4 5 10m
1 EXISTING
1 : 100
/ DEMO ROOF PLAN DRAW ING NO.
WD-06 rev:
QBCC LICENCE: 15025395
SCALE = 1:100
Page 31
NORTH
NOTES: REVISION
No. DATE DESCRIPTION ISS. BY
REFER ENGINEERS DRAWINGS
& SPECIFICATIONS FOR ALL
STRUCTURAL DETAILS, 6180
FRAMING, BRACING, TIE DOWN
AND SLAB/FOOTING DETAILS 1180
490
2000
BUILDER TO VERIFY ALL 2510 SPA
DIMENSIONS ON SITE PRIOR TO 3265
ORDERING MATERIALS
BATTENS TO
SEAL WET AREAS IN MATCH IMAGE
ACCORDANCE WITH AS3740 &
BCA REQUIREMENTS UNIVERSAL STEEL BEAMS
APPROX. LOCATION OF
PROVIDE FLOOR WASTE TO ALL EXISTING SHED
WET AREAS
SMOKE ALARMS TO BE FITTED APPROX. EXISTING
TREES
75
IN ACCORDANCE WITH BCA
00
15
APPROX. EXISTING
STAIRS, HANDRAILS AND
2075
1600
RETAINING WALL
2000
515
BALUSTRADING TO BE
CONSTRUCTED IN
ACCORDANCE WITH BCA P3.9.2 RL 33680
400
BALISTRADE REQUIRED IF
AND ALL RELEVANT CODES AND FALL IS GREATER THAN 1m SPA . EXISTIN
G
APPROX
EQUIREMENTS POOL SH
ED
SUN BED
2300
0
APPROX. EXISTING POOL PUMP
50
LIFT OFF HINGES TO BE FITTED PR
TO WC DOORS AND ENCLOSED OP
APPROX LOCATION ER
SPACES WHERE REQUIRED IN OF EXISTING TY
SKIMMER BOX BO
ACCORDANCE BCA P3.8.3.3 UN
D
660
AR
ANY NEW WINDOWS TO WET RL 33680 Y
AREAS MAY BE REQUIRED TO
BE TOUGHENED SAFETY GLASS APPROX. EXISTING
PROVIDE MECHANICAL POOL
VENTILATION AND DIRECTLY
VENT TO THE OUTSIDE OF THE 660
BUILDING (E.G. USING DUCTING 1200
TO A SOFFIT VENT)
UPPER FLOOR: HARDIES
'SECURA' FLOORING TO TILED
Y
AREAS
EXISTING
A R
PRIMARY
DWELLING
R E L IMIN UCTION
(NOT A PART OF THIS APPROVAL) P OT F OR
N
C O NSTR
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
24 LYREBIRD CT, PEREGIAN BEACH, QLD
4573
DRAW ING TITLE
NEW DECK
NEW HOME AREAS CLIENT
LAUNDRY: 6.8m²
JAMES WELCH
DRAWN
NEW DECK: 6.5m² JC/KD
SPA: 4.0m2 SCALE
1 : 100 @ A3
DATE
TOTAL: 23.8m² 2022-07-06
MEASURED TO OUTSIDE FACE OF WALL PROJECT NO.
2022058
0 0.5 1 2 3 4 5 10m
1 NEW
1 : 100
DECK DRAW ING NO.
WD-07 rev:
QBCC LICENCE: 15025395
SCALE = 1:100
Page 32
NOTES:
RELOCATE CONDENSER
NORTH
NOTES: REVISION
No. DATE DESCRIPTION ISS. BY
REFER ENGINEERS DRAWINGS
& SPECIFICATIONS FOR ALL
STRUCTURAL DETAILS,
FRAMING, BRACING, TIE DOWN
AND SLAB/FOOTING DETAILS
BUILDER TO VERIFY ALL
DIMENSIONS ON SITE PRIOR TO
ORDERING MATERIALS
SEAL WET AREAS IN
ACCORDANCE WITH AS3740 &
BCA REQUIREMENTS
PROVIDE FLOOR WASTE TO ALL
WET AREAS
SMOKE ALARMS TO BE FITTED
IN ACCORDANCE WITH BCA
EXISTING
STAIRS, HANDRAILS AND PRIMARY
BALUSTRADING TO BE
CONSTRUCTED IN DWELLING
ACCORDANCE WITH BCA P3.9.2 (NOT A PART OF THIS APPROVAL)
AND ALL RELEVANT CODES AND
EQUIREMENTS
100
LIFT OFF HINGES TO BE FITTED
EXISTING
EXISTING BEAM
TO WC DOORS AND ENCLOSED
SPACES WHERE REQUIRED IN DOWNPIPES
ACCORDANCE BCA P3.8.3.3
INDICATIVE GAS
ANY NEW WINDOWS TO WET BOTTLES
AREAS MAY BE REQUIRED TO
BE TOUGHENED SAFETY GLASS
REF. 90 STUD WALL GARAGE
PROVIDE MECHANICAL
90
570
VENTILATION AND DIRECTLY STORAGE
VENT TO THE OUTSIDE OF THE
90
BUILDING (E.G. USING DUCTING
2110 FGW
2480
TO A SOFFIT VENT) EXISTING BEAM
820
1820
UPPER FLOOR: HARDIES
'SECURA' FLOORING TO TILED STOR. DRY W/M
Y
AREAS
1160 90
A R
190
PROPERTY BOUNDARY
R E L IMIN UCTION
1600
END OF SLAB
STEP DOWN
NEW CONCRETE SLAB
NEW BEAM ABOVE
P OT F OR
N
C O NSTR
matt bradley designs
90 1060 1510 90 ©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
90 2570 90 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
1060 90 1520 90 24 LYREBIRD CT, PEREGIAN BEACH, QLD
4573
DRAWING TITLE
NEW LAUNDRY
NEW HOME AREAS
CLIENT
LAUNDRY: 6.8m² JAMES WELCH
NEW DECK: 6.5m² DRAWN
SPA: 4.0m2
JC/KD
SCALE
1 : 100 @ A3
TOTAL: 23.8m² DATE
2022-07-06
MEASURED TO OUTSIDE FACE OF WALL
PROJECT NO.
2022058
0 0.5 1 2 3 4 5 10m
1 NEW
1 : 100
LAUNDRY DRAWING NO.
WD-08 rev:
QBCC LICENCE: 15025395
SCALE = 1:100
Page 33
5000
00
NOTES: NORTH
15
REVISION
No. DATE DESCRIPTION ISS. BY
PLUMBER TO VERIFY ALL DETAILS
PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF BATTENS TO MATCH
WORK /ORDERING IMAGE
2000
PLUMBER RESPONSIBLE TO
CONFIRM ROOFWATER
DISCHARGE SYSTEM WITH ESTATE
AS CONS AND TO ENSURE
CORRECT CONNECTION IS
ACCESSED AND SYSTEM USED
GUTTERS AND DOWNPIPES: PR
ENSURE THAT ALL GUTTERS, BOX
APPROX.
O PE
GUTTERS AND DOWNPIPES ARE EXISTING POOL
RT
DESIGNED AND INSTALLED IN Y BO
ACCORDANCE WITH THE NCC VOL UN
TWO PART 3.5.3. WITH A MAXMIUM DA
DISTANCE BETWEEN DOWNPIPES R Y
OF 12M.
ALL SERVICES TO BE HIDDEN
FORM VIEW AT STREET LEVEL
EXISTING PRIMARY
DWELLING
(NOT A PART OF THIS APPROVAL)
A R Y
DARY
E L IMIN UCTION
Y BOUN
R
P OT F OR C O NSTR
560
T
N
PROPER
15 °
5082 matt bradley designs
EXISTING
NEW APPROX. WALL
2020
©MATT BRADLEY DESIGNS - ACN: 637 963 396 - ABN: 53 637 963 396
METAL
SHEET
ROOF
www.mattbradleydesigns.com.au - [email protected] - 0488 554 020
2.5 °
SHEET ALL DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION METHODS & MATERIALS TO BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH:
- THE BUILDING CODE OF AUSTRALIA (BCA);
- THE QUEENSLAND DEVELOPER CODE (QDC);
METAL - BUILDING REGULATIONS;
APPROX. FASCIA
- CURRENT ISSUES OF AUSTRALIAN STANDARDS & MANUFACTURER'S
ROOF 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
1000
24 LYREBIRD CT, PEREGIAN BEACH, QLD
4573
DRAWING TITLE
PROPERTY BOUNDARY NEW ROOF PLAN
TRUSS PITCH TO MEET PARAPET APPROX. APPROX. PITCH
TOP OF PARAPET HEIGHT = 3.1m (CONFIRM ON-SITE)
(TBC ON SITE) CLIENT
JAMES WELCH
DRAWN
1600 260 7210 260
JC/KD
SCALE
PARAPET PARAPET 1 : 100 @ A3
DATE
2022-07-06
PROJECT NO.
2022058
1 NEW ROOF PLAN
0 0.5 1 2 3 4 5 10m DRAWING NO.
WD-09 rev:
1 : 100 QBCC LICENCE: 15025395
SCALE = 1:100
Page 34
REVISION
EXTERIOR MATERIAL & FINISHES No. DATE DESCRIPTION ISS. BY
SYMBOL DESCRIPTION FINISH COMMENTS
BRK01 EXISTING BRICK VENEER PT01 ROLL FINISH
WB01 NEW PAINTED WEATHERBOARD CLADDING PT02 ROLL FINISH
PT01 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
EXISTING PRIMARY DWELLING
(NOT A PART OF THIS APPROVAL)
BRK01 EXISTING PRIMARY DWELLING
(NOT A PART OF THIS APPROVAL)
ROOF ROOF
LEVEL RL 38500 LEVEL RL 38500
WB01 WB01 WB01 BRK01 BRK01
FRONT
ENTRY
FIRST FIRST
LEVEL RL 36000 LEVEL RL 36000
1 NORTH ELEVATION 2 WEST ELEVATION
Y
1 : 100 1 : 100
A R
FIRST
LEVEL RL 36000
FIRST
LEVEL RL 36000
R E L IMIN UCTION
UNIVERSAL BEAM
VB01
UNIVERSAL BEAM
BATTENS TO MATCH IMAGE
P OT F OR
N
C O NSTR
GROUND GROUND
matt bradley designs
POOL SPA SPA ©MATT BRADLEY DESIGNS - ACN: 637 963 396 - ABN: 53 637 963 396
www.mattbradleydesigns.com.au - [email protected] - 0488 554 020
LEVEL RL 33680 LEVEL RL 33680 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
24 LYREBIRD CT, PEREGIAN BEACH, QLD
4573
DRAWING TITLE
ELEVATIONS
3 SOUTH
1 : 100
ELEVATION 4 EAST
1 : 100
ELEVATION
CLIENT
JAMES WELCH
DRAWN
JC/KD
SCALE
1 : 100 @ A3
DATE
2022-07-06
PROJECT NO.
2022058
DRAWING NO.
WD-10 rev:
QBCC LICENCE: 15025395
Page 35
Specialists in transport geotechnics
Attachment 2: Aerial
Imagery
9 August 2022 CGC-SR-2022-012-R01-Rev01 Page V
Page 36
Aerial Image of 24 Lyrebird Court, Peregian Beach – 2010 Aerial Image of 24 Lyrebird Court, Peregian Beach – 2012
2018
Aerial Image of 24 Lyrebird Court, Peregian Beach – 2018 Aerial Image of 24 Lyrebird Court, Peregian Beach – 2022
REV DATE AMENDMENT / REVISION DESCRIPTION TITLE NAME DESIGNER CLIENT PROJECT TITLE
1 27/7/2022 FINAL
DESIGNER RP SLOPE RISK ASSESSMENT
24 LYREBIRD COURT
DESIGN CHECK
ICT PEREGIAN BEACH
TITLE
PROJECT MANAGER
RP HISTORICAL IMAGERY
PROJECT NO.
PROJECT DIRECTOR
ICT CGC-SR-2022-012
DESIGN LOT DRAWING NO. REVISION
CIVIL GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS FIGURE 2 01
Page 37
Specialists in transport geotechnics
Attachment 3: AGS
guidelines for Hillside
Construction
9 August 2022 CGC-SR-2022-012-R01-Rev01 Page VI
Page 38
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 39
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 40
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 41
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 42
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 43
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 44
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
Used in these records
Slope Stability Report (4).pdfRelated documentApplication case desk ↗
About this file
- File size
- 24.3 MB (very large file)
- File type
No other editions are linked here.
Original file
Log in to download the original file
The download may take a few minutes. On mobile data, it is best to wait for Wi-Fi.